[Vision2020] Wayne, Ted, Eric, etc.
keely emerinemix
kjajmix1@msn.com
Sun, 30 May 2004 09:18:11 -0700
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
------=_NextPart_000_001F_01C44627.0748D8E0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Ted. Plain old Ted. Well-reasoned and gracious Ted . . .=20
I didn't mean to co-opt the reasons for your annoyance with Eric -- I =
was trying to communicate that it bothered me that his arguments might =
not be taken merely at face value, for whatever they're worth, because =
of his willingness to defend Doug. I was aware of your disagreement =
over spirituality vs. religion vs. worldview, but in choosing not to =
comment on that, I appeared to have been instructing you on where you =
found Eric's views intolerable. So sorry! I'll be more careful and =
defer to you more clearly next time on why someone bugs you, given that =
you're the expert on Ted Grievances.
By the way, you'd use your birth name, too, if your name were "Keely" =
and you married a "Mix." "Keely Mix" sounds like a dessert topping, and =
I'm sure my kids, Mocha and Muffin, wish they could use "Emerine," too.
keely emerine mix
----- Original Message -----=20
From: Tbertruss@aol.com=20
To: kjajmix1@msn.com ; deco@moscow.com ; vision2020@moscow.com ; =
eric@eric-e.com=20
Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2004 1:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Wayne, Ted, Eric, etc.
Keely Emerine Mix:
Wow! What a great name. I'm so plain: Ted.
My recent annoyance, such as it was, with Eric E., did not stem so =
much from his association with Doug W., such as that is, as from Eric's =
statements directly answering V2020 comments where I attempted to define =
a distinction between "religion" and "spirituality" in the context of my =
spiritual life, and the spiritual life of other kindred souls.
Although I did point out what I thought was a glaring contradiction in =
Eric's comments about the mistake he claimed people might make of =
"lumping together" certain gentlemen representing Christian groups in =
Moscow, when he also described the "unity" these same gentlemen seek, =
Eric never responded, that I read or recall, to my spotlighting of this =
alleged contradiction. Did I miss something?
But he did launch a private email where he instructed me, yes, =
instructed me, as in the master enlightening the acolyte, in the proper =
use of words regarding "religion" and "spirituality," after I responded =
to a V2020 post by Melynda on religions and worldviews. I won't post =
his private e-mail, a divine dispensation from the superior wisdom of a =
saved soul.
Then he displayed the temerity to imply I was fooling people, the =
other lost souls who call themselves "non-religious," yet chant their =
"mantras" and worship their "priests."
Then he "vigorously backpedalled" from these comments, with hair =
splitting evasions, it appeared.
Well, he can call me a fool if he wants, this I do not mind. Not that =
he was, exactly. But I know very well I am a fool. =20
However, to suggest my spirituality is an attempt to fool anybody, or =
that I belong to a group of people engaging in a naive rejection of =
organized religion who are so pathetically lacking in critical self =
awareness to still chant mantras and worship priests... As I pointed out =
in a reply to Eric, I thought he was projecting his own ideology of =
religious social/political structures oriented towards ritual and =
authority worship. This is most decidedly not my approach to =
spirituality or my experience of the sacred.
So there you have it. Wilson is not the subject of my annoyance with =
Eric E. Though if Eric's responses outlined above are puppet-like =
controlled by Doug Wilson, then perhaps I have been duped into =
discussion with a proxy who does not speak their own mind.
What a world of illusion we live in!
Ted Moffett
------=_NextPart_000_001F_01C44627.0748D8E0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">
<STYLE></STYLE>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1226" name=3DGENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=3DMailContainerBody=20
style=3D"PADDING-LEFT: 10px; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; FONT-SIZE: 10pt; =
COLOR: #000000; BORDER-TOP-STYLE: none; PADDING-TOP: 15px; FONT-STYLE: =
normal; FONT-FAMILY: Verdana; BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE: none; =
BORDER-LEFT-STYLE: none; TEXT-DECORATION: none; BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE: =
none"=20
leftMargin=3D0 topMargin=3D0 acc_role=3D"text" CanvasTabStop=3D"true"=20
name=3D"Compose message area"><?xml:namespace prefix=3D"v" =
/><?xml:namespace prefix=3D"o" />
<DIV>
<DIV>Ted. Plain old Ted. Well-reasoned and gracious Ted . . =
</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I didn't mean to co-opt the reasons for your annoyance with Eric -- =
I was=20
trying to communicate that it bothered me that his arguments might not =
be taken=20
merely at face value, for whatever they're worth, because of his =
willingness to=20
defend Doug. I was aware of your disagreement over spirituality =
vs.=20
religion vs. worldview, but in choosing not to comment on that, I =
appeared to=20
have been instructing you on where you found Eric's views =
intolerable. So=20
sorry! I'll be more careful and defer to you more clearly next =
time on why=20
someone bugs you, given that you're the expert on Ted Grievances.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>By the way, you'd use your birth name, too, if your name were =
"Keely" and=20
you married a "Mix." "Keely Mix" sounds like a dessert topping, =
and I'm=20
sure my kids, Mocha and Muffin, wish they could use "Emerine," =
too.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>keely emerine mix</DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE=20
style=3D"PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>From:</B> <A=20
href=3D"mailto:Tbertruss@aol.com">Tbertruss@aol.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A=20
href=3D"mailto:kjajmix1@msn.com">kjajmix1@msn.com</A> ; <A=20
href=3D"mailto:deco@moscow.com">deco@moscow.com</A> ; <A=20
href=3D"mailto:vision2020@moscow.com">vision2020@moscow.com</A> ; <A=20
href=3D"mailto:eric@eric-e.com">eric@eric-e.com</A> </DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, May 30, 2004 1:19 =
AM</DIV>
<DIV style=3D"FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Vision2020] =
Wayne, Ted,=20
Eric, etc.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 =
face=3DArial size=3D2=20
PTSIZE=3D"10" FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF"><BR>Keely Emerine =
Mix:<BR><BR>Wow! What a=20
great name. I'm so plain: Ted.<BR><BR>My recent annoyance, such =
as it=20
was, with Eric E., did not stem so much from his association with Doug =
W.,=20
such as that is, as from Eric's statements directly answering V2020 =
comments=20
where I attempted to define a distinction between "religion" and=20
"spirituality" in the context of my spiritual life, and the spiritual =
life of=20
other kindred souls.<BR><BR>Although I did point out what I thought =
was a=20
glaring contradiction in Eric's comments about the mistake he claimed =
people=20
might make of "lumping together" certain gentlemen representing =
Christian=20
groups in Moscow, when he also described the "unity" these same =
gentlemen=20
seek, Eric never responded, that I read or recall, to my spotlighting =
of this=20
alleged contradiction. Did I miss something?<BR><BR>But he did =
launch a=20
private email where he instructed me, yes, instructed me, as in the =
master=20
enlightening the acolyte, in the proper use of words regarding =
"religion" and=20
"spirituality," after I responded to a V2020 post by Melynda on =
religions and=20
worldviews. I won't post his private e-mail, a divine =
dispensation from=20
the superior wisdom of a saved soul.<BR><BR>Then he displayed the =
temerity to=20
imply I was fooling people, the other lost souls who call themselves=20
"non-religious," yet chant their "mantras" and worship their=20
"priests."<BR><BR>Then he "vigorously backpedalled" from these =
comments, with=20
hair splitting evasions, it appeared.<BR><BR>Well, he can call me a =
fool if he=20
wants, this I do not mind. Not that he was, exactly. But I =
know=20
very well I am a fool. <BR><BR>However, to suggest my =
spirituality is an=20
attempt to fool anybody, or that I belong to a group of people =
engaging in a=20
naive rejection of organized religion who are so pathetically lacking =
in=20
critical self awareness to still chant mantras and worship priests... =
As I=20
pointed out in a reply to Eric, I thought he was projecting his own =
ideology=20
of religious social/political structures oriented towards ritual and =
authority=20
worship. This is most decidedly not my approach to spirituality =
or my=20
experience of the sacred.<BR><BR>So there you have it. Wilson is =
not the=20
subject of my annoyance with Eric E. Though if Eric's responses =
outlined=20
above are puppet-like controlled by Doug Wilson, then perhaps I have =
been=20
duped into discussion with a proxy who does not speak their own=20
mind.<BR><BR>What a world of illusion we live in!<BR><BR>Ted=20
Moffett<BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></FONT></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_000_001F_01C44627.0748D8E0--