Ray's comments to Wade

[_Trevor]

My interntet acquaintance with Ray has gone on for nearly a decade now, and the primary impression I have taken away from the experience is that Ray is a man of uncommon depth of character and strength of conviction. He stands fearless for what he believes regardless of how others may take his views. He has an admirable work ethic and a keen mind--particularly on matters philosophical. And, when chance would have it, I was pleased to fight in the arena of ideas along his side.

While he doesn't discuss his family much, from what little he has intimated I have gotten the sense that he has a strong and abiding love for them, and is fiercely protective and devoted. It is to them that he has dedicated his life and wants nothing more than for them to be happy. No higher charge may be committed to men, and Ray shoulders that responsibility in and exempliary way.

Well done, Wade. You are to be commended.

[_harmony]

I have one last thing to say before closing out my side of this thread.

My interntet acquaintance with Ray has gone on for nearly a decade now, and the primary impression I have taken away from the experience is that Ray is a man of uncommon depth of character and strength of conviction. He stands fearless for what he believes regardless of how others may take his views. He has an admirable work ethic and a keen mind--particularly on matters philosophical. And, when chance would have it, I was pleased to fight in the arena of ideas along his side.

While he doesn't discuss his family much, from what little he has intimated I have gotten the sense that he has a strong and abiding love for them, and is fiercely protective and devoted. It is to them that he has dedicated his life and wants nothing more than for them to be happy. No higher charge may be committed to men, and Ray shoulders that responsibility in and exempliary way.

Now, I could go on and on noting the positive qualities that I have observed in Ray over the years, but this should suffice for now. As the season fast approaches where we celebrate the birth of the Prince of Peace and the epitomy and embodiment of love, I thought it might be best to end this brief exchange on a positive note and in a spirit of gratitude and appreciation. I say this not so much to be nice, but because that is how I genuinely percieve Ray, and I just wanted him to know that.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

And yet you used "toxic" to describe him. Or have you changed your mind about that?

[_wenglund]

And yet you used "toxic" to describe him. Or have you changed your mind about that?

What I just said has been, and will continue to be, the way I view Ray as a person in my mind. I can do this because I have the capacity to distinquish the privailing qualities of his admirable character from certain rare behaviors he may exibit during difficult times.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_Ray A]

Thanks for the positive compliments, Wade, I believe you were genuine in your expressions.

I'm really not going through difficult times, however. I stopped posting on MAD well over a year now, and there were several reasons for that, one being that in reality I'm like a fish out of water in "orthodox" Mormon environments. I have defended what I perceived as good in Mormonism, but 21 years ago I voiced concerns that I still have today (and too often muted myself on MAD). Some of those concerns were expressed in my first reply to you on this thread.

I perceive you as someone who defends the good in Mormonism, and although a true believer, I think you can see the universally good aspects in all religions. I was surprised when some 18 years ago, when I was really going through difficult times, a good LDS friend told me "all that really matters, and all it really boils down to, is Jesus' Sermon on the Mount". If only Mormonism was really that simple, but it isn't when those believe await fiery judgements upon those who believe differently. And I suppose it goes back to what F.F. Bruce called "the hard sayings of Jesus", who, in spite of being a "peacemaker", was also a great divider of people. And that's where I question the whole "religious thing", that the same person who can teach the parable of the Good Samaritan, can in the next breath speak of "eternal damnation" for not being good and exclusively following him. So in return it's that very root of this paradoxical tree where I've wedged my axe. And there lies the basis of my criticism of religion in general.
Extract the good, and burn the Pharisee-ism, so to speak. That has always been my goal. When "good" is determined by how many laws you keep, and following a "one true religion", and basing all of this on whether a book is historical, is, I'm afraid, where I part company.

[_harmony]

And yet you used "toxic" to describe him. Or have you changed your mind about that?

What I just said has been, and will continue to be, the way I view Ray as a person in my mind. I can do this because I have the capacity to distinquish the privailing qualities of his admirable character from certain rare behaviors he may exibit during difficult times.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I don't understand someone who uses 'toxic' to describe another person, especially a person like Ray. "Toxic" brings to mind someone who is garbage, worse than useless, harmful, a sociopath. That is not Ray. That is not Ray's behavior. That does not represent Ray's words.

[Gadianton]

Thanks for the positive compliments, Wade, I believe you were genuine in your expressions.

I'm really not going through difficult times, however. I stopped posting on MAD well over a year now, and there were several reasons for that, one being that in reality I'm like a fish out of water in "orthodox" Mormon environments. I have defended what I perceived as good in Mormonism, but 21 years ago I voiced concerns that I still have today (and too often muted myself on MAD). Some of those concerns were expressed in my first reply to you on this thread.

I perceive you as someone who defends the good in Mormonism, and although a true believer, I think you can see the universally good aspects in all religions. I was surprised when some 18 years ago, when I was really going through difficult times, a good LDS friend told me "all that really matters, and all it really boils down to, is Jesus' Sermon on the Mount". If only Mormonism was really that simple, but it isn't when those believe await fiery judgements upon those who believe differently. And I suppose it goes back to what F.F. Bruce called "the hard sayings of Jesus", who, in spite of being a "peacemaker", was also a great divider of people. And that's where I question the whole "religious thing", that the same person who can teach the parable of the Good Samaritan, can in the next breath speak of "eternal damnation" for not being good and exclusively following him. So in return it's that very root of this paradoxical tree where I've wedged my axe. And there lies the basis of my criticism of religion in general.
Extract the good, and burn the Pharisee-ism, so to speak. That has always been my goal. When "good" is determined by how many laws you keep, and following a "one true religion", and basing all of this on whether a book is historical, is, I'm afraid, where I part company.

I think that to the extent that you continue to manifest the admirable qualities I have come to see in you, and live by what James called pure religion (as clarified in the Sermon on the Mount and the parable of the Good Samaratan), and not engage in harsh pharasiacal judementalism, yourself, you will fare quite well, and need not concern yourself with how others may harshly judged you. If nothing else, after this life you are more than welcome to join me and Mudcat at his heavenly cabin by the lake, and fish and BBQ to our hearts content. [Thumbs Up]

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[_wenglund]

I don't understand someone who uses 'toxic' to describe another person, especially a person like Ray. "Toxic" brings to mind someone who is garbage, worse than useless, harmful, a sociopath. That is not Ray. That is not Ray's behavior. That does not represent Ray's words.

I am content with you not understanding what I have said--not that there is much choice in the matter since you seem intent on reading things into what I said that were the furthest things from my mind.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-