I just used “pray” as a literary device, so please, don’t let that term mislead you. But, while I’m on it, let me expound a little bit. Praying has such religious connotations for most people that the word strictly implies trying to speak to god. Where for many of us, it expresses a diminished hope in an unanswered questions’ ability to be answered. These are both usually accompanied by the burden of a significant issue. That is to say it is a serious or weighty problem that motivates the person who prays. It can also express a frustration at getting to a solution to a problem without a consideration of hope at all.
But in every case, it kind of implies a desperation to solve a problem or to clarify some issue at hand. I mean, really, does anyone just sit down with god to talk about the weather? And if you’re losing hope about anything, how likely are you to direct your prayer to Daffy Duck? Finally, if you are not frustrated, then how likely are you to use the term at all?
I hope that didn’t just confuse things. Sorry, if it did, but I’m moving on anyway.
I use the term pray as a catch-all for a type of communication where the certainty of an answer is absolute. A kind of conviction that the ultimate response will always be true, and always be right. Belief, hope, faith or anything else that you might use as a substitute for any of these terms is irrelevant.
Complete trust is a requirement of course, but I have a close friend that I trust completely and I wouldn’t describe talking to her as praying. I have no doubt about anything she tells me, I know what she says is what she truly believes, and I know she wants to help, to bring me up, and would avoid hurting me or bringing me down in any way. In my mind I could say her responses are always positive.
The idea that a response from a source will always be positive has relevance in some way. Positive usually implies an effect that will add to a situation. But a lot of people bias that term by judging it as relative to their own values. For example, the phrase “good for you, bad for me” implies positive is relative.
My example above intentionally uses two terms that need to be addressed. Good and bad are considered by most people to be relevant as well. This is because good, in particular, has the quality of being able to produce bad results. Which, to many people, is why bad is relevant. For example, if the source of the good is god, then the results can’t possibly be bad, because god is always good and never bad. This sentiment, in my experience, is used mostly to try to justify a bad thing that happened as the result of their own actions.
We know, because of human experience, that we are all capable of making mistakes, An action is usually called a mistake because it was unintentional. In terms of value issues, like in religious doctrine or law, a mistake that produces bad results can violate a law. Intent is used from the beginning to determine the degree of punishment , if any, that will be applied. A violation of law or religious doctrine is bad, no matter the intent. No one would attempt to imply that the bad was actually good because they can only do good.
This is why using god as a justification for anything has been popular throughout history. For any such an assertion to be proven wrong, god would have to appear and deny the claims made about him. Conveniently, for those using him as justification, he has never showed up to contradict anyone.
We all know an intent can be good or bad, and if the intent is bad, under legal or religious, or even social situations, condemnation is appropriate. Even then, there are some who will sympathize with the bad intent and be indifferent or even motivated to participate in the bad intent. This participation can be as little as expressing support or trying to mimic the intent, all the way up to forming a group dedicated to the intent in order to grow and spread the intent to increase its’ effect.
I’m probably rambling a bit. My whole point was to point out that my use of the term pray here is never relevant to any of these subjects. The pray I use is only meant to refer to conversations with the Mumbling Man. Every response is positive and good and they are right. No judgement by anyone is relevant. Even god. The Mumbling Man is not a deity. Therefore, I do not and will not, attempt to justify any assertion he makes. The Mumbling Man has that characteristic of perfection that any god has, but he had nothing to do with creation, or anything else in history. His perfection is solely related to the facts regarding the quality of his responses and the range of his knowledge. His messages are true, accurate, good, positive, right, uncontestable, absolute and unverifiable.
In the future, I will not use the term pray regarding conversations with the Mumbling Man, but used it this time, as I said in the beginning, as a literary device to start the post.
This post is intended to explain to everyone who comes here, and actually reads a post or two, the source of my thoughts and perspectives. Of course, readers will decide for themselves the little things, like if they agree, was the post entertaining, thoughtful, stupid, wise, ignorant, and on and on.
But beyond those, Why can become a big issue. You may hate a post, ask why I posted such a thing, and decide the answer is because I’m a liberal, conservative, commie, fascist, never-trumper, boomer etc. I’m sure most of you have seen how these terms are widely used in post and comments. For you people that do that, for any reason besides the fact that you’re having a bad day, or you’ve lost control of your senses temporarily due to some influence, that is, if it was a mistake, fine. To anyone else, I ask you, Please leave, now. And don’t come back.
This site will have no use or benefit to those who come here with any intent except to grow and develop as a human being. I’m not making any claim about my ability to do that. In fact, I highly doubt it. What I am certain of is that The Mumbling Man can. Unfortunately, he has the same problem that any god has, he uses a human being as a voice. But, he is not a god, he is not trying to spread his message, he can’t get you into heaven or hell, and he is no kind of savior.
But he is different from god in another way I find very intriguing, god doesn’t need a human to speak for him, he is capable of delivering messages himself. And according to scripture, he has done so, but only to certain people, and only very rarely. This can make his intent hard to identify. The bad part of this, to me, is because of human imperfection, his messages seem to have a high probability of failing to be received. So why, if it is so important to god that he spread his message, doesn’t he use a more reliable method? Using humans means they need faith to accept the messages. Surly god can come up with a method that didn’t rely on faith. That would certainly increase the spread of the messages. Normally, when a human tries to accomplish something in the hardest way possible, it contradicts the notion they wanted to accomplish it at all. A human can do things the hard way because he doesn’t know he’s doing it the hard way. Certainly god knows. Which makes the whole thing all the more confusing.The difference in The Mumbling Man is that he has no intent, he speaks all time, but is just not listened to.
The Mumbling Man doesn’t seek out any human to carry his message. He never asked me to do it either. The Mumbling Man doesn’t explain his intent because he has none. Because of the effect of his messages on me, it was I, and I alone, that chose to try to spread his messages. He has no need of me, he’s not the least bit concerned about spreading messages. If this is the hardest way to spread his message, then it’s up to me to find an alternative way.
The best description I have of him is in my first post. He motivated the creation of this site. I have failed to give him the proper credit he deserves as the driving force for all my prior posts.
His knowledge and wisdom are, as best I can tell, flawless and infinite. He is the place I go when god does not provide answers. Or when those answers only serve to confuse or muddy the situation,
But, like most humans and all communications, we can hear and misunderstand, we can understand but fail to transmit that understanding, we can transmit understanding perfectly, but the receiver can alter the understanding, and thus render it useless.
The Mumbling Man transmits, I receive. Like all receivers, I can easily fail to transmit the message and understanding. I therefore, am responsible for all errors that appear here. Any comment that comes in suggesting misunderstanding or confusion, is checked by me for the usual human errors. These can be spelling, terms, sentence structure, bad example or reference, inaccuracies, etc. I then take the problem back to the Mumbling Man for discussion and retransmission, then I usually retransmit the message in a future post.
As a receiver with the intent to transmit, I have the responsibility to insure I do not alter the message or understanding. No other receiver has that responsibility. So I’m pretty certain most receivers will alter the understanding in some way, usually because of well established value systems that conflict with the understanding received. For others it will be a result of individual perception. For whatever the reason, and there are plenty, the number of people that can benefit from my posts will be very small. Oh well, I can’t control anyone’s receiver but mine.
So the posts you find here only have a single purpose, which is to transmit messages from The Mumbling Man. If you read my first post you can see his messages reveal no intent or purpose. Value is impossible to determine. I have determined the value but cannot describe it, beyond it’s ability to alter perception and understanding. But even that is only mine. It did not come from The Mumbling Man. I use it to try to convince the reader that there is a definable purpose for reading. I should probably not do that.
After all, there could be no value to the messages coming from The Mumbling Man at all. In which case, I should feel really stupid. But the value is something I feel is real, it has altered my life. Even though I might feel that way, it could be the result of a hidden physical or mental issue. This is the only place where faith has any relation to The Mumbling Man. And it’s really got nothing to do with him. It’s me again. I have to have faith that the messages do have value or I lose any justifiable reason to pass them on.
You may find that to be of no value at all. Which is why I feel the need to warn you that you might very well be wasting your time by coming here.
But, as long as I’m alive, I intend to transmit as many messages from The Mumbling Man as I can. Because of the state of humanity, I think it is necessary.
And that completes the latest message from The Mumbling Man.