Wednesday, 2 October 2013

James Burgess (Sufi) - 7Words a Cover to a Quackery Practice?

This is a good example which shows the "7 Words Personal Development System" is "very likely" not as straightforward and honest as James Burgess likes to make it sound.

The topic discussed in the video by James Burgess is about a wife who is married to a man who is violent and abusive. In this example James Burgess explains that the husband keeps coming back home while he is drunk on Saturday nights and treats the wife violently. 

James Burgess claims that the wife had come to him and complained to James Burgess that her husband's irresponsible behaviour is causing bad feelings in her "Solar Plexus" (you can see the wife is already persuaded to believes in Chukras)

for those who don't know what "Solar Plexus" is, it is some sort of Buddhist (not Sufi) concept:

James Burgess then goes on in this video and after explaining different options he thinks the abused wife has in order to resolve her problem with her husband in the context of 7Words system reaches the climax of this video where he says:

at 18:45  
JB: Or you could go to a healer,
JB: cause you got a problem in your "solar plexus"
JB: and you know what? if you heal this he is gonna stop getting drunk
JB: {smile} {moving hands} maybe
I missed this bit out the first time I watched this video. So the 7words looked as a consistent system of decision making (not genius but common sense) however on the second run of this video I mentioned this particular part where James Burgess is suggesting to use a spiritual healer in order to resolve the abused wife's problem with her husband (more info on this in my correspondence with James Burgess further down this article)

This irrationality is present in most James Burgess's videos. It is pretty much the essence of who he is. In this specific example he says if painful Solar Plexus of the abused wife gets treated by a healer, then her husband stops being violent towards her  - he totally takes his "cause" and "effect" wrong and in reverse - The wife is the victim here, she is the subject of violence, the pain in her Solar Plexus is caused by her husband's bad behaviour not vice versa. How treatment of the pain in her stomach (Solar Plexus) by a healer can stop the violence and bad treatment towards her?

I couldn't believe what I was hearing initially so I specifically questioned James Burgess about this part of the video by sending him an email and he responded:
Mystics have long referred to the subtle energy centre located near the Celiac Plexus as the Solar Plexus.By healing imbalances in subtle energies in oneself, we project into the world a more harmonious atmosphere. The violent drunken husband is only one half of a social problem, his wife is the other half. If she finds peace within herself, then she will be beyond the reach of his violence.The mystic believes that everything that occurs is the responsibility of the observer. We attract to ourselves the proof of our imperfections. There should never be blame because we are all simply the cause of whatever happens to us.

Despite the fact that these types of irrational concepts and believes are the main theme of what James Burgess represents but one can not fail to mention in this video how he is doing his best in order to present 7words as a rational and logical method of decision makingHe is very obviously refraining from mentioning the "spiritual" and "superstitious" bits of 7Words as much as he can and only on a few occasions he subtly mentions them.  In a way it seems the 7Words irrational loopholes such as this spiritual healer involvement are kept hidden while it is being presenting for the first time to potential customer/recruits

He seem to be aware that he may lose his audience right away if he reveals the superstitious theme of 7Words to them from the early beginning. So quiet cleverly it seems that he is exposing individuals to 7Words by using a step by step process. Initially by giving them a mostly rational image, and once they are convinced that they want to give a go to what it seems to be mostly a rational/logical idea to them, then he slowly slowly introduce and expose them to all the spiritual healing and superstitious aspects of 7Words. So in a step by step and gradual process people can be put through the 7Words superstitious loopholes and in a gradual way lose their top level view of the whole thing.

And James Burgess does this quiet successfully, even I as a critic when I initially watched this video missed the subtle mentions he make to real nature of 7Words and so was misleaded by his presentation which as I described previously he keeps mostly in a way to show 7words as a rational and logical method. 

However unlike many I didn't stop there and I watched this video a second time and watched it more carefully this time. And so on the second run I mentioned all the spiritual and superstitious things that he was subtly mentioning. Also I only start to see the contradictions in his ideas (as result of his circumstantial point of views) when I start to see his videos for the second time. He calls these contradictions "freedom of interpretation" which is a contradiction in its own way as per below.

James Burgess and "Freedom of Interpretation"

How can 7Words still be called A Personal Development "System" while James Burgess applies freedom of interpretation to it? To me its just a trick which makes him able to tweak the rules and add and drop from them in order to adapt them to different circumstances he gets in when he is playing his "guide" or "teacher" or "consultant" role.

A system is defined by the free online dictionary as:
1. a group or combination of interrelated, interdependent, or interacting elements forming a collective entity; a methodical or coordinated assemblage of parts, facts, concepts, etc.
So as you can see "Freedom of Interpretation" is against the fundamentals of having a system on the first place. In a way when you develop a system what you do is that you replace the "Freedom of Interpretation" with a set of pre-defined rules and conditions in order to achieve something which you can't achieve while you use "Freedom of Interpretation". So 7Words can't be called a system when someone is allowed to freely interpret it.

Why Am I Writing This

James Burgess usually says very many irrational and shall we say "not so clever" things, but I have to confess the spiritual healing of the abused wife has been the most amusing and the highlight of his "wisdom" so far

So when I was convinced and was left with no doubts about the superstitious and potentially harmful aspects of 7Words (specially after my correspondence with James Burgess) I started to clearly identify cases that could be put at risk by James Burgess as a result of his ideas and actions under 7Words (eg. in case of the abused wife's example, as you can see, he is encouraging her to stay exposed to repeated violence while she is wasting her time with a false hope that a healer by manipulating her "Solar Plexus" can fix the violent and abusive husband for her) so I decided to write this series of blog posts about James Burgess in order to expose the flaws in his ideas to do my share in protecting those who might be drawn to him for whatever reason.

I need to mention that before I decide to write these blogs I raised many questions with James Burgess trough email and even requested to personally meet him. But as he refused to meet me and/or even provided an answer to my questions and criticism through email (he just ignored my questions and said that he will pray for me to find my "faith" - typical mullah - lol) so I was left with no other option but to publicize some of my findings and understanding of his ideas and describe how I think following this man if not harmful by its own is just a waste of time and money (Yes! Of course! He will charge you for his spiritual services)

James Burgess and 7Words

Based on the reasons I represent in this and other blog posts I have written on the subject, I am now convinced  that the so called "7 Words Personal Development System" is intentionally designed to have some serious irrational "loopholes" in it.

James Burgess under cover of a "Personal Development Teacher" or a "Guru" or a "Guide" can then potentially exploit these loopholes in order to create a "legitimate looking" ground for him and other so called "Spiritual Healers" around him to practice and offer their quackery in shape of "Spiritual Healing", "Spiritual Teaching" and "Spiritual Guidance" (such as in abused wife's case and her Solar Plexus), 7Words also allows them to justify their quackery based on a "scripture" in shape of a booklet which is written by James Burgess himself.;jsessionid=40C2681420677094D229D06549ADB41A

Most dangerous part of 7Words system is the aspect which allows James Burgess to give a go to psychotherapy (when he "counsels" people) and this is particularly dangerous since it can cause serious mental and emotional harm to those who take his counselling serious as James Burgess has no relevant qualifications to practice psychotherapy and as a matter of fact to practice any type of counselling

As I understood James Burgess actively introduces himself as a "counsellor" or a "teacher" or a "psychotherapist" and/or a "guide", this means he actively learns the details of his followers personal lives and learns about their worries and by gaining this knowledge he is putting himself in a position which makes him able to mentally and emotionally manipulate them (coercive persuasion) to his advantage if he wants. 

In my opinion James Burgess has to prove that coercive persuasion of his followers is not his intention before he can be allowed to roam around and actively try to effect unaware individuals lives with his so called spiritual teachings/guidance/healing/counselling/etc.

It is particularly worrying as James Burgess offers "a way of life" (7Words) which has to be accepted by his followers as a result of their "faith" and "trust" in him and not based on its merits. At the same time he refuses to answer to questions and criticism of his ideas and actions (as he refused to answer mine), while at the same time he is actively learning about his "followers" personal lives and issues in order to so called "guide" and "help" them by using intensive courses of meditation, spiritual healing, DUP (Dances of Universal Peace), Zikr (Sufi stuff) and other new age remedies which if not harmful by themselves are at best distracting an individual from the real source of problems in his/her life and can only prolong their suffering.  And all this happens while James Burgess expects his followers to maintain an unconditional "trust" and "faith" in him. 

James Burgess the Enlightened

James Burgess says that his students are supposed to trust him as a default condition (without him having to gain their trust first):

At 5:40 of this video :
JB: Sufi teacher is enlightened and the students suppose to trust that!
Also James Burgess excludes himself from having to explain or justify his ideas and actions to others and public when in another part of the same video he says:

at 05:22 of this video :
JB: And yet Sufism just tells you the way it is, it doesn't explain and defend its arguments at all!

By relating these two claims, one can mention that James Burgess is firstly claiming "enlightenment" and some sort of "prophecy" and secondly he is implying that he doesn't need to justify his actions and ideas because he claims that in Sufism the "enlightened" few (which he consider himself to be one of them) are excluded from the rule of having to justify their actions and ideas!

What is happening here in my opinion is that by mentioning these in this video the James Burgess is implying that as a Sufi teacher (that he claims to be) he has the right to be unconditionally "trusted" and "followed" by his students!!! So by setting his own rules, the James Burgess is authoritatively placing himself at the top of the pyramid (he has to be trusted and doesn't have to explain his arguments) and by this he is allowing himself to monitor and in a way to control his followers lives just as you would expect from a man who looks and sounds like him. 

If this is happening, to me it is an unacceptable situation which is caused by outrageous actions and claims of this man.

James Burgess the Double Identity

When I initially started to correspond with him, James Burgess wasn't aware that I got to know him through his activities in Lithuania where he apparently plays more his Sufi, New Age teacher role. I think he thought I was an independent prospect who contacts him from within UK. So it seems that he mistakenly showed me his UK market face when he replied to my question in regards of his affiliation with Sufism. 

As I had already seen his website and videos where he introduced himself as a Sufi Teacher and expressed his interest in Alchemical Sufism (whatever that is) I was totally surprised when in regards of Sufism he answered me:
... It is a riddle that has lost its appeal to me. I do what I do, and people call me what they like.
Also in regards of New Age teachings and methods (such as healing someone’s Solar Plexus in order to repair a violent husband) in the same email he told me:
... and have become very disillusioned with most alternative teachers, and the New Age generally, and.... 
The video in this blog is submitted to YouTube on (30 July 2013) and my correspondence with James Burgess took place on (10 September 2013). I first saw the video and then made my correspondence with James Burgess. So when I saw how he was trying to disassociate himself from Sufism and New Age in his reply to me as I had already seen him introducing himself as a Sufi Teacher and offering New Age remedies I was immediately nearly sure that I was dealing with a dishonest person with an uncertain agenda. As per below: 

The James Burgess (10 September 2013)

Says the Sufism is a riddle that lost its appeal for him and also says that he has become very disillusioned with New Age...

The James Burgess (30 July 2013)

Offers spiritual healing as a remedy for an abused and mistreated wife (healing Solar Plexus – a New Age method) and claims to be an enlightened Sufi teacher and demands his students to trust him unconditionally because Sufism is all about total obedience and no argument is supposed to be explained or defended by the master!

So in effect the same person who is James Burgess is a “Sufi” and a “Not Sufi” and a “New Age teacher” and a “not New Age teacher” he is even a "New Age disillusioned" all within just more than a month period...

no comments really...

In this section I showed contradictions are also present in James Burgess identity/personality as well as his ideas! I am sure this can’t be considered “freedom of interpretation” any longer. We are either dealing with someone who is not honest and introduces himself in different ways depending on circumstances he gets himself in at any given point of time or a person who is suffering from Dissociative Identity Disorder.

James Burgess "Circumstantial Identity" Based on Location:

In United Kingdom =>  a “Not Sufi” and a “Not New Age teacher” even a "New Age disillusioned"
In Lithuania => a “Sufi Teacher” and a “New Age teacher” even offering "New Age remedies"

James Burgess Personality Table (based on time and location):

New Age
In response to Unknown UK based Ex-Muslim


A riddle which has lost its appeal for him
Disillusioned about New Age
In video taken in Lithuania

claims to be an "enlightened" Sufi teacher who has to be trusted and followed by his students
Offers New Age remedies to an Abused Wife

James Burgess Online Evasion

For a breakdown of James Burgess evasive methods/actions in cyber space 
(with screenshots and timelines) I highly recommend you to read the section titled as "James Burgess On-line Evasion in Response to my Questionsin this article:

James Burgess A "Disaster Waiting to Happen"

To me James Burgess ideas and actions are a recipe for disaster waiting to happen. History has seen many men like him who this way or another claimed "enlightenment" and some sort of special "spiritual knowledge". 

Almost without an exception those who make claims of "special spiritual knowledge" also claim that they gained it through years of travelling and meeting gurus and teachers all across the world. The trendy places to gain acclaimed spiritual knowledge are mostly in Far East or Subcontinent or Middle East, (James Burgess is a Turkey and India type). And most of them don't get too specific about the details of their journey and  if they mention a teacher name it is usually someone who is already dead. So no possibility of checking references and check their claim merits (James Burgess's dead person is Hazrat Innayat Khan and Murshid Samuel Lewis)

All through the history men who looked like James Burgess and made similar claims as James Burgess and behaved in a similar manner to James Burgess ripped off and inflicted pain and suffering to those who trusted them and allowed them into their lives and took their teachings seriously. 

Now the question is, shall we remain indifferent while it seems the history is repeating itself in front of our eyes? No, I believe any sensible person who cares for fellow human beings has to step forward and help to expose James Burgess (and men like him) by pointing out the inconsistencies in his ideas and his outrageous actions and claims

I want to see "revealed" the real person and real intentions behind that mask of pretence who is James Burgess. This will help to protect those who can be potentially misleaded and misguided by James Burgess superstitious and potentially dangerous ideas (that waistcoat and that beard and all the prophet like huffing and puffing are indications of this pretence) 

Looking at James Burgess and having learned about what he preaches now, I can see "many unknown intentions" hidden behind layers of hypocrisy, I urge you to attend your moral duty in his regards by exposing him.

James Burgess and Vulnerable Individuals

Under circumstances that I explained above I can see that the individuals who trust James Burgess and seek their salvation in his 7Words and in his counselling and healing techniques are possibly in grave danger. This is specially because the "trust" that James Burgess requires from them as the basic requirement of joining his group, is not the type of "trust" that James Burgess expects himself to have to gain from them, but a type of "trust" that he considers himself to be entitled to, as he narcissistically claims to be "enlightened".

This situation is specially worrying since vulnerable individuals who are genuinely in need of help and protection and love and companionship are those who are most prone to fall into the type of circle/group that James Burgess creates around his 7Words idea. As I mentioned previously James Burgess has no relevant qualification as a psychotherapist (the only qualification he seem to have is as an accountant) so wanted-ly or unwanted-ly he is doing more harm than good.

And clever and educated, young and old can be similarly put in danger by James Burgess and men like him depending on those individuals relative circumstances. Quiet surprisingly intelligent and caring individuals with a flexible brain, are those who are most prone to this type of arrangement that James Burgess is setting around his 7words. 

Intelligent individuals are more likely to seek for "7Words" type of alternatives if they are unhappy and unsatisfied with their circumstances or when they are having emotional difficulties at a given moment of time. And it has always been the norm for a typewho looks like and behaves in a similar manner as James Burgess (eg. claims of enlightenment and special spiritual knowledge) to prey on - intelligent, caring and unhappy type - by hiding their real "predatory" intentions behind a pretence of sincerity and kindness playing the role of a "teacher", "guide", "guru", "consultant", "spiritual healer",  etc. and etc. 

All of us, if we are in a particularly difficult period of our life, experiencing lonely and emotionally hard times, can become equally prone to a technique called "love bombing". That's why we should be extra careful with men who look/sound/behave like James Burgess and don't allow them to effect or override our good judgement. 

Because if anything can lead us through our hard times, and provide us with our happiness, its our own good judgement. We mustn't allow them to manipulate it. We mustn't allow them to persuade us to have a reverse perception of reality. We mustn't allow them to reverse our understanding of "cause" and "effect" (as James Burgess do in his abused wife example). 

Because those men have no interest in solving our problems. They have no interest to see us happy. In fact what they are interested in is to maintain the problem. They want to keep us vulnerable. Because the vulnerability is exactly what make us dependent on them. Because our emotional problems and issues are what they can cash on. Solving our problems and issues is exactly what they won't do, even if they can...

James Burgess and Real Psychotherapy Practice:

There is a big difference between:
1) A professional and academically trained psychotherapist who has spent years of her/his life in academia, has made the commitment and gone through a lengthy process of education and learned the best practice known to mankind in terms of how to deal with specific mental and emotional problems,
2) And someone who just claims that he has the ability to resolve mental/emotional issues by using some sort of super ability he claims to have. In fact he has no way of proving his claims as he never sat for a test, he never done a dissertation, he never completed psychotherapeutic training. He never made no commitment to this but he now just want to make money out of his baseless claims to these abilities.
He just can mislead someone, hurt someone by a wrong advise and there is nothing that makes him responsible for it in professional terms. Nothing is bounding him or making him responsible for what he does and says in a consultant capacity (both morally and professionally). He can cause harm to people and then just walk off and ignore what happened and he is not liable to anything in regards of the damage he had caused. If you email him after, in response he is likely to offer to pray for you to find your "faith" (as James Burgess did to me) but that is as much as you can expect from a man in second category.
That is why a trained academic psychotherapist can help and should be trusted and consulted for help, but someone like James Burgess mustn't.

I am not sure but James Burgess might even be in breach of law by actively marketing his "behavioural" and "relationship" counselling to public as he is not qualified for this.


Due to the factors mentioned above and; 

1) James Burgess's insistence on getting Astrology involved into his 7Words,
2) By observing James Burgess's evasive methods when he is questioned about his point of views (to me and others)
3) Very importantly by considering the fact that the first requirement of joining his group is by having unquestionable "faith" and "trust" in him! 
4) The several attempts I saw from James Burgess in his videos when he tries to redefine well known terms and ideas such as "Sufism" or "Astrology" in a way that the new definition serves his agenda better (read my blog post on James Burgess and astrology)
5) And based on the correspondence I had with James Burgess in this regards (some part of it covered below) where he chose to ignore my questions and criticism.

It now looks as if "7Words" is more of a cover to a quackery practice ran by James Burgess. It looks as he has developed a mechanism under this "7Words" which puts him in a position to rip off vulnerable individuals from their money by charging them for Spiritual Healing seminars (such as the video attached to this blog) and by taking them to healing and dancing camps (Unicorn Camp: which costs up to 200 quids) all for a false promise that he gives them. intentionally or unintentionally.

Researching him for a while it looks as James Burgess "7Words" business has many more layers to it than it comes to eye initially.


Appendix: Correspondence with James Burgess

Now going back to the example of abused wife as I mentioned I asked James Burgess about this example and requested clarification as I didn't find going to "healer" the right or logical course of action for an abused wife. I also asked what he means about a healer and if he considers himself as one. James Burgess replied:

A healer is a person who has discovered how to put themselves into a certain state of consciousness that allows and directs the flow of subtle energy. The healer's intention can assist the process, however their ability to trust and allow shows a higher degree of skill. Those who do this frequently and with awareness can meaningfully be called a healer, although I believe that we all have this potential, and to some extent have all shown this - even by offering a blessing on greeting someone. "May peace be with you".
Mystics have long referred to the subtle energy centre located near the Celiac Plexus as the Solar Plexus.
By healing imbalances in subtle energies in oneself, we project into the world a more harmonious atmosphere. The violent drunken husband is only one half of a social problem, his wife is the other half. If she finds peace within herself, then she will be beyond the reach of his violence.
The mystic believes that everything that occurs is the responsibility of the observer. We attract to ourselves the proof of our imperfections. There should never be blame because we are all simply the cause of whatever happens to us.
This idea is completely impossible for most people to accept, indeed even to consider philosophically, and certainly never to try it out as a life path.
At which point as I wasn't obviously convinced that to heal the "Solar Plexus" of an abused wife can make any changes or difference in the state of an abusive and violent husband I put some more questions to him:

In the context of our example of a mistreated wife, you are saying her pain is not due to a cause (her husband's behaviour), but due to something which is drawn to her which is due to her personal fears, so by that you are saying that if the husband is being violent and drunk it is her fault (regardless of what type of person the husband is).So you basically blaming the wife for how her husband is treating her because she is scared to be treated badly!! And you see the mitigation of her pain by going to a "healer" in order for the healer to change something in her stomach (Solar Plexus) in order for that change to balance out the "universe" so that the abusive husband stop being abusive (regardless of what type of person this husband is). I am sorry to say, but this is pure superstition, and a big flaw in your 7words system. This is just against any rational and algorithmic method of thinking and decision making. 
Let me explain.
First of all according to this mystic believe (everything that occurs is the responsibility of the observer. We attract to ourselves the proof of our imperfections) everyone who ever suffered in this world has drawn the suffering to themselves because of their own fears and feelings. So according to this mystic believe all the victims of genocides in the history, victims of the infamous Jewish holocaust, all the woman and children who were mascaraed during so many wars in history, all the people who were killed or displaced due to natural disasters were victims of themselves. they caused their own bad fate, because they were afraid of having that fate. this doesn't make sense to me and is absolutely wrong way of seeing things. I am sure so many people who suffered in this world, suffered without any fault of their own. This mystic believe don't work. there are just so many exceptions to this rule which shows that it doesn't work. 
Also going back to our wife example, lets divide all the wives in the world to two category. First, the wives who are mistreated by their husbands and second the wives who aren't mistreated by their husbands. I am sure both category of wives mentioned here are similarly afraid and worried of being abused or mistreated by their husbands. So again, why some wives never get mistreated by their husband and some does if this mystic believe is true. 
that's all for the mystic believe. its wrong. the two examples above perfectly disproves it for me. 
Now I want to say, that I agree that we draw our circumstances to us. But we do that by our own actions and thoughts in an active process not through something outside and beyond our control and in the way of effecting the universe's balance which is susceptible to a healer's manipulation. When we fear a condition we tend to make decisions that actually lead us to that condition. And this is a common human reaction. When we fear something, we often focus on it so much that somehow with the decisions that we make and our actions we draw ourself to that circumstances. But as I said it is through our actions, not through some sort of energy and effecting the universe's balance and strange and obscure things through our stomachs. 
So going back to the example of mistreated wife, I agree that the wife must not blame anyone, because it is her fault for being in that marriage on the first place. she perhaps didn't make the right choice and perhaps the practicality of that marriage is where she has to focus her attention. she in no way in need of a healer but a lawyer. because as I showed the healer option is superstition and hypothetically wrong. 
Apart from the self-defeating nature of this mystic believe, there are several issues that can arise by adopting this idea when counselling/giving advise to individuals: 
1) It is confusing the "cause" and "effect". The Solar Plexus of the wife is painful because of the bad behaviour of the husband, not vice versa. Its not the wife's fault if she is being mistreated (its very very likely to be the husband's fault) 
2) by giving this promise to an individual that she can change her husband by going to a "healer" (to balance the universe in her favour by manipulating her solar plexus) she is encouraged to remain in an abusive relationship, because she is given a false hope, so she is possibly put in a position to suffer repeatedly while she is wasting her time with a healer trying to balance the universe through her stomach. 
3) In severe cases she can potentially get exposed to danger when the healer is presented as a viable option to resolve her problem with a husband. The universe is not going to change in her favour throguh her Solar Plexus. I know it won't. I disproved this mystic believe already. So while she is waiting and trying the healing she is at risk. what if the husband gets too violent eventually while she is wasting her time with a mystic belive? This idea of going to the healer only delays/prevents the decision making process to begin.  
4) I understand that healing is to sympathise with people and stronger the mutual trust is, the bigger the effect in removing the pain. but in our example the pain is the consequence, it is there for a reason, it is a sensory information we have evolved to feel in order to try to change our circumstances when the circumstances are not in our favour. By attacking the symptom which is the pain caused by the circumstances as a result of healing process the suffering person is only being distracted from her real problem.

James Burgess never answered to any of the 4 concerns I raised with him above. He ignored my emails and question from this point onward.

Also later on when I realized he is not the type to take responsibility of his ideas and actions and is not the type which accept criticism and tries to answer questions and is authoritarian about his ideas I tried to attract his attention to the fact that people may get misguided by him and his so called guidance(which he actively puts himself in this position to act as a healer and teacher and guide and etc.) and so I tried to encourage him to answer to my questions and to consider them. Here my email to James Burgess:

I think we have a reverse understanding of mysticism in a Sufi context. Because the mysticism I know and was in touch with while I was growing up in Iran is all for gaining "faith" through "reason". It defines "faith" as an state that people reach through the process of "reasoning". Which in my opinion is some sort of common sense.  
So both in a Sufi/Mystic context and a common sense context, I find it difficult to put "faith" above "reason". Because as I said there should have been a "reason" for someone to have gained his/her "faith" on the first place. (in his/her heart! the right organ as per your beliefs I believe!) I say that because we are not born with the concept of God. We learn about the concept of god while we are growing up. So this way or another in some point in our lives we "reason" and learn about the concept of God.  
So "faith" is a consequence of "reason". And "faith" is not beyond and above "reason". I think the hypothesis of putting "faith" above "reason" is wrong. Faith is a dynamic process, its a work in progress, since it is the outcome of "reason" so one's "faith" changes when the "reasons" which shape it change. Another cause and effect! 
So in this context I find you very unkind for calling me faithless.  Because I do have faith, but the "reasons" which are creating my faith are "now" different from yours (they weren't must different previously). And I am ready to change my "faith"as long as I can be convinced to do so. As I did many times before. 
Also I need to point out that atheism is not a believe. Atheism is in fact "lack of a believe". its simply when you don't believe in the concept of a creator. And according to your point if god exists and if he is all-knowing and he is the one who created this world why he made it such a miserable place? Does he take pleasure to see us suffer? does he enjoy to see what is going on in Syria for example? why he doesn't intervene? or is he just a useless god? which you think we should have "faith" in regardless of his failures? 
And you are not wrong! I wasn't looking for your "faith" when I reached you. I was looking for your knowledge and your reasons which develop your "faith" for you. This is because l put my "faith" in "knowledge", and that means that my "faith" dynamically changes based on the "knowledge" I have at any given moment of time. I can see our difference to be exactly at this point. You don't follow the same approach. You seem to have a static, as per scripture "faith". And you select your knowledge in order to justify your predefined "faith". One should do the reverse in my humble opinion.  
Also I recognize and respect your "faith" no matter how different to mine it is. You are entitled to your opinion and to your faith. However when you are out with your opinion and seeking opportunities in order to teach it to others, when you are actively seeking to influence others with it, and at the same time you also offer counselling/healing and etc. on the basis of your faith, then you have to be ready to accept criticism in a public space, you need to be ready to convince and to get convinced. That is how it works. You are saying you neither want to convince nor be convinced. But you are actively working on the "convincing" part by your teachings - which is your undisputed right to do so - however what is lacking here is your willingness to hear criticism and to get convinced by it as well. 
Because I can tell you that right now, right here, I am ready to be convinced by you. I reached you for your knowledge, the knowledge which could in turn shape my dynamic "faith" through the process of "reasoning" as I explained. However it seems to me that you are not ready to offer me your reasons, as well as you are not ready to see your ideas and your faith to be criticised and changed in the same way as mine do. 
I find this rather disappointing because we are all prone to mistakes and misconceptions as human beings. I am, and you are. so it is important that we are open to consider the criticism and to change our "faith" when need be, because we are responsible for this faith as we are influencing our lives with it, we are influencing the world around us with it and we are influencing other people around us with it.  
This responsibility is doubled when we put ourselves in the position of a teacher. When we provide counselling, when we provide advise to people about crucial issues of their lives, then it is more important for us to be able to offer a higher level of "truth" (the truth is unlimited and is not absolute, we will never know the truth, we just can learn as much of it as we can) but the way it seems to me you are not open to re-evaluate and reconsider your point of views. you are not open to evolve your "faith". You want to keep it static, while you are actively influencing people lives with it. have you ever asked yourself; what if your teachings are not 100% correct? and what if someone is being misguided by them? 
My disappointment is furthered because based on your last response, I feel you are placing your opinion above normal criticism, and you are hesitant to put your ideas through the essential course of debate in order to justify them in a constructive way. You expect me to accept them as they are. to have no input of myself. I wasn't looking for your prayers, I was looking for answers to the flaws that I thought I found in the decision making techniques you are offering as remedy to people. You refused to consider and answer.
And as I expected James Burgess never answered my questions.

No comments:

Post a Comment