The word "GOD"

When is it “true” to say: “it is raining outside”, or to say “God exists”? When we think about the first question, it seems easy to answer: It is raining outside when it is actually raining outside. It might seem faulty, on a logical or a mathematical level, but in fact everyone will understand the statement and accept it. It is as if when we put the word “actually” there, we mean to refer to the “original” definition of the word rain, which everybody knows and everybody agrees on. When we said “actually” we have called upon history to bring to our presence the meaning and definition of the word “rain”. We have called upon the first inventors and users of the word, when they first put the sounds together to coin a word that explains the water that falls from the sky. “It is raining outside” is true when what has been agreed on once as the definition of rain is happening.

Our quest there seems to have a historical linguistic nature. But what about the second question; when is it true to say “God exists”? God exists if He actually exists. What does it mean to say “God” or “to exist”?

Let us call again upon our ancestors who first coined the word; when they first put the three sounds together G, O and D and used it to explain or refer to something; an impossible inquiry indeed, but of a great value. What is it that they explained with this word? And did it refer to anything? Let us imagine the first people who used the word “God”, what did they mean by it? was it something they saw or felt? Was it revealed or inspired by who they called “God”? is it a thing, a concept, a feeling or an idea? And before they first used the word, did “God” not exist? Didn’t they experience, feel or sense what motivated them to invent the word prior to that? Was it not revealed yet?

On the other hand, was the expression “God exists” used when the word “God” was first invented; i.e. are these two words meant to be used together? Could it be a later construction, and that “God” was never meant to “Exist”?
The word “God” since its creation and to this day is existent. It meant something to the people who created it, but does it still have the same meaning? Given that the word is still existent and used, is what it meant/referred to once upon a time also still existent? Does the survival of the word help us knowing whether God actually exists or not?

Let us examine another word with the same tools; the word “Dragon”. It is believed now that these creatures have never existed, but yet the word “Dragon” was created and still survives to this day. The meanings and feelings associated with the word “Dragon” however has vanished. Nietzsche would have described that by saying “Dragons are dead. We have killed them, You and I” and everyone would agree with him. Dragons, as once existed in the perception of the people, are indeed dead. One might wonder; will questioning “God” lead the word to the same destiny?

30000 children die of poverty everyday ... I hold myself personally responsible for their death

this morning ...

More Rumbles:

My cousin in getting married ... to a younger guy ... this is good news ... she told me he almost finishing studying medicine ...
Later I knew that they are getting married cause they found out that she is pregnant ..

I was thinking to myself, "will he stay with her if she didn't have the baby? if she didn't get married?"

There was a conference about Iranian young women writers ... They were talking about unique kind of writing, by unique women ... those women, like my cousin, got pregnant without getting married ... and ... just as in my society, this thing should NEVER happen ... never ACCEPTABLE ...

They talked about a book of one of the writers ...they quoted bits of her book ... It was something like: "I had to walk up the mountain, in the desert, in the hot sun" ... she couldn't write about her problems straightly ... she had to make sure that no one knows that she got pregnant without getting married ... but still, she had to write about it ... I would expect that she would burst if she didn't ... what a significant literature ... the ability of talking about something without ever coming close to it ... amazing ..

At one point, talker in the conference, from behind his table, asked the question that was buzzing in my head: "is she going to get married if people knew that she got pregnant in this way" ... as I was leading my way out of the hall, cause I had to go to the toilet, I told them: "No, she will not get married ... the guy who is marrying her wouldn't marry her if she did not get pregnant" ..

I heard some of the comments while I was in the toilet .. then ... I woke up ...
The dream had to stop, cause I had to go realistically to toilet ... :(

to clarify,,, for health and safety issues,,, for the sake of my cousins' reputation sake ... none of the mentioned here is true .. all jsut a dream








.

How I measure my life

It is my life,,, measured by “my contribution to change”

Casualties and Survivors:

Rumbles

It is not as bad to the dead ones as it is to the living ones. It is appalling to us, the living ones, cause it is inhumane, unjust. We don’t like it because we do not accept our submission to it.

I'm not worried about the dead. In fact, i am happy for them. I feel sad for the remaining ones.

WAR ...

The man of compromises – the man of grey:

Rumbles:

I’ve always called myself a man of compromises, someone who does not take either sides of the fight, always finds solutions in the middle, to have the grey as my playground. But, now, the white and the black seem so beautiful, so tempting. An urge to move from my land and let go of my compromises. .. .. I am still struggling to be in the middle .. but ...should I stay in the middle? .. the white is so beautiful, and the black is even more gorgeous .. the right is evil and the left is the right ... should I stay in the middle?? Is grey boring? Am I lonely in my greyness??

Rumbles:

The greater school of thought will have in it’s foundations all oppositions. That is, to have both opposing parties in one institution working together to develop their understanding of their oppositions. This is a major problem in politics, socialities, religion, as well as other places (), where thought is developed amongst one-sided-view people, developed and extremed, although the common ground that they share is very apparent and demanding, they keep moving apart. This is very apparent in crazy Religions these days. Same things in politics and social structures. Parties will usually tend to group and isolate themselves, and exclude opposing parties, thence never really listening or communicating with them, creating a severe sense of Otherness and alienation, etc... Hence, instead of having an integrated society, we have groupings of incommunicable binary “Other” s. (the thing that usually doesn’t happen is trying to communicate with the Other and “really” listen to them.
When they listen, are they really listening?

Intro.

This is my space where I am going to think and reflect .. and why do I need this space?? it's the trend .. people don't want to talk anymore, nor do they want to listen .. (not all of them though) .. I don't want to start being negative, cause I am negative ... I'll leave that to come later ..

I think and think .. but thoughts remain thoughts, more like dreams, they fade away ... unless recorded ... and that's what I want to try .. unpack my head here ...

Yes .. the text has to be big and bold .. cause I want to read it easily .. I want to see it there, naked and obscene, with all what I hate in it ... and after all, this is what people are scared of, and this is what I don't want to be scared of anymore ... seeing my ugliness, understanding it, and dealing with it.

Since I usually like doing things perfectly in my life, I'm not going to do this here .. or at least I will try my best not to..... I don't want to read what I wrote again .. I don't want to revise that ... things that are revised are faked and BSd ..unreal ... I don't want that here ..