alright, i got the impression from a few individuals... ok mostly glen... that there MAY be some differing religious opinions in our lil group of trumpet playing friends. so i thought i might start a CIVILIZED conversation on said topic to see what you all think about religion.
for the record, im getting a minor in religious studies for this very reason; i like to know what people believe and why they believe it, such things are interesting to me.
fine print: debating is welcome, however i suggest that we try to keep it polite... i dont want to start a holy war here. also, using the phrase "thats just stupid" and similar statements, are unacceptable; we are perfectly capable of holding an intelligent conversation.
i myself was raised catholic and my family is fairly religious. i am currently not practicing as i have qualms with the contradictions and imperfections of the "perfect being" that is God.
GO!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
Oh hell yeah, look who's responsible for starting a post...go me.
This is my area right here...I loooove talking religion.
I'll keep it civil though, I won't say anything offensive...well, nothing intentionally offensive. For starters, I'll just begin by saying that I too am an Atheist...though probably a much stronger one than Chrissy. That's all I'll say for now...but I'm looking forward to commenting on other people's comments...:-)
for clarification: i would not classify myself as an atheist, i am more of a humanist. granted humanism does lack in a belief in god...
Oh, Humanist, Atheist, Agnostic...your average hardcore Christian doesn't respect the difference. You think Pat Robertson cares? All he knows is that you're going to hell if you don't change your ways...
well now thats a fair point. but before we start a cross burning ceremony, lets hear what the people of faith have to say :P
oh, this is interesting, however, at this current moment I don't have the time to respond the way I'd like. Belief, I have a ton to say regarding religion, but 2:11 on Monday afternoon is not the time. Just think of me as charging my battery. :)
belief? What was I saying, I meant to write "Believe Me" in my last comment.
I'd like to participate in this too... and I'll be monitoring this to make sure no attacks occur, so don't you worry Glen.
I grew up Christian, but over the course of the past year found myself not necessarily questioning Christianity or religion itself, but questioning my reason for belief in Christianity. If you'd like me to go into more details, I'd be happy to do so.
Currently I stand at a neutral position... my particular desire is not to follow a specific religion, but rather if there is a god or God, to have a reason beyond that which is physically tangible as the basis for my belief in one.
To respond to Chris' post, and talk about religion in and of itself, I would say I'm not too well-versed in religions of the world. However, I do find it interesting that multiple religions base their faith on Jesus Christ or at least reference him as being important. Most notably, these religions include Catholicism, other Christian faiths (Protestants, Methodists, Non-denominational, etc.), Mormonism, and Judaism.
In regards then to Jesus, is this plurality of religions that center around or mention Jesus prove that he was indeed a historical figure? Particularly for Glen, from the atheist stand point, do you believe that he was indeed a man that walked the Earth and do not count him as Savior, or do you believe Jesus is just made up?
That should be enough for people to chew on at the moment... and I hope more people chew indeed.
My theory on ol' J.C. is this. I'm sure he existed. What I have a hard time swallowing is that he was born of a virgin, could turn water to wine, walk on water, heal the sick, and was killed only to come back a couple of days later. I picture him (to use a point of reference that's relevant to Purdue trumpets) as kind of a Steven Davis (sp?) type of person. Now, I've never met Steven Davis, but already there's this mystique about him, just through all the stories I've heard...from EVERYBODY. I think Jesus was kind of like that, a guy that was at all the right parties, and everybody knew. Nobody really knew what his deal was, but they all liked him an awful lot, and maybe he could do some awesome party tricks. He was probably good with the ladies. And so, from this humble beginning, through word of mouth, everybody wanted to meet Jesus, cuz the stories they heard were so damn cool.
As for the New Testament itself, being the stories of "all" the apostles (I put all in quotations because doubt has been cast thanks to a fairly recent discovery of what may be the gospel of Judas), I sincerely doubt the validity of them. For starters, there are many points that contradict each other, and still more that contradict points in the Old Testament. Secondly, through all the translations, revisions, etc. etc., much of the original language has been extremely perverted, leaving us with potentially very different interpretations than what the original authors may have intended. And finally, we're putting an awful lot of faith in these guys by assuming they didn't lie to begin with.
But don't think that my beef lies just with Christianity...it stretches to nearly all religions, with a few notable exceptions...Buddhism's pretty awesome, from what little I understand of it. And Satanism is really cool. Contrary to popular belief, it has nothing to do with drawing pentagrams and sacrificing goats, but centers around basically doing whatever the hell you want, and enjoying it, so long as it doesn't stop another from doing whatever the hell he wants, and enjoying that.
That's one of my big issues with most "mainstream" religions (all sects of Christianity, Judaism, Islam); they stick their noses into people's private lives, condemning those who choose to lead a different lifestyle.
For more information on religion, see Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion...possibly the greatest, most thought-provoking book ever written, for theists and non-theists alike.
Peace it easy chicken greasy,
Glen "Nuke" Wallace
"over the course of the past year found myself not necessarily questioning Christianity or religion itself, but questioning my reason for belief in Christianity."
i have taught you well young padawan. recently ive come to question whether the goals of christianity can even be fulfilled through the religion itself. it preaches love and selflessness, yet with the promise of eternal salvation, it becomes selfish to love as it is done for the sake of salvation instead of for the sake of the other. i am fairly certain that the ideal christian mindset can only be achieved outside of the realm of religion, where the motive is not for self gain.
"In regards then to Jesus, is this plurality of religions that center around or mention Jesus prove that he was indeed a historical figure?"
while i must admit this fact strengthens the argument for his existence, it does not prove much. honestly it all COULD have started out as a campfire story or something which got passed on through the ages until people wrote it down.
supposedly though, there are historical records which are in agreement with some parts of the story of jesus's life. remember, he was executed by the romans who were a formal society. even back then politicians were loaded with paperwork. these days it is fairly widely accepted that around 30AD there was a man born who people called jesus (or really "Yešû`" in aramaic) who was crucified. other than that, the details of his life are left up to the historical credibility of the bible.
and now, on to my very young apprentice nuke.
i am copying and pasting your post to an email to stePHen davis right now, he will either laugh, cry, or both when he reads it. i couldnt have planned this discussion any better :)
i agree with most of your beefs with religion, but i think my biggest complaint is the element of faith itself. at what point do we draw the line between faith and gullibility? a man takes his son for a hike and tries to kill him, they put him away from attempted murder, but when abraham does it, he is called the "knight of faith." perhaps this man did hear a voice that told him to kill his son, but how was he supposed to know that the little green man on his shoulder isnt god? likewise, how are we supposed to know the god of abraham wasnt a little green man on his shoulder? it is the idea of knowledge that seduces me. what can we be certain of in life? philosophers have struggled since the beginning of history to answer this question, and i doubt we have yet found the right answer. but, if i cannot be certain of anything, i still see it as being more real than believing in that which is uncertain. i do not possess in my being the level of faith, of blind trust that is necessary to be a true believer. i need something more factual, or even more logical. i need more answers to the question "why?" than just "take it on faith." it will never be enough for me.
wow i kinda went on a rant just now... i didnt mean to do that... then again, that tends to be when i have my best rants :)
keep it up guys this is great! i know there are still many people who are very opinionated on the subject who havent said anything yet, i want to hear each and every one!
I believe a common theme has been found by those of us in this discussion so far, mainly Chris, Glen, and I, and that is that you can't blindly accept everything as truth. One example in recent history (which I cite only as an example, and not as something to be discussed) is the Holocaust. There are those that still belief, as far as I know, that the Holocaust never happened. This happened roughly 60 years ago. Jesus' life, roughly 2000 years ago, and certainly we've all learned about events that date even further back, to thousands of years BC. So, I think, choosing what to believe about history in and of itself can be a challenge.
Glen, I would gladly read The God Delusion, or any other book from either side of the issue, but I think we both know that if any such book was read, an individual would enter that reading with a preconceived bias. Not to mention I simply don't have time to do that right now. Thankfully Chrissy's getting a minor in this stuff.
However, it's hard to play the card of "read this, or read that," because in the realm of the possibility of the existence of god(s) or God, this still introduces putting trust in man on the subject, which I simply rather not do on this topic. I would gladly read such books, and it may change my opinion, however, no such text available would bring me to know God or if god(s) or God definitely exists.
Glen, if you could, I'd like to know a little more about your background in regards to religion. Are your parents of a religious faith (i.e. what did you grow up in)? You also mentioned that religions tend to poke into peoples' personal lives. Is this from personal experience or from learning this somewhere?
For the record Chris, and not to insult you by any means, I wouldn't say you taught me to question my beliefs (and perhaps that's not what you really meant). This was something I came to on my own.
I'd really like for some people that claim a religious affiliation to jump into this conversation. Sean, I hope you return here at some point, or that anybody else jumps in for that matter.
As I am an admin of this blog, and involving myself very much with this particular post, I'll be policing it very carefully.
I only cited The God Delusion because I just recently read it, and found it extremely enlightening. But it was written not for already-Atheists, but mostly for the purpose of "converting" those in doubt of their faith; it offers a great new way of thinking. It opened my eyes to many, many new things I had never considered, both about religion, and life in general.
I am one of the few that was brought up Atheist. My parents were both raised in very religious homes; indeed, at one point in his life, my father was studying to be ordained as a priest. He doesn't talk about it much, but from what I understand, that's when he really started to think about the Bible and what Christianity stood for, and ultimately renounced it. I dunno what my mom's story is, I know she was raised Catholic, and went to Catholic school until college, when she moved to Arizona to attend Arizona State University, and I think that's when she questioned her faith. I don't take it to the extremities of my dad, who, upon arriving in any hotel room, does nothing before finding the Gideon Bible and throwing it out, but I thank my parents for nothing more than I thank them for raising me to question everything. The option for religion was always on the table, and at any time in my life I could have embraced God, but chose not to. The whole concept of it has just never appealed to the logical part of my mind.
As for Abraham, to me, that particular Bible story resembles nothing more than the first known example of the Nuremburg defense: "I was only obeying orders."
And once more Chrissy, it's almost as though you've read my mind...the biggest issue to my mind, and indeed, to the minds of all logical, thoughtful human beings, are the GIANT leaps of faith religion requires one to take.
I dunno how I feel about Stephen Davis reading my comparison of him to Jesus...what if he gets angry? He might be a spiteful God!
I would like also to reiterate the points made by Eric and Chrissy, that I look forward to reading the comments of others...blog it up trumpets, come on! We're like...the most opinionated group of people ever. Between the 70-something of us, we should be able to find more than 4 of us who wanna talk about this...
Until next time, if you can't be good, be careful.
Glen "Nuke" Wallace
Thanks for the background info Glen, that helps me understand where you're coming from.
I don't have a problem with the citation of The God Delusion, and it may be something I might be interested in reading at some point. At the same time, and I think it might be worth you considering too, you may want to look into a book from the other side of the fence, one that promotes religion or Christianity. An example I would like to cite here would be Lee Strobel's books, such as The Case for Christ and The Case for a Creator. I have not read either of these books myself, but I've heard good things about them.
Again, I will say that these books are of man, trying to understand something that can never be understood through mental or logical means. Should God exist, I believe it is a spiritual occurrence that should direct someone to believe in Him. This is part of where I stand confused right now... up to this point in my life, the idea of God, Christianity, etc. makes logical sense to me. I feel that I've never experienced a personal spiritual experience with God, and that's where my current stance comes from.
I currently believe I hold a very neutral stand point in this debate (should anybody else enter it). I currently am not professing anything as being specifically true or untrue. I'm open for discussion.
Should no one else choose to participate in this discussion, I would actually like to then discuss atheism further and my thoughts on its implications. I'd like to wait a bit before I do that to see if anybody joins us.
I couldn't agree more with your "books of man" theory Eric, what you said is very true. My only retort, then, would be this. Aren't all the Holy Books (Bible, Koran, Torah, Book of Tao, etc.) books of man, really? Were they not written, then edited, translated, re-edited, re-translated, many times over, by mankind? And even if one chooses to believe the word of God dictated at least the writings of The Big 3 (Bible, Torah, Koran), one cannot ignore the various rewritings, editings, and translatings mentioned above. And, since we're on the Bible...have you ever read it? Like, sat down and read through it? The question is open to anybody, Christians, non-theists, any Muslims we may have in the section, whoever. Much of the stories contained there-in are things I wouldn't let my children read, and certainly don't contain stories with morals I would like to teach them (if and when they exist).
For instance, the tale of Sodom and Gomorrah, one of my favorites. Poor Abraham's nephew Lot is a good man living in a bad neighborhood. When the Big Guy decides to eliminate the town, He figures it'd be nice to give Lot and his family a chance to get the hell out of Dodge, so He sends two angels to tell Lot of his city's impending doom. So far, so good...vengeful God, but at least the good guy's getting away. This is where the trouble starts. The townsmen get wind of the presence of two men in Lot's home, and went there to (what else?) sodomize them. Lot says no; good for him. "I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly. Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes..." (Genesis 19:7-8)
...huh? Yes, you read correctly...Lot offers his virgin daughters up to be gang-raped. But wait! The plot thickens! The angels intervene, striking the would-be rapists blind, allowing Lot & Co. to get away unscathed, just as the city is being destroyed...all except for poor Mrs. Lot, who made the unfortunate mistake of turning to look at the spectacle, and was promptly turned to a pillar of salt (seriously). But Lot and his daughters continue, seeking refuge in a cave. Feeling the need to continue the family line, and apparently unaware that they could just, you know, move on to the next town, Lot's daughters formulate a plan. On two successive nights, they decide, it would be necessary to get dear ol' dad drunk and bang him. (Don't get mad at me...I'm just the messenger.) And this family, by the way, was the BEST that Sodom had to offer.
There are other examples of men offering the women (from wives to concubines to virgin daughters) in their lives up to be raped riddled throughout the Bible. Some "Good" Book, eh?
Keep it real y'all...real safe.
Glen "Nuke" Wallace
i dont have the time to write a full response yet, but ill get to it i swear!
oh, and i was just kidding eric. i didnt mean all of your beliefs stemmed from me, twas just a joke.
Haha, that's what I figured Chris, just wanted to clarify.
Good post, Glen. I wish I could say I've taken the time to research the other books you mention (Koran, Torah, etc.), but my reading has been limited to the Bible. I decided in high school and my earlier years in college that reading the Bible more frequently and studying it might be something worth doing to deepen my faith and understanding in Christianity.
The Bible indeed was written by man, but all texts are believed to be inspired by God. In other words, they were written by man with God's guidance/direction. As far as there being huge numbers of various translations and editions and such, most new translations that come about are actually taking from the oldest Greek and Hebrew texts available. No one took, say, the New International Version and translated it into the Living Testimony Bible (I don't know if the Living Testimony Bible is an actually translation, just pulled it out of my head).
As far as reading goes, the Bible itself is divided into the Old Testament, and the New Testament, as I'm sure you know. The story you've presented comes from the Old Testament. Much of the Old Testament is rather confusing to most people, I would say, and this has led to what are known as New Testament Christians. If I were well-versed in Apologetics, I'd be able to explain Old Testament stuff, but alas, I am not. So, like you, I am equally confused by much of what is presented in the Old Testament.
As far as I'm concerned, the New Testament seemed rather cohesive to me. Everything actually ties together very well, despite all the different authors. Still, I can't help but ask wonder why so much has changed from the Old Testament, to the New Testament, today.
In the Old Testament, God interacted with his people. While most of it was indirect, there were those that he actually spoke with directly, or spoke to through indirect means (i.e. Moses and the burning bush). Prophets were those that were able to directly interact with God and relay his messages to everybody else. After Christ came, died for our sins, and ascended back to heaven, the task of spreading Christianity was left only to man. Looking at today, as far as I know, there are no prophets, but Christians will say it is possible to be in a personal relationship with God. This is something I missed while I claimed to be a Christian... I knew much about the Bible and such, but didn't really feel like I knew God, or like I knew Jesus Christ. This has led me to where I am now.
That's a lot to read... input from anybody besides Glen, Chris, and I would be very appreciated.
Wow, that’s a lot to respond to….and it’s going on midnight, I’m still not done with all my homework for tomorrow, but I cannot help but join in especially because maybe we need some fresh ideas.
Ok so here’s my background: I grew up in the Catholic Church and stayed there until I was 19. Last year after attending a Lutheran church for awhile, I decided to become a member. I still currently practice Lutheranism, and I feel that my faith in the Christian faith has really flourished since coming to college and switching denominations.
Alrighty, well I really don’t have the time to address all the issues brought up here, but I’d like to touch on the Old Testament versus New Testament a little. First off, addressing Glen’s reference to Genesis 19 and also some of what Eric said, I think it’s important to recognize the reason for the difference between these two books and the purposes they serve. The Old Testament is really for teaching purposes. There are many lessons that we can draw from the OT; it gives many examples of people of faith, people of little faith who defied God and his laws…it demonstrates God’s authority and shows the consequences that could occur if we break his commandments. It’s really a book of law that shows the unfortunate reality of our sinful nature. God is powerful, full of wrath, and capable of really anything. On the other hand, the OT, like the NT, also shows God’s mercy and grace…..I mean how many chances did God give the Israelites? Also to counteract Glen’s mention of Lot’s story….think about it this way: God showed his mercy to Lot. Lot and his daughters were saved from the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah…God allowed them to escape, and then he listened to Lot when he asked God to hold off on the destruction. Lot’s whole family would have been spared had they listened to Lot’s warning….that’s a lesson to get out of this that God shouldn’t be taken lightly. They rejected God, disobeyed him, and therefore suffered the consequences. It’s just like when children disobey their parents….usually consequences are involved. It’s the same idea, and no one seems to have a problem with children being disciplined and in fact most would probably agree that it’s necessary. A basic understanding of right and wrong is necessary for survival if nothing else. Vice versa: the NT is usually seen as a book full of love and grace….yet there are warnings in there as well. Like in Romans 6:23—“For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” I actually just did a study involving some of Romans 6 (specifically 6:15-23) which conveys the reality of sin among everyone. Anyway, the point of that verse was to show you that even the NT, full of promises and hope, still shows God’s authority over us and the importance of obedience towards God and his laws. Back to the OT: it also serves another purpose which is to prophesize about the coming of Christ like in Isaiah 7 (referring to birth by a virgin) and 53 (“He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.”) Luckily, these prophecies were fulfilled in the NT, Jesus came, died, and rose from the dead, thereby washing away our sin, bearing the weight of all sin. So even though, the OT may be hard to understand, I believe we can get something out of it, lessons can be taken from it, and it’s necessary to set up the coming of Christ and in that way provides hope for all.
Ok, enough about that for the moment….on to Eric’s comment regarding God’s direct contact with people in the OT…I cannot really provide the exact “why” for God doesn’t not really doing that anymore but I can tell you what I think. With Christ’s coming and now the written Bible, I don’t think there’s a need for direct contact anymore. We now have at our disposal everything we need to know about Christ and salvation…..we might not have all the answers, but we certainly know the means to salvation (well I guess opinions on that can vary but I’m referring to if you are specifically a Christian). God even warns us against curiosity of that which God has not revealed (Revelation 22:18-19 and Deuteronomy 29:29.) Also in the Gospels, Satan tempts Jesus trying to get him to prove that He is truly the son of God. I know, Eric, that you are struggling with having a spiritual connection with God, but do you think that God is going to try to appear to you or try to talk to you?...maybe that’s not what you mean, but you did mention this struggle in the same paragraph regarding direct contact. I think humans desiring that contact is much like the temptation of Jesus. We cannot demand that God show us a miracle to verify His existence. God reveals Himself probably in many ways and all according to His will, not ours. Just because there isn’t this direct contact with humans like in the OT doesn’t mean that God isn’t capable of doing such…..but again I think it’s really because we don’t need that anymore since Christ’s coming, and now God speaks to us in different ways. To really understand this, at least to the best of our ability, and to be satisfied that we don’t know the answers, faith must play a role. Faith, as Hebrews 11:1 puts it, is “being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see.” A big part of that is accepting that you don’t have all the answers…whether you believe in God or some type of higher power, I think we can all agree that no one has all the answers. In order to believe and trust in anything, we have to accept this fact. We put our trust and faith in so many other things, that I think it would be simple to do the same for God. I mean how many times do you put your faith in another human being, someone who is fallible? And how many times are you disappointed? Probably many times…yet we will do it again and again because that’s part of having and building relationships. I just don’t get why it’s any different with religion.
Ok, I hope all that made sense, and I have lots more I could probably say….but I started this a little before midnight, and it’s now 1:20am…..and I still have homework for tomorrow!!! So I’ll check back later and see the responses and maybe write some more!!!
"God is powerful, full of wrath, and capable of really anything."
yes, this is what it says, but arent christians supposed to look at god as love? god is love, and all things that are love come from god etc...
plus, the whole point in believing in the afterlife is that you wont get punished in this life, but in the next life; god is not wrathful, but "just" in that you choose your afterlife.
plus i have some decent questions about the afterlife... and actually for the most part liked the catholic teachings [purgatory specifically, which most people actually understand differently than it is taught (i can elaborate if you wish)], but i only like them if the assumption of god is made.
"I mean how many chances did God give the Israelites?"
hahaha if he destroyed the israelites, who would he have to worship him? god wouldnt destroy his ONLY followers. if the purpose of creation is for people to worship god, then that makes god kinda egotistical, would he really risk his only source of satisfaction? i think not, thats like a crack addict flushing his stash. (i didnt actually mean to compare god to a crack addict, it just kinda happened that way...)
"A basic understanding of right and wrong is necessary for survival if nothing else."
i agree with this concept, but i think glens point is that this steers people toward a malformed conscience. it leads us to live by "might equals right." are you saying god is a marxist? whoa! and i thought i was bold. instead of teaching us to blindly obey, we should be taught why what god wants us to do is right, so that when we dont get a direct command (most of the time... arguably ALL of the time) we may properly judge the moral implications of the situation. such a teaching does not do that.
"the NT, full of promises and hope, still shows God’s authority over us and the importance of obedience towards God and his laws."
1. god has no laws governing us. if he had LAWS we would be incapable of doing the things he tells us not to. the only laws we have are those which define human nature, which i challenge you to define... there is so much variability in man because our nature is so unclear.
2. god has no authority over us (at least, not in life. i will admit he has authority in death, but not in life). the concept of free will denies this.
as a side note: i find it interesting that by creating us with free will, god limited himself. but if god is infinite, he cannot be limited in ANY way... a paradox for the ages, is god limited or do we not have free will?
"Jesus came, died, and rose from the dead, thereby washing away our sin"
argh... this is one of the most frustrating concepts of christianity; to think that man is incapable of sin. here is my visualization: jesus dies, and by doing so he takes on the sin of the whole world for the entire history of the world. so in a sense, every time we "sin" he takes a hit for us. its like he is eternally strapped to the pillar and scourged everytime we sin. how is that fair? not only to him, but to us. which is more fair: to have to stand up like a man and take the punishment that is due to you, or to have the authority figure stand over someone you love and say "if you dont do what i tell you, i will hurt him!" isnt that what jesus did? by "dying for our sins" he is now the leverage god uses to get us to do his bidding. (and now i have successfully compared god to a crack addict AND a mob boss, all in the same post... wow!)
"We cannot demand that God show us a miracle to verify His existence. God reveals Himself probably in many ways and all according to His will, not ours."
here i have admiration for you amanda. to some extent i wish i could believe this, i wish that i could not question, i wish it were that simple for me. i find faith like this to be an admirable quality. but at the same time it can be dangerous, and because of this it scares me a bit.
"We put our trust and faith in so many other things, that I think it would be simple to do the same for God."
i would agree with this, but in this case of putting faith in others, it rarely comes with consequences so high as eternal damnation vs. salvation... that changes things a bit. apples n oranges i think.
great post amanda! it got me thinking quite a bit. i hope i didnt offend anybody with my response. you have to understand that one of my tools of argument is humor. if it sounds absurd and totally radical, then it probably is and is intended to be satirical.
keep em comin!!
It seems this post has kind of died... perhaps because the comments were getting to long?
Amanda, I'd like to respond to your post at some point, I just haven't gotten the chance yet. Maybe we could just get together some time for a chat.
OOH OOH OOH! we could start a discussion group! not just about religion, but about anything worth discussing; ethics, politics (within reason), school, philosohpy (yeah, i slipped it in there :) ), ANYTHING.
this is what coffee shops were made for!
Hmmm... that actually might be kind of cool.
I concur!!! Oh and I definitely would like to respond to some posts, I just haven't found or I guess made the time....and I suppose right now at quarter to 3 in the morning, although the best time to discuss things such as religion and philosophy, I should probably hold off once more...especially considering I have to study some more for my Spanish midterm!!! Know though, that I would much rather be posting on here =)
Post a Comment