Evidence for God from Science

A great many parents put their hearts and souls into parenting, doing the very best that they can given their resources and circumstances. And when children mess up, the finger of blame is forever pointed back at the parents, often quite unfairly so.

I think it is worthwhile to remember that there are a great many other influences on a child and young person "out there" in society, and a parent cannot keep a child from being exposed to them forever. They often do what they can to alleviate the worse and ameliorate the best, but no parent is perfect anyway. Add to that the natural development of a young person where normal boundary testing and exploration will have them choosing to follow a peer group subculture, immersing themselves in influences beyond immediate parental control. Parents often find their youngsters going down paths they would not choose for them, and those parents can suffer considerable heartbreak when older children - young adults in their own right - make choices far from wise. Sometimes the results have nothing to do with the amount or quality of the love that parents have shown their children. I think that this should not be forgotten since not all children who go astray come from uncaring backgrounds.

I believe that most fathers share the same concerns as mothers regarding the health of their newborn infants, counting fingers and toes, etc. I remember being more concerned about the results of the heel prick test, having a false positive returned on one score. My concern was for my little one and how his life (should a second test confirm the first) would be seriously impaired and shortened - concern rightly placed for him, far less than for myself. I see nothing wrong in wanting the best for one's child, including a strong healthy body in every respect. How do you mean you were ostracized, Michelle? I do not understand that. What were you doing or saying for that to happen?

I know of a children's clothing firm that was started by a couple of mothers who wanted to produce a label of their own, designing clothes that better suited their own values. There are people who find themselves able to do such things, but not all of us are called to do so.

Presently in our news is a protest over TV advertising that exploits toddlers, having them climbing out of their cots, finding the car keys, driving off in a parent's car, picking up a hitch-hiking toddler, etc, etc - all assuming that this gives a bad example to toddlers who may try to follow suit. Oh my goodness! Whatever is a toddler doing watching these ads in the first place - or rather, what are the parents doing having the baby watching these ads on TV? There are far better things for parents and babies to be doing together. Since when did the TV become a human need? Yes, there are things we can do ourselves to be responsible parents, but when dealing with older teens we have to rely on the work we put in well before then and hope and pray our kids will eventually "find their brains" after that period of absence from them that many will go through.

Hmm, those are just some of my thoughts sparked off by your post, Michelle - for what they are worth.

Judah wrote:A great many parents put their hearts and souls in parenting, doing the very best that they can given their resources and circumstances. And when children mess up, the finger of blame is forever pointed back at the parents, often quite unfairly so.

I think it is worthwhile to remember that there are a great many other influences on a child and young person "out there" in society, and a parent cannot keep a child from being exposed to them forever. They often do what they can to alleviate the worse and ameliorate the best, but no parent is perfect anyway. Add to that the natural development of a young person where normal boundary testing and exploration will have them choosing to follow a peer group subculture, immersing themselves in influences beyond immediate parental control. Parents often find their youngsters going down paths they would not choose for them, and those parents can suffer considerable heartbreak when older children - young adults in their own right - make choices far from wise. Sometimes the results have nothing to do with the amount or quality of the love that parents have shown their children. I think that this should not be forgotten since not all children who go astray come from uncaring backgrounds.

I believe that most fathers share the same concerns as mothers regarding the health of their newborn infants, counting fingers and toes, etc. I remember being more concerned about the results of the heel prick test, having a false positive returned on one score. My concern was for my little one and how his life (should a second test confirm the first) would be seriously impaired and shortened - concern rightly placed for him, far less than for myself. I see nothing wrong in wanting the best for one's child, including a strong healthy body in every respect. How do you mean you were ostracized, Michelle? I do not understand that. What were you doing or saying for that to happen?

I know of a children's clothing firm that was started by a couple of mothers who wanted to produce a label of their own, designing clothes that better suited their own values. There are people who find themselves able to do such things, but not all of us are called to do so.

Presently in our news is a protest over TV advertising that exploits toddlers, having them climbing out of their cots, finding the car keys, driving off in a parent's car, picking up a hitch-hiking toddler, etc, etc - all assuming that this gives a bad example to toddlers who may try to follow suit. Oh my goodness! Whatever is a toddler doing watching these ads in the first place - or rather, what are the parents doing having the baby watching these ads on TV? There are far better things for parents and babies to be doing together. Since when did the TV become a human need? Yes, there are things we can do ourselves to be responsible parents, but when dealing with older teens we have to rely on the work we put in well before then and hope and pray our kids will eventually "find their brains" after that period of absence from them that many will go through.

Hmm, those are just some of my thoughts sparked off by your post, Michelle - for what they are worth.

Thanks for your comments. I agree with you entirely that there are many parents out there who try and do their best. Sometimes it is the young persons fault themselves.

When I was ostracized it was from a women who had had a large family and was rather bossy to the other mums as well. At the time she had grabbed me by the arm and had insisted that I count everything there and then. I politely told her that I needed to visit the ladies, but she became quite offended that I had to answer the call of nature first. She ended up being transferred to another ward because she was too intrusive to the other mums as well.

Michelle wrote:When I was ostracized it was from a women who had had a large family and was rather bossy to the other mums as well. At the time she had grabbed me by the arm and had insisted that I count everything there and then. I politely told her that I needed to visit the ladies, but she became quite offended that I had to answer the call of nature first. She ended up being transferred to another ward because she was too intrusive to the other mums as well.

That would be most disconcerting, having someone interfere like that.

Michelle,

Teaching children about contraceptives is not teaching them "appropriate sexual behavior". It sends a mixed message. "Thou shall not commit adultery, but when you do, here is how you may avoid the consequences. And when the contraceptives fail (which they do quite often), you can just murder your baby without telling your parents and everything will be OK." (This too, is a lie, as any women who has ever had an abortion can attest to.)

As far as the reasons for this problem, you've hit all around the actual problem but failed to hit it. The problem is that man in sinful. Sin is the issue. It is the gospel alone that is the solution, not contraception or legalized baby-murder. Morality without the gospel is doomed to failure. We need to get back to Bible teaching on such issues, not pop-psychology and frivilous emotionalism. It's a shame that you have your heart strings pulled for terrorists who are deprived of some sleep, while you support the legalized murder of babies. Something is out of whack here. Your emotional stories about unmarried pregnant women are indeed sad, but I haven't noticed you shedding any tears for the millions of babies slaughtered by bloodthirsty mommies and doctors. You haven't even mentioned what a sad tragedy this is.

And now for some truth that probably won't go over too well with the "emotionalism" crowd. We need to stop treating women who have abortions as "victims". They and their hired killers are the criminals. The baby alone is the victim. If civil governments aren't supposed to make murder illegal, what good are they?

By the way, I think Christians should stop using the word "abortion" and call it what it is, "legalized, tax-payer funded baby murder". Doesn't sound quite as nice, but it is quite accurate.

puritan lad wrote:bluesman,

I have to simpler solutions.

1.) Thou shalt not commit adultery.

2.) In the case of rape, adoption.

Simple enough? Murdering an innocent baby is never an answer.

Yet in reality of our human order of things answers and solutions
are never so simple.

Yes I understand that God word tells us Sex before Marriage is wrong.

It not even so simple of when its considered to be a baby.

Some believe its the moment sperm and egg get together. Science would probably tell you its just two specialized cells at this point.

I would really have a hard time forcing my will on to a rape victim.
As men we can only imagine what it like to carry and give birth to a baby.
Now imagine that baby being forced on you , when the father raped you, and likely beat you too.

Yes I wish we could stop rape and adultery, but I live in the reality that we never will. Even making abortion illegal will just drive it underground.

What about a woman who smokes, drinks, or does drugs during her pregnancy? Yes its something we should desire to stop.
Some say the morning after pill should be illegal. The Pope has said the birth control is wrong.

The problem I have is where would we draw the line at taking away a woman's rights. I wouldn't want to start down the road of the Islamic world especially the extremists.

We have to consider one thing is that it wasn't so long ago that a woman couldn't vote. It wasn't so long ago that a woman was expected to stay at home and cook, clean, and have babies. In some places they are still fighting for equal work equal pay. The list could go on.

To simply making abortion illegal in not the answer. There are many steps that need to come first.

Michael

bluesman wrote:Yes I understand that God word tells us Sex before Marriage is wrong.

Good. At least we're starting out on a Biblical path

bluesman wrote:It not even so simple of when its considered to be a baby.

Some believe its the moment sperm and egg get together. Science would probably tell you its just two specialized cells at this point.

The Bible disagrees. (See Genesis 16:11; Psalm 139:13-16; and many others). Especially note Exodus 21:22-25,

bluesman wrote:I would really have a hard time forcing my will on to a rape victim.

This has nothing to do with your will. It has to do with the prevention of the murder of an innocent baby.

bluesman wrote:As men we can only imagine what it like to carry and give birth to a baby.
Now imagine that baby being forced on you , when the father raped you, and likely beat you too.

Sad, but it doesn't justify murder. Punish the father, not the baby.

bluesman wrote:Yes I wish we could stop rape and adultery, but I live in the reality that we never will.

But we don't have to legalize murder for the sake of it. (Besides, the number of abortions linked to rape is pretty much negligible. This argument is another attempt to pull heart strings. Almost all abortions are caused by irresponsibility and selfishness, not rape.)

bluesman wrote:Even making abortion illegal will just drive it underground.

That's where it belongs.

bluesman wrote:What about a woman who smokes, drinks, or does drugs during her pregnancy?

She should be held accountablr for whatever harm she does to the baby.

bluesman wrote:The problem I have is where would we draw the line at taking away a woman's rights.

What about the father? Should he not have the right to choose. Afterall, he will probably be stuck paying alot of money for this baby throughout his life. Why can't the father choose to have a baby aborted?

There is no right to commit murder, not for a man, women, doctor, or government.

bluesman wrote:I wouldn't want to start down the road of the Islamic world especially the extremists.

We have to consider one thing is that it wasn't so long ago that a woman couldn't vote. It wasn't so long ago that a woman was expected to stay at home and cook, clean, and have babies. In some places they are still fighting for equal work equal pay. The list could go on.

And just what does this have to do with justifying baby-murder?

bluesman wrote:To simply making abortion illegal in not the answer. There are many steps that need to come first.

Making murder illegal would be a good place to start.

You're focusing to much on the woman. What about the real victim of abortion, the baby?

Much to talk about here, but it's so late up for me.
Just one point then...

bluesman wrote:The problem I have is where would we draw the line at taking away a woman's rights. I wouldn't want to start down the road of the Islamic world especially the extremists.

It really is time we spoke a great deal more about responsibilities.
I am getting so sick of hearing about everybody's rights. It is completely lopsided - rights, rights, rights!
Rights should not be divorced from responsibilities, but they are.

However, if we are going to talk about a woman's so-called rights, how about the fact that removing her "right" (disputable as that is) to abort (murder) her child instantly removes the child's overwhelming right to life?
Might is right - Mum is bigger and has clout, baby does not, baby dies.

Maybe a more compassionate view is to consider the responsibilities of the extended family in caring for both the mother and her child. Maybe the parents of the child had the responsibility to consider the consequences of their actions before they risked a conception. Maybe the word NO should have been said and meant - both parents taking that responsibility.

Maybe all that is "too hard" because we are such a sinful lot. It quite probably is, ourselves being selfish, pleasure seeking, having mind sets to lead us into believing our happiness is what God wants most for us. Fact is - it has nothing to do with happiness. That is something the world tempts us with. Obey God and you get a far better deal - joy. Obey God and the lessons can be tough, but the rewards include wisdom, holiness, love, faith... and His own sweet words "well done" at the end of it all.

I want to hear far more said (and taught) about responsibilities instead of this incessant prattle about rights.
And I know that we are a sinful lot who will never manage it out of our own selfish hearts, and so PL is absolutely spot on when He says we need the Gospel message. We need a new heart altogether, the one that only Christ can give us. We need Him - not a pill or a curette and suction to help avoid His way, His truth and His life.

Judah wrote:

bluesman wrote:Another question might be at what point should the father have the right to say that he wants his daughter or son?

At the point before moving down the path of sexual intercourse.

Give the Woman a Prize!!!

bluesman wrote:It not even so simple of when its considered to be a baby.

Some believe its the moment sperm and egg get together. Science would probably tell you its just two specialized cells at this point.

One thing doesn't exclude the other. I'm a mass of atoms, but tell me I'm not a human and I draw my rapier. (Such tough language from a not-too-strong 16.5-year-old! )
The cells are human from the beginning, and given the proper environment (the womb), they can develop themselves to functional human beings. Whether they feel anything or not is not the issue. Sleeping persons don't feel a thing when you shoot them in the 'right' place, but they can start 'functioning' again on their own. Babies also start functioning on their own. This is the difference between babies and e.g. brain dead persons, who can't develop themselves anymore.

bluesman wrote:Yes I wish we could stop rape and adultery, but I live in the reality that we never will. Even making abortion illegal will just drive it underground.

And drastically reduce the number of abortions. The Jews say, 'Who saves one life, saves the world.'

bluesman wrote:To simply making abortion illegal in not the answer. There are many steps that need to come first.

Yes -- getting a proper idea of what Life is and means.
We can't totally stop rape, but we can reduce it. We can't totally stop abortions, but we can reduce them.
I know we should encourage love and try to change values, like Michelle is saying. It's absolutely true. But legalizing abortion is not the answer, nor a temporary solution.
Plus, changing values is a difficult business, especially when the values are seen as outmoded and restrictive.

puritan lad wrote:

bluesman wrote:It not even so simple of when its considered to be a baby.

Some believe its the moment sperm and egg get together. Science would probably tell you its just two specialized cells at this point.

The Bible disagrees. (See Genesis 16:11; Psalm 139:13-16; and many others). Especially note Exodus 21:22-25

I checked these bible verses and I just don't see how they support what
you are saying. What about the half human cells wasted every month.
Those all could have been life too.

I see a lot of people didn't agree with I have said about this issue.
I should say my wife would never consider abortion and I wouldn't want her to. I am talking if one of our unborn babies would have had a serve physical or mental health problem.

One thing that I wasn't thinking about is that in some parts of the world abortion is legal and some places illegal.

I also support this woman in British Columbia who is trying to give birth
to conjoined twins. Many I heard said she should abort them.
Let God decide if they survive or not. I pray that she lives through it.
It a very dangerous pregnancy that also put the mother's life at risk.
The twins are joined at the head.

so PL is absolutely spot on when He says we need the Gospel message.

I agree we need a gospel message. I live in the reality that the gospel message won't get through to the vast majority. I agree that doesn't mean
we should stop spreading the message.
I also agree we all should work to point where abortion would not be even required or ever wanted.
In countries where abortion is already illegal I might support leaving it illegal. Where it is we need to start with stronger limits on it.
Like Not being allowed just because the baby has Downs Syndrome.
So why even test before birth for it?
I would also say after the first trimester no.

There is more to the Gospel message we need to look at .
However, I have to go play with my 4 year old twins. So I will get to later.

Michael


[/quote]

bluesman wrote:

puritan lad wrote:

bluesman wrote:It not even so simple of when its considered to be a baby.

Some believe its the moment sperm and egg get together. Science would probably tell you its just two specialized cells at this point.

The Bible disagrees. (See Genesis 16:11; Psalm 139:13-16; and many others). Especially note Exodus 21:22-25

I checked these bible verses and I just don't see how they support what
you are saying. What about the half human cells wasted every month.
Those all could have been life too.

I see a lot of people didn't agree with I have said about this issue.
I should say my wife would never consider abortion and I wouldn't want her to. I am talking if one of our unborn babies would have had a serve physical or mental health problem.

One thing that I wasn't thinking about is that in some parts of the world abortion is legal and some places illegal.

I also support this woman in British Columbia who is trying to give birth
to conjoined twins. Many I heard said she should abort them.
Let God decide if they survive or not. I pray that she lives through it.
It a very dangerous pregnancy that also put the mother's life at risk.
The twins are joined at the head.

so PL is absolutely spot on when He says we need the Gospel message.

I agree we need a gospel message. I live in the reality that the gospel message won't get through to the vast majority. I agree that doesn't mean
we should stop spreading the message.
I also agree we all should work to point where abortion would not be even required or ever wanted.
In countries where abortion is already illegal I might support leaving it illegal. Where it is we need to start with stronger limits on it.
Like Not being allowed just because the baby has Downs Syndrome.
So why even test before birth for it?
I would also say after the first trimester no.

There is more to the Gospel message we need to look at .
However, I have to go play with my 4 year old twins. So I will get to later.

Michael

[/quote]


I totally agree with you that there should be stricter controls and limits on who has an abortion, as in the case of what you mentioned. I guess what I really am is someone who prefers preventative measures that stop the problem occurring in the first place. However sometimes this is not possible and there may be mitigating circumstances. Even though as I stated before I would not have one, I believe that sometimes there is a justification.

Take for example the following situation that haunts many parents of disabled children, especially severely intellectually disabled people. The law in Australia as it is will not allow for the sterilisation of these people. It is a very sensitive area and as a parent with a moderately intellectually disabled daughter I know what these parents are going through. Even though my daughter has stressed that she doesn't want children, this is something that I have had to consider. Some people on this forum who are from Australia might remember a documentary regarding just this situation.

The parents on that show were pleading with the government to allow them to sterilize their daughter. Even though I don't believe I can not tell another women what to do with her own body, (simply because she can tell me where to go if she wants), I only have this view point for those who have the mental capacity to understand the decision they are about to make. And take responsibility for it! However in this example the daughter was so severely disabled that she was incontinent, had no language skills and and a mental age limit of a 12 month old baby. In that case I would support the parents in their quest. Their daughter thought babies were play things like dolls not something that needs looking after. She had almost (innocently) killed her baby sibling once when she wanted to drag it off somewhere to play.

After this documentary was on there were many people who commented about it. The input from the community was excellent with arguments on both sides. However there were many people who missed the point of what this documentary was about and assumed that the parents were denying their daughter the right to be a mother. There are cases where by some intellectually disabled people become excellent caring parents and these people thought that the parents were trying to discriminate against those people too.

Not so for persons in the above situation. These disabled persons need to be protected. One of the fears that these parents have is what if their daughter is sexually assaulted and doesn't tell anyone. I remember with my association with the intellectually disabled over the years a case of a girl I knew personally. This girl came from a family whose parents, and siblings were also disabled. She became pregnant because a person who was one of their friends (not disabled in any way) took advantage of her and let her think that she was playing a very special secret game. Because she didn't tell anyone she ended up having the baby. Anyway without going into the full details her baby was born severely disabled and only lived for a year.

So what happened to that girl? She got a very bad reputation (just guess) and yet the person responsible wasn't even charged. He could not be charged because the girl was eighteen at the time. Although her mental age was at the level of a four year old the law still at that time did not take that into account.

This is why sometimes I feel there might be a justification in such situations. And yes I have heard every argument against it (sterilisation) by people who think they know better. Some have even said they would adopt the baby if the situation arises. That is very nice of them, and I sincerely thank all those persons from the bottom of my heart who actually do put their money where their mouth is. You are angels in disguise. However if there are some parents who have to make this very difficult decision then they need to be supported.

I was just wondering what everyones views on this. Also I really do mean it when I say that people are angels for caring for these children. Even though it is a tough job and there is often no such thing as holidays these people still care. So thanks because you people have helped many people I know personally.

Michelle,

You are downright scary. Am I understanding this correctly? Are you supporting the forced sterilization of those whom you deem as unworthy for life, simply because they are "intellectually disabled"? Who is going to make the final decision regarding this? You? The State? So much for a "woman's right to choose" huh?

What standards will be used to make such a decision? What gives you the right to decide who is "intellectually" worthy to live and reproduce? If you really believe this, why stop at s"justification" of abortion? Let's just wipe out all "intellectually disabled" people off the earth and they won't be a problem anymore. While we are at it, let's get rid of the handicapped, as well as anyone else who is a burden on society. Who can we get rid of next? Why not try and create an Aryan Race, superior to everyone both physically and mentally? (I believe someone already tried this.)

You already admit that "The law in Australia as it is will not allow for the sterilisation of these people." Neither does God's law. So where do you get your new standard of righteousness from?

By the way, I've noticed that you and Mike use no Scripture in support of your arguments. Let's try one for starters.

"You shall not murder." (Exodus 20:13)

Am I the only one who finds this view absolutely repugnant? Scary stuff, and certainly a view inspired by the Devil!!!

I have a physically disabled child who is the most precious thing. If someone decides that she is unworthy to have my grandkids and tries some "sterilization", they are going to see a her very mean daddy take a few pounds of flesh.

And no one has answered my question yet? Does the father have a right to an abortion? Why or why not?

puritan lad wrote:Michelle,

You are downright scary. Am I understanding this correctly? Are you supporting the forced sterilization of those whom you deem as unworthy for life, simply because they are "intellectually disabled"? Who is going to make the final decision regarding this? You? The State? So much for a "woman's right to choose" huh?

What standards will be used to make such a decision? What gives you the right to decide who is "intellectually" worthy to live and reproduce? If you really believe this, why stop at s"justification" of abortion? Let's just wipe out all "intellectually disabled" people off the earth and they won't be a problem anymore. While we are at it, let's get rid of the handicapped, as well as anyone else who is a burden on society. Who can we get rid of next? Why not try and create an Aryan Race, superior to everyone both physically and mentally? (I believe someone already tried this.)

You already admit that "The law in Australia as it is will not allow for the sterilisation of these people." Neither does God's law. So where do you get your new standard of righteousness from?

By the way, I've noticed that you and Mike use no Scripture in support of your arguments. Let's try one for starters.

"You shall not murder." (Exodus 20:13)

Am I the only one who finds this view absolutely repugnant? Scary stuff, and certainly a view inspired by the Devil!!!

I have a physically disabled child who is the most precious thing. If someone decides that she is unworthy to have my grandkids and tries some "sterilization", they are going to see a her very mean daddy take a few pounds of flesh.

And no one has answered my question yet? Does the father have a right to an abortion? Why or why not?

I also have disabled children myself and I can understand the love you have for your child. I love my children the same way and would never force sterilization on my kids. However it is very obvious that you did not see the documentary I am referring to. We are not in the same country, so it would be very easy for you to take out of context what I am meaning.

I mentioned that there are cases when disabled persons make wonderful parents. I know many of them myself. And I think you yourself demonstrate just how much wonderful love you have for your child. I love my disabled children the same way. I was questioning though at what point do we if a child is so severely intellectually disabled have to say we need to protect them by this method. Remember a physical disability is not the same as an intellectual one.

Anyway to help you understand better try this scenario. The girl concerned so severely disabled intellectually becomes pregnant after being assaulted. She has the baby and thinks it is a new toy to play with. The authorities take the baby away. What do you think will happen to the girl as her baby is being taken away. She is being traumitized enough just going through the pregnancy.

As for my viewpoint regardng disabled people it is actually along the same lines as you. I was trying to see things through the eyes of what those other parents might be feeling. Sometimes we have to forget how we really feel about something and try and see the other persons side. I see the same problems as what you were referring to with creating an elite race. This is already occurring with some types of gene therapy. That is why I was talking about this. It is wrong to have forced sterilization, but there might be times when there is and are mitigating circumstances. And as we are not the parents we do not know exactly what they are going through.

Maybe some form of contraception is the answer. Look I know I come across as some cold hearted person, but I have seen many situations such as the one I posted about the girl I knew and sometimes I think, was there something that I could have been done. I just wish there weren't so many evil men out there who think a person is easy because they have an intellectual disability.

As for quoting Bible verses how about Matthew CH 7 V 1- 6 . Apart from that I really dont think being able to quote lots of scripture makes a person a Christian. Neither does going to Church.

It seems that you delight in twisting every post around I make or else I may not be very clear on what I am posting to you.

Michelle, I see your point, and I would agree that in some cases, sterilization is the best thing, with the express permission from both parents if both are still alive. It's different from abortion.

However, your use of Matthew 7:1-6 is incorrect and out of context. Jesus warned people against trying to judge people, to judge people's hearts; however, we are free to judge a person's actions (John 2:13-17, Galatians 2:11-16) and their ideas (Acts 15:5-11, most if not all of Paul's epistles) by the measuring rod of Scripture.

Turgonian wrote:Michelle, I see your point, and I would agree that in some cases, sterilization is the best thing, with the express permission from both parents if both are still alive. It's different from abortion.

However, your use of Matthew 7:1-6 is incorrect and out of context. Jesus warned people against trying to judge people, to judge people's hearts; however, we are free to judge a person's actions (John 2:13-17, Galatians 2:11-16) and their ideas (Acts 15:5-11, most if not all of Paul's epistles) by the measuring rod of Scripture.

Thanks for setting me right about the Bible verse! I am very new to this kind of thing. Even though I became a Christian many years ago because of the domestic situation I was in I couldn't grow very far ( I wasnt allowed to have a Bible). There was a lot of brainwashing in that situation (I think that sometimes it might come out in some of my posts). Anyway when I finally got up the courage to leave the first person who came to visit me unfortunately was a real Bible basher (as opposed to someone who just knows a bit of scripture). I dont mind anyone talking about God in my home, however this person quoted over forty verses in ninty minutes and would not let me even have formal introductions between each other. It sort of scared me a bit into not getting a Bible myself.

I only recently bought myself a Bible and try and read it more than twice a day. At the moment however I have what they call information overload and have trouble remembering verses, let alone fully understanding them. I have taken on too many things I guess. I think though this will sort itself out once I have my semester break.