I told my wife that the "Case for Christ" wasn't really convincing me of anything and that I would probably place myself in the Deist category of religious classification. She started me on another book "Mere Christianity", but I didn't find that one especially convincing either.
Spike's Bitches 22: You've got Angel breath
[NAFDA] Spike-centric discussion. Lusty, lewd (only occasionally crude), risque (and frisque), bawdy (Oh, lawdy!), flirty ('cuz we're purty), raunchy talk inside. Caveat lector.
Yay, Gud...God homework. Good times.
Hmm. Have you tried Meeting Jesus Again for the First Time?
(Though I suspect that Borg is theologically more liberal than your wife, given that his theological leanings are close to my own.)
I'm approved!
Does happy dance.
"Mere Christianity" pisses me off, and I try to be a Christian.
The so-called trilemma, "Lunatic, Liar, or Lord"? doesn't hold up to logical examination.
I am off to pick up teacup boyfriend at work, and then we are off to an artist lecture of some sort. Have a good night everyone.
I saw someone reading Mere Christianity on the bus this morning. Weird. But I had a violently negative response to it myself.
I'm approved!
Yay!!!
Approved for what?
Yay, Lilty!
That's tough, Gud. I hope y'all can overcome your differences. I'm not familiar with the books you've mentioned.
"Mere Christianity" pisses me off, and I try to be a Christian.
The first and to some extent the second part of it (I'm not finished with the third part yet) seem to be a persuasive argument where you build your agrument and getting the reader to accept one point after another that build on each other. The problem is that I don't think most of his points are complete. In a lot of places he's like it's either A or B, and I'm thinking what about C, D, and E that he didn't mention.