Friday, July 24, 2009


I'm writing about honesty today because it is the new topic in comments.

Demoiselle thinks I am a 50 year old pervert luring girls into polygamy. That's part of what is so funny with people who just can't believe I am happy is that they have to come up with an explanation for me so they can feel better about being right. The truth is that for a couple weeks there were a lot of girls emailing me and wanting to check things out and then I sent them to Pastor Jeff who said no to all of them except Macy who was really serious about wanting to be here. For a long time now no one is emailing me so no one is being lured here, okay? Even me when I first came here everyone was trying to get me to leave to make sure I really wanted to stay. They don't want you here if you don't really, really, REALLY want to be here. No one is lured here and it is the other way around that people who come here are not encouraged to stay. Demoiselle if it makes you happy to think what you want then okay. Call me anything you want and I will agree so you can say you won your little game and then you can move on to the next person to trash them and then leave me alone.

ALM, I was really hurt to see what you wrote after you got your answer. No one here runs around quoting the Bible saying "See, we're right!" on polygamy or anything else. I explained in my first posts how this came to be and it really was not started because of anyone believeing anything in the Bible. It just happened and people were happy with it and that is what happened. You asked me for religious reasons why we think this is okay and I got your question answered. By the way most of the families in our church are regular couples with kids and they won't be poly so it isn't something we make people do like maybe the FLDS do. But about the question I don't like that you set me up just so you could be happy about yourself. If I don't answer anymore of your questions in the future this is why.

What is sad is I came on here to write some happy news and now I am just going to save it for another time.

Sorry I don't feel like putting a happy feeling here.


  1. I am so sorry that you have been hurt. It's just another proof that you can't trust those we come across on the net.
    I don't think I have said anything out of the way but if I have please forgive me.

    Anyhow, I can't wait to read about the happy news. I keep wishing I would come by and your newest title will be "I'm Pregnant!" hehe..

  2. Megan, You are tagged! See my blog for details!

  3. Megan, you really don't need to dignify your detractors by constantly acknowledging and defending yourself against their accusations. This isn't the first time it's happened.

    Out of 27,000 visitors, two or three have called your integrity into question. Pretty good ratio, honestly, if that's all the people that have spoken out against you. If they don't want to believe you, that's fine, but you should encourage them to get their own blog where they can rail against polygamy and religion to their hearts' content, rather than beat yourself up over their disparaging remarks and have to justifying yourself.

    Demoiselle said "'megan' is an 18 year old from los angeles who suddenly has 'fallen in love' with a man more than twice her age in less than a month."

    Having spent a lot of time around kids from broken homes during my stints as a suicidal teenager in the mental institutions, I can attest firsthand that this really isn't all that implausible, and Megan's case is as close to a best-case scenario as can be.

    A lot of young adults end up in much worse situations trying to reconnect with the sense of "family" they never got at home. Some turn to violence and join gangs, others seek security in a friendly stranger and end up being exploited by a pimp. Then there are those who never do make that connection and turn to drugs and alcohol to drown out the pain of the loneliness and emptiness they feel inside.

    Megan's story is unconventional, yes, but not implausible.

  4. Rude people...ugh. Nasty e-mails and comments are the exact reason I made my blog viewable to invited users only. Now I'm so happy...but I know this isn't what you would want.

    Can't wait to hear the good news! ~*hugs*~

  5. Megan, your blog is an inspiration, do you know how many sad plural blogs there are... we need positive outlooks and yours is great, i think someone got annoyed because they cannot bare to see someone else happy. Sad huh!!!

    I love to visit your blog, although i dont post allot of comments i enjoy your open approach, so good on you...

    hey and some good news... hmmm maybe no more monthly monster times ;)...


  6. Megan

    I didn't realize that you expect the discussion to end once you answer the questions. It seems like a few other commentors here have the same expectation. That truly is a narrow-minded way of dealing with a difference of opinion, and doesn't not serve you well.

    In order to live your convictions you need to understand them at their fundamental core. In order to have a balanced view of your beliefs you need to know both sides. This allows you to make the best possible decision for yourself. If you do not do your "homework" regarding your convictions and beliefs, later on down the road you may find that your assumptions were not well grounded and disillusionment and heartache may follow.

    I was not attacking you, but debating the premise of using the Bible to justify certain attitudes and choices. The wisdom and beauty of debates are that they're wonderful teaching tools. They make us really think about what we say and believe. They stengthen our moral and spiritual foundation, and help us help other people understand where we're coming from when we have a convincing stance.

    Whether you want to believe it or not, you do live in an altered reality. Living on the prairie with very little contact from the outside world, you have isolated yourself from dealing with the serious messiness of everyday life. At such a young age, I doubt the wisdom in doing that. I think your isolation will prevent you from learning how to truly deal with what the real world is cabable of doing to us. Granted, you got a tast of that during your childhood, but that in and of itself reinforces my concerns, and leaves me questioning your level of emotional maturity and ability to react rationally with your self-imposed isolation. The fact that you feel betrayed because someone chose to express a difference of opinion and debated it is proof of my assertion.

    You have a lot of baggage from your past. Running off to live with the "family you never had" can and will become a bandaid if you don't learn how to deal with conflict and a differnece of opinion. Holding your own when it comes to your convictions builds character and confidence. Following blindly simply because it keeps you in your comfort zone is a huge mistake and will stunt you in every possible way- inparticularyly it will make you soft and weak, leaving you at the mercy of others.

    Without situations that test your mettle as far as what defines Megan, I fear that you may not be grounded enough to handle any significant curve balls life throws at you when/if your idyllic life implodes.

    I think that this blog is your attempt to have one foot in the real world and still have your perfect piece of cake too [your polygamous lifestyle]. I think you really only like to hear from those commentors who will tell you want you want to hear, and not what you should hear. That is certainly your right, but I must say it shows a weakness in character.

    What I find very telling about you, Megan is how silent you've been regarding Marcus's foul and degrading rant he directed at me. Apparently you don't mind people using your personal blog to call a woman such a dispicable thing such as the "c" word. I can't help but wonder what other hateful language and attitudes you'll allow? Would you allow Marcus or anyone else to call someone the "n" word? Would you allow Marcus or anyone else to use a ethnic slur when addressing a poster of Middle Eastern decent or religion? Will you allow homophobic rants? Your silence says that you agree with what Marcus said. How fortunate for you that he did the dirty work.

    Betrayal is a two way street.

  7. ALM, if you want to email me or chat you can.

  8. I disagree with you ALM. I think Megan responded to you very maturely. She identified how your post made her feel, and why she didn't like it — and she did it without belittling you. Yet you say she's not mature enough to handle conflict and difference of opinion?

    By contrast, have a look at your reply to her…

    '…you do live in an altered reality.'

    '…and leaves me questioning your level of emotional maturity and ability to react rationally…'

    'You have a lot of baggage from your past.'

    '…this blog is your attempt to have one foot in the real world and still have your perfect piece of cake too'

    '…I must say it shows a weakness in character.'

    'What I find very telling about you, Megan…'

    'How fortunate for you that he did the dirty work.'

    These are all subtle attacks on Megan's character — a classic way of fighting back when one's pride has been hurt.

    About Marcus… The way he spoke to you was disgraceful — no argument. He owes you a serious apology. And yet, as another person commented, if you strip away all the vulgar name-calling, he made some valid points. Do you honestly expect any of us to believe you asked the question out of a genuine attempt to understand Megan's church? No, you had a preconceived agenda, which was to discredit the church's position and to get a few cheap shots at the Bible in the process. Your question to Megan was nothing but a soapbox for you to stand on.

    Ah, but all this is for Megan's good, right? I almost forgot… It's your job to plant little seeds of doubt (about her marriage, and now her faith) so she can make wise decisions… ALM, you keep saying you have nothing against polygamy, etc, but your words betray you. Something about Megan's life bothers you immensely, and that was evident from the beginning. Is it about trust? You see her trusting her new family, and trusting her church community, and you don't seem to like it… Why? You accuse Megan of being blinded by the 'baggage' from her past. What about you ALM? Were you hurt by someone? What happened in your past that leads you to repeatedly challenge Megan's trust?

  9. My God Donald! You did a much better job of saying what I so feebly attempted to say. I fully agree with you and concur with your explanations. Both in this thread and the previous one. Like I said, ALM has finally shown what she is. Thank you for being able to express your self so elegantly.

    To ALM:
    I think you have just about worn out your welcome here. In a very nice way Megan has just about said so.

    To Megan:
    as I *hug* you I wisper in your ear "Good for you for your responce to ALM". It was perfect.

    My Dear, I think you have bit off more than you can chew at this time in your life by inviting ALM to your Email address and inviting her into your life any further. Please reconsider your invitation. ALM has shown she is not a person to trust and has nothing but contempt for you and your adopted way of live.

    Love as Always,

  10. Donald

    I stand behind everything I said. They are not subtle attacks but my honest opinions. It seems that most of the people who visit here don't want to "rock the boat" with relevant observations and hard questions because things of that nature might drive away the unicorns and fairies that they so desperately want to live in Megan's world - a world that I think most of you wish you could live in, but can't so you live vicariously through this blog.

    Insisting that my "subtle attacks" are a product of my pride being hurt is based on what Donald? What's your basis for saying this? It's so easy to throw vague, generalizations out there without a sound reason for saying, Donald. Convince me with more than just nothing.

    Insinuating that I have a trust issue is based on what Donald? Is it because I'm not a sheeple who refuses to learn and understand in order to have a grasp on the reality of a situation?

    What's your basis for saying that I have something against polygamy, Donald, when I've made it very clear in the past that I support gay marriage and any relationship that is healthy for all those participating? Yet another attempt to distract from the real issues and differences I've raised.

    I think what also bothers a lot of people about my opinions is that you cannot refute the inconsistancies, double-standards and plausability, and therefore you and others distract from the issues by saying I'm a bad person with a "personal agenda".

    I also like the fact that you minimized Marcus's horrid behavior - validating what he said minus the hate. No one seems to really mind that it's okay to spew undeniable hate here ( and please take him to task one on one rather than doing it as an after thought via your tongue lashing of me), but God forbide someone bring a honest debate or a difference of opinion to the table. It seems that's the true sin with you and others. Heaven forbid Megan or anyone else might notice that there's a possible hiccup on the horizon.

    What you see as "seeds of doubt" regarding Megan's marriage and church are simply my observations and opinions. For you to say that they are anything else but, smacks of a lack of objectivity and mis-appropriated judgement. It's almost as if you're afraid for someone to give her food for thought for fear that she'll not continue the fantasy that you have of her and her life.

    You claim that you want the best for Megan, yet you're aggressively intolerant towards anyone who offers her valid and relevant observations that very well give her the very best life possible.

  11. My comment was my 'honest opinion' too ALM. Could I be wrong about you? Sure. But you're the one who says you're all up for 'difference of opinion' and 'honest debate'. So I figure you can handle it!

    ALM, I see your point about living 'vicariously' through Megan's blog. It's human nature to want to escape the pain of your own life by getting lost in another — romance novels, feel-good movies, gossip magazines detailing the lives of celebrities, etc, are all evidence of this. But you know, there's another facet of human nature — an uglier one — that shows itself in the fascination with the gossip media… It's called 'tall poppy syndrome'. If someone seems to have it too good, there will always be those who derive some pleasure from bursting their bubble, and bringing them back down to earth.

    Regarding Marcus, I did not minimize his 'horrid behavior'. Read my comment again. You might also recall that I was one of the first to call him out for his repeated questioning about Megan's sex life early on… just as I called you out for planting seeds of mistrust. I did this because I saw nothing truly helpful in either of your comments at that time. You will also remember that I have supported many of your comments at other times. I'm not playing favorites here… I just try to tell it as I see it. You're entitled to defend yourself, but seriously… before you start accusing of others of intolerance to differing opinions, you might stop and look at how you react when anyone differs with yours.

    But rather than continue this pointless argument, why don't you explain to us just how your 'observations' are giving Megan 'the very best life possible'?

    Here's the thing… Megan's life could fall apart, like you seem to want to constantly remind her. Lots of things could go wrong… So what's the solution? Try to foresee EVERY possible 'hiccup on the horizon'? Have contingency plan upon contingency plan upon contingency plan? None of us can see the future, and none of us can insure against pain in our lives — not you, or me, or Megan. But here's what I believe… I don't believe Megan is living in a fantasy, and is oblivious to things that can and sometimes do go wrong. I think her writing shows far more maturity than you give her credit for. I believe Megan is happier than most people because she is living each day to its fullest while the sun is shining. She's out there! She's living the life and enjoying it, while others are scared to go out in case it starts raining.

    That is MY honest opinion.

  12. Donald, I noticed in ALM's response to you, she never once disputed her diatribe of the Holy Bible that you so elegantly defended in Megan's last post. All she could say is "I stand behind every thing I said", and you also neglected to bring it up. I find this telling on her part because she can't defend her point of view and I suspect it is because she has never bothered to read the Holly Bible. I don't know what version she is reading if she is reading a Bible or if she is just going on what someone else is telling her about it but she definately has a sorted view of it.

    As always you are right on target with your above thread.

    ALM said above that we couldn't repute the inconsistancies, double-standards and plausabilities of her opinions. DUH! I thought that is what we were doing! And it just wasn't you and I but a whole bunch of us including Marcus (with his fowel language). ALM, you may be reading but you are definately not comprehending what we say to you. Either that or you just choose to ignore what we say and pick and chose whatever fits into your thought pattern and reject the rest as hate talk. Either way you definately have a sorted view point on what you think is best for Megan and if it doesn't fit in to your point of view you try your best to sway her to your point of view in a very negitive way. You as much as said above that what you think should be her life and life stile because as far as you are concerned you are right no mater what. In stead may I susgest you let Megan pick and chose what Megan sees fit and let her pick and chose what she wants for a change whether it is right or wrong. Remember, this is not your life you are reading and being aloud to visit, it is Megans and she has to be aloud to live it the way she wants. Not the way you or I or anyone of us think she should. Yes ALM, Megan will make mistakes. But, isn't that how we all learn? Instead of trying to find critisism for wht she is being taught or learning try some helpful susgestions and advice instead.

  13. cmpdom

    Apparently your reading comprehension is sorely lacking if you think I've failed to make valid points in previous posts regarding the inconsistancies and hypocrisy of the Bible and of those who use it to justify their actions and beliefs. No one here has really refuted the examples that I've given. Abstract justifications that we're all slaves if we have to work don't cut it. I'm not talking about metaphorical or abstract ideologies. I'm talking how people take the Bible literally to justify their beliefs and lifestyles. Someone said that the Bible does not sanction rape, yet they ignored the Biblical story of Lot willing to hand his daughters over to the angry mob of men who wanted to sodomize the two angels he took into his home. The old Testament is full of God's orders to kill those whom he deemed unfit or unclean = Ethnic cleansing.

    Should I go on?

    I was born and raised on the King James version of the Bible. I was baptised at the age of 10 in a church camp pond after being touched by The Divine during the invitational part of the service. My baptismal experience was incredibly personal and has to this day stayed with me.

    Does any of that make me less of a Christian just because I am open-minded enough to know that all of history has been written by humans and that it's plausible and factual that certain mores and attitudes were skewed in the name of personal agendas? Why do you think your brand of Christianity more valid than others?

  14. Thanks for your kind words cmpdom67. I'm glad you haven't held our earlier conflict against me. ;)

    ALM, I responded already to your comment about Lot's daughters. It's in the previous post in case you missed it.

    I also summed up by saying:

    'The Bible records many events — accounts of good, evil, and everything in between. Just because something was recorded in the Bible doesn't make it right. However, you can still find undeniable evidence of things God considers sinful — murder, idolatry, adultery, incest, bestiality, etc, etc. Polygamy however was certainly allowed under OT law (there are laws dealing with it), and even (it can be argued) commanded in certain cases. So a Christian who considers that Jesus came to fulfill the Jewish law, might well argue that such a lifestyle is not sinful based on what the Bible says.'

    ALM, as a 'Christian', who do you believe Jesus was/is? Was he the Son of God? The saviour of the world? A teacher? Healer? Prophet? All of the above? I'm curious, because Jesus didn't seem to believe that the books of the Old Testament were 'written by humans' and 'skewed in the name of personal agendas'. He quoted from the law and prophets extensively, and rebuked the religious leaders for adding 'rules taught by men' (which is actually a quote from the prophet Isaiah).

    I notice you've also ignored my last comment where I challenged you to explain to us exactly how your 'observations' are giving Megan 'the very best life possible'?

    Here's something else amusing…

    ALM said: '…I am open-minded enough to know…'

    10 points to anyone who can spot the self-contradiction! ;)

  15. ALM, Your comment of "Apparently your reading comprehension is sorely lacking if you think I've failed to make valid points in previous posts regarding the inconsistancies and hypocrisy of the Bible and of those who use it to justify their actions and beliefs" speaks volumes about you and it proves my point that you had a preconceived agenda when you baited Megan into answering a question for you.

    In your own words you have stated your opinions that:

    1. The Bible has inconsistencies and hypcrisies.

    2. You have a problem with anyone who uses the Bible to justify their beliefs and lifestyles, something that immediately puts you at odds with about two billion people and two thousand years of Western Civilization.

    3. You obviously have a comprehension problem because Lot's actions vis-a-vis offering his daughters to the mob were his own actions and not anything sanctioned by scripture. Further, you demonstrate a profound ignorance of the value that Semitic cultures place on the notion of hospitality. Lot, were he a present day Arab living in Jordan, would be considered an honorable man for doing anything he could to protect guests of his hospitality.

    4. I'm utterly fascinated with your premise that, "The old Testament is full of God's orders to kill those whom he deemed unfit or unclean = Ethnic cleansing". Please do cite where God ordered the Jews to commit the annihilation of an entire ethnic group (genocide)? And when you are at your Neo-Nazi Holocaust Denial seminars do you cite this as justification to hate Jews? Or do you just like giving ammunition and moral support to people who hate Jews and use arguments like yours to justify their hate? And do you sing the 'Horst Wessel' or do you just hum it?

    5. "I was born and raised on the King James version of the Bible." That explains a lot about why you are so ignorant of the Bible. Unless, of course, you're a scholar of early 17th Century English and you are fluent in the vernacular of the period along with the metaphorical usage of the time? Given your inability to spell 'inconsistencies' correctly I would say not.

    (cont'd in the next post)

  16. 6. With regards to your closing paragraph;

    "Does any of that make me less of a Christian just because I am open-minded enough to know that all of history has been written by humans and that it's plausible and factual that certain mores and attitudes were skewed in the name of personal agendas? Why do you think your brand of Christianity more valid than others?"

    I'd say you've truly stated your bias against the very scriptures that are the foundation of Christianity. You deny they are at least the inspired word of God and I believe I am correct in summarizing the first sentence of the paragraph as a total refutation of any divine nature in scripture.

    "all of history has been written by humans"

    Were you a believing Christian who knows her Bible you'd acknowledge that the Ten Commandments were the literal Word of God written in His hand. Really, if you can't state this with any kind of conviction (which the above highlighted sentence aptly illustrates) then, yes, I have good reason to consider you as less of a Christian. You utterly refute the very underpinnings of the faith which leaves you irreconcilably at odds with the notion of Christian faith.

    Really, if you assert that all of the Bible is ginned up out of whole cloth then you also doubt the veracity of the Apostles and, ergo, you doubt the divinity or even the existence of Christ. Therefore, again, you are less a Christian and by your own words.

    Now that last sentence, "Why do you think your brand of Christianity (is) more valid than others?" when placed in the proper context of your query about a justification for polygamy and then placed in the proper context of following the first sentence in the paragraph this sentence is combative on your part.

    Once again you are posing a leading question with the intent to attack anyone who answers it. I doubt you care precisely how they answer the question just so long as they do so and give you an opportunity to vent your spleen on them.

    Let me ask you to answer your own question:

    "Why do you think your brand of Christianity (is) more valid than others?"

    Ah, see and there is the trap! If you say you are right then you are as hypocritical as you charge others of being. If you say you are wrong...oh well, I think I can rest assured that this particular act of humility won't happen anytime soon.

    In summary, how do you reconcile the hypocrisy of calling yourself a Christian when you clearly state that you don't believe in the testimonies that assert the existence and divinity of Christ?

    Surely, no one who so refutes the writings of Mohammed is calling themselves a Muslim and no one who refutes the teachings of Buddha calls themselves a Buddhist, right? So why do you persist in calling yourself a Christian when it is abundantly clear that you have made the case that you are not a Christian?

    I defer to the old maxim of "If Christianity were against the law would there be enough evidence to convict you?"

    ALM, were I on that jury the day of your trial you would sleep in your own bed that night as I would certainly vote to acquit you and then I would admonish the prosecution for bringing charges against so clearly an innocent person.

  17. Marcus, that's all well and good… but can we expect an apology for your obscene cursing of ALM anytime soon? Since we're talking about evidence of being Christian, you might like to consider what the apostle Paul wrote about the 'fruit of the Spirit':

    'But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other.' (Galatians 5:22-26)


    'If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.' (1 Corinthians 13:2-3)

  18. The truest and most singular definition of what it takes to be a Christian is that you believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and that He died for the sins of mankind. I can still be a Christian and question the authenticity of some of the Bible stories, because I believe in this fundamental tenet of Christianity.

    You can be an atheist all your life – one who raped, murdered, stole, and lied; someone who condemned God and the Bible and yet, on your death bed if you accept JC as your savior with a pure and honest heart you would be a Christian and you would go to heaven.

    Donald: thank you for asking for the apology and thank you for the Scriptures.

  19. Donald

    The very best possible life belongs to those who aren't afraid to question or think for themselves. Their not afraid of diversity and differences because they know that by listening, and discernment they will have a better understanding of what they think defines them.

    Generally, this type of seeking philosophy leads to better choices in life. Being brave and coloring outside of the lines opens all kinds of doors to the intellect and spirit.

    The only way to really understand our beliefs and convictions is to turn them inside out, play devil's advocate and then see if we can build a case supporting our beliefs and convictions that we can live with.

    This logical and pragmatic dissection and ressurection of our ideals and beliefs brings real confidence and security to us. The only way to do that is to understand the flip side and take what we learn into consideration when deciding if we're still comfortable with our original thought.

    Knowledge is power. Being exposed to only one segement of a spectrum can lead to stagnation and disillusionment. There are several sides to the same story. In order to do yourself justice, you should learn them all.

    As for your 10 pt question: When a person is open-minded that action attracts knowledge - therefore the KNOW in knowledge.

    Open-mindedness equates to KNOWING, where close-mindedness equates to ignorance.

  20. ALM said: Open-mindedness equates to KNOWING, where close-mindedness equates to ignorance.

    Nicely answered!! But didn't a wise man once say, 'The more I know the more I know I don't know?'

    Look, I agree with you in principle about seeking knowledge… Proverbs says, 'The discerning heart seeks knowledge, but the mouth of a fool feeds on folly.' But let's not forget this one: 'Do you see a man wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.'

    I feel you will do more good by encouraging people to become truth seekers, rather than asking to see the underbelly of their faith while you wait with knife in hand.

  21. I wasn't "waiting with knife in hand", Donald as you suggest. I truly wasn't, yet you and others interpreted my asking for clarification and POV as just that. I think I've demonstrated here many times that I don't need to use the "back door" inorder to disguise my intentions. I don't need to "lay traps" in order to open the door for any discussion.

    I think that since the issue was religion, most people automatically get defensive and see a differring of opinion as an attack. Pretty much the same as when personal politics are shared. What's that old saying? "Never talk about money, politics or religion"??

    Asking questions will more than likely lead to a discussion, as it should. I didn't realize that most here think that once a question has been answered then that's the end of the discussion. That is not how meaningful communication or knowledge seeking works, therefore I do not allow myself to be limited in that way.

    Again, I get the sense that you and others simply don't want the likes of me upsetting the apple cart here for fear that if a little bit of knowledge (not meant to imply truth) makes its way onto the stage, there's a chance that personal perceptions could be compromised.

    I see knowledge as power. Some see it as a danger. How many of us had said through the course of our lives while standing among physical, emotional, financial and spiritual ruination:

    "I should have known better" ?

  22. Donald

    "But didn't a wise man once say, 'The more I know the more I know I don't know?'

    You've captured what I've been trying to say - that knowing and learning never stops unless a person decides that there is no value in any other POV other than their own.

    I ask questions, hard ones and I share what I believe with others in order to understand further and deeper, not only my philosophy but theirs. Differring pov are benchmarks for us to use to become more informed and knowledgable.

    Asking questions, reading and experience propels us on and on, and along the way we are exposed to all sorts of diverse and incomprehensible POV's. That's the beauty and wisdom of being open-minded and desiring to truly listen to everyone and everything. It promotes growth.

    What is the quality of a life if there is no growth? What happens to the physical body when it is not excercised? It becomes weak and deteriorates. These conditions prevent us from going out and enjoying all sorts of wonderful activities and experiences - they stunt our well-being. The same happens to the intellect, the heart and the soul if they are not excercised as well.

    Knowledge is a life quest. The seeking of it should never stop if one hopes to carve out a meaningful and fulfilling life.

    Thank you for seeing some value in my assertion, btw.

  23. ALM, you are so full of shit!

    You said:

    "The only way to really understand our beliefs and convictions is to turn them inside out, play devil's advocate and then see if we can build a case supporting our beliefs and convictions that we can live with."

    But previously you also said:

    "all of history has been written by humans"

    Which means you do NOT have 'beliefs and convictions' in common with the people who think the Bible and the words within it are divinely inspired or the word of God.

    Yet in this comment, "to really understand our beliefs and convictions", you include yourself in the group of people who believe in order to give yourself standing to deconstruct their beliefs and convictions.

    You are NOT trying to 'understand' beliefs and convictions you've ALREADY STATED ARE FALSE.

    You're just pursuing an agenda and it would be refreshing if you just came clean with it as an exercise in intellectual honesty. Given the topic is about honesty that would be appropriate.

  24. I want to first praise Doland and Marcus for their ability to defend our Lord and God so well. I have the same thoughts I just can't put them into words as wellas you guys.

    To Donald:
    As you I am a forgiving Christian. Even when we disagree I am open for when we do agree and when you are right you are right and I will always defend anyone when they are right. including Marcus.

    To Marcus:
    When you can control your emotions and your passions you also speak the truth in a way we all can enjoy reading. While we read we sit there noding our heads in agreement. Saying way to go marcus. I agree, maybe an apoligy to all of us could go a long way for your language.... (even though I was saying the same thing under my breath):)and was considering how I was going to respond to ALM's outrages post.

    To ALM:
    I think you aught to quit while you are ahead... OH wait that part is already past :) !!!

    The more you talk the more you sound like the Pharisee's and Sadusee's of Jesus' day who were so pious they couldn't see the Holly Scriptures for their arrogance or if they came up and bit them in the ass.

    You talk about being so open minded and yet speak so closed minded. Because you will not accept what is so obvious to millions. The heart of both the Jewish and Christian religions is that The Holly Bible IS THE WORD OF GOD. Whether inspired by man or written by HIM it doesn't matter to us. What matters is it is what he wants us to learn and do His commandments and laws written in it. PERIOD!

  25. Sorry for spelling your name wrong Donald and any other spellings. Sometimes my fingers don't do what my brain says to do :). Then again, my spelling never was that good.

  26. No problem… Actually 'Doland' sounds way cooler than 'Donald'. Now I almost wish I'd thought of that as a user name!

    Guys, my 5 cents now is that this debate is going nowhere. I think there are deeply held convictions on both sides (close mindedness if you want to call it that) that I don't see a 'debate' changing anytime soon. In any case, Megan's blog is probably not the ideal place to be carrying on a debate about the inerrancy of the Bible. Megan has her life ahead of her to read, question things, pray, and seek to know the truth about God. There is no shortage of people wanting to force feed her differing opinions, but that rarely changes anyone. She knows where each of us stand, and she can ask any of us questions at any time if she wants to.

    I was somewhat hesitant of going into this debate from the beginning, but when you see something you value being unfairly ridiculed (misquoted) it's hard not to step in and say something. From my point of view, I addressed that in the previous post, so I'm signing out of this one now.

  27. Cmpdom67

    Don't forget about those 1.5 billion Muslims who believe the Koran is the word of God too.

  28. Attention ALM : this woman is the victim of a pseudo - Christian cult ....