Comments on: Thoughts on invocations and benedictions… http://overstatement.org/?p=94 This world is one blog shy of perfect... Wed, 21 Jul 2010 08:39:56 -0600 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: pregnancy symptoms http://overstatement.org/?p=94&cpage=1#comment-25 pregnancy symptoms Wed, 04 Feb 2009 18:19:33 +0000 http://overstatement.org/?p=94#comment-25 I wish to wish all pregnant women of good mood, easy pregnancy and natural sorts! Good luck also are happy! Give birth easily and independently! Let not doctors give birth for you, and you! Also adjust itself on chest feeding of the kid! Read the necessary information! Be, lovely pregnant mums and expecting posterities of the daddy, are healthy and wise! I wish to wish all pregnant women of good mood, easy pregnancy and natural sorts! Good luck also are happy! Give birth easily and independently! Let not doctors give birth for you, and you! Also adjust itself on chest feeding of the kid! Read the necessary information! Be, lovely pregnant mums and expecting posterities of the daddy, are healthy and wise!

]]> By: bthooper http://overstatement.org/?p=94&cpage=1#comment-23 bthooper Fri, 09 Jan 2009 12:20:19 +0000 http://overstatement.org/?p=94#comment-23 Thanks for your continued input. I'm glad you read the archives and found them somewhat useful.<br><br>Your comments have encourage me to think a bit about what this blog is for and who it is for, etc.<br><br>Originally, I started this blog (in a number of different formats) for my personal use and for sharing of ideas with a few friends who were my only audience. Eventually, i began to follow a number of United Methodist blogs, and decided to join the Methoblogroll and share my thoughts with the wider UM community.<br><br>In my estimation, too many blogs have comments full of back and forth diatribes that seem rather useless to me. I am not really interested in argument or debate. I get enough of that in the rest of my life believe me! I'm just interested in expressing myself and hearing others do the same - which is far different from tit for tat debate.<br><br>As far as the Bible goes, I assue you that I encourage everyone I know to read it - I so encourage people from my pulpit, in the Bible studies I lead, in the committees I lead, etc. I take the Bible seriously, and I believe it merits serious reflection and study, not proof-texting and reductionism.<br><br>I also advocate for spiritual practice and discipline, and have done so in all the congregations I serve. To me, reading the Bible and developing a spiritual practice are the two most important things individual Christians can do. Communially, of course, we also benefit from the regular attendance of worship, the sharing in the sacraments, and Christian conferencing. I'm sorry that I haven't more clearly advocated for Bible study and spiritual discipline via this blog, but again, that was never it's purpose. <br><br>With blogs becoming more and more popular, and more and more people reading this blog, perhaps I should reconsider:<br><br>1. Should this blog exist at all? I post plenty of informatino on the internet in other forums without this blog. If this blog becomes a lightening rod for debate, instead of a forum for exchange, I'm just not interested. <br><br>2. Should I post some more fundamental posts on basics for the uninitiated who would like a better sense of who I am and where I'm coming from?<br><br>3. Should I simply close the comments?<br><br>Your thoughts are appreciated, of course. Thanks for your continued input. I'm glad you read the archives and found them somewhat useful.

Your comments have encourage me to think a bit about what this blog is for and who it is for, etc.

Originally, I started this blog (in a number of different formats) for my personal use and for sharing of ideas with a few friends who were my only audience. Eventually, i began to follow a number of United Methodist blogs, and decided to join the Methoblogroll and share my thoughts with the wider UM community.

In my estimation, too many blogs have comments full of back and forth diatribes that seem rather useless to me. I am not really interested in argument or debate. I get enough of that in the rest of my life believe me! I'm just interested in expressing myself and hearing others do the same – which is far different from tit for tat debate.

As far as the Bible goes, I assue you that I encourage everyone I know to read it – I so encourage people from my pulpit, in the Bible studies I lead, in the committees I lead, etc. I take the Bible seriously, and I believe it merits serious reflection and study, not proof-texting and reductionism.

I also advocate for spiritual practice and discipline, and have done so in all the congregations I serve. To me, reading the Bible and developing a spiritual practice are the two most important things individual Christians can do. Communially, of course, we also benefit from the regular attendance of worship, the sharing in the sacraments, and Christian conferencing. I'm sorry that I haven't more clearly advocated for Bible study and spiritual discipline via this blog, but again, that was never it's purpose.

With blogs becoming more and more popular, and more and more people reading this blog, perhaps I should reconsider:

1. Should this blog exist at all? I post plenty of informatino on the internet in other forums without this blog. If this blog becomes a lightening rod for debate, instead of a forum for exchange, I'm just not interested.

2. Should I post some more fundamental posts on basics for the uninitiated who would like a better sense of who I am and where I'm coming from?

3. Should I simply close the comments?

Your thoughts are appreciated, of course.

]]> By: Joiarib http://overstatement.org/?p=94&cpage=1#comment-22 Joiarib Fri, 09 Jan 2009 02:16:55 +0000 http://overstatement.org/?p=94#comment-22 Your response is disappointing on a number of levels. First, of course, is that you publish your thoughts, musings, and opinions for all the world to read—and invite comments on them—but then you don’t want to engage in a discussion about them. (And I don’t see why you have to characterize our exchange as an argument.) Surely you believe in a civil exchange of ideas, as well as the possibility that you could learn as well as teach. I presume—perhaps wrongly—that you don’t demand blind allegiance from your congregation but are willing to listen to their points of view. Don’t your virtual congregants deserve the same courtesy? <br><br>Second, your advising me to read the Bible strikes me as both clichéd and a bit disingenuous. I would have thought that at least you would have coupled the Bible with some sacred scripture from outside the paternalistic Judeo-Christian tradition. The Vedas or Analects, perhaps. More significantly, after reviewing the archives of your blog, I find the word “Bible” occurs only once before (five months ago) and nowhere else have you suggested that such reading is useful or helpful. Why bring it up now? (Reviewing the archive was beneficial, though; it introduced me to the wonderful Orwellian term “reproductive justice.”)<br><br>Third, your glib dismissal of me with "Good luck to you," strikes me as uncharitable and hurtful. Am I not as worthy of your ministrations as are the least and lost? Could I not be, in fact, among the least and lost?<br><br>Finally, if your claim that the world is one blog shy of perfect is correct, perhaps mine, posted here, is the one that can bring it to perfection. Your response is disappointing on a number of levels. First, of course, is that you publish your thoughts, musings, and opinions for all the world to read—and invite comments on them—but then you don’t want to engage in a discussion about them. (And I don’t see why you have to characterize our exchange as an argument.) Surely you believe in a civil exchange of ideas, as well as the possibility that you could learn as well as teach. I presume—perhaps wrongly—that you don’t demand blind allegiance from your congregation but are willing to listen to their points of view. Don’t your virtual congregants deserve the same courtesy?

Second, your advising me to read the Bible strikes me as both clichéd and a bit disingenuous. I would have thought that at least you would have coupled the Bible with some sacred scripture from outside the paternalistic Judeo-Christian tradition. The Vedas or Analects, perhaps. More significantly, after reviewing the archives of your blog, I find the word “Bible” occurs only once before (five months ago) and nowhere else have you suggested that such reading is useful or helpful. Why bring it up now? (Reviewing the archive was beneficial, though; it introduced me to the wonderful Orwellian term “reproductive justice.”)

Third, your glib dismissal of me with “Good luck to you,” strikes me as uncharitable and hurtful. Am I not as worthy of your ministrations as are the least and lost? Could I not be, in fact, among the least and lost?

Finally, if your claim that the world is one blog shy of perfect is correct, perhaps mine, posted here, is the one that can bring it to perfection.

]]> By: bthooper http://overstatement.org/?p=94&cpage=1#comment-21 bthooper Wed, 07 Jan 2009 02:03:53 +0000 http://overstatement.org/?p=94#comment-21 I think it is pretty clear that you don't agree with me. I respect your difference of opinion, but I am unwilling to turn my comments here into some kind of argument. I'm sure you can find more interesting sparring partners in other venues.<br><br>I would again encourage you to find an effective spiritual practice and to read the Bible. Good luck to you! I think it is pretty clear that you don't agree with me. I respect your difference of opinion, but I am unwilling to turn my comments here into some kind of argument. I'm sure you can find more interesting sparring partners in other venues.

I would again encourage you to find an effective spiritual practice and to read the Bible. Good luck to you!

]]> By: Joiarib http://overstatement.org/?p=94&cpage=1#comment-20 Joiarib Wed, 07 Jan 2009 01:54:17 +0000 http://overstatement.org/?p=94#comment-20 What exactly don't you follow about Warren's comments in the clip you post? He says that a biological disposition to a behaviour does not mean that the behaviour should be indulged. Is this not true? I assume you have seen the film M.<br><br>As for Obama's choice of Warren to deliver the inaugural invocation, it seems perfectly logical given thier identical stances on gay marriage. What exactly don't you follow about Warren's comments in the clip you post? He says that a biological disposition to a behaviour does not mean that the behaviour should be indulged. Is this not true? I assume you have seen the film M.

As for Obama's choice of Warren to deliver the inaugural invocation, it seems perfectly logical given thier identical stances on gay marriage.

]]> By: Shawn Lang http://overstatement.org/?p=94&cpage=1#comment-6 Shawn Lang Wed, 24 Dec 2008 16:08:19 +0000 http://overstatement.org/?p=94#comment-6 I think that the Boswell book is particularly compelling. Thanks for posting this Bryan. You're a true comrade in the struggle!<br><br>Peace<br>Shawn I think that the Boswell book is particularly compelling. Thanks for posting this Bryan. You're a true comrade in the struggle!

Peace
Shawn

]]>