Quote:

---

You're halfway there, I do believe that other religions have tapped into some cosmic power and can perform some supernatural acts. I also believe that those behind all of that are demons.

---

So demons are going around healing people in unverifiable ways and creating visions to steer people toward's the wrong religion? In what way are your miracles different? What's to say yours aren't the demon miracles? And again why are you all so powerless to do this in verifiable ways?

Quote:

---

You want to address any of the other miracles I listed? You want to learn a bit about the life of St. Lakovos? You want to come visit our church and hear from priests why he's a saint?

---

You pick one that you think is highly evidenced in favor, and make a case that's more than a vague reference. The picture one was laughable. Truly laughable. What exactly do you think will be convincing about what your preists have to say? What do you think will be different than if I asked some imams? Your saint could heal could he? Why didn't he park himself in a hospital?

I'm not going to bother with "visions" and "Dreams". It's the most unverifiable unevidenced assertion I can possibly think of.

Feel free to start a new thread so this doesn't derail any further.

dermdoc said:

---

It is almost like you want to have a discussion on an open discussion forum. But on your terms.

---

Exactly, I'll be sure to lower my expectations based on my audience.

I think the biggest issue here is both sides unwilling to be open minded (or at least stay highly skeptical). Here is a case that was heavily investigated. Scientists are named, the facility where research was conducted is named and it was a big deal in Poland at the time. As far as I can find, no atheist scientists are jumping to try and disprove it as they do with many other false miracles. On the other hand, would the Church be willing to hand over materials when they believe it will not be given a fair shot? Idk who's to blame in this not being more studied, but you'd think skeptics would be lined up around the block to disprove it and be very loud when they were denied access to simple documents. Idk.

http://www.miracolieucaristici.org/en/download/sokolka.pdf

ETA: When science disproves a miracle, it seems to be a big deal. When science seems to prove a miracle, it's always crickets.

Your saint could heal could he? Why didn't he park himself in a hospital?

He did heal people around him. Heres an audiobook version of "The Garden of the Holy Spirit', a recent book about St. Iakovos that very quickly sold out. The Youtube Channel Athonite Audio has uploaded a full audiobook of it.



I'm gonna listen to it today. I encourage everyone else as well.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

It is often argued on this board that life without God would be without purpose or meaning. Arguments are made that without God, one might live a life of pure hedonism, or violence, or that there would be no reason to continue to live at all. I want to argue that I don't really think you all actually believe this.

Consider a hypothetical where you become convinced that there is no God. No doubt that it would be a shock, but what would you decide to do with your life? Just end it? Get it over with since nothing matters at all? Whatever life and family you've built with your spouse and kids, all your friendships, all of the things you enjoy - you'd just end it? Because none of it matters and none of it has meaning? I don't think you would.

Atheist worldviews are described as depressing by some here because there is no eternal meaning. But it occurred to me that what is described above is far more depressing. I have been enormously fortunate with my life. I have a wonderful family, lovely wife, fantastic kids, great friends, great community. I love to cook, and bake, and woodworking, and golf, and watching movies, and travelling. From my perspective, I have been given a gift and a have two choices. I can consider the gift meaningless and throw it away. Or I can accept the gift and make the most of it for some 70 +/- years even though it doesn't last forever. I don't need to live for eternity in order to love my wife here and now. And I don't need to be with my children forever in the afterlife to love them and be proud of them today.

I was reading a line in the purpose of the universe thread a moment ago. And at the same time, I was on the phone making a tee time reservation. Its 72 degrees in Dallas and I'm about to go pick up my son and we're going to play as many holes as we can until it gets too dark for my old eyes to see. What a perfect afternoon! It occurred to me while I was reading this other post that I don't think you all think there is no meaning outside of an existence with God. I think you all love your families. And you love your children. And you love your communities, and your friends, and your hobbies, and contributing for the future generations, and building something instead of burning it down. I know that the feeling I have now getting ready to take my son golfing is a feeling you all experience in life too.

We have a beautiful gift, even if it isn't eternal.

Thats all! Go spend time with the people you love, do something nice, do something fun. Have a good weekend!

---

There is no "making the most of it" in your worldview because there are no true goals. How do you not understand this?

Klaus Schwab said:

---

There is no "making the most of it" in your worldview because there are no true goals. How do you not understand this?

---

Cuz I'm dumb and just want a worldview that lets me rape, kill, and steal!

kurt vonnegut said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

It is almost like you want to have a discussion on an open discussion forum. But on your terms.

---

Exactly, I'll be sure to lower my expectations based on my audience.

---

You already know your audience on here.

C'mon man. You are better than this.

The Banned said:

---

I think the biggest issue here is both sides unwilling to be open minded (or at least stay highly skeptical). Here is a case that was heavily investigated. Scientists are named, the facility where research was conducted is named and it was a big deal in Poland at the time. As far as I can find, no atheist scientists are jumping to try and disprove it as they do with many other false miracles. On the other hand, would the Church be willing to hand over materials when they believe it will not be given a fair shot? Idk who's to blame in this not being more studied, but you'd think skeptics would be lined up around the block to disprove it and be very loud when they were denied access to simple documents. Idk.

http://www.miracolieucaristici.org/en/download/sokolka.pdf

ETA: When science disproves a miracle, it seems to be a big deal. When science seems to prove a miracle, it's always crickets.

---

Your basic premise here is false. It's news when science disproves a miracle because that happens from time to time. The opposite never actually happens. This isn't an example of science proving a miracle. If the church really believed they had something here they would themselves make a big deal of it, they have not. In fact many of the places I see this discussed online have Catholics asking why the church hasn't pushed this more.

At a very basic level the initial claim is totally unextraordinary. Bread that fell on the ground, was put in water and slowly turned red. This has an obvious and repeatable natural explanation. This is an effect known to be caused by bacteria, and the bread fell on the ground which is a great place to have bacteria added. So far nothing.

The extraordinary claim is that two catholic scientists claim that it's heart muscle.

But let's follow up on that a bit, the university officially distanced itself from the claims:

"The Medical University officially dissociates itself from the results of these studies and emphasizes that the university does not endorse them. This is the position of the Rector of the University, which Prof. Chyczewski, as a spokesman, presents in the latest issue of the "Medyk Biaostocki" magazine published at the university. On Thursday, the statement was made available to PAP.

We didn't do it as a university" - Chyczewski told PAP and added that the research was carried out illegally, "quietly", outside the official way. It took place in the Academic Department of Pathomorphological Diagnostics. Chyczewski emphasizes that the university did not have any commission to carry out this research, the study was not registered anywhere. "Please do not attribute the diagnosis to any particular institution operating in an institution called the Medical University," Chyczewski wrote in his statement."

This is google translated from polish.

The Medical University dissociates itself from the research on the "miracle" in Sokka | Studying in Poland (naukawpolsce.pl)


As to scientist being willing to examine it:

The Department of Forensic Medicine in Bydgoszcz reported its readiness to perform them. "Out of scientific curiosity," says its head, Prof. Karol liwka.
A DNA test would accurately indicate whether the tissue that has been tested is human or animal, and whether it is male or female material. "With a high degree of probability, we would determine which region of the world it comes from. We would dispel all doubts," assures Prof. liwka.
Prof. Chyczewski: - The Archbishop was not interested in conducting such research. I was told that if there was a circumstance of the miraculous origin of this material, it should not be bothered any more.

What really happened in Sokka - rp.pl

Again google translate from polish


This was not heavily investigated, the church didn't want it to be, it wasn't investigated with ANY peer reviewed science. It seems even a little bit of skepticism and investigation proves your initial characterization pretty far off.

one MEEN Ag said:

---

He did heal people around him.

---

Who, when, of what ailments? What evidence besides heresay do you have?

Again, just listen to the audiobook. The first 5 minutes are two accounts of him posthumously appearing to people as well as healing someone in the hospital. You want a doctors note? Its a long road to soften this impenetrable heart of yours.

Again, everyone, all the time is lying. The interesting part is that you can get on a plane and go to the Monastery of St. David in Greece, and go talk to the people who knew him, witness the miracles he performed in the name of God, and can vouch for him. Bring pants, no shorts allowed as this is a holy place.

This is your shot Aggrad08, no need to lament about how its 2000 years of telephone, we don't know who jesus is, he never existed, miracles aren't real. We can't even interview those people anymore. Time to read up on the lives of the saints.

And I will admit, my faith didn't move from a mostly intellectual pursuit to 'knowing and doing' until I joined the Orthodox church. Man they looked like a bunch of weirdos to me at the start of my journey. Can't imagine my life without it now.

Aggrad08 said:

---

The Banned said:

---

I think the biggest issue here is both sides unwilling to be open minded (or at least stay highly skeptical). Here is a case that was heavily investigated. Scientists are named, the facility where research was conducted is named and it was a big deal in Poland at the time. As far as I can find, no atheist scientists are jumping to try and disprove it as they do with many other false miracles. On the other hand, would the Church be willing to hand over materials when they believe it will not be given a fair shot? Idk who's to blame in this not being more studied, but you'd think skeptics would be lined up around the block to disprove it and be very loud when they were denied access to simple documents. Idk.

http://www.miracolieucaristici.org/en/download/sokolka.pdf

ETA: When science disproves a miracle, it seems to be a big deal. When science seems to prove a miracle, it's always crickets.

---

Your basic premise here is false. It's news when science disproves a miracle because that happens from time to time. The opposite never actually happens. This isn't an example of science proving a miracle. If the church really believed they had something here they would themselves make a big deal of it, they have not. In fact many of the places I see this discussed online have Catholics asking why the church hasn't pushed this more.

At a very basic level the initial claim is totally unextraordinary. Bread that fell on the ground, was put in water and slowly turned red. This has an obvious and repeatable natural explanation. This is an effect known to be caused by bacteria, and the bread fell on the ground which is a great place to have bacteria added. So far nothing.

The extraordinary claim is that two catholic scientists claim that it's heart muscle.

But let's follow up on that a bit, the university officially distanced itself from the claims:

"The Medical University officially dissociates itself from the results of these studies and emphasizes that the university does not endorse them. This is the position of the Rector of the University, which Prof. Chyczewski, as a spokesman, presents in the latest issue of the "Medyk Biaostocki" magazine published at the university. On Thursday, the statement was made available to PAP.

We didn't do it as a university" - Chyczewski told PAP and added that the research was carried out illegally, "quietly", outside the official way. It took place in the Academic Department of Pathomorphological Diagnostics. Chyczewski emphasizes that the university did not have any commission to carry out this research, the study was not registered anywhere. "Please do not attribute the diagnosis to any particular institution operating in an institution called the Medical University," Chyczewski wrote in his statement."

This is google translated from polish.

The Medical University dissociates itself from the research on the "miracle" in Sokka | Studying in Poland (naukawpolsce.pl)


As to scientist being willing to examine it:

The Department of Forensic Medicine in Bydgoszcz reported its readiness to perform them. "Out of scientific curiosity," says its head, Prof. Karol liwka.
A DNA test would accurately indicate whether the tissue that has been tested is human or animal, and whether it is male or female material. "With a high degree of probability, we would determine which region of the world it comes from. We would dispel all doubts," assures Prof. liwka.
Prof. Chyczewski: - The Archbishop was not interested in conducting such research. I was told that if there was a circumstance of the miraculous origin of this material, it should not be bothered any more.

What really happened in Sokka - rp.pl

Again google translate from polish


This was not heavily investigated, the church didn't want it to be, it wasn't investigated with ANY peer reviewed science. It seems even a little bit of skepticism and investigation proves your initial characterization pretty far off.

---

My premise was the two sides don't play very nicely. I did search for a while looking for articles disproving the miracle and was unable to find what you found. Thank you for finding that. I would still expect this to be bigger news from the skeptical community, but maybe my expectations are off. I would also expect, should a skeptical scientist actually validate what the original two scientists found, it would be explained away by any means necessary (including "we dont know") and the word "miracle" would never be used. Would you agree?

I also stated the church very well may not be willing to hand over documents, so I'm correct there again. If two scientists committed outright fraud and stick their names on it, the faithful should know. It doesn't need to be hidden. I wish both sides would approach it a bit more open minded than they currently do.

dermdoc said:

---

kurt vonnegut said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

It is almost like you want to have a discussion on an open discussion forum. But on your terms.

---

Exactly, I'll be sure to lower my expectations based on my audience.

---

You already know your audience on here.

C'mon man. You are better than this.

---

Apologies. I forgot that you are allowed to make cheeky jabs, but that I am not.

(Winky face included this time so that you know I'm not really being a jerk)

kurt vonnegut said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

kurt vonnegut said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

It is almost like you want to have a discussion on an open discussion forum. But on your terms.

---

Exactly, I'll be sure to lower my expectations based on my audience.

---

You already know your audience on here.

C'mon man. You are better than this.

---

Apologies. I forgot that you are allowed to make cheeky jabs, but that I am not.

(Winky face included this time so that you know I'm not really being a jerk)

---

I know you are definitely not a jerk. Your post seemed out of character which is why I responded,

Shalom.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

Klaus Schwab said:

---

There is no "making the most of it" in your worldview because there are no true goals. How do you not understand this?

---

Cuz I'm dumb and just want a worldview that lets me rape, kill, and steal!

---

If you're not seeking affirmation in your worldview to the extent that MEEN discussed empathy, why are these responses so frustrating? It feels like you've limited the only allowable response to, 'I would act just like you Kurt.'

Not all the responses are frustrating. I think Banned gave a response on page 1 and on page 3 that responded to my question. And they definitely were not 'I'll be just like you' posts.

The Banned said:

---

My premise was the two sides don't play very nicely. I did search for a while looking for articles disproving the miracle and was unable to find what you found. Thank you for finding that. I would still expect this to be bigger news from the skeptical community, but maybe my expectations are off.

---

From the skeptics side of things I really just don't see anything compelling here, nor do I see the religious folks as being particularly fervent in their own belief. We've had scenarios like the shroud of turin where believers were more fervent and allowed some real science to be done, this just isn't that.

Quote:

---

I would also expect, should a skeptical scientist actually validate what the original two scientists found, it would be explained away by any means necessary (including "we dont know") and the word "miracle" would never be used. Would you agree?

---

I think "we don't know how" would be a reaction of scientist to a real miracle. But the next example of a real scientific miracle will be the first, so we will just have to see. A great many quality scientists are believers of one sort or another, so no I don't expect dismissal at all costs.

Quote:

---

I also stated the church very well may not be willing to hand over documents, so I'm correct there again. If two scientists committed outright fraud and stick their names on it, the faithful should know. It doesn't need to be hidden. I wish both sides would approach it a bit more open minded than they currently do.

---

I really don't know what else you would want from the skeptics side of things here. It seems all shortcomings on this one belong to the church. As I said, they showed willingness to investigate and were denied.

one MEEN Ag said:

---

Again, just listen to the audiobook. The first 5 minutes are two accounts of him posthumously appearing to people as well as healing someone in the hospital. You want a doctors note? Its a long road to soften this impenetrable heart of yours.

---

I want evidence not heresay. You seem to not understand the distinction. Is a doctor's involvement somehow too much to ask?

Quote:

---

This is your shot Aggrad08, no need to lament about how its 2000 years of telephone, we don't know who jesus is, he never existed, miracles aren't real. We can't even interview those people anymore. Time to read up on the lives of the saints.

---

I'm asking you to provide something more than heresay in an audio book. I'm asking you to provide more than accounts of holy men similar to those of other religions. So far you can't.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

Klaus Schwab said:

---

There is no "making the most of it" in your worldview because there are no true goals. How do you not understand this?

---

Cuz I'm dumb and just want a worldview that lets me rape, kill, and steal!

---

Yes the typical sarcastic move since you can't answer a simple question. All relative nonsense.

Klaus Schwab said:

---

kurt vonnegut said:

---

Klaus Schwab said:

---

There is no "making the most of it" in your worldview because there are no true goals. How do you not understand this?

---

Cuz I'm dumb and just want a worldview that lets me rape, kill, and steal!

---

Yes the typical sarcastic move since you can't answer a simple question. All relative nonsense.

---

This thread is very revealing.

dermdoc said:

---

Klaus Schwab said:

---

kurt vonnegut said:

---

Klaus Schwab said:

---

There is no "making the most of it" in your worldview because there are no true goals. How do you not understand this?

---

Cuz I'm dumb and just want a worldview that lets me rape, kill, and steal!

---

Yes the typical sarcastic move since you can't answer a simple question. All relative nonsense.

---

This thread is very revealing.

---

How is life meaningful? Feeling good while golfing. Step aside Christians, the atheists have found the answer.

What did you shoot?

Klaus Schwab said:

---

kurt vonnegut said:

---

Klaus Schwab said:

---

There is no "making the most of it" in your worldview because there are no true goals. How do you not understand this?

---

Cuz I'm dumb and just want a worldview that lets me rape, kill, and steal!

---

Yes the typical sarcastic move since you can't answer a simple question. All relative nonsense.

---

I explained why I find meaning in my finite life. You didn't engage with what I said and just gave a response of 'nope' and then offered a condescending question about why I can't understand. Ask a stupid question, you get a stupid answer. How do you not understand that?

dermdoc said:

---

Klaus Schwab said:

---

kurt vonnegut said:

---

Klaus Schwab said:

---

There is no "making the most of it" in your worldview because there are no true goals. How do you not understand this?

---

Cuz I'm dumb and just want a worldview that lets me rape, kill, and steal!

---

Yes the typical sarcastic move since you can't answer a simple question. All relative nonsense.

---

This thread is very revealing.

---

Well don't hold back now. . . What did it reveal?

Are you yourself a living miracle? When you go home from work at night and look at the sun setting and the stars starting to shine, are you experiencing the results of miracles? That these things exist at all, is that a miracle?
All this from nothing? Logically - they had to come from some cause? What/Who set the actions in motion that resulted in you and these things you experience every night/day? Something created has a creator? Right?
If so, those things are miracles and I will worship the creator of such miracles.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

Klaus Schwab said:

---

kurt vonnegut said:

---

Klaus Schwab said:

---

There is no "making the most of it" in your worldview because there are no true goals. How do you not understand this?

---

Cuz I'm dumb and just want a worldview that lets me rape, kill, and steal!

---

Yes the typical sarcastic move since you can't answer a simple question. All relative nonsense.

---

This thread is very revealing.

---

Well don't hold back now. . . What did it reveal?

---

Putting on my moral relativism hat, you tell me.

Agilaw said:

---

Are you yourself a living miracle? When you go home from work at night and look at the sun setting and the stars starting to shine, are you experiencing the results of miracles? That these things exist at all, is that a miracle?
All this from nothing? Logically - they had to come from some cause? What/Who set the actions in motion that resulted in you and these things you experience every night/day? Something created has a creator? Right?
If so, those things are miracles and I will worship the creator of such miracles.

---

Could be. But here's the thing, it could also not be. The only honest answer to why everything is, is "I don't know". Most arguments for a creator just don't quite stick as any kind of proof.

But I think I can grant a creator god or gods and you still aren't any closer to demonstrating the miracles of revealed religion. God is still perfectly silent, unrelentingly invisible.

And even granting that a creator exists, how do you know it desires worship? It always struck me as such a petty desire.

If there is a creator God, are the things created miracles in themselves? I think they are indeed miracles and evidence of a God that I can't totally explain nor comprehend and that's ok. I'm not sure what the miracles of religion that you are struggling with. Can you give a few examples?

Agilaw said:

---

If there is a creator God, are the things created miracles in themselves? I think they are indeed miracles and evidence of a God that I can't totally explain nor comprehend and that's ok. I'm not sure what the miracles of religion that you are struggling with. Can you give a few examples?

---

Yes, but they are not who you think he is...

One "miracle" in particular was performed by them:


The "Miracle" of Ftima: Farsight

The "angel" Mohammed conversed with in the cave......Gabriel is not what you think..

The Prophet Muhammad - Farsight

Not tracking with what you're saying?

There is a very good chance that what the many cultures down through time term god is simply extraterrestrial in origin. The mythological gods...Zeus, Ra, the sun-god et. al. have a basis in reality. IE, real "persons", not myth. The data is there. My question is how did et evolve? And how many billions of years ago did that occur? Where?

At least 3 of the major religions on this planet, Islam, Judaism and Christianity were all originated and maintained by nhi.

Perhaps this is one of the reasons the et cover-up is no intensely maintained.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

Not all the responses are frustrating. I think Banned gave a response on page 1 and on page 3 that responded to my question. And they definitely were not 'I'll be just like you' posts.

---

And just to be clear, that's me and some of the people I know that struggle with our vices and wrestle with them because we believe it to be objectively right. Without God, I think I'd still have feelings of right and wrong, I would just reach the logical conclusion that it doesn't really matter and I'm artificially holding myself back from stuff I want to do. One Bible passage that I think sums up your point of view, Kurt, is the following:

For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law; for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified. For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus (Romans 2:12-16).

Even those that don't believe in the true God have a conscience. "The law written on their hearts". This would be the Christian explanation for why atheists don't go full sociopath and why many atheists can still be good and decent people. It sounds like you're a good and decent person that listens to his conscience without a deep faith in the eternal, and some of the rest of us… maybe not so much.

I'll read this closer later, but I appreciate these responses.

The Banned said:

---

Even those that don't believe in the true God have a conscience. "The law written on their hearts". This would be the Christian explanation for why atheists don't go full sociopath and why many atheists can still be good and decent people. It sounds like you're a good and decent person that listens to his conscience without a deep faith in the eternal, and some of the rest of us… maybe not so much.

---

Everyone has temptations and things they struggle with, I'm not an exception.

I appreciate your responses on this thread, I haven't responded to a few of your posts, partly because I was interested to see if anyone else would weigh. I don't really know you, so feel free to take this response with a grain of salt. . .

I think that in some cases you might not give yourself enough credit. Or maybe you don't give enough weight to the positive feeling of relationships or just general human comradery. On the last page, you talked about how, without God, you would not cheat on your wife, but that you might have acted differently before your wife. To me, this feels like admission that you have something with your wife that you value over sex. You also talked about how, without God, you might run your business different with the intentions of maximizing profit at the expensive of your customers. Again here, I think there is opportunity to evaluate the pleasure of more money with the pleasure of running a business in manner that you feel to be fair and that allows for you to feel that you are helping people.

Now, I am aware that the way I've described placing a higher value on marriage over sleeping around and placing a higher value on 'good' business practices over greedy practices could just be described as seeking a specific form of pleasure that society generally finds more positive. Nevertheless, I thought it important to point out that not all pursuits of self interest have to be damaging. A lot of secular moral philosophy argues for the greater value provided and received through altruistic actions rather than those that are purely for oneself.

On a side note, a discussion about the nature of altruism through secular and non-secular lenses would be fun, though I don't feel I'm equipped to lead or contribute much to that one.

kurt vonnegut said:

---

what would you decide to do with your life? Just end it? Get it over with since nothing matters at all? Whatever life and family you've built with your spouse and kids, all your friendships, all of the things you enjoy - you'd just end it? Because none of it matters and none of it has meaning?
We have a beautiful gift, even if it isn't eternal.

---

"Besides if you are right and I am living my life poorly and will someday be judged by God - then let him do his job. Its not your job."

Kurt, I have read most of the 4 pages, but not all. I appreciate the way you have handled yourself. I think I would enjoy a face to face conversation with you, since in my mind, these things are hard to discuss online. I am a Christian. Have been for many years. I have some very good friends that are atheists. They are good people. In some ways better than me. They know I am a Christian. We have discussed the existence of God. I still believe and they still don't. We still respect and like each other. To me, that is the key. As you implied above, that is God's job. (1 Cor. 3). I don't hesitate to share my faith, buty I also don't believe in beating people over the head with it. It is up to God whether someone responds as I would like, not me. And in my belief, it is not whether you live your life poorly that you will be judged, but whether you accept the Gospel of Christ.

To answer your questions, I do not think I would end my life for many of the reasons you described. I also have grandchildren! But as others have mentioned, I was raised to value those things and blessed enough to be able to enjoy them. I suppose the exact circumstances under which I discovered that might change my feelings.

I appreciate your insights here. I ran this thought experiment by my wife and she feels similar to you in that her never probably wouldn't change all that much. We'd make some changes that are big in our faith and fertility, but wouldn't seem like a big deal to most Americans. She'd still be kind and dutiful and all that.

I then told her I think I'd change quite a bit and she said "yah, I could see that" haha. I guess we're just different