Walking in heels from SAGA back to my room with a styrofoam cup full of coffee is very difficult. True to form, I always manage to spill. Of course it didn’t occur to me that I could just have a cup when I get back to my room that will probably be about 10 times better than what I got from SAGA. You wouldn’t be laughing if it were you . . .

It’s still Monday and it hasn’t been too bad so far. Art history test went ok, but I wish I had spent more time with those darned flash cards. Oh well, next time.

Religion was eventful if only because almost everything Prof. Westblade brought up sparked a little flame of outrage in my thoughts. The discussion concerned the account of Noah and the Flood found in Genesis and he was comparing it to the “historical” rendition as found in the epic of Gilgamesh. Well of course if something really happened there are going to be several accounts of it. What he did not seem to want to acknowledge was that there is a rather large difference between a Biblical account of something and a human account [note: one is Divinely-inspire, the other is not]. Without going into too much detail, needless to say I was immediately on his case about it. I could not help but giggle at some of the things he said because otherwise I would have been quite angry. It was as though he gave absolutely no significance to the infallibility of Scripure. Not to say that the other accounts are completely unimportant, they exist for a reason, whether or not that reason is simply to disprove them against the truth. Either way, I don’t see why it is so hard to simply submit to the infallibility of the Biblical passage and work out from there rather than trying to decipher how/what Moses changed from the Babylonian account of the Flood to the story that we find in the Bible . . . So that’s my rant for the day. Oh, and I am enjoying the class ironically enough.