Figuring Out Religion

[dualstow]

The thing that I always thought was bizarre about the whole virgin birth story was that one of the gospel writers took the time to trace Joseph's genealogy all the way back to King David.  What possible relevance could that have to Jesus if Jesus and Joseph were not related and as far as Joseph was concerned Jesus was simply a love child from a dalliance Mary had with a supernatural being early in their marriage?

I think that claiming lineage to David bolsters the idea that you're the Messiah (if you're selling it to the Jews). The virgin birth pops up in other cultures' myths. So, I wonder if the two things weren't cobbled together from different points in time and the editors at Nicea couldn't decide which one to redact out.

[Mountaineer]

Based on pondering induced by the "genetically engineered intelligence" thread...

What if medical science had the know-how to genetically engineer a human fetus so that the probability that he/she would be religious could be increased by a factor of 3 (a made-up number)?  Or, in particular, Christian?

Would you advocate genetically engineering the developing fetus?

No.

... M

[dualstow]

Very creative, Tenn. 

[Greg]

http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleani ... today.html

Interesting read for those who'd like to see some testimonies of those that came to Christianity not through their family/cultural heritage, but during adulthood. I especially liked the story of this guy:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/201 ... naret.html

Had to leave his parents for Christianity. I just have to say that I'm so grateful that I didn't need to do something that must have been so hard to deal with.

[MediumTex]

http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleani ... today.html

Interesting read for those who'd like to see some testimonies of those that came to Christianity not through their family/cultural heritage, but during adulthood. I especially liked the story of this guy:

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/201 ... naret.html

Had to leave his parents for Christianity. I just have to say that I'm so grateful that I didn't need to do something that must have been so hard to deal with.

If you are coming from a religion like Islam, Christianity probably seems like a walk in the park with God.

From my perspective, Islam is to life in third world Muslim shitholes as rap music is to inner city America--it is a series of myths and folklore designed to metabolize the stress of a miserable existence by focusing the rage (especially among young men) outside the community.

Like rap music, I think that today's Islam will always fail to deliver improved living conditions to many of its poor adherents.  In the same way that you can't shoot your way out of the ghetto, you can't bomb your way out of a stone age religious community that simply doesn't understand how modern societies are built and maintained.

When I look at these jihadists who allow themselves to be manipulated by their religion into self-destruction because they believe that God's self-improvement plan involves turning themselves into messy piles of meat and bone, I can't help but think about all of those young black males in American cities whose fashion sense is informed by what prisoners wear, whose sense of entrepreneurship presupposes all business worth conducting is illegal, and who view the number one threat to their existence as the law enforcement apparatus that is supposed to be keeping everyone safe.  It's really bizarre how messed up a person's head can get when you put them in a desperate situation and the only counsel they receive is self-serving and short-sighted.

In my analogy, the artists and producers of rap music fill the same role in the U.S. ghetto that the radical imams play in these Muslim armpits around the world.

What is strange, though, is that I like rap music.  I find it to be an entertaining and cartoonish take on ghetto life that is often very clever and amusing.  To me, rap music is to the ghetto as horror movies are to old houses.  It's fun because it's campy, not because it's true.  Apparently, though, others listen to rap music and find themselves acting it out, or maybe they were already acting it out and the music just made them want to do it with more style.  I don't know, but I suspect the same is true with radical Islam and the way it impresses itself upon the minds of young men without much going for them.  Where I might just laugh at a story about a God who rewards murderers and thugs with eternal life in a paradise of material and sexual abundance, apparently if you are backward and desperate enough you can hear these stories and somehow find them appealing and persuasive, to the point that it overwhelms all of your natural instincts for survival and self-preservation.

I find that in the case of rap music producers and artists, there is the same kind of subtle smugness toward the people who support them that imams have toward their followers.  It's like they are sitting backstage before the show/daily prayers and saying "Can you believe they think all that shit I'm talking about is real?"

See if you can see a similar hint of smugness on the mugs below.

Anjam Choudary:



Suge Knight:



They each represent the same form of parasitic community leadership that drains its society of what little it may have while leading it down a path that leads nowhere.

[Mountaineer]

Based on pondering induced by the "genetically engineered intelligence" thread...

What if medical science had the know-how to genetically engineer a human fetus so that the probability that he/she would be religious could be increased by a factor of 3 (a made-up number)?  Or, in particular, Christian?

Would you advocate genetically engineering the developing fetus?

No.

Would you be willing to expand on your thinking on this?  These are knotty issues.

Sure, like it or knot.  The anti-GMO crowd goes bonkers already over corn, rice, etc.  If we GMO humans, there would be world-wide rioting and I like to live in peace. 

But on a more serious note, I am not for man wanting to be like God and I see this issue differently than man using God's gifts to cure disease or improve the food supply.  Basically, from my Christian perspective, I see GMOing humans very similar to the original sin.  But of course, if one does not believe God's Word ...........

... M

[Mountaineer]

See if you can see a similar hint of smugness on the mugs below.

It is in the eyes. 

... M

[iwealth]

Meet Homo Naledi!

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/10/africa/ho ... index.html

The fossils were found at the end of a series of chambers and tight squeezes deep underground, some 90 meters (100 yards) from the cave entrance. To get there, scientists would have to squeeze through a 7-inch wide cave opening.

Yikes. That probably explains why we haven't found more of these missing links.

[Fred]

Basically, from my Christian perspective, I see GMOing humans very similar to the original sin. 

This gave me an interesting thought. If the Garden of Eden Bible story is true and Adam and Eve were created in a pristine state not subject to death, but then the dying process began after disobeying God and eating the forbidden fruit, and passing this same defect down to all of their offspring, then it seems to me there would have to have been some sort of genetic mutation involved in order to produce this effect. I have heard that the human body once possessed the ability to manufacture its own Vitamin C the way other mammals do but that this was lost through some kind of genetic mutation. So it seems to me, a similar process must have been involved with the fall of Adam and Eve if the Bible story is true.

Now that we are entering an era when gene editing is possible I've heard talk of possibly repairing the Vitamin C defect and it is believed that this might increase life expectancy significantly. But what if they could find the "original sin" gene and repair that too?

[Mountaineer]

Would you be willing to expand on your thinking on this?  These are knotty issues.

But on a more serious note, I am not for man wanting to be like God and I see this issue differently than man using God's gifts to cure disease or improve the food supply.  Basically, from my Christian perspective, I see GMOing humans very similar to the original sin.  But of course, if one does not believe God's Word ...........

As MT said in the other thread, why do you think a human who genetically modifies another is "playing God" moreso other aspects of modern medicine is?

And why, in particular, would you be against GMing that results in more Christians?

Good questions.  Using the gifts of God (reason, intelligence, hospitals, medical equipment that man developed and built, etc.) to repair our bodies in the kingdom of the left is OK.  God already has a plan to rescue us sinful humans from the depths of sin (i.e. create Christians) - it was accomplished on the cross by Christ - it is for all who believe and that is kingdom of the right stuff.  I do not believe that "engineering" more Christians by sinful man is in God's plan; that is God's work.  When we try to become like God, it does not turn out well - at least it has not for several thousand years.  In gramatical terms, Christians are the direct object.  When God runs the verbs, all is good.  When man runs the verbs in conflict with God's Word, it is not all good.  But as I indicated earlier, if one does not believe in God's Word and the authority of Scripture ...............

... M

[Mountaineer]

As MT said in the other thread, why do you think a human who genetically modifies another is "playing God" moreso other aspects of modern medicine is?

And why, in particular, would you be against GMing that results in more Christians?

Good questions.  Using the gifts of God (reason, intelligence, hospitals, medical equipment that man developed and built, etc.) to repair our bodies in the kingdom of the left is OK.  God already has a plan to rescue us sinful humans from the depths of sin (i.e. create Christians) - it was accomplished on the cross by Christ - it is for all who believe and that is kingdom of the right stuff.  I do not believe that "engineering" more Christians by sinful man is in God's plan; that is God's work.  When we try to become like God, it does not turn out well - at least it has not for several thousand years.  In gramatical terms, Christians are the direct object.  When God runs the verbs, all is good.  When man runs the verbs in conflict with God's Word, it is not all good.  But as I indicated earlier, if one does not believe in God's Word and the authority of Scripture ...............

... M

Does the Bible specify that using reason, intelligence, hospitals, medical equipment is acceptable? What passages exactly?

Where does it say that GM is not acceptable?  Where does it say that using GM to convert people to Christianity is not acceptable?

There are three categories in the Scriptures relative to what you are asking.  1 - That which is commanded by God to do, 2 - that which is commanded by God not to do, and 3 - that which is not addressed either way.  Which category do you think your questions fall into and why?  Also, why is this important to you at all, other than the baiting aspects? 

Think of the likely outcome of the answers from either of us - is it going to change either of our beliefs?  Only hearing the Word proclaimed can change non-believers, and only Jesus rejecting me could change me to a non-believer, and Jesus has promised not to do that.  Thus, a meaningless exercise based upon each of our stated positions from previous posts?  I would be interested if you see it differently.

... M

[MediumTex]

Basically, from my Christian perspective, I see GMOing humans very similar to the original sin. 

This gave me an interesting thought. If the Garden of Eden Bible story is true and Adam and Eve were created in a pristine state not subject to death, but then the dying process began after disobeying God and eating the forbidden fruit, and passing this same defect down to all of their offspring, then it seems to me there would have to have been some sort of genetic mutation involved in order to produce this effect. I have heard that the human body once possessed the ability to manufacture its own Vitamin C the way other mammals do but that this was lost through some kind of genetic mutation. So it seems to me, a similar process must have been involved with the fall of Adam and Eve if the Bible story is true.

Now that we are entering an era when gene editing is possible I've heard talk of possibly repairing the Vitamin C defect and it is believed that this might increase life expectancy significantly. But what if they could find the "original sin" gene and repair that too?

Maybe the mutation was a genetic abnormality that allowed ancient humans to start conceptualizing the future and their own mortality, which then gave rise to the need for a deity and, later, a savior, to soften the mental horrors associated with the ability to conceptualize one's own death.

That makes perfect sense to me.  What we think of as the "Fall of Man" may actually be the point at which we decisively broke free of our natural habitat, figuratively represented as the Garden of Eden.  Our mental capabilities increased more and more as natural selection favored humans with the ability to provide soothing answers to the vexing questions that haunted us after we became aware of the transitory nature of our lives.

I think that the allegories in the Garden of Eden story are endlessly interesting, particularly the way it may represent the transition from hunter/gatherer society to agricultural society (think about how they just picked what they needed before they sinned against God, but after that they had to work the land to live).  If you take the story literally, though, it seems like you miss all of that interesting symbolic meaning.

[MediumTex]

Does the Bible specify that using reason, intelligence, hospitals, medical equipment is acceptable? What passages exactly?

Where does it say that GM is not acceptable?  Where does it say that using GM to convert people to Christianity is not acceptable?

There are three categories in the Scriptures relative to what you are asking.  1 - That which is commanded by God to do, 2 - that which is commanded by God not to do, and 3 - that which is not addressed either way.  Which category do you think your questions fall into and why?  Also, why is this important to you at all, other than the baiting aspects? 

Think of the likely outcome of the answers from either of us - is it going to change either of our beliefs?  Only hearing the Word proclaimed can change non-believers, and only Jesus rejecting me could change me to a non-believer, and Jesus has promised not to do that.  Thus, a meaningless exercise based upon each of our stated positions from previous posts?  I would be interested if you see it differently.

... M

I think the basic question is where to place a certain activity along a continuum.

If we assume that basic first aid is at one end of a continuum and full human cloning is at the other end, we have to mark some point on that human health care continuum as the point at which impermissible "God playing" commences.  Different people will mark that point in different places, often based upon what level of care may be needed to save their own lives or the lives of those they care about.

I don't know if either of your beliefs are going to be changed, but you would both nevertheless have to mark a point on the continuum based on your own values and beliefs, and it would be interesting to know how close or far apart those points are.

[Mountaineer]

Does the Bible specify that using reason, intelligence, hospitals, medical equipment is acceptable? What passages exactly?

Where does it say that GM is not acceptable?  Where does it say that using GM to convert people to Christianity is not acceptable?

There are three categories in the Scriptures relative to what you are asking.  1 - That which is commanded by God to do, 2 - that which is commanded by God not to do, and 3 - that which is not addressed either way.  Which category do you think your questions fall into and why? 

Not being familiar at all with Scripture, I don't know the answer to those questions.

Also, why is this important to you at all, other than the baiting aspects? 

Baiting aspects? I thought we were having a conversation, aimed at trying to understand where each of us is coming from.  I must admit that it's frustrating to have my motives questioned.

Think of the likely outcome of the answers from either of us - is it going to change either of our beliefs?  Only hearing the Word proclaimed can change non-believers, and only Jesus rejecting me could change me to a non-believer, and Jesus has promised not to do that.  Thus, a meaningless exercise based upon each of our stated positions from previous posts?  I would be interested if you see it differently.

This thread is 200+ pages long, and I don't think anyone here has converted to Christianity, nor has renounced his/her beliefs.  So I don't understand why it would now matter that neither of us is likely to change his belief system.

OK, Tenn, I apologize for questioning where you were coming from - I'm having a bit of a stressful day and I read your post as something like one of the antagonistic style posters might say to just be snarky.  Seriously, I apologize.  I am really busy right now but I will try to get back to your questions soon when I might think a bit more clearly.  Peace Dude!

... M

[MediumTex]

No worries.  And thanks very much for the response.

[Mountaineer]

As MT said in the other thread, why do you think a human who genetically modifies another is "playing God" moreso other aspects of modern medicine is?

And why, in particular, would you be against GMing that results in more Christians?

Good questions.  Using the gifts of God (reason, intelligence, hospitals, medical equipment that man developed and built, etc.) to repair our bodies in the kingdom of the left is OK.  God already has a plan to rescue us sinful humans from the depths of sin (i.e. create Christians) - it was accomplished on the cross by Christ - it is for all who believe and that is kingdom of the right stuff.  I do not believe that "engineering" more Christians by sinful man is in God's plan; that is God's work.  When we try to become like God, it does not turn out well - at least it has not for several thousand years.  In gramatical terms, Christians are the direct object.  When God runs the verbs, all is good.  When man runs the verbs in conflict with God's Word, it is not all good.  But as I indicated earlier, if one does not believe in God's Word and the authority of Scripture ...............

... M

Does the Bible specify that using reason, intelligence, hospitals, medical equipment is acceptable? What passages exactly?

Where does it say that GM is not acceptable?  Where does it say that using GM to convert people to Christianity is not acceptable?

Reason: There are many places in Scripture that discuss reason.  I encourage you to read them and form your own opinion as to whether reason is a valuable gift from God and/or acceptable.  I think there are around 60 passages in the link.  You asked for specifics.  I did not go to commentaries as I think at least to start you should read these verses and then discuss with a Pastor if you have interest.
https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearc ... &limit=100

Intelligence:  Ditto intelligence. 
https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearc ... ersion=ESV

Hospitals: Hospitals are not mentioned directly, physicians are, and by reason, I am assuming they had some types of medical equipment.  The healing ministry was an important and integral aspect of the total ministry of Christ and His apostles.  See what you think.
https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearc ... ersion=ESV
and,
https://www.biblegateway.com/quicksearc ... &limit=100

GM: Not mentioned in Scripture to the best of my knowledge, but neither is space travel, airplanes and all the other stuff we have invented in the last couple thousand years.  God's gifts are good and He provides our needs.  I can see how this subject of "playing God" by manipulating God's process of creating people is covered in Exodus 20:3 (Number One of the 10 Commandments but you may consider that a stretch - Ex 20:3 “You shall have no other gods before [or besides] me.").  GM is not inherently bad, it is the improper use.

In general, to me the real issue is not the tool (reason, intelligence, GM, etc.), it is improper use of the tool and forgetting where the tool comes from.  Everything we have is a gift from God.  When we forget who is the Creator and who is the creature, we run into serious problems.  The central purpose of Scripture is to provide what you need to know to bodily exist for eternity in complete joyful righteousness.  It's primary purpose is not to be a science book, a math book, a history book, a how to live your life book, or a medical book, although some of those topics are included and are good advice.  Go to where you will hear the Word faithfully proclaimed - hear the Gospel (Jesus came to forgive and atone for the sins of everyone - those who believe His promises are saved) - and receive the gift of Jesus himself.  It will change your life and probably the lives of those around you when you come to believe Jesus is really in you.  If you have not been baptized, do so and receive the gift of the Holy Spirit (even if you are not aware of it as an infant is not aware, at least in the way we think) whose purpose is to make Jesus known. 

... M

[Fred]

OK, Tenn, I apologize for questioning where you were coming from - I'm having a bit of a stressful day and I read your post as something like one of the antagonistic style posters might say to just be snarky.

I think your style of making dogmatic assertions is probably what rubs people the wrong way and leads to "antagonistic style posters" and snarkiness. I don't see that in other believers who post in this thread. They simply say, "this is what I believe" and why and then are open to discussion. You have a tendency to make hard-line assertions that your beliefs are the only correct ones so deal with it. Maybe you don't see that but I don't think I am the only one here who has observed it.

[Mountaineer]

OK, Tenn, I apologize for questioning where you were coming from - I'm having a bit of a stressful day and I read your post as something like one of the antagonistic style posters might say to just be snarky.

I think your style of making dogmatic assertions is probably what rubs people the wrong way and leads to "antagonistic style posters" and snarkiness. I don't see that in other believers who post in this thread. They simply say, "this is what I believe" and why and then are open to discussion. You have a tendency to make hard-line assertions that your beliefs are the only correct ones so deal with it. Maybe you don't see that but I don't think I am the only one here who has observed it.

Actually, that is an excellent comment.  As my grandmother used to say, "Honey catches more flies than vinegar".  I am not a relativist, I believe there are absolute truths, many of ultimate importance which cannot be proven via logic or reason or observation.  I believe that many religious wars have been fought over differing interpretations of Scripture.  I am not a fan of political correctness.  I do the best I can at the time I do it all the while recognizing I am simultaneously a saint and a sinner.  I believe there is much wisdom in the Chesterton quote in my signature. 

So, taking all that and merging it, if you were about to step in front of an Amtrak train going 150 mph that you were unaware of, would you want me to tell you in a harsh manner because I know I'm right "don't do that", or "strike up a nice unthreatening friendly conversation and chat while you were stepping to your immanent death"?  Silly perhaps, but that is how I view unbelievers whose death will not be over in a couple of seconds but last for eternity when the opposite can be.  Unfortunately, one never knows when the moment of death will come, so the urgency is there to tell of the good news of Christ and his forgiveness for all.  The gift has already been given, do you refuse it?  Of course, you may view it differently and not like presents.

... M

[MediumTex]

OK, Tenn, I apologize for questioning where you were coming from - I'm having a bit of a stressful day and I read your post as something like one of the antagonistic style posters might say to just be snarky.

I think your style of making dogmatic assertions is probably what rubs people the wrong way and leads to "antagonistic style posters" and snarkiness. I don't see that in other believers who post in this thread. They simply say, "this is what I believe" and why and then are open to discussion. You have a tendency to make hard-line assertions that your beliefs are the only correct ones so deal with it. Maybe you don't see that but I don't think I am the only one here who has observed it.

I see what you are saying, and yet I believe Mountaineer to be a reasonable person with a generous spirit, so I am pretty sure he is not coming across that way intentionally.

People would have usually gotten mad at one another long before this in a typical internet religion discussion, and I really do feel like I have learned a lot about faith and how it interacts with one's reason.

The mental gymnastics that Mountaineer and Greg display still puzzle me, but it is clear to me that they are sincerely held beliefs that have contributed to positive changes in their lives.  I suppose if you can keep all of that straight in your head and it makes you happy, peaceful and hopeful, I don't know why you would want to look past your belief system because it's doing everything a belief system is supposed to do.

[Mountaineer]

OK, Tenn, I apologize for questioning where you were coming from - I'm having a bit of a stressful day and I read your post as something like one of the antagonistic style posters might say to just be snarky.

I think your style of making dogmatic assertions is probably what rubs people the wrong way and leads to "antagonistic style posters" and snarkiness. I don't see that in other believers who post in this thread. They simply say, "this is what I believe" and why and then are open to discussion. You have a tendency to make hard-line assertions that your beliefs are the only correct ones so deal with it. Maybe you don't see that but I don't think I am the only one here who has observed it.

I see what you are saying, and yet I believe Mountaineer to be a reasonable person with a generous spirit, so I am pretty sure he is not coming across that way intentionally.

People would have usually gotten mad at one another long before this in a typical internet religion discussion, and I really do feel like I have learned a lot about faith and how it interacts with one's reason.

The mental gymnastics that Mountaineer and Greg display still puzzle me, but it is clear to me that they are sincerely held beliefs that have contributed to positive changes in their lives.  I suppose if you can keep all of that straight in your head and it makes you happy, peaceful and hopeful, I don't know why you would want to look past your belief system because it's doing everything a belief system is supposed to do.

MediumTex,

What do you perceive as Greg and my more significant mental gymnastics?  I'm curious.

... M

[dualstow]

I don't see how you can use the Shallow Hal simile and say mental gymnastics. They don't mix.

[Greg]

I don't see how you can use the Shallow Hal simile and say mental gymnastics. They don't mix.

Agreed. Based on the information that I have myself, I see a reason to believe that there is a God and that there is a Christian God. The mental gymnastics that I might have would be through apologetics to try and better understand various issues surrounding Christianity.

After this many pages in this thread, what is seeming clear to me is:

1.) Christians can't explain their viewpoints in a clear enough way to make unbelievers of Christianity to want to believe
2.) Based on looking at the same information, two people can reach two conclusions about the nature of the universe
3.) Some people are very risk adverse in their investment portfolios and want data to understand which investment is the best for the future. Some people will choose something non-agnostic and they may be rewarded, some may not. Those with the agnostic portfolio (such as the PP), will not take huge losses but not have big gains in life. This seems to be true of religion as well.
4.) probably more things I haven't thought of yet

EDIT: Typos

[Mountaineer]

I don't see how you can use the Shallow Hal simile and say mental gymnastics. They don't mix.

Agreed. Based on the information that I have myself, I see a reason to believe that there is a God and that there is a Christian God. The mental gymnastics that I might have would be through apologetics to try and better understand various issues sounding Christianity.

After this many pages in this thread, what is seeming clear to me is:

1.) Christians can't explain their viewpoints in a clear enough way to make unbelievers of Christianity to want to believe
2.) Based on looking at the same information, two people can reach two conclusions about the nature of the universe
3.) Some people are very risk adverse in their investment portfolios and want data to understand which investment is the best for the future. Some people will choose something agnostic and they may be rewarded, some may not. Those with the agnostic portfolio (such as the PP), will not take huge losses but not have big gains in life. This seems to be true of religion as well.
4.) probably more things I haven't thought of yet

Greg, I like it!  If I may add to your points,

1. That is, God is in complete control of what the Gospel hearers response will be.  Christians can only cast seeds, it is up to God whether they fall on fertile soil or barren rock.  It is up to God to nurture and grow the seeds, and whether the plants will thrive or be choked out by weeds.  Seed casters should never "do guilt", they are doing exactly what God wishes even though the father of lies tries to say otherwise and make them feel guilty.

2. I'd say in this thread two people can reach way more than two conclusions. 

3. Interesting comparison. 

... M

[MediumTex]

I don't see how you can use the Shallow Hal simile and say mental gymnastics. They don't mix.

So Hal and his skinny sexy girlfriend go to a restaurant and she eats six plates of food, and after returning from the bathroom her chair collapses from the weight when she tries to sit down.  When they finish dinner and attempt to use the elevator in the parking garage they have to ride it separately because together they exceed the weight limit.

Those kinds of experiences of friction between fantasy and reality are where the mental gymnastics are needed.

The ongoing existence of doubt in most believers' minds suggests to me that mental gymnastics and religion go together like peas and carrots.

[dualstow]

I don't see how you can use the Shallow Hal simile and say mental gymnastics. They don't mix.

So Hal and his skinny sexy girlfriend go to a restaurant and she eats six plates of food, and after returning from the bathroom her chair collapses from the weight when she tries to sit down.  When they finish dinner and attempt to use the elevator in the parking garage they have to ride it separately because together they exceed the weight limit.

Ha! That is really good. It makes sense now. Earlier, when you admonished me not to tell believers the equivalent of "It's cool that you like fat chicks, as someone has to love them" I agreed with the sentiment. Still, I didn't know where you were coming from, because I didn't say anything like that. I was thinking <<Of course believers don't see a fat chick*, period.>>

However they do see the breaking chair, as you pointed out above. That is an excellent, excellent point. For some people, the whole narrative collapses along with the chair. One example that comes to mind would be abuse suffered by a priest. For others, the narrative continues to exist with additional web weaving (the gymnastics). It was a faulty chair. The priest was a faker and not a conduit of God in the first place.

This latter group of web weavers can be further bifurcated into those who weave effortlessly, even subconsciously, and those who have to try, perhaps feeling the occasional twinge of doubt.

I'm liking the Hal comparison more and more.
-----
*Just a note for WiseOne and other female readers of the forum: I don't walk around saying "fat chick" in my daily life, and I don't see overweight women or men as something to mock or disparage. Still, the specific term is used in this thread for reason. **Ok, now I feel the need to mention that I've met WiseOne and she is not fat, so don't get that idea from note 1. I'll stop digging the hole right now.