Prayers on the way! Thank God no one died!

Oh heavens! We never did anything that bad. Long skirts only, and not during Christmas and Easter.

A good friend of ours is a music director at a more, um, progressive church. For the last Sunday of Advent one year, her church did Amahl and the Night Visitors during the morning service, with the singers in the organ loft and dancers up front acting out the parts. It was actually very good. Dunno if it exactly counts as liturgical dance... an opera, even a short one, isn't exactly liturgy.

In  theory, I'm not against dance as a form of worship. It's what tends to happen in practice...

Did it involve actual ballerinas, or just a few clueless young things from the congregation?

I admit that when I was a teenager, I got involved in liturgical dance. But then, teens aren't known for their good sense. I suppose it kept me off the streets...

He's right about women's figures. A low waist-to-hip ratio is where it's at.

Have you ever seen the parody Baby Got Book? It's... a little bit wrong. And that's what makes it so funny.

A bit of both, I think.

Provided I have time, when I look something up online, I like to read about it more in depth. Reading about something in context builds the mental connections that reinforce memory.

In other cases (when time is short or my interest is low), I'm more or less relying on Google to remember things for me.

I think, given my personality (I'm inquisitive and I love to read), Google helps my memory more than it harms it.

She's prettier than Britney Spears ever was, and has a nice voice for pop.

But as all I got out of her song is that she has soft skin, likes bubble baths, and is sick of zucchini (this is what happens when you take Spanish instead of French in high school), I can't swear to the literate part. Maybe everything sounds more literate in French.

Thanks for your clear explanations, GFL.

The problem is more the lack of empathy than the threat of an implicit judgment.

As Ansonia put it:

Edward, not all chitchat that treats faith like a shiny new gadget is done in the spirit of contempt. Some people are genuinely interested, but shallow. Other people are simply geeky and inclined to talk about  anything  -- religion included -- as if it were the latest electronic gizmo.

I wouldn't put it like that. There's a lot to faith that can't be quantified, so quantification is often a fool's errand. But foolish is different from insulting.

Ultimately, quantitative analysis is part of God's creation, too. If there  is  a useful way to apply quantitative analysis to religion, I don't think God would mind us doing it.

I do, however, agree, that faith is oriented towards truth that transcends logic, and that trying to use logic (or, rather, the pretense of logic) where logic doesn't go is counterproductive.

What's funny is that's exactly the sort of stuff Job had to put up with from his friends.

I find Google a boon to those of us with poor recall, incidentally.

Even when I only vaguely recall a name or a fact, a few Google searches usually reminds me of exactly what I was trying to remember -- that is, if it's the sort of information that's public to begin with.

"The library is big, but the librarian is asleep" pretty much describes my memory.

I have a lot of memories cluttering up my head, but poor recall -- poor control over accessing those memories. I remember things at random times, prompted by some outside cue that inexplicably triggers the memory. I'm much less successful at willing myself to recall a given memory when I need it.

My memory for music and poetry is much better than my memory for other things. I'm horrible at remembering numbers (less of an impediment for a mathematician than you might think). I can only remember my own phone number because of the tune the digits make when you interpret them as scale degrees.

But even with something as memorable as music, my mind plays tricks on me. Over time, my memory might unconsciously embellish or alter a melody or chord progression to make it more pleasing to me.

Given enough time, even memories of poetry and music fade -- though sometimes they leap back to life when triggered by a cue.

Also, sometimes I remember things that never happened.

In short, my memory is unreliable. I find an unreliable memory makes life less certain.

Your explanations have been very helpful, as any explanation that helps me unify the bits of knowledge I've already picked up always is.

Does this non-common law governing court procedure (such as standing orders) have a name?

Also,  shouldn't  standing orders maintain a degree of consistency in court procedure while at the same time dealing with the fact that new factual circumstances are always arising?

Challenge: Summarize the Book of Job in 200 words or less...

God allows Job to suffer. Job complains about his suffering. A lot. Job's friends try to rationalize Job's suffering using theology. Whether they tell Job that he must have sinned to deserve so much suffering, or whether they tell him that his suffering will not last long if he's innocent, what they want from Job is clear: Job should stop complaining and accept his suffering as God's will. Job doesn't buy it. So Job and his friends argue for a really, really long time.

Eventually God, who is perhaps tired of having all Job's friends speak for Him, speaks to Job out of the whirlwind. God doesn't explain to Job why He allowed Job to suffer. Instead, God recounts the majesties of creation and asks Job, in light of them, what Job has to say for himself.

Job, overawed, replies that he cannot answer God. He humbles himself and falls silent.

God then turns to Job's friends and tells them, "Only Job has spoken rightly of me."

Only Job. Not Job's friends who thought that they could speak for God.

Since you're a lawyer and I'm not, could you explain something to me?

I thought judges had to stick to the common law when they issued orders. Apparently they don't.

If standing orders aren't common law, then what kind of law are they?

No, but because for most people, understanding the Book of Job doesn't come easily, as those of us who believe we understand the book ought to realize.

The story of Job is, on the surface, monstrous. What is God doing to this poor man? Is God some sort of sadist? Why is this story even in the Bible? In my experience, many people -- even Christians -- don't really get beyond this point in their understanding of the story. And once you do get beyond this point in your understanding of the story, it can be really, really tough to put your understanding into words.

As Amy quoted above, "The book of Job is a classic because all of life is a mystery."

The mysteries of life are a little tough to Twitter.