As some of my works have Christianity or at least some type of vague spirituality or metaphysics lurking in the backstory or surfacing here or there in a plot or in a character, I thought it would be a good idea to clarify just what my religious vs. spiritual beliefs are.
Let me summarize my beliefs (yes, this is a summary; my beliefs are somewhat intricate), however haphazardly organized they are. I am writing these off the top of my head as they occur. I edit as I go along.
Cogito ergo sum (I think therefore I am). As did Rene Descartes, I believe that all I can be sure of is that I exist. My perception of everything else might be in error. This is true for everyone. Some interesting concepts can be derived from this. For example, in the movie The Matrix, nearly all humans are being kept in cells and used as energy sources while the images of the false world they know are fed to them. When Neo was in his cell, all he could be certain of is that he alone existed and that only because he was thinking. All else was an illusion.
If my perceptions are dubious, then everyone else’s is in doubt as well, assuming that other humans exist. If they only exist in my mind, then my perception of what they perceive is in doubt. If others do exist, then everyone’s perception is in doubt.
Now if I am the only being in existence, then who created me? There must be another entity to create me and another to create my parent entity, and so forth, and so on. My recollection of my perceptions tells me that I have existed for only a finite amount of time. In that case, death is when I pass out of existence. How does that work if I am the only entity that exists? Do I pass on to another existence? I think that if I exist, then at least one other entity exists in order to have created me. Perhaps my reality is only the madness of someone who has existed in solitude too long.
Based on my experience, I believe subjectively that God exists. In that case, whoever created me and the being that created Him and so on ad infinitum, is God. So, if I exist, God, being my creator, must exist in some form.
If my perception of reality is correct, meaning it is actual reality for all of us, where did it originate? The best explanation science has to offer is that it was created in “the Big Bang”. What caused the Big Bang? No one knows at this point in our scientific evolution. My inclination is to say God, but then God is a ready, go-to explanation for everything beyond the limits of our scientific knowledge.
I am a Christian, though I do not cling to any one denomination. I believe in most of the principles that Christ taught. The only way to know these for certain is to look at the actual words of Christ. This leads to problems, because how do we know that the words Christ reportedly said were not carefully selected when the New Testament was put together to meet one or more agendas? While in college, I took two years of New Testament Greek and had a GPA in it of about 3.9-4.0. During these two years, the way we learned was by translating the Gospel of Mark. My professor was a Lutheran Minister whose father and brother (I think it was a brother) were Lutheran ministers, and I attended his church for a while. I was also a member of a Christian fellowship for a few years and often discussed religion and philosophy with friends. After these experiences I am increasingly suspicious that the teachings of Christ as they stand in the four gospels were probably carefully vetted before inclusion. I don’t have the space at the moment to discuss this, but I hope to write an article about it in the future.
I do believe in the overall message of Christ as I perceive it, which is to love one another and to love God. I honestly believe that if people could do this, most of our problems would disappear, but most people are incapable of doing this.
I don’t think most people understand just how radical Christ’s message (λογος in the Koine Greek of the New Testament) was for those times. Then, most people believed in multiple fickle gods and goddesses, to whom they had to offered sacrifices to have prayers answered and which, to my rudimentary knowledge of ancient polytheism, did not provide moral guidance or establish laws per se. Only Judaism had a single god. Then Christ came along and said this single god loves everyone and wants everyone to love each other and to love Him. What a truly radical thought! Over time, that idea would change the way we think on a global basis. Christ was right. If we could truly love God and each other (ἀγάπη and φιλία in the New Testament), all hatred and desire to damage or destroy each other in any sense would disappear. You can’t intentionally harm someone if you truly love them. But most of us can’t love each other as we should, which is heartbreaking.
Recently, I read Nietzsche’s The Antichrist, his last work before going mad and being confined to an “asylum”, as mental institutions were known then. I have read parts of his other works and I have read a little biographical info on him. I would like to read a lot more of them. Interestingly, Nietzsche’s father was a Lutheran minister and his grandfather a theologian. I agree with a lot, but not everything, of what Nietzsche says about the Church and about how Christianity can foster weakness. I think what must be taken into consideration though is Nietzsche’s perspective based on his life experience. I suspect that his constant suffering from a variety of ailments undoubtedly soured him on what belief in God can do for oneself. I think also that his strong negative views on society led him to state that “God is dead”, meaning that the world treats God as if he were dead.
Many people cite the evil people have done in God’s name (e.g. the Crusades) as a reason not to believe in God. This is one reason I say that people confuse God, the Church, and the laity. Because people, in order to achieve their own goals, say God ordained them (whether they actually believe it or not) to do such and such, does not mean that He did. They may actually believe they are doing the work of God, but if they are not living in accordance with Christ’s teachings, they are not doing the work of God.
Despite the evil that has been done in the name of God and the Church, belief in the teachings of Jesus has accomplished a lot of good from the establishment of charitable and nursing programs and hospitals to innumerable cases of individual healing, feeding the poor, and mercy for the weak and what we would term today “the underprivileged”. Unfortunately, these acts are not exciting and consequently do not make headlines as do acts of violence, betrayal, etc.
Who has examined the the words Christ actually spoke according to the four gospels? Here are a few websites reporting what Jesus said: ElDoradoweather.com; Walking with Jesus Ministries; Sacredtexts.com; etc
I am not what many people would consider a religious man. I do believe in God (Father, Son, and Holy Ghost) and I consider myself a Christian, though not a good one by any stretch of the imagination. Am I worried about going to Heaven or Hell? Not really. What will be, will be. But then there is what Heinrich Heine reportedly said on his deathbed when asked if he was worried about getting into Heaven: Gott wird mir verzeihen. Das is sein Beruf. [God will pardon me. That is his business.]
For decades, I prayed regularly in private usually every day, whether I was in a crisis or not and I rarely attended church from about 1980 to 2024. Within the past year, I have begun attending church regularly.
Sometime last spring, the solitude of having lived in a remote area of Arkansas for five years began to take its toll on me. I needed people, but in this rural area there are very few bars (and I don’t drive after any alcohol consumption anyway), few restaurants stay open past 9:00 (and those that do usually have few customers), and there are no social hotspots. My solution was to do what the pioneers did and go to church. I tried several but almost all taught the traditional views, lessons, and sermons. Then I found a church, whose name I won’t mention, that I thought my wife, who teaches in west Texas most of the year (at that time; she lives in the Dallas area now — a long story), would enjoy. I was right and we began attending regularly when she came home over Christmas break.
Now that she is back in Texas, I still attend it every Sunday and usually on Wednesdays as well while she attends a church she found in her town. I do enjoy the sermons, and the congregants are good people who sincerely believe. Occasionally, I may disagree with something stated in a sermon, but overall I believe it is a good experience and it does strengthen my faith in God and humanity as well and I put a nominal amount in the offering bucket every Sunday, because I believe it will be put to good use.
Nonetheless, I do not claim to be of any denomination or sect currently, though I was brought up in a Church of Christ. I have not applied to be a member of my current church and I do not intend to do so in the foreseeable future. I have nothing against joining any church. I just prefer to think of myself as still a member of the church where I grew up though I haven’t seen it in decades.
Nonetheless, I do not take the Bible on blind faith. I see the Bible as an anthology of writings by men who were perhaps divinely inspired but were still as fallible and as subject to misperception as any other human. I see the Bible as a hodgepodge of history, myth, and law overlapping the bronze and early iron ages. While some things in the Bible may be taken literally, much of it should be taken metaphorically. The Bible should be studied meticulously just as another other important work of ancient literature should be studied–with a critical, discerning, perspicacious eye seeking truth, not searching for justification for nefarious acts past, present, or future.
The best Sunday school I ever attended was while I was in college in the late 1970s’. I was a member of Intervarsity Christian Fellowship at the time, and I was trying to find a suitable church for me in Richmond, KY, where my alma mater of Eastern Kentucky University is located. My professor of Koine Greek (see above), his father, and, I believe, another relative were pastors at a Lutheran church that met in the Baptist Student Union building just off campus. Instead of teaching the usual Bible stories, they brought in textbooks and studied the archaeology supporting the Bible. Many of the small congregation, as I recall, were professors at the university. It was a fascinating experience.
I also suspect that parts of the Biblical texts, especially the New Testament, may have been occasionally manipulated, intentionally or unintentionally, to suit the politics of the time.
I know that many experts vehemently deny that the content of the New Testament was manipulated to suit the political problems Emperor Constantine was facing at the time and that there is no evidence to that effect. However, I look at the frequent number of times that Christ advises his followers to obey their rulers and then my doubts arise.
What are the actual teachings of Christ? In the several verses where Jesus is quoted, what does he actually say we should do to follow him? For now, please research this on your own. I may write a post on it later, but this one is already much, much longer than I originally intended. Besides, I think it is important that you read exactly what Jesus said, come to your own conclusions, and not rely on my interpretation or anyone else’s.
The Christian church (any Christian church) seems constructed to be manipulated by someone. Here’s the problem: there are three parts in the communications between God and the laity: 1) God, 2) the clergy, 3) the laity. To know what God teaches, the laity relies on the clergy. We must therefore trust the clergy to teach about God and His desires and instructions for us. But there are two problems: we trust the clergy to know what they’re doing (they are human after all and subject to errors); and they are also susceptible to their own political currents and the political currents of the world around them. This is not even to mention which of them might have their own private agendas. In short, the clergy is human, flesh as it were. As in John 1:14, “and the word became flesh…” My Greek professor (see above) explained the meaning of flesh in this context as the word of God became flesh with all its weaknesses and failings.
There is also the fact that the concepts of a heaven for true followers and a hell for non-believers and sinners make for one incredible carrot-and-stick combination. It’s as if the clergy is saying: do as we say and you go to heaven; don’t do what we say and go to hell; but we also have the power to forgive sins, so you might get into heaven despite those sins, but you have to do as we say.
At the same time, I do not automatically decry any belief of any faith. I try to judge each with a measure of disinterest.
My personal beliefs align best with the thought expressed on a small, wooden plaque I picked up in Germany in the distant past and now keep in my office:
“Ihr glaubt der Jager sei ein Sunder, weil er selten zur Kirche geht, im grunen Wald ein Blick zum Himmel ist besser als ein falsch Gebet.”
You (all) believe the hunter to be a sinner, because he seldom goes to church, in the green forest a glance to the sky is better than a false prayer.
Anonymous
I do have a spiritual side. I sometimes think I feel the presence of God when I see a truly awe-inspiring sight such as when I saw the Grand Canyon for the first time or when I have gazed at the myriad stars on a moonless night at sea hundreds of miles from land.
Where my beliefs depart from those of many Christians, is that I do not perceive God, “the Church”, and the Laity as one entity. I believe that confusing the three is a serious failing of many people, both believers and non-believers. God is spirit; “the Church” (in my view and as I shall use it in this writing) is the clerical organization of any and all Christian denominations; the Laity is the community of non-clerical adherents of any and all Christian denominations.
The Nature of God
I shall use the traditional pronoun of He/Him/His for ease of reference, though any spirit should technically be referred to as “it”, because it is neither male nor female. However, one’s perception of God, including mine, is often exceptionally personal, and using a non-personal pronoun might be construed as offensive, irreverent, or even blasphemous. As the majority of people probably still perceive God as male, I shall refer to God as male in this text.
I shall do that also because that is my perception and my tradition and the traditional perception in which I grew up. Using the pronoun she is just as inaccurate as using he, but if someone perceives God as female, that perception should be respected just as perceiving God as a male should be respected. If someone wants to refer to God as it, that view should also be respected. No one knows the actual nature of God and whether God is male, female, or neither is a matter of perception and tradition. For that matter, in my view, all perceptions of God should be respected including those that deny or doubt His/Her/Its existence.
Probably the one thing about God that most people can agree upon, whether they believe in one God or many, is that God is spirit. The definition of spirit, however, is perhaps as vague as the definition of God. Spirit, in general terms, can be a metaphysical entity or sense that runs through one person or through all people or through all living things, like the Asian concept of chi or the similar though fictional concept of the Force in the Star Wars movie franchise.
Spirit, in my experience with the modern lay/vernacular usage, is something that only living things have. Rocks do not have spirit. Dirt does not have spirit. Trees and other plants might be perceived as having spirit. However, in animistic beliefs, inanimate objects have a spirit of their own or a spirit associated with them.
Spirit can be good or evil or anywhere on the spectrum between them. It seems to be the abstract/invisible part of a person of all people or of all living things that animates them and drives their decision-making. It is a combination of emotions and reasoning and perception that drives the actions of one person or of a people or of all living things or of all things, depending on one’s beliefs. A soul then is a person’s personal, individual spirit or part of the universal spirit.
A good way to understand the connection between breath/air and spirit is to remember that the ancient Greek word for spirit is pneuma (πνεῦμα), which is also the word for breath or air (cf. modern English pneumatic). According to my professor of Koine Greek at university, the Greeks associated breath/air with spirit, because when a person dies, both their breath and their spirit leave them.
Spirit is a part of God, but God is more than that. God seems to be not only the spirit that permeates all things but more than that: the spirit that created the universe, drives it, and that one day will destroy it. This divine spirit is usually not considered haphazard. It is often perceived as intelligent, omniscient, and omnipotent. Depending upon one’s perception of fortune, it is often imbued with human characteristics, such as being good or evil, merciful or merciless, loving or cruel or with any other human trait. It is easy, therefore, to understand why the ancient Greeks and Romans believed in many gods. Everything seems to take on human characteristics at one point or the other.
Perhaps we perceive God with human qualities because we have trouble understanding each other’s actions and motivations. We see the actions of each other, particularly of those far removed from our daily lives, as fickle, mysterious, and inscrutable. Therefore, we see the actions of universe as fickle, mysterious, and inscrutable.
My perception is that God is the intelligent, overarching spirit that guides the universe, but to what degree He guides the universe is debatable to say the least. Many believe that He concerns Himself only with major events and not with the mundane, day-to-day lives of His followers. Others believe that since He is omniscient and omnipotent that He is involved in every occurrence no matter how trivial or esoteric.
The Nature of The Church
What I am calling The Church is the administrative organization that supports the clergy and clerical operations of a belief system. This is similar to the corporate structure of a business. It is composed of people who are usually paid in some fashion for their work for the organization, though the Church does have numerous volunteers working for it. As an organization, it has its established procedures, protocol, and goals. It functions via collaborative thinking and decision making or by supporting the guidance of an individual.
The Nature of the Laity
The laity are the unpaid followers of a belief system. They are people who believe in the faith’s goals and teachings and contribute to its success through contributing work or finances or tangible items to support the Church and its operations. The Laity is the source of the Clergy.
The Nature of the Afterlife
No one can offer concrete proof of an afterlife. People may use logic and reason and stories of personal experience to convince themselves or others that there is an afterlife, but how could one offer anything concrete to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that there is an afterlife?
If life ends in nothingness, what would it be like? How can one visualize it? One could think of an overcast night at sea when there is only blackness in literally every direction, and one seems to be floating in a black void with no up or down or left or right and nothing visible to indicate the passage of time. However, there would still be one’s heartbeat and one could still taste and smell the salt air and feel the tropical heat or arctic cold on one’s skin.
The best visualization of nothingness would probably be to visualize existence not before one’s birth but before one’s conception. Then it would be logical to return to that void after death.
Some faiths tell of past lives while some people speak of recollections from past lives. While there can probably never be concrete evidence of past lives or of God, does that mean that past lives and God do not exist? Does lack of evidence mean something never existed? No, it just means that it cannot be proven to exist or to have existed. Sciences such as archaeology, paleontology, and paleoanthropology continue to uncover new evidence of the world’s prehistory that was previously considered to be myth or legend. At the same time, given the nebulous nature of human perception and recollection, simply because someone seems to recall a past experience does not mean that experience actually took place. Any criminal defense or prosecuting attorney, psychiatrist, or psychologist or other mental health professional should be able to speak to this.
“The oldest and strongest emotion of mankind is fear, and the oldest and strongest kind of fear is fear of the unknown.“
H.P. Lovecraft, “Supernatural Horror in Literature”, 1927
Having one’s followers believe in an afterlife is a useful tool in keeping one’s followers in line with the organizational doctrine. This is the classic aforementioned “carrot and stick” method of convincing others to believe and do one’s bidding: if one does as the Church demands, after death one will spend eternity in a very pleasant place with friends and family. If one does not do as the Church requests, one will spend eternity in torment.
Do I believe in an afterlife? I hope there is an afterlife. To quote the poster behind Fox Mulder’s desk in The X-Files: “I want to believe”. The idea that life should end in nothingness is depressing and abhorrent. If one believes in souls and spirit, it is illogical that life should end in a void.
The Nature of the Bible
The Old Testament is a collection of manuscripts written over a period of roughly 1,200 years by (presumably) men who are lost to time. The authors of some manuscripts cannot be verified, while the authors of others are unknown, and the authors of others are only a name about whom literally nothing is known. Most of the manuscripts are known only second-hand, i.e. no original text exists and its contents are known only by being quoted in other manuscripts.
The New Testament is likewise a collection of manuscripts whose authors generally cannot be verified and which was written over a period of about 100-200 years. Also like the Old Testament, none of its texts are original but are known only through being quoted in other texts.
A history professor at almost any university would probably fail a student who used sources this dubious. A hypothetical conversation between the two might go something like this:
“Johnny, who is your source for saying Jesus was the product of Mary and the Holy Spirit?”
“Matthew, Professor Quisquam.”
“And who is Matthew?”
“I really don’t know. He was probably one of Jesus’s disciples. They say he knew Jesus personally.”
“Where did Matthew get his information?”
“They say he might have gotten it from Mark, but Jesus might have told him too.”
“And who is this Mark?”
“Well, uh…”
Does this mean that the Bible is useless as a spiritual guide? Not really. Scholars, clergy, and the Laity have gained valuable insight and life lessons from it for millennia. Parts of it are the bedrock for laws and nations worldwide. And while zealous devotion to the Bible has been the source of conflict from college debating teams to brutal crusades and oppressive regimes, much good has arisen from scholarly study of it ranging from anonymous personal acts of forgiveness and mercy to the founding of global charitable institutions, hospitals, and universities.
The Bible seldom states life lessons as explicitly as The Analects of Confucius or The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius. Most of its lessons must be learned through interpretation of its passages just as one would interpret a novel. And while there are traditional interpretations of probably every passage, sometimes they are interpreted in unusual or even bizarre ways that can lead to conflict with other Christians and particularly with non-Christians.
Of course, the mutability of the interpretation of the Bible also makes it easily susceptible to intentional or unintentional misinterpretation.
Another complex problem arises when one considers that at some point what texts should be included in the Bible had to be decided. Most, particularly in the Old Testament, are included probably out of tradition. In my humble opinion, the New Testament is more problematic.
There are some instances where Jesus gave straightforward spiritual guidance, particularly in the Sermon on the Mount or in Matthew 22: 37-40, when He said, ” Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: Love your neighbor as yourself.”
After that, much of what Jesus said was to tell people to not be afraid and that they should follow him, because He is the only way to God.
Some of the remaining teachings He gave concerned obeying the established authorities.
Jesus says about obedience:
“If you love Me, you will obey what I command.”
John 14:15
“Whoever has My commands and obeys them, he is the one who loves Me…”
John 14:21
“Jesus replied, ‘If anyone loves Me, he will obey My teaching.’”
John 14:23
“You are my friends if you do what I command you. “
–John 15:14
“Remind them to be subject to rulers and authorities, to obey, to be ready for every good work, to speak evil of no one, to be peaceable, gentle, showing all humility to all men.”
Titus 3:1-2 NKJV
“Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive, for they watch out for your souls, as those who must give account. Let them do so with joy and not with grief, for that would be unprofitable for you.”
Hebrews 13:17 NKJV
These statements were made to people who probably had only a simple understanding of government, which was to either obey the authorities, the king, and the emperor or suffer the consequences, which would quite often be a slow, agonizing death.
Then there is Romans 13, verses 1-7, are quoted here from the New International Version of the New Testament:
Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended. For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience. This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. Give to everyone what you owe them: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.
This was written by Paul the apostle in 55-58 CE (formerly AD). According to Wikipedia, Nero was Emperor of Rome from 13 October 54 CE to 9 June 68 CE.
The path to life after death as described in the New Testament is essentially: a) The only way to life after death is through God b) the only way to God is through Jesus c) obeying Jesus will give someone eternal life d) disobedience will land one in Hell. This is the ultimate carrot-and-stick of persuasion: either do what I say and spend eternity in bliss or disobey me and spend eternity in Hell.
But once Jesus left this plane of existence, who was to tell the people what guidance was coming from Jesus? Only the lay leaders and the clergy could. That gave them an incredible amount of power.
Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Lord Acton
The Nature of Good and Evil
“For there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.”
William Shakespeare (Hamlet, Act II, Scene 2)
Is a gun good or evil? Place a pistol on a table and leave it there, without touching it. It performs no actions on its own, therefore it cannot be either good or evil. Use it to shoot someone, and it is evil–usually. What if you used it to shoot an assailant, thereby saving another person’s life. In the eyes of the person saved, that pistol was used for good. To the now (perhaps mortally) wounded assailant, that pistol was used for evil. If someone uses a rifle to shoot a deer to feed his/her family, that rifle is used for good. To the deer’s mate, that rifle was used for evil.
Irreconcilable Problems of Belief
The question I have trouble reconciling with my belief in God, is where was God when the Jews (who believe they are his “chosen people”) and millions of other non-Jews when the Nazis shipped them to concentration camps or murdered them en masse? Undoubtedly, many of all faiths prayed fervently to be freed when they were being used as slave labor. Likewise, where is God when innocent young women are tortured to death by a serial killer?
Why then do I continue to believe in God? I have no choice. That God exists is more than my perception. It seems to be an innate part of my being. At times, particularly when facing some incredible spectacle of the natural world, I can no more deny God’s existence than I can deny my own. At other times, some stroke of fortune, good or bad, seems to be more than a coincidence or simple luck; it seems to be of deliberate design. Perhaps when I view a scene that affects me spiritually, there is a certain combination of endorphins and related biochemicals released that create the feeling of a spiritual experience or it could be a genuine spiritual experience. All I can do is understand the moment as I perceive it.
“Ich kan nicht anderst, hie[r] stehe ich, Gott helff mir, Amen.”
I cannot do otherwise, here I stand, God help me, Amen.
Martin Luther before the Diet of Worms, 17 April 1521
One interesting catchphrase used repeatedly on the television show Lost was “do not mistake coincidence for fate.”
God is often used as the reason for things beyond our comprehension, for things that science has not yet found a way to explain.
I believe that science does not and can never know everything. If science knew everything, there would be nothing left to discover. Science is exploration of the unknown. It is egotistical for anyone to argue that science has uncovered all the answers to everything. This argument has probably made since at least the Enlightenment. Each generation since has probably believed that they are at the pinnacle of science and all knowledge, yet the next generation with its own advances and refutations of past beliefs, believes the same. Many in this year of 2025 undoubtedly believe humanity now knows everything and there is nothing more to learn, but people in 2125 will believe the same as will people in 2225, etc. ad infinitum. The same can be said for the people of 1425, 1525, 1625, and 1725. Science is constantly tearing down old concepts and building new ones. As recently as the 1940’s it was believed that it would be impossible to break the sound barrier. The first exoplanets were not confirmed until 1992.
But God is always just beyond the horizon of our knowledge.
Perhaps because I am a visually oriented person, perceiving God as an invisible spirit is difficult. I find it easier to understand things if I can visualize them. Because comprehending something may be easier if it can be visualized, might be the reason ancient peoples built idols and conceived of God as a person (or persons).
“God does not play dice with the universe.”
Albert Einstein
At this point, in the interest of time I shall end this rambling essay by saying that, as you can see, I try to take everything with a healthy dose of salt. For most of my spiritual beliefs, I cannot quote sources or cite passages from obscure texts. I base my beliefs on subjective experience and analysis rooted in a cold logic (as one friend described it). But this all seems right to me, which is all anyone could ask of themselves.
Phil Slattery, Writer, Publisher 