Man oh man!

What a piece of work is a man!

How noble in reason, how infinite in faculty,

in form and moving how express and admirable,

in action how like an angel, in apprehension how like a god—

the beauty of the world, the paragon of animals!

William Shakespeare, Hamlet, act 2, scene 2

I’ve been having some issues with my writing style lately.

I began using the outline layout because I thought my message was being obscured by my prose style. The numbered paragraphs were meant to make each point stand out.

But there’s no flow to it; it’s like climbing stairs when what I’m after is more of a stroll in the park. And it’s pretty impersonal.

I’m up in the air about this because what I’ve been trying to convey are, to me anyway, some very significant ideas, concepts that have shaped my life, especially over the last decade. Exactly how to get these ideas across has had me a bit flummoxed.

So I’m doing a reboot on my approach. I’m going to fall back on the style I used in my emails with my friend the Otter; I'm comfortable with it and he seldom complains.

Let’s get into it.

I want to talk about our vanity. No, not just vanity—arrogance. That’s a subject with which I have some first-hand experience.

Let me tell you what I consider our ultimate arrogance: that many of us believe that we are created in the image of God. 

In the image of God. Just wrap your mind around that for a minute. Go ahead, take a moment….

Feeling god-like? Okay, now let me compound that conceit: the reason we know that we are created in God’s image is because we believe that God told us so.

That's right. We know we are created in God's image because God told us. Who can argue with that?

Well, me, I guess.

For many of us, the source for this message of creation is the book of Genesis.

The book of Genesis, written, we generally agree, by one or more human authors—divinely inspired authors, any true believer will insist.

My problem is this: whether it’s true or not, we would still believe it.

Go ahead, dwell on that notion for a bit: if it wasn't true, we'd still believe it was.

And, even more, it seems a mighty convenient dogma in either case.

Quite the conundrum, I'm thinking.

Well, I reckon that’s enough for now. I’d welcome discussion, if a reader would be so inclined.

That feels better. I think this approach comes much closer to what I’m after. By the way, this whole style business is why I didn’t post last week; I was still rasslin’ with the problem. So, my apology for missing my self-imposed deadline.

!