I think she is sincerely secure in her religious delusions to the point where reality, apparently any of it, is of no consequence. IMHO, this isn't faked or deliberate falsehood but an actual twisting of reality to fit a delusional perception.
Of course, this characterization isn't unique to Faith either. Many who follow the path of "prioritizing beliefs" over reality when attempting to identify "truth" lead themselves into this identical corner during their later years.
It's a fascinating group of people who teach us much about how the brain works.
There's nothing odd about it, nothing just my own.
Actually, there's plenty odd about any belief. Beliefs that have nothing to do with God are just as odd as those that do.
Superstition is stuff like imputing power to relics or rituals
Relics like the cross? Rituals like praying?
Or are crosses devoid of all power? Does praying have no power?
Yes some of them supernatural, but that's not superstition if you have any respect for language.
When you or those-you-approve-of do it, it's supernatural. When those-you-don't-approve-of do it, it's superstition.
You do know that both are seen as equally "odd" - yes? At least, by the average functioning members of first world countries.
Everyone knows that crosses have a "more than normal" feeling about them - but that this comes from the cultural significance we put on them. They don't actually have any power. Just like Ouija boards.
Everyone knows that praying is something we (as humans) do when we don't know what to do. Sometimes that leads to epiphanies that can lead to change. Sometimes it doesn't. The prayer itself doesn't have any power. Just like cheering on your sports team from watching the game at home.
I've asked how you think [evolution occurs from microevolution times hundreds of repeats] could happen and so far nobody has really come up with a way it could
And three, yes I sometimes try to defend the conservative point of view in politics, or such events as the movie "Ujplanned." I don't think I do a very good job of this, however.
I think you do a really good job of bringing the information of the side you're defending to the table. It's just that taking that information and using it to "defend" the argument just doesn't hold much water.
Like "defending" square wheels. You can bring all the information to the table you'd like on how square wheels can be used - and you can be really good at getting this information. It just doesn't matter. Can't change reality. Round wheels are better than square wheels. Any "defense" of square wheels is going to be futile.
No, crosses have no power, that would be superstition.
If you say so. You likely don't have any hanging on any of your walls then, right?
I mean... I know they have no power, so I don't have any hanging on my walls. Just saying.
Also prayer has no power in itself but God's answers do.
I see. So the ritual of prayer has the possibility (depending on God's answer) of bringing about God's power. Sounds a lot like how the ritual of transubstantiation has the ability to change bread into the body of Christ through God's power.
But prayer is not a ritual. Only transubstantiation is.
Unfortunately this is on the same level as the answer that "microevolution just continues for millions of years."
That's not unfortunate. It's just a fact. Mutations and time occur for millions of years to produce many different changes and variations.
It's an assertion of what is really no more than belief or faith, there is no substance to it.
Lots of it is. The chimp and human DNA is.. what... 98% the same, or something like that? But, please be careful as I'm trying to use your language, you know modern chimps don't make humans... and you know no one thinks that. What we're talking about here is a common ancestor diverging, one path leading to modern chimps and another path leading to modern humans.
Something drastic has to change to make the chimp genome do something new.
What mutations would do that and what makes you think they would happen anyway?
All kinds of mutations - changes, additions and/or deletions. I think it would happen because it did... we (chimps and humans) evolved from a common ancestor. It's the only explanation that explains all the evidence.
Why wouldn't mutations add a few fingers or subtract a few or turn the fur into scales or whatnot?
1. Those are bigger, more difficult mutations. 2. Who says they didn't happen? If it happened, and the poor recipient died... then obviously their descendants wouldn't be around today for us to see them.
If you kept getting mutational trials of that sort they could last for millions of years and never produce a human hand.
Yes, that's possible. And it's also possible that the more subtle, simpler mutations could happen.
Let's look at the evidence!
Oh, look... modern chimps exist. Modern humans exist. A common ancestor previously existed. This happened.