A story in the 22 July 2001 issue really captured my interest -- it amazes me how people will adapt to their technology, rather than make their technology adapt to them. It's certainly nothing new: the keyboard on the computer you're sitting at right now probably has a "Qwerty" layout for the keys. That key arrangement is anti-ergonomic -- it was specifically designed to slow down typing because of the mechanical limitations of typewriters in the 1870s. Problem with the keys jamming? Anti-engineer the keyboard to slow people down, don't fix the technology to keep it from jamming! (Which, of course, they did do long ago -- but we're still stuck with Qwerty even though a far superior alternative has been available for decades!)

Similarly, when people have a problem communicating with "Short Message Service" on their cell phones, the solution is to alter (even destroy) the language, rather than make SMS better:

The full translation is fairly interesting:

Original	SMS Version	English
Our Father who art in heaven,	dad@hvn,	Dad at heaven,
hallowed be thy name.	urspshl.	you're special.
Thy kingdom come, thy will be done,	we want wot u want	We want what you want
on earth, as it is in heaven.	&urth2b like hvn.	and Earth to be like heaven.
Give us this day our daily bread,	giv us food	Give us food
and forgive us our trespasses,	&4giv r sins	and forgive our sins
as we forgive those who trespass against us.	lyk we 4giv uvaz.	like we forgive others.
And lead us not into temptation,	don't test us!	Don't test us!
but deliver us from evil.	save us!	Save us!
For thine is the kingdom,	bcos we kno ur boss	because we know you're boss,
and the power,	ur tuf	you're tough,
and the glory, for ever and ever.	&ur cool 4 eva!	and you're cool forever!
Amen.	ok?	OK?

(The SMS translation was written by Matthew Campbell, a history student at York University. Its translation back to English was written by Randy Cassingham.)

Interestingly, several readers thought that there would be a lot of angry letters about this story. But it took quite a while to get one, and they've been rare. Perhaps people are growing up and understand one can talk about religion without them feeling like they need to be threatened -- or perhaps they are starting to realize that uninformed arguments religious issues often makes them look pretty darn stupid.

Anyway, that leaves thoughtful reflection on the story -- which is what True is all about. The most interesting so far:

• That is really ...er... disturbing. I don't mean the alteration of the prayer -- if it's not in Greek, it's already been altered, right? [Good point! -rc] Instead, what I object to is the rapid bastardization of the language. I am only fair when it comes to spelling. My spell checker is my best friend and I use it constantly! When I see news items like this, it makes me feel as if I'm wasting my time. Why bother being literate? What do I tell my (hypothetical) children when they ask me why they have to learn spelling in school? The adult world obviously doesn't care about it, why should they?

  Now that I've finished ranting about that part, I'll have to say that the intersection of technology and religion doesn't particularly bother me. I think it's only natural that the users belief and spirituality should be a part of new technology. I certainly can't help but notice that Christian preachers have adapted well to the medium of television. (Too well, some might say!) --Fred, Illinois

Heh! Just so. But I have no concern about the intersection of technology and religion. After all, churches have used lights and heaters for years. Rather, my concern is bending humans to the weaknesses of technology. As in "Let's cripple people so they can accommodate 19th-century typewriters rather than fix the keyboard!" As in "Let's completely screw up the most expressive language ever created because cell phones with processors more powerful than what filled an entire room in 1950 can't handle more than 160 characters at a time!" Yaknow? We should bend technology to fit people, not bend people to fit poorly designed technology.

• [Fred in Illinois] is correct in noting that Greek was the language in which the Christian New Testament was written. However, most scholars agree that it is most likely that the lingua franca of ancient Israel, spoken by Jesus when teaching this prayer to his disciples, was most probably Aramaic. Strictly considered, Greek itself is one such example of "rapid bastardization of the language" of the words of Jesus. --Link, Virginia

"The more things change, the more they stay the same," eh?

• Okay, I understand the point you're making about technology not being improved for proper human usage. However, "Give us food" ??? Understand that I am far from a religious man, but I was raised as a Roman Catholic who went to mass every Sunday and learned about the evolution of the modern day ceremonies and prayers. I can understand the reasoning behind translating many of the Latin prayers into languages that correspond with the peoples. But how do you go from "and the glory, for ever and ever" to "&ur cool 4 eva!" or "and you're cool forever!" and expect the same traditional meaning? Besides all that, does a God-fearing cell phone user really need someone to send them an SMS version of the Lord's Prayer? What a pain in the butt it would be to stop and pray everytime it was received. And what if you're busy and just delete it? What kind of message would that send to God? It even sounds childish when read in the SMS to English translation.

  I think this "religious group" needs to spend a little more time in constructional hobbies, like building playgrounds for kids or mending broken homes, than trying to create more trendy ways to live and/or pray.--Adam, Ohio

I can't say I disagree with anything you say, Adam. Pretty much, that's why I make fun of stuff like this.

• I am a high school English teacher and I found your item on the SMS version of the Lord's Prayer fascinating. Not only do I agree with your point about bending people's behaviors around the limitations of technology instead of adapting technology to suit people's needs, but I also found this to be a good example of a grotesquery of language, something "charactertized by ludicrous or incongruous distortion." (I run into grotesqueries all the time in student writing. For example, the following was the thesis for a research paper on the Holocaust: "The Holocaust was a tough time for the Jews.") As an undergraduate in college, I had a friend who was cynical about his Polish Catholic upbringing and used say the following grace at meals: "Rub-a-dub-dub, thanks for the grub. Hail, Superchief!" Many people would find that prayer of "thanks" offensive, but if the Lrd's Pr is intended to be serious, it is doubly so. --Hank, Arizona

Indeed, it is my understanding that the "Lrd's Pr", as you so aptly named it, is intended to be a serious worship tool. (Hank went on to ask if he could use a printout of this page as a teaching aid for his English students -- permission I gladly granted.)

I finally got a few rants about the story. They ran from Bible-thumping preaching to "a long time reader" who "will forestall my cancellation decision until I've allowed sufficient time for your explaination" (keep waiting, pal) to this one:

• I don't like the story's tagline at all. Saying "(an experimental form of virtual worship) is pretty much what all prayer is" is pretty insulting to anyone of any faith that believes in prayer of any form. --Mike, Virginia

Sorry, Mike, but I just don't accept your claim that you speak for "everyone of faith". Plenty of "people of faith" have taken the story just for what it is. But I do agree that you chose to be insulted, rather than take the "Christian" approach. That says a lot more about you than it does me, or the story, doesn't it?

(After I wrote the above, I got this letter: "Your comment might have been an attempt to make fun at religion, and the self-righteous indignations will probably start pouring in. But as a religious person, I found the comment deep and inspiring! --Gidon, Israel"

No, it wasn't meant to "make fun" of religion, it was meant to provoke thought. I am gratified to see that it did just that, even in the Holy Land.)

OK, two more and I'm gonna call it a page:

• Regarding Mike's claim that the tagline is "pretty insulting to anyone of any faith that believes in prayer of any form." Last time I checked, most people don't believe they are in the direct presence of God, that that comes in "eternity" or "heaven" or "paradise" or "the new earth" (or whatever your brand of religion calls it) and part of the eternal reward for being saved, living a good life, etc. is spending eternity worshipping God face to face. So, until then, isn't worship "virtual"??? --Adam, California

That is, to be sure, an even-more succinct explanation of the tagline than even I would have been able to write. Last:

• I have studied the king james version of the holy bible,or at least mused on it for 43 years.As a result of this I have seen the bottomless pit,where satan is to be released from.I understand the "warming trend".I have witnessed the lake of fire the planet earth is going to be cast into.I have found alien robots in the bible.Evidence as solid as steel proves creation by a greater being.I am not a preacher or a "religious nut." I just want to know how to make money from it.I only have a 10th grade education and am 60 years old. --Carlton (location not given)