[wideminded]

The physicist George Gamow related in his autobiography how, as a boy, he once saved the bread he had been given during communion, ran home, and examined it under a microscope. He credited this incident as being the origin of his atheism.

Now who's being gullible?

Not sure what you mean by your comment. Here we have a case where a young person is showing initiative and trying to find out things for himself rather than merely accepting what he has been told. That seems laudable to me.

[Mad Dawg]

I have a couple of probs with the Gamow story. The first is that what he did was, well, really naughty. And the second is that, while the initiative is charming and commendable, he found nothing other than what the theory would predict.

These Catholics say there is no apparent change. I looked and beheld no apparent change, so they much be wrong about everything.

That makes no sense.

[NYer]

Here we have a case where a young person is showing initiative and trying to find out things for himself rather than merely accepting what he has been told. That seems laudable to me.

Laudable?

We can't see reason or intelligence but we know it exists. They tell me that when I flip a switch, electricity turns on the light. We only see the effects of the electric current - light. So it is with the Eucharist. We can't see His presence but know He is there - because He said so.

Jesus turned water into wine. He multiplied 2 fish and a few barley loaves to feed a multitude of 10,000 men plus their wives and children; the leftovers filled up 12 baskets. I wonder how Gamow would have explained that.