6th February 2008

“The idea that God sent Jesus into the world to live a perfect life and to suffer so that my imperfect life could be forgiven and I could go to Heaven is complete and utter nonsense.”

Anon.

42 Responses to “6th February 2008”

  1. Renshia Says:

    Makes a guy wonder???

    Why does God still hold me guilty of a sin committed thousands of years ago by someone else? What happened to forgiveness?

    What kind of a free choice is it when you can have the apple if you want, but if you do you will die? And why is this knowledge of good and evil a bad thing?

    Why am I guilty of sin when I’m only reacting to things in the only way I know how?? Should not the teacher be responsible for the ignorance of the student?

    It’s only when you sit down and think about it does the absurdity of it all shine.

  2. Thunder Says:

    * Why does God still hold me guilty of a sin committed thousands of years ago by someone else? *

    Every question from you atheists are indictments and not inquiries. If they were inquiries then the answers given you would be considered but since you have no interest in knowing no answer can satisfy your accusation. That is NOT objective or reasonable.

    Answer: He doesn`t. He holds us responsible for what we do and don`t do (ezekiel 18). He also equips us to know what is and what is not consequential to that sin committed long ago. As scripture says he that subjected us to the vanity (of the fall) did that subjecting in hope (hope of gaining control over carnal impulses, romans 8). It is an excercise in dominion over self.

    * What happened to forgiveness? *

    You want forgiveness for what you do wrong that you will continue to do unabated? That`s not forgiveness that is being neutered.

    * What kind of a free choice is it when you can have the apple if you want, but if you do you will die? *

    Free choice is a colloquialism. There is no scriptural material suggesting that the choices we make don`t carry consequences.

    * It’s only when you sit down and think about it does the absurdity of it all shine. *

    The only thing shining through here is your igonrance. For you to suggest that you have attempted to understand it more in one sit down, than millions have spent their lives in the study of it, is absurd.

    * Why am I guilty of sin when I’m only reacting to things in the only way I know how?? *

    That isn`t what you say when I tell you you don`t understand. You contest me. Qualifying yourself. You can`t both understand and not understand at the same time. When the pharisees contested Jesus telling them they don`t understand his reply was that because they claimed to understand their sins remained.

    * Should not the teacher be responsible for the ignorance of the student? *

    But you are NOT THE STUDENT! YOU DROPPED OUT!

    * And why is this knowledge of good and evil a bad thing? *

    It is a bad thing in the hands of the unprepared. It is a good thing in the hands of the prepared.

  3. Terence Meaden Says:

    Five virgin birth stories are listed. None has been proved truer than the others. They are all just stories:
    “I no more believe that Jesus was born of the virgin Mary than I believe that Krishna was born of the virgin Devaka, Horus was born of the virgin Isis, Mercury was born of the virgin Maia, or Romulus was born of the virgin Rhea Sylvia. As the preceding examples help to demonstrate, parthenogenesis would in any case not be proof of divine paternity or of the truth of any subsequent preaching . . . Christianity insults our intelligence as well as our innate morality by insisting that we believe absurdities that are drawn from the mythology of paganism and barbarism.” Chistopher Hitchens. The Spectator. December 2007.

  4. Brian Says:

    If what you observe doesn’t make sense to you, maybe your understanding of it lacks completeness. Fools limit their conclusions based on incompleteness of understanding all the time. The assertion you are really making here is that you don’t completely understand why God did something therefore he is irrational, while your position is supreme. I guess that makes you smarter than God.

    Did he do something that doesn’t make sense, or does it just not make sense to you? If he understands what he is doing and you don’t, who is prepared to make a conclusion about it? You?

    Now that would be complete and utter nonsense.

  5. Nefari Says:

    No, I’m sure that’s not it at all. Despite the insults to my intellect and judgment, I’ve been around the block enough times to know when to suspect something is contrived and poorly thought out. I don’t need a sophisticated argument to counter such tripe. A child can see through it. And most do until social pressure and brainwashing take hold.

  6. Critic Says:

    Every question from you atheists are indictments and not inquiries.

    You seem to think that we actually take your silly religion seriously. We certainly do not. There are not enlightening enquiries that could be made into such a primitive belief system.

    (ezekiel 18)……[(]romans 8)

    I told you that quoting from that ridiculous book is not helping your argument in this forum. Your dogged persistence only shows how slow you are to learn about your adversaries. Hocus-pocus chants and primitive campfire stories provide enlightement only to the self-limited minds of you and your fellow fanatics.

    * And why is this knowledge of good and evil a bad thing? *

    It is a bad thing in the hands of the unprepared. It is a good thing in the hands of the prepared.

    Spoken like a religious fanatic – which is no doubt a compliment in your eyes.

  7. Critic Says:

    If what you observe doesn’t make sense to you, maybe your understanding of it lacks completeness.

    Or, just maybe, what you are observing really does not make any sense?

    Fools limit their conclusions based on incompleteness of understanding all the time.

    Fools follow primitive religions – all the time. Remind you of anyone?

    The assertion you are really making here is that you don’t completely understand why God did something therefore he is irrational, while your position is supreme. I guess that makes you smarter than God.

    No, the assertion is that god does not exist and the silly religion that you follow is ridiculously illogical.

  8. Brian Says:

    He who takes it upon himself to learn the truth will prosper while he who does not will remain in darkness. If you really want to know the truth, pursue the truth instead of criticizing another’s dilemma. It’s your own knowledge of eternal truth that constitutes freedom. It’s not found in justifying what you have to say, although that seems to be the mode of this conversation. Justification for the truth can remain unestablished while the truth of the matter continues to bear. If you can’t see the difference, no wonder you question God’s ability to provide for his children.

  9. Nefari Says:

    Brian: He who takes it upon himself to learn the truth will prosper while he who does not will remain in darkness.

    Nefari: That is useless dialog since both sides of the table can make that assertion. Unless, of course, this carries the conceited implication that you have and those who disagree have not.

    Brian: If you really want to know the truth, pursue the truth instead of criticizing another’s dilemma.

    Brian: Fools limit their conclusions based on incompleteness of understanding all the time.

    Nefari: I cannot add to that.

    Brian: Justification for the truth can remain unestablished while the truth of the matter continues to bear.

    Nefari: It’s certainly possible, but it makes for poor reasonable and responsible living. Especially without examination and held beyond criticism.

  10. Terence Meaden Says:

    The matter is simpler than Brian supposes.
    The default position is that there are ‘no gods’—no Isis, no Krishna, no Mercury, no Abrahamic god.

    When people want to believe in gods, either they invent them, or they choose to believe in some god that others have fabricated.
    Nobody has ever proved that there are any gods. There are only the tales sown and disseminated by storytellers.
    The gods and the angels and the spirits and the demons are all in the mind.

    We cannot say that we are smarter than your mythological god because there isn’t any god beyond the fiction that has become part of the neuron circuits of your mind.

  11. Nefari Says:

    I agree Terence. The conversation, both here and everywhere, needs to shift from a debunking of an established myth to requiring the myth to justify its truth in the first place. Perhaps this is necessary because the myths are so well established and reason has been allowed to slumber for so long.

    But people everywhere need to keep in mind these religious claims have never been verified or demonstrated to be grounded in any extra-mental reality. Furthermore, because of their very nature, their promises are not verifiable.

    I would not spend a day’s wage on something without some evidence or guarantee, let alone a life-long investment in some imaginative dogma. Buyer beware indeed!

  12. Critic Says:

    The matter is simpler than Brian supposes

    And that would make it VERY simple indeed. ;{>}

    Having evaluated the evidence, I take the default position since it is the only logical choice.

    He who takes it upon himself to learn the truth will prosper while he who does not will remain in darkness.

    Truth is such a fuzzy word coming out of the mouth of the religious person for it can mean anything that that person wants it to mean. Let’s talk about facts instead.

    Prove that god exists or stop wasting our time.

    Thank you for your consideration.

  13. Chris Says:

    Of course from my perspective this is a debate about nothing at all but what the heck. The thing that frustrates me most about the theist position is that it cannot be maintained without the faith component and that doesn’t seem to bother them. That any modern and educated person can believe, dedicate their life to, passionately advocate for, discriminate and kill for a proposition that proudly states that it is beyond examination from our best tools of discovery is profoundly upsetting and is an both a testament to and a repudiation of our Darwinian heritage. We occupy the pinnacle of evolution on this planet and are capable, through our science, of truly amazing achievements. A society’s technology is, after all, the way we judge its advancement. And yet, back there, maybe in our very genes, the superstitious memes haunt our species, whispering lies about our special place in the natural world and poisoning our relationships with other groups who are listening to different lies.

    Fuck it all – who needs a beer?

  14. Critic Says:

    Chris – VERY well said.

    Believe me, I feel your pain. Just reading a line like this one

    …no wonder you question God’s [sic] ability to provide for his children.

    written in the 21st century by someone who can operate a computer breaks my heart.

    As for the beer, I always need a beer – especially if someone else is buying!

  15. Brian Says:

    Proof is a proper interpretation of the data. If you want proof, you’re the one who must come to that conclusion, that’s not something I can do for you. The evidence is overwhelming indeed but only if you choose to recognize it as such, the peril be upon your own shoulders, not mine.

    How encouraging to sense that the hope in your life follows on the heels of an uncontrollable tongue and 12 oz. of alcohol. Discipline in thought and action surely is not your strong suit.

  16. Nefari Says:

    Proof is derived from evidence, not proper interpretation.

    There is proof that 1+1=2. It’s not open to my interpretation. I don’t have to come to the conclusion as it’s been done for me already. And it certainly isn’t my choice to believe it.

    To dismiss the argument by discrediting the speaker over a lighthearted remark is expected from a tradition of logical fallacy and sophistry.

    Your Jedi mind tricks won’t work here, I’m afraid.

  17. Critic Says:

    Proof is a proper interpretation of the data.

    No. Proof is irrefutable evidence that can be measured in a reproducible manner. You have no proof. You don’t know what you are talking about. Using the word ‘data’ in your response does not make you credible.

    How encouraging to sense that the hope in your life follows on the heels of an uncontrollable tongue and 12 oz. of alcohol. Discipline in thought and action surely is not your strong suit.

    Wow. You’re mean. ;{>}

    Maybe you should drink a beer and calm down.

    As for “hope,” the way I live my life has nothing to do with eternal salvation or learning god’s plan [sic] or genuflecting in front of some religious icon. I don’t live my life “hoping” for anything. I live my life in a joyous manner with friends, family, a loving wife and a great dog and a semi-lucritive career. A religion with some wacko imaginary god inflicting the fear of eternal damnation are not necessary for a happy life – contrary to what you may have been brainwashed into believing.

    But, I would like another REAL beer before I die. Preferably a cask conditioned ale with very little foam.

  18. Terence Meaden Says:

    To Brian:
    What data? You say there is data. Produce the data. Your god does not exist just because your brain says so, and which allows you to follow some absurd mythology for which you have no answer but the very weakest one of all, viz. ‘faith’. If you want to convince others that your god exists, then the onus of proof is entirely on you. But you cannot do it because no-one can. You just rely on the meaningless, feeble, excuse of faith—faith in fictions that were dreamt up by Bronze Age dwellers and travellers in the deserts of the Near and Middle East a few thousand years ago.

    The intellectual high ground is wholly with the non-theist.

    The low ground is with the credulous who’ll believe any fiction if it is said firmly and often enough by priests and other indoctrinated simpletons.

    The truth is this:

    The default situation is that our universe is about 13.7 billion years old. In it are countless galaxies and stars. We are in a Solar System that is between 4.6 and 5 billion years old, and we are on Planet Earth that has supported life for over 500,000 years. Homo sapiens dates back only some 200,000 years. These and millions of other facts are proven scientific facts—the result of the interdisciplinary research of hundreds of thousands of scientists working over the last few centuries.

    The reality is that there are no gods; but I will accept that your god exists inside the top of your head, but that is only because you put it there.

  19. Chris Says:

    Lay off of Brian – He can’t drink a beer (making the opposite sex more attractive for 5000 years and thus insuring our survival) because he believes some rogue card shark charlatan named Joe Smith looked into a hat at some gold tablets that he supposedly found buried in the woods of upstate New York. Of all the ridiculous cults, Mormonism must take the prize. Lost tribe of Israel in North America….you’ve GOT to be kidding me. Actually, I think Smith was kidding. Imagine his enduring delight when he found people actually bought his load of crap. Ask a Mormon about Kolob. Good for a laugh…

    How’s that for an ad hominem attack?

  20. Terence Meaden Says:

    Has Brian told the list that he is a mormon?!

  21. Brian Says:

    It’s nice to know that the truth still flusters people. I’m entirely comfortable with being a mormon, especially in these latter days.

    Give it a hundred years, you’ll see what I mean.

  22. Chris Says:

    Flustered? No. Latter days? Huh? Only in the sense that today is latter than yesterday. We deal in fact here, not truth the way you want to misuse the word. One of the things that bugs me about the religious. There’s only one objective reality chum. It’s not the argument that frustrates people of my temperment. It’s the stubborn refusal to accept that 2+2=4 no matter how many ways one tries to take a run at the problem. Folks like you can’t be taught because you exist in a sensory deprivation chamber called theism.

  23. Brian Says:

    Folks like you can’t be taught because you exist in a sensory deprivation chamber called theism.

    It’s more that I live in a sensory enlivening dimension where truth is freely available.

    If you can’t accept that there is a higher power above you in this life, then I guess you believe that you are the highest power. That makes whatever you achieve in your short life the limit. You should make an effort to get past 2+2, life is so much more interesting and rewarding.

  24. Nefari Says:

    More false promises. Mormons, like all other theists, like everyone else, deal with drug addiction, divorce, and from time to time paint the walls with their brains. Don’t tell me about it being more interesting and rewarding.

  25. Brian Says:

    So I guess its not the religion that actually changes lives. I kind of thought that was understood, my mistake. You have to actually do something with truth, like maybe live according to it. If you thought religion was a shield from life’s challenges, I’m surprised we’re at 2+2. Religion doesn’t eliminate life’s challenges, it just puts them in perspective. Without that, life is pretty short and dull. Thanks for illustrating.

  26. Nefari Says:

    I’ll hand it to Mormons: They create a good appearance of promoting family values. Also, the clean living has its merits. However, these things are coincidental to the theistic claims, which are, as you may recall, the issue here. You can have all these things, for better or for worse, without god.

    Now, can we get away from the late night infomercial about how much better everyone’s life could be in your cult (since you assume we are a miserable lot), and please demonstrate the existence of god?

  27. Brian Says:

    How many [more] times do I need to say that you provide the proof yourself. Observe the evidence, it starts there. It escalates to living by the truth and culminates in your own personal experience. I can tell you where to look but if you won’t act on it, what I have to say is worthless to you. You are correct, peaceful living is the natural result. If you really want to know, go see my website. Realize for starters, there are 11 other witnesses of the plates who never denied their testimony. That’s about all I can tell you, and if you won’t listen to that, you’ll ignore the rest anyway. Good Luck.

  28. Brian Says:

    PS: Proof (noun): that portion of information that was available to convict OJ of murder, but was interpreted incorrectly resulting in acquittal. The outcome was changed by a lack of acceptance, not by a lack of evidence.

  29. Nefari Says:

    Brian: How many [more] times do I need to say that you provide the proof yourself.

    Nefari: I’m glad you didn’t work quality control in the Apollo program with such a poor concept of proof.

    Brian: Observe the evidence, it starts there. It escalates to living by the truth and culminates in your own personal experience.

    Nefari: Are you really that full of yourself to think that you are the only person here to have had a religious experience? How many Mormons leave the church a year? What about their experience? I have never heard of anyone becoming apostate over Napoleon’s loss at Waterloo or the Nile flows from South to North. These things carry objective evidence.

  30. Brian Says:

    I’ll just trust that you’re man enough to bear the consequences of what you don’t want to know. My vantage point gives me security in having seen both sides of the issue. Knowledge of God stems from an unbelief in God first. And an unbelief in God stems from being full of yourself. Ironic that you would mention that.

    I can see this is going nowhere for you. Have a nice life.

  31. Critic Says:

    Realize for starters, there are 11 other witnesses of the plates who never denied their testimony.

    Hooo boy. We’ve got a real believer on our hands. What kind of goofball would come to this forum and try to convert us to the LDS lunacy? I mean, give me a fucking break. This Brian guy apparently was born and bred into his crazy religion. Never had to apply one neuron to original thought – just cough up the wrote learning that he has been brainwashed with since he was born.

    It’s an interesting idea tho -converting and atheist to mormonism. I would think that such a conversion would be a multi-step process. First I would have to become a deist. Then a bit later I might join the ‘church’ of England. Perhaps a bit later I could be come an episcopal. Then, finally, I could have a lobotomy and become a mormon.

    Give it a hundred years, you’ll see what I mean.

    I would ask that Brian come back to this forum in 100 years and give us an update. We don’t need any progress reports until then however.

    Thank you for your consideration.

    PS: Dosen’t the fact that Brigham Young was a serial pedophile even give you pause?

  32. Critic Says:

    Chris said:

    How’s that for an ad hominem attack?

    Splendid.

    Well done.

    Bravo!

  33. Critic Says:

    If you can’t accept that there is a higher power above you in this life, then I guess you believe that you are the highest power.

    Power? No powers. No hierarchy of powers. No fantasies about the supernatural.

    Just reality.

    Just life.

    Why is that not enough for some people? The real life that we all lead is thrilling and wonderful and beautiful, why make up some silly back story (Jesus died to save us, Mormon wrote some wacko book to save us, etc.) just to try to make yourself seem more important?

    The religious mind is apparently very unhappy and desperate to behave in such a manner.

    I am happy to be a temporary lump of cells existing by chemistry for a finite time then not existing any more. What more could any sane person want? That’s all there is – just a few years of life in an amazing universe. Sounds like a great deal to me.

  34. Brian Says:

    Sounds pretty clear you never read the testimony of the 3 witnesses nor the testimony of the 8 witnesses. Each of these 11 saw the plates and the engravings on them.

    See you in 100 years.

  35. Terence Meaden Says:

    I have just been to a mormon web site which confirms the worst fears. As well as gullibly accepting the crazy Joseph Smith nonsense, mormons are so devoid of intelligence as to be creationists!
    e.g.

    “. . . But what does all of this have to do with the creation of the earth?
    According to the Bible we learn that, in the beginning “the earth was without form and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters” (Gen. 1:2). In this verse of scripture, the Hebrew word translated as “moved” more specifically means “to hover” or “watch over.” Therefore we could better interpret this scripture as saying that the Spirit of God hovered and watched over the face of the waters in much the same way a mother hen hovers and watches over her eggs while they are incubating. In the beginning of the earth’s creation, the Spirit of God watched over and nurtured the earth as it incubated and became ready to be born.
    We also learn from the Bible that a little later in the earth’s process of creation, “God said, Let there be a firmament in the midst (i.e., middle) of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. And God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament” (Gen. 1:6,7). In the beginning, the earth was enveloped with and immersed in water. Man’s beginning is the same as he grows inside his mother’s womb. Even today, the earth’s surface is 70% covered with water. Interestingly enough, man himself is composed mostly of water.
    Thus we see that the earth came into existence in much the same way that we did. Rather than being “created” as an inanimate object, it could more correctly be said that the earth was “born” much like most other living creatures. . . . ”

    The logical fallacy comes right at the start: “according to the bible”–
    a naive acceptance of a collection of myths transmitted by illiterate storytellers of the Bronze Age and Iron Age and eventually put into writing, much like the tales of the Odyssey and the Iliad came to be written out by Homer.

  36. Critic Says:

    See you in 100 years.

    Please, make sure your next post is 100 years from now. Please, please, please.

    As well as gullibly accepting the crazy Joseph Smith nonsense, mormons are so devoid of intelligence as to be creationists!

    Mormons are a wacko bunch, that’s for sure. All this talk about, “reading the accounts of the 3 and the 8 which make 11,” (at least they got the math right) is such singsong wrote learning that is turns the stomach.

    Of course, we have a present day example of this in the Scientology movement.

    I think both Mormonism and Sceintology are great object lessions on how religions get started. First there is some egomaniac (Jesus, Joe Smith, Ron Hubbard, etc.) that decides he needs to subjugate the minds of some gullible folks and relieve them of their money. So he starts a religion that is then handed down generation to generation with continued modification and enhancement until it reaches maturity and is actively polluting the minds of numerous innocent people around the world. All the time, building up it’s financial resources on the backs of the faithful. And, more importantly, using its influence to control society – mostly in nefarious ways.

    The amazing thing is that grown up men, like Brian, believe such unalduterated crap. The human mind is amazing in its capacity to create and believe.

    And, BTW, arguing with a mormon is much like beating your head against a wall. You will never make an impression an it always feels better when you stop and they get on their bicycles and ride away They are such utter fools..

  37. Thunder Says:

    * You seem to think that we actually take your silly religion seriously. *

    Well I know what I have thought and what I have posted. There is no way you can derive that notion from anything I have scripted.

    * We certainly do not. *

    I have never suggested you did. The disparity between the attention you give this subject and the preparation you obviously deem unnecessary suggests that you are filling an need other than of understanding or reason/dialogue. It fills your primative need to vent anger, frustration and contempt. You chose the people that you blame for being the origion of those attitudes. You don`t have to understand to hate. Aamof it is almost requisit that you misunderstand either intentionally or impulsively.

    * There are not enlightening enquiries that could be made into such a primitive belief system. *

    Spoken like a true non-scientist.

    * I told you that quoting from that ridiculous book is not helping your argument in this forum. *

    Your protest disinterests me. You are not one to look for reason or logic from. If you were you would see the illogic of attempting to impose a preliminary ad hoc rule invalidating the material upon which a religious belief is predicated when in discussion of that religous belief.

    * Your dogged persistence only shows how slow you are to learn about your adversaries. *

    Incorrect. Saying what you want to hear is not and never was a motive of mine. The christian position ISN`T extraneous to scriptural material. If you don`t like that that is your problem not mine.

    * Hocus-pocus chants and primitive campfire stories provide enlightement only to the self-limited minds of you and your fellow fanatics. *

    You can only gain from what you digest.

    * Spoken like a religious fanatic – which is no doubt a compliment in your eyes. *

    It is common sense.

  38. Critic Says:

    Hi Thunder.

    I was getting worried about you -you mentioned that you live in or near Nashville so Iwas afraid you might have been involved in the storm devastation. My wife was travelling on business in the area and she got to spend some time in a storm shelter early Wednesday morning. Glad to hear you survived too.

    Now, as to your replies: blah, blah, blah. Still no proof. Only supposition and sophistry and the re-statement of your baseless claims.

  39. Thunder Says:

    * I was getting worried about you -you mentioned that you live in or near Nashville so Iwas afraid you might have been involved in the storm devastation. *

    God apparently isn`t done with me.

    * My wife was travelling on business in the area and she got to spend some time in a storm shelter early Wednesday morning. *

    I was sleeping (before that I was watching basketball and Dr. House). Didn`t vote. I`m having to research into mccain a little bit. Really I don`t trust him much. He really does seem like a rino. I`m not repub but in the current configuration I would NEVER vote for a damn democrat.

    * Glad to hear you survived too. *

    thanx.

    * Now, as to your replies: blah, blah, blah. Still no proof. *

    Already answered this. The answer cannot change. If it changed that means it wasn`t correct to begin with. If you want a different answer you have to provide something that necessitates a change in the answer already given.

    * Only supposition *

    You (atheists) have to learn how to be true. It is NO supposition you don`t know what you are talking about. It is obvious you are unfamiliar and in your stating you don`t need to be you confirm what I say. I know how to read and you clumsy oafs trip over yourselves all the time because it is not an abiding intent for you to be honest. If you don`t care if you are honest you will never fail to contradict yourselves.

    * sophistry *

    I care to be honest and so I am exact in the things I say. There is NO intention within me to deceive anyone. That is certainly an allegation you cannot prove.

    * the re-statement of your baseless claims. *

    I`m not convinced you can relate what I have claimed without also stating a lot of suppositions drawn from your stereotypes. You CANNOT hear.

  40. Critic Says:

    God apparently isn`t done with me.

    Do you REALLY believe that god controlled the tornado so that it would kill someone else and not kill you? That seems to be the implication.

    The answer cannot change. If it changed that means it wasn`t correct to begin with.

    And we all know about the infallibility of religious explanations. That is a major problem with the religious mind and it explains why religion is so slow to give way to rational thought. Whenever an aspect of our understanding passes from god’s control to a rational explanation, it takes several (many?) generations for the religious to accept the new explanation and diminish the power of god. Of course, since the enlightenment, god’s powers and duties have been slowly eroding so that now all he really has to do is protect Thunder from tornadoes and pick lottery winners.

  41. thunder Says:

    * Critic *

    no.

  42. Critic Says:

    *Thunder*

    good.