And on the subject of the Lake Tiberius Pedestrian …

Posted on by Ark

 

”If Paul needed a personal visit from Jesus to know that Jesus was resurrected, then why wouldn’t everyone?”

Comment by someone on a Christian thread.

Hmm…. why indeed?

 

Ark.

 

 

117 thoughts on “And on the subject of the Lake Tiberius Pedestrian …”

  4. I am not a fan of Paul’s but he was not a member of the “Christian community” in Jerusalem (and only his word that he was a persecutor thereof) so, news travels slowly, especially between groups that deliberately isolate themselves from others. Within those groups news travels at the speed of light, or gossip, whichever is greater.

    It is puzzling that the Catholic Church embraced Paul when they wanted any who claimed to acquire knowledge by direct revelation out of the game. But Paul was apparently good for business as his anti-Semitic stances appealed to Roman elites.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  5. Well, you see, the thing is … most Christians believe they HAVE had a personal visit. I mean, after all, isn’t that “special feeling” in their heart the full-fledged proof that the resurrected Jesus stopped by?

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    2. Nan, in my employed clinical years at the Psych/A&D hospital we had mentally-ill patients—typically those with forms of schizophrenia (the extreme) to hyperreligiosity (lesser extremes)—suffering from increased degrees and symptoms of malcognition, even delusions and audio or visual hallucinations in acute cases.

      Here’s a very interesting (and ironic!) connection with schizophrenia and/or hyperreligiosity… extravagant episodes of piety. Hmmm. šŸ¤”

      A noticeable number of them, sometimes a large number would frequently be admitted who ALSO had histories of TLE, or temporal lobe epilepsy, the “ailment” Paul/Saul suffered from his entire adult life. What a coincidence, huh? šŸ˜‰

      Furthermore, advances in neurology and neuroscience, physiology, and cognitive psychology continue over time to reveal that a much, MUCH larger section of the world’s population suffer—to one degree or another—from these associated disorders, certainly not excluding ColonStorm below and many many others we know! šŸ˜›

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. ….and many many others we know! šŸ˜›

        O! Stop talking about me behind my back. I do read the comments on my blog y’know? If anyone’s a nutter it’s you!!!
        Bloody Arsenal supporters!

        Just saw Aubameyang-the-man miss a bloody sitter!
        SMH.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. šŸ˜„ Oh dag-nabbit! Foiled again by Inspector Clue-seux! (or however you spell your mysterious alias Arkasatan!) šŸ˜‰

          Ugh, if I’m a “supporter” Arkesatan, it ain’t an Arsenal/Dunners one—more like the undergarment type beneath me footballing knickers/shorts. šŸ¤¦ā€ā™‚ļø Someone just point the cannons at The Emirates and put us out of our misery, please!

          And congrats again on another of your Reds superb 4 — 0 thumping. Your boys looked VERY good in the attacking third. Enjoyable match to watch for sure. šŸ™‚

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

  6. You donā€™t want to hear my take ark- besides, one good comment will launch your short post into a flurry of ridicule, so I respectfully decline to acquiesce to your request.

    ha!

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. CS: don’t be shy, you’ll never get ridicule or scorn from me. Sure, I may challenge your points/logic at some time, but only ever with the very best of intentions (and surprisingly, respect). We all of us have our answers and are open to discussion, no?

      You have your answers, so do I … they differ, but without a free discussion nobody can advance (one way or the other). Closed debate is closed minds.

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

    2. Now that’s the spirit! As the good book says, “always be prepared to deflect and run away whenever anyone asks you to give the reason for the ‘nope’ that you you have.” šŸ™‚

      Liked by 3 people

      Reply

      1. To be fair ark, you ask a common question. Why? Why him and not you. There are many good reasons, all of which will spring into long discussions themselves, so Iā€™ll just have to write a post- you and your friends will then be welcome to visit to discuss a serious question.

        Iā€™ll be sure to link to credit you for the inspiration.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. Go for it. Far be it for me to tell you how to compose this upcoming response, but would it be too much to ask you not to fill it will your usual apologetic rhetoric and thinly veiled ”let every man be a liar ”’ approach?
          Just for a change, eh?

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

  7. I’d imagine ‘everyone’ would have been more important than having to clobber the doubts of someone who should have damned well known better?

    I love that “lake pedestrian” nomenclature ā€” but seriously, how come the holes in his feet didn’t ruin his ‘reserve of buoyancy’?

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

      1. Some of us exhaust between the buttocks, making derision easier … I have been thrown out of places after certain foods when younger, but never have I levitated. (Perhaps I should try a big bowl of the local onions, fried, now that I’m here in the Land Of Voluble foodstuffs? Kiwi onions, eat yer hearts out!) (Wimps …)

        But levitation? Again, I’ve never been that good. But what was not recorded from Jesus’s Last Supper menu? Onions …

        Like

        Reply

      1. To hell with polite … keeping schtum when called for is a simple basic survival tactic in too many places.
        The ‘godly’ have only rarely (very) been open to discussion. Free exchange of ideas? Not often, when God is in charge.

        Like

        Reply

    3. He’s clever like that. Or is that cunning? Think about it … on one hand we have the infinite Bible and any other Good Book, and on the other hand we have the severely limited resources of science, education, finance, and the need to support the Pope and his like.

      So who is God going to get to support Him in His dotage, and how?
      Seeing that grovelling sycophancy is food and drink to Him (He who has no need for anything other than unquestioning grovelling sycophancy).

      It’s a bit of a toughie …

      Like

      Reply

    1. Hello, my dear. Nice to see you. Been a while. We are all 100% fit and healthy down here in Arksville.
      Busy as Hades, baking in the heat (pun intended!) 30c today, and vaccinated up to the bloody eyeballs!

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. Good to hear youā€™ve had your shots! Weā€™ve had both of ours for ages now. (Will get another soon . . .grandchildren 5 – 11 just started) Glad itā€™s warm somewhere in the world! Here, weā€™ve had snow several times and itā€™s c-c-c-cold – around zero today; promising to be a ā€˜lots of snowā€™ winter (the way I like it!) And how do I know this? Well, the hornets built their nests high up this past summer (as opposed to in the ground) – a sure sign. Cheers to those who hang around at Arkā€™s place!

        Liked by 3 people

        Reply
  11. Pingback: Why Paul? Why not you? | The Lions Den

  12. So, Ark, the answer lies in Acts 22:12-16. Let me ask you a question. Would you be willing to be struck blind, and then, in order to see again, obey the vision and the voice of God to enter into this Christian lifestyle, spreading the message of Life that He was to give you?
    God chose Saul for the purpose for which he had for him. Saul was doing what he thought was God’s will. God set him straight.
    You don’t think that you are doing God’s will, do you?

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. Randy, I’m surprised that you haven’t discovered by now that citing/referring to scripture does NOT prove anything to non-believers. If they believed what the bible says, they most likely wouldn’t be atheists.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. I know, Nan, but Ark was referring to an excerpt from that same Bible in his question.
        Just because it isn’t believed doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

        Like

        Reply

        2. It isn’t likely true because there isn’t any evidence.
          My question is obviously rhetorical. Remember, I am an atheist,
          I would have thought even one as indoctrinated as you would have figured this out by now.

          Like

          Reply

          2. I thought you would be.
            Us godless bloody heathens are everywhere these days, aren’t we?

            You would be forgiven (pun intended) if you began to think that what you have been brought up to believe about your god is simply baloney and maybe … just maybe us atheists know something that you don’t?

            Like

          6. Well someone, with or without the capital S would have to be human, even if they were regarded as a literary figure.

            Like

          7. Well, I guess the Son of God is considered a human.
            But,….you know, no sin could be found in Him.
            Sorry, Ark, back to the scriptures.
            I think I would like Ken Ham, but I don’t know him.

            Like

          10. Yahweh: one time Canaanite deity, husband of Asherah, genocidal megalomanical monster, who also sanctioned slavery. and yet you assert without sin?
            How does that work, Randy?

            Like

    2. Well, Modern scholarship currently regards Acts as pretty much fiction which tends to make your question moot, I’d say.

      If I may? Let me ask you a question in return which is ostensibly in a similar vein.
      Would you be prepared to suffer haemorrhoids in order to be able to fly around the world on a broomstick, thus avoiding airport security and Covid restrictions if it meant you acknowledging that Harry Potter and his magic wand are real?

      A straightforward: ”Ooh, yes indeed!”
      or,
      ”No chance! I already have haemorrhoids and they are a literal pain in the arse!”

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

    3. Sheesh, Randy! I;m surprised at you … of course he’s doing God’s will! Nowā€”

      ā€”for God’s sake, THINK about it!

      Honestly … God is omniscient and omnipotent, no? So what option does poor ol’ Ark (or anybody, for that matter) have? Is there anā€”are there anyā€”alternative?

      Like

      Reply

      1. God’s ‘omniscience’ blows ‘Free Will’ right out of the water (for that matter, out of the universe). Anyone with even half of a brain can see that? God’s feted* omniscience and our feted* ‘Free Will’ are a blatant contradiction. Sheeshā€”!

        * Feted: in this instance it means much ballyhooed, as in greatly over-hyped exaggerated totally undeserved fanfare.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

  13. Argus, He knew you would say that.

    Omniscience and omnipotence are two different things.
    If you were omniscient, you would know what I am about to say, but you wouldn’t have anything to do with me saying it.
    I think (I’m not omniscient) you guys are trying to convince me to come over to your “dark side” but, I could no more leave this Life that has been given to me, than I could convince you to come to the light.
    No one comes unless he is called, and I am not the Caller.
    But, this Life is good, fellowship is sweet, and understanding the One that you do not know (or believe exists) brings incredible Joy.
    You like to mock me, and I see the fun in that as well.
    But, I am grieved that you may never hear His voice, or experience His presence, or receive His Life.
    I have to give you credit, though, for at least reading my responses.
    I do not fear death, and I love my life.
    You speak of things you do not know.
    I know the One you cannot see.

    There is a way that seems right to you, but the end of that way is death.

    Like

    Reply

    2. For myself (I can’t speak on anyone else’s behalf) I’m not trying to convince folks to come over to any side. My motivations are simply a ‘search for Truth’ and to present my own points of view in a hope of furthering meaningful discussion. Butā€”

      ā€”but although I hold dear the concept of Free Speech I reserve the right to reveal (to flag up) what I perceive to be falsehoods. When Reality and Myth collide it is often the better speaker, or the Man With The Gun, that prevails. Naziism was blatantly wrong yet the Man With The Gun prevailed … until a better system with a bigger better gun prevailed. Henceā€”

      ā€”in times past all the Holy(!) Inquisition/s; and even in my own childhood the zealot doltish oaf teachers with big rulers, straps, canes. (Today, God’s holy Islam …)
      I swore (and by God, I meant it!) that when I reached maturity I’d track them down and revisit their points of view and methods, on them. I actually started to do so, but the very first I cornered was now a much older man and a bit of a wreckā€”and not knowing my intent he welcomed me. All thoughts of vengeance just wafted away in the steams of the cup of tea and cheery chat he gave me … and I learnt another lesson.

      Now, Mr Pope your Holiness etc etc, about that Holy Inquisition of yoursā€”the racks, the red hot irons, strappados and stakes … as an atheist my most very fervent wish is that there actually IS a god; and that he is driven by MY valuesā€”not by yours as demonstrated by any religioso in a position of Powerā€”and He does something about it all; especially to your Holy Inquisitors and their ilk.

      And while I’m praying to God here, I may as well include the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus in my Wish List. Certainly couldn’t hurt …

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. In fact, I would argue that there is just as much evidence (perhaps more!) to suggest thereā€™s a Santa Claus and a tooth fairy. .. just ask my grandchildren. šŸ˜‰

        Liked by 2 people

        Reply

      2. Argus, I appreciate your explanation.
        God is a Spirit, and those that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in truth.
        Many have claimed Christianity, while failing to accept the Lordship of the Son of God.
        If a man has not received the second birth ( the spiritual rebirth) he cannot see the kingdom of God or glean the truth in His word.

        Like

        Reply

        1. Randy, you write that “God is a Spirit” — and this seems to be the general consensus among believers. The thing is, “spirits” are pretty difficult to pin down. Have you ever seen one? No, I’m NOT talking about “feeling a spirit in your heart,” I’m asking if you’ve ever had an actual VISUAL encounter with a “spirit.”

          My suspicions are that you haven’t. Yet you continue to believe in and follow the dictates of a “SPIRIT god” that for all intents and purposes simply doesn’t exist.

          Don’t you think your belief is based on pretty flimsy evidence?

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

          1. Nan, it would be flimsy if I just believed it because it sounds cool.
            But, the truth is, I had no concept of the Spirit until after the day I was born again. Turns out, I was dead to the spirit and the things of the Spirit of God until the day that he poured this new life upon me.
            Most of my understanding comes from that moment and the understanding I began to get from reading the Bible after that time.
            No, I haven’t seen a spirit. But I have experienced Him in more ways than I can describe.
            I would have so many questions for you, if you were open.

            Like

          2. Randy, I’ve been there, done that. I’ve experienced ALL that you’ve mentioned in your comments. I fully understand your “Christianese.” But in the long run, I discovered it’s simply not real.

            You can ask me questions (if Ark doesn’t mind), but I can guarantee you that you’re not going to like the answers.

            Liked by 1 person

          3. Christians such as Randy are generally poop scared of entering into any dialogue that involves evidence with former Christian like yourself Nan.
            They simply haven’t enough Apologetics to cover all the bases.
            The eventual outcome will likely be asserting you were never a True Believer, or suggest you had a problem with a church or pastor, that you deconverted because you wanted to sin ( you naughty girl!) or he will simply run away and not deal with it.
            *sigh* ‘Twas ever thus.

            Liked by 2 people

        2. Oops … that ‘second birth’ reads like it may be limited to just one particular franchise of God’s revelations.
          Now tell me pleaseā€”it is possible to see The Truth in His word, without having to subscribe to a particular Christian franchise?
          Which brand do you support?
          And may I ask, why that one and not any/all of the others?

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

        3. Other than my computer’s on-board dictionary, and what I understand one to be … what exactly is a ‘spirit’? (And no, I’m not looking to hang you out to dry, I just want your understanding of the term).

          Like

          Reply

          2. Argus
            I appreciate the questions. I am not ashamed of my beliefs, even if you were looking to hang me out to dry.
            I have never been asked this particular question, so I want to be thoughtful in.my answer.
            Bear with me.
            ( Is this the platform you wish to carry on a conversation through?)

            Like

          5. And rather than deal with your indoctrination we have the weak attempt at humour.
            Just a little bit sad…
            SMH.

            Like

          7. Of course! Many atheists are a lot more well versed on the bible than Christians.

            Are you going to address the issue at hand or simply tip toe around?

            Like

          9. No, not really. You gave a reason why he chose Paul and then asked if I’d be willing to go through what he went through.
            That is not the same as addressing the issue in the title of the post.

            Consider:

            Surely, appearing to everyone to convey a similar message would have removed all ambiguity and cut out the ‘middle man’, so to speak?

            Just imagine it.

            No need for churches and no need for Christianity and the 30,000 denomination/sects within Christianity. No bibles either, or at least not the fabricated nonsense we have been left with.

            Islam would not have been established and Judaism would have likely been absorbed into the Body of Christ.
            Hinduism would have disappeared as would all the other global religions.

            If it worked for Paul it would have worked for everyone. Jesus/Yahweh is ‘God’ after all, yes?
            Furthermore, free will would have been maintained as we would still have the choice to accept or reject.

            It would most certainly have negated the need for all the ”workers” who went on to try to evangelize the world.

            I’m presuming you are aware enough of history to know what horrors ensued when Christians landed on ‘foreign’ shores, not to mention the multitude of internecine battles and wars, pogroms, crusades etc?

            Think of all the millions upon millions of lives that would been spared over this time frame? No slavery either. No genocide of the Native Americans, no Holocaust.

            Even from my atheist perspective this seems an infinitely better solution when compared to the nightmare scenarios that ensued over the next two millennia, don’t you agree?

            Liked by 1 person

          10. I do not agree. If God “made man in his own image” then that means he would be capable of reasoning, making decisions, choosing a path of life. Surely you wouldn’t want to be programmed to obey his “perfect plan” for you.
            By having a choice in our decisions, we have to reap the consequences.
            Those consequences are all these problems that you enumerate.
            But, there is a solution that he has provided.

            Like

          11. I accept that you don’t agree, however you have not addressed the question/s I raised.

            What has ‘being created in his image’ to do with anything?
            Was not Paul also ‘created’ this way?

            By having a choice in our decisions, we have to reap the consequences.

            Again, Jesus appearing to us all would not negate Free Will, which would be maintained.
            We would still have the choice to accept or reject, only we could not now say there was no evidence, and faith would not be an issue.

            So, will you please re read the question and try to answer it without the nuanced theological hook.

            Thanks.

            Like

          14. So, how can you change it? By trying to prove to the world that we are a product of mindless evolution and the survival of the fittest?
            You have to somehow get people to see beyond themselves, beyond their own desires.
            How would you do that?

            Like

          15. Again, you are not addressing the primary question of the post.
            Why do you continue to behave in this manner?
            Show some integrity, please.

            Like

          16. And there you have it, Randy. Imagination. I, for one, cannot be satisfied with ā€œan invisible being waved its magic wand and – presto!ā€ Some of us actually try to understand science.

            Liked by 1 person

          17. Science is good. But it is always searching for truth. Sometimes science hasn’t found the truth yet.
            ” It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, the glory of kings to search a matter out.”

            Like

          21. That’s entirely the point: we have to get people to see beyond themselves. Which means to the verifiable facts, rather than the total self-interest summarised byā€”

            “I believe in Jesus, so I’m guaranteed a seat in Heaven! Nyah nyah na naaaa-nah!”

            That you have a Bible and give it total credit is (for most folks) entirely a matter of geography. No? I was brought up in an indoctrinated country too … but one simple thought can free anyone from the priest:

            CONTRADICTIONS ARE IMPOSSIBLE, IF YOU
            FIND ONE, CHECK IT’S PREMISES,
            ONE OF WHICH (AT LEAST) IS FALSE

            To make it easier, is there any contradiction in the observation I make often to the effect thatā€”

            “A loving omniscient
            And the Holy Inquisition
            Are a contradiction.”

            QED

            Liked by 1 person

          22. Hi Randy ā€” again, not looking to hang anyone out to dry, just seeking anything that may prove what I believe True to be False. So far, no takers … other than sincere mythology quoted as Unique Truth but just another mythology out of many.

            Sadly for mythologists I want logical (rational~!) answers, not references to books that some consider ‘holy’ and others (moi, for example) do not. Bible, Koran, Jewish Good Book; all grist to their own mills but not ‘holy’.

            I’ve just blitzed through a book written for less educated rational minds by a couple of scientific experts, and even the thoughts engendered by that knock me (a lesser mind)(and not ashamed to admit it) right out of the ring.
            But sadly I can no more go along with the Big Bang theory than I can with the God Theory; all of the matter and energies contained in all of the many myriad universes (that we apparently have) once exploded out of a tiny speck of infinite mass in a non-existent nowhere? (Dammit … I hate stuff like that, almost as much as I hate any Infinities.) To a mind like mine the God hypothesis is much more appealing; I’d go with it except I just cannot stomach all the blatant contradictions. I like the idea of an omnipotent with only my best interests at heart …

            Liked by 2 people

          23. I’m curious. If you do come to the conclusion that all this was created by a mighty being, how will you come to know that being?
            I am not being snarky, I really want to know.

            Like

          24. And I doubt very much that I would ever come to such a conclusion. To even entertain such a conclusion leads us always back in the direction of the Prime Mover; to my notion of the God who is creator of The God who created us … and of course to the God who created Him, and of course to the God who created that one, and of course etc etc ad infinitem.

            Like

          26. Actually … the mind (this one, mine) is a lot more ‘spiritual’ than most readers herein would credit, even incredulously. But my beliefs are quite different to most. (Okay, very very different.)

            I ask unanswerable questions, of myself mostly, and I do NOT subscribe to disembodied intelligences or infinite beings. But I have seen, heard, and experienced stuff that nothing rational can explain. And I’ve also helped blow genuine charlatans out of business. (Briefly, that is; I move on; and I dare say they quickly reestablish themselves with new unthinking non-thinkers.)

            The Zen ‘religion’ likes to get folks thinking.

            Thinking, rather than Believing, note; and one style (school) of Zen believes in setting unanswerable questions to the student such that he almost goes loopy trying to find a rational answer to the blatantly unanswerable (to us, the quite idiotic), hence the famous:

            “What is the sound of one hand clapping?”

            A Christian/Mosaic variation might be to ask the student something like ā€” “When God said ‘Let there be light’, to whom was He speaking?”

            We might think it would be easy to fudge an answer but a Master knows, no matter how ‘clever’ (or otherwise) the fudge offered. The koan is to tangle up the rational mind so that deeper levels can act. We all have our conscious mind and we all have a sub-consciousā€”but how many layers to the sub conscious? I tried a few times seriously to figure/witness as to how many different levels I could simultaneously think on (don’t ask). Some philosophers ponder on who is the observer, and who the observed? Mosaic religions bypass questions by putting everything into the hands of their God, who can do anything. Clever …

            Liked by 1 person

          27. There is a scripture that says, “It is the glory of God to conceal a matter.
            To search a matter out is the glory of kings.”
            I question, I listen to your questions, I actually admire your thought processes.
            The things you have observed that nothing rational can explain: maybe the explanation is behind the veil, a world of invisible beings that do affect the natural world.

            Like

          28. Are you suggesting that the failure/refusal of your god to manifest to everyone is justification for the millions upon millions that have died and /or been slaughtered defending their interpretation of Christianity?

            Like

          29. Okay, being human this is the best I can do. A spirit is a bring with thoughts, purpose,and will, and is not limited by physical or human constraints.
            Because he is “spiritual” He knows God, either as a servant or as a rebellious enemy.

            And God created the spirits as well as the humans.

            Like

          30. Anyone who knows God is surely not dumb enough to be an enemy … thanks for the explanation; appreciated.

            Like

  14. The only thing different in our viewpoints of life and our satisfaction with it is that you have an invisible friend. I didnā€™t have one when I was a child; I donā€™t need one now. šŸ˜‰

    Liked by 4 people

    Reply

    1. Don’t fret, Carmen, You have me and ostensibly I’m ‘invisible’.
      Also, I never cursed a fig tree, though I did dig one up ‘cos it’s roots were invasive and I confess to swearing at one of the lemon trees yesterday after several thorns a scraped down my forearm.
      And while Jesus never did answer prayers I can at least send you a text message.
      šŸ˜‡

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

      1. Hah! YOU had it easy! Our Lord and sacred holy Saviour had to wear the hat …
        (and I don’t mind betting they stapled that nappie to him so He didn’t lose it wriggling about on the Cross, trying to get comfy)(damned splinters in the butt, not good).

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

  15. Why would the Omnipotent need to curse a tree?

    Does that deed admit of a failing, that from the very Beginning He made it defective (being healthy) and had a need to blast innocent bystander (the healthy tree) in order to convince folks (us) that He really meant/means business, when actually He could’ve created us the way He would (later) want us, but right from the beginning, and so cut out all the angst?

    Methinks someone’s God is a wee bit of a sadist.
    (In fact me knows it … creating innocent bystanders solely in order to nuke them seems to indicate a seriously disturbed personality.) (Don’t forget all them piggies, too …)

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  16. No takers yet, but I’m a patient pup. I can wait. Until, if I have to, Heaven catches fire and/or Hell freezes over. If anyone would like to challenge my statement that God is a colossal (the ultimate~!) sadist, please do so …

    Like

    Reply

  17. If God were doing Personal Visitsā€”wouldn’t that double the population of this planet? Or is He able to deputise, and send some of those loafing angels to town and around? I’m sure some of them at least would jump at the chance. From memory I think it was such a visit that made Mary have to do some quick thinking and very fast talking when ol’ Jo noticed the swelling under her robes …

    Like

    Reply

  18. Dammit … Christian nuts were once a dime a dozen and open to reasoning (well, discussions, at least) provided they were allowed the Last Word. Now they seem to bleat their piece and scuttle very quickly back under their rocks.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment