Mature Religious Discussion

[Chrisputer]

Thank you for clearing that up abou the canyons snor snor.

I'm just saying that Noah existed way before the first records of man. <hr></blockquote>

Well that depends on where you look. In a day or so i'll get some information on the fact of early human history around the flood.

And BTW I'd love a link to BBT web site. Theroy busters to the rescue! It's a shame. If I do find some good theroys to bust i'll never get into the back room. Oh well

 

[Resting_Fox]

All i have to say about religion is that it's a fools way of explaining the unexplained. There was a Jesus. and there was a Buddah, but the only religion that makes sense is science. Yes, science is a religion. It may not have any gods but it still is a way of explaining of how things are and how things came to be. And aren't all other religions just that. The only thing is, is science is more often true than religion. For example, many religions have been proven incorrect. often scientific findings may support religion but there are two for every one that prove it wrong

P.S. There was a thing on primetime thursday last week about the afterlife and i missed it but anyway what all did they say? PM please.

 

[Massy]

Firstly, the Church and religon are two different things. The Church is an institution, and probably the one with the most blood on its hands since the dawn of time. Religon itself is a personal matter, whether one chooses to believe in life after death, God, Jesus, Mohammed, whatever. If the title of the post is correct, it is the latter we are discussing. So the crimes of the Church (Indulgences anyone?) are for another time.

Secondly, Interpreting something as old and hacked together as the bible literally is folly. Each book of the Bible has about five different authors, and as such contradictions abound. It is definately no tool for living ones life by, unless you desire the stoning of homosexuals and child slavery.

However, in the Bible one can find words of great wisdom, as in Corinthians, where we read: "When I was a child I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child. When I became a man I put aside childish things." It is the same with the development of our species. When the human race finally fulfils its destiny and is able to stand on its own two feet and live life to the full, it will no longer require the prop of religion, a supernatural being to whom to pray or the false consolation of life in another world than this.

(Additionally, anyone wonder why the The common idea of "life after death" is more or less a continuation of the life we have led on earth, since we can know no other? After the soul has fled the body, it apparently "wakes up" in a beautiful land where we are miraculously united with our loved ones, to a life of eternal joy in which sickness and old age are banished. It is sufficient to pose the question concretely to see that this is impossible. If we consider all the things that make life worth living: eating good food, drinking fine wines, singing, dancing, embracing, making love etc., it will be immediately evident that all these activities are inseparably connected with the body and its physical attributes. More cerebral pastimes like talking, reading, writing and thinking are equally bound up with our bodily organs. The same is true of breathing, or any other of the activities which, in their totality, we call life.)

When that moment arrives, humanity will cast off religion with the same ease that grown people put aside the fairy stories which they so loved in childhood, but which have outlived their usefulness.

[ December 18, 2001: Message edited by: Massy ]</p>

 

[SnorSnor]

Massy, you said,

Secondly, Interpreting something as old and hacked together as the bible literally is folly.<hr></blockquote>

Really? From the original Hebrew texts? And can you prove the Bible was "hacked together"?

You also said,

Each book of the Bible has about five different authors<hr></blockquote>

Each book was written by one author. For example, Job was written by Job, Ezekial was written by Ezekial, etc. The only book that might've had 2 authors was Daniel, and that's only Nebuchadnezzar's (major sp???) dream. Daniel wrote the rest, and there are no contradictions.

Also said by you,

It is definately no tool for living ones life by, unless you desire the stoning of homosexuals and child slavery.<hr></blockquote>

Ah, but thanks be to Jesus Christ that we don't have to stone people anymore. By His death and resurrection, we have been freed from the law of sin and death if we believe and accept Him as Lord and Savior of our lives.

Those laws that told to stone were part of the Old Covenant. Since Christ came, died, rose, and ascended, the New Covenant was set, and the old one is gone.

Also, it's also believed by some Christians that when we die, we "sleep" till Jesus Christ comes again. They don't believe that once you die, you're up in heaven, but you "sleep" the sleep of death till Christ raises you up like He said He would do when He returns.

It is interesting when one looks to see it

 

[Massy]

"It is interesting when one looks to see it "

Yes, it is.

Look at Genesis. In some parts, god is referred to as "the Father". Sometimes "The Lord God" sometimes "The Lord" No, I can't prove that this one book was hacked together, any more than you can prove that it wasnt. But it sure looks that way, unless the one writer of that book just decided he'd take artistic liscense rather than be consistent. However, you make my case a lot easier to argue when you mention Job for me. This page <a href="http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mjob.html" target="_blank">here</a> explains it nicely. Granted, its not unbiased, (No human source is, as Acu would do well to understand. Note: If this point is countered with "Yeah but I speak the word of god, so I'm unbiased because God is perfect." I forsee heavy objects being thrown in that direction) but it is very persuasive.

Edit: I also found this on the same page, explain if you will, or just read it, because it's interesting: <a href="http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mgiantsons.html" target="_blank">http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mgiantsons.html</a>

[ December 18, 2001: Message edited by: Massy ]</p>

 

[Gamer4Fire]

Originally posted by SnorSnor:
<strong>Since Christ came, died, rose, and ascended, the New Covenant was set, and the old one is gone.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Sounds like a contradiction, or a correction to me.

[ December 18, 2001: Message edited by: Gamer4Fire ]</p>

 

[SnorSnor]

Originally posted by Gamer4Fire:
<strong>

Sounds like a contradiction, or a correction to me.

[ December 18, 2001: Message edited by: Gamer4Fire ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

It does? How?

Those who believe and accept Christ are covered by the blood of the new covenant, removed from the Law, and put under grace, and are made clean in God's eyes whenever one repents and asks for forgiveness. Those who don't are still under the Law that God has set up.

Massy, I'll check into it probably tomorrow, since it's late tonight

[ December 18, 2001: Message edited by: SnorSnor ]</p>

 

[Crono]

Chrisputer, my name is Crono, not "Chronos". I am honored that you think I am the father of time in Greek Mythology (Chronos is Uranus in Roman mythology), though.

Um, I was going to address something, but i can't even remember now. <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

 

[Crono]

Originally addressed to me by Ghastriph:

Man, you are truly stubborn.
The people put the blood on the doors so GOD can tell the believers from the non-believers. This was before Jesus' Crucifixion, so nobody, really, had the Spirit of Christ inside of them....except for a few people....(read:: Moses, etc...) <hr></blockquote>

Ok, what you say contradicts god's omnipotence. If he knows all, he would have no need for the blood of lamb to tell the Hebrews from the Egyptians. He would already know which households housed which ethnicity.

Look at the HUGE cannyon in the middle of the atlantic oceaon. It's almost as if something just burst out of there. Perhaps water? That would explain how the earth would get misty in the morning.

I believe there WAS a super contenent both the bible and sciance prove that.
<hr></blockquote>

WTF? Boy, it seems you are extremely poorly educated in the ways of earth science. If I ever meet the person who taught you that, I'll slap him. It gets misty in the morning due to something called condensation. When temperature falls below the dew point, water vapor in the air condenses (becomes liquid water) and forms fog because the water droplets are so small that they are suspended in the air. Fog is not something that seeps out of oceanic ridges.

That canyon is actually the Mid-Ocean Ridge, and magma (which becomes lava) comes out, not water. The ridge is a separation line between two tectonic plates. This is all one big convection current. When the lava cools, it pushes the land away from the ridge, and the land at the opposite end of these plates gets pushed into the earth and melts, so the land gets recycled. this is why land masses change over great amounts of time. You will go into greater depth when you have earth science. I had it in 8th grade.

For the flood all that has to happen is for God to throw a meteor and have it hit earth. That would puncture the water barrier which would make it fall to earth as well as with either the meteors impact or with the added pressure on certain areas of the earth would make the inside part of earth break open which would make the inside part of water flood out which equals = World Wide flood.

After a while the water sedels into the ground and we are left with oceans everywhere. WHEW! <hr></blockquote>

Groundwater makes up .01% of the earth's water supply. If all of that excess water settled into the earth, the percentage of groundwater would be much larger. So, this brings up an interesting question: Where did the water go? It couldn't have just evaporated. When you learn about solutions, you will learn that this cannot happen. The Earth's atmoshpere has a saturation point (the point where it cannot hold anymore water. Any water added will only displace water already evaporated as liquid water). And the water couldn't have escaped into space due to something called gravity. So please tell me where this water went?

 

[Novowels]

The bible has no contradictions?

Um. Ok.

I can name a contradiction in the first two chapters of Genesis, actually. Read them. I don't even have to tell you. It's two different accounts of Creation. Which one is right? They can't both be- they the creation of man/animals in a different order in each. Plus, was woman created with man, or from his rib? It says differently in each.

But if you like it New Testament style, every single account of the Passion up to Jesus' death is very different, and full of contradictions.

Of course, it's hard to be accurate when you write something 100 years after the "fact" (when actually, this "Jesus" person probably didn't exist. There's precious little writing of him outside the NT, and the Romans kept very good records of the time.)

Of course, if you want a handy list of biblical contradictions, check out <a href="http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com" target="_blank">www.skepticsannotatedbible.com</a> - Fun stuff.

I'm going to leave this in the obviously capable hands of the other athiests. I'm gonna go play Smash Bros. Stupid event 50. Yarggh.


--------------------
Novowels
--------------------

[ December 19, 2001: Message edited by: Novowels ]</p>

 

[Gamer4Fire]

Actually, all of the animals are created and man is created last. Then God "brought forth" all the animals so Adam could name them. So animals were created before man, yes.

 

[Chrisputer]

The only thing is, is science is more
true than religion. For example, many religions
have been proven incorrect. often scientific findings may support religion but there are two for every one that prove it wrong<hr></blockquote>

Yes you are right. Science has proven many relgions wrong, but I have yet to see anything hard in science that has disproved Christanity, And I mean science not critisizim.

Interpreting something as old and hacked together as the bible literally is folly. Each book of the Bible has about five different authors, and as such contradictions abound. It is definately no tool for living ones life by <hr></blockquote>

You've got some facts wrong here. First of all. There are 2 parts of the Bible, what you call "hacked together". The Old testiment is mainly about how God created everything and humanity meased it up. And how he called a certain people to live up to his standereds. Of course they never could keep that up because they rebelled so much. So he sent his son Jesus to die for us so that if we didn't live up to standerds that we didn't have to die and God would forgive us.

The reason the second half of the Bible is so different is because there were (a) five different acounts of what Jesus did while he was on earth and what he commanded that we do when he left (Please note that there are no contridicictions between them.) (b) about half of the new testiment was Paul's letters to the different churches. (c) The big one, The first half of the bible is about how we messed everything up and what the punishments were, and the second half of how God sent Jesus to forgive us.

It IS a tool to live by, Can you name one thing in the new testiment that if everyone did that would hurt socity?

 

[Chrisputer]

WTF? Boy, it seems you are extremely poorly educated in the ways of earth science. If I ever meet the person who taught you that, I'll slap him. <hr></blockquote>

You know I deaply resent that. I thought that there was no name calling or insulting going on here. This is my first debate and I'm doing well considering I'm only 11 and this is my first debate. And I taught myself on earth science so you might as well just slap me.

Also I did not say that mist comes from mountain ridges or what ever. What I said or meant to say was that is that when the sun heated a side of the earth that the water inside of the earth would rise up from the ground and form a mist.

Also on the issue of galaxys spinning in different directions with the law of cintrifigal force still doesn't make any since. Could you put the answer in layman's terms so it's easier to understand please?

 

[Massy]

You've got some facts wrong here. First of all. There are 2 parts of the Bible, what you call "hacked together". The Old testiment is mainly about how God created everything and humanity meased it up. And how he called a certain people to live up to his standereds. Of course they never could keep that up because they rebelled so much. So he sent his son Jesus to die for us so that if we didn't live up to standerds that we didn't have to die and God would forgive us.

The reason the second half of the Bible is so different is because there were (a) five different acounts of what Jesus did while he was on earth and what he commanded that we do when he left (Please note that there are no contridicictions between them.) (b) about half of the new testiment was Paul's letters to the different churches. (c) The big one, The first half of the bible is about how we messed everything up and what the punishments were, and the second half of how God sent Jesus to forgive us.

It IS a tool to live by, Can you name one thing in the new testiment that if everyone did that would hurt socity?
<hr></blockquote>

I know the story.

By "hacked together" I did not mean old testatment meets new testament, makes big book. What I meant is that each book (Mainly the old testament, to be fair, I'm not suggesting Paul got his secretary to write his letters.) has more that one author, as can be told from their writing, the terminology they use, and the accounts they give which aren't quite in accordance with another, such as the example given where eve was either made from adam, or from his rib, is says it twice and doesnt appear to be able to make up its mind. The Bible is not a tool to live by, because although the New Testament contains mainly poistive messages (Unlike the Old, stoning children, etc) it is still vague. "Sexual Immorality" is wrong. Fair enough, but who considers what is immoral? I definately wouldn't trust the church to make that call.

[ December 20, 2001: Message edited by: Massy ]</p>

 

[Bumble Bee Tuna]

Chrisputer- I know you're enjoying yourself, but can I make a suggestion?
This is generally a scientific debate here. People are discussing things using scientific evidence. You are discussing things using explanations you have made up unscientifically (the mist thing). You obviously know almost nothing about science. This is not meant as an insult, it's just that you are 11, and haven't learned it yet. As such, you should stop arguing, because even when people prove you wrong, you don't understand it. You might want to stay and keep asking questions, since it will help you learn some science. But don't try to argue.
Now, as to your question, I don't profess to be at all knowledgeable about astrophysics, but I think your question could be answered like this. Ever see a large whirlpool in water? If I remember correctly, in a whirlpool, very small whirlpools spinning the opposite direction of the big one can appear in the currents. I feel like I've seen this, so hopefully you have too and that would help explain. If not, then sue me but I tried. It probably can't be explained, you obviously got those supposed proofs against science from a Christian website and have no idea what they mean. Seriously, evolution violating the 2nd law of thermodynamics? This isn't a closed system, we have the sun.

Hope you take the advice. IF you have any more questions please go ahead and ask, I'll be happy to attempt to enlighten you. But please, don't try to argue, it's really bad.

-B

 

[Massy]

Centrifugal force doesn't actually exist... Hence why if you spin an object around on a piece of string, then cut the string, the object flies in the direction it was spinning, on a tangent to the circle of its path, rather than outwards where centrifugal force is supposedly pushing it.

 

[INFESTD]

really, who wrote the bible?

ive only read genisus. it makes since to me though

 

[Vinnie275]

Like forty something guys wrote it. Like the Moses dude and Paul and all them other guys the Catholics blindly worship.

Fisking Joseph Smith! You guys sure are rambling. Let's make this some fun. How about we play it like a game, n.w.n or something like that.

&lt; Zap275 has entered MRD &gt;
Zap275_
Class: Bible Thumper
Intelligence: 20
Faith: 40
Enemies: Mormans, Catholics, Atheists, Satanists, Hippies who don't share their rash
Weapon: Sword of Light
Magic: White, Life1, Life2, Life3, Nova
&lt;&gt;

See now I made it fun! Let's move it to the forum games room so X can screw with it! yay!

 

[Gamer4Fire]

Originally posted by Massy:
<strong>Centrifugal force doesn't actually exist... Hence why if you spin an object around on a piece of string, then cut the string, the object flies in the direction it was spinning, on a tangent to the circle of its path, rather than outwards where centrifugal force is supposedly pushing it.</strong><hr></blockquote>

The string is the force pulling it towards the center. In space its gravity. Centrifugal force does exist.

 

[Massy]

<a href="http://forums.vmag.com/suvrodeo0300/messages/918.html" target="_blank">http://forums.vmag.com/suvrodeo0300/messages/918.html</a>
<a href="http://fermi.bgsu.edu/~stoner/p201/circle/tsld013.htm" target="_blank">http://fermi.bgsu.edu/~stoner/p201/circle/tsld013.htm</a>

Or, if you fancy a bit more detail:

<a href="http://www.getfaster.com/Techtips/Physics4.html" target="_blank">http://www.getfaster.com/Techtips/Physics4.html</a>

Or just ask any half-competent Physics teacher.

[ December 20, 2001: Message edited by: Massy ]</p>

 

[TheMagicalKuja]

Originally posted by Mmm Mmm Gopher:
<strong>At first I was going to make the argument that the world would be a much better place if it werent for religion, but then I realized that without religion, the world would be even worse. There would be no reason not to do evil, not to murder, not to steal, ect. ect.

What pains me is that religion is both keeping the world together and tearing it apart. Some religions strengthen common values and comdemn evil, while others preach war against non-believers and people with differences in opinion and customs. Without religion the bombings of sept 11 probably would have never happened, but the human race probably wouldnt have survived to that day anyway.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You sum this up nicely. I'm agonistic, simply because my faith is quite weak and I'm still curiious in figuring out how God works. However, a flat-out denial of a God or gods is useless, there are ZERO arguments proving either true or false. Such the fact that things cannot come from nothing, and the Big Bang Theory is very faulty. Such is why I have a deep grudge against atheists. Most atheists don't just deny religion, they HATE it, and the people that worship it! That's RACISM!!!! RACISM SUCKS MAJOR @$$!!!

Oh well, if judgement does come, I can always have fun eating BBQed Satan. Or maybe we could be in h**l already (Remember, h**l is eternal seperation from God, and the brimstone could be symbolic for something else.), and someone found a bible, and...

 

[SnorSnor]

I can name a contradiction in the first two chapters of Genesis, actually. Read them. I don't even have to tell you. It's two different accounts of Creation. Which one is right? They can't both be- they the creation of man/animals in a different order in each. Plus, was woman created with man, or from his rib? It says differently in each.<hr></blockquote>

From where I see it, it looks like they're giving a brief description of the seven-day creation acount. Then later, it goes into detail about how God created man.

But if you like it New Testament style, every single account of the Passion up to Jesus' death is very different, and full of contradictions.<hr></blockquote>

Let me see one.

Of course, it's hard to be accurate when you write something 100 years after the "fact"<hr></blockquote>

100 years? They were actually written before 60 AD, before the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Since it's so early, the eye witnesses were obviously still alive, and if they were still alive, they would be able to remember whatever they have seen.

It also shouldn't be hard to remember the things that happened, since Jesus said His Spirit will help remind them of what exactly happened.

when actually, this "Jesus" person probably didn't exist<hr></blockquote>

Most people agree that Jesus did exist. Even some athiests believe He existed, but was just a "good man."

Fair enough, but who considers what is immoral? I definately wouldn't trust the church to make that call.<hr></blockquote>

God, actually, considers what's immoral. You don't need to trust a church, all you need is to trust God.

really, who wrote the bible?<hr></blockquote>

The majority of the Christians believe that the Bible is the inspired Word of God, but was written down by men.

More later

 

[Massy]

Most atheists don't just deny religion, they HATE it, and the people that worship it! That's RACISM!!!! RACISM SUCKS MAJOR @$$!!!<hr></blockquote>

Yeah... good one. I know loads of atheists who hate theists, who are, obviously of a different race. Plus an agnostic isnt someone who can't make up their mind, its someone who believes knowledge of the otherworldly is beyond man's comprehension.

God, actually, considers what's immoral. You don't need to trust a church, all you need is to trust God.<hr></blockquote>

Well, God doesnt return my calls... and in the very next answer you give, you say that the bible is the word of God...written down by men. God, if she exists, needs men as her messengers. Why not jsut ask the men? Except the men are part of the church. Who, like I said, I wouldn't trust to make a moral judgement if my life depended on it.

Edit: Yeah, Jesus did exist... one of the first communists actually.

[ December 20, 2001: Message edited by: Massy ]</p>

 

[kirbyultimate]

I think more than 40 people wrote the Bible. and i'm Catholic, so I believe in one god and that is God, with a capital G.

 

[Vinnie275]

Originally posted by kirbyultimate:
<strong>I think more than 40 people wrote the Bible. and i'm Catholic, so I believe in one god and that is God, with a capital G.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Eh? What about the triforce(d'oh. been playing zelda to long) I mean the trinity?

Originally posted by Massy:
<strong>

Well, God doesn't return my calls... and in the very next answer you give, you say that the bible is the word of God...written down by men. God, if she exists, needs men as her messengers.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

Just as he wrote them tablets up on Sianai(is that how you spell it?) with his fingers eh? He didn't need men. But he used them to write it. It's sort of a text driven communion, you know like, another thing connecting them. All the good stuff.

<strong>
Why not jsut ask the men? Except the men are part of the church. Who, like I said, I wouldn't trust to make a moral judgement if my life depended on it.
</strong>

Every single clergy except for 3 that I've known were corrupt or taught material that ran against their religion. Nobody is perfect. But yes, you shouldn't trust those guys, you should trust God.

<strong>
Edit: Yeah, Jesus did exist... one of the first communists actually.
[ December 20, 2001: Message edited by: Massy ]</strong>

Bolshaviks weren't really alive back then or something. Well really Jesus didn't oppress his people by invoking large war time taxes, or destroying the upper class so I don't suppose he was really that much of an active red.

 

[Vinnie275]

EDIT: Hmmm I wonder how badly I'll get burned on this one. Just teaches you not to poast 5 min after you get up ^_^

EDIT2: Criminey. I pressed the quote button instead of edit. Shoot.

[ December 20, 2001: Message edited by: Zapdos275 ]</p>

 

[Massy]

You kinda missed my point... Each clergy member will have a different opinion on what constitues immorality, if I asked Pat Robertson (Quite possibly Satan himself) he'd say pretty much anything, wheras if I asked my local vicar they'd probably say not as much.

Jesus threw the money lenders out of the temple. "Its easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man into the kingdom of heaven." Granted he wasnt a member of any party (I'm guessing because they, y'know, didnt exist), but he shared a lot of Marxist ideals.

 

[SnorSnor]

Originally posted by Massy:
<strong>You kinda missed my point... Each clergy member will have a different opinion on what constitues immorality, if I asked Pat Robertson (Quite possibly Satan himself) he'd say pretty much anything, wheras if I asked my local vicar they'd probably say not as much.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I wouldn't take time to listen to Pat Robertson. Listen to someone like Charles Stanley or Billy Graham. They are pretty knowledge people about the Bible.

 

[Vinnie275]

Originally posted by SnorSnor:
<strong>

I wouldn't take time to listen to Pat Robertson. Listen to someone like Charles Stanley or Billy Graham. They are pretty knowledge people about the Bible.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Rod Parsley is too, but he said on live t.v. that he was Jesus' second hand man. Those men are so inflated by their own religious egos. They'll do anything to bring money into their tithing coffers. Reminds me of the Morman church.
-
You know, that would be cool if Jesus wouldve started the commie craze. Imagine Stalin going to bed at night in his hammer/corn scythe stocking cap, praying that Jesus would destroy the western capitalist pig-dogs.

 

[Gamer4Fire]

Originally posted by Massy:
<strong>Or just ask any half-competent Physics teacher.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Are we talking about centrifical or centrifugal force? One exists the other doesn't. Now I'm getting confused.

 

[Vinnie275]

I thought they were the same thing...just one is spelled wrong? I dunno they teach you that when you're a frosh in HS.

 

[Massy]

Centrificial exists, Centrifugal doesn't.

Bah...the discussions kinda petering out now...think i missed the best of it.

 

[Bumble Bee Tuna]

Yeah we just learned this stuff in physics.

Centrifical is force towards the center, and it is due to the acceleration towards the center that occurs with circular motion. The whole idea doesn't really make much sense but it works.

Centrifugal is force away from the center and doesn't exist. When you supposedly feel this force, like when you go around a curve in your car, you are really feeling a lack of centrifical force, the car has it, you don't.

Anyway you probably knew that already.

-B

 

[Vinnie275]

Yeah knew it or tried to forget it.

 

[GoodNess]

Jesus is neat. :D

 

[Vinnie275]

Yes Jesus is very neat :D

 

[Master Mario]

Correction:

Very very very neat!

 

[Bowls'A'Plenty61]

To the gopher fella,
i agree with you A LOT. i have not been able to find words for the opinion you gave when asked about religion, but now i might borrow a paragraph or two of all that if ya dont mind! Cheers to your posts!
Zapdos you have become my smashboards.com hero (next to slakkichu who has the dogged out ability to make hyperfalcon look like dumb sh*t.

 

[Bumble Bee Tuna]

Bowls-
Don't know about you, but I've never needed Slak to see that HyperFalcon is a dumb ****. Slak doesn't need to make him look like one, he looks like one by default.
Good ol' Chuck...Always good for mindless babble and a laugh.

-B

 

[Massy]

But Chuck's so good, he knows the names of all the moves