Joseph Smith Promises Mormons
Everlasting Burnings and Lucifer as Their God
In volume 6 of "History of the Church" published by the LDS Deseret Book Co., on page 306, is a recorded, Sunday April 7th, 1844, Joseph Smith sermon. It is best known as the King Follett Discourse. He states: "Here then, is eternal life--to know the only wise and true God; and you have learn how to be gods yourselves and to be kings and priests to God, the same as all the gods have done before you, namely, by going from one small degree to another, and from a small capacity to a great one; from grace to grace, from exaltation to exaltation, until you obtain the resurrection of the dead, and are able to dwell in everlasting burnings, and to sit in glory as do those who sit in everlasting power."
In the next paragraph, with the heading "The Righteous to Dwell in Everlasting Burnings" he states again "...they shall rise again to dwell in everlasting burnings in immortal glory,..."
Isa. 33: 14 states: "The sinners in Zion are afraid; fearfulness hath surprised the hypocrites. Who among us shall dwell with the devouring fire? Who among us shall dwell with everlasting burnings?"
As early as 1836 Joseph Smith had a revelation recorded in the D&C that states: "The heavens were opened upon us, and I beheld the celestial kingdom of God, and the glory thereof, whether in the body or out I cannot tell. I saw the transcendent beauty of the gate through which the heirs of that kingdom will enter, which was like unto circling flames of fire; also the blazing throne of God, whereon was seated the Father and the Son." (Doctrine and Covenants 137: l-3). And he also said: "These are the first principles of consolation. How consoling to the mourners when they are called to part with a husband, wife, father, mother, child, or dear relative, to know that, although the earthly tabernacle is laid down and dissolved they shall rise again to dwell in everlasting burnings in immortal glory, not to sorrow, suffer, or die any more; but they shall be heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ. What is it? to inherit the same power, the same glory and the same exaltation, until you arrive at the station of a God, and ascend the throne of eternal power, the same as those who have gone before. (Teachings, pp. 346-47, emphasis added).
Christ described the everlasting burnings this way: "And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: and he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left. . . . Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels." (Matthew 25:32,33,41, emphasis added). Even the Book of Mormon records: "Nevertheless, after wading through much tribulation, repenting nigh unto death, the Lord in mercy hath seen fit to snatch me out of an everlasting burning, and I am born of God." (Mosiah 27: 28, emphasis added)..
There is nowhere in the Bible that it describes being in God's presence as being surrounded by fire or everlasting burnings. However the god of this earth does reside in eternal burnings. It is clear that Joseph Smith's god is Lucifer himself. Further validation of this in D&C 63:59 : "Behold I am from above and my power lieth beneath. I am over all, and in all, and through all, and search all things, and the day cometh that all things shall be subject to me." Why, in the temple ceremony, when Adam calls out to God three time, is that Lucifer answers.
When I received my endowments in 1961, the actor playing Lucifer was wearing a lambskin Master Masons apron (it may be different now). It had the Masonic symbols of the compass and the square. Adam asks him "What's that apron you have on?" Lucifer "It is an emblem of my power and priesthoods." Temple Mormons wear garments with those symbols embroidered in them for the rest of their lives and are buried in them.
My missionary D&C has in the introduction a statement; "Joseph Smith received visitations from Moroni, an angel of light...". Apostle McKonkie's book Mormon Doctrine, under the heading Angel of Light, states "See Devil".
Joseph Smith's sermons, "revelations", and writings give followers many warnings that they are (we were) literally playing with eternal fire and damnation.
I remember using Mormon Doctrine in my youth to figure out the passage in the Bible that says their will be no marriage in heaven. I was told the book would give me the answer. The logic made no sense to me at the time and I decided to try and find a different and better explanation for the obvious contradiction between temple marriage and that passage. McKonkie (if I remember correctly) basically said that the Bible was saying that since there were no marriages in heaven, we needed to perform them on earth. In my head the one part that stood out for me was "Know ye not the scriptures". Since Christ was saying the answer is obvious in the scriptures, I could only conclude at a very young age that some scriptures were now missing. This was long before I understood how the Bible was created over time.
Sorry to stray so far from your point, but I do believe modern Mormon's see Mormon Doctrine and McKonkie as radicals. I have heard that Glen Beck is seen as someone who adopts Mormon Doctrine, and is therefore a sort of Mormon radical.
Since the only Devil I believe in is myself, I'm not too worried about playing with eternal fire and damnation. I think Joseph Smith was a deceiver, I still don't know if he deceived himself in the process. To me he is no more or less a villian than people in the Bible. I group him with all of them. The only difference between the Bible and the Book of Mormon is that the BOM was complete fiction, while the Bible has history mixed in with fiction. The Bible in many ways is worse because it was changed as needed to influence people's beliefs as it went along. For instance, I believe that early in Christian history Judas was seen very favorably and became a threat to a certain group of believers. The story of Judas betraying Christ in my opinion was created to villify someone who was very popular.
The story of the ressurection of Christ doesn't even appear in the Bible until the third account of the death of Christ. The earliest account makes no mention of the resurrection. The second account takes it a step further, but still no mention of a ressurection, it wasn't until the third and later account that a ressurection was needed and inserted. The same sort of thing occurred in the early Jewish history. In one case where people weren't sure about going to war, a new scripture was suddenly found deep in the temple and off to war they went.
If Christianity is believeable, then there is no reason to discount the vision. My logic going forward tells me that all of Christianity is made up of people doing exactly what JS did. I see it all the same. I think to believe in the Bible is to ignore 80% of what is actually written. I don't remember being taught about God instructing people to make a Golden Hemmerhoid and yet it's in the Bible. Go figure. It is not my intent to defend JS, but I will admit when I'm at a Christian home listening to them trash Mormon's I wonder how they can do it with a straight face.
Devil Bar Kokhba
This is interesting. Relative to the marriage in heaven that is in Matt. 23:30.
I'm sure there are some that view McConkie as a radical but he quite accurately described the doctrines of the LDS Church. Not all the followers get beyond "milk" and to the "meat". Less than 25% of Mormons ever go to the temple, and probably 25% of them ever really study the deeper meaning of the endowments. Glenn Beck is about a mile away from being a McConkieite and would fall squarely into the more "modern" group. Some of the things he says would make Brigham Young cringe.
I'm sure that Judas was looked upon favorably by some, the very worst of mankind have loyal followers but the manuscripts (contemporary to him) and historians do not record him favorably. The Gnostics loved to write contrary accounts to the Christians.
As far as the accounts of the resurrection...I don't know what Bible you're reading but all four gospels have detailed accounts of it; Matt. 28, Mark 16, Luke 24 and John 20. The assention is only mentioned in two of them but it is not central to Christian doctrine.
God didn't command the the Philistines to make gold hemorrhoids, the pagan priests did. God was dealing with a truly pagan culture and He knew how to get their attention.
The trashing is not of Mormons, Christians always admire them as people, it's Mormonism. I believe Joseph Smith was a sociopath and as he spoke his religious fantasies they came true in his mind. People bought the stuff and he just kept getting wilder and wilder.
I put my faith in The Word. It has solid, objective proof of it's infallibility. How does one doubt a document that recorded over three hundred prophesies about Christ between four Hundred and twelve hundred years before he came. Mathematically if just EIGHT of these prophesies came true (and all three hundred + did) it would be ten to the seventeenth power against it happening. Besides there are literally thousands of other prophesies that have been fulfilled and are being fulfilled today. Of the over sixty Joseph Smith "prophesies" it's a stretch to find 4-5 that actually happened. The man is and was a fraud and Jesus Christ and the Bible are not.
Am I casting my pearls before the swine, Devil?
Devil Bar: After sending the last one I am concerned that you may take it that I'm calling you a swine...not so...just a metaphor for am I wasting my time. Sorry if it was offensive.
No worries friend, I did not take it that way. In fact I enjoy everything you say, regardless of whether we agree or not. To answer your question "Am I casting my pearls before swine?". I will say it is a fair question and my answer is that I don't think so.
I have an appreciation for many of the poetic and philisophical passages in the Bible. I also have a respect for your personal belief in the Bible. That is to say, I seek no converts and I'm only reacting to one branch of Christianity calling another branch silly when I think they are all standing on quick sand.
I will say that I have a fascination for the Historical Bible, which to me is anything that can be proven. For instance, it is pretty easy to prove that John The Baptist was a real person, but there is no actual proof of Christ. No historian mentions him and there were two really well known historians recording events at the time. Josephus does not mention him. The passages attributed to Josephus is known by almost every credible historian to have been added at a much later date. So speaking from my perspective only, and wishing to know the real truth of the Bible, I will say that the probablity exists that Jesus was a real person, but there were so many people named Jesus at the time and so many people claiming to be the Messiah, that for me personally there is no historical proof of his existence. It is also very hard to explain the incredible gap in time when there is no record of Jesus at all in the Bible. My favorite explanation was that he travelled with his Uncle and learned many Eastern views on religion.
So here is how I look at the Bible. Let's go back to the beginning of the written record. I cannot find any evidence of the existence of the Bible before the Jews were conquered in 587 BCE. The Jews were removed from their homeland and sent into exile into a city that was pretty amazing. A wonderful song "By the Waters of Babylon" still survives to this day and expresses their feelings very well about their plight. You had for all intents and purposes some really smart people working under King Neb., and in my opinion they messed with his head on a regular basis.
They had lost their temple, any written record, basically everything. So in order to keep their heritage and not just get lost into Babylonian society, they began to write things down. This is where the story of Moses and Abraham comes from. Later on these writings became known as the Torah. I know of no known scriptures that pre-date those writings. This is also the beginning of the Old Testament. The story of Daniel was of course written during the time of their capture and other scriptures were added later. It is believed by Historians that the Jewish people who wrote the story of Moses and other stories, did not actually believe the story to be a record of actual events, but rather a story of teaching and of particular significance at the time because they were being held captive. So for me personally I have a great appreciation of the Bible, but do not see it as the word of God, but rather many men over many centuries behaving in exactly the same way as Joe Smith did, adding books over time. Somewhere in all of that, when you separate the fiction from the history you find some really amazing moments in history and that fascinates me.
Thank you for not taking my swine remark the wrong way.
It seems, however, your arguments always rest on earlier manuscripts or historical records that have been "changed" to fit the Christian message. I suspect your sources for this information are all agenda driven to prove Christianity wrong. How convenient it must be to believe in this incredibility well orchestrated conspiracy by early Christians. They must have been really busy with their laptops to get this done.
Ask yourself, why would 13 men live a life of poverty and abuse to only be brutally killed (martyred, some crucified upside down) for teaching what they had seen and personally experienced (only John died of old age in prison). Thousands of other early Christians lived through the same kind of persecution and death for their belief. The three witnesses of JS all left him and he was killed by a mob made up mostly by former believers and followers. He was jailed because he had his militia destroy the "Nauvoo Expositor" for printing the fact that he was not only a polygamist but a polyanderist (having 11 married women sealed to him in marriage).
Given the enormous amount of archeological and historical evidence supporting the Bible and the zero proof of JS books, it is a travesty to classify them in the same group. Did Paul, the Christian killer, really have a road to Damascus experience with Christ or was this brilliant Jew in it for the monetary gain (there was none). Maybe he just wanted to be a contrarian to his scholarly Sanhedrin Jewish brothers? Why would this brilliant man (considered by many literary critics the greatest writer of all time) live a life of condemnation, poverty and physical torture for something that he had to know wasn't true?
If Jesus did go to the Far East (and there is zero proof that he did) none of their teachings took. If they had we would be believing in millions of gods, works salvation, reincarnation and the kundalini force. It is much more likely that he was in Europe or the British Isles.
The God of the Bible, the creator of all things, left us massive amounts of scientific proof of his existence and the accuracy of his recorded word. For instance over the last few years telescopes like the Hubble have given us data that there can be no other planet like earth anywhere in the Universe. The odds (here I go again with odds) against it are ten to the two hundred and forty seventh power, i.e. impossible. Read “Cosmic Blueprint” by Paul Davies and “Rare Earth” by Peter Douglas both secular cosmologists. Also read "The Creator and The Cosmos" by Dr. Hugh Ross, world renowned for his work on quasars. Dr. Ross was an avowed agnostic until he realized that the Bible had described the earth and the cosmos completely and accurately a thousand years before Christ. The data we now know will blow your mind and it all supports the Biblical account of creation.
Happy New Year!
Regarding Mattew, Mark Luke and John's account of the ressurection:
Mark's Gospel was the first canonical gospel, written approximately 70 CE. The earliest known manuscripts of Mark do not even have a resurrection narrative, beyond the young man telling the women that Jesus had risen. Later texts included resurrection appearances which bring this gospel more or less into line with the Gospels of Matthew and Luke. However, the answer in respect to Mark must be that the earliest known gospel text did not mention the women speaking to the risen Jesus.
Matthew's Gospel reports an earthquake that rolled away the stone. Mary Magdalene and the other Mary saw the angel who caused the earthquake sitting on the stone. The women saw Jesus later while on the way to tell the disciples of their experience. Finally, the eleven disciples went to a mountain in Galilee and saw Jesus.
In Luke's Gospel, the stone had already been moved when a group of women arrived, but there is no mention of an earthquake. This time, two men appeared to the women in shining garments, apparently angels. Later, Jesus appeared to two men, Cleopas and (possibly) Peter, but they did not recognise him, even after conversing with him, inviting him home, and eating dinner with him. They suddenly realised that he was Jesus, ("their eyes were opened and they knew him") but then he vanished out of their sight. At his next appearance, Jesus went to some lengths to assure them that he really was Jesus, showing the disciples his wounds, and finally being drawn up into heaven. All this happened in and near Jerusalem, not in Galilee.
In John's Gospel, only Mary Magdalene is mentioned going to the sepulchre and saw the stone moved. Then came 'the disciple whom Jesus loved' and Peter, who went in and saw only the linen clothes and the napkin. Next 'the disciple whom Jesus loved' went in, saw and believed. Only after they left did Mary see two angels in the sepulchre. Mary afterwards saw Jesus standing and knew not that it was Jesus, supposing that he was the gardener. The next two appearances are quite similar to a single appearance in Luke's Gospel except, as Elaine Pagels points out in Beyond Belief: The Secret Gospel of Thomas (2003), the account seems intended to disadvantage the disciple Thomas, by causing him to miss the blessing of the Holy Spirit and then appear to doubt that it was Jesus that he saw [Pagels identifies a thread of anti-Thomas narrative in John's Gospel.]. Finally, Jesus appeared to the disciples at the Sea of Tiberius but, although 'the disciple whom Jesus loved' quickly identified him, none of them dared to ask who he was, "knowing that it was the Lord."
Again, let's look at the history of the Bible. The Bible you use today (New Testament) was being compiled shortly after the death of Christ, so of course it should be looked at closely back in time. At some point in time in the early years the Gospel of Judas and the Gospel Mary Magdelene was as credible as any other. It wasn't until Constantine convened the first Council of Nicea, 325 years after the death of Christ that they made the first real attempt to decide which of these many scriptures were the so called word of God. Sadly, most of these early scriptures no longer exist. Your belief in the Bible is of the book compiled sometime after 325 AD.
325 years later men were deciding what would be considered scripture and what would not be. Many of the scriptures at the time were competing for validity via their various supporters so to speak. If my memory of history is correct, nothing was really resolved at the time, but there were very definitely competing Christian beliefs at the time and each was trying to prove their philosophy. It would not be much different than trying to come to an agreement in modern times among the Mormon's, Catholics, Lutherans etc.
Look at other events at the time of Christ. Cleopatra existed just prior to the time of Christ and was written into history as a harlot and even in modern times is treated as such in movies. The Romans hated her and villified her, as you would expect.
The real truth is that she was brilliant and except for a very bright Roman General, might have succeeded. Now that we have the benefit of modern analysis, we have more history from the Egyptians, which shows her to be a brilliant leader. The Bible is no different, people selling their side of the story and changing things to fit their beliefs. Your Bible of today is at the very least missing many original writings, and no Bible Historian would argue that many things in the Bible were changed over time, or they contradicted each other. It was a group of men many hundreds of years later who complied the books and decided what was the word of god and eliminated ones they didn't like.
I think the Jewish scholars are about to find many interesting things in the next year or two. They are using the original Hebrew texts and doing an analysis of writing styles to see which authors wrote Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. They may not know the actually author, but they will know if the same author wrote more than one gospel. I find that very fascinating. Writing styles are like finger prints, the logic behind their analysis is very good.
Also, there are more misconceptions about the Bible than I can count. Moses did not cross the Red Sea, it was an inaccuracy in the translation. The story was that he crossed the Red Marsh, and the list goes on. Christ was not the son of a carpenter as many believe today, in fact the term used was a general term used for common laborers of the time.
Without knowing what was really written in the Bible and who the authors were, I can't just pronounce it the word of God. I would have to translate the Bible into something more historically accurate in order to know if I believed it or not.
Devil Bar Kokhba
There is a glaring gap in your responses to my offerings...GOD. What I am finding is that the internet is doing a lot of damage to the LDS belief system. However those who escape Mormonism via the web almost universally do not find Christ as savior and end with agnostic if not atheist views. Those of us fortunate enough to have Christian disciples to help us bridge the gap between the lie of Mormonism and the truth of Christianity become strong in our faith via digging deeper than most.
GOD IS! Christ was crucified for claiming his position in the trinity..."Before Abraham, I AM" when questioned by the Pharisees. He also said "He who belongs to God hears what God says, the reason you do not hear is that you do not belong to God."
The proof of God and creation is so prolific that one has to be nearly blind not to acknowledge it. Our atmosphere is made up of 78% oxygen, 21%, Nitrogen and 1% carbon. If any one of these were just .1% off we would not exist. If we were 1% closer or 1% further away from the sun intelligent life would not exist on earth. We are in the only solar system where all the planets ore on the same plain. The other planets shield us from meteorites , especially Jupiter. Our sun is in its cooler, more stable stage of life, making our planet habitable to intelligent life.
If you read "Darwin's Black Box" you will find that Darwin said that if there was anything smaller than the simple molecules he could observe his theory was in jeopardy. Of course we now know that the molecular world is not only infinitely smaller but highly complex. The following is a quote from www.allaboutcrettion.org:
Through the microscope, we observe the E. coli bacterial flagellum. The bacterial flagellum is what propels E. coli bacteria through its microscopic world. It consists of about 40 individual protein parts including a stator, rotor, drive-shaft, U-joint, and propeller. It's a microscopic outboard motor! The individual parts come into focus when magnified 50,000 times (using electron micrographs). And even though these microscopic outboard motors run at an incredible 100,000 rpm, they can stop on a microscopic dime. It takes only a quarter turn for them to stop, shift directions and start spinning 100,000 rpm in the opposite direction! The flagellar motor has two gears (forward and reverse), is water-cooled, and is hardwired into a signal transduction (sensory mechanism) so that it receives feedback from its environment. ("Unlocking the Mystery of Life," video documentary by Illustra Media, 2002.)
When we apply the general principles of detecting specified complexity to biologic systems (living creatures), we find it reasonable to infer the presence intelligent design. Take, for example, the bacterial flagellum's stator, rotor, drive-shaft, U-joint, and propeller. It is not convenient that we've given these parts these names - that's truly their function. If you were to find a stator, rotor, drive-shaft, U-joint, or propeller in any vehicle, machine, toy or model, you would recognize them as the product of an intelligent source. No one would expect an outboard motor -- much less one as incredible as the flagellar motor -- to be the product of a chance assemblage of parts. Motors are the product of intelligent design.
Finally my point is that if God did all this and much, much more, could He not direct and protect His word. For instance there were six councils over a two hundred year span that each confirmed the cannon of scripture. If scripture is God breathed it is also God protected. Constantine and the chosen scholars would be in God's control to only include His truth, no more no less.
The Qumran discovery of Biblical manuscripts validates the accuracy of the Bible. All but two of the books of the Old Testament are represented and even though nearly a thousand years older than some of the codices there was virtually no difference. Yes there were other manuscripts there but that doesn't qualify them as scripture any more that Dan Brown's books qualify as valid history.
Here is a link to a short video I think you will find interesting from the aforementioned web site.
PS The "Jewish Scholars" you referred to will have had fun using their Hebrew to translate Greek, The New Testament was written entirely in Greek. Also this fingerprinting has been accomplished years ago.
You are right, the Old Testament was Hebrew, the New Testament was Greek. There is still much more to learn about the authors of the Bible.
If you accept that Adam and Eve had conversations with a snake the Garden of Eden, that poor old Lot was tricked by his daughters into having sex with them, that Noah built a boat and put all the animals on earth into it, that there is any logic to hanging someone from a cross to atone for Adam eating a forbidden fruit, that God gets really pissed off and kills nearly everyone on earth, that God and the Devil got into a contest of egos and punished Job in the process, that God gets pissed on a fairly regular basis and kills people, then of course I'm happy for you.
You might want to stop for a minute and look at the personality of God. Christians run around happy about the day we all get burned in a fire and they get to go to heaven. Jehovah's Witnesses jokingly go around house shopping for something nice to live in after everyone else suffers a horrible death.
Do Christians ever stop and think about the things they support? They support the wholesale slaughter of fellow human beings, because that is what God wants. There is no logic in any of it and to find logic is to ignore pretty much everything.
I have heard all of the attempts to somehow show Science supports Christianity, but you have to look in some pretty shallow pools to find that support. For every Science Fiction showing God created the earth, there are about two-hundred other opinions that disprove the theory.
Just my opinion.
Claude, you said:
The proof of God and creation is so prolific that one has to be nearly blind not to acknowledge it. Our atmosphere is made up of 78% oxygen, 21%, Nitrogen and 1% carbon. If any one of these were just .1% off we would not exist.
I don't see how this proves there is a God. The Earth was formed 4.5 Billion Years ago. The first sign of life began 3.5 Billion years ago. I don't understand how you go from, this was the perfect environment for life to begin, therefore there is a God. It took 1 Billion years, an uncomprehensible period of time for the first life to begin.
You said this:
Ask yourself, why would 13 men live a life of poverty and abuse to only be brutally killed (martyred, some crucified upside down) for teaching what they had seen and personally experienced
First of all nobody was choosing a life of poverty, it was imposed on them. The kind of poverty at the time of the birth of Christ was unimaginable. Most of the children were dying of starvation. King Herod was building some of the most amazing structures ever put on this earth, unfortunately most do not survive. The seaport built by him, the temple, his own tomb (only recently discovered) but the general population was starving to death. I think we would all be pretty motivated if we were starving to death and the ruler was living so well.
We seem to think of these people at the time of Christ as modern day Hippies choosing a life of service, they were actually political activists so to speak. It isn't even uncommon that they should do so. History is filled with people who sacrificed, long before and long after Christ. Good grief, if you want to look at a people who sufferred look at the Jews, and that battle continues to this day. I don't think the early Christians were anything special. The Jews tried to take back the temple in 132 - 136. The Romans did horrible things to them and they did not suceed. I don't think what they were doing was all that impressive or unusual. Everything should be looked at in context of the times. At the time miracles were being performed on a regular basis. One of the many who is still known to this day was Honi the Circle drawer. He was called when they needed rain. He would take a stick and draw a circle around him and wait in the circle until it rained. In context of their times, nothing unusual was going on. By the way, Josephus mentions Honi, but doesn't mention Christ.
Devil Bar Kokhba
At last your face (I assume). Still hiding behind the Devil bar handle though.
This will be my last communication with you sir. I have engaged you in order to expose the thinly veiled, deep seeded hatred in which you have somehow buried yourself. I pity you. Truth and evidence mean nothing to you, the end justifies the means. Though to what end you see, mystifies me.
Consider this; If your atheistic/agnostic views are correct, I have lost nothing, in fact what I have gained is a life filled with true joy and love. I sing praise wholeheartedly to my God and Savior. I see people giving their lives to the benefit of others by feeding them, clothing them, drilling thousands of wells to give them fresh water for the first time, etc. etc., in your view, all in the name of a non-existent god. I have participated in and donated to massive charities, like Pat Robinson's "Operation Blessing, that has fed and clothed over 65 million people from money given by those uninformed Christians , and Franklin Grahams "Samaritan's Purse" that has provided over 100 million children with Christmas shoe boxes full of toys also donated by those misled Christians. There are literally tens of thousands of similar large (Salvation Army, Goodwill) and small Christian charities. You would be hard pressed to find more than a hand full of charities run by Atheists and Agonistics like yourself. "You will know them by their fruits".
However if I'm right, and God does exist and He is a Triune Person in the form of Father, Son And Holy Spirit, you sir, are up the well know creek without a paddle and will face the judgment seat with nothing but your hatred of God and trying to find words to justify it. Who is the fool here?
It's been a hoot!