Er enkelte religiøse grupper intolerante?

[jjkoggan]

Diskusjonen er splittet ut fra tråden - Vi er ikke et rasistisk parti sidan den ikkje hadde noko der å gjøre. Vennligst rapporter tråden om emnetittel skal redigerers eller innlegg fjernes eller legges til.
The discussions has been split out of the thread mentioned above. Please report the thread if the title is wrong or if some posts should be included or removed.

Religion er IKKE rase.
Å si at man hater muslimer er IKKE rasisme, da Muslimer kan være både fra europa, afrika og asia.

Jeg missliker sterkt både muslimer og kristne nettopp fordi de er troende (til det meste). Jeg er dog på ingen måte en rasist. Jeg bare tolererer ikke intoleranse, og det er noe resten av verden burde starte med. Vi tolererer ALT for mye fra religiøse, som hater folk fordi "gud" sier det.


Dette er vell gjerne basert på statistikk, som sier at denne innvandringsgruppen er et tapsprosjekt for den norske stat.


Men er det ikke nettopp det de er da? De har påført seg selv den stigmaen de har, og de gjør ingen ting for å rydde opp i det. Flere europeiske land har brukt milioner av kroner for å gi disse både skole, hus og andre tilbud, men resultatet er at de stjeler alt av verdi og drar sin kos.


Kriminelle bander som kommer til norge KAN faktisk sorteres på nasjonalitet, og vi ser en klar overvekt av personer fra de gitte nasjonene. Da er det ingen problem med å sette spørsmplstegn med immigranter fra denne gruppen. Om Frankriket og bulgaria har probøemer med dette, så burde de ta tak i problemet, og ikke klage på norge for at vi sier at franskmenn stjeler, når de faktisk gjør det.



Men folk er så opptatt av politisk korrekthet, og at folk ikke skal stigmatiseres, at de ikke klarer å se fakta i sakene, og tenke fornuftig.

Om jeg som franskmann opplevde å bli stigmatisert i norge, så er dette på grunn av andre franskmennsdårlige oppførsel, og ikke noe annet. Det er et problem jeg vil legge på mitt eget land, og mitt eget folk, som ikke kan oppføre seg som folk ute i europa.

Not a racist perhaps, but a first class BIGOT Mr Zepticon! Ironic that you are as intolerant as the Muslims you accuse of being intolerant It is one thing to be prejudiced when you are illiterate and uneducated like many Muslim immigrants to Norway and quite another to be an educated ethnic Norwegian and be equally bigoted!

[Zepticon]

Not a racist perhaps, but a first class BIGOT Mr Zepticon! Ironic that you are as intolerant as the Muslims you accuse of being intolerant It is one thing to be prejudiced when you are illiterate and uneducated like many Muslim immigrants to Norway and quite another to be an educated ethnic Norwegian and be equally bigoted!

Like i said, i am intolerant to intolerance, and that includes muslims and christians. The day i dont hear about hating gay marrige, killing atheists, stoneing girls for beeing raped, condem aboirtion and similar issues, i will tolerate them.

 

And the reason i made a clear point about hating christians and muslims? It is because i wont know or care they are muslims or christians, unless they are ranting about the aove cases or simlar things.

[jjkoggan]

 

Like i said, i am intolerant to intolerance, and that includes muslims and christians. The day i dont hear about hating gay marrige, killing atheists, stoneing girls for beeing raped, condem aboirtion and similar issues, i will tolerate them.

 

And the reason i made a clear point about hating christians and muslims? It is because i wont know or care they are muslims or christians, unless they are ranting about the aove cases or simlar things.

 

Do you realize there is great diversity of opinion in both the Muslim and Christian communities and that many are more tolerant than you are? By condemning billions of people you show great ignorance.

 

Racists and bigots judge people not as individuals but as members of groups. Your statements fit the stereotypical American view of an intolerant atheist. Based on first impressions I prefer listening to my funamentalist Christian neighbors over listening to you. They have never expressed such bigoted opinions

[Zepticon]

Do you realize there is great diversity of opinion in both the Muslim and Christian communities and that many are more tolerant than you are? By condemning billions of people you show great ignorance.

Yes, the diversity is how much religious they are, the more religious, the more intolerant, and the less i like them for that. The worse they are at their religion, the better they get. The bible clearly state what to to about gays, masturbation and wearing two different kinds of thread. The bible is only source we have for the christian god, so if a person is christian, but does not belive in the bible, then he is cherry picking, and that is just as bad, beause he seek justification for his intolrance in the religion.

 

The muslims that say "Islam is a religion of peace" clearly have no read the book, or have been cherrypicking or done interpreting in a creative way to make the text writen there less disgusting.

 

I suggest you read the Bible and Qur'an, and then come back and tell me that is not a disgusting piece of litterature, and the gods displayed there are nothing but petty jealous intolerant little shitkids. Stories about how "God" killed every inncoent littel child in egypt because he didnt agree with the Pharaoh. Or drowned every living human on earth. Or stole everything from a man just to win a bet against the devil.

 

Anyone who belives in this god, is someone who should not and can not be taken seriously in a civlized society.

 

Racists and bigots judge people not as individuals but as members of groups. Your statements fit the stereotypical American view of an intolerant atheist. Based on first impressions I prefer listening to my funamentalist Christian neighbors over listening to you. They have never expressed such bigoted opinions

An "intolerant atheist"? Is that what they call militant atheist?

 

Lets have a look at the difference between an intolerant atheist:

 

An intolerant muslim:

 

And an intolerant christian:

 

 

Clearly, atheists are the worst!

[SUSE and Pepsi]

Yes, the diversity is how much religious they are, the more religious, the more intolerant, and the less i like them for that. The worse they are at their religion, the better they get. The bible clearly state what to to about gays, masturbation and wearing two different kinds of thread. The bible is only source we have for the christian god, so if a person is christian, but does not belive in the bible, then he is cherry picking, and that is just as bad, beause he seek justification for his intolrance in the religion.

 

The muslims that say "Islam is a religion of peace" clearly have no read the book, or have been cherrypicking or done interpreting in a creative way to make the text writen there less disgusting.

 

I suggest you read the Bible and Qur'an, and then come back and tell me that is not a disgusting piece of litterature, and the gods displayed there are nothing but petty jealous intolerant little shitkids. Stories about how "God" killed every inncoent littel child in egypt because he didnt agree with the Pharaoh. Or drowned every living human on earth. Or stole everything from a man just to win a bet against the devil.

 

Anyone who belives in this god, is someone who should not and can not be taken seriously in a civlized society.

 

 

An "intolerant atheist"? Is that what they call militant atheist?

 

Lets have a look at the difference between an intolerant atheist:

 

An intolerant muslim:

 

And an intolerant christian:

 

 

Clearly, atheists are the worst!

 

Får helt mark av konservativ kristne som mener at homofili er en sykdom, og som skal prakke Jeesus Christ og Fanden vet hvem andre på vanlige folk.. Fandens Oldemor er åpenbart ikke en like stor trussel.

[jjkoggan]

 

Yes, the diversity is how much religious they are, the more religious, the more intolerant, and the less i like them for that. The worse they are at their religion, the better they get. The bible clearly state what to to about gays, masturbation and wearing two different kinds of thread. The bible is only source we have for the christian god, so if a person is christian, but does not belive in the bible, then he is cherry picking, and that is just as bad, beause he seek justification for his intolrance in the religion.

 

The muslims that say "Islam is a religion of peace" clearly have no read the book, or have been cherrypicking or done interpreting in a creative way to make the text writen there less disgusting.

 

I suggest you read the Bible and Qur'an, and then come back and tell me that is not a disgusting piece of litterature, and the gods displayed there are nothing but petty jealous intolerant little shitkids. Stories about how "God" killed every inncoent littel child in egypt because he didnt agree with the Pharaoh. Or drowned every living human on earth. Or stole everything from a man just to win a bet against the devil.

 

Anyone who belives in this god, is someone who should not and can not be taken seriously in a civlized society.

 

 

An "intolerant atheist"? Is that what they call militant atheist?

 

Lets have a look at the difference between an intolerant atheist:

 

 

An intolerant muslim:

 

And an intolerant christian:

 

 

Clearly, atheists are the worst!

 

I have read the bible and large portions of the Koran which I suspect you have not. I, on the other hand do not condemn all who disagree with me, even if they do me. They have the right to believe as they do and I do not hate them or categorize them as all evil since I am not so ignorant to believe they are all the same, NOR so ignorant that I believe that deeply religious means deeply intolerant.

 

I also do not believe and never have said that atheists are more intolerant than religious zealots because I try to judge everyone as individuals. Anything less is illogical, we are all more than our labels suggest

[Zepticon]

I have read the bible and large portions of the Koran which I suspect you have not.

I have, as most Atheists, i have more knowledge about the bible, its history, and how it came to be than most christians.

 

I, on the other hand do not condemn all who disagree with me, even if they do me. They have the right to believe as they do and I do not hate them or categorize them as all evil since I am not so ignorant to believe they are all the same, NOR so ignorant that I believe that deeply religious means deeply intolerant.

I do not condem all that disagree with me, and i know perfectly well they have the right to belive what they want.

 

That does NOT mean that i dont have anyrights to critizise what they belive. Religion is in no way imune to ridicule. This is a fundamental part of a civilized world. Any form of laws against, or punishment for "blasphemy" is a restriction of our freedom of speech.

 

As i clearly stated above, i know that all religious people are not equally bad, and the better they are, the less value they put on their about 2000 year old bible. I have neither stated that deeply religious means intolelrant, i said that the more faith they put in the bible, the more intolerant they are. The book is, after all, over 2000years old, and every law and view presented in it are based on the values in a 2000 year old society.

 

I also do not believe and never have said that atheists are more intolerant than religious zealots because I try to judge everyone as individuals. Anything less is illogical, we are all more than our labels suggest

If you read the statistics, we are everything our label suggest. Both in bioogy, psychology and antropology. If someone say they are religious, one can say a whole lot about that person just from knowing that, he is likely to be well educated and have a good economy, it is close to guaranteed that his parents had the same religion as him. Depending on what religion he prefer, we can determine what part of the world he was born in.

 

 

Hvorfor snakker dere Engelsk?

Fikk svar på engelsk, regner emd han foretrekker det Samme for meg.

[jjkoggan]

 

I have, as most Atheists, i have more knowledge about the bible, its history, and how it came to be than most christians.

in the end, it is not the holy texts that matter most, it is the interpretation and application that matter. These things have changed drastically over time

I do not condem all that disagree with me, and i know perfectly well they have the right to belive what they want.

. This contradicts multiple statements that you made earlier that you "hate Muslims and Christians "

That does NOT mean that i dont have anyrights to critizise what they belive. Religion is in no way imune to ridicule. This is a fundamental part of a civilized world. Any form of laws against, or punishment for "blasphemy" is a restriction of our freedom of speech.

I agree 100%,

As i clearly stated above, i know that all religious people are not equally bad, and the better they are, the less value they put on their about 2000 year old bible. I have neither stated that deeply religious means intolelrant, i said that the more faith they put in the bible, the more intolerant they are. The book is, after all, over 2000years old, and every law and view presented in it are based on the values in a 2000 year old society.

Since you have contradicted yourself earlier that you hate all Muslims and Christians, are you saying that all religious people are bad, some just less than others?

If you read the statistics, we are everything our label suggest. Both in bioogy, psychology and antropology. If someone say they are religious, one can say a whole lot about that person just from knowing that, he is likely to be well educated and have a good economy, it is close to guaranteed that his parents had the same religion as him. Depending on what religion he prefer, we can determine what part of the world he was born in.

 

If you know statistics, then you know about outliers and Gaussian distributions. One can derive probabilities that an individual adheres to the norm but one can never be absolutely sure that any given individual fits the stereotype until individually evaluated. This is why generalizations like "Muslims and Christians are bad" are both grossly unfair and illogical. In the USA there are 35 000 Christian denominations with some you would only remotely recognize as religious and others quite bizarre. Though you can estimate probabilities about what being a Christian is in America, you would be an idiot to claim you know for sure what any individual Christian is actually like. Any competent statistician would agree- people should be judged individually

 

 

[Zepticon]

in the end, it is not the holy texts that matter most, it is the interpretation and application that matter. These things have changed drastically over time

Yes. And this is stupid beyond belif. Why should you need to interpret the "Word of God". The moment you say that you should interpret the bible, the entire bible is completly worthless as a guidance, as it can mean anything you want. If God wrote it, it must be followed to the word, and a god should know that slavery is bad, beeing 2000 years ago, or 2 years ago.

If the Bible is not written by god, it is a worthless piece of paper...

 

. This contradicts multiple statements that you made earlier that you "hate Muslims and Christians "

I made one statement that i hate Muslims and Christians. And when i say muslims and christians, i mean the proper ones, and not the christians we have populating most of Norway today (they can hardly be called that, since they enither know the bible, or practise any of the laws within).

 

Muslims in the middle east and Pakistan are "proper" muslims. They live by the words in the Qur'an, and kill atheists for not beliving, and others for insulting the prophet and allah.

 

Those are the guys i hate, and i have proper reason to do so, they do not contribute anything to humanity, not a single shit other than their hatefull god and barbaric culture.

 

Since you have contradicted yourself earlier that you hate all Muslims and Christians, are you saying that all religious people are bad, some just less than others?

The moment you belive something you cant prove, you are a dangerous person. The is no difference in beliving in a god that does not exist, and beliving in a god that tell you kill people, and dont exist.

 

Also, the worse you are at yur religion, the better you are as a human, because then you let your won reason and sense, make the judgements, and not a fantasy figure in a 2000year old books written by people who thought the world was a flat disk, and that the stars was holes in the sky.

 

 

If you know statistics, then you know about outliers and Gaussian distributions. One can derive probabilities that an individual adheres to the norm but one can never be absolutely sure that any given individual fits the stereotype until individually evaluated. This is why generalizations like "Muslims and Christians are bad" are both grossly unfair and illogical. In the USA there are 35 000 Christian denominations with some you would only remotely recognize as religious and others quite bizarre. Though you can estimate probabilities about what being a Christian is in America, you would be an idiot to claim you know for sure what any individual Christian is actually like. Any competent statistician would agree- people should be judged individually

Yes, and i take that as give. But we cant talk about individuals, because then this discussion would be pointless.

 

If we know by statistics that 5% of population A is a criminal, and 65% of population B is criminal, where should we spend our effort if we wanted to reduce crime?

 

if we treat population A and B as a group, wihtout making the distinction between them, we have a 35% chanse of stopping a crime. If we only focus on group B, that chance is 65%. So it is alot more effective to generalize, and not treat everyone as an individual.

 

So, if we say (random numbers) that 55% of Japanese immigrants, 2% of Chinese immigrants, and 94% of Icelandic immigrants are criminals, there is no sense in treating Icelandig immigrants and Chinese immigrants the same way.

 

We do not assume Icelandic immigrants are criminals, we just know that they are more likely to be one than the Chinese, so we should focus the work on them, since it would be most effective.

 

The people outside 2 standard deviations on the gauss graph are not the people we are looking for, they will allways be there, but that does not mean that the statsitcis are useless, and that we cant use it to work more effecitly.

[jjkoggan]

 

Yes. And this is stupid beyond belif. Why should you need to interpret the "Word of God". The moment you say that you should interpret the bible, the entire bible is completly worthless as a guidance, as it can mean anything you want. If God wrote it, it must be followed to the word, and a god should know that slavery is bad, beeing 2000 years ago, or 2 years ago.

If the Bible is not written by god, it is a worthless piece of paper...

. Atheists don't experience spirituality so you/they dont understand that religious texts are not supposed to be logical documents taken at face value

 

I made one statement that i hate Muslims and Christians.

 

Muslims in the middle east and Pakistan are "proper" muslims. They live by the words in the Qur'an, and kill atheists for not beliving, and others for insulting the prophet and allah.

 

Those are the guys i hate, and i have proper reason to do so, they do not contribute anything to humanity, not a single shit other than their hatefull god and barbaric culture.

 

Are you so ignorant to presume all Muslims in Pakistan etc.. Are the same?

 

The moment you belive something you cant prove, you are a dangerous person. The is no difference in beliving in a god that does not exist, and beliving in a god that tell you kill people, and dont exist.

 

Also, the worse you are at yur religion, the better you are as a human, because then you let your won reason and sense, make the judgements, and not a fantasy figure in a 2000year old books written by people who thought the world was a flat disk, and that the stars was holes in the sky.

This is clearly not the case, most criminality in the western world has not been religiously motivated.

 

 

Yes, and i take that as give. But we cant talk about individuals, because then this discussion would be pointless.

 

Our constitutions protect the rights of all individuals, not discrete groups like ethnic Norwegians Anything less cannot be called a liberal democracy. All must be treated as individuals under the law. Otherwise, you become an illiberal democracy that resembles third world nations that use ethnicity and religion as a reason to kill and torture

 

Endret 29. mai 2013 av jjkoggan

[Battaman]

. Atheists don't experience spirituality so you/they dont understand that religious texts are not supposed to be logical documents taken at face value

Then they are worthless as far as guidiance goes and should/could be ignored all togheter.

[Abigor]

. Atheists don't experience spirituality so you/they dont understand that religious texts are not supposed to be logical documents taken at face value

That is straight out wrong.

 

Atheists experience very much spirituality as well as religious experiences.

 

Atheism != non-religious

[тurbonєℓℓo]

Atheists don't experience spirituality

How can you know? Of course the atheists experience the same as the Christians, and other religious, but they do not believe that what they experience is of something supernatural, godly... They have their own kind of spirituality. A clean, with more realistic view of the world. We understand the text better than the christians i say. We read it from a critical view, and does not believe everything we hear....

 

so you/they dont understand that religious texts are not supposed to be logical documents taken at face value

But it does not matter. The text is not coherent, and the stories in the text does not back each other up. I recommend this site, go ahead read it, it shoud teach you a few things about the bible;

 

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/

 

Can you really believe in the bible after reading this carefully?

 

 

Are you so ignorant to presume all Muslims in Pakistan etc.. Are the same?

No. We do not think that. But are you thinking that we atheists are all the same? Isn't you assuming that now? I mean: "That we all is so ignorant to resume all Muslims in Pakistan etc.. are the same?

 

BTW: If you are shooting your own foot with a gun, that is'nt a good idea, right? =)

 

This is clearly not the case, most criminality in the western world has not been religiously motivated.

Most crime in the west is done by the religious, believe it or not...

 

Our constitutions protect the rights of all individuals, not discrete groups like ethnic Norwegians Anything less cannot be called a liberal democracy. All must be treated as individuals under the law. Otherwise, you become an illiberal democracy that resembles third world nations that use ethnicity and religion as a reason to kill and torture

I agree. I think you are right. But atheism is not about what you talk about here. No one here thinks that we should have a totalitarian goverment that does not protect the rights of all individuals (...) ... We are mostly liberals. Most atheists is liberals (Not necessary left wingers, but we have social liberal values.) Most of the atheists are humanists, and support such things as the human rights. Endret 30. mai 2013 av turbonello

[IQ84]

Stories about how "God" killed every inncoent littel child in egypt because he didnt agree with the Pharaoh. Or drowned every living human on earth. Or stole everything from a man just to win a bet against the devil.

Kanskje hatet ditt bunner i at du leser Bibelen alt for bokstavelig? For å være ærlig får jeg en følelse av at du bare ramser opp noen historier du har hørt om, uten å ha lest de selv(?). La oss ta Job (det er stor uenighet om hvordan den skal tolkes, og den blir ofte referert til som Bibelens vanskeligste bok, så jeg skal ikke late som om jeg har svaret), sånn som jeg forsto den prøvde den å si:

selv de beste av oss begår synder,

Selv de beste av oss lider,

du lærer av dine tap,

Gud gir og Gud tar,

Livet går videre,

at du ikke kommer noe vei av å dvele med tap

og ikke minst at mennesker er uvitende.

[SonicDragon]

WHY THE FUCK IS EVERYONE TALKING IN ENGLISH HERE!?!?!?!

[тurbonєℓℓo]

WHY THE FUCK IS EVERYONE TALKING IN ENGLISH HERE!?!?!?!

Fordi amerikaneren jjkoggan begynte å snakke engelsk. Men det er ikke nødvendig for oss å svare på engelsk. Han forstår norsk utmerket, så det er bare å svare på innleggene hans (selv om ham måtte svare på engelsk) på norsk. Jeg for min del svarte bare for morroskyld.

[Zepticon]

Kanskje hatet ditt bunner i at du leser Bibelen alt for bokstavelig? For å være ærlig får jeg en følelse av at du bare ramser opp noen historier du har hørt om, uten å ha lest de selv(?). La oss ta Job (det er stor uenighet om hvordan den skal tolkes, og den blir ofte referert til som Bibelens vanskeligste bok, så jeg skal ikke late som om jeg har svaret), sånn som jeg forsto den prøvde den å si:

selv de beste av oss begår synder,

Selv de beste av oss lider,

du lærer av dine tap,

Gud gir og Gud tar,

Livet går videre,

at du ikke kommer noe vei av å dvele med tap

og ikke minst at mennesker er uvitende.

Ser du ikke at i det du ikke behandler bibelen som 100% sann, så sparker du bein under hele kristendommen? Bibelen er sann, fordi det står i bibelen at den er sann, og det gir ingen rom for tolkning. Bibelen er grunnsteinen til religionen, go om man skal "tolke den" så er den like relevant for kristendommen som Harry potter serien, som tar opp like mange problemer og finner svar bare man "tolker den rett".

[Zepticon]

. Atheists don't experience spirituality so you/they dont understand that religious texts are not supposed to be logical documents taken at face value

Sure we do. The only differnce is that we do not attribute it to an higher beeing, but its just a product of our own state of mind. It can be very different reasons as to why we get it, but the feeling is the same across all religions and also for atheists. So when religious people say they have a "divine" experience, its just an "experience" but they cant explain it in other ways than to be a touch of god, because they do not know enough about our mind.

 

The first time you look up on the milky way a cold clear night in a place where there are no other lights, and you get hit by the amazing feeling about how unfathomable huge the universe is. That can blow your mind, and you get a feeling that ehen described is the same as religious people can get in a church.

 

There have also been experiments with this, and if you google "the god helmet" you will see documented expriments triggering a divine experience by adding an electromagnetic field around your head.

 

Are you so ignorant to presume all Muslims in Pakistan etc.. Are the same?

I never said so, but theya re similar enough, and there are large enough amounts to have laws that make atheism a crime punishable by death.

Those who disagree are not the problem, because theya re not the ones who make laws, or kills in the streets. The "nice" muslims are irrelevant, and anyone with a sense of reason, will understand that when i say "muslims are evil", i am not talking baout the guys who are nice, but "the evil muslims".

 

This is clearly not the case, most criminality in the western world has not been religiously motivated.

Most crimes are not religiously motivated.

NO crimes are atheisticaly motivated.

 

Religion still motivate more crime than atheism.

 

Our constitutions protect the rights of all individuals, not discrete groups like ethnic Norwegians Anything less cannot be called a liberal democracy. All must be treated as individuals under the law. Otherwise, you become an illiberal democracy that resembles third world nations that use ethnicity and religion as a reason to kill and torture

I have not argued against the right of the individual.

The right as an individual does not make you immune to be classified as a high risk person.

 

It is not discrimination to pick you out for s screening at the airport when you are part of a group that have a statistical higher risk of beeing a criminal. Note that i am drawing a clear line between statistics, and prejudice. If you have documentet numbers that back up your actions, and you act proffesional, its not a violation.

 

I fully accept that young males between 18 and 25, are more prone to speeding, and i would have sence enough to understand why i am beeing checked more often than older people or females. Its a statistical fact, that i am in a high risk population, and thus it will be more effective to target me, that a girl, since i am more likely to be an offender.

But as lons as i am not treated as an offender, but an potential offender, it is okay.

[IQ84]

Ser du ikke at i det du ikke behandler bibelen som 100% sann, så sparker du bein under hele kristendommen? Bibelen er sann, fordi det står i bibelen at den er sann, og det gir ingen rom for tolkning. Bibelen er grunnsteinen til religionen, go om man skal "tolke den" så er den like relevant for kristendommen som Harry potter serien, som tar opp like mange problemer og finner svar bare man "tolker den rett".

At Bibelen er skrevet av mennesker har aldri vært en hemmelighet. Hvor i Bibelen står det at den er sann? Hvordan går det ut over en boks relevans at det er rom for tolkning? Ellers synes jeg ikke det høres så dumt ut å lese den som en leser annen litteratur.

Endret 30. mai 2013 av IQ84

[Zepticon]

At Bibelen er skrevet av mennesker har aldri vært en hemmelighet. Hvor står det at Bibelen er sann? Hvordan går det ut over en boks relevans at det er rom for tolkning? Ellers synes jeg ikke det høres så dumt ut å lese den som en leser annen litteratur.

Ja, men da er bibelen bare en bok, skrevet av folk for 2000 år siden. Hvorfor i svarteste er det noen som gidde å ta dette for god fisk da? Gud er bare omtalt i bibelen, og om dette bare er en bok skrevet av non random tullinger i en ørken for 2000 år siden, så er det jo piss fra ende til annen. Hvor mye peiling hadde folk på den tiden?

Endret 30. mai 2013 av Zepticon