If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Reason Magazine)   RAND PAUL talks to the holy-roller voters and what is this "I don't believe Jesus would have killed anyone or condoned killing, perhaps not even in self-defense" I don't even   (reason.com) divider line 47
    More: Interesting, jesus  
•       •       •

1100 clicks; posted to Politics » on 19 Sep 2012 at 10:35 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



47 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-09-19 10:20:32 AM
Pfftt! Jesus will forgive me. I do what I want! Whateveh!!!
 
2012-09-19 10:37:22 AM
Jesus was pretty clear about his feelings towards violence (except bankers, strangely), even in self-defense...
 
2012-09-19 10:38:36 AM
Thank you Rand.
 
2012-09-19 10:38:43 AM
Good start Rand. Now think about what Jesus said about the poor and the wealthy.
 
2012-09-19 10:38:45 AM
He killed a fig tree in rage once.
 
2012-09-19 10:39:37 AM
The Christian Conservatives are not Christian.
 
2012-09-19 10:40:52 AM

Citrate1007: The Christian Conservatives are not Christian.


Or conservative.
 
2012-09-19 10:41:30 AM
"I don't believe Jesus would have killed anyone or condoned killing, perhaps not even in self-defense."

Yes, but What Would Aqua Buddha Do?

The rest of the talk is anti-abortion stuff that will appeal less to many libertarians.

Small government. Yeah!
 
2012-09-19 10:42:03 AM

qorkfiend: Jesus was pretty clear about his feelings towards violence (except bankers, strangely), even in self-defense...


Occupy Temple Street?
 
2012-09-19 10:42:20 AM
Depends which Jesus he meant.

The one that says to turn the other cheek, or the one that says "I don't bring peace, I brought a sword"?

// not like RANDPAUL really knows what the Jesus said
// like the rest of these yahoos - a verse that supports you here, another one there, eighteen Dominionist pastors' interpretations later, and suddenly, rich people are trucking camels into heaven by the thousands, with god's smiling approval
 
2012-09-19 10:42:36 AM

Citrate1007: The Christian Conservatives are not Christian.


4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-09-19 10:47:32 AM
I don't believe Jesus would have killed anyone or condoned killing, perhaps not even in self-defense

...No, he'd just wait until you died from some other cause, then send you to hell to suffer aeons of conscious torment, with no hope of release, because he's non-violent like that.
 
2012-09-19 10:49:16 AM

Dr Dreidel: Depends which Jesus he meant.

The one that says to turn the other cheek, or the one that says "I don't bring peace, I brought a sword"?

// not like RANDPAUL really knows what the Jesus said
// like the rest of these yahoos - a verse that supports you here, another one there, eighteen Dominionist pastors' interpretations later, and suddenly, rich people are trucking camels into heaven by the thousands, with god's smiling approval


Well, the turn the other cheek was interesting in the context of the time-

But given that, when the Romans came to take him to have him *executed*, and he *knew* that was what they were doing, he demanded his disciple that had drawn his weapon to sheathe it.

/A lot of the more apocalyptic messaging in the bible has signs of being added later, since, well, apocalyptic preachers were a dime a dozen in that day and age. .. And now, actually.
//Took a class on the "Jesus Seminar", which is really a very, very fascinating orginization. And a lot of them aren't necessarily theists, either. They are noooottt well liked by the Catholic Church, what with the whole trying to sift through what might have been said by others and attributed to him. Though I'm a physics grad student, it was still fascinating and fun.
///Then again that may be because I REALLY LIKE ARGUING/DEBATING....
 
2012-09-19 10:49:25 AM
And Ran Paul just flushed away any chance to win the Republican Nomination for President


.

qorkfiend: Jesus was pretty clear about his feelings towards violence (except bankers, strangely), even in self-defense...

and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.

Link  Another area with dueling Bible versuses.
 
2012-09-19 10:50:05 AM
Easy for the guy with the free-resurrection card to say.
 
2012-09-19 10:54:23 AM
The Teabagger/GOP loves invoking his name... but hate living up to the message.
 
2012-09-19 10:58:51 AM
But would he have killed in defense of his wife?
 
2012-09-19 11:04:10 AM

WizardofToast: He killed a fig tree in rage once.


To be fair, that fig tree was kind of a dick.
 
2012-09-19 11:05:49 AM

WizardofToast: He killed a fig tree in rage once.


But he never sent bears to kill kids for calling him baldheaded.
 
2012-09-19 11:10:16 AM
media.philly.com
Here, some of Rand's disciples spread the gospel to a soon-to-be-convert. And, what did "Doctor" Paul say about this violent act? If it were any more than "boys will be boys" or "accidents happen" (the second being his stock reply for the annual fatal mine collapse in Kentucky), I'd be thoroughly surprised.

Libertarians Republicans: "No, no, no, I said do as I say!!"
 
2012-09-19 11:22:51 AM
While rand says quite a few dumb things, even in this very piece, I agree with his logictrain here.


While not being a real christian, my thoughts about the death penalty stem from that whole shall not kill commandment. I would argue that we as humans should not think we are close enough to gods wisdom to play god and decide who deserves death or redepmtion.

I am pretty sure Jesus, and any other prophet would point out that revenge is a satanic desire while redemption is a more saintly pathway.

I find it strange that so few Real Christians can agree with my logic train.
 
2012-09-19 11:23:07 AM

Felgraf: Dr Dreidel: Depends which Jesus he meant.

The one that says to turn the other cheek, or the one that says "I don't bring peace, I brought a sword"?

// not like RANDPAUL really knows what the Jesus said
// like the rest of these yahoos - a verse that supports you here, another one there, eighteen Dominionist pastors' interpretations later, and suddenly, rich people are trucking camels into heaven by the thousands, with god's smiling approval

Well, the turn the other cheek was interesting in the context of the time-

But given that, when the Romans came to take him to have him *executed*, and he *knew* that was what they were doing, he demanded his disciple that had drawn his weapon to sheathe it.

/A lot of the more apocalyptic messaging in the bible has signs of being added later, since, well, apocalyptic preachers were a dime a dozen in that day and age. .. And now, actually.
//Took a class on the "Jesus Seminar", which is really a very, very fascinating orginization. And a lot of them aren't necessarily theists, either. They are noooottt well liked by the Catholic Church, what with the whole trying to sift through what might have been said by others and attributed to him. Though I'm a physics grad student, it was still fascinating and fun.
///Then again that may be because I REALLY LIKE ARGUING/DEBATING....


Kinda why the politics tab doesn't die a smothered death full of bots and looking like freeperland.

/argue that! =^]
 
2012-09-19 11:23:51 AM
jesus was not a fan of violence. or bankers. or pharisees.
 
2012-09-19 11:25:58 AM
It's true! That's why Quakerism is so rad.
 
2012-09-19 11:26:51 AM

thekilt04: my thoughts about the death penalty stem from that whole shall not kill commandment.


[citation needed]

The original Hebrew in Exodus/Deuteronomy translates to "thou shall not murder". Probably due to the myriad other places in the text where people are commanded/permitted to kill (violators of the Sabbath, adulterers, Amalekites, idol worshippers, pursuing attackers, burglars who tunnel into your house...).
 
2012-09-19 11:34:29 AM

Dr Dreidel: thekilt04: my thoughts about the death penalty stem from that whole shall not kill commandment.

[citation needed]

The original Hebrew in Exodus/Deuteronomy translates to "thou shall not murder". Probably due to the myriad other places in the text where people are commanded/permitted to kill (violators of the Sabbath, adulterers, Amalekites, idol worshippers, pursuing attackers, burglars who tunnel into your house...).


And now we all debate the true meaning and etymology of the word and concept of "murder", right? That's what we get to do for the next 3 hours?

/Jesus replaced the 10 commandments with "love one another"
//The first ten commandments were likely an amalgamation of things, like our bill of rights
///Intended to unify the scattered jewish tribes under a single agreed upon set of rules.
////Rules Jesus saw them following to the letter while ignoring the spirit
 
2012-09-19 11:35:40 AM

Dr Dreidel: thekilt04: my thoughts about the death penalty stem from that whole shall not kill commandment.

[citation needed]

The original Hebrew in Exodus/Deuteronomy translates to "thou shall not murder". Probably due to the myriad other places in the text where people are commanded/permitted to kill (violators of the Sabbath, adulterers, Amalekites, idol worshippers, pursuing attackers, burglars who tunnel into your house...).


That's the thing, I never saw the murder version until late in life. My fragile little 8 year old mind fossilized the giant 8ft poster in my grandmothers bedroom, and I only read about the kill/murder debates in highschool.

And yeah, the entire OT is filled with death, more to the point the jews were pretty good at the whole warfare thing seeing how they killed off the 'natives' in their "home"land.

Still, isn't jesus saying love is more important than pettiness; more so that the ideals of the NT overshadow the rules of th OT?
 
2012-09-19 11:41:34 AM

BeesNuts: Dr Dreidel: thekilt04: my thoughts about the death penalty stem from that whole shall not kill commandment.

[citation needed]

The original Hebrew in Exodus/Deuteronomy translates to "thou shall not murder". Probably due to the myriad other places in the text where people are commanded/permitted to kill (violators of the Sabbath, adulterers, Amalekites, idol worshippers, pursuing attackers, burglars who tunnel into your house...).

And now we all debate the true meaning and etymology of the word and concept of "murder", right? That's what we get to do for the next 3 hours?

/Jesus replaced the 10 commandments with "love one another"
//The first ten commandments were likely an amalgamation of things, like our bill of rights
///Intended to unify the scattered jewish tribes under a single agreed upon set of rules.
////Rules Jesus saw them following to the letter while ignoring the spirit


Carlin does a good job hashing out the commandments to their more consise meaning. And dropping 6 repeating commandments.

And that's a whole nother egg to crack if you try to seperate OT and NT. I mean why pay attention to leviticus or dumbrottery?
 
2012-09-19 11:48:12 AM
Jesus the man only killed fig trees.

Jesus as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, has a very high body count.

But I hope this is the start of a trend of being good Christians instead of Prosperity Gospel Christians.
 
2012-09-19 11:51:12 AM

thekilt04: Still, isn't jesus saying love is more important than pettiness; more so that the ideals of the NT overshadow the rules of th OT?


Jesus, who killed a fig tree when it wouldn't shade him enough, was above pettiness? I'll grant that most of his teachings on humanity are based on patience and love, but there are some that aren't.

And I was specifically pointing out the mistranslation of Commandment #6.

BeesNuts: And now we all debate the true meaning and etymology of the word and concept of "murder", right? That's what we get to do for the next 3 hours?


If you'd like...however, I'll simply state that even in Hebrew, there's a difference between "to murder" (the root is resh-tzadik-het) and "to kill" (root is hay-resh-gimmel). There's also "to be torn apart [usually by animals]" (tet-resh-pey) and simply "to die [the implication is 'of natural causes']" (pey-tet-resh). It's not so much a dictionary definition as it is a contextual one - and as it relates to the OP, defining that commandment as "do not kill" is nonsensical next to all the times people are permitted/commanded to kill. The only way it makes sense is "Do not extrajudicially kill - or 'murder' - someone else."

Maybe it's like the Inuit and snow - so much death, they came up with different words for the different types.
 
2012-09-19 11:55:10 AM
www.skepticmoney.com
 
2012-09-19 11:59:31 AM

Cinaed: The Teabagger/GOP loves invoking his name... but hate living up to the message.


It's difficult to simultaneously follow the teachings of Jesus and Ayn Rand.

So Jesus takes a back seat.
 
2012-09-19 12:05:43 PM

Dr Dreidel: thekilt04: Still, isn't jesus saying love is more important than pettiness; more so that the ideals of the NT overshadow the rules of th OT?

Jesus, who killed a fig tree when it wouldn't shade him enough, was above pettiness? I'll grant that most of his teachings on humanity are based on patience and love, but there are some that aren't.

And I was specifically pointing out the mistranslation of Commandment #6.

BeesNuts: And now we all debate the true meaning and etymology of the word and concept of "murder", right? That's what we get to do for the next 3 hours?

If you'd like...however, I'll simply state that even in Hebrew, there's a difference between "to murder" (the root is resh-tzadik-het) and "to kill" (root is hay-resh-gimmel). There's also "to be torn apart [usually by animals]" (tet-resh-pey) and simply "to die [the implication is 'of natural causes']" (pey-tet-resh). It's not so much a dictionary definition as it is a contextual one - and as it relates to the OP, defining that commandment as "do not kill" is nonsensical next to all the times people are permitted/commanded to kill. The only way it makes sense is "Do not extrajudicially kill - or 'murder' - someone else."

Maybe it's like the Inuit and snow - so much death, they came up with different words for the different types.


Well kid jesus sent another child to burn in hell for all eternity for brushing up against him. Then again that story didn't end up in the bible that was approved.

But same with the fig tree I read it more as a growing up literary technique, showing the jesus character growing up to learn responsibility with power etc. Like spiderman.

Regardless, I want to say the end message was that god is the one who does the killing and judging, not you.
 
2012-09-19 12:19:10 PM

Lionel Mandrake: Cinaed: The Teabagger/GOP loves invoking his name... but hate living up to the message.

It's difficult to simultaneously follow the teachings of Jesus and Ayn Rand.

So Jesus takes a back seat.


To be honest, niether side really understands ayn rands philosophy because noone reads her books. Russian writting is LONG. I would recomend Anthem before anything else.

Essentially forced charity bad. Being true to yourself is more important than feined charity or niceness. She really was trying to make a philisophical update to invs hand capitalism, that as long as you are working/producing you are naturally going to bring other people up with you- regardless of your niceness/charity to others. Her idea of selfishness is not more pie for me, but I like apple pie. Qualitative not quanitative.

That being said... who has ever actually followed jesus' ideals of charity? Even cloisteired monks had secret rooms in their monestaries to indulge in riches of wine and food.
 
2012-09-19 12:26:34 PM

thekilt04: Regardless, I want to say the end message was that god is the one who does the killing and judging, not you.


God may do the judging, and some of the killing, but he's also delegated a lot of that responsibility to the people (as in all the capital crimes listed in the OT). I'm not arguing to be pedantic here, I think there are a lot of people who forget that the OT god is not the NT god, and there had to be a lot of retconning to make the two characters even appear similar (let alone identical). The modern Christian reading of the OT is often at odds with Jewish reading (and sometimes, at odds with the actual text).

The OT god is more than OK with capital punishment (though the way the Talmud understands it, not OK with a liberal application of it).
 
2012-09-19 12:32:04 PM

Dr Dreidel: thekilt04: Regardless, I want to say the end message was that god is the one who does the killing and judging, not you.

God may do the judging, and some of the killing, but he's also delegated a lot of that responsibility to the people (as in all the capital crimes listed in the OT). I'm not arguing to be pedantic here, I think there are a lot of people who forget that the OT god is not the NT god, and there had to be a lot of retconning to make the two characters even appear similar (let alone identical). The modern Christian reading of the OT is often at odds with Jewish reading (and sometimes, at odds with the actual text).

The OT god is more than OK with capital punishment (though the way the Talmud understands it, not OK with a liberal application of it).


They are just products of their environments. :p

/gods grow up so fast!
 
2012-09-19 12:33:15 PM

thekilt04: Lionel Mandrake: Cinaed: The Teabagger/GOP loves invoking his name... but hate living up to the message.

It's difficult to simultaneously follow the teachings of Jesus and Ayn Rand.

So Jesus takes a back seat.

To be honest, niether side really understands ayn rands philosophy because noone reads her books. Russian writting is LONG. I would recomend Anthem before anything else.

Essentially forced charity bad. Being true to yourself is more important than feined charity or niceness. She really was trying to make a philisophical update to invs hand capitalism, that as long as you are working/producing you are naturally going to bring other people up with you- regardless of your niceness/charity to others. Her idea of selfishness is not more pie for me, but I like apple pie. Qualitative not quanitative.

That being said... who has ever actually followed jesus' ideals of charity? Even cloisteired monks had secret rooms in their monestaries to indulge in riches of wine and food.


I see no reason to read her books, as her philosophy is hardly new/original. That plus the fact that everyone I know - even the couple who kind of like her - have told me not to waste my time. So, yeah, I've only read short writings by/about Rand/Objectivism. But nothing I've read has led me to want to read her novels.

And whether or not people follow Jesus isn't the point. Paying lip-service to Christian teaching while actually pursuing more Randian objectives is the pinnacle of hypocrisy. Hypocrisy abounds everywhere, but I find this rather common example especially egregious.
 
2012-09-19 12:40:05 PM

Dr Dreidel: thekilt04: Regardless, I want to say the end message was that god is the one who does the killing and judging, not you.

God may do the judging, and some of the killing, but he's also delegated a lot of that responsibility to the people (as in all the capital crimes listed in the OT). I'm not arguing to be pedantic here, I think there are a lot of people who forget that the OT god is not the NT god, and there had to be a lot of retconning to make the two characters even appear similar (let alone identical). The modern Christian reading of the OT is often at odds with Jewish reading (and sometimes, at odds with the actual text).

The OT god is more than OK with capital punishment (though the way the Talmud understands it, not OK with a liberal application of it).


The whole flood the world to try and get rid off my frankinstien's monster that is humanity kinda shows how OT god rolled with the punishments. My issue is more so modern, if god can tell someone they are a holy revengencer machine for god, how do the rest of us prove it? Stop it? Are the crazies the real saints and do we give them axes to do gods work? I ponder because so many, from nat turner to mcviegh have used this reasoning. How do you support a safe society if at any moment someone will need to enact the lords rancor?

Yeah I don't have that much exp with the talmud or the torah, so this has been a refreshing perspective to look into, so I thank you good sir.

Maybe I can start a new sect devoted to a hippie interpretation of jesus.
 
2012-09-19 12:40:09 PM

thekilt04: Essentially forced charity bad. Being true to yourself is more important than feined charity or niceness. She really was trying to make a philisophical update to invs hand capitalism, that as long as you are working/producing you are naturally going to bring other people up with you- regardless of your niceness/charity to others. Her idea of selfishness is not more pie for me, but I like apple pie. Qualitative not quanitative.


She always seemed to be of two minds about it - not so much "forced charity bad" as "charity is not moral". Like it was a hobby or something. Oh, you give to the Humane Society? I play baseball.
 
2012-09-19 01:01:44 PM

RsquaredW: thekilt04: Essentially forced charity bad. Being true to yourself is more important than feined charity or niceness. She really was trying to make a philisophical update to invs hand capitalism, that as long as you are working/producing you are naturally going to bring other people up with you- regardless of your niceness/charity to others. Her idea of selfishness is not more pie for me, but I like apple pie. Qualitative not quanitative.

She always seemed to be of two minds about it - not so much "forced charity bad" as "charity is not moral". Like it was a hobby or something. Oh, you give to the Humane Society? I play baseball.


In her mind charity was a hobby, and not nessesary for everyone to do. She was trying to reinforce that anything you DO is charity because you are DOing something.

To illustrate her point, playing baseball is a form of charity. You are using your time and the benefits from your labor(income) to DO something. In DOing, you are supporting oh so many things, from companies like rawlings to community organizations like little league.
 
2012-09-19 01:10:23 PM

Lionel Mandrake: thekilt04: Lionel Mandrake: Cinaed: The Teabagger/GOP loves invoking his name... but hate living up to the message.

It's difficult to simultaneously follow the teachings of Jesus and Ayn Rand.

So Jesus takes a back seat.

To be honest, niether side really understands ayn rands philosophy because noone reads her books. Russian writting is LONG. I would recomend Anthem before anything else.

Essentially forced charity bad. Being true to yourself is more important than feined charity or niceness. She really was trying to make a philisophical update to invs hand capitalism, that as long as you are working/producing you are naturally going to bring other people up with you- regardless of your niceness/charity to others. Her idea of selfishness is not more pie for me, but I like apple pie. Qualitative not quanitative.

That being said... who has ever actually followed jesus' ideals of charity? Even cloisteired monks had secret rooms in their monestaries to indulge in riches of wine and food.

I see no reason to read her books, as her philosophy is hardly new/original. That plus the fact that everyone I know - even the couple who kind of like her - have told me not to waste my time. So, yeah, I've only read short writings by/about Rand/Objectivism. But nothing I've read has led me to want to read her novels.

And whether or not people follow Jesus isn't the point. Paying lip-service to Christian teaching while actually pursuing more Randian objectives is the pinnacle of hypocrisy. Hypocrisy abounds everywhere, but I find this rather common example especially egregious.


Read Anthem. So easy to see the lines between that story and our current debates on non issues like birf control and stemcell.

Very short too, maybe 50 pages. There is prolly a copy online you can read for free.

And my point is more so that they pay lip service to both rand and jesus, but don't follow either.

If they did follow rand in any fashion we wouldn't have corn or oil subsidies.
 
2012-09-19 01:11:34 PM

thekilt04: My issue is more so modern, if god can tell someone they are a holy revengencer machine for god, how do the rest of us prove it?


Oh, that's what you meant? Well, if Reaganauts hadn't slashed funding for mental hospitals, they'd be getting the care they need.

I had a Rabbi in HS who said (I think it was after some school shooting) that anyone who claims they know god's reason for this or that (his implication was "anyone who speaks for god who isn't repeating the actual words, context and all, from the Bible") is a dangerous charlatan. Like, you can say "God doesn't like thievery", but not "God flooded New Orleans 'cause of teh ghey".

thekilt04: Yeah I don't have that much exp with the talmud or the torah, so this has been a refreshing perspective to look into, so I thank you good sir.


Sigh. 16 years of earning XP in the "Divinity" track (Talmud and Torah), all to come to the realization that I'm an apatheist (agnostic who doesn't care if there's a god or not). What character trait boosts can I get from that?

// not an RPGer
 
2012-09-19 01:24:25 PM

Dr Dreidel: thekilt04: My issue is more so modern, if god can tell someone they are a holy revengencer machine for god, how do the rest of us prove it?

Oh, that's what you meant? Well, if Reaganauts hadn't slashed funding for mental hospitals, they'd be getting the care they need.

I had a Rabbi in HS who said (I think it was after some school shooting) that anyone who claims they know god's reason for this or that (his implication was "anyone who speaks for god who isn't repeating the actual words, context and all, from the Bible") is a dangerous charlatan. Like, you can say "God doesn't like thievery", but not "God flooded New Orleans 'cause of teh ghey".

thekilt04: Yeah I don't have that much exp with the talmud or the torah, so this has been a refreshing perspective to look into, so I thank you good sir.

Sigh. 16 years of earning XP in the "Divinity" track (Talmud and Torah), all to come to the realization that I'm an apatheist (agnostic who doesn't care if there's a god or not). What character trait boosts can I get from that?

// not an RPGer


Yeah I'm living in commiefornia and st regan the regan is prolly my most hated gov of ca for that reason.

I agree with you and your rabbi... and I think there is a walters song that goes along with that idea. That is what bothers me the most with politics, it seems everyone has god and jesus rooting them on. Bibi and dinnerjacket both seem like fanatics. Bush the lesser as well.


And don't feel too bad about the wasted years, I dumped 8 years into getting my teaching credential only to remember that I'm a misanthropic asshat who shouldn't be near children.

/I suffer -5 on my teach the test saving throw.
 
2012-09-19 01:49:05 PM

Dr Dreidel: Sigh. 16 years of earning XP in the "Divinity" track (Talmud and Torah), all to come to the realization that I'm an apatheist (agnostic who doesn't care if there's a god or not). What character trait boosts can I get from that?


Probably good for a boost on some Lawyer abilities. Mainly "wade through hairsplitting tedious written argument", I'd guess.
 
2012-09-19 01:56:26 PM

thekilt04: In her mind charity was a hobby, and not nessesary for everyone to do. She was trying to reinforce that anything you DO is charity because you are DOing something.

To illustrate her point, playing baseball is a form of charity. You are using your time and the benefits from your labor(income) to DO something. In DOing, you are supporting oh so many things, from companies like rawlings to community organizations like little league.


Just so.

It's a stupid argument, but it's more coherent than the purely selfish strawman that everyone ascribes to her.
 
2012-09-19 01:58:15 PM

Dr Dreidel: Sigh. 16 years of earning XP in the "Divinity" track (Talmud and Torah), all to come to the realization that I'm an apatheist (agnostic who doesn't care if there's a god or not). What character trait boosts can I get from that?

// not an RPGer


Future Ned: "Wait a second, this isn't a Midwestern Bible College, this is an Elite East Coast Ivory Tower!"
Future Rod: "Don't worry dad, I majored in religious studies."
Future Ned: "Whew."
Future Rod: "Comparative religious studies"

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
 
2012-09-19 02:58:57 PM
Hey nobody said you HAVE to be like Jesus. You dont have to fast for 40 days or get nailed to a cross either.
 
Displayed 47 of 47 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report