[20:17] <Volkard> Hello
[20:17] <RoyK> aften
[20:18] <Volkard> how far east did the Vikings go?
[20:18] <RoyK> greenland and the current US
[20:18] <RoyK> oh
[20:18] <RoyK> east
[20:18] <RoyK> down to turkey
[20:18] <Volkard> I know they reached the Volga
[20:18] <Volkard> but anything further?
[20:19] <RoyK> not sure
[20:19] <Volkard> do you think of the Rus as Vikings per se?
[20:19] <RoyK> guess they met
[20:19] <RoyK> but different folks
[20:20] <RoyK> the vikings were a lot simpler in terms of culture than most of the other parts of europe - probably because it was fewer people up here
[20:20] <RoyK> well, at least that's we now
[20:21] <RoyK> erm
[20:21] <RoyK> know
[20:21] <Volkard> what about south?
[20:21] <RoyK> no youtube videos from the viking times
[20:21] <Volkard> i know they got to jerusalem
[20:21] <RoyK> africa
[20:21] <Volkard> which was popular destination back then
[20:21] <RoyK> afrika
[20:21] <RoyK> they went to they nothern afrikan states
[20:22] <Volkard> which ones?
[20:22] <RoyK> most of them, I guess
[20:23] <Volkard> do you call the Normas vikings?
[20:23] <Volkard> Normans*
[20:24] <Volkard> I heard this argument a lot of time
[20:24] <Volkard> saying taht because Rollo landed in normandy and forced the first creation of semi autonomous territory in normandy, therefore later normans should be thought as Vikings.
[20:32] <RoyK> Volkard: Gangerolv was his name
[20:33] <RoyK> Volkard: Göngu-Hrólfr
[20:34] <Volkard> yeah
[20:34] <RoyK> Volkard: he was forced to leave Norway after slaughtering a few people
[20:35] <RoyK> Volkard: according to what I've heard, he was given land in Normandie as a barrier between Belgium and France
[20:35] <RoyK> Volkard: since both were friendly towards the norseman, but fought against oneanother
[20:35] <RoyK> Volkard: this I've heard from a friend that studied in france
[20:35] <Volkard> I see.
[20:36] <Volkard> I still wonder if Normans can really be considered "Vikings"?
[20:36] <RoyK> Volkard: the norse books say he grabbed land there, but the french version is different
[20:36] <Volkard> I have always leant to 'no'
[20:36] <RoyK> Volkard: the word "viking" means "fra viken" that is "from the fjord of oslo"
[20:38] <Volkard> http://www.ling.upenn.edu/%7Ekurisuto/germanic/oi_cleasbyvigfusson_about.html
[20:38] <Volkard> "víkingr" is described as such in Cleasby and Vigfusson's An Icelandic-English Dictionary:
[20:38] <Volkard> víkingr, m. a freebooter, rover, pirate, but in the Icel. Sagas used specially of the bands of Scandinavian warriors, who during the 9th and 10th centuries harried the British Isles and Normandy...The word 'víkingr' is thought to be derived from vík (a bay), from their haunting the bays, creeks, and fjords... "
[20:39] <RoyK> yes
[20:39] <RoyK> 'viken'
[20:39] <RoyK> literally 'the bay'
[20:39] <RoyK> is the old name of the oslo fjord
[20:40] <Volkard> so only 9th to 10th centuries
[20:41] <Volkard> basically only when they were bands of pirates
[20:41] <Volkard> before the kingdoms
[20:41] <RoyK> currently reading this: Eddukvæði
[20:41] <RoyK> Volkard: there were kingdoms long before that
[20:42] <Volkard> before 1085?
[20:42] <RoyK> in norse times, perhaps around 700-800
[20:43] <RoyK> it started when they moved to farmers
[20:43] <RoyK> hunters didn't stick together
[20:43] <Volkard> alright
[20:44] <Volkard> The Vigfusson definition says its basically untill the 10th century though
[20:44] <Volkard> so the expansions afterwards cannot be considered "vikings"
[20:44] <RoyK> according to norwegian history, the formal end of the viking are was 1030
[20:45] <RoyK> which of course is a fact that should be taken with a few pints of salt
[20:45] <RoyK> as with all sorts of history ;)
[20:45] <Volkard> for the british, the end of the viking age is Stamford Bridge
[20:45] <Volkard> for the Danes its Canute the Holy's death
[20:46] <RoyK> when was that?
[20:46] <Volkard> Canute?
[20:46] <Volkard> 1085
[20:46] <RoyK> ok
[20:46] <Volkard> stamford bridge?
[20:46] <Volkard> 1066
[20:47] <RoyK> damn - how good isn't it to listen to the Brown Album (Primus) today
[20:48] <Volkard> primus!
[20:48] <RoyK> :)
[20:48] <Volkard> you know they reached as far as America
[20:48] <Volkard> and I bet you heard off the sagas.
[20:48] <Volkard> of*
[20:49] <RoyK> what sagas?
[20:49] <Volkard> but did you know that native americans had oral traditions and tales about the vikings?
[20:49] <RoyK> doesn't surprise me
[20:49] <RoyK> recently, there was found rests of cannabis in an old viking ship that had been to the americas
[20:50] <Volkard> interesting
[20:50] <RoyK> a small lump of 1kg or so
[20:50] <RoyK> guess they liked it ;)
[20:50] <Volkard> thats not small
[20:50] <RoyK> well, if you're travelling far, why not bring some more?
[20:51] <Volkard> sure
[20:51] <RoyK> primus makes me rest today :P
[20:52] <RoyK> norwegian politics is at its depth
[20:52] <RoyK> so it's nice to listen to good music
[20:53] <Volkard> so when did nobility start in norway?
[20:53] <Volkard> kingdoms and so on
[20:53] <RoyK> it was that way all the way afaik
[20:53] <Volkard> dont think so
[20:54] <Volkard> in sweden it only started in 1280
[20:54] <RoyK> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olav_den_hellige
[20:54] <RoyK> after that, there was peace, or so they say, but there was a lot of fighting going on for long
[20:55] <RoyK> and then there was the black death where the danes took over
[20:56] <Volkard> ok
[20:56] <Volkard> I found a source saying viking ended in Norway in 870
[20:56] <Volkard> after the reign of King Halfdan
[20:56] <RoyK> what source?
[20:56] <RoyK> seems very strange
[20:56] <Volkard> http://www.vikinganswerlady.com/timeline.shtml
[20:57] <RoyK> heh
[20:57] <RoyK> a lot happened after that
[20:58] <Volkard> right
[20:58] <Volkard> but this is before the formation of the Sacndinavian kingdoms
[20:58] <Volkard> the "pagan" times
[20:58] <RoyK> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heimskringla
[20:58] <RoyK> read that
[20:59] <Volkard> I read it
[20:59] <RoyK> you can probably find it translated
[20:59] <Volkard> and Egil's Saga
[20:59] <Volkard> by Snorri
[20:59] <RoyK> that's rather vicious ;)
[21:00] <RoyK> egil's, I mean
[21:00] <Volkard> I think its just theoretical
[21:00] <Volkard> Egil's saga
[21:00] <RoyK> well, might be
[21:00] <RoyK> but it doesn't seem that way
[21:01] <RoyK> people didn't write theoretical stories in those days
[21:01] <RoyK> or perhaps they did...
[21:01] <Volkard> theres some controversy I remember
[21:01] <RoyK> like the bible...
[21:01] <Volkard> some are saying its not Snorri's work
[21:01] <Volkard> yeah
[21:01] <RoyK> there are some controversy over the bible, last I heard
[21:01] <Volkard> theres no source to confirm it basically
[21:01] <Volkard> haha yea
[21:02] <RoyK> Volkard, this is an interesting conversation ;)
[21:03] <Volkard> yeah
[21:04] <Volkard> most of the stuff we know comes from crhsitian times
[21:04] <Volkard> like 13th century
[21:04] <Volkard> very few sources that are pre-christian
[21:04] <Volkard> and most of it is pictorial depictions and picture stones
[21:05] <Volkard> like the Gosforth stone
[21:05] <RoyK> have you read Hávamál?
[21:05] <Volkard> Hymiskviða ?
[21:05] <RoyK> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C3%A1vam%C3%A1l
[21:06] <Volkard> yeah
[21:07] <Volkard> http://www.vikinganswerlady.com
[21:07] <Volkard> this website is really great
[21:07] <RoyK> Volkard: are you English?
[21:08] <Volkard> no
[21:08] <Volkard> Emirtai
[21:08] <RoyK> ok :(
[21:08] <Volkard> Emirati
[21:08] <RoyK> ok :)
[21:08] <RoyK> sorry - wrong parantese there
[21:08] <Volkard> thats fine :)
[21:09] <RoyK> http://www.pitt.edu/~dash/havamal.html
[21:09] <Volkard> Vikings and scandinavian history is just a hobby of mine
[21:09] <RoyK> hehe
[21:09] <Volkard> my specialities are Asian History
[21:09] <RoyK> cool :)
[21:09] <RoyK> are you a historian?
[21:10] <Volkard> yes
[21:10] <RoyK> ok
[21:10] <Volkard> my expertise particularly is the big 3
[21:10] <Volkard> China, Japan, Korea
[21:10] <RoyK> ok
[21:11] <RoyK> it'd be rather interesting sharing a day with you, learning
[21:11] <RoyK> but I'd like to divert a bit
[21:11] <Volkard> well, if you're ever in dubai then you are most welcome :)
[21:11] <RoyK> in the emirates, they hate gays, right?
[21:11] <Volkard> yeah
[21:12] <RoyK> do you?
[21:12] <Volkard> I dont.
[21:13] <RoyK> that's good
[21:13] <Volkard> I helped some foreigners who ran into troubles with the police to get away from criminal prosecution
[21:14] <RoyK> I'm not particularly gay myself, just a little, but I must say I have a strong hathred for regimes like yours
[21:29] <Malinux> isn't Volkard the dude who shows up here now and then? :)
[21:30] <Malinux> people who really hate gay-people, often do so because they depress (<<-- is that the right word?) their own gay-feelings
[21:32] <Volkard> A lot to do with traditions Malinux
[21:32] <Malinux> traditions of depressing their gay-feelings?
[21:32] <Volkard> Traditions against gays
[21:32] <Volkard> religious laws
[21:33] <Malinux> religous noncense
[21:33] <Malinux> laws with no logical reason
[21:33] <Malinux> like norway when homosexuality was phorbited by law until 1972
[21:53] <RoyK> Volkard: really, if you don't like our way of allowing people to fuck whoeever they want to fuck, you're not welcome here
[21:54] <Volkard> I dont have a problem with it.
[21:55] <Volkard> I already told you that I helped lots of people who came into danger because of it.,
[21:55] <RoyK> Volkard: if your daughter or son came out to you and told you she or he was gay, would that be ok?
[21:57] <RoyK> (silence)
[22:01] <Volkard> I dont havfe authority to judge them
[22:02] <Volkard> they need to be strong.
[22:02] <RoyK> whom?
[22:03] <Volkard> as long as he does it in the privacy of his house I will be fine with it
[22:03] <Volkard> you need to understand that this is very foreign to me
[22:04] <RoyK> Volkard: homosexuality appears everywere - for animals of all kind - also higher reformed animal like humans
[22:04] <Volkard> I was not tested like this, so I cant demand othe rpeople to act like heroes.
[22:05] <RoyK> don't be heros
[22:05] <Malinux> so it's okey he is different, as long as you don't have to see it?
[22:05] <RoyK> just be people
[22:05] <RoyK> just accept people
[22:05] <Volkard> Malinux, here its dangerous if its done publicly.
[22:06] <Malinux> how do you do homosexality in public?
[22:06] <Malinux> do you hetereosexuality in public  anyway?
[22:06] <RoyK> Volkard: but why don't you accept it?
[22:06] <Volkard> you have to understand that homosexuality is one of the more extreme violation, and there is no religious permission.
[22:07] <RoyK> Volkard: would you like to try it? it's quite nice? :D
[22:07] <Malinux> the question is actually as simple as: Do you, or do you not accept if your son or daughter is gay?
[22:07] <Volkard> essentially its like any other religious violation.
[22:07] <Malinux> there is two possible answers
[22:07] <Malinux> yes, or no
[22:07] <Volkard> what you mean by accept?
[22:07] <Volkard> its not my place to accept it.
[22:07] <RoyK> no, and you get out rather quickly. yes, if you want to talk about it
[22:08] <Volkard> he will still be my son of course if thats what you mean
[22:08] <Malinux> this is the defination of acceptence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acceptance
[22:09] <Malinux> Volkard: no, that's not what I meant. The question was very simple, but you avoid answering it
[22:09] <Malinux> by a yes or a no
[22:09] <Malinux> By the "answers" so far, I assume you want to answer no?
[22:09] <Volkard> yes I accept it of course.
[22:10] <Volkard> I dont think you understood what I said.
[22:10] <RoyK> dr0: ping
[22:11] <Malinux> maybe I didn't
[22:11] <Volkard> I was not tested personally like that, I did not have those feelings and the conflict with religious demands. so I cannot pass judgement
[22:11] <Malinux> so you are controlled by relgion?
[22:11] <Malinux> religion
[22:11] <Volkard> we have free choice.
[22:11] <Malinux> really?
[22:11] <Malinux> nobody has free choices :)
[22:12] <Volkard> you can choose to observe the commandments or not to. and our scriptures emphasize the need to overcome our urges.
[22:12] <Malinux> If people had free choices, people could choose not to be gay
[22:12] <Malinux> that would be easier in a contry like yours
[22:12] <Volkard> I mean free choice about their decisions, to observe or not to observe.
[22:13] <RoyK> Volkard: I like men - would you want to meet?
[22:13] <Volkard> some people take this challenge and try to overcome their urges.
[22:14] <Volkard> RoyK, I dont have prejudices.
[22:14] <RoyK> that's good
[22:14] <RoyK> lots of people in this channel are gay or otherwise
[22:15] <Malinux> Volkard: challenge to overcome urges like homosexual feelings?
[22:15] <Volkard> our religion says that if your urges overcome you, then you should go to a foreign place where nobody knows you and do whatever your heart desire
[22:15] <Malinux> That's impossible in the long term
[22:16] <Volkard> Malinux, i dont know. this is very foreign to me and I cannot offer insights.
[22:16] <Volkard> we all have issues with urges.
[22:16] <RoyK> Volkard: no, there is no such thing as anti-homosexuality in islam - I've read the Koran
[22:16] <Malinux> yes, but if the urges is not dangerous or harm anyone, why do you need to do anything with them?
[22:16] <Volkard> everyday I have to perform certain rituals. its not easy
[22:16] <Malinux> you don't need to?
[22:16] <Volkard> I have an urge to stay in bed
[22:17] <Volkard> but I overcome this urge every morning like a lion
[22:17] <Malinux> that's not the same
[22:17] <RoyK> Volkard: there are interpretations of the bible and the koran that say that gay stuff is bad, but only interpretations
[22:17] <RoyK> Volkard: there's no single word about it in either book
[22:18] <Volkard> Its not true.
[22:18] <RoyK> quote that for me, please
[22:18] <Volkard> The prohibition against homosexuality is absolute and it doesnt leave any room for exceptions
[22:18] <Malinux> there is a lot of other things the bible (and the koran?) says you shouldn't do that most religous don't concern about
[22:18] <RoyK> quote that for me, please
[22:18] <RoyK> Volkard: find the phrase
[22:19] <RoyK> Volkard: in your Q'uran
[22:19] <Volkard> why is this turning to a religious argument?
[22:19] <Volkard> are you muslim scholar?
[22:19] <RoyK> Volkard: you were the one starting it
[22:19] <RoyK> Volkard: I've read the damn book
[22:20] <Malinux> I think you turned this into religion in the first place Volkard
[22:20] <Malinux> why can't we just get a quote from the Koran then?
[22:20] <RoyK> Volkard: there are some phrases back in the early parts stating you should not seed what can't be seeded or so
[22:21] <RoyK> Volkard: but that's about it
[22:21] <Volkard> there is reference to these acts as indecent and blasphemous all throughout the thing
[22:21] <RoyK> Volkard: there's nothing about not respecting love
[22:21] <RoyK> Volkard: {{citation-needed}}
[22:22] <RoyK> Volkard: and my I ask, how can it be blasphemous to love someone?
[22:23] <Malinux> because religion is not logical I guess
[22:23] <RoyK> then. just. fuck. religiin.
[22:23] <Volkard> http://quran.com/7/80-84
[22:24] <RoyK> Volkard: heh - that doesn't say nawt about gays
[22:25] <RoyK> guess that's the pass they have in the bible about sodoma
[22:25] <Volkard> yes
[22:25] <Volkard> abog sodom
[22:25] <Volkard> about
[22:25] <Volkard> the people of Lot
[22:26] <RoyK> which is bullshit
[22:26] <Volkard> the word homosexuality in arabic comes from this
[22:26] <RoyK> a 6000yo text
[22:26] <Volkard> also for homosexuals
[22:26] <RoyK> want to take that as your rule?
[22:26] <RoyK> times have changed, man
[22:26] <RoyK> we're not in those days anymore
[22:27] <Volkard> this is not your business
[22:27] <RoyK> it is
[22:27] <Volkard> you dont believe in freedom of religion?
[22:27] <RoyK> sure
[22:27] <RoyK> but freedom of religion isn't freedom of keeping people down
[22:27] <RoyK> so no
[22:28] <Volkard> how do I keep you down exactly?
[22:28] <RoyK> like you just tried to
[22:28] <Volkard> Im not tryign to keep you down.
[22:28] <RoyK> a phrase from the q'uran which says nothing
[22:28] <RoyK> that phrase is ZIL
[22:28] <RoyK> it's just buggus
[22:29] <Volkard> this is one source for the prohibition against homosexuality in islamic law
[22:29]  * RoyK rubs Volkard's chest slowly
[22:29] <Volkard> buggus?
[22:30] <RoyK> Volkard: you have to understnad, you have to learn the Q'ran first
[22:30] <Dry_Lips> lads, there's ##religion for religous talk... Remember that #ubuntu-no is a logged channel
[22:30] <Volkard> RoyK, Are you serious?
[22:30] <RoyK> Volkard: then start to try to understand what it's about
[22:30] <Volkard> RoyK, You do realize that I studied it in more than a theoretical way?
[22:31] <RoyK> Volkard: when you're done, you probably won't even chat
[22:31] <RoyK> Dry_Lips: jada, men er litt gøy å snakke her også
[22:31] <Volkard> You're trying to convince me that my religion doesnt say what it says
[22:31] <Volkard> its kind ofsilly.
[22:32] <Volkard> in fact, this is one of three reasons (only three) for which person can be executed.
[22:32] <RoyK> Volkard: I'm not religious, but I've read a lot. You're trying to tell me that homosexuality is forbidden by the god(s), which I find rather amusing
[22:34] <Volkard> RoyK, there are situations when you're required to give your own life, so its not unreasonable to be expected to resist urges, even if this urge is characteristic.
[22:34] <RoyK> Volkard: I've been kind to you, and I understand you're not very fond of the regime, but I don't like the way you talk about Islam's way against the gays
[22:35] <Volkard> RoyK, sometimes accepting Islam requires condemning yourself to misery and suffering in your life, but you are considered a hero.
[22:35] <RoyK> Islam has as little against gays as Christianity has - it's just 6000yo stories
[22:36] <RoyK> in a time where there were too many men, because of wars
[22:36] <RoyK> it's that simple
[22:36] <RoyK> they needed men to fertilise the women
[22:36] <RoyK> so homosexiality was forbidden
[22:36] <Volkard> you are trying to pass reformist islamic movment as the benchmark for islam
[22:36] <Volkard> this is just not the case.
[22:37] <RoyK> I like people to be open
[22:37] <RoyK> I don't put pressure on you
[22:37] <Volkard> thats fine, but reality doesnt come in necessarily likeable flavours
[22:38] <RoyK> neither does religious thoughts
[22:38] <Volkard> I'm just being honest with you about rulings and beliefs on this issue.
[22:39] <Volkard> the really is no running away from it, it doesnt allow homosexuality
[22:39] <RoyK> I just wonder how people can beleive that 6k yo scipts can make their days better
[22:40] <RoyK> Volkard: homosexuality has been normal at all times
[22:40] <RoyK> Volkard: check the history books
[22:40] <Volkard> RoyK, these are things that people value, and any decision about values is irrational
[22:41] <Malinux> the history books is written by stupid people who says the earth is older than 6000 years. How stupid isn't that?
[22:41] <Volkard> there is no rational moral theory, and there is no rational beauty theory
[22:41] <Volkard> and there is no rational political program
[22:41] <Volkard> and there is no rational belief.
[22:41] <RoyK> Volkard: are your history books less than 6000 years old?
[22:41] <Volkard> decisions about values dont express knowlege but rather they represent the commitments a person takes upon themselves.
[22:42] <RoyK> Volkard: are your history books less than 6000 years old?
[22:42] <Volkard> only science is rational, and thats why its indifferent to values and morality and doesnt forces people to do anything
[22:42] <RoyK> Volkard: are your history books less than 6000 years old?
[22:42] <Volkard> yes
[22:42] <Volkard> its not a history book.
[22:42] <RoyK> something like 5000?
[22:42] <Volkard> if you want to learn history goto textbooks
[22:43] <RoyK> or something like 700?
[22:43] <Malinux> it can't be more than 6000years anyway, as nothing existed before that
[22:43] <RoyK> tror noen bør kaste ut den fyren her
[22:43] <Malinux> tja
[22:44] <RoyK> Volkard: this is quite off-topic at this channel
[22:45] <RoyK> Volkard: we value a good chat, unless it's very, very off-topic and very little intellectual
[22:45] <Volkard> ok.
[22:48] <Volkard> historically the entire body of work spans over a great period of time.
[22:49] <Volkard> Malinux, Like I said; its not a historical book, if you want to learn about the world you shouldnt turn to scripture.
[22:50] <Volkard> Islam doesnt give you knowledge about nature or about men, it just sets worshipping demands.
[22:50] <Volkard> do you have mandatory military service in norway?
[22:51] <Volkard> its like when a soldier gets drafting papers.
[22:51] <Volkard> the drafting document doesnt give him any info about the military or about the war, it just calls him on duty of service.
[22:57] <Volkard> in fact we have very good records and evidence of things happening more than 6000 years ago, and we know of a lot of thousands of years of human existance in pre-historical times and of millions of years of existence on earth before men and even longer periods.
[22:58] <Volkard> but the whole concept of "the age of the world" is really tough because of the conceptual difficulties of ideas like "time" and "beginning of the universe".
[23:08] <RoyK> Volkard: thing is, the q'uran and the bible are both old, they are historical books, they are not about the current culture. to interpret those within the current culture, you either have to be very smart or very dumb, mostly the second happens
[23:09] <RoyK> Volkard: time is changing people, and struggling to people and culture as what it were 6000 or even 800 years ago is devastating
[23:12] <Volkard> this is a very serious point.
[23:12] <Volkard> this is not a religious question but meta-religious
[23:13] <Volkard> it could be indeed the beginning of the end.
[23:14] <Volkard> but I could imagine myself a situation when there is a crisis, an unresolvable conflic between the formal norm of religious law and between life necessities.
[23:14] <Volkard> this is not because religion is short-handed, but its because of funcitonal incompetency with historical reasons.
[23:15] <RoyK> Volkard: are you truely religious?
[23:16] <Volkard> in some cases it could be ok to consciously violate a theoretical and pedagogical law instead of saving ourselves hypocritically.
[23:16] <Volkard> yes RoyK.
[23:17] <RoyK> Volkard: so, do you beleive the world was created 6000 years ago?
[23:17] <Volkard> I hmm
[23:17] <Volkard> I think I already explained that.
[23:17] <RoyK> no
[23:18] <Volkard> i do not
[23:18] <Volkard> the scriptures are not physics or history textbooks
[23:19] <Volkard> history, chemistry or physics textbook give you information about the world
[23:19] <RoyK> and it shows us what?
[23:20] <Volkard> physics, history, chemistry ... these are mundane things, like eating and sleeping. its not holy.
[23:20] <RoyK> ir's the same thing
[23:20] <Volkard> RoyK, it tells you how to worship
[23:20] <RoyK> it's the same thing
[23:21] <Volkard> its all about your status with god and your duties to worship him
[23:21] <RoyK> I worship nature
[23:21] <Volkard> not about knowledge about the world, nature or history
[23:21] <Volkard> RoyK, that is fine.
[23:21] <Volkard> to each their own.
[23:22] <Volkard> knowing when and how the world came to be -- that is only important from scientific research perspective, its completely irrelevant to religion and faith.
[23:22] <Volkard> your status with god and your duties towards him arent dependent by it
[23:23] <Volkard> whether the world is old or new, whether it was created or not and when this happend and how, and the historicity of all of it.. all of these things are human concerns, interest of knowledge and understanding, stuff science deals with, religion and faith, the quran and the duties, have other concerns - holy concerns.
[23:24] <Volkard> its really ridiculous to think that scripture was handed to teach you some physics or history lesson
[23:24] <Volkard> and god came down to earth to act as a science professor
[23:26] <Volkard> (the scriptures are much better than science, histoiry, astronomy, chemistry or physics lectures)
[23:55] <Volkard> I hope that clears things up