Hall of wit and epicness.

[ignoramus]

I just want to know if Jesus had sweaty balls in the hot sun?
If he did, why would his dad let that happen?

[Edwardo Piet]

I just want to know if Jesus had sweaty balls in the hot sun?
If he did, why would his dad let that happen?  

Because his dad is a perv.

[Whateverist]

I think you prefer to keep the conversation on a surface level every bit as much as the fundies do. Purplundy was one theist who didn't subscribe to the supernatural or a literal afterlife and read the bible allegorically. Those are not weaknesses, they are the sign of someone with intellect and integrity who disagree with us about the significance of religion. But to throw the same old tired criticisms which apply to the fundies at him is wrong headed. He didn't insist on keeping the conversation superficial, but you are. If someone of substance is willing to talk to me about why they bother with religion, I'm happy to listen more and talk less.

[The Grand Nudger]

With that list of propositions, a persons "theism" is as allegorical as their reading of magic book. It isn't theism in any coherent or meaningful sense. Hell, -I- would be a theist if the above describes theism.

Even a common theist could tell you that.

-I think that, at least sometimes...you impart depth where there is none, and imagine that necessary elements of theism (in general or specific) can be excluded while still cogently commenting on theism.

[Edwardo Piet]

Would an interesting variation on this topic be to inquire why you know another faith is untrue ??

Epic.

[Joods]

This is epic and speaks mounds.

It breaks my heart to hear someone tell another person they are bad and need to say sorry simply for being born. This whole original sin crap is one of the top things that sicken me about religion.

[Edwardo Piet]

I agree. Original Sin is a horrible concept and it's another reason I also hate the concept of Karma especially when it's the kind where supposedly if you are born disabled it's because you're being punished for past lives where you were bad. Another fucked up concept.

[Edwardo Piet]

I guess there's no reason we can't put ourselves in the hall of wit and epicness if we genuinely think we've made a post that is epic and/or witty.

Ergo:

If I may interject . . .

. . . I would love anyone to give an example of what non-physical evidence of anything could even conceivably be in principle without being a self-contradictory concept. Doesn't the concept of evidence, by its very nature, presuppose something that can at least in principle be evident to us, and aren't we physical beings, and can't evidence only be evident to physical beings . . . physically?

I thought I'd put it here because I am sure no one else would put it here. And, regardless of how bigheaded putting one of my own posts here may seem to make me, I doubt anyone else will find this epic but I think this epic and this at least gives others the chance to ask themselves if maybe this is epic.

I don't think it's witty. So I guess it goes under 'epic'.

(Bloody hell saying that sounds arrogant. I guess I believe it's 'epic' in the sense that extremely mild redness that looks exactly like pink is 'red'. Pink is not what I'd really call red and this post is not what I'd really call epic but it's on the spectrum and it's possible that pinkness to someone would look dark enough to seem red to them even when it isn't red it's pink, or this post I just quoted would seem interesting enough to someone that they would deem it epic even if it isn't epic they're merely interested in it to enough of an extent to like it like I like it. And I guess I like it like I like my posts sometimes and maybe this more than others hence why I put it here just like I like myself sometimes and sometimes more than others hence why despite not feeling proud about anything I do experience my own Hammy equivalent of pride. Which is usually something along the lines of "I am not pride because I ultimately take no credit for my own actions but I am glad I did what I did and I feel lucky to be myself for happening to engage in this behavior successfully right now". )

I was going for substance rather than flashiness. Although I know I often come across like I'm trying to look smart rather than actually being smart, hence why people often say what I right is word salad, or 'nonsense', or 'bollocks', and why many would think I was trying too hard to be witty or flashy rather than being anything even remotely close to epic or writing anything of any real substance. Overly verbose means necessarily lacking in substance, no? (being ironic there).

I guess maybe people are right about me, and I probably feel otherwise because I'm suffering from Dunning Kruger and love the sound of my own voice and blind to my own flaws and lack of depth. And I think I'm smarter than I am.

I can imagine many people thinking "What on earth are you going on about?". And I can imagine many people thinking that it must be nonsense therefore. Or that, no, it is not that it must be nonsense and that they can't make sense of it because it doesn't make sense, but it really is nonsense regardless.

Why do I post these things.

[Cod]

I guess there's no reason we can't put ourselves in the hall of wit and epicness if we genuinely think we've made a post that is epic and/or witty.

Ergo:

If I may interject . . .

. . . I would love anyone to give an example of what non-physical evidence of anything could even conceivably be in principle without being a self-contradictory concept. Doesn't the concept of evidence, by its very nature, presuppose something that can at least in principle be evident to us, and aren't we physical beings, and can't evidence only be evident to physical beings . . . physically?

I thought I'd put it here because I am sure no one else would put it here. And, regardless of how bigheaded putting one of my own posts here may seem to make me, I doubt anyone else will find this epic but I think this epic and this at least gives others the chance to ask themselves if maybe this is epic.

I don't think it's witty. I was going for substance rather than flashiness. Although I know I often come across like I'm trying to look smart rather than actually being smart, hence why people often say what I right is word salad, or 'nonsense', or 'bollocks', and why many would think I was trying too hard to be witty or flashy rather than being anything even remotely close to epic or writing anything of any real substance. Overly verbose means necessarily lacking in substance, no? (being ironic there).

I guess maybe people are right about me, and I probably feel otherwise because I'm suffering from Dunning Kruger and love the sound of my own voice and blind to my own flaws and lack of depth. And I think I'm smarter than I am.

I can imagine many people thinking "What on earth are you going on about?". And I can imagine many people thinking that it must be nonsense therefore. Or that, no, it is not that it must be nonsense and that they can't make sense of it because it doesn't make sense, but it really is nonsense regardless.

Why do I post these things.

It's not big headed matey, it's a fairly good post and deserves recognition, if we have all missed it, why not post it yourself?  good idea. I'll be putting some of mine on

[Joods]

I dunno... I don't post my own stuff here because I think if I did it would just be me screaming for attention. Like, "Look at me! Look at my post!"