Humor in Science and Theology

[Dale (evolutionary providentialist [now deceased])]

This is the humor thread however.

[jpm (Phil McCurdy)]

And yes there is a grammatical error, but it came that way.

[beaglelady]

@St.Roymond

Demons aren’t God or gods. To use an illustration, deity is like fruit pies and demons are like custard pies; one can object to fruit pies without objecting to custard pies.

A small percentage of atheists believe in demons but how many of them believe in demon possession besides your friend? Who would do an exorcism?

@St.Roymond

I’m still laughing at this: “supports” can mean “is in favor of” – that’s why I don’t think “supports” is quite the right word here.

You should read the thread. I was clearly in the minority when I said there is no demon possession. At least two of the moderators openly expressed belief in demon possession as did most of the regular participants. That guy Caspar was a moderator. Really big into defending biblical demon possession. Even the demonized pigs that flew off the cliff.

[beaglelady]

@Dale

This is the humor thread however.

You can flag anything I write and it will disappear like magic.

[Randy]

Keeping in mind the wise reminder it wasn’t a true bird, I thought this extension of @jpm’s meme was funny, too

[Dale (evolutionary providentialist [now deceased])]

@St.Roymond

I’m still laughing at this: “supports” can mean “is in favor of” – that’s why I don’t think “supports” is quite the right word here.

It was funny, so it fit the thread well and should stay.

[T_aquaticus (The Friendly Neighborhood Atheist)]

I’m never sure where the line is for overly subversive, but thought I would give this a try:

[Kendel]

I’ll take it as a subversive commentary on forms of religious art that I don’t like. In which case I think it may be as meaningful as the original.

[paleomalacologist (David Campbell)]

“Early bird” is also in the name of Eoornis; it got the worm even though not everyone got the jokes. Eoörnis pterovelox gobiensis - Wikipedia gives a brief summary, and copies of the original monograph are not hard to find online; a thorough search through my papers might turn up a copy, if it hasn’t been lost.

[LM77 (Liam Maguire)]

@T_aquaticus

I’m never sure where the line is for overly subversive

@Kendel

I’ll take it as a subversive commentary on forms of religious art that I don’t like. In which case I think it may be as meaningful as the original.

I love how the angel on viewer’s right is all like “Check out this guy!”

[Terry_Sampson]

• “Classmates was dedicated in 2006 on the campus of the University of the Incarnate Word. Sculptor Paul Tadlock had no idea that a frenzy over the piece was to follow. When the sculpture was revealed, some students and faculty laughed, some were angered, and nearly all gravitated toward the same nickname, deeming it the “mansplaining” sculpture.”[https://www.atlasobscura.com/places/classmates

[T_aquaticus (The Friendly Neighborhood Atheist)]

@Terry_Sampson

and nearly all gravitated toward the same nickname, deeming it the “mansplaining” sculpture.

By “mansplaining”, they mean the standing figure is helping the sitting figure understand a concept that is too difficult for the sitting figure.

[Terry_Sampson]

Thanks for reminding me that I forgot to put in the explanatory quotation marks.

[heymike3]

@LM77

“Check out this guy!”

“Like that, he will come back again.”

By the way, that was Sproul’s pithy rejection of full preterism

[jpm (Phil McCurdy)]

@T_aquaticus

By “mansplaining”, they mean the standing figure is helping the sitting figure understand a concept that is too difficult for the sitting figure.

That sounds a little condescending. That means talking down to someone.

[Paraleptopecten (Timothy Campbell)]

Better have thick walls on the pressure cooker for this one:

xkcd: Cuisine

[jpm (Phil McCurdy)]

[Kendel]

[jpm (Phil McCurdy)]

How true. Perhaps even if you add the oft used naughty addendum of “in bed.”