Joe Rogan isnt sold on the Bing Bang theory finds Jesus resurrection more plausible

It's off topic. Why don't you start a thread on that with an actual premise and I'll be glad to chime in.
It is absolutely the topic. We are discussing faith versus evidence in regards to religion/athiesm. You said:
Faith and reason has always been the motto and no one has ever taught people to have faith without reason
So I’m asking you to show me the reasoning behind a donkey talking as described in the Holy, Perfect, infallible and divinely inspired word of God (numbers 22).
 
It is absolutely the topic. We are discussing faith versus evidence in regards to religion/athiesm. You said:

So I’m asking you to show me the reasoning behind a donkey talking as described in the Holy, Perfect, infallible and divinely inspired word of God (numbers 22).
Well, are you beginning with a premise of insisting on the historicity of the entire Old Testament?? Or are you going with the more commonly held notion that the Old testament is semi-historical, highly stylized and crafted for the authors intended theological purposes?

Like I said, start an interesting thread with an interesting premise and I'll chime in.
 
Its called having an open mind and he isn't so big on himself that he cant admit hes wrong and change. Not that hes right here in either case but just to have this quality is respectable to me.

There are so many more boneheaded stubborn AF idiots out there who aren't willing to do this.


Ive been watching more JRE lately, sporadically but more than usual. Hes' been having a lot of Christian evangelists and supporters on lately. He's likely going to become born again some time soon.
I don't care too much, but let's call a spade a spade

Joe Rogan is doing this for money, he's appealing to the audience that's going to get him the max dollars.
 
It is absolutely the topic. We are discussing faith versus evidence in regards to religion/athiesm. You said:

So I’m asking you to show me the reasoning behind a donkey talking as described in the Holy, Perfect, infallible and divinely inspired word of God (numbers 22).
Why would you read the bible ? There is nothing about male vaginas and internet pornography in there.
 
Yup, prosperity gospel is evil. I posted videos of her crazy ass on here a while back. Not sure what this has to do with what I've said though

She's the head of the White House Faith Office. An official part of the administration. Legit. Certified. Stamped.

How do you feel about that.
 


Lol Jesus would be embarrassed


bro wuld definitely be flippin' tables rn

throwing-things-throwing-a-fit.gif
 
This is a perfect example of taking what someone says out of context in order to argue whatever it is you're trying to argue. He's just having a conversation. Thats what Rogan does. Hes not even making a specific argument about anything

And absolute complete LOL at anyone saying hes just "catering to his audience". Like finances are Rogans motivation or something, on top of which he has one of the largest podcast audience in existence, with a pretty even political split.


  • Political diversity is evident among listeners, with 35% identify as independents, 32% as Republicans, and 27% as Democrats.

But the important thing is to just make up an assumption about a topic you never actually took the time to learn.
 
This is a perfect example of taking what someone says out of context in order to argue whatever it is you're trying to argue. He's just having a conversation. Thats what Rogan does. Hes not even making a specific argument about anything

And absolute complete LOL at anyone saying hes just "catering to his audience". Like finances are Rogans motivation or something, on top of which he has one of the largest podcast audience in existence, with a pretty even political split.




But the important thing is to just make up an assumption about a topic you never actually took the time to learn.

"However, 54% of weekly JRE listeners leaned toward Donald Trump in the 2024 US presidential election in a late October poll; just 26% favored Kamala Harris. (Rogan endorsed Trump on the eve of the election.)"

from your link. not to nitpick, but that doesnt seem like a balanced audience if over 2x the number of people vote for one candidate rather than the other.

in the end though, Rogan's opinion shouldnt influence anyone. the guy is a grey blob, a fence sitter, a wishy washy wet noodle. he changes his opinions according to who he is interviewing, generally.
 
"However, 54% of weekly JRE listeners leaned toward Donald Trump in the 2024 US presidential election in a late October poll; just 26% favored Kamala Harris. (Rogan endorsed Trump on the eve of the election.)"

from your link. not to nitpick, but that doesnt seem like a balanced audience if over 2x the number of people vote for one candidate rather than the other.

in the end though, Rogan's opinion shouldnt influence anyone. the guy is a grey blob, a fence sitter, a wishy washy wet noodle. he changes his opinions according to who he is interviewing, generally.
But he does have influence, especially to the impressionable "bros".
 
in the end though, Rogan's opinion shouldnt influence anyone. the guy is a grey blob, a fence sitter, a wishy washy wet noodle. he changes his opinions according to who he is interviewing, generally.
Or he's a grifter who's on the side of wherever the money is or whatever let's him sell you something
 
She's the head of the White House Faith Office. An official part of the administration. Legit. Certified. Stamped.

How do you feel about that.
It's sad and kinda funny i guess but I don't get my salvation from politicians so I don't care.
 
This is a perfect example of taking what someone says out of context in order to argue whatever it is you're trying to argue. He's just having a conversation. Thats what Rogan does. Hes not even making a specific argument about anything

And absolute complete LOL at anyone saying hes just "catering to his audience". Like finances are Rogans motivation or something, on top of which he has one of the largest podcast audience in existence, with a pretty even political split.




But the important thing is to just make up an assumption about a topic you never actually took the time to learn.

Any idea why he completely ignored Wladimir Klitschko's request to come on the pod and correct the misinformation and propaganda that he felt was coming from some of the guests or Rogan himself?

Rogan not only didn't bring him on the pod (it's been months), he completely ignored it as if it didn't exist, no rebuttal, no comment, nothing.

The same guy who was talking about litter boxes in classrooms somehow didn't know a famous world class elite boxer was directly reaching him out to him on an important current events topic lol.

Hes a pussy and he definitely caters to his audience. He'll always blow where the wind is going, and he's very careful to not disrupt the momentum. In LA, nonstop talk of DMT and the power of cannabis. In Texas, keep everything hush hush and don't bring up how Texas is one of the most ridiculous states when it comes to state legalization (since hes now butt buddies with Abott and Paxton)

The new Rush Limbaugh.
 
Back
Top