NBA: Team Religion vs Basketball Exegesis

[DMC]

both extremes sound dumb as fucc, srs.

Which extremes? Stupid fake ass coon.

[DMC]

DMC is a typical guy of slightly above average IQ who thinks he's smarter than he actually is, tbh... I'm not surprised he's using words incorrectly.

"believe"

lol.. refs are cheating us... whimper whimper wah wah wwwwwwwwwwwwaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh

[DMC]

Never realized "basketball" was a book. Is it on iTunes?

[spurraider21]

^was that the book your thread le was referring to?

[DMC]

^was that the book your thread le was referring to?

I see you also lack capacity for abstract thought. In court you're going to need to be able to not only grasp abstract concepts quickly, but apply them as well.

Since the le started off "Team Religion" it was fitting to use "Basketball Exegesis" as the alternative. There's no team religion in real life, since religion is the worship of a deity. However there is the abstract concept of team worship, and likewise the abstract concept of understanding the game of basketball without restraint from team affiliation and "belief", as it were. The same is true for the Bible. There is the religious insistence that the Bible is 100% factual, and that's fueled by fervent desire to believe not only in the God of the bible, but in the goodness and righteousness and omniscience of the same. Then you have the exegesis of the book itself, of the authors of the book and of the historicity of the characters within. That can be discussed without need for the caulk of faith to fill the logical seams in the carpentry of the books themselves. Often you find that the first group cannot have a rational conversation with the 2nd group, but can instead find support in like minded people who get together and bolster the notion that their beliefs are based in reality. Spurs fans often think their team is unbeatable unless someone is cheating them, because they are Spurs fans. If you try to discuss basketball itself, there's often a deer in headlights look to be had, like Jars Mesh Set... leaning on obscure logical fallacy accusations as an attempt to escape the sandwich he's about to eat in these here Western Conference Finals.

[spurraider21]

i just asked a question. i wasn't making any implications. it was simple yes or no question that required a simple yes or no answer

[DMC]

i just asked a question. i wasn't making any implications

That's the safe answer.

[spurraider21]

you could have just said "no."

[DMC]

you could have just said "no."

And you could just shut your sucker already but we all know that's not going to happen.

[Splits]

I see you also lack capacity for abstract thought. In court you're going to need to be able to not only grasp abstract concepts quickly, but apply them as well.

Since the le started off "Team Religion" it was fitting to use "Basketball Exegesis" as the alternative.

Yeah, that sounds all well and good to the fine folks of the south, until you realize the term "exegesis" is very specific and applies only to the analysis of written words, religious or not.

But please do continue the cover-up of your intellectual laziness, it is quite entertaining.

[spurraider21]

And you could just shut your sucker already but we all know that's not going to happen.

So if the thread le didn't refer to that book, why did you send images of it as responses?

[DMC]

Yeah, that sounds all well and good to the fine folks of the south, until you realize the term "exegesis" is very specific and applies only to the analysis of written words, religious or not.

But please do continue the cover-up of your intellectual laziness, it is quite entertaining.

Are there no written words here?

[DMC]

So if the thread le didn't refer to that book, why did you send images of it as responses?

Yeah I didn't think so.

[AaronY]

thanks

Lol'd