This is deep

it's mariana trench deep

Attached: supreme.png (1280x1358, 103K)

guys i think he might be an atheist

This is old

>specifically design this photo shoot to trigger christians
>christians get triggered
>"haha what a failure that guy is"

I mean, he whistled, and you danced to the tune.

>cringey self important twat

thats every militant atheist ever. heres good ol dawkins embarassing himself live on air

youtube.com/watch?v=N-kWeo0o-Jw

>Those comments
Go back please

I never understood why people parody Jesus Christ regardless whether you're religious or an atheist. Jesus was literally tortured and nailed to a cross, unless you're willing to live through that same experience, you're a faggot for roleplaying as him.

What?

He was always a cringey self important twat, hence why he spent five years failing at every comedy opportunity he was given (radio shows, The 11 O'Clock Show, a chat show) before he leached off Stephen Merchant's talent with "The Office".

People have been killed in far worse ways before, Chinese history is full of it

I get your premise but I don't think it is correct

It always felt to me that the majority o British citizens were atheist or not part of any organized religion. I don't know what Gervais was trying to prove with this

I think he's funny

People are saying it's teenage and cringe. That's different to being triggered.

you've got me there.

People being mocked often don't get why they are mocked.

What the fuck has that got to do with people pretending to be Jesus Christ?

This guy is the biggest fucking faggot in the entire film industry, I've hated his work ever since the invention of lying
>expect film to be a comedic romp
>ends up being haha christians dum haha
I'm not even a Christian but this was so on the nose I felt like a retard for thinking it was going to be any different

Attached: 1560527964737.png (635x457, 376K)

>b-but the comments!

Troll Americans? Derp. I'm not sure why you think he himself devised this photoshoot either.

did the brave truth-telling atheist do any pics featuring Islamic symbols?

How many were yours?

He knows american jews have a fetish for taking the piss out of gentiles and it would further his career.

ahh well now your half baked premise makes sense

No, only Christcuckery deserves to be mocked

If you think that's bad watch After Life

>implying i even bother reading comments

Not only am I implying you read YouTube comments, I am also implying that you make them.

How is it half-baked?
We know for the fact the goal of that photo shoot was to shook christians and make them react, spreading awareness of it further by commenting on it.
We can observe that this indeed happened, due to the coverage it got, and mentions it keeps getting, including this thread.

That is, there was an objective set for the photo, and the objective was achieved, and it keeps being achieved again and again. This is a good execution of the plan. It works. He won. He achieved his goals.

Half baked?

What's so particularly wrong about being a Christian, at least formally?
In my opinion it can stand as a nice base strategy to follow, even if you don't really believe in it. Most of the values and moral codes that come along with it are solid.

>ATHEISTS
>EDGY
LMAO

NOW THE CONTRARIAN POSITION IS BELIEVING IN GOD

God isn't real. To be a Christian you must at least believe in God.

believing in j*sus chr*st is an affront to god's chosen people

What is god? do you believe in something beyond our understanding? maybe we are in the matrix I dunno

How would you make this photo shoot with islamic symbols?
First, there really aren't many.
Second, muslims don't read that magazine much.
Third, muslims don't have the media reach to be outraged about it in a way that will spread awareness of it in rich markets.

So why bother?
Comedians stay away from islam, because islam is a shit market for comedy, in addition to it being harder to mock, since most people with money to pay for comedy don't know enough about islam to get the jokes.

God from the Bible

you dont think posing as mohammed would spark more controversy than posing as jesus?

>because islam is a shit market for comedy

Oh yeah i'm sure it's not the obvious reason and not the potential fatwa

then youre absolutely wrong

Your post is cute and all but that other user was right. To be Christian you have to believe in the the Christ. It's in the name dude

My point is, does it really matter if he's real or not, when you can reap some benefits from it?
Music isn't a magical force either, but it can push you and motivate you. Believing in something greater than yourself can do the same thing.

Also they blow you up

>Most of the values and moral codes that come along with it are
Wrong, there is just as much evil in there as morally righteous stuff. If you're going to pick which bits you want to follow and forget the rest, without actually believing in it, then in what way are you a Christian? You're just following your own instinctive morality at that point.

Atheism isn't antichristianism even dawkins said he's culturally christian

Most atheists are still trapped in a Christian worldview. Progressivism is just secular Christianity.

>even dawkins said he's culturally christian
Because he's Anglo? He doesn't believe there's a God doesn't mean he wants his country to turn into the Middle-East.

Yes it does matter if the "creator of existence" is real or not

DIDNT READ THE CHAIN LOL BUT I ENJOY THIS POST

>it's a pretending to be a christfag to own the mooozlims episode

>WHAT DO YOU MEAN KARL SOME ANTS ARE LAZY AND DON'T DO ANY WORK? YOU'RE TALKING BOLLOCKS, I STUDIED BIOLOGY AT UNIVERSITY HOW COULD YOU KNOW ANYTHING JUST BY WATCHING THEM IN THE PARK READ A BOO-

sciencealert.com/many-worker-ants-are-actually-lazy-slackers-but-there-s-a-good-reason-for-that

>Most atheists are still trapped in a Christian worldview
You need to elaborate in that.

How do you pose as Mohammed? There is no obvious visual metaphor, the way Jesus on the cross is.

No, it is the obvious reason - money. He wants to sell his comedy.

Not too many cases of that happening.
I mock islam in my comedy routine. My country is 13% muslim according to Wikipedia. Nobody blew me up. The biggest reaction I've gotten is a table of people getting up and leaving once, and a guy shouting at me "enough with religion already" another time, in over 20 stage appearances.
My old dog was named Mohammed. The biggest reaction I got was an old guy saying "thats not right, you are wrong for doing that, you should change it", and he was an iraqi christian that ran away from Saddam to get here.

Because using a false (or at least unjustified) belief as the basis of your morality can be extremely harmful, Islam is the perfect current example, but Christians and Jews have their fair share as well. If your morality is based on "this is what God wants", and what God wants can be made up by anyone, then it can be used to justify all sorts of evil.

Why not dedicate yourself to the greater good of humanity without the religious baggage?

He always was, it's there in his xfm shows. It's just on a smaller, controlled scale that arrogance can be charming especially with the restraint of others and his self-awareness.

When it's matched by real life success, the self-awareness disappears.

>If you're going to pick which bits you want to follow and forget the rest
That's what I've done my whole life, and why the hell not? You can take a beneficial idea from every religion. But I see what you're getting at, you wouldn't be a "devout Christian".
>You're just following your own instinctive morality at that point.
Fair enough, but a large number of people don't even do that. Religion can change certain individuals for the better. You often see that in prison.

> muslims don't have tvs

>How do you pose as Mohammed?
you don't remember the draw Mohammed thing?

>watch The Office
>this guys a comedic genius!
>watch the invention of lying
>what the fuck

>My country is 13% muslim according to Wikipedia.
India?

yikes!

>How do you pose as Mohammed?
put beard on, hold scimitar, write mohammed across your chest in red paint

>You need to elaborate in that.
As an atheist, I propose these:
>People are inherently valuable. Why? Because God made them in his image, and there is a part of God in them. If not for that, why? No secular reason for people to be inherently valuable. People of low or zero or even negative utility should be seen as having no worth.
>People are seen as having free will. Why? No reason to think so, its not intuitive. Before Christianity, people didn't think so, most cultures were fatalistic, they believed in predetermined Fate. In Christianity God gave man free will, which explains why evil exists (in a janky wonky way). There's no secular reason to believe in free will, yet all our institutions and laws assume it.

The two big ones off the top of my head.
Mind, I am also sick with these diseases. Sick enough to value them and like them and fight for them. I think their absence would be a negative, but I can't give an explanation as to why; Christians can give their dummy God explanation, which is consistent with their views and better than nothing.

Bulgaria.

saying a type of person is the ultimate in cringe doesn't mean you have been triggered into being an advertisement. this is how it's half baked. I don't think your premise is broadly incorrect, but to say some random person online who calls prominent atheists cringy is a rube playing into their marketing ploy isn't a linear deduction.

you could just as easily say that if someone said "damn all atheists are cool as shit" are dancing to the tune as well because either opinion can be said to be an intended response, and conceivably could be. unfortunately for your line of thought opinions could exist, as they often do, independent of a photo shoot. I understand your "it's brilliant marketing!" idea, but I think you have got tunnel vision to be so confident in its scope. It's a sound premise broadly speaking, but no, it's not a bullet proof vest to protect Ricky and all others from being called cringy just as it doesn't become the source for all adulations to the same.

cringe

I am an atheist and it triggers me for cringe. What do I win?

Attached: 16055poster.jpg (900x677, 45K)

It has been sad to watch Gervais descend into being a typical boomer with outdated humour. His last standup was cringe, and not because his views were wrong, or he was being insensitive. That's what he would like to think. "My critics hate me because I tell the truth! I just say what's funny and don't give a fuck!" But that ain't it. He's not funny because he spends his time tackling tired subjects, making the same old points people have heard countless times, making the same jabs and jokes that people have all heard already. He's behind the curve, trying to keep up, but too old and caught in the past to do so. And he is in such a bubble that I doubt it even occurs to him. Look at when he was criticised by Andy Kindler. Andy Kindler is one of those "so bad they're good" comedians but who actually isn't funny, but he was right about Ricky Gervais in a way. Ricky Gervais is a 'friend down the pub' type character who is fun to talk to but, as a comedian, is useless without a script in front of him. Look at his Twitter and try to find even one tweet that is witty, funny, or interesting. Good luck. Kindler trashed Gervais over and over again and Gervais had nothing, no counter, no banter, just silence. And he bragged about ignoring him despite the fact that, as a talented comedian, you'd think he'd have something, anything. It would be a good opportunity for him, the successful but outsiderish figure to get one up over an unsuccessful but insider figure to American comedy. But he couldn't, which is revealing.

You are a double mark, then. You win the love of CEO's worldwide.

bait

I'm not sure if it does, at least not in the context of what I'm talking about. But in general, of course it's a question that everyone has wondered about.
I agree with your points.
>Why not dedicate yourself to the greater good of humanity without the religious baggage?
Because the religious baggage, or the idea of God, a greater being/force/whatever can sometimes push you to do more than you would normally be able to do. It's like believing in a miracle basically. So in that sense, I don't find anything wrong with believing in God, as long as you're simply using it to motivate yourself, for example.
Regardless of anything, the greater good of humanity should always be at the forefront, but since not everyone has that idea in mind, certain people can perhaps benefit from a belief system that preaches it.

Jews love to mock the crucifixion and celebrate his suffering, Gervais is just a mouthpiece for the jewish liberal media's atheist concensus.

BASED TEXAS

PUT ON A "DRAW MOHAMED" (ISLAMIC BLASPHEMY) CONTEST

HIRE A FIRE TEAM OF FUCKING NAVY SEALS WITH MACHINE GUNS AS SECURITY

RETARDED MUDSHITS SHOW UP TRYING TO JIHAD THE INFIDELS, BUT INSTEAD GET ABSOLUTELY SMOKED

GOD BLESS AMERICA :^)

>Bulgaria.
By any chance did you introduce or mention your dog to any Muslim? Are Bulgarians muslims more lax? How are their relations with the rest of the country?

>you could just as easily say that if someone said "damn all atheists are cool as shit" are dancing to the tune as well because either opinion can be said to be an intended response, and conceivably could be.
I could, and I do. Missionary atheists reacting to it that way, and spreading it, and engaging the triggered christians, are all marks reacting as expected. You are building a strawman here.

>I understand your "it's brilliant marketing!" idea, but I think you have got tunnel vision to be so confident in its scope. It's a sound premise broadly speaking, but no, it's not a bullet proof vest to protect Ricky and all others from being called cringy
How is it cringe if it works? You set goals, you achieve the goals, you make money, you spread your name, you engage millions, you build an image, you create a brand. How many Golden Globes has Ricky Gervais hosted now? How many shows has he been invited on? Its clearly working. Bit like studying history, watching some ancient general execute a battle plan and win the field against all odds, and then say ""ugh Alexander was such cringe charging the Persian emperor like that, like he is immortal or something, CRINGE". Well, it worked.

Many atheists see themselves as the antithesis of Christians, and so they must always do the opposite of Christians. Frequently, they give in to hedonism and selfishness. This is idiotic because there is some valuable wisdom in Christianity's teachings, such as the importance of family, marriage, and sexual virtue. The trick is to separate what is supernatural (and ridiculous) and what is practical.

>By any chance did you introduce or mention your dog to any Muslim?
Yes.

>Are Bulgarians muslims more lax?
More lax than who? I've only lived in Bulgaria and Germany, muslims are alcohol drinking, sex having, prayer missing, gold wearing, not dieting heretics in both countries.
There is this fallacy on the internet that even though 99% of christians aren't actually practicing, 99% of muslims are. Not really. Most muslims are about as (not) pious as most christians.

Attached: 1558469936984.jpg (1125x1283, 475K)

They will also at the same time use religious language to talk about science and liberalism, not seeing the irony

Well we can go one better than that. How about a real life dictatorship which people can see with their own eyes? That way, we don't risk anyone becoming unconvinced of its existence and committing evil because the only thing stopping them was authority.

embarrassed=\=offended

Not him, but most muslims I've talked to have been hybridized in a way, wherein they've picked up some christian values as well. Or at least the younger demographic has.
By and large, they're fine and not overly zealous.
A bigger problem we face is with the gypsy demographic, but even if we were to abolish them entirely, we'd still have a shit ton of problems from a political and socioeconomic stance.
t. Bulgarian

triggered =/= offended

Attached: Jews.png (545x680, 534K)

I view it as a double-edged sword. Not sure if it's as good an idea in real life as it is on paper.
But I think the core problem can be solved with better education, both at home and in school.

Good point.

When christianity was the establishment making fun of it was beneficial. Now its beating a dead horse. Thats why ot sucks and is cringy, because its stale. It just comes of as a faggot fedora tiping move when you make fun of christiams while trying to appear as you are doing something edgy. If you talked shit about muslims or jews and some of their fucked up beliefs and practices, that would be something new. But ricky here wont do that.

>religious language
Care to elaborate?

Good thing they wrote it in hebrew so no christian can actually fucking read it

no it isn't a strawman. you're presuming because a state that lines up with your premise's expectant results exists that it is causative merely because it exists. you are also... ahem, moving the goal posts by saying it is the goal of prominent atheists to be as cringy as possible to engage the public at large, not just this photo. so... I guess if you think they're all cringy too then you're a tool? I don't know the ball probably got away from you there. anyway champ, hopefully a caution about causation vs correlation conflation will be useful to you in your travels among the skeptic community.

Ricky's comedy is sub-par either way, so it doesn't matter desu.

But this photoshoot wasn't done now, it was done years ago

You make no sense and nothing you say addresses or follows from what I say.
Re-read the conversation so far and try posting again.

Photoshop abs on a fat bloke, innit

Howcome whenever a comedian makes fun of Christianity some mouthbreather comes out of the woodwork and says "duuhh what about da Muslims"

Gervais is a faggot because he thinks Jesus was "just a nice guy" who was nailed to a cross and started a religion because he had some good ideas.

This is impossible, more impossible than God being the Son of Man and rising from the dead and preventing us all from having to sacrifice animals on altars of stone for our scape.

EITHER Jesus is a bad man, and if a bad man one of two types. Crazy or evil. No one goes around starting religions and saying they're the son of God for any good reason, they want to fuck people's wives and shit. And then they start in on the husbands, drunk with power. Or he's doing it like Manson, to amuse himself while fulfilling the prophecies of Isiah. Or the Jews formed a radical splinter group and took advantage of him since his mind was bad, and started a new religion to make more money from the Gentiles like Hezekiah's bitch boy said would happen.

OR he's a good man, therefore not a man at all, because if he goes around saying all that good shit and pretending to be God then he's a faggot and needs to get nailed. But can't be if good man. If good man then God.

Clearly not a bad man. Even butt boy Gervais admits this, with his child's atheism. In 1998 on XFM "Season 0" he said that as a child, when injured, he would intentionally injure himself again and shout out loud "showed you, God, it didn't hurt!"

OY VEY!

Attached: 1555296638641.jpg.jpg (628x487, 57K)

This!!!! is God

Attached: freddy krueger list main (Custom).jpg (633x354, 52K)

op: photo of ricky
step 1: guy: damn they are all gay
step 2: you: aha they tricked you into thinking they're gay by acting gay in that photo

it's a solid premise, but ricky is one of many such people whose reputations existed independently of the image. the guy can say they gay, and have it not be, partially be, or totally informed by the photo. you cannot say he's been played by marketing just by his reaction. that's why I've said it seem like a fine premise, it resembles causation, but it isn't actually sound because it could just as easily be correlation. he could be saying he think they gay incidentally not derivativly.

see? half baked. I get your premise and it makes sense, but you cannot presume it is functioning based on someone saying a group Ricky belongs to is gay.

Why does based Ricky trigger Yea Forumstard christfags so much?

Attached: ricky gervais.png (495x430, 135K)

seething christcuck

There's nothing based about cringe content. On the other hand, you could rape a goat on stage and make it look aesthetically pleasing.
Ricky's just not it.

commie shitholes aren't really representative of anything

Step 1: OP posts a photo of Ricky.
Step 2: Haha, you reposted a photo of Ricky, spreading awareness of him and his shtick, just like the advertisement agency that scheduled the photoshoot intended.

And I guess Step 1.5: Other people joining in a lively discussion of the photo, bringing more people into the talk, spreading the photo further.
The photo is "Hi, I am Ricky, a comedian, and my comedy looks like this.". You are spreading it, so more people know that this is Ricky, he is a comedian, and his comedy looks like that. Talk more about it, he wants more kids to be aware of him.

I'm not even Christian, its just really boring, unoriginal and cringeworthy to take hits at christianity. It's such an easy target, why doesn't he ever mock the prophet muhammad or something.

Because christanity as a religion has been dulled out, the pope said that its okay to be gay. Most christians are just christians by name. Meanwhile you have muslims commiting terorist attacks and jews biting off baby foreskins and shooting palestinian children in the head. Christianity is a neutered religion, islam and jews are not

American Christians were a mistake and ruined Christianity for the rest of the world.

>specifically design this photo shoot to trigger christians
>christians get triggered
>"haha what a failure that guy is"
>I mean, he whistled, and you danced to the tune.

something seems different here... maybe you changed what you were trying to say along the way to draw out just admitting you were making an assumption. hmmm.

you're wrong to presume other people are triggered merely by them proffering an unfavorable opinion on a group, to which something they are presented with, belongs. if you want to keep avoiding this point by pretending it's about whether or not advertisement exist then this will just go on forever. Your premise is fine in abstraction, you merely cannot presume/demonstrate its functioning based on a sentence reply on an image board. good evening.

Nah. People everywhere ruined religions for the rest of the world.
Americans have contributed to some societal decay, but they're not the center of the world historically.

>something seems different here... maybe you changed what you were trying to say along the way to draw out just admitting you were making an assumption. hmmm.

I made a rough throwaway take on something obvious. Then a Phd in forum arguing came and made me sharpen and clarify my arguments and back it up with references, citations and submit it for peer review. Of course the initial rough take looks different. The idea is the same.

Also, triggered doesn't mean what you think it means. It means there is a button in you, that when pressed produces some emotional response. It doesn't need to be seething anger. It can be crying, it can be joy.
And please don't tell me that christians don't get triggered by this clown atheism. They obviously have some mental switch that gets flicked when they see this. They are primed to respond to shit like this. And marketing people see and make use of it.

so how is ricky dressed up as santa causing someone to think Dawkins is a homo?

Dawkins does that by himself kek

Americans contributed disproportionately much, because of the dominance of their culture over the world. Globalism made is to all countries share at least some of the USA's culture, though its export of music, film, TV shows, and so on.
Not that their take is disproportionately bad, rather their take is disproportionately common nowadays.

You don't make any sense again. What is this referencing? What are you talking about?

If he had regular sex, he wouldn't be such a devoted atheist.

Ever used a word or phrase from a bible passage before? There you go.

>celibacy is a christian virtue
>a wild sex life is seen as unchristian degeneracy
>this post

big_think.jpg

Does Gervias lift or is he just fat?

HAVE SEX GODCEL

The Bible is part of European tradition. You can cite it without believing it is literally the word of a literal God.

>Americans contributed disproportionately much
Right. But not much in regards to Christianity. The country is too young to have any significant impact on a belief system that is so old.
In any case, they haven't "ruined" Christianity for the rest of the world, as you or someone else suggested.

>Right. But not much in regards to Christianity. The country is too young to have any significant impact on a belief system that is so old.
Oh, thats not what I meant. I must've misunderstood the conversation.
I am talking about the perception of Christianity, by its alleged followers and by outsiders. Not the theology.

American contributions to the theology are the many, many protestant churches and the rural cults that most European Christians would perhaps not even consider to be part of Christendom.

So when I join the conversation about Americans "ruining" Christianity for the rest of the world, I mean the perception of it, not the doctrine of it. Its just a bad look.

It's funny because the bible isn't the "word of God" even according to the most strict doctrine. I mean, how can a letter sent to Rome by Paul be from God? It cannot.

the post you replied to calling them triggered: "there really is nothing more cringy than prominent atheists". Richard dawkins, is a prominent atheist, who may be considered cringy by the poster, who may or may not be christian, independently of the ad campaign.

again, in case it wasn't clear, you cannot divine whether the poster was triggered, or at all influenced in opinion by the poster just because his response would align with the response of someone who may have been. I know again, you will get this into the weeds of whether or not advertisement exists. you cannot and have not demonstrated its effect on the poster merely by him saying prominent atheists are cringe.

Oh, gotcha.

It is divinely inspired, thus the word of God.
I don't know the correct terms in English, but God acted through these people, and what they produced is the divine word of God.
Ask your local cleric about it.

So as long as any given person exhibits more than 1 trait, and does more than 1 thing, we can't conclude if people judge them on the one trait or the other.
Maybe this famous sprinted winning the sprint at the Olympics is perceived because of his modeling job. Okay.
But when You see a picture of that sprinter, on the finish line, hands raised up, in a sports magazine discussing the race, and people make comments, you can assume they are reacting to the sprinter and not the model.
When you see that image of Ricky in the OP, you can expect they are reacting to the atheist, not to the actor from The Office. And when Dawkins is cringy while talking about politics, you can expect people are reacting to his political take, rather than his religion take. Or are they?

Is this the line of thinking you want me to take and go on? Genuine question, I still don't get it. I want a literal and serious response, not baiting.

Why not throw a jab at the Chosen people, just for the beauty of it?

Is this recent? Atheism being edgy was relevant about 20 years ago.

10 years ago for Rolling Stone Magazine. I am not sure they published it even, because Christians took the bait a bit too hard and threatened protests.

I love how atheists pile on Christians at every opportunity but they never touch Muslims or Jews, I wonder why that is? When is Ricky going to dress up as Muhammad?

No one here is a practicing christian

The least predictable post ever.

>God isn't real.
*tips*

Attached: e1e8571d6242566fbb2db80f916c6e65[1].jpg (557x711, 54K)