Salvijus

^_ ^ It's an ancient christian connection I figure. She's deeper into Jesus even than I am, lol. (Which I thought was impossible.) It's nice to meet someone like that once in a while. God bless her.

This is so frickin good I can't contain myself. Sjdjdjsnsjwiwjwjwiwiwnakqoq8qiajanaja. I'm dying. Every sentence is a total orgasm to my body.

It's so fuxkin gooood... Good share.

Uuhhhhh, this is nice. I wonder where it's from.

I mean it takes a lot to go through life. People should be proud of themselves just because they have made it this far and are still alive.

"Help others to help yourself" kind of thing. Makes no sense until you try it. Somehow it always comes back to you.

I think simply living life alone is enough to grow. It's just an inevitable part of life. Just focus on not dying is enough, haha.

It's a cheat code for success. If you have mental health problems, donate a bit of money to the mental health institutions. You have a specific health problem, you can donate there etc. Depending on the problem you have. Good karma will come back. It will open your heart also. Miracles will happen.

Just follow your passion and you will evolve through that in your own unique way.

I was going to say try tithing. But it seems you're good now.

Sometimes you watch something so good that you wished the entire world would see it. Please trust me when I say it, this is an insane story.

Grace

Congrats on making this far and good luck in the coming years.

It is. But you don't have to judge yourself. Own it.

Find another hobby.

My favorite color

I should remember your name, babe. Makes it easier to talk to you

See. I told you. It's 90-99%. My chatgpt just said 99% only tho.

Who Jesus was is a big debate. But whether he existed or not is almost 100% certain. Just ask chatgpt "what's the probability of Jesus' existence given all the evidence and historical research that we have" it's 99% percent.

I'm just right. Yours and mine chatgpt answers both say the same thing that your post didn't include the balanced professional historical scholory consensus. So it's ggwp. I win.

It's both convenient and true. Sorry babe.

@The Crocodile both your answer and my answer from chatgpt agree that your version does not contain a balanced view based on professional scholory consensus. The way you presented your post is as if it was hard data but it was only more of a speculative, bayesian-style reasoning often used by skeptics (like Richard Carrier) to illustrate how they interpret the strength of the evidence. The proper answer to the question "what is the probability of Jesus existence given all the evidence we have" was the one that I prompted. Yours was something else entirely.

Ai has surpassed every rationalist and scientists probably by now. Its ability to be rational is just off the charts. It's absolute beauty to look at.

@TheCrocodile btw I double checked your answer from chatgpt about religion you posted yesterday. Copied it and gave chatgpt to analyze it. It got exposed as ingenuine immediately. "The numbers like “30–40%” for the existence of a historical Jesus are not based on any universally accepted statistical model. That’s important. This is not a scholarly consensus or anything like a peer-reviewed conclusion—it's more of a speculative, Bayesian-style reasoning often used by skeptics (like Richard Carrier) to illustrate how they interpret the strength of the evidence. That part could have been generated by ChatGPT, but the probabilities aren't from any authoritative source—they reflect a qualitative judgment, not hard data. So if someone claimed "ChatGPT says there's a 30% chance Jesus existed," they’re misusing the output. ChatGPT might express something that way if prompted, but it would usually clarify that such numbers are illustrative, not definitive. If you're wondering whether someone edited or altered it to make it sound more skeptical, it’s possible—but not certain. It fits the style of skeptical analysis you can request from ChatGPT. Final Take: The original text you provided accurately summarizes a mythicist/skeptical position, but it doesn’t represent the consensus of professional historians or biblical scholars. If it was from ChatGPT, it likely came from a prompt asking for the skeptical side and not the balanced or historicist view." Gosh I love ai.

Ai is an amazing bullshit detector. I'm just in awe.