May 14/Wednesday/2014

Well we have more of Beercan christian’s delusional rambling and projecting his things that as usual are not true whatsoever. We have him as usual trying to alter reality by projecting his nonsense and justifying it with more nonsense and attempting to somehow make people do as he is suggesting, which is to just “dismiss” what I say for no other reason than “Beercan said so”.

So I again have copied and pasted his misleading drivel and will do as I always do and re-explain why Beercan is just doing as he always does:

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/bbsj-vs-jesus-part-five-lucian-of.html?m=1

– Telling us things have significance and credibility when clearly I explain why they don’t

– Telling people to simply just dismiss what I wrote and not listen to me by his usual “opinions only” and trying to pass off his opinions as facts.

> This is a very common William
Lane Craig move and every other apologist (passing opinion off as fact) so I guess Beercan thinks he can just do that little trick, since that’s all religious people really need is someone to just colorfully give them an OPINION to fuel their delusion and cognitive dissonance.

So let’s begin.

Beercan says….

“BB(s)J vs. Jesus Part Five: Lucian Of Samosota
Though, at the time of this writing BB(s)J is out of action (at least on twitter), the blog is up and so is his post about the “meaningless” evidence for Jesus. Thus, I will continue to critique his logic for dismissing such evidence.”
———–

And for this I’m glad. With work, school and not being on Twitter anymore I need to feel productive and feel like I’m fighting religion and exposing it’s lies, brainwashing, stupidity and meaninglessness. This helps me do that in spades because Beercan revolves around my schedule, not the other way around.

In fact with how busy I am I might not have even written another thing on my blog for a while, but with the exchanges with Beercan I had some great ideas and got some really awesome blog articles started. I got a great one I started on Lee Strobel that I can hardly wait to finish and post. Beercan makes a great muse.

As for Beercan “critiquing my logic” for dismissing the evidence of Jesus outside of the bible, well that’s kinda hard to do when everything Beercan says and believes is faith based and nothing else. His “evidence” is also nothing but faith based.

Beercan also never got back to me about how nothing about christianity makes any sense about “Jesus is God and sacrificed himself to himself, because of what he was going to do to us himself and had to have himself painfully tortured because he loves us and wants to torture us in hell even if someone never heard of him and was brainwashed to another religion and doesn’t know any different.”

Yet Beercan says that I say things don’t make sense merely because I SAY that they don’t make sense. I think that Beercan confuses “things actually not making sense” with “projecting his opinion about completely outrageous fairytales”. Yep,

I might add also that I really don’t think Beercan ever rechecks, rereads, or fixes up his multiple multiple spelling errors.
.
.
Beercan continues…..

“On to number five!

BB(s)J tell us what it is:

5) LUCIAN OF SAMOSATA 115-200 AD wrote a satire which he basically calls the christians “morons” in different words.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucian

Here is the satire: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passing_of_Peregrinus

We will get to what is actually written in a bit.

First though, have to admit that I believe – so far – this to be the worse attempt by BB(s)J to discredit something. For one, he has very, very little in way of critique what is ACTUALLY written. So little, that he incorrectly address what is written once, and never again…”
————

I swear I didn’t rewrite those last 2 sentences in the above paragraph. I really have no idea what he was trying to say in the last 2 sentences above either. Yes he really did say that.

See here if he hasn’t fixed it yet:

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/bbsj-vs-jesus-part-five-lucian-of.html?m=1

Well this is really funny that Beercan thinks this is my “worse” (instead of “worst”). I think it’s one of the best debunkings I do in this, but let’s just let Beercan continue with his silly little non-arguments and attacks on what I wrote.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“So here are his arguments against Lucian (a person HOSTILE to Christians):

a) Was written over a 100 years after Jesus’s supposed death.

As usual, BB(s)J doesn’t give us any justification why time should matter. What does the fact it was written 100 years after Jesus’ death mean to whether or not Lucian is referencing a historical event and person?

In BB(s)J’s mind, perhaps, nothing historically factual can be passed down to the following generations beyond 100 years?”
————–

Seriously Beercan? You either never even considered the multiple illogical things that make this evidence ridiculous and all the obvious reasons why this is completely non-credible, or you know and are just deflecting.

I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say that you aren’t being dishonest, just stupid and never even tried to think about it.

I guess I have to tell you since you can’t think of these yourself. I mean they just seemed common sense to me, so I guess I gave you too much credit.

a) Lucian was born several years after the time Jesus was supposed to be killed. 92 years AFTER Jesus supposedly died.

– Lucian wasn’t there.

– Lucian never knew Jesus.

– Everything he knew about Jesus was simply hearsay that he heard from christians over 130 years later, not 100, but 130 years later when he wrote the satire.

– This is no different than mormons talking about Joseph Smith’s golden disks 130 years later in 1950 to people and someone writing a TV show talking about how stupid they thought that mormons are.

Speaking of which, Beercan really should watch this short entertaining vid on mormonism so he can actually grasp that 15 million people believe this religion as firmly as he believes christianity….

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-8ZozYbF3C4

Also, how christianity is any more different, or anymore believable than mormonism, or islam.

– Far more evidence for both islam and mormonism than for christianity though.

b) The whole point of what my article was about was:

– That there isn’t any credible evidence of Jesus outside of the bible

– Or within the entire 1st century

– Or not by biased records only of unreliable christian scribes in rewrites hundreds of years later that someone else SUPPOSEDLY said

– Not said to be a forgery by multiple experts and unbiased scholars

(This stuff about Lucian fits 2 categories of being unreliable and meaningless)

c) History of historical figures that have non-credible evidence is different than religious figure evidence that has no evidence for the following reasons:

– Religious stories of divine figures or prophets, have a necessity that mystical, or divine people exist and are to be believed in order to fuel either a brainwashed financial empire, or simply a brainwashed rejection of equality, human rights and freedom

– Non-religious based historical figures that have minimal evidence and records hundreds of years later do not have an agenda and could very well be inaccurate, untrue and wrong. Nobody is saying they couldn’t be.

– Non-religious historical figures do not dictate peoples lives with supernatural stories of the kind that tell them who to hate and to kill others and how to live their lives.

– There’s no motivation to lie, or make things up about the non-religion based historical figures, but plenty reasons to lie about religious figures and prophets.

– If a historical figure is inaccurate, is lied about, or even completely fictious, it affects no ones life whatsoever.

– If a religious figure is made up and lied about, that is completely what we call “fraud, brainwashing and deception” and is preying on victims and causing people to waste their life on a lie and be victims of that lie.

These are the differences, harms and motivations of believing religious figures and non-religion based historical figures.

Beercan continues…

“Is it impossible for Lucian to have known such an event happened? Is it impossible that the knowledge of Jesus’ crucifixion could have survived over 100 years? It’s impossible that Lucian could be referencing an actual event?”
————–

Ok, this is just Beercan being the most pathetic I’ve seen him and has officially become THE WORST apologist I have ever witnessed.

Let me explain why:

– In Beercan’s question “Is it impossible for Lucian to have known an event happened?”

> Seriously?

> Beercan clearly missed the part about Lucian not believing anything about christianity, or Jesus

> Lucian is simply describing “christians” and mocking them (it isn’t that hard to do and christians such as Beercan make it really easy to do).

> In the same story Lucian talks about Zeus and Hercules, but I don’t see Beercan jumping on that and saying that this is evidence for Zeus and Hercules, which is another religion we call “Greek mythology”

> Not only did Lucian think that christians were idiots, but considered believing in christiany “a sin against the greek gods” in his satire

> AGAIN, Lucian is talking about CHRISTIANITY the same way Monty Python made fun of christianity in “Life Of Brian”. That movie is no more evidence of Jesus than Lucian’s satire.

> We have people claiming to have seen the Lochness Monster in multiple sightings, so if Lucian wrote that he saw the Lochness monster in his satire, does that mean we are supposed to take that as evidence of the Lochness monster?

Beercan continues….

“This is why I repeatedly point out that time alone, is not a factor in determining the validity of a writing – especially ancient texts”.
————-

Beercan seriously, use your head. I don’t see what you don’t get! Then you wonder why people like me can’t help but say that religious people are idiots.

I mean we don’t want to say that, but we can’t help it. I mean you aren’t really idiots (well Beercan is definitely the exception and definitely is an idiot) but it’s your brainwashing illness that bipasses thinking and logic that makes you seem stupid and give the illusion of stupidity.

> The same as someone with a 150 IQ who thinks it okay to drink and drive.

> The same as someone with a 150 IQ justifying to themselves not paying their taxes for 3 years and then owing the government thousands and being unable to pay.

> The same as someone with a 150 IQ banging hookers without a condom and getting a disease.

These 3 examples are hypothetical things of smart people doing stupid things, just like christians can be smart people, but think stupidly because they’re brainwashed to not think logically and to accept nonsensical things as reality that no rational person would.

– This satire by Lucian was written ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY years after Jesus was said to have sacrificed himself to save us from himself.

– 130 years?! WTF?! How is 130 years later written by someone who based the details of christianity in a SATIRE story on nothing but HEARSAY about it, credible again?

– It doesn’t matter how many times Beercan says it’s credible, it doesn’t make it credible. It’s still 130 years later and the writer is simply talking about a silly religion, which he is saying is silly.

Beercan continues….

“Time certainly is a consideration among many other factors, and justification is needed to argue why time should be or is a mark against a writing. BB(s)J give no justification”.
—————

WHAT?! “No justification?! I’m not the one who needs to justify 130 years later on something that is based on being aware of a people’s nonsensical religion that the writer himself thinks is ridiculous.

– Beercan is the one who needs to justify this to me, not the other way around

– So you have to wonder then since Beercan seems to be implying that I myself am bending the laws of the universe in my mind so to speak and classifying the standards of which there is a certain amount of time where something is believable on nothing but hearsay. What exactly his boundaries of a time frame that makes Lucian unconvincing and non-credible are I really can only guess.

> Is 200 years later if Lucian wrote this story not credible?

> Is 300 years later if Lucian wrote this story not credible?

> 400 years?

> 500? 600? 800? 1000? What?

> The year 1900? What year is Beercan’s standard for “non-credible”?

– I really am not the one who needs to give justification, but Beercan is definitely reinforcing my belief that he’s justifying his delusion and brainwashing

– It just makes Beercan sound more irrational and desperate every time he implies that 130 years later from Jesus supposedly dying based on hearsay and no evidence is credible and not affected by the fact that things are:

> Forgeries

> Suggestions of natural effects of nature (an eclipse which had noncredible evidence either way)

> Biased christian ONLY sources

> Nothing outside of a fairytale book that is disproved by science, history and common sense

– Does Beercan forget that half of the new testament is forged?

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2011/05/13/half-of-new-testament-forged-bible-scholar-says/

– Does Beercan forget that the apocrypha that was removed from the bible was because it was thought to be nothing but forgery and evil stories that the church just wanted people to forget about?

http://www.thelostbooks.com/missing.htm

> Like Acts of Thomas where Jesus had an identical twin brother… huh?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acts_of_Thomas
.
.
Beercan continues….

“Not to mention this is a non-Christian source! A hostile source to be exact! Which is important.”
—————-

Ok Beercan is making no sense here.

– This is a non-christian source, talking about the religion of christianity 130 years later from when Jesus supposedly died

– I still don’t see how 130 years later and based entirely on hearsay by someone calling the religion stupid makes this credible in the slightest tiniest bit.

– As I mentioned before, this is no different than someone writing in 1950 that an Angel gave Joseph Smith golden plates and that israelites and Jesus used to live in North America and someone today using the fact that someone in 1950 wrote about it as evidence that it happened.
.
.
Beercan continues…

“Lucian doesn’t believe Jesus is God – yet apparently he believes Jesus existed, which we will read.”
————–

He wrote about what delusional christians believed. How would he know what anyone believed was true, or not 130 years before?

– He wouldn’t.

– He thought they were delusional anyways.

– If Beercan can’t see what the big deal is about how 130 years later based on hearsay is such a big deal, then I hope Beercan can tell us how him telling us about Jesus would qualify as evidence then of Jesus also.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“b) Was talking about brainwashed christians, not Jesus.

This is another writing I don’t believe BB(s)J bothered to actually read.”
————-

Oh I read it alright.

– At what point was he saying he had evidence and saw Jesus?

– If I wrote a story 130 years later about vampires and Dracula being real because people believed Bram Stoker was writing about real events, would not make Dracula or vampires real.

– Bram Stoker’s Dracula was written in 1897, so according to Beercan if I write in 2027 about the story about how people who believe the story is real and that people believe vampires and Dracula are real, then they must be real.
.
.
Beercan continues…..

“Here’s the quote in question: “The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day—the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. … You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains their contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property.”

“Christians…Worship a man, to this day…and was crucified on that account.” “…and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws.”

Boy if he’s not talking about Jesus…”
—————

He’s talking about what a bunch of people believed who he thought were both delusional and stupid and nothing more. Something he himself didn’t believe was that christianity was trying to show how intelligent they are.

– If people can’t see how I’ve shown Beercan’s logic to be completely faith based and non-existent then I really don’t know what else to say.

– I can only hope then at best that onlooking Atheists, or agnostics will look at what Beercan is saying and see the harmful effects of religion and the brain damage it causes.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“Unless, that is, BB(s)J wants to propose some other crucified person whose laws a Christian would follow…I’m all ears (eyes)”.
—————-

But I wasn’t even saying that actually.

– I simply explained how this satire that Lucian wrote is not evidence for Jesus because it isn’t and I showed that.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“Clearly, in this writing, Lucian is making fun of Christians, but note at what he IS and ISN’T making fun of Christians about.

1) he is making fun of Christians believing they are ‘immortal” and for following a crucified sage’s laws. In essence that they are following some guy who was crucified and gave them some laws to live by tht they still did nearly 100 years later.”
—————

Now the above is now showing how completely clueless and out of touch Beercan is.

– He clearly is making fun of christians for believing the part about them
following laws from someone they believe sacrificed himself 130 years before by having himself painfully crucified….. to himself.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“2) he is NOT making fun of them following a guy that didn’t exist!”
————–

I think that there’s some things that you don’t seem to get Beercan.

– Whether or not he was implying that he believed Jesus existed, or not and that he thought that christians were following a real person, doesn’t prove anything regarding Jesus having been real and not just a myth passed on by stories and hearsay.

> This is no different than todays urban legends that we think are true, but aren’t

> How could he POSSIBLY know if Jesus was a real person Beercan and not a faith based creation from imagination and hearsay if Lucian was born 92 years after 33 AD?

> How is Lucian any more credible than Beercan at proving Jesus existed?

> As far as I can tell both Beercan and Lucian both got all their info of Jesus from the same hearsay sources of delusional, brainwashed, faith based christians, just a different year.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“Number two is an important point! After all, Passing of Peregrinus is a story about how GULLIBLE and silly Christians are. Certainly following the teachings and “laws” of a guy that didn’t wen exist is pretty gullible!”
————-

Seriously Beercan?

Let’s just go over this and explain why this point you are trying to make is nothing but a non-point.

– Jesus technically doesn’t need to have existed for people to have believed in him.

– The power of hearsay is all that is necessary.

As Beercan’s buddy Ehrman explains:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pXLu6ApQy2s

– 2000 years ago people believed anything and if they wanted to convince people they would tell stories and people (especially people who wanted to believe) would just believe them.

– It was a time of suspicious, supernatural beliefs and when people didn’t know anything and simply filled in the blanks with stories.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“So given this, we have three options in regards to understanding this passage:

1) Jesus existed and Lucian knew this from history passed down via various means and put it into the story.”
————–

For which there is no evidence for and my whole point which Beercan can’t seem to understand
.
.
Beercan continues….

“2) Jesus didn’t exist and Lucian wrongly believed he did, via bad history being passed down through various means.”
——————

Still not evidence Jesus existed and there is no indication that Lucian had any evidence Jesus existed and wasn’t simply just repeating what christians described believing.
.
.
Beercan continues…..

“3) Jesus didn’t exist, and Lucian knew he didn’t exist, but kept that fact out of the story for some reason (even though it would make the Christians look even more dumb!)”
—————–

Irrelevant what Lucian might have thought, if he believed Jesus existed, or not.

– Was still just Lucian repeating and talking about the stupidity of christians.

– Still not proof of Jesus because how in any way possible would Lucian have evidence of Jesus?

> Born 92 years later.

> Wrote about Jesus 130 years later.

> Never knew Jesus.

> How in any way possible could Lucian seriously be aware, or have credible evidence Jesus existed?

> May he have believed Jesus might have existed as a historical person? Maybe yes, maybe no.

> Would it have been anything other than hearsay? NO.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“Now, any of the above is possible, but are any of the plausible? Only 1) and 2) are the most plausible.”
—————

Except that there is no way Lucian could reliably know Jesus existed if he was born 92 years later in the year 125 AD.

– How is hearing circulating, unproven and of course fictional stories from christians, evidence in any way?

– This is no different than someone like a Jehovah’s witness going to a hindu’s door and telling them christian fairytales about Jesus and Beercan counting THAT as proof of Jesus.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“What would then give either more weight is do we have other writings that support either proposition?

In short: yes. 1. Giver further outside evidence, which we will get to in other posts.”
———————-

Now Beercan is just outright lying.

– There is no credible evidence of Jesus outside of the bible and I have repeatedly shown how and why to Beercan, but you apparently can never beat Beercan’s dead horse enough for him to actually realize that it’s dead

– There are 2 Monty Python characters that Beercan reminds me of and that is the parrot salesman and the Black knight.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4vuW6tQ0218

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zKhEw7nD9C4
.
.
Beercan continues….

“If BB(s)J wishes to argue that 2 is more plausible, he needs to provide justification.
————

Alright well then I’ll just repost what I said above.

Still not evidence Jesus existed and there is no indication that Lucian had any evidence Jesus existed and wasn’t simply just repeating what christians described believing.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“But let’s move on to BB(s)J other “logically sound” arguments against this quote:

c) Lucian wasn’t even born til 125

Of course what BB(s)J is getting at here is that Lucian was born well after Jesus’ death, thus could know NOTHING about him at all. That it’s impossible for Lucian to know if Jesus really did or didn’t exist, because he wasn’t there.”
—————

Ok so why does Beercan keep implying that he isn’t getting it when he just indicated clearly that he does in fact know?

Beercan just summed it up pretty clearly.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“BB(s)J seems to believe that people in ancient times weren’t any good at passing along actual history to each other and that 100 years is FAAAAAR too long for Lucian to know anything factual about Jesus via any means or other person.”
—————-

So the evidence that Lucian would have 130 years later of Jesus would be what
again?

– No body of Jesus

– No eyewitnesses despite what the gospels said

– Nothing but biased christian sources

Also reminding Beercan of the painful truth of Jesus one more time.

http://michaelsherlockauthor.blogspot.ca/2013/10/12-painful-facts-about-christianity.html?m=1
.
.
Beercan continues….

“Because all Lucian would know of Jesus is what OTHERS told him, and there is no way in hell they were correct about what they told him or what he read.

In a way, BB(s)J is right!”
—————

Ok so now that Beercan finally realizes this, that should be the end. However…. no.
.
.
Beercan continues…..

“Lucian had no way of knowing Jesus, or that if Jesus really existed because he wasn’t there! ALL Lucian knows of Jesus is what OTHERS wrote about or told him or he heard through other means.”
——————–

Right. A bunch of crazy delusional people who told Lucian ridiculous nonsense that had no evidence, nor did it make any sense, or was it believable.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“But let me ask BB(s)J this – how do we know anyone from ancient history and even sooner really existed?”
—————-

I already answered this several times and will even submit again the story that you helped me write (thanks by the way for that idea, I never would have thought of that without you). I hope that my interactions with you spark up lots more ideas to show how meaningless and pointless christianity and all religion is.

https://thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com/2014/05/11/the-difference-between-jesus-and-alexander-the-great/
.
.
Beercan continues….

“All BB(s)J knows about Socrates is what others have told him via Wikipedia or other sources. Well, maybe they made it all up!”
————–

Yep, maybe. It’s possible. Doesn’t affect my life any if they did though.

– I wonder how much it would mess up Beercan’s life if they completely lied about christianity and Jesus in order to control and manipulate people?

> Beercan would waste all his time on irrelevant and pointless things

> Beercan would be the slave of a lie

> Beercan would not ever have reached his full potential and if he ever finally realized what an imbecile he had been he would probably beat himself to death with a hammer for believing something so nonsensical and stupid
.
.
Beercan continues….

“Unless we witness an event or know a person ourselves, all we know of historical events and people of history is from what others tell us. And yes, when it comes to ancient history, we have fewer and fewer people to rely upon than we do today, which is exactly why historians go to such lengths to study a text from history and not just ignore it because it wasn’t written the day of an event.”
——————

Am I wrong here when I read that Beercan is basically just saying that we should believe everything we hear? This is what it sounds like he’s saying

– So how come Beercan doesn’t believe in Zeus, Shiva, Allah, Mithros, Odin, mormonism, or scientology?

– The stories weren’t as believable? Well again you can thank Constantine for the big push.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fmz9SMFYI6g
.
.
Beercan continues….

“If BB(s)J has justification beyond time, he hasn’t shown it. And time alone, as we know, is not justification itself – that would make it a circular, and a logically invalid, argument.”
—————–

Beercan, Beercan, Beercan. You’re not fooling anyone.

– You attempt to shift the burden on me by making it my responsibility to show you how 130 years later with no evidence is not credible, however, you are simply sounding like a broken record now.

– I repeatedly have explained to you why, but you seem to have missed the point in that YOU are the one who has to somehow convince us that 130 years based on no evidence could possibly be credible.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“d) Proves there were brainwashed christians 100 years after Jesus’s supposed death.

Sigh…for some reason BB(s)J believes it impossible anyone could come to believe in 1) God and 2) Jesus on their own but ONLY through brainwashing.”
—————

Well this is true actually, so Beercan is right, brainwashing is the only way someone could be religious. Of course I do only say this because there is no rational reason to believe a religion unless you are brainwashed.

Let’s list a bunch of reasons and examples:

– Child indoctrination

> Where the child is programmed to follow the religion they were raised only and to ignore any evidence against that religion

> Preying on people who are emotionally and mentally vulnerable

> Exploiting people with lies and deception to believe things that aren’t real and make people feel worthless

> Convincing people that they are sick and selling an imaginary cure to an imaginary disease
.
.
Beercan continues….

“However there apparently were “slightly” brainwashed Greeks as well who believed Jesus existed!”
————–

Yep. Was way easier to convince people back then. No science and strong blasphemy and witchcraft laws made actually learning anything very difficult.

– There’s no slightly brainwashed, or really brainwashed.

– There’s brainwashed, or not brainwashed.

– Curable, or uncurable
.
.
Beercan continues….

“In addition, a person’s existence is not dependent on WHAT people believe about them.”
————-

I agee. Such as the fact that Jesus would only need the following in order for people to believe.

– Simply people passing around hearsay stories and insisting that they were true and continued child indoctrination.

> Just like the mormons who have 15 million members now and believe absolute nonsense and that Beercan doesn’t believe.

– The right people to mastermind and fabricate the whole Jesus idea for political purpose.

> The motivation was there.

– Heavy drugs and DMT.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“But let’s get to the real meat of BB(s)J’s argument!

– There was proof of people who were brainwashed to believe in Zeus, Odin, Allah and Charles Manson being God.

Yep, more irrelevance…”
———–

No. It’s not irrelevant at all and is a valid point and Beercan is simply just deflecting in order to not address the issue, which is that Beercan is brainwashed to a lie.

– A lie that Beercan has no evidence for

– A lie that he can’t deny is no different, or any less ridiculous than any religion.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“I guess BB(s)J forgets we are discussing evidence for the PERSON of Jesus. Whether or not Jesus DID in fact exist. NOT what people believed about him.”
—————–

Ok now Beercan is both deflecting AND being stupid.

– There is no reason to believe Jesus because there is no evidence and nothing about Jesus, or christianity makes sense.

– There is no more evidence of Jesus than of any other religion.

– Christianity only exists so strongly today and is so overwhelmingly powerful, because of Constantine, who wasn’t even a christian but used it as a tool for power.

– Jesus has no existence if people don’t
believe!.

– If someone is brainwashed they can be convinced of anything.

> It just takes the right brainwashing and the right type of person, with a vulnerable state of mind.

> Apologists are true masters of brainwashing even though they themselves are brainwashed.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“That people believed in other mythological gods or someone’s claim they are god has nothing to do with if Jesus – the person – existed.”
—————–

If he did exist historically, he wasn’t God, he wasn’t that important, or significant and everything about him evolved from hearsay and exaggerated stories.

– There is no evidence and I explain repeatedly why there isn’t any and why no evidence of Jesus is credible, or believable, or even convincing whatsoever.

– Beercan is now either being stupid, or deflecting AND being stupid.

> The point is that Jesus is just like any other mythological character that Beercan doesn’t believe in with just as much evidence.

> His religion is just as nonsensical as any other religion with just as much evidence (mythical stories and hearsay)

> There is no reason that Beercan shouldn’t be accepting of any other religion, however he happens to believe the one that he was either indoctrinated, or exposed to, or familiar with.

– As many times as Beercan says it’s irrelevant does not make it irrelevant.

> It’s quite relevant, undeniable and Beercan is doing nothing but deflecting.

> There is no evidence to believe Jesus existed and wasn’t just a fabricated lie for political power, or an insignificant nobody whose reputation evolved because of lies and hearsay.

> Nothing about Jesus makes any sense.

> The only reason someone would believe nonsensical things without evidence is because of brainwashing.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“Irrelevant statements are not arguments, thus can be ignored as such.”
————–

Except when the statements are NOT irrelevant.

– Except when Beercan is deflecting in order to not have to deal with the truth, or confront reality.

– Except when Beercan is too stupid to see how or why the points are relevant.

– Except when Beercan is just lying because he knows I’m right and won’t admit it and he is just being a pathetic weasel.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“BB(s)J either can’t grasp this concept (he really pushes this line of argument) or doesn’t care and thinks he’s making a logical argument.

And just because one believes their argument is logical doesn’t mean it truly is!”
————–

This is really funny because there is nothing logical about christianity, or any religion whatsoever.

– If the argument shows how your religion is completely fictious and only believed because the religious person is brainwashed, since there is no evidence whatsoever, than it’s significant.

– I guess the funniest part about Beercan’s statement is that christianity is based on nothing but faith, lying, brainwashing and child indoctrination and he’s telling me that people can be deceived into thinking they have a logical argument when they don’t.

> Let’s remind ourselves that Jesus sacrificed himself to himself because he wanted himself tortured because he loves torturing, especially when it’s himself.

> Also, Jesus cares if you’re circumcized and who you sleep with but starves billions while helping certain random sports teams win games.

> Jesus also doesn’t want you to be gay even though Jesus is the almighty master of the universe and could have simply made everyone straight.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“- What christians believe in Zeus, Odin, Allah and Charles Manson being God?

Again, has no bearing whatsoever if Jesus did exist! Nor addresses what was written!

More irrelevance!”
————

Of course it does. I think I’m gonna have to start calling you the “Deflection christian” instead. That’s all you do is deflect deflect deflect.

– You never answered why you don’t believe them.

– So since you didn’t answer it, it means that you have no answer.

– Since you didn’t answer it, it means that you knew you had no defense and that this really does make you look brainwashed and delusional.

> This is good because it shows that I’m getting through to you whether you know it, or not.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“Does not address the writing at all”.
—————–

Of course it does Beercan and you know it.
.
.
Beercan continues…..

“And then BB(s)J ONLY goes on to show that some people believed other people were Jesus.

Not ONCE does BB(s)J actually address what is said by Lucian other than to incorrectly reference what it says.”
—————-

LOL Why would I when there wasn’t anything that was said that was credible as evidence?

Well actually I did say how nothing Lucian said was talking ABOUT Jesus, but simply about christianity, which he was saying much the same way apologists and priests do today, which isn’t proof of Jesus either.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“So let’s look at his ONLY points of argument to this quote:

1) was written 100 years after Jesus’ death.

2) doesn’t address Jesus by name.

That’s it. That’s all BB(s)J presents to argue against the quote in question…”
———–

Well I said more than that, but addressed many issues in this response that should clear things up, especially about how Beercan is a lying, deflecting weasel.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“But as we saw, gives no justification for why 1) is an issue against the writing. And 2) is no hurdle either as clearly it’s Jesus being alluded to!”
———-

Well I guess I could simply just list everything again for good measure just in case Beercan still thinks he actually is making a point. I’ll just copy and paste what I already said in this response.

a) He was born several years after the time Jesus was supposed to have been killed. 92 years AFTER Jesus supposedly died actually.

– Lucian wasn’t there.

– Lucian never knew Jesus.

– Everything he knew about Jesus was simply hearsay that he heard from christians over 130 years later, not 100, but 130 years later when he wrote the satire.

– This is nothing different than mormons talking about Joseph Smith’s golden disks 130 years later in 1950 to people and someone writing a TV show talking about how stupid they thought that mormons are.

Speaking of which, Beercan really should watch this short entertaining vid on mormonism so he can actually grasp that 15 million people believe this religion as firmly as he believes christianity….

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-8ZozYbF3C4

Also, how christianity is any more different, or anymore believable than mormonism, or islam.

– Far more evidence for both islam and mormonism than for christianity though.

b) The whole point of what my article was about was:

– That there isn’t any credible evidence of Jesus outside of the bible.

– Or within the entire 1st century.

– Or not by biased records only of unreliable christian scribes in rewrites hundreds of years later that someone else SUPPOSEDLY said.

– Not said to be a forgery by multiple experts and unbiased scholars.

(This stuff about Lucian fits 2 categories of being unreliable and meaningless)

c) History of historical figures that have non-credible evidence is different than religious evidence that has no evidence for the following reasons:

– Religious stories of divine figures or prophets, have a necessity that mystical, or divine people exist and are to be believed in order to fuel either a brainwashed financial empire, or simply a brainwashed rejection of equality, human rights and freedom.

– Non-religious based historical figures that have minimal evidence and records hundreds of years later do not have an agenda and could very well be inaccurate, untrue and wrong. Nobody is saying they couldn’t be wrong.

– Non-religious historical figures do not dictate peoples lives with supernatural stories of the kind that tell them who to hate and to kill others and how to live their lives.

– There’s no motivation to lie, or make things up about the non-religion based historical figures, but plenty reasons to lie about religious figures and prophets

– If a historical figure is inaccurate, is lied about, or even completely fictious, it affects no ones life whatsoever.

– If a religious figure is made up and lied about, that is completely what we call “fraud, brainwashing and deception” and is preying on victims and causing people to waste their life on a lie and be victims of that lie.

These are the differences, harms and motivations of believing religious figures and non-religion based historical figures.
.
.
Beercan ends….

“Yet, given that his two arguments fail here BB(s)J still contends: STILL DEFINITELY NOT EVIDENCE OF ANYTHING!”
———–

No my arguments didn’t fail and in fact quite showed how and why, but regardless, I expanded on this blog response many times over and brought up many other really good points to show how there is no convincing or credible evidence of Jesus in the entire 1st century.

Now I hope that we get through this fairly quickly so that Beercan can address some of the brainwashing articles which we know he is just too much of a coward to address.

I also wanted to thank Beercan again for all the great ideas for blog stories to show people the sheer stupidity of christianity and to expose religious insanity for the brainwashing and danger that it is.
————

Advertisements