Well almost done here with the responses. This is the second last one, then I get to address the ridiculous response on brainwashing that Crackpipe did.
This is more of the Bart Ehrman issues that Crackpipe has.
So let’s get this done, then the brainwashing article, then the list of lies, then the “Evidence of Jesus Is Meaningless 2” article that Crackpipe helped make by addressing every argument he could make (no matter how pathetic).
“BB(s)J replies yet again!
Well in BB(s)J’s latest reply, we go all over the place!
So let us see where he takes us first!
His first topic is Bart Ehrman.
As we remember, BB(s)J tried poorly, and incorrectly, to show Bart Ehrman did not believe that Paul’s letters were reliable or that Bart believes there is NO evidence for Jesus outside the Bible.
These are wrong, but BB(s)J doesn’t get it.”
So let’s go over the list of things we know about Bart’s views
– Bart confirms that Paul never knew Jesus, or actually met him.
> So not reliable in any way shape, or form.
– Bart confirms that Paul claims to have only communicated to Jesus through visions.
> So not reliable in any way shape, or form.
– So I just downloaded and read Ehrman’s entire book off of ibooks “Did Jesus Exist” and I can with all honesty say that there was no convincing, or credible evidence in the entire book.
> I did really agree with him though on what he said at the very end about how harmful religion is, how harmful faith in christianity is and how destructive christianity is.
– Bart actually quite certainly says that 11 books of the NT are forgeries.
> As per Wikipedia:
Acts of the Apostles
First Epistle of Peter
Second Epistle of Peter
Epistle of James
Epistle of Jude
Second Epistle of Paul to the Thessalonians
First Epistle of Paul to Timothy
Second Epistle of Paul to Timothy
Epistle of Paul to Titus
Epistle of Paul to the Ephesians
Epistle of Paul to the Colossians
> You really can’t get more unreliable than forgeries.
– Ehrman repeatedly throughout the book says that the NT is not reliable, so when Bart says NT guess what? He means Paul too.
– He of course specifically says “the gospels are not reliable throughout the book, but there really is a ton that Paul’s letters leave out.
– I think somewhere Crackpipe said he read the book too.
> So funny if he did read it, then Crackpipe would have read Bart say over and over how he didn’t believe in God and explained over and over again how he thought Jesus was an insignificant nobody who simply had things get out of hand (basically).
– How could Bart actually think that Paul’s writings were historical when Bart doesn’t believe that Jesus talked to Paul?
– Is the angel Gabriel writing the koran for Mohammed historical too then to Crackpipe, or Bart?
> Was Gabriel real? (same as Paul’s Jesus)
– Is the angel Moroni talking to Joseph Smith historical and giving him the golden plates real? (Same as Paul’s Jesus).
“In fact, BB(s)J horribly misquotes Bart again, and blames Bart for misquoting him…
To quote: “Guess Ehrman’s done some thinking and research in the past 5 years.”
But as I pointed out BB(s)J misused BE’s quotes, and does again here!
So, now, instead of admitting he was wrong he changes the argument, and blames Bart!”
No I’m aftaid that Bart knows that the entire NT is not reliable, or historical, not just the gospels.
– Paul’s writings are 20 years later which makes them unreliable.
– The fact that Paul mentioned Jesus’ brothers, then the gospels mentioned them 40-80 years later just means the gospels got info from Paul’s writing and words.
– Since when are the mutterings of a man who says he visioned “a divine being” considered “evidence”?
> Crackpipe is saying that he bases his entire religion on one man having hallucinations and saying that that is historical.
> Bart isn’t saying Paul’s hallucinations were real.
“Remember, he was trying to knock down that I kept using BE quotes that there WAS evidence for Jesus outside and within the Bible.”
I of course showed exactly how there ISN’T any evidence for Jesus outside of the bible and that nothing is reliable, or credible IN the bible, for various reasons.
> I explained what those reasons are and how simply referencing something without evidence doesn’t make it evidence any more than referencing the Tooth Fairy.
“This is true, Bart believes Jesus existed and there is non-Biblical evidence as well.”
Yes, Bart “believes” Jesus existed, but clearly says in his book that whether or not Tacitus and Josephus were forgeries, or were not forgeries, the fact remains that they would just be repeating hearsay.
Check ibooks version
> Pg 182 for Pliny the younger.
> Pg 194 for Tacitus.
> Pg 231-233 Josephus.
“As BB(s)J rightly quotes me: “BB(s)J, in his many replies, thought he’d try to take me to tast regarding Bart Ehrman and his stance on the evidence for Jesus (which is Bart Ehrman believes Jesus existed).”
Yep, Bart BELIEVES a historical nutcase named Jesus existed who wasn’t God.
– I said there is no credible, or reliable evidence outside of the bible.
> There isn’t.
> Bart agrees.
“Now this is true and well known to those who actually follow him and read and listen to him- which I have!”
I never said that Bart didn’t believe the historical nutcase who wasn’t God existed.
> Common knowledge.
– I did say that the bible isn’t historical, reliable, or credible.
– Why would Bart think that Paul’s visions are evidence and historical?
> Last I checked Bart didn’t believe in God, didn’t think Jesus was God and didn’t think Paul REALLY had visions, or voices from Jesus.
> I know Bart believes people had delusional visions and hallucinations, like he mentions about in several other videos
> This is the same as saying that this woman had God tell her to kill her kids:
> You know the way God was said to have told Abraham?
“So, since BB(s)J can’t show me wrong in this regard, he changes tactics: Bart doesn’t provide evidence, it’s just his opinion, and he has a motive.”
He repeatedly says how mythicists aren’t taken seriously.
– His career and work does involve Jesus having to be real.
> This can’t be denied.
” The link that Crackpipe provided contains no evidence whatsoever and just states Ehrman’s OPINION.”
It’s an interview, he’s selling the sizzle not the steak. Bart goes into the “what” evidence and “why” it is in his book. It’s called marketing…”
Yes I read his book that he clearly says he doesn’t think it will change the minds of mythicists who are convinced that Jesus didn’t exist.
> This is of course because Bart knows that Atheists will not get past the truth no matter how many times Bart tries to make them forget the truth.
> The truth is that the ONLY evidence that Bart is offering is using the bible to prove the bible.
> This is of course circular reasoning.
> This is of course basing Jesus’ existence off of the ramblings of one man who said he “heard voices from a divine being that came from outer space”.
– What’s funny is what Crackpipe is using as a defense, which are the words of a man who says that everything about Jesus being divine, or even important, or significant whatsoever, are not true.
– Crackpipe seems to be missing the parts where Bart explains how Jesus wasn’t God and was only a nutcase who really was a complete imbecile.
– The fact that Crackpipe is using Bart to prove he isn’t a brainwashed idiot because Bart says Jesus is real, still means that Crackpipe is a brainwashed idiot for thinking that an insignicant nobody is the omnipotent master and creator of the universe.
“Remember, I’m just establishing that I was correct with my quotes of Bart.”
Nope. Bart still doesn’t think that the gospels and NT are historical and Bart still doesn’t think that Jesus talked to Paul.
> Bart also knows that 11 of the gospels are forgeries.
> Therefore not historical, or reliable.
“So then BB(s)J puts up a YouTube video that is supposed to show that Bart DOESN’T believe there is evidence outside the Bible:
“- Bart openly says that there is no evidence of Jesus outside of the bible. Clearly says that if Jesus did exist he was illiterate too.”
Again, BB(s)J is wrong on Bart, right off the bat. Makes one begin to question BB(s)J’s comprehension…
Bart did NOT say “there is no evidence of Jesus outside the Bible.”
Bart rightly says there’s no evidence outside the Bible WITHIN the 1st century. He does believe there is evidence outside the Bible, as I have quoted him on what he says it is.
Not sure why BB(s)J fails to notice that…”
So Crackpipe has of course proven himself wrong again since Bart clearly says in his book that whether the 3 references were forged, or not, there is nothing to suggest that they weren’t “hearsay”.
– Again pg 182, 194 and 231-233 on ibook version.
“But what I find interesting is Bart’s discussion re: Mythicists.
Maybe BB(s)J will quite Bart on it…probs not.”
Hey if Bart is gonna say something I agree with then I will of course bring it up.
– If Bart is going to say something that proves my point then of course I’m going to point it out.
– Crackpipe is just at a lose lose situation really.
– Crackpipe can pretend I’m not making my points and attempt to make me think he actually is making points all he wants.
– There will still be no evidence of Jesus and Bart Ehrman will still tell you that if Jesus did exist at some point then he was just a meaningless nobody, who was not a god, or THE god, or divine in any way.
“> How could the omnipotent master of the universe not be able to read? WTF?! He made a good point about that too.”
The context of which was to explain “why” there were no written works by Jesus.”
Crackpipe fails to see that I was pointing out evidence of Crackpipe’s delusion.
– Since when is “God” unable to read?
– This was a point being made that this is EVIDENCE that Jesus wasn’t “God” or divine in any way, or that he didn’t exist.
– If Jesus was somehow a divine omniscient being then he would magically know how to read and write.
> Or he didn’t exist.
> If Jesus existed then he would have written somethings and lots of them.
> If he existed he would have wrote things and we would have them because we were supposed to have them, because “God” would want us to have read his words.
> He then must not have existed.
> Either way proves that Crackpipe is living a lie.
“Bart Ehrman BELIEVES Jesus existed but he has no evidence that he did.”
Bart wrote an entire book laying out the evidence, perhaps you should read it. He was reading FROM it in the video.”
Yeah I read the whole book thoroughly and Bart bases the entire existence of Jesus off of one man’s writings.
– Again reminding Crackpipe that this is no different than Joseph Smith and the angel Moroni and Mohammed and the angel Gabriel.
> So you have to wonder if Crackpipe believes the 2 above stories of Joe and Moe?
> If he doesn’t then you have to wonder why, since he is putting Jesus under the same standard of evidence as Joe and Moe, or more to the point of Gabriel and Moroni.
> Oh wait a second, I just remembered why:
– Also reminding Crackpipe that Bart admits in the book that even if the entries outside of the bible weren’t forgeries inserted later, that they were just hearsay based.
> Clearly says so in his book “Did Jesus Exist.
> Pages 182, 194, 231-233 in ibook straight up version.
-” Again reminding Crackpipe that Bart does not think Jesus was a god and clearly states that Bart is an agnostic with Atheistic leanings and he says that too.”
Yep! Several times I said Bart didn’t believe Jesus was God. And that he wasn’t a Christian.
So you’re not reminding me of anything…but thanks anyway!”
I think it really is important to keep reminding Crackpipe, because Crackpipe seems to be in great need of being reminded that he is using someone as a source who thinks christianity is a complete lie and a delusion.
– Crackpipe also forgets that Bart is still basing his “evidence” off of the rantings of ONE MAN who never met Jesus and created an enterprising business from simply telling people “he had visions”.
– Crackpipe doesn’t seem to see that his comparison is no different than proving Santa Claus exists by saying the historical Santa Claus existed.
> The difference is that Jesus is a “Santa” for grown ups.
> The difference is that St. Nicholas was a real person who they actually had evidence he was a historical person.
> Still no evidence of Jesus other than the hearsay of stories from Paul written 20 years later which furthered his monopoly empire.
> Still no evidence of Jesus outside of the bible either since the 3 sources were either forgery or based on meaningless hearsay.
“- I already debunked why Pliny the younger, Tacitus and Josephus don’t work, no matter what Bart Ehrman says, I repeatedly show how they are not credible and non-reliable and therefore CANNOT be used as evidence.”
So BB(s)J is claiming superior scholarship over Bart’s!”
– Bart admits there could be some forgeries.
– Bart clearly says that these are based on hearsay from christian sources.
> This is another way of saying “plain old common knowledge of what other people BELIEVED”.
“- Bart also says again that there ISN’T any evidence for Jesus outside of the bible.”
Wrong. He’s never said this. BB(s)J either doesn’t understand this or doesn’t care, but he’s wrong as we have seen.
Why BB(s)J do you keep saying this when it’s WRONG!”
3 minute mark for starters (No eyewitnesses).
– There is just no way to say this, but Crackpipe is just dumb, like really really really dumb.
> Crackpipe is sickeningly dumb.
> I can’t believe so much of time has been wasted simply because Crackpipe is such an idiot.
– Let’s go through this vid again and see what it is that Crackpipe just can’t get!
– 7 min in> Talks about mythicist claim that no evidence of Jesus exists ANYWHERE until references are made over 80 years later.
> These as we know were simply based on hearsay and nothing else.
– 8 min in> Mentions Josephus
> Which we know from Bart’s book that Bart says that even if the 3 sources aren’t a forgery (which Bart doesn’t deny the possibility some are forgeries) that they are just repeating hearsay anyway from christian sources.
– 8 min 40 seconds in> says that only outside sources are Josephus, Pliny the younger and Tacitus, but that mythicists say they are forgeries.
> But reminding Crackpipe again that even if they weren’t forgeries that they are just common knowledge from christian hearsay.
– 9 min in> Says that mythicists say that they were forged.
– 10 min 35 seconds in> says that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are the only sources.
– 14 min 20 seconds in> Talks about what evidence he does not have.
– 14 min 40 seconds in> No hard physical evidence.
– 14 min 50 seconds in> No archeological evidence of any kind.
– I really do challenge anyone to view what I just said as not being correct when I clearly show it.
“- Bart says that the only evidence of Jesus is IN the bible.
Wrong, again. Lol.”
Yawn. Nope, Crackpipe is clearly wrong and I clearly show it.
– Let’s review this pretty basic stuff AGAIN!
> Bart says there is no hard evidence. 14:40
> Bart says that their is no archeological evidence of Jesus, or writings. 14: 50
> Never denies that the 3 sources could be forgeries.
> Says that even if the 3 sources weren’t forgeries then there is nothing to say that they aren’t just plain old christian hearsay.
> This is hearsay that is 60-80 years later.
– The christian sources and writings are clearly the only “evidence” of Jesus and that if it wasn’t for Paul we would not have any evidence.
– Bart even reminds us in his book that Paul is just passing on traditions he has heard. (1 Corrinthians 11:22-24, 15:3-5).
– So now whatever Crackpipe says is just more lies, stupidity and desperation.
Actually Bart continues:“What I show in Did Jesus Exist? is that there are so many Christian sources that can be used by historians that there is really no doubt at all that Jesus at least existed.”
So this is what we have then:
– Christian sources that are based on the ramblings of one man (Paul).
– Again Bart is proving that Mormonism is true and islam is true if we are using the same logic as Bart is using here.
– As I’ve shown though Bart is too scared to talk about islam.
– Mormonism is so ridiculous that that is the only reason Bart hasn’t even bothered to take it seriously.
> The fact that only 15 million people follow mormonism and that everything about mormonism is so ridiculous are the only reasons Bart doesn’t say anything about it.
> Mormonism has more evidence for it and makes just as much sense.
> Both were created from one man who talked nonsense, just like islam.
” I guess Bart means like Eusebius and the many things he forged and quoted that we have copies of copies of.”
Maybe you should read the book to find out!”
I did and Eusebius was mentioned.
– Reminding Crackpipe that even Bart agrees with me about the completely obvious part about how even if they weren’t forgeries that they were complete hearsay.
> Reminding Crackpipe again that there is no evidence for Jesus and that Crackpipe is a gullible idiot.
“So I quote Bart saying:
“Paul must have converted to believe in Jesus within two or three years of the traditional date of Jesus’ death. And Paul knew some facts about Jesus’ life; he knew some of his teachings; he knew his closest disciple Peter; and he knew his brother James. Personally! If Jesus didn’t exist, you would think that his brother would know about it.”
AGAIN reminding Crackpipe that the only evidence we have of Jesus is not evidence at all.
– The delusional nonsensical ramblings and writings of one man are not evidence but are exactly that, the delusional nonsensical ramblings of one man.
> If Paul were to write such delusional ramblings today then people would take him as seriously as they would David Koresh.
> Does Crackpipe think David Koresh was the new savior? Somehow I doubt it.
“And BB(s)J combats this point with: analogy. Instead of addressing the facts about Paul’s letters directly, he just erroneously compares them to works by others that have no bearing on Paul’s letters…”
Of course Crackpipe simply just ignores and dismisses rather than admit, or consider that Crackpipe’s beliefs are just the same old stupidity which makes no sense.
> As many times as he deflects and avoids, just shows he’s too afraid to accept the truth.
> Crackpipe will of course just dismiss the fact that his belief in his delusional lie has just as much evidence as other peoples delusional lies that he doesn’t believe in.
> Crackpipe will of course not see the truth, which is that he is living a lie, just like all religious people are living a lie.
> He will not see that Crackpipe’s nonsensical religion makes no more sense than anyone else’s nonsensical religion that he wasn’t brainwashed to.
> He will not see that the ONLY reason he will believe HIS nonsensical religion is because THAT is the one that he was brainwashed to.
“I say: “So either Bart Ehrman is a complete IDIOT or there IS actual evidence for Jesus and one can either accept or reject it.”
Actually no Bart Ehrman is not an idiot but he is someone who is simply telling us his opinion and nothing else.
– This is an opinion based on the writings of ONE person (Paul) and nothing else.
– Last I checked a book of lies is still a book of lies and basing ones entire existence on a book of lies is pretty stupid.
> The bible is definitely a book of lies.
– At least Bart is agnostic and doesn’t have to base his life on lies, he just has to give an opinion that the liar existed and the liar who lied about that liar.
“To which BB(s)J says: “No Crackpipe, Bart is just giving his OPINION, that’s it. He repeatedly says that there isn’t any evidence, over and over. I guess you missed those parts.
Let me show you this vid again:
Again BB(s)J shows his laziness or inability to comprehend correctly what he reads and hears.
But not ONCE does Bart say there is “no evidence” for Jesus. Hasn’t happened, doesn’t happen. Not even in the video…
Crackpipe truly is a stupid human being. I really don’t think anybody can know how much I despise this person and all the time that I have wasted on such a stupid annoying obnoxious moron.
– He says there is no evidence for Jesus, so why is that so hard?
> Crackpipe is forgetting the forgeries and forgetting that Paul saying Jesus told him things and basing christianity off of scripture is no different than mormons and muslims doing the same thing.
> Crackpipe will just cowardly not even respond or acknowledge these points which is typical religious deflection and dishonesty.
“So let’s look at the quotes:
14 min 40 sec in- “There is no hard physical evidence, or archeological evidence of any kind for Jesus.
(Glad Bart cleared that up).”
Ah, but no quote where Bart says this isn’t really an argument against Jesus’ existence…”
LOL Crackpipe is just wasting everyones time.
– Since when is “no hard physical evidence” ever not a good point?
– Last I checked “no physical evidence” is a pretty good point.
– What exactly are Crackpipe’s reasons again for not believing any other religions?
> Pretty sure that “no hard physical evidence” would be one of them.
“15 min 30 sec in- “We have no writings made by Jesus of any kind”.”
Yep…not really an argument again…”
SMFH Of course it’s evidence.
– Why wouldn’t God the omnipotent master of the universe, or even his divine omnipotent son have any writings if he were made human, unless he didn’t exist?
> If he was simply human, well there isn’t any evidence of a historical Jesus outside of Paul’s ramblings.
> So I’m waiting for the part where Crackpipe says that he believes in a historical Jesus who was a psychotic nobody and his entire religion is based on the ramblings of the existence of a madman.
> Bart says Jesus was an apocolyptic preacher.
> If Crackpipe believes what Ehrman is saying then he was saying Jesus was not only a nutcase but an idiot also.
> I see no difference between Crackpipe believing some idiot who may have or may not have existed being god 2000 years ago, or Crackpipe thinking Charles Manson, or David Koresh are “God”.
> Either way Crackpipe is an idiot and a nutcase.
“16 min 15 sec in- “No Greek or Roman author mentions Jesus in the entire 1st century”.
(As I repeatedly keep saying).”
Yep, we have never disagreed on this point. Not once.
And this doesn’t equal Bart saying there isn’t evidence outside the Bible, which he believes there is…”
No, Bart clearly says that the outside sources could be forgeries, but that even if they weren’t forgeries that they are just hearsay from christian sources and nothing else.
– This of course is the same reason that Bart calls the gospels not historical because they are written completely on hearsay.
> That is of course hearsay that goes against history and repeatedly contradicts itself.
“18 min 15 sec in- “A myth that Romans kept records of everything”
(So much for what you were saying about Tacitus then and his wonderful record checking of so many years before).”
LOL! Funny how BB(s)J missed how this was an argument AGAINST Mythicists claims!”
LOL The joke is on Crackpipe then because why did he try to use it as if Crackpipe was making a point?
– It simply means there is no evidence either way.
– It doesn’t matter to me if they did keep records, or didn’t.
> Because I am not the one deluding myself into believing a magical jewish illiterate zombie created the universe and gives a crap whether I’m circumsized, if I were gay, or frequently visit rub and tugs.
“Second, it’s HISTORIANS like Bart who claim Tacitus used Roman sources, and in my links and quotes said which ones he used!
Bart doesn’t say the Romans DIDN’T record ANYTHING, just not everything.”
That’s funny then that your buddy Bart says this on pages 193-194:
> Tacitus didn’t say if there really was a guy named Jesus who really lived.
> Got his info from hearsay stories.
> Not basing this off of anything historical.
– Now if Crackpipe would just wake up to reality and the real world and realize that everything he believes about his religion and every other religion that he doesn’t believe in is a lie.
> Also that Crackpipe is brainwashed and that the only reason he believes his particular religion is because he has been brainwashed to it and if he were brainwashed to those other religions then they would be what he believes.
“21 min 20 sec in- “Josephus isn’t mentioned by a single person in his day”.
> Well that sure is convenient then isn’t it?”
Not sure what BB(s)J is arguing here, but I’m sure he missed the point of what Bart was saying, as this was a point against Mythicists too.
This has just become painful to be reminded that people like Crackpipe exist.
– There’s even less evidence of Jesus because nobody even mentions the guy who supposedly mentions Jesus.
– Jesus was that insignicant that nobody even wrote or cared about the guy who wrote about him or was said to have written about him.
“But it doesn’t matter, because Bart has an agenda and thus cannot be credible to BB(s)J.
“- If Crackpipe however doesn’t see though how much the importance of the existence of the historical Jesus is to Ehrman then Crackpipe is just fooling himself.
> If Ehrman has nothing to gain then how come all his books including the one he is promoting “From Jesus To God” all depend on the fact that Jesus had to have existed?”
Certainly couldn’t be because he believes Jesus DID exist…”
Well Bart’s entire argument that it was a guy who hallucinated and heard voices who also made a monopoly of churches, really doesn’t quite cut it for me sorry.
– Again saying that this exact same argument is what Bart should be using to prove mormonism and islam are true and so are Moroni and Gabriel.
> Instead Bart thinks mormonism is stupid and based on lies and that he has admitted that he is too terrified to say anything about islam.
– Oh and I’m also reminding Crackpipe how Paul told people to “pay their taxes because God wanted them too”.
> This really sounds like Paul just wanted people to pay money and sounds like he just wanted to manipulate people.
“Romans 13:1-7 New King James Version (NKJV)
Submit to Government
13 Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. 4 For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. 5 Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience’ sake. 6 For because of this you also pay taxes, for they are God’s ministers attending continually to this very thing. 7 Render therefore to all their due: taxes to whom taxes are due, customs to whom customs, fear to whom fear, honor to whom honor.”
> If Crackpipe can’t see how the above chapter is all about manipulation, greed and money, based on an agenda, then I don’t know what else to say besides “Crackpipe is truly hopeless”.
“I’m sure people would really be lining up to buy his book if he promoted that Jesus didn’t exist. DUH! Think about it.”
Actually they probably would, he has a following, my guess is BB(s)J would buy it to and USE it against Christians.”
LOL I think the brainwashed christian population is quite a lot bigger than the Atheist, or agnostic population.
– I read it but found it to be a complete waste of time (regarding anything n Crackpipe’s benefit, or behalf) since Bart’s book really said nothing other than “Paul says Jesus existed so Jesus must be real” which I will be honest and say I was shocked at how absurd this “evidence” is that he presented.
> Though I wasn’t surprised.
I recommend that Crackpipe and everyone else read “I am Christ” by Michael Sherlock. It really is an awesome book that says it all.
(After I post all these responses, the list of Crackpipe’s lies and the evidence of Jesus is meaningless 2 article that he helped make, then I will do a book review on Michael’s book)
(Seriously is an awesome book)
“BB(s)J doesn’t like that Bart believes Jesus existed and thus must now find a reason to discredit him, rather than seeing Bart’s arguments (such as buying the book) and dealing with those.
This way, BB(s)J doesn’t have to deal with them but sticking with fallacious logic!”
Well having bought the book I found it useful for showing Crackpipe how he is wrong in many ways.
– It’s not that I’m trying to discredit Bart, because he is brilliant in many ways and I will never forget the way he butthurt WLC like nobody I’ve ever seen before (though probably tied with Sean Carrol).
– I also cannot help but be perfectly honest and say that Bart’s ONLY evidence of Jesus being Paul the apostle was quite absurd.
> Circular reasoning using the bible to prove the bible.
> The words of ONE MAN (Paul) with an agenda who said that he had visions and voices.
> Ehrman doesn’t believe in Jesus being divine in any way, so that means that he doesn’t believe that Jesus talked to Paul.
> This means that Crackpipe also believes that Paul is purely lying about talking to Jesus.
> If Paul is lying about talking to Jesus then obviously there is nothing stopping him from lying about other things.
“Then he quotes me where I show BB(s)J misquoting Bart in that first post…”
No idea what reference he’s talking about but I most likely addressed it and debunked it as I always do since Crackpipe never makes any point and just wastes peoples time.
Let’s go over what Crackpipe has said here shall we?
– 1 min 40 sec- Talks about how the gospels are not historical (this means they aren’t reliable)”
Yep, Bart’s talking about the reliability of the Gospels in a SPECIFIC context: the Resurrection. And in this he claims OPINION! He doesn’t find them to be credible in that context, because of his belief.
Bart doesn’t like them for that purpose.”
BWAHAHA Every once and a while Crackpipe says some really mindblowingly funny stuff.
– Bart actually says that the gospels simply aren’t historical and says they aren’t reliable.
> Bart repeatedly says how the gospels are not historical and not reliable here:
> Let’s allow Crackpipe to tell us what particular things Bart finds credible in the gospels that Bart explains in the vid.
– What “BELIEF” does Bart have again?
> Bart LACKS a belief in the bible or God, or Jesus being divine, or Jesus resurrection because there is no evidence.
> Bart doesn’t believe in any anything divine.
> Crackpipe can try to tell us that “Bart believes everything is a lie about Jesus and God and the resurrection”, but the truth is that because Bart simply lacks the evidence he lacks the reason to believe.
> The funny part though is that Crackpipe says that “Bart is just giving his OPINION that he doesn’t believe the resurrection happened.”
> However Crackpipe attacks me for saying that “Bart is just giving his opinion that Jesus existed” and “his opinion that Paul is evidence”.
“Okay, but were does Bart say that Paul’s letters are “unreliable” and “non-credible”? He doesn’t. Because Bart knows that Paul’s letters are NOT used to defend the belief of Jesus’ resurrection. However, like Bart, most people do agree that Paul’s letters are evidence for the EXISTENCE of Jesus.”
Reading my quote I had a “where was my head?” moment. As soon as I reread what I wrote I knew it was wrong!!
Odd BB(s)J didn’t see it! I bet others did…
For some reason I wrote that Paul’s letters aren’t used to defend the resurrection, that is wrong. Way wrong!
I am aware of at least one person who used Paul’s letters: Mike Licona.
Even while brainwashed I still can see when I write something incorrect. So I will go back and correct this gross error.
In any case, my point still stands: Bart DOES find Paul’s letters credible and reliable, just not for the Resurrection ONLY.”
So let’s remind Crackpipe again of how credible and reliable Bart believes Paul’s letter to be:
– 20 years later they were written.
– Forgeries big time, Paul or not:
Acts of the Apostles
First Epistle of Peter
Second Epistle of Peter
Epistle of James
Epistle of Jude
Second Epistle of Paul to the Thessalonians
First Epistle of Paul to Timothy
Second Epistle of Paul to Timothy
Epistle of Paul to Titus
Epistle of Paul to the Ephesians
Epistle of Paul to the Colossians
– Bart doesn’t believe Paul talked to Jesus.
– Doesn’t sound like much of Bart thinking it’s reliable.
– I highly doubt anyone will ever even bother reading these responses.
“I then say: Okay, but does Bart say those words at all?
8:16 into the video, “MY conclusion: These are NOT reliable historical accounts. There are too many discrepancies.”
Bart’s referring to the GOSPELS here. And giving HIS conclusion, opinion.”
– Crackpipe is disagreeing with me when I say that Bart is just giving his “OPINION” that Jesus existed.
> Then Crackpipe has the nerve to say that Bart is just giving his “OPINION” speaking out against the resurrection.
> What a douchbag Crackpipe is.
> What a time sucking hypocritical delusional brainwashed douchbag.
” My point was obviously that Bart was contradicting himself. Which he was. He already said that Paul’s letters were 20 years later and that Paul wasn’t an eyewitness and wasn’t there and never knew Jesus.”
Here again BB(s)J doesn’t understand what Bart was saying.
Bart doesn’t contradict himself at all, but spells out VERY plainly his point and BB(s)J still missed it. (And he was the one who originally linked it!)”
Just another example of Crackpipe lying.
– Crackpipe knows he’s lying of course but this just screams desperation and grasping at straws.
– If Bart doesn’t contradict himself then why does he do the following….
> Not hold Paul to the same standards as the gospels?
> Not take Joseph Smith and Moroni seriously?
> Not see that 35 seconds in here Bart contradicts his requirements when Paul is Bart’s ONLY source.
“- This is no different than somebody saying they were witness to a murder 20 years ago, but they weren’t there and never met the murderer, or the victim.
> So what judge, or court would give a flying crap about what he said then?”
Wow. What a complete misunderstanding of what Bart says about Paul…”
No that was a pretty good comparison.
– I wasn’t talking about what Bart was saying about Paul (which shows what an obvious moronic imbecile that Crackpipe is).
– I was showing the comparison of Paul proving Jesus and how irrational and unreliable Paul’s letters were as evidence.
> I nailed it pretty good.
“But it gets better:
“> Is Crackpipe saying Paul knew Jesus and he was there when he was crucified?”
LOL!! Wow, it almost seems like he’s purposely TRYING to not comprehend what is written and said and imagine things being said!”
Crackpipe gets WORSE!
– Crackpipe really is on crack. I mean he must be.
– Paul was not saying he met Jesus
> So not evidence.
– Bart even says here that Paul not being an eyewitness was not evidence.
– Crackpipe is doing nothing but deflecting the fact that Paul really is not evidence no matter how much Crackpipe’s delusional faith tries to tell him that it is.
“I can’t help it if Ehrman contradicts himself and implies something different 5 years later, then later says he’s saying something different but really isn’t.”
Bart isn’t contradicting himself, you are failing to understand his argument…
He then reposts a video:
No, Crackpipe is failing to see that we know he is pretending to make a point when he obviously doesn’t have one.
– Bart said in one video that Paul was his evidence of Jesus being historical (again reminding Crackpipe that Bart the expert has no reason to think Jesus was anything other than a crazy illiterate nobody).
– In the other video Bart said the gospels weren’t reliable because there were no eyewitnesses and based on hearsay.
> Paul himself admits that he’s just repeating the hearsay of scriptures.
> Paul also admits he wasn’t there when Jesus died and never met, or knew Jesus either.
> These standards Bart has of the gospels should apply to Paul’s letters too.
> Nothing Crackpipe says will change that.
– In typical Crackpipe fashion, he tells me I don’t understand something, then never tells me what it is that I supposedly don’t understand.
“> Bart was talking about how the gospels are not reliable and not historical.
> He listed because the authors of the gospels weren’t there and they were 40 years apart.”
So far so good. So he has the ability to understand…”
That makes one of us.
– Now it’s gotten to the point where Crackpipe is just rambling and just doing everything he can to SOUND like he’s making a point when he really has no idea what point to make.
” He implied that 20 years later and not an eyewitness was non-credible and non-reliable.”
ONLY within the context of the resurrection…
NOT the context of knowing that Jesus existed.”
Nope. Bart is clearly talking about everything that are in the gospels.
> Not just the resurrection.
> Crackpipe is lying again.
> See again for yourself:
“As Bart said in your first video (in this reply) James would know if he didn’t have a brother.
Bart finds Paul’s letters to be VERY credible an reliable as it pertains to Jesus’ existence.”
Bart is taking Paul’s word that he knew Jesus’ brothers.
– Bart is taking the word of one man who had an agenda and a reason to lie and feed people propaganda.
– Written 20 years later from said events by someone who had hallucinations and predicted the end of the world would come soon.
> Last I checked we are still here, so definitely not reliable.
– Paul is taking the word of a man (Jesus) who simply was simply doing the same old pattern that everyone does who creates a religion (hijacking someone else’s).
> Christianity hijacked judaism, Paul hijacked christianity to control it and exploit people with it.
> Muslims hijacked judaism, the same as mormons hijacked christiany.
– At the same time Bart believes over half of the new testament to be forgeries and even pieces of the gospels.
> He also knows Jesus didn’t comeback from the dead.
> He also knows that Paul never talked to Jesus as a vision.
> This should simply dismiss everything Paul says as not reliable for the same reasons that Bart dismisses mormonism and would publicly dismiss islam if he didn’t fear for his life.
“> I said there is no evidence of Jesus outside of the bible for which Bart is perfectly aware of.”
This is FALSE as we have seen, though BB(s)J ignores this fact or continues to miss it!
Nope totally TRUE. Crackpipe is just desperate, delusional and dumb.
– I repeatedly showed above exactly where Bart says there isn’t any hard physical evidence of Jesus.
– Bart mentions 3 references of Jesus, but doesn’t deny the possibility that they are forgeries and acknowledges that many people think so and some references more than others.
– Said how each reference whether they were a forgery or not was still just hearsay repeated by christians that they were referencing.
> Pages 182, 194, 231-233.
– Also wanted to remind everyone that Crackpipe is a total loser who has wasted his life believing something that has no evidence and that he is a brainwashed slave of a lie.
“> I repeatedly showed how Bart said the gospels were non-historical.”
Yep…no one disagrees there, Bart said that in a specific context.
>” I repeatedly showed how Bart contradicts himself about what he says and how he says the gospels are not reliable, or historical and then uses the same standards for Paul.”
It shows YOU don’t understand how historical evaluations of ancient writings is done. Or Bart’s arguments.”
Nope that’s exactly what I did and clearly used Bart’s own arguments to support what I said.
– Shows that Crackpipe fails to see own hypocrisy when he says that “Bart is just giving his OPINION regarding the gospels being historically unreliable and non-factual”, but when Bart doesn’t specifically say that Paul’s letters aren’t reliable and says that his letters are “evidence” of Jesus, then that’s ok.
– Let’s remind Crackpipe that Bart confirms 11 of the New Testament are forgeries and how many letters were taken OUT of the new testament because they were forgeries and for other reasons.
> Forgeries aren’t reliable last I checked.
– Reminding Crackpipe that the ONLY “evidence” that Bart is basing Jesus’ existence on are Paul’s writings.
> Written 20 years later which is part of the reason that Bart said the gospels were unreliable because it had such a huge gap in time of being written.
> Bart does not specify once how Paul could not be making the whole thing about Jesus’ brothers up.
> The fact that Paul could have simply been refering to Paul referring to James as a “brother” as in “ALL baptized christians are brothers” is never completely discluded from what I read.
> The fact remains that Paul’s story of having visions of Jesus are still no different than Joseph Smith seeing Moroni and Mohammed seeing Gabriel for 20 years.
> All 3 stories are just as believable by those who were specifically brainwashed to each religion.
> You have to wonder if Crackpipe ever tried looking at his own religion through the eyes of a muslim and thought about WHY they believe that christianity is ridiculous, not true and false and why they believe islam.
> You have to wonder if Crackpipe ever tried looking through the eyes of an Atheist and seeing how ALL religions are stupid.
> You also have to wonder if Crackpipe really is as much of a loser as he comes across as. I say “yes”.
“You LUMP the Gospels AND Paul’s letters as if they are one document, they aren’t. Each are separately looked at and given merit, if it’s due.
Paul’s letters are found to be reliable and credible as to the existence of Jesus.”
LOL Says the brainwashed loser who is the slave of a lie.
Let’s examine what Crackpipe just said and expose it for what it is….
– All those wonderful little things that make Jesus so wonderful in the gospels are nothing but hearsay and not backed up by Paul in any way.
> No miracles.
> No parables.
> No virgin birth.
> Barely ANY stories of Jesus’ life.
– So AGAIN Crackpipe is relying and basing EVERYTHING that is being said to be “evidence” of Jesus, from the words of a guy who was financing a monopoly of businesses.
> Paul was basically a cult leader and saying the same things that cult leaders always say.
> Crackpipe is both in denial and oblivious to these more than obvious things.
> It doesn’t matter how many times Crackpipe says “well Bart Ehrman says” because that won’t change a thing about how unreliable Paul was.
– Reminding Crackpipe again how the NT is full of comfirmed forgeries, 80 books were removed from the bible and that science and actual history disprove the entire OT.
– Again also reminding Crackpipe that Bart thinks that the gospels are unreliable and not historical and based on hearsay, but THAT Crackpipe seems to have a problem with. (Surprising LOL)
“Reject it as you may, but it’s BECAUSE Bart applies the same standards to the Gospels and Paul’s letters he finds Paul’s letters to be credible. That’s a huge point you miss, because you fail to understand Bart’s argument within its context.”
Because Paul met Jesus’ brothers.
– That’s it.
– Read the entire book and that’s all I got out of it.
– Bart says there isn’t any hard evidence of Jesus and there isn’t any archeological evidence of Jesus.
– Bart says that even if the 3 outside sources aren’t forged, that they still would just be evidence of christian hearsay and nothing else.
> Doesn’t deny that they could be forgeries though.
>” Notice how he says that people who are NOT convinced will NOT be convinced by reading his book…. Now why is that?”
You tell me, because if you recall that statement is aimed at folks like you: Mythicists.”
Actually no. That is where Crackpipe is wrong.
– I acknowledge the POSSIBILITY that there was some lunatic imbecile loser named Jesus, or whatever other variant of names who was a complete irrelevant nobody.
> This has always been the case.
– I simply state the flat out truth and nothing else.
> The truth is that there is no evidence Jesus existed, as in nothing, nada, zilch.
> The truth is that the only “evidence” of Jesus are the ramblings of the ancient equivalent of Pat Robertson, who claims to have met Jesus brothers 20 years after the fact.
> The truth is that these 2 guys are saying that they ARE Jesus and the fact that people believe that they are Jesus, proves how stupid people really are.
“Remember what he says right before and right after that?
How about you re-watch it and quote it verbatim…
I said: 2) Bart believes there is evidence outside the Bible.”
BB(s)J says: Which I clearly explained multiple multiple times why nothing Bart says will make those THREE pieces of evidence credible.”
And you keep saying he believes there ISN’T evidence outside the Bible…which is wrong.”
No I am quite right.
– Bart doesn’t deny the possibility that they are forgeries.
– Says straight out when talking about each one SPECIFICALLY that even if they weren’t forgeries that they were nothing but christian HEARSAY that was going around through word of mouth,
> Josephus was a jew who didn’t believe in “christ”.
> Tacitus and Pliny were Romans who thought christians were imbeciles and wrote more about Hercules and Zeus than they did about Jesus.
“I wrote: “3) Bart believes Paul’s letters are great evidence.”Which is true, he does…
Then BB(s)J says this: “So why does he say the gospels are not reliable, not historical and can’t be considered evidence for multiple numbers of reasons, then not hold Paul’s letters to the same standards?”
That’s very amusing that Crackpipe somehow thinks he’s making a point.
– Again reminding Crackpipe that Bart’s big chunk of evidence was Paul knowing Jesus brothers.
– Again reminding Crackpipe that he is simply the exact opposite of me and saying that Bart is simply stating his OPINION that the gospels are not reliable and not historical, but Crackpipe is agreeing with Bart that Paul’s writings are “evidence” simply because Paul knew Jesus’s brothers.
> The difference is that I am giving specific examples of why Paul’s letters are not evidence of Jesus and quite meaningless.
> Crackpipe is giving no examples or evidence of how, or why the gospels are historical.
> Crackpipe has also not said how his religious divine figure communicating with Paul, is any more believable than Joe’s or Moe’s divine figure.
> This is not a new argument.
Ricard Carrier says how and why the gospels and Acts are nothing but nonsense.
“Maybe BB(s)J should get Bart’s book, then again maybe not…
Here’s my all-time favorite from BB(s)J:
“- I believe either that Crackpipe is on unemployment and that is what pays his rent and why he has so much free time, or he lives in his parents basement and sponges off them.”
Not really funny, just disturbing that Crackpipe says the things he does and thinks the way he demonstrates that he thinks.
– Crackpipe definitely has proved what a loser he is.
– I did enjoy Bart’s book.
> Also Richard Carrier’s responses to the book.
“Boy does BB(s)J like to speculate!
What evidence does BB(s)J have to back this up I wonder? :)”
Well let’s list the reasons then:
– That Crackpipe spends all his time responding to me and not doing anything actually worthwhile, productive, or sane.
– The fact that Crackpipe couldn’t actually work, or have a job because he spends too much time responding to me.
– Crackpipe is such an unfunny loser who repeatedly makes me vomit with how unfunny and obnoxious he is.
– The fact that Crackpipe seems to waste so much time on a complete delusion that he is too brainwashed and stupid to see is the most evil and harmful thing on the planet.
– The fact that Crackpipe wastes so much time warping reality, cherry picking his bible and his religion and justifying absurdities and atrocities, that there’s no way he could be anyone else other than someone who either lives in his parents basement on disability, or on unemployment because he’s so creepy and annoying and no one wants to hire him.
– The fact that Crackpipe is so creepy, stupid and such a weirdo, that he appears to have dedicated his life to defending something that is so harmful, idiotic and evil and he can’t even tell that he is the one destroying the world and ruining lives.
“I said: “It really bothers BB(s)J when other atheists get on him and don’t agree 100 percent with him. In fact one was on his case just before he quit.
Not sure why he chooses to let them get under his skin like that, but there it is. Guess that’s the price one pays when they chose to be an “angry atheist” (as he described himself on his twitter account) rather than trying to be a happy one.”
BB(s)J says: “No, what Crackpipe has misunderstood is this:”
– It angered me that what little time I had on Twitter, I was fighting with people who were representing themselves as rational people by basically standing for Atheism, but then DEFENDED religion.”
He chose to be angry and fight with them…”
Well yeah, why wouldn’t I?
– I compare what I was saying to those Atheists who defend religion to being angry at people who are not child abusers, but would defend child abusers and child abuse.
> So basically Crackpipe is attempting to somehow mock me for standing up and speaking out against human rights violations, insanity, war, bigotry, destructive mental illness and the greatest evil in the entire world.
– Unlike Crackpipe, I can see religions for what they are and not just christianity, but ALL religions.
> Crackpipe on the other hand DEFENDS religion, so he is defending the most evil, harmful and destructive thing there is.
– I fail to see the significance in why I shouldn’t speak out against Atheists who defend religion also.
> This is the equivalent of saying that we shouldn’t arrest police who break the law.
– However, no, they did not get under my skin, that is when someone intentionally tries to irritate you.
> Thet didn’t irritate me, just anger and disgust me that they exist.
> More of a feel sorry for them and feel sorry for the world thing.
“- It angered me that these people who were former christians who became Atheists, who were once child indoctrinated to religion, were saying that religion isn’t brainwashing and that they weren’t brainwashed before when they were religious.”
Okay, so he chooses to be angry at other atheists, as I said, when they disagree with him…”
Why wouldn’t I?
– If Crackpipe was a cop and he sees other cops are drinking and driving and commiting serious crimes, would he not say something?
> I would.
> Shows you what kind of person Crackpipe is.
> He reminds me of the priests who cover up child abuse in the vatican and simply relocate the priests.
– I will continue to speak out against anyone who defends religion whether they are an Atheist, or not.
> Just like Crackpipe will continue to defend religious stupidity and everything christianity does that destroys the Earth, but only against non-believers in christianity, or Crackpipe’s specific strain of christianity.
– I will also add that Crackpipe doesn’t get under my skin either, but he does disgust me with what a vile human douchbagasaurus he is.
“Let’s move on…
“> Having just a BELIEF that a “god” exists, or possibly exists does not make somebody religious. Again, maybe just a “deist”.”
We got some clarity as to his position…
> Not believing a “god” exists, does not make somebody brainwashed, it just makes them an Atheist, or agnostic.”
No issue there…”
My position isn’t that hard to figure out.
– Belief in gods, or a god is not an issue and nobody cares about that.
– Beliefs in harmful, destructive and evil religions that make no sense and destroy society and the world itself are what the true problems are.
– Being a deist is just a harmless innocent and quite meaningless belief that isn’t really brainwashing since there is nothing specifically being brainwashed to.
– Being brainwashed to a religion is a harmful and contagious disease that infects and spreads.
– Also that ALL religions are nothing but lies that make absolutely no sense and can only be believed through brainwashing and child indoctrination.
“- I have good reasons to be angry and I should be angry, in fact EVERYONE should be angry about religion.”
So he is angry and chooses to be so…and seems to want to be.
– As for the Atheists who defend religion and brainwashing “getting under my skin”, well guess what? They don’t.
> They disgust me.
> They might make me fear for society in general with how stupid they are, when they are supposed to be the smart ones.
> They might enrage me that they are wasting my time on them when I could be waking up a religious lunatic.
> They might anger me that they give certain manipulative, lying, dishonest religious apologists credibility, when that is the last sane thing an Atheist should be doing.
> They do NOT however get under my skin.”
Okay…he doesn’t let them get under his skin, but he does choose to be angry at them. I stand corrected.”
Nope, they don’t get under my skin.
– I quit Twitter over a month ago because I am too busy in my real life with school, work and actually having a life.
– What Crackpipe seems to not understand is that the term “get under your skin” means if someone is attempting to annoy, or irritate you.
– The reality is that I did not get irritated, just disgusted and angry simply knowing that Atheists are defending religion.
> It is a good reason to be angry.
– I really in all honesty have no problem repeatedly telling people how I feel and what I know they need to hear.
> It’s just a time issue and I just have no time whatsoever anymore with school and work and preparing to go to university to help attain more knowledge and skills to fight religion.
> My entire life consists of working, school and thinking of ways to reason with people and combat religious mentality.
> At present I just don’t have time to waste with people who are already Atheists and in fact have no more time to be on Twitter at all.
> I really do not have a free moment anymore if I’m not at school, the gym, studying, or writing.
– But no, they did not get under my skin and if I had the time I could quite easily get under their skin, but they will have to wait.
– Just like Crackpipe doesn’t get under my skin, though I know he tries.
> He’s far too much of a pathetic loser with the mentality of a schitzophrenic mental patient to get under anyones skin.
Finally, BB(s)J attempts to provide a list of my lies.
Lie 1- BB(s)J just repeats his points- he gives us no further justification.”
Oh, just one.
Okay. He does, later, say he will get to the list, but we will have to wait for it…”
Well Crackpipe sure does bombard me with his stupidity and nonsense, but like I said it will be great stuff when I put together my article “Evidence of Jesus 2”
> This will have most of the arguments that Crackpipe threw at me that I then
destroyed and will also include Bart Ehrman’s points about Paul and Jesus’s brothers.
> Still have one more article after this one and then the list of Crackpipe’s lies, then I can put together the article destroying all Jesus’s evidence that Crackpipe helped me make.
“Me – “Plus, I believe the readers are intelligent folks and can form their own conclusions when comparing what I say to what you say. Perhaps you disagree?”
“I disagree, only because some people, especially brainwashed religious people are merely looking for someone to simply say complete nonsense because they simply hear what they want to hear.”
Well we see how he feels about his readers…”
What Crackpipe fails to grasp and understand is that religion is what stops people from thinking.
– Religion is what brainwashes and mentally conditions people to ignore evidence and believe nonsense.
– Religion is what causes people to be anti-science and limits peoples potential.
– Religion causes people to not seek answers and better themselves.
– Religion causes people to encourage others to be stupid and accept nonsense.
– Religion causes people to have illogical thinking and to not use reason.
– Religion can only exist if people lie to themselves and to each other.
– Without lying and the forcing of people to accept those lies, religion would not exist in this day and age.
– Without child indoctrination, where children are conditioned to ignore and defy truth, logic, science and evidence, religion would simply just disappear.
“- I have also provided multiple links for which I see on my WordPress that Crackpipe hasn’t looked at them so it’s no wonder he keeps saying the same stupid stuff over and over.”
Um…perhaps because I don’t directly click on the links provided from your blog. I copy and paste your posts into my blog and follow the links from there.
So in other words Crackpipe is either lying or sarcasticly wasting my time by trying to be funny.
– Either one makes Crackpipe look badly, so whatever.
“Me- “Also, these aren’t just my views, but when noted views of historians too (inuding secular historians).”
“The facts are still there, despite what Crackpipe says.”
Or despite what actual historians say too…they evidentially are not as smart as BB(s)J for thinking there is evidence for Jesus.
Me- “BB(s)J would like you to believe that nobody finds any of the evidence credible, but in fact that’s the fringe view.”
BB(s)J- “Of course brainwashed believers will BELIEVE some of the evidence based on faith and people whose life work involves Jesus existing.”
What about Bart and the other historical scholars who believe there is evidence? What’s their reason if not truly convinced of the evidence?
Well, BB(s)J I’m sure has an answer.
Me – “BB(s)J aligns himself with Jesus Mythers:http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_myth_theory”
BB(s)J says: “Yep. Sure am.”
Well I am aligned with anyone who shows arguments that expose the lies that is “religion”.
– Whether someone believes Jesus existed and wasn’t divine in any way, or didn’t exist at all they are both mythicists if you think about it.
> Jesus never existing is what we consider a myth.
> Jesus existing but not being a mythical god is another way of considering Jesus a myth.
> Like Santa doesn’t live in the North Pole with elves making toys, that myth is a lie.
> St. Nicholas however is a different story.
– The fact remains that there isn’t any evidence of Jesus despite what Crackpipe will try to say.
– I will again repeat why so Crackpipe can’t say his little idiotic remarks which aren’t true.
– There is no hard evidence, or physical evidence as all historians will agree, including Bart Ehrman as I have said.
– Serious new testament scholars will simply tell you the exact same thing that Bart Ehrman says, which is that the gospels are non-reliable, non-historical and go against anything that proves them.
– As for what I keep telling Crackpipe about Joseph Smith and Moroni and Mohammed and Gabriel, well I’m not the only one who points that out.
> Richard Carrier brings that up quite often.
– Here’s even a jewish historian who really did a big number on christianity.
> Says Jesus was based on a bunch of nobodies.
– Then there’s Bart’s hypothetical situations.
– An infinite amount of possibilities and explanations of Jesus and anything divine about Jesus.
> Maybe Crackpipe should attempt to make a historical explanation that isn’t supernatural regarding Jesus.
“So what does BB(s)J say to the following? “While catching on with young atheists, the scholarly world is pretty firm on its view: Jesus existed.”
BB(s)J :”Just like many Bigfoot scientists and experts will tell you that Bigfoot exists.”
Yep. He dodges…”
Well I was actually just trying to show Crackpipe an example to help make him think, but obviously I was asking the impossible.
– Again though, there is no evidence Jesus existed and Paul’s Epistles that he knew his brother are unfortunately just not good enough for me.
– I’ve heard the pieces of evidence and read Bart’s book but I’m afraid I don’t find his “Jesus’ brothers argument” convincing, or even remotely fitting the definition of “evidence of Jesus”.
– I wonder if Crackpipe can convince us how and why we should believe that Paul even met Jesus’ brothers, or that Paul even had visions and conversations with Jesus.
> I wonder if Crackpipe would just go “well Bart thinks so”.
> Reminding everyone again that Crackpipe also thinks Bart is just giving his OPINION about the gospels being non-historical and non-reliable about the resurrection (which is the whole gospels).
> But Crackpipe is agreeing that Paul’s interactions with Jesus’ brothers as being classified as “evidence”.
– The last I checked, Crackpipe isn’t a historian either.
“> Credible muslim apologists will say that Mohammed flew to heaven on a winged horse and split the moon.”
Again, I was thinking that maybe I would just try to get Crackpipe to think.
-What was I thinking by trying to making Crackpipe actually think for himself?
> You can lead a sheep to water but you can’t make him think.
“We are talking HISTORY scholars, not JUST apologists.
More irrelevant dodges from you…”
Says the guy who said that Bart was only giving his OPINION about the gospels being unreliable and not historic and Crackpipe being full of non-truths.
– Then stood by what Bart said about Jesus’ brothers knowing Paul.
“Bart even takes a jab at your folks in the beginning of the first video you linked!
Care to quote what he said there about the Mythicist scholars?”
Sorry, I can’t remember what he said, or which video, I’m too preoccupied with still thinking about how Crackpipe said Bart was only giving his OPINION about the gospels being non-historical and unreliable.
– I could also give Crackpipe the Mythicist side of things, but I doubt he would read it because his brainwashing won’t allow it.
This one here really says it all though:
“Then he repeats his arguments again…
But I like this: (Me)” I am secure enough to let the reader make up their mind. And hell, do some work on their own an look into it! Don’t just rely on me and BB(s)J for your info!”
To which BB(s)J says: Worst and most pathetic apologist line ever that Crackpipe says there.”
That’s right, telling people to think and discover for themselves is pathetic…
And I’m supposed to be brainwashed…”
I said this because it wasn’t an argument you said and it said nothing and had the equivalency of “just because”.
– Also, it really was the worst most pathetic apologist line ever because every REAL apologist knows you don’t want people thinking for themselves.
> If they do that then they will actually start seeing how nothing in christianity makes any sense and how no evidence of Jesus actually exists whether he even might have even existed or not as a nutcase loser.
> Everyone knows that apologetics is all about misleading people, false projections, lying and simply just condescendingly dismissing everything.
> If apologists didn’t do the above then they couldn’t do apologetics anymore.
“BB(s)J “- Not outside of the fictional bible and fictional gospels, which contradicts itself and is historically inaccurate”
Me- We haven’t yet gone through all of them, but yes we have one source: Tacitus. Nearly all historians, save for the Jesus Myth people, find to be authentic and accurate and EVIDENCE for Jesus. For the reasons I brought up and more.”
Now, BB(s)J confuses his time line here. The quote ABOVE was in reference to his FIRST argument against Tacitus.
So when he says: “No the Tacitus reference has a good possibility of being forged as I will show again:”
However you didn’t argue this line until your rebuttal! Not your first argument, of which I was replying to.
Keep the arguments straight, unless you don’t mind looking confused and dishonest…
I vote the former…”
Ok let’s examine this….
– First off, I have no idea what Crackpipe is babbling about (something about Tacitus and the argument being out of place).
– Oh well. Since I have no idea then I guess I will somewhat skip it and just take a few stabs at what he generally might be talking about.
– The Tacitus entries could be forged and many scholars do think so.
– Whether or not the entry even is an inserted forgery, these references are nothing but hearsay said and heard by christians who were loudmouths and who made sure everyone was aware of their stupidity.
– Tacitus thought christians were stupid and crazy and based it on hearsay, or it was forged and still based on hearsay.
> Win win for me.
“Okay, BB(s)J has a problem with the actual definition of faith and what faith is:
-” If you have EVIDENCE then you don’t have faith, you have FACT! Why is this so hard?”
What BB(s)J obviously fails to understand is that evidence doesn’t equal truth.
There could be evidence for proposition X, but that doesn’t mean proposition X is true.
Conversely, something could be true even though there is NO evidence at all.
Thus, while one may have evidence for a proposition they may not have enough to prove the proposition: faith.”
Yet Crackpipe has yet to say how anything about Jesus actually existing has any evidence.
– Oh except that Paul talked to Jesus’s brothers, but Crackpipe failed to say why we should believe that Paul was telling the truth because of the following….
> Mohammed and Joe Smith also said the same type of story.
> Myself, Bart and Crackpipe don’t believe any of the mormon, or muslim story to be true, but there really is no difference in the stories when it comes to believabity.
– Since Crackpipe and anybody else who believes in Jesus existing has no evidence and only has faith based facts, then they don’t really have any facts, they only have FAITH.
– Facts are what help you know if something is true, but if you have to have faith that something is even a fact, then you still only have FAITH not fact.
– Facts that don’t require faith are what can be counted as EVIDENCE.
> Faith can NEVER be counted as evidence until it can be called a “FACT”.
> You can have faith your wife is cheating on you, but until you have the actual facts (video, recordings, caught in the act) then all you have is FAITH.
> You can have a fake fact that misleads and brings you to false conclusions that are indistiguishable from the truth.
> You can have facts that are undeniable and absolute as the truth.
> You can also have facts that are based on faith and have no references that are trying to be passed off as fact, but if they require faith then they are not fact.
> If you can’t prove something is even a real fact, then that is also FAITH and not fact.
“BB(s)J seems to be bothered that I don’t include info about myself in these discussion: “Again Crackpipe doesn’t tell me anything about himself and just leaves us hanging. How convenient.”
Information about myself is irrelevant to the discussion at hand.
I never said I wouldn’t talk about it, but it’s not on topic to the evidence for Jesus.”
No it is very relevant because then I can simply just point out how Crackpipe is brainwashed.
– This is important because as I repeatedly have said is that the only reason someone could believe in a religion is because they are brainwashed.
– If I can expose the brainwashing then I can expose the specific type of emotional vulnerability that has been exploited, or simple child indoctrination.
“Smart for him to not answer and tell us how he became religious, because it basically just proves brainwashing.”
ME – “For some reason BB(s)J believes (see? A belief) that the ONLY way one can come to a faith or religion is via brainwashing and NO other way.”
“Of course that’s the only reason someone can become religious is by being brainwashed and I’ve written several articles to explain WHY and also explained several points.”
Guess he has beliefs after all!”
Nope. Not a belief, a FACT.
– Just because people get scared snd freaked out by the term doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
– Just because people don’t understand it doesn’t make it untrue either.
– If someone believes something that is completely ridiculous and only believe that because they were conditioned that way, then that is brainwashing.
– If someone believes that Allah is their god and islam is what they HAVE to believe in and there is no other option for believing in anything else and any attempt to think otherwise is pure insanity…..
> They have been brainwashed to think this way.
> Probably through child indoctrination, but possibly through having an emotional weakness exploited from being caught while vulnerable.
– Crackpipe has yet to explain why other people believe religions of their parents, or what he calls it when people have been mentally conditioned to disregard evidence and believe completely illogical and irrational religions that Crackpipe himself thinks are illogical and irrational.
– Crackpipe can’t deny that brainwashing exists.
– Crackpipe also can’t deny that people who are brainwashed don’t know they are brainwashed.
> Crackpipe also can’t deny that if he is brainwashed that he could be mentally conditioned to deny everything that is true and that everything he believes in is wrong.
> Afterall, there is no evidence that anything Crackpipe believes is true actually is true.
> Whether or not Crackpipe believes in a “God”, or intelligent design is also completely irrelevant because there is no evidence, or reason whatsoever that a god would even care, even notice anyone, or be the god of Crackpipe’s religion.
> There also is nothing to prove God even exists.
“As we recall, BB(s)J claimed that I made the argument there was more evidence for ATG…which of course wasn’t true.
I explained what I was pointing out in the original post…but BB(s)J still misses it: “- What other meaning then was Crackpipe even saying then?”
– If that wasn’t what he meant, then what was his point even?”
Here was the EXACT thing I wrote re: ATG.
“But does it being written in the 2nd century (that is, at least 170 years old) discount it’s veracity?
Well, what would BB(s)J think about Alexander the Great? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_the_Great#Historiography”
And then:”In short, the EARLIEST accounts are at minimum 200 years AFTER ATG Died.
I’m not going to put words in his mouth, but I’m guessing he accepts these as legit sources of history.
So, time, while a factor to consider does NOT immediately throw out a source for it’s veracity.
Pretty clear what I’m addressing…”
I can’t take this stupidity anymore and can’t believe the amount of time that I’ve had to WASTE on this stupid moron.
– I already addressed this and now I have to go back and waste more time finding it because Crackpipe was such an imbecile.
> Why do I bother? Seriously!
> Oh yeah because religion is the most harmful, destructive and evil thing on Earth and I have to make sure people like Crackpipe don’t infect others with their harmful faith virus which also causes people to become total idiots.
> If people don’t stand up to this insanity and infection then the world truly is doomed.
– I found this in my responses I did:
“Beercan then does more rambling about Alexander the great and saying that there is more evidence for Jesus then for Alexander the great. This is of course a pointless and stupid argument no matter who uses it for the following reasons:
a) It still proves nothing.
b) Whether Alexander the great’s history is correct, or not doesn’t impact anyone’s life with a religion.
c) If everything about Alexander the great was wrongly documented and untrue wouldn’t surprise me in the least. Why would it?
d) The fact that Jesus is the basis of a religion and that everything about Jesus, the canon gospels and the entire new testament contradicts themselves, that there is no evidence of anything about Jesus whatsoever and strong evidence AGAINST Jesus being god, or even being a real person, makes all these non-credible stories about Jesus completely meaningless.
e) There is no political agenda involved in Alexander the great and the stories about him.
f) All stories about Jesus are based on hearsay.
g) There is just as much evidence of the nonsensical story of Muhammed flying to the moon on a winged horse and cutting the moon in half, but I don’t see Crackpipe latching on to believing that happened.
Which was based on this idiocy that Crackpipe wrote from his article:
“Like our issue with Alexander The Great, what we know of Socrates comes from second hand sources and much well after his death. In both cases we have both time and second hand accounts as issues-yet if we hold to how BB(s)J evaluates historical documents, none can be considered credible.
In addition, Socrates himself never wrote anything (at least so far none have been found). All we know if his teaching/saying and ANY facts about his life are based soley on writings of others. Does BB(s)J consider these sources dubious??
It’s another clear example of BB(s)J cherry picking what he “believes” is true based soley on his bias.”
The “issue” that Crackpipe is referring to was thought to be the common saying that apologist losers say all the time which is “there’s more evidence for Jesus than Alexander the great”.
– It’s quite common and if Crackpipe meant of another “issue” about Alexander then he never specified.
“- Now let’s consider that anyone who would even be alive at the time of the “incident” would be dead anyway.”
This is why Paul’s letters are so important. Paul CLAIMS that he knew 1) Peter (who followed Jesus), and 2) James – Jesus’ brother!
Peter AND James were around then! And Paul KNEW them…
“More goes into it than just the date of the text when determining is value.
BB(s)J needs to hang most of his arguments upon the date, because of any actual evidence against the works (especially hostile sources which are GOLD to historians).”
The writings of one man, 20 years later from said dates could easily have been forged.
– Does Crackpipe believe that an angel wrote the koran over a 20 year period?
– Does Crackpipe believe that an angel gave Joseph Smith the golden plates and that the book of mormon is the writings of Joseph Smith copying those plates?
– These are the writings of ONE MAN who claimed things were true that weren’t true and yet they are believed by BILLIONS of people.
– So here AGAIN is the bottom line….
> There is no difference between Paul’s letters and his claims, than Joseph Smith’s claims and Mohammed’s claims.
> If Crackpipe, or even Bart Ehrman is going to suggest that Paul’s letters are evidence of Jesus, then if they are going to use that logic they have to agree that Mohammed’s claims and the koran are true and Joseph Smith’s claims and the book of mormon are true.
> Simple as that.
“And now a classic case of BB(s)J NOT comprehending what he reads:
“Well yeah, of course the date is important. Who does Crackpipe think he’s kidding by implying that it isn’t?”
Not surprising…though he can read the dang quote right above, and yet whoop! Over his head…”
So Crackpipe is now just misleading people by attempting to imply things that just aren’t true.
– Time is of course an issue for writings and archeological findings that are dated FROM an actual event and anyone who suggests that time isn’t an issue for valuing something’s being historical, or genuine, or authenticity is both an idiot and a liar.
– Also the fact that Alexander the great was not a religious based figure that people base their life around makes me not give the slightest bit of a care about how that might affect my life.
– Also the fact that there is no agenda regarding Alexander the great as there is with christianity.
> There is motive to lie and mislead people with religions but not with plain old history.
“ME – “But with BB(s)J’s comparison: What I believe about The Quran has NO bearing on the reliability of the writings we are discussing. None!
But BB(s)J says it is relevant so maybe he can tie it together:
“I will of course go over my point again to explain to Beercan how relevant it [what I believe about the Quran] was (which he of course knows it was, but is just deflecting).
Nope. Not deflecting at all. It also really isn’t that complicated.
And Crackpipe knows this and CRACKPIPE is the one deflecting, not me. Like big time deflecting.
– So let’s try this one more time.
> Paul’s letters and his claims to have talked to Jesus’ brothers are merely claims and letters of ONE MAN that could easily have been faked.
> The fact that Paul talked to Jesus is fake and Bart Ehrman doesn’t believe that happened either.
> The claims and writings of Paul are no different than the claims and “evidence” of Joseph Smith and Mohammed.
> If Crackpipe is saying that Paul’s claims and writings are true, then he must also admit that Moe and Joe’s claims are real too.
> If Moe and Joe aren’t evidence to Bart and Crackpipe, then Paul’s letters and claims as “evidence” can’t be evidence either.
“- All stories of Jesus whether they be in the bible, or one of the examples of Jesus outside of the bible that I show as meaningless, Beercan and other brainwashed christians believe.
– Other religions and Atheists, agnostics, or deists can tell that these stories of Jesus are absurd and have no truth or meaning, simply by examining the evidence, or lack of.
– Muslims however believe the story of the winged horse and Mohammed splitting the moon in half, as I showed beercan (I saw that nobody ever clicked or opened that vid about the horse, so that would include Beercan) He really should watch it.”
I can’t really make things any more clear than that.
– Crackpipe however shows that he just doesn’t get it.
“I said he failed…he thinks he knocked it out of the park, yet tries again:
– Ok one more time:
> Nothing about Jesus and the entire Jesus story makes any sense to anyone else who isn’t brainwashed to christianity from various brainwashing methods.”
Okay, what SPECIFICALLY does this have to do with WHAT I believe about the Quran and why it EFFECTS the validity of the writings we are discussing?”
Because I’m showing that there’s no difference in the level of stupidity and ridiculousness of any religion.
– The difference is that christianity is the SPECIFIC religion that Crackpipe has been brainwashed to believe and which he has been programmed to disregard anything disproving it.
– This really isn’t that difficult to see.
“> The same can be said about Mohammed riding a flying horse and splitting the moon.”
How does this DIRECTLY and RELEVANTLY effect the writings we are discussing?”
Again, it really isn’t that hard.
– Bart and Crackpipe are basing christianity off of Paul’s letters.
– There is no evidence that Paul didn’t just make up everything about seeing Jesus and meeting his brother 20 years later.
> Crackpipe and Bart don’t believe mormonism and islam, but as with all 3 religions they are all basing each other off of the writings of ONE MAN.
“> Muslims only believe this because they were brainwashed to believe it and nobody else in any other religion, or non-religious affiliation believes it.”
How does this DIRECTLY and RELEVANTLY effect the writings we are discussing?”
Because the claim of Bart and Crackpipe is that Paul’s letters are supposed to be evidence and are being claimed as talking about real things.
> Even though Bart doesn’t believe that Paul actually talked to Jesus and doesn’t believe Joe talked to Moroni and got the golden plates and Mohammed had Gabriel tell him what to write in the koran over a 20 year span.
> However we are supposed to take Paul’s writings as evidence as Crackpipe is saying.
> Crackpipe is the one failing to see that the “evidence” of Paul’s letters is not evidence of anything.
> If Crackpipe doesn’t believe me then maybe he’ll believe historian elite Richard Carrier:
Carrier debates Mark Goodacre and Carrier documents all the ways Paul is not evidence of anything and that Paul as he says in point #9 “Paul is therefore good evidence against historicity, not for it.”
> Goodacre is actually someone Carrier thinks is a real expert and it seems that even though Goodacre is clearly on the christian side and is obviously indoctrinated, they both come to the conclusion in the beginning of the debate that the only “evidence” of Jesus is Paul.
> Carrier shows Goodacre many things Goodacre wasn’t aware of and Carrier shows us clearly why nothing in Paul that is supposed to be evidence is evidence at all.
“> This is EVIDENCE that all religions are nonsense and only brainwashing because they are ONLY believed by people who have been brainwashed to THAT religion.”
How does this DIRECTLY and RELEVANTLY effect the writings we are discussing?”
It shows how the ridiculous claims of Paul and christianity make no sense and are no different then any other religion that makes no sense.
– It shows how they’re no different than any other religion that is based on the claims and ramblings of ONE MAN!
– It shows that Crackpipe is brainwashed to believe something that makes no sense and refuses to believe other religions that have the same type of evidence and claims, because Crackpipe wasn’t brainwashed to those other religions.
“> This is no different than the Manson family having complete faith in Charles Manson and nobody else having the faith in Charlie and everybody seeing how the family was clearly brainwashed and insane.”
And lastly, let’s all ask the question: How does this DIRECTLY and RELEVANTLY effect the writings we are discussing?”
Because the only reason Crackpipe believes this stuff of Paul’s is because of being brainwashed.
– Nothing about christianity makes any sense.
– There is no evidence Jesus was real, or even anything in the old testament being true, or real.
– All the evidence that has been attempted to prove the historical whack job nobody known as “Jesus”, has been thoroughly debunked.
– There is even less evidence for there being a divine Jesus (as in zero).
“But, because BB(s)J has comprehension issues, I ask it directly:
ME – Answer this question BB(s)J: In what way does what I believe about the Quran have to do with whether any of the we are discussing writings are true or not?
His reply:”- There is no evidence of Jesus that is credible, or reliable.”
Every serious scholar (except Habermas and Mike L) knows the gospels are fiction.
– The 3 outside sources are forgeries or hearsay, or both (as said by Bart Ehrman who never denied that the 3 sources were just hearsay, but confirmed that there is no evidence that the gospels are not just parrotting hearsay from common christian sources.
– Paul is completely meaningless and his words are no different than other religions words that were based on one man (Mohammed, Joseph Smith).
“Let’s give him another shot:
“- Nothing about christianity makes any sense whatsoever and it is a religion of nothing but illogical insanity.”
Swing and a miss, strike two.”
But what Crackpipe can not do is the following.
– Prove anything in the bible is true.
– Prove he isn’t brainwashed.
– Prove that the only reason that he believes such unbelievable nonsense that nobody in their right mind would believe isn’t because he’s brainwashed.
– Prove that any “evidence” of Jesus actually is even counted as evidence when it is nothing but evidence of either forgery, hearsay, lies, or poor comprehension.
“C’mon BB(s)J! Despite all evidence to the contrary, I have FAITH you can make it relevant:
“- Christians only believe it because they have been brainwashed to do so, but any unbrainwashed person to christianity is clearly able to tell and see the nonsense and stupidity.”
Not my fault that Crackpipe is too stupid.
– I really have been making things as simple as possible, so even a complete idiot like Crackpipe I thought really should be able to figure it out.
– I overestimated Crackpipes thinking ability I guess.
– He’s obviously dumber than I thought.
“Okay, I’ll give you another shot. I’m feeling charitable:
– The muslim religion is the exact same and muslims have been brainwashed to believe things that nobody else believes because we are clearly able to see that they make no sense and are ridiculous insanity.
> Such as the flying horse being ridin by Mohammed back and forth to heaven and spiltting the moon and an angel telling Mohammed what to write in the koran in a cave over 20 years.
– It really doesn’t matter how many times Crackpipe says it’s irrelevant, it’s far from irrelevant.\
You can lead a horse to water…”
But you can’t make a brainwashed idiot like Crackpipe think.
“- I really can hardly wait til we get through this article I wrote so Beercan will focus on one of my brainwashing articles (which of course he won’t)
As we remember, I offered that BB(s)J could pick the next topic.
“Well Crackpipe I do think you are even more of an idiot for telling me a few weeks ago on Twitter that you were going to reply to a certain article then ended up replying to something completely different and replied to the Evidence of Jesus is Meaningless article.”
Funny thing about Twitter, BB(s)J – you may delete your posts, but MY replies to you still exist!
– The article Crackpipe makes in response to my brainwashing articles is so beyond stupid that I really was speechless and really made me wonder what I got myself into.
– I am again reminded that religion really does make people stupid.
– Crackpipe is just so mindblowingly dumb that I really am at a loss for words.
“- I really am not going to suggest Crackpipe do anything, since I still have got 14 blog responses to reply to since obviously he has no life, couldn’t possibly have a wife, girlfriend, or job, most likely is on unemployment, or disability and all he does is write blog replies to me. – Crackpipe can reply to whatever he wants to, I really don’t care, but I am suggesting that Crackpipe do as I suggested and reply to Robert Price’s article while I continue to find a spare moment in my busy schedule to reply to his psychotic blog responses, since I do in fact have a life.”
“Talking out both sides of his mouth…calls me out for not dealing with specific posts, then says he won’t suggest anything, then does suggest a topic…yet, says he doesn’t care…”
I don’t care. Why would I?
– I simply pointed out something that Crackpipe did that made no sense and Crackpipe never has even offered an explanation for it.
– Again, I can’t help finding something really dumb, pointless and stupid if in fact something Crackpipe did was really dumb pointless and stupid.
“I don’t have to prove God doesn’t exist because God has no evidence and the “null hypothesis” does the trick nicely.”
You can’t prove, or disprove a negative.”
Sure you can! By using LOGIC!
Example: there are NO married bachelors!
It’s a negative.
Easily proven through the use of the “law of non-contradiction.”
Where a true proposition cannot contradict itself.
Since to be a bachelor means to NOT be married, no married bachelors can exist!
If you can’t prove God exists because there is no evidence to prove, or disprove then you can’t prove anything.
– Logic Crackpipe.
– What you CAN prove though is that a religion can only be believed if someone is brainwashed to believe it.
– If they realize that they have been brainwashed then they are no longer brainwashed.
– If they are no longer brainwashed then they are either a deist, an agnostic, or an Atheist.
> The reason that mormons believe Joseph Smith was given golden plates by Moroni.
> The reason that muslims believe Gabriel told Mohammed what to write over a 20 year span.
> Why does Crackpipe not believe these 2 scenerios happened, but believes that Paul talked to Jesus and knew people who did?
> Why do muslims not believe that Paul talked to Jesus?
– Here is a demonstration that religions are all just different degrees of STUPID!
> What a funny little controlled experiment in the video above that shows religion’s true colors and shows how different religions turn on each other just because they are different.
> Different types of religious brainwashing makes different reactions according to what that specific religion has programmed them to think.
> This is the same with all religious brainwashing that they have conditioned reactions and conditioned denial of facts.
> If brainwashed people didn’t deny the truth then they wouldn’t be brainwashed.
> The cognitive dissonance prevents religious brainwashed people from allowing themselves to consider the truth.
> In otherwords they have been conditioned to be cowards who have been conditioned to not be able to handle the truth.
“So, yes, BB(s)J if you could provide a LOGICAL reason God couldn’t exist – then you could PROVE he doesn’t exist!
Then BB(s)J lists stuff that doesn’t actually say anything about whether God exists or not…”
Well I can’t help it if Crackpipe’s cognitive dissonance won’t allow him to handle the truth.
“- If the above doesn’t prove there is no God and that religion is all a nonsensical pointless waste then I really don’t know what else to say.”
Does not surprise me…
Recap what BB(s)J said.
1) don’t have to disprove God.
2) can’t disprove God
3) irrelevant things disprove God.
More logical fails from BB(s)J:
Crackpipe is just such a pathetic loser. I just can’t be nice about this. I just hope he’s not a faith healer, jehovah’s witness who doesn’t accept or give blood, or an anti-science person who thinks the Earth is 6000-10000 years old, a gay hater, a person who deludes others into not enjoying this world as much as they could have because they think they have another life coming later, or someone who encourages people to waste their money feeding greedy evangelists pockets.
– His pathetic misrepresentation of what I said in his little 1,2,3 just shows that Crackpipe has no defense of what I said and his only option he thinks he has is just “ignore and deflect what he can’t answer or deal with”.
“- Every single reason Beercan has to not believe in islam, or Mohammed being a prophet, is the same reasons that muslims and every other religion has for not believing in christianity.”
ME – “Even if were true, it doesn’t mean Christianity isn’t true, but I see you don’t understand that or you wouldn’t have said it!”
Well I guess I have to waste more time to explain simple common sense, because Crackpipe’s brainwashing prevents him from being able to think of these simple common sense things.
1) There is no truth to the entire old testament (proven time and again).
2) Almost half of the new testament are forgeries and the gospels themselves even have forgeries and the only “evidence” of Jesus is the ramblings of one man 20 years later who had a chain of churches he was making money off of.
3) In the new testament Jesus himself references old testament people that we know aren’t even real and are pure fiction.
4) The gospels are complete fiction that is based on nothing but hearsay and is common knowledge that the only evidence for the gospels is the gospels themselves, which is circular reasoning.
5) There is no evidence whatsoever that Jesus even existed.
> The 3 outside sources are either forgeries, or hearsay, or both.
> Paul’s letters are not evidence because they are the delusional ramblings of a guy who can only be described as having schitzophrenia, or the desire to set up a money making scam.
> People brainwashed to believe christianity are basing their entire existence and lifestyle on the rambling words of ONE MAN (Paul) who was writing nonsensical stories 20 years after the fact.
6) The fact that there have been over 3700 gods and magical deities documented throughout man’s existence.
– Crackpipe does not believe in any of the 3697 others even though they are just the same old very similar, but very different stories (just, Yahweh, Jesus and Satan).
– Technically there is no reason that Crackpipe shouldn’t believe in gods of other religions.
7) The fact that there is no evidence, or reasoning that God would be Yahweh, or Jesus even if it did exist.
8) The fact that there is no proof that belief in christianity or any other religion for that matter even has “a life after death world”.
9) The fact that out of 1000s of religions christianity only rose above others and replaced other nonsensical religions is because of Constantine the psychopath who actually only worshipped himself.
10) The fact that science disproves the biblical age of the Earth and evolution proves Yahweh and Jesus had nothing to do with creating anything.
11) The fact that Yahweh is a homicidal psychopath in the bible alone and even more so outside of the bible.
12) The fact that Yahweh and Jesus are nothing alike.
13) The fact that heaven and hell aren’t even brought up til the NT.
> There’s no such thing as a soul and when you’re dead you’re dead and thinking anything else is just a delusion people have been brainwashed to and there is nothing to prove, or suggest otherwise.
> It’s not just that they can’t mentally deal with the truth, but that they just won’t because they are too cowardly and mentally weak to deal with the truth.
14) The fact that Jesus was depicted as a whack job nutcase who predicted the end of the Earth, like todays whackos standing on street corners.
> We’re still here of course.
15) The fact that religion is just a money making scam that is used to take advantage of people.
> Greedy evangelists push christianity on people in order to make themselves rich.
> They see that other people scam people with religion in order to make money because they see that people are so easy to be “fleeced”.
16) Christianity just follows a pattern regarding how religions work and how religions have worked throughout history.
– A religion with no evidence is forcefed through child indoctrination.
– A religion with no evidence is pushed on people and blasphemy laws are enforced unless secular voices and secular reasoning and secular SANITY is involved.
> Examples today of blasphemy laws are things like sharia law and anti-gay laws, even though people can’t help how they are born.
> Every religion believes theirs is the right one and the amount of people willing to die for their gods outside of christianity is staggering.
> Christianity like all religions is based on hearsay fictional stories that make no sense and have no logic, or truth.
> Christianity when it started out as judaism, was like all religions and used as a thing to explain the world around them because people had no idea what was going on.
17) Now we do and we know how the universe actually works.
> We know evolution is true.
> We know that life has existed on Earth for billions of years and we know that the building blocks of life form naturally.
> We know that organic life evolves from simplicity to complexity.
> We see evolution happening in front of us everyday and anyone who says “that isn’t evolution, that’s adaptation” is confused, because adaptation IS EVOLUTION.
18) The fact that the biggest scholars and biblical historians who THINK that Jesus existed have no evidence that Jesus was real, but DEFINITELY have no evidence that Jesus is divine in any way.
> Which means that even if Jesus was a real person (which we have no evidence of) that christians are just worshipping a crazy nutcase who couldn’t read, or write and was lying to everyone.
> Which means that one of the only evidences of christianity is the evidence that people are gullible idiots.
> Which means that one of the only evidences of christianity is how great the power of gossip and lying really is.
> Which means that one of the only evidences of christianity, is the evidence of how child indoctrination truly is the most evil thing on the planet, because it makes people willingly waste their childrens lives believing in a lie and robbing people of their true potential and freedom.
19) The fact that even if Jesus was real, or even was “divine”, nobody can even explain what “Jesus died for our sins even means in a sensible explanation.
Let’s see what people say:
“Somebody had to pay a penalty”. LOL
– HAHA Penalty?! WTF?
– Why would people have to pay a penalty because of how they were born and for living and behaving no different than animals that God doesn’t give a crap about.
> This is so unbelievably dumb that I can’t even believe that I have to even address it.
> Why would God kill his son, or himself, or his top angel, or an idiot schitzophrenic rabbi for somethings that it would have no reason to give a flying crap about?
– People say it all the time but if they actually sat down and thought about it they would see that the term “Jesus sacrificing himself” in any sentence has no meaning and makes no sense.
20) So are people saying that God gives a crap about if a dolphin rapes a dolphin, or a shark eats a person?
> Are the dolphin and shark sinning? Do people think that God personally holds a grudge against the dolphin and shark?
> A “sin” only exists if a “God” exists and actually cares what anybody does.
21) Do people think that God cares about the over 1500 documented species of animals that have displayed homosexual behavior? Are they sinners too?
> Isn’t God too busy giving children ebola plague, AIDS and causing natural disasters?
22) If a god actually cared about anyone it would actually take steps to show it, but it either doesn’t exist, or doesn’t care about anyone’s well-being.
> There is no logical reason that a “God” would even consider the term “sin” either existing, or having any meaning to it.
23) The “resurrection” has no evidence it happened and there are seriously an infinite number of explanations that could explain how the resurrection story came to being.
– Twin brother Judas seen afterward and people made up stories.
– Propaganda to make Jesus’ church monopoly still active by his followers telling people that they saw him resurrected.
– The details were greatly exaggerated and Jesus never was even killed.
– Jesus never even existed and was just a plagarized savior god copycated from other religions.
> Since there is no evidence Jesus was even a real person and no evidence about anything in the gospels even being true, the fact remains that any plausible example no matter how weird, or unlikely could have happened.
> There is no evidence of anything supernatural existing EVER, even in this modern age, so we can classify “the supernatural” as “impossible”.
> Any explainable scenerio that involves POSSIBLE circumstances happening are as I said “infinite” if people actually put some thought into it about where the whole Jesus and new testament stories came into existence.
24) The fact that there is nothing about christianity that makes any sense and there is no answer that can even be counted as an answer that would make christianity make sense.
The following are NOT ANSWERS:
– “Just because it doesn’t make sense to you doesn’t mean it doesn’t make sense”.
– “Just because it doesn’t make sense to you doesn’t stop it from making sense to me”.
– “It makes perfect sense to me”.
– “You don’t understand because you don’t have faith”.
– “Burn in hell sinner”.
25) The fact that this is the exact same world we live in that it would be like if Jesus didn’t exist at all and was just a lie.
> The fact that this is the exact same world we live in that would be if Jesus was just a pathetic pathelogical lying nobody and everything about Jesus was just made up exaggerated hearsay.
> The fact that this is the exact same world we live in if there was no God and everything happened through the big bang, stellar nucleosynthesis and evolution and people are just gullible superstitious idiots.
26) The fact that people don’t find it odd that:
– Only muslims stone people to death NOW but the bible clearly says to stone people to death.
> Remember that the story “Jesus and the woman taken in adultery” is a forgery by the way, so jewish law would have demanded she be stoned, aswell as the man.
– That christians don’t do animal sacrifices anymore when the bible says how much God loves the smell of burning flesh.
> Why would God love the smell of burning flesh?
– That the bible condones slavery, rape, murdering of innocent women and children and genecide?
> Yet everyone is fine with it and even makes excuses for everything.
> Why is God depicted as the most evil psychopath ever written about in all literature, but christians call it loving?
– You don’t need to be religious to be a good person, or be happy, you just need to be a good person and work hard at being happy.
> Which shows how unnecessary and unimportant christianity and all religions really are.
“Actually yes it does Crackpipe, it does in fact show how christianity ISN’T TRUE. I will again explain since you just don’t seem to get it.”
More water he doesn’t drink…
So let’s walk him through it: WHAT a person believes about a proposition has no bearing on the TRUTH of the proposition.”
LOL That’s soooo funny. I can’t believe Crackpipe just said that! (NOT)
Let’s clear some things up:
– Crackpipe’s BELIEF is the only reason he believes.
– Crackpipe alters reality in his head to fuel his delusion.
– I don’t have any beliefs except for making the world a better place and be a good person and work hard to accomplish things.
> “All religion is nothing but brainwashing”, but that really isn’t a belief since it really is the truth, but the religious voices and muscles have silenced any scientific evidence that is attempted on being made.
– I have no religious beliefs, only the lack of a religious belief (which is what Atheism is).
> I do believe in “humanism” and would count myself as a “humanist”.
So I will admit that I was wrong about not having a “belief” because “humanism” is definitely my belief.
– Now this is the truth:
> Christianity is based on a lie and a delusion and there is no evidence Jesus was even real, or not.
> Any attempt at “evidence” of Jesus is exposed as meaningless.
> Gospels [Shown to be fiction]
> The 3 outside sources [forged or hearsay]
> Paul’s letters [Shown to be completely meaningless]
> With a pretty good case from
Richard Carrier saying that Jesus never even existed at all.
“Nor does one’s JUSTIFICATION for a belief regarding the proposition effect the TRUTH of the proposition.”
If in “justification” does Crackpipe mean showing the following?:
– How there is no evidence for believing something and showing how any evidence that was believed to have existed was actually non-existent?
– How Crackpipe’s religion is no different than any other nonsensical religion that Crackpipe doesn’t believe in?
– How the only way that Crackpipe or anyone else could believe in Christianity or any other religion is through child indoctrination and brainwashing when older from having an emotional vulnerability exploited?
– How people don’t need religion and don’t need to believe in a lie to be happy?
– How there are an infinite number of ways that could hypothetically explain how the christianity religion was created, rather than the unproven, undocumented and delusional supernatural reasons for which we have no evidence of ever happening?
– How christianity and all religions actually do more harm than good and that Crackpipe’s brainwashing is what clouds his mind from seeing this?
– How the reason I’m on here putting so much time, effort and work into reasoning, isn’t to make myself comfortable with any assurance, but because religion and people like Crackpipe are what is truly wrong with this world and are what are destroying it?
> No I think I have shown the above quite clearly.
> Crackpipe however has done nothing but say “you can’t prove my delusion that has no evidence and makes no sense and is no different than any other religion I don’t believe in and think is ridiculous”.
“- Each religion makes absolutely no sense and goes against history and science and anything else logical.”
You would have to show this, otherwise you are just stating: I don’t understand it so it can’t be true!”
Sure, since Crackpipe is so stupid, so I willl do it again.
– Crackpipe just has to think of all the religions he doesn’t believe in and thinks are ridiculous and makes no sense.
> He then just has to see that they have the same amount of evidence for their religion and maybe even more,
> Joseph Smith even had a signed eyewitness report that people seen the golden plates and even handled them….. before the plates disappeared.
– Bart Ehrman didn’t deny the 3 sources could be forgeries, though he was skeptical on some, but said that they were just hearsay even if they weren’t forgeries.
– Explained multiple times from multiple experts that the gospels are fiction, not reliable and not historical.
– That Paul’s letters that weren’t forgeries were not evidence and were actually evidence AGAINST Jesus even existing and I sent you the links of why that is.
> If Crackpipe persists with saying how Paul is evidence of Jesus then I guess I will just have to write an article showing all the multiple points that are made and explained.
> I guess I will actually do that anyway, which is another great thing that Crackpipe helped aid me in my mission of exposing religion for the evil earth destroying lie that it is.
– That the only way anybody who is religious could believe such ridiculous nonsense as christianity, or any other religion that Crackpipe doesn’t believe in because of how ridiculous they are is because of brainwashing.
> Maybe Crackpipe thinks that there were colonies of israelites living in North America in 600 BC.
> Maybe Crackpipe thinks that Gabriel told Mohammed what to write in the koran for 20 years? (coincidentally the same amount of time it took for Paul to write anything).
> Maybe Crackpipe thinks Mohammed flew back and forth to heaven on a winged horse?
– Since christianity is exposed as being completely fictional and makes just as much sense as any other religion that Crackpipe doesn’t believe in, thinks is ridiculous and thinks is fictional.
> That PROVES Crackpipe is a brainwashed coward who is so brainwashed that he can’t see his own stupidity from other peoples stupidity.
“Which is not a logical argument and thus: not an argument at all.”
LOL Crackpipe says this while having no defense for him believing his religion and no defense for his religion being true.
– Crackpipe also has no defense for not being brainwashed, or child indoctrinated.
– Crackpipe still has no defense regarding how there is evidence for Jesus even being historical.
– Crackpipe still has no defense for the fact that he can’t deny that christianity is no different than thousands of other religions he doesn’t believe in.
– When I say “no defense” that means “no argument to say it isn’t true”.
” Each religion only makes sense to the people who have been brainwashed to THAT religion that those particular people have.”
Actually, a religion could make perfect “sense” to me and I still may disagree with it.”
BWHAHAHA This just gets better and better. (Funny, but still painful at the same time)
– Then let’s have Crackpipe tell us a religion that makes sense but that he doesn’t agree with?
> While he’s at it he can tell us what DOESN’T make sense about other religions and we will then compare them to christianity.
> Would love to know what Crackpipe defines as “makes sense”, or doesn’t make sense”?
– Let’s now have Crackpipe tell us what doesn’t make sense about christianity to him?
> After he tells us what doesn’t make sense about christianity, then we’ll ask him why he believes it then?
“A religion could logically be sound in argument, but still not be true.
However, it can’t be illogical and be true…”
LOL Crackpipe has to be the stupidest human being to walk the face of the Earth.
This is what he just admitted….
– Even if christianity was logical (which it totally isn’t) but even if it was, it could be false.
> So since the EVIDENCE points to the fact that christianity ISN’T LOGICAL whatsoever, then it really is false.
– Since there is absolutely nothing logical about christianity (according to Crackpipe’s logic) then it must be false.
> This is going with Crackpipe’s logic.
“But you would have to show this, not just state that you don’t understand it and don’t believe it to be logical.”
Sure, let’s list things that aren’t logical about christianity….
– There is no difference between christianity’s “evidence” and start of it’s being pushed as real (Joe, Moe and Paul).
– Christianity bases much of itself on the hebrew bible, or as christians call it “the old testament”.
> Why do christians only follow the parts about hating gays, but ignore everything else in Leviticus?
> Jesus even references the old testament several times, but we know that nothing about the old testament is true, so obviously the Jesus references are lies too.
– The fact that since the gospels are said to be fiction and even have later forgeries in them and 11 other books in the NT are forged, plus countless books were taken out of the bible, indicates that the bible has a history of lies and forgeries.
> So the bible, the NT, the existence of Jesus and christianity itself are shown to be completely untrustworthy, which is completely illogical to believe that it’s true.
– The fact that there is no evidence of God and no evidence that Yahweh, or Jesus would be the RIGHT God or gods out of the thousands of religions throughout history anyway, or the real one.
– Yahweh is a complete psychopath and shown to be not only vain, but very evil.
> Jesus says a few pretty psychopathic things too.
> The connection of Yahweh and Jesus seems very unlikely.
> The fact that anyone would actually call Jesus, or Yahweh “loving” is not only illogical, but is just downright stupid, aswell as insane.
– The fact that christianity throughout history (including today) is the cause of wars, unspeakable torture, faith healing neglect, hatred, bigotry and oppression.
> A “god” that existed would not allow this all to happen in it’s name. knowing that is was the cause.
> A “god” would not allow this all to happen in the first place, unless it doesn’t exist, or can’t do anything to help because it’s powerless.
> Basically Crackpipe is admitting just by the simple act of believing that the christian “God” is true, that his god is a powerless nothing, or an uncaring psychopath.
– Of course if Crackpipe doesn’t believe me then maybe he will listen to Richard Carrier about how illogical christianity and belief in god is.
“Then again I offer BB(s)J to pick the next topic.
“No feel free to pick what you want Crackpipe. I just thought it stupid that you originally said you were going to respond to something and responded to another article, which was just pretty dumb I thought.”
It really was pretty stupid.
– This is like as if when I told Michael Shelock a couple weeks ago that his book “I Am Christ” was really awesome and told him I was going to write a review on it.
– So what if I told Michael I was going to write a book review on Michael’s book “I Am Christ”….
….but instead did a review of another one of his books?
> How would that not look completely stupid?
> It makes no sense to do that.
– As it is he never even did reply to the article he originally said he would.
– The funniest thing is that all he really did was help me to put a better bunch of arguments together about how there is no evidence of Jesus and even more stuff to show that christianity is a lie.
> So Crackpipe doing his best to get on my radar and get on my nerves really did backfire for him.
> To think that I was probably going to shut my blog down since no one really even reads it anymore since I closed my Twitter accounts down because of how busy I am with work and school.
> Now thanks to Crackpipe I have a whole bunch of ideas for new blog articles and might even activate my Twitter again and start sending the articles to christians to wake them up and show them they have been living a lie.
“Then says: I say again that you attack this article by Robert Price and give me time to respond back to the 14 articles that you currently have in waiting for me to respond to since you have no life, job, or purpose other than responding to me.
Well since Crackpipe didn’t, that just indicates that he must have agreed with what Price says, or various other possibilities.
> Crackpipe is afraid of Big Bad Bob.
> Crackpipe knew he had no arguments against what Bob says, even though Bart says several attacks on Bob in Bart’s book that Crackpipe could have attempted to use.
> Crackpipe is obviously too stupid.
“> Then pick one of my brainwashing articles even though you have deflected all my brainwashing points thus far.
> I highly doubt that you will address any of them though since they really do expose you as delusional.”
So I’m free to pick ANY topic I want, but if I DON’T pick the two that BB(s)J offered…
Guess I’ll do brainwashing then!!”
Now Crackpipe reminds me of why I dislike him so much and think he’s such an idiot and a douchebag.
All I obviously was saying was the following….
– Why would I possibly care?
– Go ahead.
– You asked me so here it is, any of my brainwashing articles, or Robert Price’s article on why he doesn’t think Jesus exists.
– There is nothing stopping himself from answering whatever he chooses, but if he asked me which, why would he submit something else?
– Crackpipe really does show the world how stupid religion makes people.
“Gotta love it: > Your being an unemployed loser, or mentally unbalanced person on disability really does give you more time than us people with lives, so I would slow down if I were you.
And there we have it!
Another stellar response from BB(s)J!
Yep and I still stand by that.
Anyways, just one more article to finish then the list of Crackpipe’s lies, then I can put together the new “Evidence of Jesus is meaningless 2” article.
Really not looking forward to the next response article Crackpipe did on one of my brainwashing articles.
> His replies are on a whole new level of stupid.