Category Archives: Uncategorized

The Crackpipe Christian Chronicles

If anyone happens to be reading this, this a list of exchanges I responded to with a christian who not only chose to stalk me the best he could and try to be as irritating and annoying as possible, aswell as attempt to harass me on Twitter, but who also assisted me in doing several bits of research that show how truly pathetic and fabricated christianity and all religions are.

He started out as “The Beercan christian” as he called himself and so that is what I called him, but before long it was obvious that he wasn’t drinking beers while writing the stupidity he was saying, but smoking crack instead.

We had a history of him exchanging with me before on my blog, but I had chosen to ignore him since his stupidity and time wasting were truly painful to have to endure. Now however I have chosen to ignore the Crackpipe christian because I have wasted enough time on him and I have reached the end of my rope with his nonsense and unsurpassed stupidity, but I hope everyone enjoys the approximately 20 new blog ideas I had gotten from the exchanges on my main blog that are either on there way, or up there now.

I mean he seriously is one unfunny obnoxious idiot who obviously thinks he’s brilliant, even though all he does is lie, mislead, deflect and try to be as condescending as possible.

I also hope everyone enjoys the fact that all Crackpipe christian did was help prove exactly how there is no evidence of Jesus existing, aswell as him helping show me how everything about christianity is based on lies and brainwashing.

Do especially enjoy my “Evidence of Jesus is meaningless 2” article that Crackpipe helped me put together:

https://thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com/2014/08/03/evidence-of-jesus-is-meaningless-two/

I present to you The Crackpipe christian (formerly The Beercan christian):

April 30-2014- The Beginning

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/the-beginning-april-30-2014/

May 1-2014

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/may-12014-thursday/

May 5-2014

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/monday-may-5-2014/

May 6-2014

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/may-6-tuesday2014/

May 7-2014

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/may-7-wednesday2014/?relatedposts_hit=1&relatedposts_origin=4&relatedposts_position=0

May 10-2014

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/may-10satuday-2014/

May 14-2014

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/may-14wednesday2014/

May 15-2014

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/may-15-thursday-2014/

May 15-Part 2

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/may-15-part-2/

May 16-2014

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/may-16-friday2014/

May 17-2014

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/saturday-may-17-2014/

May 18-2014

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/sunday-may-182014/

May 20-2014

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/may-20-tuesday2014/

May 20-Part 2

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/may-20-part-2/

May 20-Part 3

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/may-20-part-3/

May 20-Part 4

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/may-20-part-4/

May 20-Part 5

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/may-20-part-5/

May 20-Part 6

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/may-20-part-6/

May 23-2014

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/friday-may-23-2014/

May 23-Part 2

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/may-23-part-2/

May 27-2014

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/03/tuesday-may-27-2014/

June 1-2014

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/03/sunday-june-12014/

May 7-Part 2

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/02/may-7-part-2/

The Many Lies Of The Crackpipe christian:

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/03/the-many-lies-of-the-crackpipe-christian/

The Many Lies of the Crackpipe Christian

From May 1, 2014

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/buy-bullshit-journal-vs-jesus-part-one.html?m=1

Crackpipe said:

“1) BB(s)J is NOT a historian. That is, while he does have his bias and, yes, beliefs, he is not bound by the standards that historian scholars say a Bart Ehrman hold themselves to. If it fits BB(s)J’s belief mold, it works for him no matter what.”
————-

I have no religious beliefs. I’m an Atheist.
:
:
Next:

“2) Youtube is one of his favorite means of “evidence.” Now, before I am accused of discarding evidence due to it’s source, I’m not. Each source he does provide stands on it’s own merits. However, that being said, I’m waiting to see a peer reviewed paper (which atheists LOVE) that cites a youtube video as a source.”
———–

My sources do not stand on their own, Crackpipe is just too stupid to accept, or listen to what they say.

If it’s scientifically backed and in a youtube vid with scholars and experts, then it isn’t standing on it’s own.
:
:
Next:

“3) BB(s)J seems to believe that rhetoric and random thoughts equal arguments.”
————-

I believe that speaking well and showing people correct information and helpful examples to compare to are beneficial.

I also show facts and correct information, aswell as show plausible possibilities, not faith based delusions that rest on nothing but the supernatural.
:
:
Next:

“4) If it doesn’t make sense to BB(s)J is can’t and doesn’t make sense at all and MUST at all costs be discarded.”
————-

WRONG! If it doesn’t make sense to me then Crackpipe is supposed to explain how it makes sense, which after asking many times in several blogs, he does not.

Rather than explain, Crackpipe just ALWAYS says the same thing about “just because it doesn’t make sense to BBJ doesn’t mean it doesn’t make sense.”
:
:
Next:

“Now, I haven’t read through this post and will respond as I read it. So let’s hope that BB(s)J throws us some curveballs and actually has an argument this time!”
————–

I always have great arguments but Crackpipe simply either dismisses them
like a coward, or ignores them.
:
:
Next:

“Already off the bat, we have BB(s)J taking the authoritative position just because, well….he doesn’t believe there is evidence for Jesus…”
————-

I KNOW there is no evidence of Jesus and there’s nothing that I’ve heard that is.

I’ve also heard many evidences AGAINST the existence of Jesus, however I never discounted the possibility of a pathetic nobody that this character might be vaguely based on, we just have no evidence of him.
.
.
Next:

“All of Julius Caesar’s evidence is made up of hearsay! That is, what someone (whom we can’t question because they are dead) reports to say or record about someone else. Why? Because NOBODY who was around at that time to report directly to us is alive! We have to take what the reporter says and weigh it against what others say and how they say it – again, what historians do as a living! at that SPECIFIC time and place…not with our 21st century eyes. Which is exactly what BB(s)J does.”
——————-

Julius Caesar was NOT hearsay when he was reported by multiple sources and accomplished many things. He was also not a supernatural being who people created a religion around and were motivated to do so.

Caesar had reports about him AT THE TIME he lived, not 30-100 years later.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Caesar
:
:
Next:

“D) it was all written in the 2nd century.

This is a fair enough point. However, this also shows the cherry picking that BB(s) does as it pertains to ancient documents.
————–

Not cherry picking, but sorting out facts and truth and seperating them from lies, hearsay and myth.
:
:
Next:

“Yeah…the Osiris think has been killed so many times that’s it’s not even funny…plus it’s from a blog. If I offered a blog post up as evidence BB(s)J would have my head!”
————

The Osiris thing has not been killed whatsoever and I had shown Crackpipe clips where Richard Carrier explains the significance of Osiris and also how the Romans also worshipped Osiris even up to the time of Constantine and that Osiris evolved into Serapis.
:
:
Next:

Sunday, May 4, 2014

“We shall now move onto BB(s)J’s other pieces of evidence that don’t matter to him and see his methodology for coming to the conclusion that Thallus isn’t evidence. (Hint: he just uses opinion, bias, and incorrect info and that is all!)”
————

They matter to me because idiots like Crackpipe try to use it to prove a lie even though it’s meaningless.

I’m not using opinion, but simple common knowledge.

I’m not using it bias, I’m simply stating the truth.

I post what I have every indication of as being correct.

If something has reasons why it isn’t credible or reliable then it ISN’T EVIDENCE!
:
:
Next:

“In any event what we see is what little lengths BB(s)J goes to make his argument.
—————

Why should I have to go great lengths by saying something was a copy of a copy of something that doesn’t prove anything because of the biased source, and also because the “evidence” is just that there was an eclipse?

An eclipse mentioned in the fictionally proven gospels written 40-60 years later that doesn’t prove anything.

– Why did I need to go through great lengths for something so meaningless and petty? I didn’t.
:
:
Next:

“2) arbitrarily accepts what “evidence” is or isn’t. Based soley on his opinion and not methodology.”
————-

No, I accept things as “evidence” because they actually ARE evidence, not something that is faith based only, like Crackpipe does.
:
:
Next:

“3) And using the ol’ “Christians Lie” argument without basis or evidence.”
—————

Christians do lie and quite often.

Maybe Crackpipe should remember all the things taken out of the bible in the apocrypha and also the fact that the bible has countless forgeries in it and things that weren’t written by Paul, but were said to be.

How about the many forgeries in the gospels?

How about how Eusebius really was a known forger and that it was common knowledge that he was?

As Bart Ehrman agrees in his book Did Jesus Exist on page 139 he says about if someone is biased against the subject matter then those things have to be considered.
:
:
Next:

“So we are left with ignorance and opinion for BB(s)J’s argument against Thallus.”
—————

No, copies of copies of someone else’s work that nobody has ever seen, that merely say that there was “an eclipse” which were written about in a book that is confirmed to be a fictional fairytale, really AREN’T what someone considers evidence.

Crackpipe then agrees later on in the same article that he doesn’t find Thallus work to be believable evidence of Jesus, so WTF?!
:
:
Wednesday, May 7, 2014

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/part-three.html?m=1

Next:

“In short, the ONLY two reasons that BB(s)J gives for discounting what Phlegon had written is: 1) Christians recorded it, and probably lied. 2) time from when they recorded it to when it supposedly was originally written.”
————

That’s a lie. The fact that there are none of his works containing any of the Jesus mentions. Just christians saying they read quotes of Jesus. This was of course not them showing any actual works of Phlegon, but instead just saying “they saw it”.

Which is of course the equivalent of a known pathological liar telling people they saw Big foot.
:
:
Next:

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/bbsj-vs-jesus-part-four-mara-bar.html?m=1

Wednesday, May 7, 2014

“c) Was 40 years later from when Jesus was supposedly killed.

That’s pretty current!”
—————

That’s a total LIE!
40 years later even NOW is NOT something considered current.

Almost 2000 years ago with barely anything that could be considered reliable media and everything being based on superstition, hearsay and myth, WAS NOT CURRENT.

This isn’t opinion, or bias, this is common knowledge and rational thought!
:
:
Next:

“Well that is what we are trying to determine! Lol. We haven’t gotten through all the sources yet, nor finished with this one! Though pretty much most historians disagree with this contention. In any event this point is moot in regards to the quotes we are dealing with here.”
——————-

This is a lie. Most historians know that there is nothing historical about the new testament.

So lie, lie, lie.
:
:
Next:

“But Bart Ehrman BELIEVES Jesus existed and that there is extra Biblical evidence for Jesus.”
————

Lie about the extra biblical.

Ehrman clearly says in his book Did Jesus Exist that even if the outside sources weren’t forgeries (which he doesn’t deny that some are) that there is no evidence or reason to think that they weren’t using chistian hearsay and nothing else.

Which would be no different than someone talking about greek gods based on hearsay.
:
:
Next:

“Now obviously BB(s)J won’t admit at all that this could be Jesus, but that’s rejecting evidence based soley on bias.”
———–

No. I’m rejecting it because it isn’t evidence of anything and proves and shows nothing.

Because it doesn’t prove anything and is too vague to actually mean anything.
:
:
Next:

“Can BB(s)J give ANY justification beyond speculation to think MBS is writing about another king? Can BB(s)J make the four facts for anyone else? Can BB(s)J give us any reasons that Jesus doesn’t fit the four facts?

Well, if not then it does look as we have possible evidence of Jesus outside of the Bible!”
——————-

No, this is evidence of nothing, except about how dishonest and desperate Crackpipe is.

73-200 AD based on hearsay, or misinformation is evidence of nothing.
:
:
Saturday, May 10, 2014

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/bbsj-responds.html?m=1

Next:

“There’s really not much in the way of bothering to reply to. BB(s)J just repeats his points- he gives us no further justification.”
—————

That’s a lie of course since I add quite a lot of things and lots of reasons.

It’s not my fault that Crackpipe ignores everything and lies.
:
:
Next:

“He also shows a lack of understanding of what is being argued…”
————-

That is a lie of course since Crackpipe is the one who argues that things are evidence of Jesus and then later on agrees they aren’t.

It is also a lie because Crackpipe is the one who doesn’t understand how these things really are NOT evidence of Jesus.
:
:
Next:

“Example: whether or not I believe what the Quran says about Muhammad has NO BEARING on whether or not Sextus is true or not! Sextus’ validity is based on what we can determine about it with the information we have. Not based on one’s belief in the Quran.”
————–

Crackpipe is lying in the sense that I was making an additional point regarding why he was delusional in the first place.

This is nothing more than Crackpipe pretending he was actually making a point since Sextus was quoting something we have no record of that Crackpipe agrees is not evidence of anything.

So Crackpipe’s entire point of arguing about Thallus, or Sextus in the first place was nothing more than a time wasting lie.
:
:
Next:

“it’s just another example of the poor, dare I say shitty, logic BB(s)J uses to make, defend, and believe his “arguments.”
——————

No it’s actually an example of Crackpipe not addressing anything I said in what I wrote and doing nothing but deflecting.
:
:
Wednesday, May 14, 2014

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

Next:

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

There really wasn’t anything to address, like all the others.

This is not evidence of Jesus and it takes more faith to believe any of the evidence of Jesus than actually believing in Jesus.

I didn’t incorrectly address anything here. That is a lie.
:
:
Next:

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

No, it’s the fact that what he is writing about is common knowledge based on christian HEARSAY.

That’s it. Hearsay and nothing else. Crackpipe’s hero Ehrman even agrees.
:
:
Next:

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

He’s aware of christian hearsay and nothing else. He’s aware of their delusion.

So no, that is a lie.
:
:
Next:

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

Of course I read it and it was nothing but hearsay.
:
;
Next:

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

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

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

This is an absolute lie because time is absolutely important when there is no evidence and there should have been and time is especially more important when there is no evidence but hearsay.
:
:
Next:

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

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

This is of course another lie since there is no evidence that this is based on anything more than Christian hearsay.

The same hearsay that created the gospels from Paul, who simply wrote about conversations with his imaginary friend Jesus.
:
:
Next:

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

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

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

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

No, because this was nothing but a hearsay story told by christians without evidence, so 1 is a lie as an option.

It was a hearsay story that was no different than Hercules and Zeus and Lucian knew that and based it on that christian hearsay, so 2 is a lie.

Since it was just meaningless christian hearsay and nothing else and there was no evidence (because if there was then Lucian would have believed and wrote that he did). So this is a lie.
:
:
Next:

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

There is no outside evidence that isn’t completely non-credible and non-reliable because everything about Jesus is based on hearsay.
:
:
Next:

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

No, that would be Crackpipe that needs to provide the evidence, or justification.

There is no evidence for Jesus ever and the gospels are completely non-historical and hearsay, aswell as contradicting themselves.

Paul is also not evidence for Jesus, with no evidence Paul knew anybody who knew Jesus and no evidence Paul was talking about anything other than scripture and Jesus in outer space.
:
:
Next:

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

No it wouldn’t make it a circular argument. That is a lie.

I’m not the one with no evidence who believes in things that don’t make any sense.

Saying “that just because he thinks it doesn’t make sense doesn’t mean it doesn’t make sense” does not explain how it makes sense. So that is nothing but deflection.
:
:
Next:

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

That’s a lie. I don’t believe that people who simply might believe in a “god” are brainwashed, even though I don’t agree with it.

That is nothing more than “deism” and is harmless and innocent really.

Religion can only be believed by people through child indoctrination and brainwashing when older by being exploited by being caught in a state of being emotionally vulnerable.

Crackpipe has yet to provide an alternative method.
:
:
Next:

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

Of course it is and Crackpipe is the evidence of that contradiction.

Crackpipe believes Jesus existed, even though there is no evidence Jesus even did exist.

Crackpipe only believes Jesus existed because he is child indoctrinated or brainwashed when older.
:
:
Next:

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

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

This is a lie because it isn’t an irrelevant argument and is a valid point.

People like Lucian believed in the Greek gods which had no evidence, like Crackpipe believes in Jesus without evidence.

It shows that Crackpipe only believes his religion because he is brainwashed and he should be able to see the similarity to his god without evidence.
:
:
Next:

“1) was written 100 years after Jesus’ death.

2) doesn’t address Jesus by name.

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

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

Crackpipe is of course lying again.

The whole point was that there is no evidence and that this is nothing but complete hearsay based on nothing but people telling stories.

The other LIE is that I wasn’t referring the fact that Lucian is simply parotting christian hearsay and talking about the hearsay story with it’s hearsay character.
:
:
Thursday, May 15, 2014

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/bbsj-vs-jesus-part-6-tacitus.html?m=1
:
:
Next:

“As the link says, there’s way more to what Tacitus wrote. Not just in Annals but in his other works as well. The small part regarding Christ’s crucifixion, found in Annals, is almost equal to an aside
——————-

Nope. That’s a lie.

Just parrotted christian hearsay. Nothing more.
:
:
Next:

“BB(s)J fails to take into account the context of the writing, and that the WHOLE passage must be considered to ascertain which “Christ” is being written about. Tacitus gives us that context.”
————-

I failed at nothing, that’s a lie.

The passage is hearsay and Bart Ehrman agrees.
:
:
Next:

“Well what I think is that you, BB(s)J, have failed completely here, again. And that you finish off with irrelevant argument just highlights it.”
—————

No, this is a lie. My point that this is no different than us talking about Joesph Smith getting golden plates from an angel in the 1800s TODAY, which is not evidence and Crackpipe does not believe the mormon origin story.
:
:
Next:

“Well, as I have still not used one Christian source to make my point I still won’t here when I quote Bart Ehrman on Tacitus: “Tacitus’s report confirms what we know from other sources, that Jesus was executed by order of the Roman governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate, sometime during Tiberius’s reign.”
—————–

Bart clearly says in his book on page 194 in the electronic ibook version that Tacitus is based on hearsay, nothing else.
:
:
Next:

“BB(s)J is free to reject the evidence, it’s a choice we all have. But he does so with no justification, thus he doesn’t make any argument as to why we shouldn’t.”
—————–

That is a lie. I give several good reasons why to reject Tacitus as evidence of Jesus.

I will list them again via copy paste:

a) This only has Tacitus talking about the superstition that christians believed, NOTHING ELSE.

b) When speaks of Pontius Pilot, Tacitus is simply repeating THE CLAIM that christians made, nothing else.

c) If he actually had documented verification of the execution then he would have also verified Jesus NAME, whatever that was.

d) Tacitus merely repeats that they followed “Christus” from what Tacitus was told.

– “Christus” means “messiah”, or “anointed one”.

– This just means that “they followed some guy”.

– It’s still a 2nd century claim that is based on hearsay 82 years later from the time of Jesus’s supposed death, by someone simply repeating a people’s delusion and nothing else.

– This is no different than simply restating what Mormons believed over 150 years ago.

– Do christians believe any of the claims that mormons made about Joseph Smith?

—- So why is Crackpipe saying that I’m giving no justification when I clearly am?
:
:
Thursday, May 15, 2014

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/buy-bull-journal-misquotes-bart.html?m=1
:
:
Next:

“The only real issue here is the last point as it’s clear we are going through the evidence one by one. Both of us have use BE in our arguments – however, sadly for BB(s)J Bart sides with me on this argument: Jesus DID exist and there IS evidence outside the Bible.
So, no BB(s)J, neither Bart nor I base our conclusions SOLEY on Paul.”
—————-

I thoroughly read the book of Ehrman’s book Did Jesus Exist and if you look at the ibook version it again clearly mentions on the following pages:

182 (Pliny is hearsay)

194 (Tacitus is hearsay)

231-233 (Josephus is hearsay on both sources even if they aren’t forgeries which he gives credit to the possibility)
:
:
Friday, May 16, 2014

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/buy-bull-journal-fires-back-sort-of.html?m=1
:
:
“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.”
—————–

Nobody was getting under my skin and I had planned to get off Twitter for a while and made frequent announcements I was leaving because I am just too busy.
:
:
Next:

“Example: I have faith that my wife loves me. I can’t prove it, of course, but I do have evidence that she does upon which my faith is built.”
————–

This is definitely a lie because Crackpipe is far too much of a pathetic douchbag loser for anyone to want to be with him.
:
:
Next:

“As for wanting something to be true being faith: wrong. I can want something to be true and know that it won’t. So how could I have faith while KNOWING otherwise? A definition can’t contradict itself.”
—————–

Crackpipe just told 2 lies.

You can’t have “faith” if you KNOW something isn’t true, because you have evidence. Then it isn’t “faith”.

The evidence itself however should not require faith to be evidence though.

A definition HAS just contradicted itself, because Crackpipe just contradicted himself with his horribly incorrect definition.
:
:
Next:

“BB(s)J is upset that I didn’t see his replies as something worth addressing. Sometimes, BB(s)J,arguments speak for themselves and still hold even if you replied to them (and in some cases are helped!)”
—————-

This is a lie. Crackpipe does not reply because he can’t argue with what I’ve said, so he simply ignores it.

Very similar to what a coward would do. Sorry, EXACTLY what a coward would do.
:
:
Next:

“I have explained how someone can use some of the writings as evidence, BB(s)J hasn’t addressed those points- just says I didn’t do it.”
————-

I’m still saying it, because it’s a complete and total lie. Crackpipe explained NOTHING.
:
:
Next:

“Also, these aren’t just my views, but when noted views of historians too (inuding secular historians).

BB(s)J would like you to believe that nobody finds any of the evidence credible, but in fact that’s the fringe view.”
——————

Like Bart Ehrman who says in his book that they are just hearsay even if they aren’t forgeries? He also doesn’t deny that some could be forgeries.
:
:
Next:

“Faith is not an epistemology. That is faith is not a way of knowing truths. I can’t come to know anything via faith, that’s not what faith is or “does.”
————

This is normally true, but where Crackpipe is concerned it is an outrageous lie!

Crackpipe has no evidence for anything he believes in his religion. Nothing, zero, zip.

It takes more faith to believe in the “evidence” of Jesus, than of Jesus.
:
:
Next:

“Faith is a product of evidence and evaluation.”
—————

That’s a total lie. Faith is not based on evidence because if you have evidence then you have knowledge.

Faith has nothing to do with evaluating, it is only about hoping.

How does Crackpipe’s definition fit in here in wikipedia at all?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faith

Faith is confidence or trust in a person, thing, deity, view, or in the doctrines or teachings of a religion. It can also be defined as belief that is not based on proof,[1] as well as confidence based on some degree of warrant.[2][3] The word faith is often used as a synonym for hope,[4] trust,[5] or belief.[6]

“Not based on proof” Nice.
:
:
Next:

“BB(s)J has faith too. He can’t prove his atheism, but despite this he believes it to be true: that’s faith!”
—————

This is an incredible lie. A very stupid one.

As an Atheist I have no faith.

I can prove my Atheism because I can prove I’m an Atheist.

I have no religious belief, or faith, WHICH IS WHAT MAKES ME AN ATHEIST!

I’m an Atheist because I have no belief in gods, or religions and there is no evidence that is realistic, or believable.
:
:
Next:

“What I would like Beercan to explain to everyone is why he doesn’t believe that Mohammed flew back and forth to heaven on a winged horse, but believes that Jesus was a god (on no evidence)

This has nothing whatsoever to do with what we are talking about. That BB(s)J feels the need to change topics is telling…”
—————–

Of course it does. It was supposed to tell us WHY Crackpipe doesn’t believe islam and the magical stories about Mohammed are true, but believes the stories about Jesus.

The answer is of course “because the islam story is ridiculous” which is what Atheists say about ALL religions.

Since Crackpipe can’t answer then that merely means he is a lying coward who is afraid to admit he has no answer.
:
:
Next:

“As the phrase goes: show, don’t tell. Or: put up, or shut up.”
—————–

Well Crackpipe is not following his own advice because he ignores everything.

Examples:

– How the Jesus sacrifice thing makes any sense.

– How Crackpipe became a christian?

– Why does he believe the stories of Jesus without evidence, but not Mohammed?

—- I repeatedly asked these but get no answer.
:
:
Next:

“What so far BB(s)J has done is = Nuh uh!!”
—————-

That is a lie and Crackpipe knows it.

– What Crackpipe has done is not show how any “evidence” of Jesus was actually evidence of anything.

– He has not answered how christianity makes any sense.

– He has not proved he is not brainwashed.

– He has not said why he believed christianity and Jesus over Mohammed and islam.

– He has not told us how he became a christian, if he was child indoctrinated, or brainwashed when older.

These questions were asked repeatedly but were just deflected and ignored.
:
:
Next:

“Well maybe we can touch on each of those later. I mean if it’s okay with you, since I don’t seem to pick the topics YOU want me to.”
——————-

This is of course a complete lie and the only reason I commented on picking topics was because Crackpipe bugged me about answering a specific article and then responds to another article instead.

It’s not my fault that Crackpipe is too stupid to see how dumb that is and why I even brought that issue up.
:
:
Next:

“”- The last time I checked, not one single thing in the bible, or christianity was backed, or supported by science, or 99.9% of history.

So bottom line:

– Beercan hasn’t disproved a single thing

– Beercan has lied”

There’s the “lied” words. Odd though in this whole post BB(s)J failed to point out my lies, or actually address what I wrote. Just stated lots if things but never showed what I wrote was wrong (or a lie).”
—————–

Another lie. I extensively explain WHY in every response. I prove exactly how and why what Crackpipe says is a lie and wrong.

Crackpipe is well aware of this so I don’t know who he’s kidding.
:
:
Next:

Saturday, May 17, 2014

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/bbsj-vs-jesus-part-7-pliny-younger-and.html?m=1
:
:
Next:

“However, as we are discovering: BB(s)J gives us very little in the way of actual argument against these writings. (Even on the one I agree with him on).”
————

As I repeatedly have shown how Crackpipe simply just ignores what I say and never addresses it. So he has lied.
:
:
Next:

“Yeah, like that idiot Bart Ehrman, right? Or the majority of historical scholars – damn them for misleading and using any of this shit for evidence for Jesus – you tell them BB(s)J! They should all have to give back their doctorates for such lies!”
——————

Crackpipe really should read Bart Ehrman’s book “Did Jesus Exist” and he might just quit using Bart as a back-up of support.

Read page 182 in the ibook version where Bart AGAIN clearly says how the words of Pliny are NOT evidence of Jesus.

So another lie told by Crackpipe and when he told me I should read the book he was implying that he HAD read it. Obviously he didn’t.
:
:
Next:

“NO CHRISTIAN thinks Jesus killed himself. Take that back, there might be one…(there’s always and exception that proves the rule).”
———–

So they don’t think Jesus is God?

How could “God” be killed unless he allowed himself to be? Which is the equivalent.

Therefore God as Jesus killed himself.
:
:
Next:

“Second, he really doesn’t know his Gospel or the meaning of Christ’s death. Which is to be expected. He doesn’t want to understand, nor does he really care. A false view works better for him than what is actually true in the Christian view of salvation…but I digress, let’s get to the meat of his argument!”
——————

So since I repeatedly asked for an explanation and Crackpipe never explained, then that means that Crackpipe doesn’t know either and is just pretending that he has some sort of clue.
:
:
Next:

“Where in the world do you EVER see someone seriously say that these works “prove” Jesus existed?

Hint: the P-word is more often used by atheists.”
—————-

Crackpipe is misleadingly trying to convince us that he has not done this with several “evidences” of Jesus.

He would be lying if he said he wasn’t being a hypocrite here since he has said in our exchanges about how things were evidence of Jesus.

For example:

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/bbsj-vs-jesus-part-6-tacitus.html?m=1

“So it appears, for sure here, we have good, solid evidence for Jesus outside the Bible.”

and

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/bbsj-vs-jesus-part-four-mara-bar.html?m=1

“Well, if not then it does look as we have possible evidence of Jesus outside of the Bible!”
:
:
Next:

“Even in court (which BB(s)J likes to use as an example) proof is ONLY established to the boundaries of “beyond” reasonable doubt. Because 100 percent certainty can NEVER be established when it comes to historical accounts.

Those who deny this, are well…ignorant of reality and afraid of its implications.”
—————-

Then Crackpipe is obviously VERY ignorant of reality.

Crackpipe is the one CLAIMING 100% CERTAINTY! SO WTF?!

He’s claiming 100% certainty Jesus was resurrected.

He’s claiming 100% certainty Jesus was/is divine.

If he then were to say he ISN’T then he obviously doesn’t have “faith”

Either way Crackpipe is a liar.
:
:
Next:

“There are many sites out there that show that the Osiris/Jesus connection is such a shitty argument. Don’t believe me?
Google Osiris vs. Jesus.
Literally, do those words exactly.

Now, I have yet to come across one actual historian that uses this argument…if BB(s)J can find one I would love to see who. Even most Myther historians don’t use it.
Why?
Because it’s bullshit.
Odd though, that in the day that the internet is damn near available to everyone (the library is free folks!) this shit still get’s put out there!
————-

That is of course another lie.

Richard Carrier uses it quite often and he bases it off other people.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XORm2QtR-os

Crackpipe is lying then if Crackpipe says that this isn’t true:

– Osiris: Those baptized into his death and resurrection are saved in the afterlife.

The above is very true about the legend of Osiris and it also is similar to Jesus.
:
:
Next:

“So is it really possible that the Christians were following Serapis?

Yeah, if Hadrian’s definitely not real report was…well, um…real.”
———–

The report is real. From second hand sources, but the REPORT itself is real.

Just like the 3 sources of Jesus are real, but based on hearsay.

Amusing how Crackpipe attempts to say how the gospels, Paul and the 3 outside sources are real, but he dismisses this report that is supposed to be from Hadrian.
:
:
Next:

“- Could even have been written in the 15 century.”

Um……wait…..
PBS in my link says it got ITS Pliny quote from Josephus….

Shit, we have a problem.

Time to call in the “impartial” wikipedia!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pliny_the_Younger#cite_note-Pliny_10.96-21
————-

It says they found it in the late 1400s (like I said).

“Manuscripts[edit]
In France Giovanni Giocondo discovered a manuscript of Pliny the Younger’s letters containing his correspondence with Trajan. He published it in Paris dedicating the work to Louis XII. Two Italian editions of Pliny’s Epistles were published by Giocondo, one printed in Bologna in 1498 and one from the press of Aldus Manutius in 1508.[27]”

So again, that is a lie.
:
:
Next:

Sunday, May 18, 2014

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/bbsj-vs-jesus-part-8-celsus-or-bbsj.html?m=1

” So we are ready to see BB(s)J to admit this is evidence!!!”
————–

Lie. 140 years later, by someone writing a nonsensical version of a story that no one has even heard of, that’s merely based on another nonsensical story, IS NOT EVIDENCE!

As Bart Ehrman says on page 138.
:
:
Next:

“No, read the quotes again – the first quote has NOTHING to do with Christianity and ONLY about Jesus. Not about Christians, but about JESUS.”
————-

No, that is a lie. It is about the nonsensical belief what christians believed, regarding their leader they believed existed and regarding how the story of christianity is based on a lie and a fraud.
:
:
Next:

“b) This was over 130 years after Jesus’s supposed death was claimed to have happened.”

But as we know this isn’t really an issue as you make it out to be, and he says “Jesus!” you have been complaining the others didn’t, so here’s one that does!”
————–

That is a lie of course. 130 years later from someone who wasn’t there and is basing what he says on hearsay, is a HUGE ISSUE!

So definitely a huge LIE!

Again, Bart’s book Did Jesus Exist page 138.
:
:
Next:

“Ironically: I didn’t think this was that great of evidence either. However, you just let your bias shine though and to what extant you are willing to go to try and hold your belief.

Too funny!”
—————-

2 lies.

– Saying I have a bias because I said that the nonsense that christians believe in isn’t the same nonsense as the nonsense of the story of Celsus…. isn’t a bias, it’s a FACT.

– I wasn’t believing either one, just saying that the story didn’t back anything up.

– I don’t have a belief, I have a lack of belief based on lack of evidence and lack of anything in any religion making any sense.

– Crackpipe has a belief in something that makes no sense and has no evidence.
:
:
Next:

Tuesday, May 20, 2014

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/bbsj-kills-his-own-argument.html?m=1
:
:
Next:

“It’s not often you watch someone destroy their own argument while trying to defend it, but in this post you will!
—————-

I do no such thing. Crackpipe is lying. Unless Crackpipe is talking about himself.
:
:
Next:

“As with all other writings, BB(s)J tries to make the case that because someone wasn’t an eyewitness to an event, they cannot know any facts of the event. And that time removed from an event is good enough reason to discredit it.”
——————

That is only a half lie, but is still a lie.

I say that because someone wasn’t an eye witness to the event if it ACTUALLY APPLIED.

The situations I mention definitely apply.
:
:
Next:

“So, even IF Lucian did use Christians as his only source, it doesn’t mean his writing isn’t credible. BB(s)J would have to give further justification. He doesn’t.
————-

That is a lie. Crackpipe is the one who is required to tell us how this is credible in any way.

130 years later about something that makes no sense and has no evidence is what automatically makes this non-credible.

This is time wasting deflection and nothing else.
:
:
Next:

“Second, since BB(s)J himself wasn’t there at the time of Lucian’s writing he doesn’t know what sources Lucian used- he just assumes it was only Christian sources.
————–

Well as I do know that Bart Ehrman said that Josephus, Tacitus and Pliny the younger only had christian sources as their info, that would give us the logical conclusion that Lucian only had christian sources also.

So that is another lie from Crackpipe.
:
:
Next:

“As we know from Tacitus, there were Roman sources and records as well that were available.
So, along with his other repeated points not truly being problems, we can disregard his last point as well because a fallacious argument.”
—————–

Well Crackpipe’s buddy Bart clearly said in his book, Did Jesus Exist, on page 194 that Tacitus got his info from christian hearsay sources.

– We know that christian sources aren’t reliable (multiple proven forgeries, the apocrypha, gospel contradictions, Eusebius, etc, etc).

Crackpipe can look it up if he doesn’t believe me. Page 194.
:
:
Next:

“He then goes on a rhetorical rant…

And doesn’t address the question I posed, thankfully I asked it again in a different way:”
————–

I do address the question Crackpipe asked and in fine detail.

Crackpipe is lying again.
:
:
Next:

“Now, notice Lucian states (as a matter of fact and record) that Christians worship a man who “WAS crucified.”

Not: whom they believed was crucified.”
————–

Clearly implying that is a hearsay belief and that he is basing eveything he’s writing on hearsay.

Just like Tacitus, Josephus and Pliny were basing everthing they knew about christians and Jesus on hearsay.
:
:
Next:

“Yes justification IS needed or it’s circular in nature, thus not an argument.”
—————–

I gave several reasons why and to suggest I didn’t is an outright lie.
:
:
Next:

“But as we just saw BB(s)J thinks he doesn’t need to.”
————-

I gave several reasons in my response.
:
:
Next:

“Well if he wishes to make a logically sound argument he does. Otherwise he’s just begging the question: why can’t a 130 years removed document be trusted?

His answer: because it’s 130 years removed.

Circular. Illogical. Fails as an argument.

He can speculate, and he has at times, but speculation is not justification.”
—————-

Crackpipe is such an unbelievable liar.

If someone looks at what I wrote for May 14th they’ll see that what I wrote thoroughly explained my point about the time issues.

I shouldn’t have had to, but I did anyway because I knew Crackpipe would expect it, because I knew he’d be grasping at straws and doing whatever he could to timewaste.
:
:
Next:

“But we see he’s not willing to, thus it is not an argument. And repeating it doesn’t make it more so.

And since he can’t justify it beyond its original claim, he then goes on another irrelevant rant.”
————

So 2 lies.

I thoroughly answered.

My rant wasn’t irrelevant. It answered him thoroughly.
:
:
Next:

“I DID give justification as to why time ALONE is not enough. Many times.”
————-

This is another flat out lie.

Crackpipe did no such thing.
:
:
Next:

“Them follows it up with another: false comparison re: Joseph Smith and his plates.

But let’s use it against him: Joseph Smith did exist, DESPITE what was believed about him.”
————-

Except that Joseph Smith isn’t the issue, but OBVIOUSLY Moroni and the plates ARE.

So it’s not a false comparison. That is a lie. Why would Crackpipe think I was talking about Smith?
:
:
Next:

“See BB(s)J doesn’t seem to be able to parse out what’s claimed the Christians believed from what Lucian appears to claims as fact.

I pointed the difference in the first post.
————-

No Crackpipe did not.

That is a lie.
:
:
Next:

“But then he says this:
-” At what point was he saying he had evidence and saw Jesus?
– If I wrote a story 130 years later about vampires and Dracula being real because people believed Bram Stoker was writing about real events, would not make Dracula or vampires real.”

Both are straw man arguments (more fallacies). He knows I never made such a claim so to bring it up is quite pointless.

Second point, though fallacious can be thrown back at him: being 130 later alone wouldn’t make Dracula or vampires unreal either.
————-

I wasn’t pointless because it shows the stupidity of the non-existent point Crackpipe was in no way making.

The comparison I made was similar to the one Crackpipe was making.

Being 130 years later wouldn’t make vampires real if there was never any evidence for them in the first place.
:
:
Next:

“So, really, all you have for an argument is your time!

That’s it!

One weak, admittedly unjustified, argument against Lucian!”
—————-

No that’s a lie. I listed several.

Also as Bart says on page 138 how time really IS an issue.
:
:
Next:

“Now, I really don’t have to go on. BB(s)J just killed his own argument. But don’t want BB(s)J to be upset I didn’t read his post…”
—————-

Complete lie.

Crackpipe did nothing but lie and say that he did. I in no way killed my argument.
:
:
Next:

“Faltering, we see BB(s)J scrambling to build up his argument. If he made it as good as he says he did?”
—————–

It actually wasn’t that. That is a lie.

It’s just that I’m not used to someone being as stupid as Crackpipe and I was doing my best to make something that was so undeniably and completely obvious, a clear thing for him, but Crackpipe just wasn’t getting it.

Like trying to convince a burning man to let me throw water on him and the man not letting me.
:
:
Next:

“It Is relevant because IF Lucian DID believe Jesus existed there was a reason for it beyond Christians saying so, as he didn’t didn’t much like them and as we see didn’t take much stock in what thy said.

You miss this point constantly.

You assume that these Romans would ONLY (or at all) use Christian sources for their writings when we know the Romans had sources of their own.”
—————

No I don’t assume. I know.

I know because there is no evidence of Jesus and that evidence doesn’t exist and that nothing makes any sense.

I know that Paul was not evidence of Jesus and Paul is the closet thing that is supposed to come as evidence for Jesus.

I know that when people like Bart Ehrman also say the same thing that there is no evidence other than christian hearsay as references, that really there is nothing else other than christian hearsay.

I also know that Crackpipe is just wasting everyones time and really can’t do anything else but waste everyones time.
:
:
Next:

“Well at the time if my post on Lucian we still hadn’t gone through the big THREE which nearly all scholars INCLUDING Bart Ehrman find to be VERY credible sources. See where I wrote “which we will GET to in other posts?”
—————-

Nope. They don’t. Many also find them forgeries.

Bart Ehrman himself admits that the 3 sources are nothing but christian hearsay (pages 182, 194, 231-233).
:
:
Next:

“And apparently if one disagrees with BB(s)J, they are lying. Guess Bart Ehrman is a liar too.”
—————

I disagree with Bart Ehrman on using Paul as evidence, but Crackpipe has stated in the past that when Bart says that “the gospels are not historical and are not reliable sources” and gives multiple good reasons WHY, Crackpipe then says Bart is just giving his opinion.

As for the 3 sources Tacitus, Josephus and Pliny, Bart has said they are based on nothing but christian hearsay.

So this is again another LIE of Crackpipe’s.
:
:
Next:

“Yep! BB(s)J just admitted (via NO justification as we have seen, and ignorance if ancient history) that it is IMPOSSIBLE for Lucian to know anything factual about Jesus.

That it is impossible that any information could be passed a long over 100 years.

THAT’S BB(s)J’s ONLY argument against Lucian!”
——————-

No that is another lie and I list multiple reasons why that isn’t true.

But reminding Crackpipe about what Bart says about the time issue on page 138.
:
:
Next:

“Yet, he hasn’t shown us how this is impossible, especially when historians tell us there were ancient historians prior to Lucian.”
—————–

HAHAHA Complete and total lie.

There were not. There were however a looong list of people who should have told us, but didn’t.

http://jdstone.org/cr/files/nohistoricalevidenceofjesus.html

Crackpipe can’t tell us who these historians he mentions are either.
:
:
Next:

“All BB(s)H has to back up this argument: faith.”
—————

Another lie.

I have no religious faith and there is no evidence of anything that should give me any faith in any religion.

Atheism= a lack of faith.
:
:
Next:

“He does try and address my points, but with rhetoric…”
————-

I really do address everything, but Crackpipe then uses more painful usage of the word “rhetoric”.

http://i.word.com/idictionary/rhetoric

I still wonder if he’s ever looked up the word.
:
:
Next:

“Nothing worth replying to.”
——————–

Which is a lie.

Crackpipe merely is avoiding and deflecting because he has no argument and no defense for his religion which makes no sense and has no evidence.
:
:
Next:

“”Beercan continues…..
M -“And then BB(s)J ONLY goes on to show that some people believed other people were Jesus.
Not ONCE does BB(s)J actually address what is said by Lucian other than to incorrectly reference what it says.”
————–

That is a lie. I do speak about what he says and on many points and many issues but Crackpipe simply just dismisses them and then pretends that I never said anything.
:
:
Next:

“Then he goes back to his second point which he abandoned in this post!”
—————-

Another lie. I abandoned no points.

I can really hardly wait to post all these then pretend Crackpipe does not exist and ignore him completely and no more time is wasted on such a sleazy dishonest and stupid person.
:
:
Next:

“Yes, you SAID more. But your argument was down to those, and now (thanks to you) down to one: date.

Then he just lists his arguments AGAIN which just gets boiled back down to the two, then one argument…”
—————-

ARGH. This is what I’m talking about time wasting and why Crackpipe really is just nothing but a time wasting lying idiot.

I mean I just wanna be done with this but Crackpipe wastes sooo much time.

Here goes again:

I said:

– Lucian believed in the greek gods.

– Lucian would have said he believed in “the leader of christians” if he actually believed he existed.

– Lucian thought christianity was ridiculous, which means he didn’t believe in christianity being true, or their leader.

– Lucian never mentioned any sources of why he would believe.

– There was no evidence Jesus existed back then either and everything about Jesus was based on hearsay.

– Everything about Zeus and Heracles was based on hearsay also, but Lucian believed in them because that was what he was brainwashed to.

– Since Lucian wasn’t brainwashed to christianity and belief in Jesus he thought the story was fiction.

– There is no evidence that the Romans had any sources on Jesus even if he did exist.

– If Jesus even existed he was a meaningless nobody and everything about him was complete hearsay.
Nobody who SHOULD have, or WOULD have written about Jesus wrote about him.

– So either Jesus didn’t exist, or he wasn’t important enough to have kept any records of and everything about Jesus or whatever his name was, completely evolved from hearsay.

– Lucian’s satire is not evidence because he isn’t believing christianity, or telling us evidence, or saying things that weren’t common knowledge.

– The only reason Crackpipe even is convincing himself that there is evidence of Jesus is because he is delusional.
:
:
Next:

“Then onto Mormonism…Islam…
Then restates his belief…”
—————

I have no belief! I’m an Atheist. So that is a lie.

Unless we’re talking humanism, which isn’t religious belief, but instead just a simple belief that helping people is an important thing.
:
:
Next:

“BB(s)J cuts his own argument down to one point: date.

Of which he won’t justify, thus cannot be an argument.”
—————-

Another stupid and truly pathetic lie.

Of which I just showed.
:
:
Next:

“And he can’t fathom how facts could be passed along in ancient history.”
—————

That is a lie. Of course I can.

Multiple sources that are unbiased is good and not being supernaturally based to support a religion.

Religions are based on superstition and exaggeratted stories that wow people into becoming members.

Stories like in the apocrypha, the many forgeries and the gospels all have made up, supernatural nonsense in them to brainwash and mislead delusional people.

Pure history with proper unbiased multiple sources are not.
:
:
Next:

Tuesday, May 20, 2014

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/summary-of-bbsj-vs-jesus.html?m=1
:
:
“Rather I just wanted to discuss a few things regarding the evidence for Jesus.

BB(s)J is right on one thing: there is no evidence for Jesus in the 1st century…OUTSIDE the Bible.

However we do have evidence within the 1st century when we include the Bible as source material.

In fact, we have source material from someone who KNEW Jesus’ brother: Paul.”
—————-

No we DO NOT.

All references to Jesus brothers can NOT be proven to be anything other than talking about what believers and baptized people called themselves “brother and sister”.

Paul’s rantings are nothing more than him talking about his imaginary friend in outer space and scripture quotes from the hebrew bible.

As explained:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2012/12/what-did-paul-know-about-jesus-not-much/

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/2839
:
:
Next:

“Due to his beliefs BB(s)J thinks the Bible cannot be used as a source. He is free to do that! Doesn’t mean he’s right.”
————–

Again, my only belief is humanism, which is the belief that you put people’s well-being over the beliefs of any religion, make the world a better place, contribute to benefit people’s lives.

As an Atheist though I have a LACK of belief in a religion, or a god. That is what makes me an Atheist.

The bible CAN’T be used as a source because that is circular reasoning AND there is nothing to back it up.

The bible is a historically false book that bases itself off of the old testament which has many plagarized stories and the new testament which has proven forgeries, lies and bases itself off of old testament (which is nonsense) and has multiple contradictions.

Christianity, Yahweh and Jesus also are no different than the over 3000 other fictional gods throughout recorded history that Crackpipe doesn’t believe in.

So that is a lie and there are no “beliefs” that stop me from using the bible as either a historical source, or evidence of Jesus.
:
:
Next:

“However, historians do consider – in part, if not in whole – The NT to be a source for historical information. Especially about the early Christian Church!”
—————–

Not Hector Avalos, or Richard Carrier.

Coincidentally happen to be Atheists who aren’t brainwashed to religion.

A book about supernatural lies that never happened with an agenda to lie, mislead and deceive can never be considered a reliable source of anything.

It is the equivalent of Joseph Smith and Moroni, Mohammed and Gabriel, which are both fairytales to Crackpipe and myself. Fairytales are not history.
:
:
Next:

“Nearly all historical scholars also believe there is eveidence outside the Bible. There are three solid sources and one possible.
The solid sources are Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, and Josephus (who refers to Jesus twice).
The possible source is Suetonious.
——————

No, that is a lie.

The 3 sources are thought to be forgeries and also if they aren’t forgeries then they are simply basing themselves on christian hearsay and nothing else.

Suetonious has multiple flaws on why the reference is not credible, or evidence of Jesus.
:
:
Next:

“In short, historians have pretty much come to a conclusion: Jesus existed.”
—————

This is a lie also.

Many historians will only say Jesus existed because they are brainwashed to say so.

There is no evidence Jesus existed, but there are many historians who are afraid to speak out due to fear of their careers.

Christian influence and the belief in the existence in Jesus is strong and if anyone thinks that that belief itself doesn’t have influence on peoples careers then they’re crazy.

Just like religious influence has power over psychological research on brainwashing and peoples careers who try to expose it.
:
:
Next:

“Really it comes down to a matter of faith.
I have faith, based on the evidence, Jesus existed.
BB(s)J has faith, based on rejection of the evidence, Jesus didn’t.
I have faith as well that Jesus is the Son of God.
BB(s)J has faith he isn’t.”
—————

That’s a lie.

It all comes down to the fact that Crackpipe has been brainwashed and psychologically conditioned to believe a lie.

It’s that same brainwashing that causes Crackpipe to tell himself that there is evidence when there really isn’t.

I’m saying that there is no evidence of Jesus really even existing (there isn’t) and there is no evidence to say that Jesus was divine whatsoever.

I have no “faith” that there isn’t evidence of Jesus, there just really isn’t any evidence of Jesus.

I also have no “faith” Jesus wasn’t divine, I have no reason to believe Jesus was divine or anything so I have a lack of faith. I also have facts about simple reality.

Facts do not require faith for them
to be facts. Facts are FACTS because they are true and shown to be true.
:
:
Next:

“By going through the evidence with BB(s)J my attempt was to show his failures in logic, that his arguments weren’t so, and that despite his repeated claims there ISN’T evidence for Jesus outside the Bible, as scholars claim there is.
—————-

This first part actually isn’t a lie, because it IS an ATTEMPT, but Crackpipe failed completely.

There isn’t evidence for Jesus outside the bible and scholars agree that it’s nothing but hearsay, even if they aren’t forgeries, so that is a lie.
:
:
Next:

“Of course BB(s)J will say I failed.
And if I did, that’s fine. I’m not interested in being right, I’m interested in the truth.
—————-

This is definitely a lie.

Crackpipe, aswell as all christians are not looking for the truth, they’re looking for ways to deceive people and convince others so they can fuel their own delusion.
:
:
Tuesday, May 20, 2014

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/science-against-evolution.html?m=1
:
:
Next:

“One thing BB(s)J listed in his scientific proofs was evolution.

Well far be it from me to ignore a hot button topic

Evolution is a broad topic, so I have nothing specific at the moment to reply to so I just offer this link: http://scienceagainstevolution.info/v18i8e.htm
——————

Saying evolution doesn’t exist is an absolute LIE.

The evidence is overwhelming.

Crackpipe needs to compare these 2:

http://ideonexus.com/2012/02/12/101-reasons-why-evolution-is-true/

against this:

http://bornagainpagan.com/texts/002-text.html
:
:
Tuesday, May 20, 2014

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/tacitus-ii-bbsj-kicks-bart-ehrman-ass.html?m=1
:
:
Next:

“As usual I will address ONLY the on topic points unless he goes so far off base that I want to point it out.

There is a lot of stuff that warrants no reply so I don’t include those. But by all means go read BB(s)J’s post and see if I missed anything.”
——————

This is a lie.

Crackpipe means that he had no defense against what I said and just simply ignored it because lying and deflecting are all Crackpipe knows how to do to “defend” his delusion.
:
:
Next:

“I will not, however, reargue my points if it isn’t needed.”
————

This is a lie.

Crackpipe says the same untrue nonsensical points over and over, while at the same time not addressing the things I bring up and if he does he simply just dismisses them and nothing else.

He doesn’t answer them and just deflects like a coward.
:
:
Next:

“If you bothered to actually read the links you provided…

However, if you want to continue to argue that Tac is just using Christian sources by all means show us YOUR evidence.”
————–

Ok well this is of course a lie about the christian sources.

The “scholar” Crackpipe referred to is a brainwashed delusional professor whose education was in religion and nothing else, so of course his OPINION was that Tacitus cited correct sources. His life also consists of attempting to convert and brainwash people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gerd_Theissen

My evidence is that Tacitus isn’t saying anything that isn’t common knowledge about christianity at that time.

My other evidence is Bart Ehrman saying the same thing I do about Tacitus using common christian hearsay on page 194 in the ibook version of his book Did Jesus Exist.

Also the fact that there is no evidence of Jesus anywhere and that Paul was not evidence of Jesus either.
:
:
Next:

“Then BB(s)J just makes more irrelevant analogies…”
———–

No, not irrelevant, just my best attempts at showing someone who is both so brainwashed and stupid, something to compare things with to help them think.

Unfortunately Crackpipe refused to think, or even try.
:
:
Next:

“So I guess BB(s)J now admits that yes Christ is synonymous with Jesus and thus Jesus was named in the writing – of which before he claimed Jesus wasn’t named.”
—————-

No, that would be a lie again.

The specifics are not there and again he’s only talking about christian hearsay.

Christian hearsay and christianity are only evidence that there were brainwashed idiots that worshipped something dumb.

There are no details about Jesus’ life or anything that isn’t common knowledge that comes from christian hearsay.
:
:
Next:

“THEN changes tactics to argue the forged issue…”
—————

No, that is another lie.

I was simply implying what I had repeatedly said which was that this was evidence of nothing and common christian hearsay.

There is nothing to say otherwise.

Same as the common knowledge that Bruce Wayne is Batman to all who know the story.
:
:
Next:

“Oh, this great commentary on ancient history:
-” There was no video, audio, internet, newspapers, radio, or trustworthy media of any kind.”

No. Words. Needed. LOL!!!”
—————–

That’s a lie again.

It was an attempt on my part to show Crackpipe why things were different back then and how things were far more unprovable and unreliable.

Either way, Bart Ehrman brings up the same argument regarding photography on page 144 of Did Jesus exist.

I guess there is just nothing I can say that will make Crackpipe see why things weren’t reliable.

I wonder if it was this hard for his parents to explain sex to him. Doubtful that he’s ever even had sex though to be honest. What an imbecile.
:
:
Next:

“Since all I have been doing is relaying what HISTORIANS claim we can assume that BB(s)J doesn’t think historian would have an answer to these questions either.!”
—————

Which historians? Liar.

Ehrman who says Tacitus was just hearsay even if it isn’t a forgery?

A brainwashed christian?

Richard Carrier?

Hector Avalos?

Robert Price?
:
:
Next:

“I’m married. That means in my life I only have ONE person I need to concern myself with how they feel and think about me.”
—————

Definite lie.

Crackpipe is far too much of an idiot and a loser to be married to anyone and is either on disability, welfare, or unemployment benefit and living with his parents.
:
:
Next:

“So let’s see what BB(s)J does:

” Does Bart tell us what Roman sources that Tacitus used that wasn’t simple common knowledge? No.
– Did Tacitus say that he knew Jesus, saw him crucified and come back from the dead? No.
– Does Tacitus give us any evidence saying he was a witness to anything such as a “miracle” or anything saying he believed Jesus existed and not just repeating what people he thought were idiots believed? No.
– Does Tacitus simply repeat common knowledge that everyone knew at the time and imply that he thought christians were morons? YES!”
.
In other words, BB(s)J is saying Bart’s wrong.

Fair enough but Bart IS an actual history scholar.
BB(s)J is not.”
——————

Well Bart clearly says in his book “Did Jesus Exist” that Tacitus was only using christian hearsay. Again page 194.

Please do look.
:
:
Next:

“And that’s about all that was new, relevant, or fun to read.”
————

That’s a lie. Crackpipe simply just ignored all the parts that I tore him
a new one, but he loves to play pretend.

He also thinks that ignoring things wins arguments. It doesn’t. It does however make him look bad.
:
:
Next:

Tuesday, May 20, 2014

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/josephus.html?m=1

“If Josephus DID write about Jesus, then he believed Jesus existed. Which is why we are discussing the passage.”
————–

If he did write about Jesus then he was just writing about common christian hearsay and nothing else.

So that is another lie.
:
:
Next:

“Of course though, we know that BB(s)J believes it impossible for any facts in history to get passed along…(especially when Jesus is involved!)”
——————

No that’s a lie.

I know for a fact that there is no evidence or FACTS that exist that are evidence of Jesus.

This would mean that Jesus was such an unimportant nobody whose entire history were made up and exaggerated and was no different than Charles Manson, or David Koresh.

Then there’s the other possibility that he didn’t exist and Richard Carrier and Robert Price are right on the money with what they say.
:
:
Next:

“For what purpose would citing Josephus is this case be useful to them?
Even WITH the Christian addition, Josephus’ writing is of little value to the early Church fathers. It adds nothing of value to what they already believed about Jesus. Since it was clear and known that Josephus didn’t believe Jesus was the Messiah.”
—————

This is a lie. The church is desperate enough to use anything, or any tactic.

If they can forge half the new testament and insert forgeries into the other half, as well as lie about history, science and even try to pass off multiple apocrypha as real, then this demonstrates that they will do anything.

If they can deny science, history and reality and brainwash innocent kids, then there really isn’t any limit to any particular tactic the church might use to deceive and mislead.
:
:
Next:

“To BB(s)J this adds up to:
“e) Christianity’s greatest piece of evidence of Jesus is actually christianity’s greatest evidence how it is nothing but, fraud, lying, deception and brainwashing.”

Eh…sure! IF you hang with the scholarship of the 1900’s, which must be far superior than today’s!
————-

No, that is a lie.

The forgeries are confirmed. Maybe not all, but some.

The fact that even if none of Josephus writings were forgeries that Josephus would be saying nothing but christian hearsay (like Bart Ehrman says in his book Evidence of Jesus page 231-233).

There is no evidence that says otherwise.
:
:
Next:

“What it boils down to is this: we saw BB(s)J had only two core arguments: 1) date (as always) and 2) forgery.

1) as we know, but BB(s)J has trouble with it, is not a great argument. (especially when you have little else)
2) we see is weak and just grasping at straws and is only convincing to those who already believe Josephus
Is: “STILL DEFINITELY NOT PROOF OF ANYTHING! LIKE REALLY REALLY DEFINITELY NOT!

LIKE REALLY!
—————

More lies.

You see #1 (the year) isn’t even an argument because since it’s just hearsay anyway and based on no evidence whatsoever, it really doesn’t even exist as an argument in the first place.

As for #2 (the forgery) is irrelevant also since it’s just hearsay regardless of if it’s forged or not. The census that there were forgeries in Josephus were overwhelming though.

Now as for my OTHER arguments, well obviously that despite it being a forgery or not, it’s still just hearsay and nothing else.

Think of it this way….

– If someone forged something on something that I wrote, saying I banged Crackpipe’s mom.

– But maybe Crackpipe had trouble telling if it was a forgery or not.

– Whether it was a forgery or not everyone at the trailerpark says that Crackpipe’s mom is a dirty whore who bangs anything and everyone.

– The part about Crackpipe’s mom being a dirty whore was common knowledge to everyone living at the trailer park.

– The fact that I’m germaphobic and wouldn’t want to get her diseases and the fact that it’s been reported she doesn’t use condoms would hint that it’s probably a forgery and I didn’t really bang her.

– Again though, the fact that Crackpipe’s mom being a smelly whore who bangs anything and everything is just common knowledge.

– If Crackpipe says that “what everyone says about his mom being a dirty whore” can’t be proven (denial) so it’s just “hearsay”, well then he just explained Josephus and the Jesus reference.
:
:
Friday, May 23, 2014

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/are-we-born-atheists.html?m=1
:
:
Next:

“More than once I’ve seen the argument that we are all born atheists.
But is this true?
Atheism, at its core and true definition, is the belief that God doesn’t exist.”
—————-

That is a lie. Atheism is the lack of a belief.

We lack the belief because there is no evidence of gods and no evidence any religion is true.

Even if an Atheist happens to say they “believe there is no God” it is an inaccurate statement because there is nothing to 100% verify that.

There is no way to prove something that does absolutely nothing and has no evidence it exists and can’t be seen, touched, or heard, or communicated with.

Just like there is no way to disprove something that does absolutely nothing and has no evidence it exists and can’t be seen, touched, or heard, or communicated with.
:
:
Next:

“But as babies, since we lack this ability does that make us atheists at birth?

No.”
—————–

This is a lie.

To be an Atheist you have to not believe in gods, or supernatural religions.

What gods, or religions do babies worship again?
:
:
Next:

“Now, as I wrote in the post where I called bullshit on atheism being just a “lack of belief”, I explained how that definition makes it meaningless – for a rock can be considered an atheist then. Or (God help us) a can of beer!”
————–

This is a lie.

The term is only applied to sentient, thinking beings (humans).

If an intelligent alien didn’t believe in gods, or religions then it would be an Atheist also.

The same with an AI life form that didn’t believe in gods or religions being based on truth.
:
:
Next:

“Atheism IS a belief.”
—————-

Lying again.

Lack of belief.
:
:
Next:

“Thus, we are not born atheist, theist, agnostic, or anything.”
————-

Another lie.

We are born Atheists and nothing else.

Religious people child indoctrinate their kids though and corrupt and infect kids with lies.
:
:
Next:

“We are born into pure neutrality.
We can’t form any belief. We truly lack the ability.
So are we born atheist?
No.”
—————

That is a lie.

We form beliefs on what is right and wrong through experience and the universal golden rule.

We also form beliefs based on influence.

We form religious beliefs through child indoctrination and brainwashing.

We ARE born Atheists.
:
:
Tuesday, May 27, 2014

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/bbsj-replies-yet-again.html?m=1
:
:
Next:

“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.”
————-

That is 2 lies.

“I showed how Bart didn’t find them reliable by explaining about how many forgeries there are and how 20 years later was as unreliable as the gospels were because Bart specified that 30-40 years later was not reliable.

Bart Ehrman himself says that there is no evidence of the bible outside of the bible.

If Crackpipe doesn’t believe me then he can read the article he himself sent me:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/bibleandculture/2012/06/07/bart-ehrman-on-did-jesus-exist-part-three/

“To most modern people, it is surprising to learn just how little evidence there is for Jesus outside the Christian sources. He is not mentioned in any Roman (or Greek, or Syriac, or… whatever – any pagan [i.e., non-Jewish, non-Christian]) source of the entire first century. Never. That strikes people as surprising. He is mentioned a couple of times within about 80 years of his life by two Roman sources (Pliny and Tacitus; I’m not sure Suetonius can be used). And he is almost certainly referred to twice in the Jewish historian Josephus, once in an entire paragraph. But that’s it for the non-Christian sources for the first hundred years after his death. It’s not much.

Yes, there is a clear distinction to be made between literary and documentary evidence. The only reason I place special evidence on the former, when talking about the historical Jesus, is that there is no documentary evidence for his existence. (For lots and lots of historical issues, documentary evidence is invaluable; but only when it exists for the issue under consideration. If any did exist for Jesus, that would, of course, be highly significant.) We do not have any birth records or land deeds, no reports of his trial (other than in literary sources), and no death warrant related to Jesus – no documents (or inscriptions) of any kind. All we have are later literary references. And so these are the sources that we have to focus on.”

Then of course Barts book “Evidence of Jesus” which says….

pg 143-144
– No historical records of Jesus

– No hard physical evidence of Jesus.

– Bart mentions 1800 years before photography was invented.

– No archeological evidence of any kind.

pg 145
Jesus couldn’t read or write and there are no writings of him.

pg 147
No Greek or Roman author from the first century mentions Jesus.

pg 158
No references of Jesus from anyone who was an eyewitness.

pg 169
No eyewitness accounts of Jesus.

Then talking about Paul in his book…

That’s his evidence, his OPINION that he knew some of Jesus’ brothers, but never proves to any great degree that he’s not talking about how christians refer themselves as “brothers” to each other.
:
:
Next:

“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…
—————–

Actually no Bart clearly says in the book…

page 15
“I hardly need to stress what I already have intimidated: the view that Jesus existed is held by virtually every expert on the planet. That in itself is not prove of course. Expert opinion is still at the end of the day still opinion. But why would you not want to know what the experts have to say?”

So Crackpipe is again lying.
:
:
Next:

“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:
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HRDqTh4y46c
“- 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…
—————-

Ok this is a definite lie.

Crackpipe is saying that the 3 sources of Josephus, Tacitus and Pliny are supposed to be evidence of Jesus in the 2nd century.

Not only is it NOT evidence in the 2nd century but Crackpipe has done nothing but confirm everything I said.

– They are said to be forgeries.

– Even if they aren’t forgeries they are saying nothing that was commonly known christian hearsay.

– They are from biased, untrustworthy christian historians found centuries later.

Definitely not evidence of anything.
:
:
Next:

“”- 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!”
————

This is a lie.

So I read Bart’s book as Crackpipe suggested and Bart clearly says in the book how some were confirmed forgeries, even if they weren’t they were nothing more than based on christian hearsay.
:
:
Next:

“”- 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!”
—————–

Many lies from Crackpipe again.

Bart says in his book

Page 143-144
– No hard physical evidence for Jesus.

– No archaeological evidence for Jesus.

Page 145
– No writings of Jesus.

Page 169
– Not a single eyewitness account about Jesus written in his day.

Then here:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/bibleandculture/2012/06/07/bart-ehrman-on-did-jesus-exist-part-three/

Since the 3 sources are hearsay there really is nothing.
:
:
Next:

“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…

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…
————-

It clearly has Bart saying that there is no evidence of Jesus.

Bart’s point about using Paul as evidence of Jesus really is all there is, but the writings of someone talking about their imaginary friend 20 years later is not evidence.
:
:
Next:

“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!”
———–

I bought the book and it was very helpful in backing up what I said and other things.

Showed Crackpipe to be a liar repeatedly.
:
:
Next:

“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!)”
—————

That’s a lie. Bart does contradict himself and I showed how.

Bart listed why the gospels aren’t credible, or reliable but doesn’t hold Paul’s letters to the same standards.
:
:
Next:

“Bart finds Paul’s letters to be VERY credible an reliable as it pertains to Jesus’ existence.”
—————-

This is a lie.

Bart is aware of the multiple forgeries that weren’t written by Paul.

Bart is aware of the many changes scribes have made about Paul’s letters throughout the centuries.

This is not reliable, or credible.
:
:
Next:

“”> 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. Crackpipe continues to lie.

There is no evidence outside of the bible and the 3 sources as Bart says in his book, are just repeating christian hearsay that everyone was aware of.
:
:
Next:

“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.”
————

Nope. That is a lie.

Even if it isn’t a forgery it’s just christian hearsay.
:
:
Next:

“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.”
—————

That’s a lie. He never brings it up in the brainwashing discussion either.

Crackpipe is deflecting because he knows that he will be admitting to either being child indoctrinated, or brainwashed when older.

Which is the only way that someone would believe any nonsensical religion that makes no sense.

Which is what makes people believe all those other religions that Crackpipe doesn’t believe in and he thinks are ridiculous.
:
:
Next:

” As we recall, BB(s)J claimed that I made the argument there was more evidence for ATG…which of course wasn’t true.”
—————-

He brought up Alexander the great in the sense of using the same old argument apologists keep using.

He was implying that argument and Crackpipe knows that he was and is doing nothing but waste peoples time about this now.
:
:
Next:

“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…”
—————-

Paul’s letters claim he knew “brothers” as in how christians called each other “brothers” back then.

The gospels were written 15 years later.

Things were inserted into the gospels from some of Paul’s letters.
:
Next:

“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…”
——————

That’s a lie.

Crackpipe originally said he was going to reply to a particular article and even asked me if he could.

The idiot then responds to another article and never even ended up responding to the one he was originally saying he was responding to.

I then said I didn’t care because I don’t care, but if he was going to reply then to pick one of the many brainwashed articles I’d written. Simple.
:
:
Next:

“Recap what BB(s)J said.
1) don’t have to disprove God.
2) can’t disprove God
3) irrelevant things disprove God.”
—————-

Lies again.

It should be this:

1) Can’t prove or disprove invisible, untouchable things, that have no evidence, do nothing, contradict themselves and make no sense.

2) Even if there were a god it wouldn’t be the god of any religion.

3) All religions are lies that have no evidence and make no sense.
:
:
Next:

“So let’s walk him through it: WHAT a person believes about a proposition has no bearing on the TRUTH of the proposition.
Nor does one’s JUSTIFICATION for a belief regarding the proposition effect the TRUTH of the proposition.”
—————–

This is a lie in the sense that Crackpipe is saying one thing but doing another.

Crackpipe BELIEVES christianity is true and Jesus was a real person.

He BELIEVES that Jesus is the son of God even though there is no evidence to support this.

He BELIEVES there is evidence for Jesus even though the evidence is nonexistent.

He can’t grasp that the only reason he BELIEVES things without evidence is because he has been unknowingly brainwashed.
:
:
Next:

“More logical fails from BB(s)J:
“- 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!”
—————–

This is a lie. It is Crackpipe who does not understand.

Islam makes no sense and has no evidence it is true.

Mormonism has no evidence it is true and also makes no sense.

Christianity has no evidence it is based on truth and also makes no sense.

The brainwashing does not allow Crackpipe to see the impossibility of it being true.
:
:
Next:

“”- 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!
Which is not a logical argument and thus: not an argument at all.”
—————-

This is a lie. I’ve shown Crackpipe many times how this makes no sense, but he never responds.

It’s Crackpipe’s job to tell us how christianity makes sense, but he won’t because he can’t.

Ring a bell?:

The belief that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree…
:
:
Next:

“Actually, a religion could make perfect “sense” to me and I still may disagree with it.”
————–

This is a lie.

No religion makes sense to Crackpipe because he was not brainwashed to them.

He never provided any examples which is no surprise.
:
:
Next:

“A religion could logically be sound in argument, but still not be true.
However, it can’t be illogical and be true…
But you would have to show this, not just state that you don’t understand it and don’t believe it to be logical.”
————–

This is a lie. Religions since they are all based on lies make no sense, especially if they’re based on superstition and fake facts 2000 years ago.
:
:
Next:

“So I’m free to pick ANY topic I want, but if I DON’T pick the two that BB(s)J offered…”
————

I have 12 brainwashing articles up right now.

Why would I have cared which one Crackpipe picked? I wouldn’t
:
:
Next:

Sunday, June 1, 2014

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/06/brainwashing.html?m=1
:
:
Next:
:
:
“BB(s)J is allowing me to chose which topic I wish.

Now, I know that I won’t pick the right one, so I’ll just pick the more interesting one (to me) to deal with: BRAINWASHING!”
—————–

No I clearly said to pick one of my brainwashing articles and that I really don’t care which.

There are 12 of them to choose from.
:
:
Next:

“BB(s)J believes that the ONLY reason someone is religious is because they are brainwashed. He then believes that a “rational” person would PROVE they aren’t brainwashed. Well, a bit tough to do when someone is secure in their BELIEF that a religious person MUST BE brainwashed, thus any argument to the contrary can’t be valid.”
—————

Again, the only belief I have is humanism, which is the belief that people should be looked after and as a priority over religion.

Yes a rational person should attempt to prove they aren’t religious, it really shouldn’t be that hard.
:
:
Next:

“Can I show him I’m not brainwashed?

Not on a blog, no. But as we will see, he has the argument backward…”
—————–

This is a lie in the sense that Crackpipe could show me how he became religious in a blog post, but does not.

Was he child indoctrinated, or was he a victim when older when caught in a state of being emotionally vulnerable.
:
:
Next:

“However, I CAN show that his argument is illogical. Which would mean, of course, his argument is invalid. And show that he actually is the one who needs to “prove” the claim, not the opposite!”
——————-

No, Crackpipe is simply deflecting and refuses to tell us how and why he became religious, or in other words, which form of brainwashing was he brainwashed with?

Child indoctrination, or being caught in a state of being emotionally vulnerable.
:
:
Next:

“Thus, I don’t need to prove I’m not brainwashed, he would have to make a better, specific, argument.”
———–

No, Crackpipe needs to show me that he wasn’t child indoctrinated, or what emotionally vulnerable state he was in when he came religious.
:
:
Next:

“He claims the ONLY reason people come to a religion, a faith, is because they are brainwashed because if they weren’t brainwashed, they wouldn’t be religious.
This is circular reasoning.
Premise 1) all religious people are brainwashed.
Premise 2) if they weren’t brainwashed they wouldn’t be religious.

Conclusion: all religious people are brainwashed.
—————–

No not circular reasoning because Crackpipe has failed to prove otherwise.

This is no different than saying

Premise one) All AIDS victims are infected with AIDS

Premise two) If they weren’t infected with AIDS they wouldn’t be AIDS victims.

Conclusion: All AIDS victims are infected with AIDS.

It’s true just like religion is brainwashing.
:
:
Next:

“Okay, in short brainwashing is a theory, and there are a few theories about it.”
————

True, but not the version of “theory” that Crackpipe is implying, which is the equivalent of “just a guess”.

Also, child indoctrination and many cases are quite undeniable.
:
:
Next:

“However: “Neither the American Psychological Association nor the American Sociological Associationhave found any scientific merit in such theories.[2]

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

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

http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Brainwashing.html
————–

Lies again. If you look at the 2 links of the 2 associations Crackpipe gives there is no word in them about brainwashing.

Also this link that Crackpipe gives us CLAIMS to be from wikipedia but if you look at them you see that they are quite different.

http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Brainwashing.html

Compare:

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

They’re not even close. Complete dishonesty and completely misleading on Crackpipe’s part.
:
:
Next:

“Whoops, he actually doesn’t…not one link to a scientific paper/blog/YouTube video to follow up.

Because as we know, there really isn’t any: just anecdotal.”
—————

Crackpipe is lying in the sense.

The videos and testimonies I proved were evidence enough alone.

You’d think that obsevational experience and people telling straight out about them being brainwashed and their cult leaders knowing exactly what to do and say would be enough, but I will be sure to ask Crackpipe for scientific evidence of Jesus being the son of god should I ever deal with the Crackpipe christian again.

I will however write a follow up article about brainwashing scientific evidence.

I also will point out the bogus science from the bogus effort of the biased misleading specialist who was funded by the bogus science organization in the article.

I must say that even though dealing with Crackpipe has been painful due to him being so stupid, unfunny and obnoxious, because of Crackpipe I now have content and ideas for approximately 20 new religion destroying articles.

Great job loser.
:
:
Next:

http://news.psu.edu/story/141191/2009/11/03/research/probing-question-does-brainwashing-exist

Now this is significant. This would argue that “brainwashing” if effective at all, is to a small percentage of people.

However, as Finke says those who joined the cults/groups studied, did so willingly (as we will see).

Which isn’t brainwashing.”
——————-

This is a bogus report funded by a bogus organization with a dishonest and misleading agenda.

Roger Finke is funded by the Templeton foundation and anything they promote or fund has an agenda to deceive and mislead. This is no secret.
:
:
Next:

“Sure persuasive methods were used to make the decision more attractive, but if brainwashing works so great, such methods are unneeded.

Yet, BB(s)J wants you to believe masses of people can be and are brainwashed into large religions and aren’t aware of it…”
—————–

Nope. Not true. Complete lie.

I’ve always said that religious people have been child indoctrinated in vast amounts.

Suggesting that the other group of brainwashed people who are exploited when emotionally vulnerable, has never implied vast numbers of people.

Child indocrination is undeniable.

If Crackpipe tries to say this muslim girl isn’t child indoctrinated then he is an even bigger liar than I thought.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=WL&v=QxHBlSziBhw

– Of course I plan on not having anymore further contact with Crackpipe after I finish the “Evidence of Jesus is meaningless 2” article. He has sucked up enough of my time. He really does suck.
:
:
Next:

“But even his examples do not show this to be the case, as we will see. These are SPECIFIC cases that cannot be transposed upon masses and other beliefs.”
—————-

This is a lie.

This article of mine Crackpipe is attacking was made only specifically to show extreme undeniable cases.

I never implied that anything other than child indoctrination were for converting the masses.

I like to think that people are smarter than this when they are older.
:
:
Next:

“So, EVEN IF brainwashing is possible, under IDEAL conditions it’s short term at best. Retention seems to be an issue…”
————

This is a lie.

Also, child indoctrination is a usually a lifetime thing.

– Even if you ignore the huge number of people brainwashed for life as christians, you can’t ignore the enormous muslim population that have been brainwashed for life.

You gotta wonder what Crackpipe thinks the percentage of muslims who stayed being muslim from being child indoctrinated?

80%? 85%? 90%?

I’m gonna take just a guess and say 97%. 97% who were child indoctrinated and stayed muslim for life.
:
:
Next:

“And whatever brainwashing is, what it isn’t is forcing someone to make a choice they normally wouldn’t.”
————–

If they don’t know anything else because they are child indoctrinated then yes they would, but don’t know any different.
:
:
Next:

“Nor is it simply persuasion. That is making a certain proposition more attractive than another.

Influence is not control.”
———–

This is a lie.

It is if someone doesn’t know they were child indoctrinated and doesn’t know they were brainwashed.
:
:
Next:

“So does Christianity fit the bill?
BB(s)J believes so.

To show this, he uses small, specific instances. And we will see the stark contrasts between these examples and ones faith in their religion. As well as the fact that in two examples, pure “brainwashing” was not used.”
————–

Complete and total lie.

My examples showed people who were already brainwashed and the fact that they were brainwashed is completely obvious.

Showing that people were brainwashed was the point of the article, not HOW.

They were mostly child indoctrinated and simply already on their way to being cult material.
:
:
Next:

“Susan says, her claim, that her actions were the result of brainwashing and drugs.

Could be.

Of course her youth wasn’t idyllic. And as she admitted she was a “seeker.” Manson fit the bill. So she hung around because she liked what he was saying.

But neither video goes into the “brainwashing” details.”
————

That is lie.

They explain how Charlie did it and the mentality they were in when they were brainwashed.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ynBDVvGMKjo

Manson had a gift of manipulating people and had people convinced he was Jesus. This was what the video said.

This means telling people lies and exploiting them when they are vulnerable.

Why does it mean that? Because that is always what it means. So it really isn’t that hard to figure out.
:
:
Next:

“And let’s not forget the fact Manson still has a following! There are NEW followers of his. Are they brainwashed? If so, how is he doing it from prison, and against their will?

But let’s say they were brainwashed. Can their brainwashing be transposed to Christianity in general and to the mass of believers?

No.”
——————

That is a lie.

Of course we can compare both the same way.

People who were caught in a vulnerable state and exploited, by either christianity, Manson, or whatever religion they were exposed to at the time.

If they weren’t child indoctrinated then they were caught at the right state of mind, at the right time, to that particular religion, by the right type of predator, at the right place.
:
:
Next:

“To say yes, as BB(s)J presumably would is to say that Manson COULD have done this on a much larger scale.”
—————

This is a lie.

Manson put no effort into his religion at all. He is completely happy in jail and jail to him is like a permanent vacation.

Christianity has millions of professional manipulators and liars. Like the type Crackpipe wishes he was.

Manson has himself.
:
:
Next:

“However, this couldn’t happen due to the fact that isolation and complete dependence are virtually impossible on a large scale.”
—————–

Of course it could because people simply need to be isolated mentally, emotionally, or socially.

– One or more of the three all you need to brainwash someone or to be brainwashed.
:
:
Next:

“Okay, but what’s weird is that the video BB(s)J links puts forth the argument most of the followers were MURDERED. That they DID NOT willingly choose to drink poison due to brainwashing.”
————–

This is a lie in the sense that it isn’t weird in the way that Crackpipe is implying.

Did some brainwashed people kill their own kids? Yes.

Did brainwashed people order some members to drink? Yes.

Was there only one other person who died by gunshot? Yes, Jones and a woman.

So was there brainwashing? Yes.

Would it make any difference if only 100 out of 912 were still brainwashed in the end? No. There still would have been brainwashed people. Which was the whole point.
:
:
Next:

“So background info JJ and the Peoples Temple didn’t start so much as a cult but social/racial/political advocacy group, with Communist ideals.”
————

This is a lie.

All churches and relgions are cults, just larger versions and are only called “cults” when the leader is still alive.
:
:
Next:

“ANY use of force is not brainwashing.”
—————

Total lie.

Muslims use force all the time.

They tie kids to trees until they memorize the koran.

They cane you or kill you for religious violations.

Christians generally don’t use force due to secular influence in society. Without that secular influence christianity would be a lot worse and would be the same as it were a 1000 years ago.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CWS0ePXeq24

The only reason that muslims have no secular influence is because Atheism is a death sentence in islam.
:
:
Next:

“By this account, sure doesn’t sound like brainwashed zombies willing to kill themselves.”
—————-

This is an unbelievable lie.

What part of rehearsed suicide, killing your kids and pointing guns at people to prevent them from leaving doesn’t sound like brainwashed zombies?
:
:
Next:

“However this needs to be an example of pure brainwashing for BB(s)J’s argument to hold ANY water.”
—————

No it doesn’t.

That’s pathetically dumb.
:
:
Next:

“So again we do not have a clear case of actual brainwashing. Especially for a larger group, which BB(s)J needs to establish can happen to show it IS happening…”
————-

This is a ridiculously stupid lie.

These people killed themselves, killed their children, moved to the jungle and followed a crazy person and believed an insane religion.

This is clearly brainwashing for a large group.

WTF is wrong with Crackpipe?
:
:
Next:

“But are there still believers?

At least one: http://m.nydailynews.com/news/national/waco-survivor-waiting-david-koresh-resurrection-article-1.1734205#bmb=1

If even under IDEAL circumstances brainwashing is short term, how then is it that this man STILL believes?”
—————

This is a lie when saying all brainwashing is short term.

Especially if someone is saying that child indoctrination is not long term when it clearly is.

Child indoctrination is super deep and in most cases lasts a lifetime.
:
:
Next:

“It would have to be shown, undoubtedly, that all 700 plus adults were brainwashed into drinking the poison and no force/coercion can be evident.”
—————

This is a pathetic and shamefully stupid lie.

These demands are ridiculous and insane and Crackpipe’s claim is as moronic as the most moronic thing he’s ever said, which says a lot.

They were brainwashed in a multiple number of ways, child indoctrination being one of them and then being constantly filled with lies and delusion from trusting Jones and his group and needing the attachment of the group.
:
:
Next:

“But we clearly don’t have that here, even with the ideal conditions in place.
Why?
And let’s not forget that multiple forms of coercion were used, especially at the end…
So again we do not have a clear case of actual brainwashing. Especially for a larger group, which BB(s)J needs to establish can happen to show it IS happening…
————

Incredible lies from an incredibly dishonest flea brain.

We CLEARLY have a case of absolutely bonkers crazy brainwashed.

Is Crackpipe that blind, or that stupid? I say the latter.

What part of mass suicide, killing your kids and moving to the jungle to be the slave of a mad man does Crackpipe not understand?

How about this?:

“Larry Layton, who had fired a gun at several people aboard the Cessna, was originally found not guilty of attempted murder in a Guyanese court, employing the defense that he was “brainwashed”.[170] ”

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

COURT CONFIRMED BRAINWASHING!
:
:
Next:

“In addition, decades after the events at Waco if folks were truly brainwashed, the should not be any longer. His influence is no longer in play, they no longer are isolated from the outside world, not dependent upon him.

But are there still believers?

At least one: http://m.nydailynews.com/news/national/waco-survivor-waiting-david-koresh-resurrection-article-1.1734205#bmb=
—————-

Unbelievable lies and unsurpassed stupidity.

Doesn’t Crackpipe see there is no difference between his religion and this branch davidian member whose waiting for his dead savior to return?

Crackpipe is brainwashed because he is most likely child indoctrinated, or was exploited by christianity while in a state of being emotionally vulnerable.
:
:
Next:

“4) People who have a cult leader who say they are Jesus.

What other reason is there that people follow these men besides brainwashing?

Um…choice?
——————–

Another lie.

They have been deceived into thinking they have no other choice.

Would Crackpipe chose to follow these people if he knew they weren’t Jesus?

They have been brainwashed to believe.
:
:
Next:

“So BB(s)J at least admits that not EVERY case of alleged brainwashing is not voluntary. Well, that would make it unnecessary. That would make it…not brainwashing…”
——————

Another lie.

Brainwashing to religion is when you are child indoctrinated, or when you are exploited when caught in a state of being emotionally vulnerable.

The believers in the cult leaders pretending to be jesus is exactly that. They were caught in a state of being emotionally vulnerable and that state of mind was exploited.
:
:
Next:

“But from the clip what we DO see is people WILLINGLY coming to follow (or at least listen to) this “guru.” In addition, the director (and star) makes no bones about what he is doing, and doesn’t say he trying to brainwash people.

I would argue that INTENT of the person DOING the brainwashing is important – we have no intent of brainwashing here. The director stated his purpose, brainwashing wasn’t one of them.
—————-

This is a lie.

The director clearly shows that he wants to show how people are so easily to be misled by thinking people are prophets.

As in what I repeatedly say about being caught in a state of being emotionally vulnerable.
:
:
Next:

“We don’t even have the IDEAL conditions: isolation, dependence, etc.”
————–

This is a lie in the sense that Crackpipe is telling us that these things are necessary because biased christian doctors with an agenda to mislead have said this.

However if we go to a non-biased, non-christian, non-religious agenda who simply deals with all fields we will see this…..

” Philip Zimbardo discusses mind control as “the process by which individual or collective freedom of choice and action is compromised by agents or agencies that modify or distort perception, motivation, affect, cognition and/or behavioral outcomes”,[29] and he suggests that any human being is susceptible to such manipulation.[30]”

Dr. Zimbardo…. non-biased and simply doing his field of work. No agenda, no reason to make things up and mislead people.

Oh let’s see what he has to say:

http://www.apa.org/monitor/nov02/pc.aspx

Well it sure sounds like serious professional opinion brainwashing exists.

Oh how about that it’s from the American Psychological association.

Isn’t that funny how Crackpipe said at the beginning of this response article of the that the APA didn’t give it brainwashing any seriousness?

Let’s see, not that far in….

Crackpipe said in his article:

Okay, in short brainwashing is a theory, and there are a few theories about it.

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/06/brainwashing.html?m=1

However: “Neither the American Psychological Association nor theAmerican Sociological Associationhave found any scientific merit in such theories.[2]”

Which I showed how the article Crackpipe presented that he quoted and referenced from was bogus.

Remember this?

http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Brainwashing.html

Compare:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainwashing
:
:
Next:

“BB(s)J is equates someone erroneously believing something with brainwashing.

That is, telling someone a lie and them believing it is NOT brainwashing. Brainwashing needs to manifest the belief they otherwise wouldn’t have…

So this bit of “evidence” for brainwashing, really isn’t…”
————-

Another lie.

I repeatedly say how people can only believe their religion because they were caught in a state of being emotionally vulnerable and were exploited by that particular religion for various reasons.

– Those reasons can be anything due to the persons mental state that usually results in deluding themselves to “a sign”.
:
:
Next:

“Well, none of the videos BB(s)J actually gives us any scientific evidence of this…”
————–

This is a lie of course.

The videos themselves ARE the scientific evidence.

We have people scaring children, terrifying them, filling them with lies and not allowing them to believe the truth or think for themselves.

We also have people writing childrens books full of lies and forcefeeding delusions and turning them into slaves of those lies and fears.

How is that not evidence? WTF?!
:
:
Next:

“”7) How are muslim suicide bombers who blow themselves up to please Allah and have sex with 72 virgins, not brainwashing again?”

Well, I can’t speak to what Muslim suicide bombers believe and whether or not it’s the result of brainwashing.”
—————–

That is a lie of course.

The point is that Crackpipe can’t deny that muslims killing themselves as martyrs is brainwashing and he knows this.

Crackpipe has simply done what he always does and just deflected and avoided like the pathetic coward that he is.

He has done what he always does and answered by not answering.

Crackpipe responds with the most pathetic and spineless answer imaginable…..

“But let’s ask ourselves a simple question first: is a person who simply commits suicide brainwashed?”

– Yes Crackpipe you truly do disgust me with how pathetic you are.
:
:
Next:

“In any event, we see that BB(s)J can’t fathom ANY other reason a person would believe they would please Allah – outside of being brainwashed (which we have seen is an illogical argument).
But, again, I’m not a Muslim so I can’t really speak to this. Even so, as a non-Muslim I still can think of at least TWO reasons other than brainwashing that someone would believe and do such a thing…”
—————-

Many lies here.

There is no way someone could become religious unless they are brainwashed.

It isn’t an illogical argument and Crackpipe has provided nothing but bogus research from a bogus science foundation, a ridiculous lie about circular reasoning and the repeated claim of having 2 reasons that he does not disclose.

Crackpipe has again reminded us how pathetic he truly is.
:
:
Next:

“”a) There’s no evidence for any religion being true.”

So BB(s)J believes…there’s another belief he has!”
————

Another lie.

I have no beliefs other than humanism.

There isn’t any evidence of Jesus, or any religion and Crackpipe failed miserably at showing any evidence of Jesus, or any other religion.

The point that there is no evidence of Jesus or any other religion is a FACT, not a belief.
:
:
Next:

“”d) No religion makes any sense.”

Again, because they don’t make sense to BB(s)J NONE can be true…another logical fallacy.”
—————–

This is a lie because no religion makes any sense and of course Crackpipe has not provided any reason or evidence, or explanations on how they do, which was the whole point.
:
:
Next:

“”e) Science explains how the universe works and functions and has nothing to do with any religion.”

Okay, but explaining how something works and functions doesn’t always answer HOW it was made and designed…”
———————

This is a lie in the sense that it has nothing to do with any religion.

This statement of Crackpipe’s is an argument for deism and nothing else, which simply still proves christianity to be wrong and yes, every other religion.

– Earth is 4.5 billion years old (FACT)

– The big bang created nucleosynthesis (FACT)

– Evolution is real and proven (FACT)

– Noah’s ark and the flood never happened (FACT)

– No evidence of anything supernatural
or religiously true (FACT)
:
:
Next:

“”f) Strong evidence religions are just recycled from other religions that make no sense.”

Here I would agree with certain religions. Not necessarily “recycled” but certainly dependent. Which IS an argument against them, given what is known from the “base” religion…However, this doesn’t really address the “brainwashing.” ”
——————-

Of course it does.

It means that Crackpipe is brainwashed to a recycled nonsensical lie that has been plagarized from silly stories and hijacked from other religions like Judaism.

Crackpipe only believes this complete nonsense because he has been brainwashed to do so.
:
:
Next:

“”g) Without child indoctrination and dececeptively brainwashing people religion would just disappear.”

Another illogical argument we can disregard…”
——————

This is a lie.

Crackpipe has no argument and simply thinks he can just dismiss everything, like that makes my point not true, but my point is quite true and quite real.

Again I think it quite pathetic and cowardly that Crackpipe said he was going to attack my article when all he has done is lie, deflect and dismiss everything. What an unbelievable loser.
:
:
Next:

“”h) That if religions were simply TRUE they would be obviously true and not in need of apologists LYING about everything to make people believe them.”

Another illogical argument we can disregard…”
—————–

Another lie.

The point is that because people are brainwashed they are unable to see that this makes no sense that things are not obviously true and that apologists defending and lying for their religion makes no sense.

As Richard Carrier explains:

http://infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/whynotchristian.html
:
:
Next:

“”- Saying things over and over again about there being overwhelming evidence when they know that not to be true.”

– They know that there’s no reason to believe any religion whatsoever and have to lie and say there is.”
If you are religious YOU ARE BRAINWASHED!
If you make someone else religious YOU ARE BRAINWASHING THEM!
That’s all religion is IS BRAINWASHING and nothing else!”

In the end, science is against BB(s)J on this topic, and he really only hinges this argument on his faulty logic…no surprise.”
—————-

More lies from Crackpipe.

He has used bogus science from a bogus science report from a bogus science foundation with an agenda to convert, lie and mislead.

Brainwashing is real and I’ve shown it.

Crackpipe had an entire article that he could have explained how someone could have become religious other than brainwashing and child indoctrination, when the religions are shown to be nothing but lies and there is no evidence that shows any religion to be true…… however he offered no alternative. FAIL
:
:
Next:

“In short, I am not isolated by any stretch of the imagination”
—————–

This is a lie.

Crackpipe has isolated himself from many things:

– isolated himself from reality
– isolated himself from truth
– isolated himself from the possibility that he has wasted his life in believing a lie
– isolated himself from the fact that there is no difference between his religion and all other religons that he doesn’t believe in
– isolated himself from even listening to anyone
:
:
Next:

“I have no dependence upon anyone other than myself and my wife…I have no spiritual leader that my faith is hooked to or dependent upon…”
—————

This is probably the most laughable lie said yet.

Crackpipe is dependent upon his lie being real because he is too much of a coward to accept the truth that he has wasted his life on a lie that makes no sense, has no evidence and is no different than any other ridiculous religion Crackpipe doesn’t believe in.

He is dependent upon a lie that he can’t accept himself being a complete idiot and always has been.
:
:
Next:

“NO example BB(s)J can be shown to be a part of my life, and yet I’m a believer in my faith.”
————–

That is a lie.

I showed several examples and Crackpipe chose to just ignore and dismiss them rather than deal with the truth.

He never explained how he wasn’t child indoctrinated.

He never told us any personal details on how and why he became a christian when older. This was intentional.
:
:
Next:

“How can this be from brainwashing, when my faith exists far beyond IDEAL conditions for such a thing to take place?
—————–

This is a lie.

No ideal conditions are necessary.

He was either child indoctrinated which is easily done.

There is Crackpipe being caught in a state of being emotionally vulnerable when older.

If he was brainwashed he wouldn’t know he was brainwashed.

Either way he has offered no details of how and why he became christian so we cannot know.
:
:
Next:

“See the real problem with BB(s)J’s contention is that HE is the one that has the burden of proof in EVERY CASE.”
—————-

This is a lie.

Crackpipe revealed nothing about his faith for me to dissect.

I have no burdon of proof to prove because there is no evidence for Crackpipe’s religion or any other religion.

I’ve repeatedly shown how there is no evidence of Crackpipe’s religion being true and have repeatedly asked him while waiting for a response to explain how christianity makes any sense and he has refused to do so.

I have repeatedly shown how christianity is both untrue and a lie.

The burden of proof is on the believer who believes things that make no sense and have no evidence.
:
:
Next:

“That is, while he may make a broad statement and generalization – his “facts” do not support MOST cases.”
—————-

That’s another lie.

The actual experts support everything I say.

Crackpipe’s bogus science from a bogus misleading science foundation with an agenda to mislead is worthless.
:
:
Next:

“His belief is based solely on his inability to accept that someone can honestly come to believe their faith – yet this is an illogical argument, and one that can only be addressed on an individual level, and ignores evidence to the contrary.”
——————–

Multiple lies again.

– I have no belief, I have either facts, or I have a lack of belief, unless we are talking about humanism which is the following definition:

http://www.yourdictionary.com/humanism

– Since Crackpipe has not told us any other way that someone could become religious, then he has not shown my point false that the only way someone can become religious is by brainwashing.

Or child indoctrinated:

http://eepat.net/doku.php?id=habermas_and_the_problem_of_indoctrination

– Crackpipe has not explained why he then does not believe in islam and why muslims do not believe Jesus is divine.

– So in otherwords Crackpipe has not provided any argument, or evidence, he has simply deflected and ignored everything I said, so this part about “ignoring evidence” is of course another lie.
:
:
Next:

“In short, he has to show that there cannot be ANY OTHER way someone comes to a faith and belief…even his examples don’t show this – as we see in every case people willingly believing and seeking…”
——————

Lies lies lies.

Crackpipe has to show ME how it’s possible.

I can’t think of any other way and unlike Crackpipe I’ve actually tried.

My examples showed people being brainwashed, demonstrating brainwashing, child indoctrination and showing how easy it is to brainwash people.

People who are “willingly seeking” are the type of people I mentioned who are “exploited while being in a state of emotional vulnerability”.

> Or in otherwords “the certain state of mind they are in is what causes them and allows them to be in a vulnerable state in the first place.”

> Like people who are vulnerable to peer pressure and social acceptance, or a way to feel a high, are more vulnerable to doing drugs, or be the victims of a drug dealer (the first hit is always free…. ever hear that before?).
:
:
Next:

“The argument is actually in reverse – I don’t have to show BB(s)J that I’m NOT brainwashed, he has to show that I was and still am…”
—————–

This is a lie of course.

The basics are pretty clear:

– Crackpipe was either child indoctrinated, or he was brainwashed while older because he was exploited while in a state of being emotionally vulnerable.

– Crackpipe intentionally has not revealed how or why he became a christian because he knows that the truth simply works against him and exposes him.

> Complete dishonesty and extremely pathetic.
:
;
Next:

“ONLY in these broad, generalize, and illogical arguments does BB(s)J’s argument exist…”
————–

More lies.

No, my arguments exist great when not being deflected and ignored like the coward and liar that Crackpipe is.
:
:
:
:
Alrighty then, that’s it. There were many I skipped in order to save time but I’m finally finished.

Now to finish the “Evidence of Jesus is meaningless 2” article, then post these and then never look at Crackpipe’s blog, or exchange anything with Crackpipe ever again.

Truly Crackpipe is the biggest time wasting imbecile and liar I’ve ever had the displeasure of dealing with.

Sunday, June 1,2014

Ok, just one more article response of Crackpipe’s, then the list of his lies, then the “Evidence of Jesus is meaningless 2 ” article that Crackpipe helped me unknowingly write with all his wonderful feedback.

So here we go. Crackpipe as usual will start off quoting stuff from what I’ve written and I will quote that and then follow it with his stupidity, then my response under the line.

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/06/brainwashing.html?m=1

Crackpipe says….

“Brainwashing!
BB(s)J is allowing me to chose which topic I wish.

Now, I know that I won’t pick the right one, so I’ll just pick the more interesting one (to me) to deal with: BRAINWASHING!

Let us begin!”
———————–

WTF?! Did I not clearly say to pick one of my brainwashing articles and that I really don’t care?

– Then Crackpipe wonders why Atheists ignore him and block him.

– He really is a skidmark and really comes across as such.

– Also he’s so unfunny, he really is and his humor alone is so painful that people just block him, or ignore him just from that alone.

– Why does Crackpipe say that he’s picking one of my brainwashing articles because they’re more interesting?

> I clearly told him to pick one of my brainwashing articles, so WTF?!

> He must be trying to be funny, or be irritating I guess.

> I also like how he never linked the articles I wrote where these come from.

> Great job. Loser.

– Anyways, this is the article of mine that he is attacking:

https://thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com/2014/04/29/its-no-conspiracy-theory-religion-is-brainwashing-its-fact/
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“I often tell religious believers they are brainwashed and it unfortunately doesn’t give the results that it is supposed to. Which is really part deflection on the religious person’s part since a rational person would respond with defending the claims and proving the accuser wrong, which never happens.”

BB(s)J believes that the ONLY reason someone is religious is because they are brainwashed. He then believes that a “rational” person would PROVE they aren’t brainwashed. Well, a bit tough to do when someone is secure in their BELIEF that a religious person MUST BE brainwashed, thus any argument to the contrary can’t be valid.
—————-

It really isn’t that hard to do if you actually try and it’s just a very simple job of asking the right questions.

– Part of the exercise of getting someone into proving to themselves they aren’t brainwashed, is actually getting them to think about it in the first place, then seeing how they were brainwashed and realizing that they are.

– It’s a necessary first step.

– Of course if the person is not honest with me, or the person who is pressing them with the questions, or worse, not honest with themselves, then of course it’s gonna be an issue.

– Such as this entire blog response that Crackpipe did ABOUT brainwashing.

> Crackpipe doesn’t reveal a thing.

> Nothing, zip, zero.

> Completely knows what I want to hear but he completely deflects everything.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Can I show him I’m not brainwashed?

Not on a blog, no. But as we will see, he has the argument backward…

However, I CAN show that his argument is illogical. Which would mean, of course, his argument is invalid. And show that he actually is the one who needs to “prove” the claim, not the opposite!”
————–

More sleazy, slippery, misleading, time-wasting apologetic dishonesty.

– More of Crackpipe’s “your argument is illogical, so your argument is invalid” nonsense.

– This is of course nothing but time wasting deflection because Crackpipe knows exactly how and why it exposes him as brainwashed.

> If he didn’t know that he was avoiding and deflecting, then why did he deflect and avoid EVERYTHING that was relevant?
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Thus, I don’t need to prove I’m not brainwashed, he would have to make a better, specific, argument.

Of course he won’t believe it, or accept it because…well, he believes all Christians are brainwashed not matter what!”
————–

So more deflection then. Not surprising though because it is a typical cowardly apologetics maneuver.

– Proving my point that if apologists didn’t lie, deflect and time-waste then they couldn’t do apologetics at all.

– Of course all christians are brainwashed and every other religion too.

– If Crackpipe is saying he doesn’t have to prove anything, then why does he even bother pretending that he is replying when he just ADMITTED that he isn’t even going to answer anything?

> In a sense Crackpipe just admitted he is just here to waste my time and nothing else.

– The only way someone could believe such nonsensical insanity as religion is by being brainwashed to believe it.

> Being mentally conditioned to willfully accept the unacceptable.

> How else can Crackpipe explain people having the same amount of faith he has, or more, but with different religions which sound completely insane to Crackpipe?
.
.
Crackpip continues….

“The benefit of being illogical: security!

If he chooses to believe an illogical argument, that just reflects poorly upon him…”
——————-

But since Crackpipe just avoids and deflects the whole time and never even shows HOW the argument is illogical by revealing nothing about how he became a christian, then it is just exactly as I said.

– Crackpipe knows that if he reveals the slightest information about how he became religious then he will reveal his brainwashing and how he is brainwashed.

– He just basically said “because his argument is illogical, it’s invalid, so I don’t have to co-operate and don’t have to answer anything”.

> For which of course he explained nothing to us at all.

– I really hope that someone observes what he has just said and seen that he just completely avoided and blew off answering anything.

> Pointing out that these are the words of a typical cowardly apologist.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“The desired result is that the religious believer will self reflect and consider the facts and evidence. Afterall, if I was brainwashed I would want to know if I was brainwashed (wouldn’t you?).”

BB(s)J believes it IMPOSSIBLE for a person to choose and believe a religion on their own.”
—————–

Well since Crackpipe never revealed how he became religious then he really hasn’t proved me wrong has he?

– Crackpipe has deflected a lot though and completely avoided everything that I wanted him to say and reveal.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Since this post is to show this isn’t a conspiracy I’m sure he will have a plethora of evidence to show this.

Brainwashing however is reality and is of course the only reason anyone is religious in the first place. If people weren’t brainwashed, then they wouldn’t be religious.

But is this a logical argument?

No.
——————

Well since AGAIN Crackpipe never reveals anything, then there is no exposing the truth is there?

– If someone does nothing but deflect and don’t answer then both the treatment and argument are not going to work.

– This is Crackpipe’s fault though for being the slippery dishonest, misleading weasal that he is.

– AGAIN for the treatment and revelation to work the religious victim has to confront the truth.

> This is a lot like substance abuse.

> In order to deal with the problem the person has to admit that they have a problem, or even acknowledge they have a problem.

> Like a substance abuser the religious victim has to realize WHEN things started becoming a problem and HOW.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“He claims the ONLY reason people come to a religion, a faith, is because they are brainwashed because if they weren’t brainwashed, they wouldn’t be religious.”
—————–

So insead of co-operating and proving me wrong Crackpipe continues to deflect and avoid.

– Boy he really is showing me how christianity isn’t brainwashing. NOT

– What a loser Crackpipe is.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“This is circular reasoning.

Premise 1) all religious people are brainwashed.

Premise 2) if they weren’t brainwashed they wouldn’t be religious.

Conclusion: all religious people are brainwashed.
————-

Yet if Crackpipe ACTUALLY wanted to defend himself from what I’m saying, he could say exactly HOW someone could become religious other than brainwashing.

– As I have constantly reminded Crackpipe and everyone who has the pleasure of reading what I have to say….

There are 2 types of brainwashing:

> Child indoctrination (where the child is raised and mentally conditioned and programmed to deny the truth and accept the unacceptable).

> Brainwashing when older (where someone is caught in a state of being emotionally vulnerable and that religion exploits the person).
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“We are right back to where we started (which is why it’s called circular reasoning).

As we know, circular reasoning is a logical FALLACY and as such makes his argument invalid.

Well that was simple!

Oh, but that won’t sell with BB(s)J.”
—————

Well no of course not.

– Of course Crackpipe knew that and knew that he was just time-wasting.

– He knows exactly what I want him to tell me, but avoids doing so and just continues to timewaste.

– Crackpipe might want to self refect on his own circular reasoning:

> He’s not brainwashed because Crackpipe refuses to show how he isn’t brainwashed, so he’s not brainwashed.

> If Crackpipe says he’s not brainwashed, then he’s not brainwashed, because Crackpipe says so.

> As long as Crackpipe doesn’t answer a thing and never exposes how he became brainwashed, then we can never show how he’s brainwashed.

> Crackpipe says that it isn’t true that the only way someone can become religious is by brainwashing and keeps insisting that, but then never says how else someone can become religious.

> My argument isn’t valid because Crackpipe says it isn’t valid, so it’s not valid.

> Crackpipe doesn’t have to prove he isn’t brainwashed because that would prove him brainwashed, so he doesn’t have to prove it.

– I think Crackpipe should realize that he isn’t fooling anyone and that he is only fooling himself.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Okay. So, Let’s see what he does to back up this illogical claim.

But first, let’s define brainwashing:
—————

No Crackpipe, please continue showing my illogical claim.

> Maybe Crackpipe has Attention Deficit Disorder.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Brainwashing is a bipassing of being able to grasp and contemplate reality. Brainwashing is what makes thoughts that aren’t real become disguised as thoughts that are.

BB(s)J doesn’t really say where he gets this definition from. Seems he just defined himself to fit his argument.

It’s vague. And worded funny.”
——————

LOL Did I seriously just read what I thought I just read?

– Crackpipe is calling ME vague? BWAHAHAHA! Too funny!

> This from a guy who just says “his arguments are illogical so their invalid, so I’m not answering them”.

> This from a guy who tells me that “christianity is true because a guy said he had Jesus as his imaginary friend and knew his imaginary friend’s brothers”. Seriously?! WTF?!

> This is coming from a guy who says “that just because I don’t think that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree, is a sane thing to think”.

> Doesn’t Crackpipe find his own religion a little VAGUE?

– Also, Crackpipe says I’m describing myself.

> Crackpipe needs to tell me then what it is that I’m brainwashed to and what evidence he has to back up whatever he’s saying.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Definitions are important, and we want to nail this down.

So let’s use BB(s)J’s favorite website: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mind_control

Okay, in short brainwashing is a theory, and there are a few theories about it.”
————-

So Crackpipe is going to play the misleading game is he? Well that is typical apologetic style.

> Evolution and gravity are theories also for things we have evidence for, but I don’t see Crackpipe jumping out of bulidings and I don’t see Crackpipe wondering why he has to get a flu shot every year.

– What Crackpipe of course is wasting his time not talking about is the fact that few people really are brainwashed as adults, or when older, but most religious peiopeople are CHILD INDOCTRINATED.

– Crackpipe is more than likely child indoctrinated also, which is the part about himself that he has not revealed.

> I hope everyone notices that Crackpipe is doing that on purpose, by not disclosing how he became religious.

– The majority of Crackpipe’s response is just talking about brainwashing when older, regarding an article I wrote to demonstrate some more than obvious brainwashing that really stands out.

– It really is an overall waste of words that Crackpipe makes since he doesn’t really remind everyone that the overwhelming majority of brainwashed people are child indoctrinated.

– As I repeatedly say in my articles about being brainwashed when older, “they are exploited while being caught in a state of being emotionally vulnerable”.

> Sometimes I say “exploited while being caught in a state of emotional vulnerablity”. 😉

– I never said it was the majority reason people are religious, just that it happens and religious people willingly attempt to spread their disease to others

> Crackpipe and other apologetic filth are evidence of religion infecting other people and attempting to brainwash them.

> People like Crackpipe will try to convince people they are broken and in need of fixing.

> People like Crackpipe will try to convince people they have an imaginary disease and try to sell them their imaginary cure.

> In otherwords people like Crackpipe are evidence of people who brainwash other people.

– People like Jim Wallace were brainwashed when older and now they spend their time brainwashing other people.

> Wallace is a perfect example of someone who was brainwashed by a religion and now spends his time brainwashing other people.

> Wallace is the evidence of brainwashing working and doing it’s job if you’re familiar with his story.

> Amazing and also frightening how just sitting in a church as an Atheist can mentally condition you to become religious and believe complete nonsense.

> Nonsense that isn’t true and has no evidence I might add.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“However: “Neither the American Psychological Association nor theAmerican Sociological Associationhave found any scientific merit in such theories.[2]”

http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Brainwashing.html
————

Lies again. If you look at the 2 links of the 2 associations Crackpipe gives there is no word in them about brainwashing.

Also this link that Crackpipe gives us CLAIMS to be from wikipedia but if you look at them you see that they are quite different.

http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Brainwashing.html

Compare:

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

They’re not even close. Complete dishonesty and completely misleading on Crackpipe’s part and the website he provided that was untrue.

This ACTUAL wikipedia article link is overwhelming with things that prove my point!

– Of course he never mentions those.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Okay, but what’s the definition?

Wikipedia offers us this: “Mind control (also known as brainwashing,coercive persuasion, thought control, orthought reform) is a theoretical indoctrination process which results in “an impairment of autonomy, an inability to think independently, and a disruption of beliefs and affiliations. In this context, brainwashing refers to the involuntary reeducation of basic beliefs and values”[1] The term has been applied to any tactic, psychological or otherwise, which can be seen as subverting an individual’s sense of control over their ownthinking, behavior, emotions or decision making.”

I like this one better than BB(s)J’s vague definition. As I echos the “theoretical” aspect of brainwashing.
—————-

My definition was not only short and sweet but told the truth.

– Crackpipe really has shown the definition of brainwashing though and seen that what I say isn’t just me saying it.

– However Crackpipe’s misleading tactic of implying “theoretical” as “just a wild crazy guess” is quite dishonest, desperate and pathetic.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“But does it truly exist?

Brainwashing has been around for as long as religion has been around and ever since people have been able to indoctrinate children and deceive people.

As an expert in the field, BB(s)J says yes! And backs it up with scientific evidence.

Whoops, he actually doesn’t…not one link to a scientific paper/blog/YouTube video to follow up.

Because as we know, there really isn’t any: just anecdotal.”
————

Well it’s a good thing Crackpipe brought that up and conveniently showed me the wikipedia article that talks about this.

Let’s use some of the quotes it has in it and then we’ll look for stuff….

– Oh here’s a good one:

” Philip Zimbardo discusses mind control as “the process by which individual or collective freedom of choice and action is compromised by agents or agencies that modify or distort perception, motivation, affect, cognition and/or behavioral outcomes”,[29] and he suggests that any human being is susceptible to such manipulation.[30] ”

> Let’s checkout Dr. Zimbardo:

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

> Let’s see what [29] says about what Dr. Zimbardo says:

“Zimbardo, Philip G. (November 2002). “Mind Control: Psychological Reality or Mindless Rhetoric?”. Monitor on Psychology. Retrieved 2008-12-30. “Mind control is the process by which individual or collective freedom of choice and action is compromised by agents or agencies that modify or distort perception, motivation, affect, cognition and/or behavioral outcomes. It is neither magical nor mystical, but a process that involves a set of basic social psychological principles. Conformity, compliance, persuasion, dissonance, reactance, guilt and fear arousal, modeling and identification are some of the staple social influence ingredients well studied in psychological experiments and field studies. In some combinations, they create a powerful crucible of extreme mental and behavioral manipulation when synthesized with several other real-world factors, such as charismatic, authoritarian leaders, dominant ideologies, social isolation, physical debilitation, induced phobias, and extreme threats or promised rewards that are typically deceptively orchestrated, over an extended time period in settings where they are applied intensively. A body of social science evidence shows that when systematically practiced by state-sanctioned police, military or destructive cults, mind control can induce false confessions, create converts who willingly torture or kill ‘invented enemies,’ and engage indoctrinated members to work tirelessly, give up their money—and even their lives—for ‘the cause.”

For the full article:

http://www.apa.org/monitor/nov02/pc.aspx

> Well that was a good one, so let’s bring up more of Dr. Zimbardo’s work on this.

Here’s a great article on brainwashing that he did that supports everything that I say:

http://www.csj.org/studyindex/studycult/study_zimbar.htm

> If Crackpipe tries to say that this only applies to “cults” and not religions, let’s remind Crackpipe that religions ARE cults.

> The difference between a religion and a cult is the size of it’s members and that a “cult” usually has a leader that is still alive.

> Christianity started off as a cult but whether or not Jesus did, or didn’t exist, Paul became the cult leader to his imaginary friend in outer space.

– Here’s a good one also:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cults_in_Our_Midst_(book)
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“So what do actual experts say?

Does brainwashing exist?

“Not in the way that the mainstream media portray it, says Roger Finke, professor of sociology and religious studies at Penn State. “The popular idea is that brainwashing techniques can completely alter a person’s opinions, while he or she is powerless to stop the conversion,” he says. “But such techniques have never actually been found to exist.””

Note Finke doesn’t say brainwashing is just getting someone to believe something that isn’t true, but altering their opinions, and yes beliefs. Nor is the person powerless to stop the conversion (important note).
————

Unbelievable. Checkout Finke’s field of work and what he does. Professor of sociology and religious studies.

Seriously?! So biased religious person with an agenda. Great.

– As a brainwashed slave of a lie what else do you think he’s going to say?

– HAHA Look at Roger Finke’s wikipedia:

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

> Gee what a surprise, that a scientific research project was done regarding defending religion somehow and it was financed by the Templeton foundation.

> I don’t suppose Crackpipe is familiar with the Templeton foundation, but I think most apologists are, so actually I will say “yes he is”.

> Basically, Templeton is a religious organization that pretends to be a science organization and they fund people who do science projects which are biased, dishonest and make religion look good and Atheism look bad.

> Here’s some stuff I had on file that I found and set aside from someone who tried throwing Templeton related “evidence” in my face last year:

http://rationallyspeaking.blogspot.ca/2011/11/templeton-foundation.html?m=1

http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2009/06/21/fighting-back-against-templeton/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1374348/Templeton-Prize-2011-Athiest-astronomer-Martin-Rees-accepts-1m-religious-prize.html

And in the words of Sean Carroll HIMSELF about the Templeton foundation:

http://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2013/05/08/on-templeton/

– So by reading these 4 articles above we can see how non-credible Mr. Finke is with his completely biased and untrustworthy “scientific research”.

– If anyone should read those four articles directly above and think that the research Crackpipe is presenting from Dr. Finke is trustworthy, then they’ve got as many rocks in their head as Crackpipe does and probably smoking rocks like him too.

> The Templeton foundation are the ones who funded this laughable evidence on “children NOT being born Atheists:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/3512686/Children-are-born-believers-in-God-academic-claims.html

> Now let’s hear the truth regarding this:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2008/nov/28/religion-children-innateness-barrett

> So in otherwords this “research” Crackpipe is presenting is not only not trustworthy whatsoever, but another example of how religious people have gone to new limits to mislead and brainwash people.

> Religion has evolved it’s apologetics to a level now that it can mislead and deceive people by disguising it as science itself.

> Terrifying. It really is.

– What Crackpipe doesn’t seem to grasp for some unknown reason is that altering someone’s opinion and beliefs IS BRAINWASHING.

> If their opinion involves believing something to be true, but isn’t true, but they BELIEVE it is true, then that is exactly what I said as the definition.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“To continue:
“However, Finke notes that the popular portrayal of brainwashing became widespread in the United States during the 1970s, a time in which a number of cults and religious movements, like theUnification Church, were on the rise.”

So what of these cults? They used brainwashing right? That’s the ONLY way they got members right?

“When these movements were studied systematically by social scientists, however, it was found that they had no powers of brainwashing, says Finke.”

Oh, huh…

Then how did they get members?”
————–

Again, this is coming from the unreliable voice of a religious organization famous for dishonestly misleading people into thinking they are a science organization.

– Finke is a religious professor, who is a christian, with an obvious agenda to mislead with that agenda.

> I say this because this is what all apologists do (mislead with an agenda to get people to share their delusion any way they can).

> If apologists didn’t lie and mislead then they couldn’t do apologetics at all.

> Like William Lame Craig disguises himself as both a scientist and a historian, he is neither, but merely an apologist and nothing else.

> Finke is no different and is merely an apologist using his science credentials to help mislead and brainwash people into thinking that they CAN’T be brainwashed.

> Shows people how tricky desperate, creative and sneaky apologetics has gotten.

– Again, religions, or cults get new members (outside of child indoctrination) by exploiting someone’s state of emotional vulnerability.

> As Dr. Zimbardo says:

“What makes any of us especially vulnerable to cult appeals? Someone is in a transitional phase in life: moved to a new city or country, lost a job, dropped out of school, parents divorced, romantic relationship broken, gave up traditional religion as personally irrelevant. Add to the recipe, all those who find their work tedious and trivial, education abstractly meaningless, social life absent or inconsistent, family remote or dysfunctional, friends too busy to find time for you and trust in government eroded.”

– I think I will trust Dr. Zimbardo since he was an unbiased professional who has accomplished multiple psychological studies with no bias and no religious, or anti-religious agenda.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Propaganda and other methods of persuasion were used to make the movement look as attractive as possible to prospective members, but, in the end, the vast majority of people that explored these movements never joined them. “It was really only a tiny percentage that joined,” notes Finke.”

http://news.psu.edu/story/141191/2009/11/03/research/probing-question-does-brainwashing-exist

Now this is significant. This would argue that “brainwashing” if effective at all, is to a small percentage of people.
————-

Well in actuality I can’t argue with Crackpipe there, because this is true that the number of people who get brainwashed when older is kinda small.

But this doesn’t really conflict with anything I say, so Crackpipe has failed so far to make any significant defense.

– The overwhelming majority of people who are religious were child indoctrinated.

– Though as I always have said that SOME people ARE brainwashed when older by having an emotional vulnerability exploited.

> The vulnerability varies from person to person, but the predators of religion know that the perfect victims are the ones who have these emotional vulnerabilities and they always make sure to exploit them.

> Very similar to wolves that hunt the weakest and the sickest of the herd.

– I never claimed there are mass numbers of people getting brainwashed when older though.

> Maybe I just think that though because I’m optimistic and subconciously I just don’t want to think that so many people could be so stupid.

> In a way I could be in denial and am myself brainwashed to not think so many people are so stupid and dumb enough to get brainwashed, but you never know.

> This is most likely a self defense for my mind because I really can’t mentally deal with the truth about how large the number of stupid people who are brainwashed to religion really is because of how much it would anger me and disgust me.

> I’m hopeful it’s true and the numbers are small.

> Truthfully and honestly if I discovered that the numbers were larger than I think about how many adults get
brainwashed to religion, I really would have a hard time accepting the stupidity of my own species, but because of how let down and disappointed I would be.

> So in a way I am no different than religious people in accepting some truth despite being confronted with facts.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“However, as Finke says those who joined the cults/groups studied, did so willingly (as we will see).

Which isn’t brainwashing.

Sure persuasive methods were used to make the decision more attractive, but if brainwashing works so great, such methods are unneeded.”
————

Persuasive methods that cause someone to believe a lie. Crackpipe somehow doesn’t see how that’s brainwashing?

I think Crackpipe is kinda missing the point here, so let’s break this down for him:

– If they joined the cult willingly but already believed the whole bible/Jesus story already, then all they were doing was joining a cult that hijacked christianity.

– Many cults are sects of christianity such as Jonestown and The Branch Davidian.

> Many cults even have a leader claiming to be Jesus.

> So if they were child indoctrinated to the lie of Jesus and christianity already, then they were already brainwashed and just needed a push to go somewhere, like a cult.

– People in cults will bring up their families into cults and those kids will have more kids in the cult.

– As for the small number of people who get brainwashed when older, who were not religious:

> It is as I said and religious predators who were child indoctrinated, or brainwashed themselves when older, or they are just scam artists, will prey on people who have an emotional vulnerability and exploit it.

> Crackpipe would be lying if he said that it wouldn’t make his day by finding someone in an emotionally vulnerable state that he could exploit into christianity.

> Crackpipe is a predator afterall.

> Like child molesters are predators too.

> Crackpipe would be selling his imaginary cure to his imaginary disease faster than the big bang itself happened.

– In retaliation to what Crackpipe quoted above about what The Templeton Foundation’s puppet Roger Finke said, I will quote Dr, Zimbardo…

“Whatever any member of a cult has done, you and I could be recruited or seduced into doing–under the right or wrong conditions. The majority of ‘normal, average, intelligent’ individuals can be led to engage in immoral, illegal, irrational, aggressive and self destructive actions that are contrary to their values or personality–when manipulated situational conditions exert their power over individual dispositions.”
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Yet, BB(s)J wants you to believe masses of people can be and are brainwashed into large religions and aren’t aware of it…”
—————

Well it depends on what Crackpipe considers “large”.

– I never claimed that it was large amounts of people brainwashed when older, who were Atheists and then were brainwashed later to christianity or another religion.

> Though it could be.

– I do know that people are child indoctrinated in large numbers and lose the ability to be able to think on their own.

– I do know that people are exploited by being caught in a state of being emotionally vulnerable and if Crackpipe doesn’t agree that that is his favorite type of victim that he looks for then he’s just proved that he is a liar.

– I do know of 3 particular people who were brainwashed by being caught in an emotional vulnerability.

> William Lame Craig
> Lee Strobel
> Jim Wallace

> The 3 speak of when they converted, but they were all different ways.

> All 3 were caught in an emotional vulnerability.

> All 3 are now brainwashed slaves of a lie.

> Craig said “that as a teenager the holy spirit revealed himself to me” (which means that he was caught in an emotional vulnerability and he was brainwashed).

> Craig even says if there was no evidence and all the evidence pointed against, then he would still believe.

> Strobel said his wife kept taking him to church and he went out to disprove christianity and became a believer.

> Lee must not have tried very hard since his evidence and sources were the worst and were a case of Strobel being an imbecile, not a case for christ.

> Strobel’s wife said she went to church to convince herself that God exists, which indicates her emotional vulnerability.

> She then projected her brainwashing onto Strobel since every one of Lee’s arguments of “evidence of Jesus” in his movie “A Case For Christ” was non-existent, so what clearly happened was that she spread the faith virus disease on to Lee.

> Jim Wallace had the same thing.

> Jim went to church because he was invited and church projected certain fears and emotional weaknesses into him and he convinced himself of certain things in order to mentally deal with those vulnerabilities

– The fact that there is no truth to christianity because the bible is all a lie and Jesus was not divine, even if he did exist, proves they are brainwashed to believe a lie.

> Their emotional vulnerabilities cause them to believe things without evidence that are not true.

I will quote Dr. Zimbardo again:

“Whatever any member of a cult has done, you and I could be recruited or seduced into doing–under the right or wrong conditions. The majority of ‘normal, average, intelligent’ individuals can be led to engage in immoral, illegal, irrational, aggressive and self destructive actions that are contrary to their values or personality–when manipulated situational conditions exert their power over individual dispositions.”
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“But even his examples do not show this to be the case, as we will see. These are SPECIFIC cases that cannot be transposed upon masses and other beliefs.”

To show this mass effect is even possible, BB(s)J needs to provide a large scale brainwashing. Perhaps in a follow up post…”
—————-

Hmmm A follow up post?

– I really shouldn’t have to do a follow up post since I’ve written so many brainwashing articles to get people thinking and open their eyes, but since Crackpipe refuses to give my articles any credit because scientific studies aren’t included, then I suppose at a later date I could include another brainwashing article with some research included such as the ones that I included here in this article response.

> Thanks for another great idea Crackpipe for a blog article exposing christianity and all religions for the lies that they are.

> Your ideas and feedback will have definitely helped open the eyes of many brainwashed victims and make them become Atheists.

– Again, reminding everyone that I never claimed adults, or young adults were brainwashed in masses.

– Child indoctrination though is “in mass” and IS brainwashing,

– In all honesty, myself being the victim of brainwashing in more forms than just religion, aswell as having many friends and family who are brainwashed to religion, really does make me someone with good feedback on the subject.

> But of course Crackpipe will say anything to deflect and ignore.

– I guess that a good article with lots of research and scientific info would be a good idea and would probably convert a few people to reality if they seen the evidence.

> Great idea Crackpipe. You really have helped the cause of Atheism over the past few months.

> It would have to wait til I get Crackpipe’s list of lies finished and get “Evidence of Jesus is meaningless 2” finished too.

> I intend on taking a break from Crackpipe christian for a while, maybe for good, even though he will most likely respond to all these in a day after I send them.

> I won’t have time to respond to his next bunch of stupidity til about christmas holidays if I did decide to.

> Gotta write all the blog articles that Crackpipe gave me ideas for though.

– Whatever it takes I suppose to wake people up from the despicable evil that is religion.

– Whatever it takes to show people that they are living a lie and destroying the world and too brainwashed to see it.
————-

“Okay, what else do the experts say about cults and brainwashing?

Wikipedia tells us:
“James Richardson observes that if the NRMs had access to powerful brainwashing techniques, one would expect that NRMs would have high growth rates, yet in fact most have not had notable success in recruitment. Most adherents participate for only a short time, and the success in retaining members is limited.[35] For this and other reasons, sociologists of religion includingDavid Bromley and Anson Shupe consider the idea that “cults” are brainwashing American youth to be “implausible.”[36] In addition to Bromley, Thomas Robbins, Dick Anthony, Eileen Barker, Newton Maloney,Massimo Introvigne, John Hall, Lorne Dawson, Anson Shupe, Gordon Melton, Marc Galanter, Saul Levine (amongst other scholars researching NRMs) have argued and established to the satisfaction of courts, of relevant professional associations and of scientific communities that there exists no scientific theory, generally accepted and based upon methodologically sound research, that supports the brainwashing theories as advanced by the anti-cult movement.[37]”
—————–

LOL I love how Crackpipe has cherry picked and left out the best parts, which are right underneath what he copied and pasted. I mean if you look at the Wikipedia numbers you will see that it’s literally right underneath.

Like this:

Other scholars disagree with this consensus amongst sociologists of religion. Benjamin Zablocki asserts that it’s obvious that brainwashing occurs, at least to any objective observer; and that it isn’t “a process that is directly observable.”[38] The “real sociological issue”, Zabloki states, is whether “brainwashing occurs frequently enough to be considered an important social problem”.[39] Zablocki disagrees with scholars like Richardson, stating that Richardson’s observation is flawed.[40] According to Zablocki, Richardson misunderstands brainwashing, conceiving of it as a recruiting process, instead of a retaining process.[40] So although Richardson’s data are correct, Zablocki states, properly understood, brainwashing does not imply that NRMs will have a notable success in recruitment; so the criticism is inapt.[40] Additionally, Zablocki attempts to debunk the other criticisms Richardson, et al., apply to brainwashing: if Zablocki is correct, there’s a plethora of evidence in favor of the claim that some NRMs brainwash some of their members.[40] Perhaps most notably, Zablocki says, the sheer number of former cult leaders and ex-members who attest to brainwashing in interviews (performed in accordance with guidelines of the National Institute of Mental Health and National Science Foundation) is too large to be a result of anything other than a genuine phenomenon.[41]

– So let’s hear what these folks have to say:

Benjamin Zablocki

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

“Zablocki heads the Sociology department at Rutgers. He has published widely on the sociology of religion.[1][2][3]
Zablocki is a fervent supporter of what he calls ‘the brainwashing hypothesis’. The question is not whether brainwashing exists, he asserts, but to what extent.[4]”

Let’s see more:

Margaret Singer

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

– WOW! The woman certainly had credentials and seems that she dedicated her life to things of psychological research, including several different forms of BRAINWASHING.

> She even had an award named after her a year after she died.

– So let’s take a look at what happened with Margaret Singer’s research about religious brainwashing….

> Well that’s interesting.

> Says how her work was attacked and criticized because people in religious power didn’t want the TRUTH exposed.

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

> Not surprising that there were death threats and that religious people would stoop so low as to hide the TRUTH from the public.

> Just shows again how religion has no limits to how evil it can be and the measures it’s followers will go in order to maintain it’s control.

> Ben Zablocki agrees with the fact.

“Zablocki further alleges that brainwashing has been unfairly “blacklisted” from the academic journals of sociology of religion. Such blacklisters, Zablocki asserts, receive lavish funding from alleged cults and engage in “corrupt” practices.[4]”
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“A How Stuff Works article says:

“Likewise, many psychologists believe that large-scale brainwashing — via the mass media and subliminal messages, for instance — is not possible, because the thought-reform process requires isolation and absolute dependence of the subject in order to be effective. It’s just not that easy to change a person’s core personality and belief system.”
—————–

Many psychologists also believe that religious people in power and control, will abuse their power to bury and discredit those who want to expose the truth.

– As Dr. Zablocki said and I just pointed out.

“Zablocki further alleges that brainwashing has been unfairly “blacklisted” from the academic journals of sociology of religion. Such blacklisters, Zablocki asserts, receive lavish funding from alleged cults and engage in “corrupt” practices.[4]”
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“This is VERY important to remember, for when we look into BB(s)J’s examples. ABSOLUTE Dependence and isolation is required…”
——————

So again, if someone is caught in a state of being emotionally vulnerable, then they can be convinced and manipulated to not believe reality.

– The examples I provided have nothing to do with OTHER mental and emotional forms of brainwashing, that’s just Crackpipe trying to be misleading and imply that other forms of emotional exploitation doesn’t exist.

– It really doesn’t fit into whether or not I said that brainwashing adults in vast amounts when older exist, because I can tell you right now that that is not how I feel.

– Child indoctrination in huge numbers is reality though.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…

“And: “Regardless of which definition you use, many experts believe that even under ideal brainwashing conditions, the effects of the process are most often short-term — the brainwashing victim’s old identity is not in fact eradicated by the process, but instead is in hiding, and once the “new identity” stops being reinforced the person’s old attitudes and beliefs will start to return.”

So, EVEN IF brainwashing is possible, under IDEAL conditions it’s short term at best. Retention seems to be an issue…”
——————–

Actually no this isn’t true and I’ve listed 3 examples of this already.

Craig
Strobel
Wallace

– All 3 were brainwashed.

> All 3 are long term.

> All 3 were “born again” or “saved” as they refer to themselves.

> “Born again” is another way of saying “new identity” for themselves.

> Last I checked, all 3 of them thought of themselves completely different after as though they were different people afterward.

> Last I checked, all 3 of them aren’t changing anytime soon.

> The only way this isn’t true about them is if they know it’s all a scam and are just happy with the vast amounts of money they make and they laugh at how easy it is and at how stupid people really are.

> It’s one or the other, they’re brainwashed, or scam artists.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“And after a lengthy and in depth article Skeptic Dictionary says:
“It seems then, that if we define mind control as the successful control of the thoughts and actions of another without his or her consent, mind control exists only in fantasy. Unfortunately, that does not mean that it will always be thus.”

http://www.skepdic.com/mindcont.html
——————

BWAHAHAHA! Crackpipe has done it AGAIN!

– He’s sent me a link of something that he cherry picks for a quote, while giving me a whole bunch to use against him.

http://www.skepdic.com/mindcont.html

Here’s a few copy pastes from the site, so please tell me how Crackpipe was benefitting himself sending me the link?

In the section “Recruiters, kidnappings and inquistions”:

“Some recruits into non-mainstream religions seem to be brainwashed and controlled to the point that they will do great evil to themselves or others at the behest of their leader, including murder and suicide. Some of these recruits are in a state of extreme vulnerability when they are recruited and their recruiter takes advantage of that vulnerability. Such recruits may be confused or rootless due to ordinary transition difficulties (such as new college students), difficult life circumstances (such as failing in college or at a new job), or even tragic personal events (such as death of close friends or loved ones) or world events (such as war or terrorism). Some may be mentally ill or emotionally disturbed, greatly depressed, traumatized by self-abuse with drugs or abuse at the hands of others, etc. But it would not be to the advantage of the cult to actively recruit the emotionally disturbed. As one cult recruiter told me.”

– This is also what they said…

“Cults have complicated ideologies and practices that mentally or emotionally upset people have difficulty grasping. These structures are what allow the cult to control the person. Cults do not want people who are difficult to control.”

– Here’s more of people agreeing with me about “being vulnerable” which I talk about a lot….

“Thus, while some recruits might be very vulnerable to those who would like to control their thoughts and actions, recruiters look for people they can make vulnerable. The recruiter quoted above also said….”

“Cults seek out strong, intelligent, idealistic people. They also seek out the rich, no matter what their mental status is.”

“The goal is make the recruits vulnerable, to get them to give up whatever control over their thoughts and actions they might have. The goal is to make the cult members feel like passengers on a rudderless ship on a stormy sea. The recruiter or cult leader has a rudder and only he can guide the ship to safety.”

“The techniques available to manipulate the vulnerable are legion. One technique is to give them the love they feel they do not get elsewhere. Convince them that through you and your community they can find what they’re looking for, even if they haven’t got a clue that they’re looking for anything. Convince them that they need faith in you and that you have faith in them. Convince them that their friends and family outside the group are hindrances to their salvation. Isolate them. Only you can give them what they need. You love them. You alone love them. You would die for them. So why wouldn’t they die for you? But, love alone can only get you so far in winning them over. Fear is a great motivator. Fear that if they leave they’ll be destroyed. Fear that if they don’t cooperate they’ll be condemned. Fear that they can’t make it in this miserable world alone. The manipulator must make the recruit paranoid.”

“Love and fear may not be enough, however; so guilt must be used, too. Fill them with so much guilt that they will want to police their own thoughts. Remind them that they are nothing alone, but with you and a god (or some power or technique) they are Everything. Fill them with contempt for themselves, so that they will want to be egoless, selfless, One with You and Yours. You not only strip them of any sense of self, you convince them that the ideal is be without a self. Keep up the pressure. Be relentless. Humiliate them from time to time. Soon they will consider it their duty to humiliate themselves. Control what they read, hear, see. Repeat the messages for eyes and ears. Gradually get them to make commitments, small ones at first, then work your way up until you own their property, their bodies, their souls. And don’t forget to give them drugs, starve them, or have them meditate or dance or chant for hours at a time until they think they’ve had some sort of mystical experience. Make them think, “It was you, Lord, who made me feel so good.” They won’t want to give it up. They have never felt so good. Though they look as if they are in Hell to those of us on the outside, from the inside it looks like Heaven. ”

“What religion doesn’t use guilt and fear to get people to police their own thoughts? Even some therapists use similar methods to control their patients. They prey on the vulnerable. They demand total loyalty and trust as a price for hope and healing. They often isolate their prey from loved ones and friends. They try to own and control their clients. The methods of recruiters are not much different. Are the recruits, the converts to the faith, and the patients willing victims? How would we tell the difference between a willing victim and an unwilling victim? If we cannot do that, then we can’t distinguish any true cases of mind control.”

– Now I hope anyone reading the above can see the many things included that we see apologists and evangelists and churches and church leaders do.

– This still blows my mind that Crackpipe was so desperate that he had to use Skeptic’s dictionary to attempt to make a point, only to have it bury any point Crackpipe was making in a landslide.

– What a total loser Crackpipe is.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“And whatever brainwashing is, what it isn’t is forcing someone to make a choice they normally wouldn’t.

That is, to force someone to choose A or B when they wouldn’t pick either isn’t brainwashing.”
——————-

Let’s break things down again for Crackpipe since he’s either too in denial, too dishonest, or too stupid to get it. My guess is that it’s all 3.

Brainwashing is…

– Child indoctrination and mental conditioning to deny the truth are things drilled into children’s heads since birth, or very very young.

– If someone is caught in a state of emotional vulnerability, then religion can exploit that vulnerability by convincing the person of things that aren’t real, but also by convincing them (without evidence) that certain things are not true.

– By convincing people that fake evidence is true and by exploiting them, by abusing people’s trust and deceiving them, by the time they find out that certain things are lies, they will have been too absorbed in the religion that they won’t listen to reason anyway.

– This is why people will embrace the religion they were presented, because that was the religion they were exposed to when emotionally vulnerable.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…..

“Nor is it simply persuasion. That is making a certain proposition more attractive than another.

Influence is not control.”
——————

No but making someone feel worthless and afraid IS about control.

– If religion didn’t make people feel worthless and afraid then it wouldn’t exist.

– If religion didn’t make people feel worthless and afraid then people wouldn’t be vulnerable.

> If they weren’t feeling worthless, afraid and weren’t vulnerable then they wouldn’t allow themselves to believe the nonsense that they are exposed to that makes no sense and has no truth.

– If people weren’t exposed to the religion that they have the most influence and exposure to while vulnerable, or child indoctrinated, then they would simply have to find inner strength.

> Religion destroys inner strength.

> Religion causes people to be slaves of a lie.

> Religion causes people to not be able to deal with the truth and makes them mentally unable to deal with the fact that they have been lied to, are living a lie and the people they trusted have lied to them.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…..

“So does Christianity fit the bill?
BB(s)J believes so.

To show this, he uses small, specific instances. And we will see the stark contrasts between these examples and ones faith in their religion. As well as the fact that in two examples, pure “brainwashing” was not used.

FAITH in GOD not A MAN.

1) The Charles Manson Family:

BB(s)J links two YouTube videos. One about Susan Atkins, the other about Charles “Tex” Watson.

Susan says, her claim, that her actions were the result of brainwashing and drugs.

Could be.

Of course her youth wasn’t idyllic. And as she admitted she was a “seeker.” Manson fit the bill. So she hung around because she liked what he was saying.

But neither video goes into the “brainwashing” details.”
————

What Crackpipe is not telling us is that she was in a state of being emotionally vulnerable.

– Whatever means that put her in that state is irrelevant, she was in that state and she embraced what Charlie was offering.

– This IS BRAINWASHING and it fits the bill about everything that I was saying.

– Crackpipe FAILS to come up with any significant argument.

– In what universe is convincing multiple people that you’re God and that “God” wants you to kill for him, NOT BRAINWASHING?! WTF?!
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“So, looking for said info I came across this: http://www.aboundinglove.org/sensational/mrhmso/mrhmso-003.php

This is the same Charles from the 2nd video.

He gives us some great insight into the Manson family.

“Well, under the surface, what people couldn’t see was that we were living an isolated life in shacks and living hungry, on food foraged from dumpsters. Of course, there were the drugs we all took together and the lack of sleep that made us extremely open to suggestions, and the force of a stronger personality. I will say that sex in the Manson family has really been exaggerated by the media.”

There’s that isolated word as we have seen, in addition to other factors: lack of sleep, food, and drug use.

So one could say their minds were ripe for brainwashing.
——————–

Crackpipe is the biggest timewasting imbecile I’ve ever come across.

– How is this even a “point” he is making?

– By showing this article he is just showing my point, THAT BRAINWASHING EXISTS!

http://www.aboundinglove.org/sensational/mrhmso/mrhmso-003.php

– Seriously WTF?!

– Crackpipe is attempting to disprove brainwashing and dispove that religion is only brainwashing, by showing people being exposed to religions who are brainwashed and then AGREEING that they are brainwashed.

– Crackpipe would have done a better job of proving it wrong by simply doing what all apologists do and refuse to acknowledge brainwashing as anything but an insult and an attack.

> This is nothing but deflection, dishonesty and denial by not addressing brainwashing, but it really is the best they can do since there is no defense that RELIGION IS BRAINWASHING!

> Crackpipe is now proving why they don’t have any defense of brainwashing.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…..

“Yet Charles says him and others were afraid of him: “Charlie would simply look at members, and immediately they would fall silent. But at the same time, some were almost willing to die for him. Everyone wanted to please Charlie and was fearful of his opinion of them. Myself, I ran from him several times in fear.”

“I feel that Manson avoided sharing his beliefs with me in fear that I wouldn’t fall for them…. Of course, my own rebellion, disobedience and ignorance were to blame. The drugs were a stimulant making me gullible to believe what I wouldn’t normally believe. This took me into a death spiral downward to greater rebellion, emotional pain, drug consumption and worldly, fleshly pleasures.”

Now if Manson DID brainwash them all to COMPLETE obedience, why would he worry that someone wouldn’t believe him on certain beliefs?”
—————

What I find so unbelievably pathetic about Crackpipe is that he refuses to use his brain at all.

– I mean how hard would it have been to answer this when all it would take was a little effort in trying?

Pointing out the completely obvious:

>> Manson knew what he was doing and knew what had to be done in order to keep people under his spell.

>> Like all religions, leaders don’t want people to think about the truth.

>> Manson’s religion (like all religions) made no sense, but Manson didn’t have billions of people backing up his ridiculous nonsense religion, so he had to do whatever it took to keep people’s faith.

>> If Manson’s followers, or any other religion’s followers actually took the time to see how their religions make no sense, have no evidence and are nothing but a scam, then nobody would be relgious.

>> In case Crackpipe didn’t notice how similar Manson’s relgion was compared to christianity and that every day thousands of people are doing just that, waking up from their brainwashing.

>> I woke up from my brainwashing from religion many years ago and why Crackpipe thinks that people can’t wake up from brainwashing only proves that Crackpipe is too weak himself to do so and nothing else.

>> People who are brainwashed and are the slaves of a lie that makes no sense, don’t have to be and if they actually put in the effort they could unbrainwash themselves.

>> Very funny that Charles knew Charlie had brainwashed him, but then went and got brainwashed to christianity.

> Neither christianity or what Manson preached is any more believable than the other.

http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial_killers/notorious/manson/skelter_6.html

> The brainwashed will believe what they do and unless they realize things don’t make sense and that there’s nothing sane about it.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Why would they “fear” him? Why weren’t they brainwashed to accept EVERYTHING Manson said and never fear him?

But Charles sums it up nicely: “Well, cults go after weak people. In my case, I was lacking a strong identity, direction and goals. I had no spiritual meaning, no sound belief system or feeling of acceptance. I was also naïve and gullible, a people-pleaser. I was empty, lonely and angry, allowing myself to slowly be governed by my own self-will and surroundings.”
—————

So Crackpipe’s point is what? That certain people are easier to brainwash than others? We know that.

But since Crackpipe is attempting to have a point, let’s break this down to show him how non-existent it is:

– Cults AND religions go after weak people.

> They are the only ones they can get to believe their nonsense which makes no sense and has no evidence.

> Unless they are child indoctrinated.

– If someone is “lacking an identity”, is really irrelevant when you think about it and only if they are stupid enough to believe the lies and nonsense.

> Also they have to be pushed into that stupidity by being in an emotionally vulnerable state.

> People’s emotions can make them behave stupid and do irrational things and believe nonsense.

– The fact that Charles is religious now and believes complete nonsense, but stopped believing Charlie’s nonsense, just proves that he substituted one nonsense for another nonsense.

> Also, Charles was clearly spiritual if he believed supernatural stupidity about Manson, so who does either Crackpipe, or Charles think they’re kidding?

– Also, how in any way is Charles an expert on brainwashing when he is clearly still brainwashed himself?

– Let’s also not forget that many very intelligent people who found religion when older also found religion to be a source of INCOME and probably aren’t even believers at all.

– I mean it takes one of 3 things to genuinely become religious when older:

> Being caught while emotionally vulnerable.

> They’re stupid.

> They’re neurotic.

– However, remember that people like Jim Wallace and Lee Strobel went to church and through repetition they had a vulnerability opened up.

> Or of course they simply seen it for what it is, which is an income which has made them millions.

– Now I’m not talking child indoctrinated here remember. I know many very brilliant indoctrinated people and that is an upbringing that is embedded in them so deep that they simply have their brains wiring altered.

> With work the wiring can be put back in place though.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“So what do we have here for the Manson family.

1. Small group of people. 16-25
2. They were isolated
3. Dependent

Which fits for possible brainwashing. But we haven’t looked at two other key factors:

Fear. And Willingness.

If someone were brainwashed to follow someone, why would fear be a part of this? Why wouldn’t the brainwasher be able to rid his followers of such fear?”
————-

Seriously mindblown that Crackpipe thinks he’s making any kind of point here.

– I also can’t believe what a hypocrite Crackpipe is since he is defending and representing christianity.

– Christianity and other religions put fear in place also.

– Let’s list a few:

> Fear of hell.

> Fear of God.

> Fear of Jesus.

> Fear of Satan.

> Fear of not going to heaven.

> Fear of no “rewards” in the afterlife.

> Fear of not having an afterlife.

> Fear of bad things happening to friends and family.

– The many over 40,000 sects of christianity in the world fear the above very much.

> With the same fear and believability that Manson’s followers had.

– Why would Manson, or any church leader be any different from each other?

> Fear is everything to belief and without fear there is no motivation to believe.

> If Crackpipe says any different then he’s lying.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“And in both cases above we see they were “seeking” and “allowed” themselves to be influenced.”
————

Which would have been perfect prey for the church if they had of gotten to them first.

> Maybe the westborough baptist church.

> Maybe some mormons.

> Maybe some jehovah’s witnesses.

> Maybe the klu klux klan.

> Maybe just your plain old evolution denying, science denying, Earth is only 6000 years old types of church.

> Maybe just one that handles poisonous snakes.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“And let’s not forget the fact Manson still has a following! There are NEW followers of his. Are they brainwashed? If so, how is he doing it from prison, and against their will?”
——————

Well obviously some morons converted other morons.

– Makes just as much sense as christianity if you think about it.

> No evidence Jesus was God, or even a real person.

> Charlie is a real person who actually is saying he’s God.

>> Point- Manson.

> Morons will brainwash other morons.

> People will be brainwashed to Manson’s story just like all religions will be brainwashed onto people for the same reasons.

> Morons will have kids and indoctrinate them.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“But let’s say they were brainwashed. Can their brainwashing be transposed to Christianity in general and to the mass of believers?

No.

To say yes, as BB(s)J presumably would is to say that Manson COULD have done this on a much larger scale.”
————–

I AM saying they were brainwashed.

I have no idea what Crackpipe is saying here though.

– Something about Manson working on a larger scale.

– I have no idea what he’s babbling about here.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“However, this couldn’t happen due to the fact that isolation and complete dependence are virtually impossible on a large scale.”
—————

This isolation thing Crackpipe keeps babbling has gotta stop.

– Isolation is just one of many factors.

– These cases I had shown were cases of brainwashing that couldn’t be denied.

– I was showing how brainwashing exists and how it can’t be denied that it exists.

> It still can’t be denied.

– These examples show it, but most of these people were child indoctrinated already, the cult was just s step forward that simply PROVES it!
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Oh, but there was a large scale example right?

2) Jim Jones and Jonestown and over 700 people dead:

“Were they brainwashed? Of course they were. Would it have been wrong to tell them they were and try to save them before the mass suicide happened?”

Okay, but what’s weird is that the video BB(s)J links puts forth the argument most of the followers were MURDERED. That they DID NOT willingly choose to drink poison due to brainwashing.”

For some general information read here: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonestown

—————

Crackpipe sure is desperate and nitpicky.

– The fact that they were there in the first place is brainwashing.

– The fact that they believed what they believed was brainwashing.

– The fact that they could be blinded into thinking this was normal was brainwashing.

– The fact that some of them might not have known it was poisoned doesn’t hide the fact that some of them did know.

– All of them were brainwashed to believe that they weren’t a cult.

– Brainwashed idiots murdered other brainwashed idiots WITH CONSENT to be murdered.

– Yeah please tell me how these quotes from the same wikipedia article Crackpipe is referring to don’t totally sound like these people were brainwashed.

“Survivor Odell Rhodes stated that while the poison was squirted in some children’s mouths, there was no panic or emotional outburst and people looked like they were “in a trance”.[145] This statement was a contradiction to the crying and screaming children heard throughout the majority of the testimonial death tape.[136]”

“In addition to Jim McElvane, several other temple members gave speeches praising Jones and his decision for the community to commit suicide, even after Jones stopped appreciating this praise and begged for the process to go faster.”

– Crackpipe just doesn’t get it.

> Thinking that it’s okay for someone to murder you and to murder your own children is not a normal way of thinking.

> Thinking that it’s okay to murder other people and that it’s a good thing, is not normal, so I really don’t see what Crackpipe’s point is.

> This could only be thought of by brainwashed victims of a lie.

> You have to wonder what Crackpipe is using as a defense here?

> So is Crackpipe saying that only a 100 people willingly committed suicide? How many?

> Is Crackpipe saying that the people who forced the members to drink, or injected others weren’t brainwashed?

> What part of the Jonestown massacre didn’t result from brainwashing?

> If they murdered someone who didn’t want to die then they were brainwashed to kill people.

> If they willingly killed themselves then they were brainwashed to kill themselves.

> If they drank kool-aid and died and didn’t know it really was poisoned, then they were poisoned by people who were brainwashed.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“So background info JJ and the Peoples Temple didn’t start so much as a cult but social/racial/political advocacy group, with Communist ideals.”
————

Who were brainwashed to think this way BECAUSE of their CHRISTIAN beliefs.

– They were already mostly child indoctrinated christians.

– Once brainwashed into a church it really isn’t that hard to mass manipulate people into doing things as a group.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Jonestown was to be their Communist Paradise. People from TPT went willingly, and not everyone went or chose to go…”
—————

Amazing what the power of brainwashing will do then right?

– Amazing what the power of religious brainwashing will do.

– Amazing how people will deny the existence of religious brainwashing when they don’t see that that is the reason people do absolutely insane things willingly.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“But once they got there, they must have been brainwashed to the point where they would stay and knowingly drink poison without a second thought, right?

Not really.

Take from the video BB(s)J provided, there were reports of abuse and torture.

From this Atlantic article we learn that people were abused, blackmailed, and otherwise coerced into choosing to stay, though they didn’t want to.”
————-

So because of their brainwashing they believed in christianity.

– Because of their brainwashing they followed Jim Jones and the people’s temple.

– Because of brainwashing they got there to Jonestown in the first place.

– Because of brainwashing they were murdered.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Quote: “One guy tried to leave and Jim said he’d use his paper against him so he’d never see his children again. So he came back. The thing was, too, that Jim would not let children off the compound. So if you were going to leave, you were leaving your child. There was no way of getting a child out of Jonestown.”
————

What a wonderful christian church the people’s temple was.

– Where was God, or Jesus again in all this?

> Oh yeah that’s right, they don’t exist.

– Typical delusional psychotic christian church though.

> Believing lies.

> Hiding abuse.

> Believing in Jesus and the afterlife.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“And from this article:

“In Guyana, Wagner-Wilson said followers were starved, beaten, forced to work all day, and held prisoner in the compound, fearful to speak out.”

“I learned after the massacre that he drugged people on the outpost there to keep them from trying to leave, to keep them from trying to dissent, to control them in different ways, all unbeknownst to the masses.”

ANY use of force is not brainwashing.”
—————-

Crackpipe is just so unbelievably dumb.

– There were over 900 people in the cult and many people who were abused didn’t even know they were abused.

– The brainwashing caused those in the cult to hide that anything was truly wrong to themselves.

– Nothing Crackpipe has said has proven how Jonestown people were not brainwashed in one form or another.

– It was one or more of these forms of brainwashing that caused them to murder both themselves and each other.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“So numerous were these reports even at the time that Congressman Leo Ryan went to Jonestown to investigate.”
————

Typical church though.

– Lots of abuses.

– Lots of cover-ups.

– Lots of brainwashing.

– Lots of people being controlled and manipulated.

– Lots of people living a lie and being prisoners (mentally or physically).

– Lots of people told they will get a reward if they serve the leader and do what he wants (whether the leader is living or dead).
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“But what of the poisoning? The 900-plus men, women, and children who appear to have been “brainwashed” into drinking it?

Brainwashing or murder?

“I believe that this was a mass murder. First of all, there were over 200 children who could not have formed the intent to commit suicide. Second, Jim Jones had isolated his people and conditioned them through suicide rehearsals and mock sieges to accept death. Third, he orchestrated the events on that final day so that the outcome was never in doubt. He had gunmen go shoot the Congressman. Then he turned around to his followers, once he got news the Congressman was dead, and announced it. He said, now some among us have done something that’s going to cause the army to come in here and nobody will be safe. Let’s bring forward the potion and let’s bring the children first. By having the children die first, he sealed the fate of their parents and other elders, because no one would have any reason to live. As this was all going on, the pavilion was surrounded with armed guards with guns and crossbows, so people were not going to go anywhere. Many appeared to have been injected with poison.”
http://content.time.com/time/arts/article/0,8599,1859903-2,00.html

By this account, sure doesn’t sound like brainwashed zombies willing to kill themselves.”
——————–

Crackpipe is just such a total moron. I really can’t put into words how much I dislike him. Oh well, at least he gives me ideas for blog articles to write which show how christianity is a lie and how all religion is harmful.

Let’s list the multiple reasons why this is obviously brainwashing and how Crackpipe is an absolutely out of his mind numbskull:

– They rehearsed the suicide.

> If you are rehearsing mass suicide and think that it’s all going to be ok because you’ll go to heaven, then that is obviously brainwashing.

– The people who poisoned their kids willingly only did it willingly because of brainwashing.

> People don’t normally kill their kids and think everything is going to be okay unless they are brainwashed.

> People who aren’t brainwashed will normally put up more of a fight against killing their kids.

– The guards surrounding Jonestown with guns and crossbows were brainwashed too.

> Why else would a bunch of people hold guns on people and surround a town just so those people they were surrounding would kill themselves, unless they were BRAINWASHED?

> Why then would the people with guns and crossbows surrounding the town kill themselves too unless they were BRAINWASHED?

– And seriously what the heck is that stupid idiot Crackpipe talking about that they didn’t sound like brainwashed zombies?

> They didn’t sound like anything else BUT brainwashed zombies!

> How much more brainwashed can you get by killing your kids and yourself because your spiritual leader told you?

> How much more brainwashed can you get by pointing guns at people and making sure they killed themselves?

– Does Crackpipe not get yet that he really is an idiot and that only an imbecile would think that this isn’t brainwashing?

– He really should reflect on about how christianity is a lie aswell and that if he is dumb enough to believe christianity and Jonestown aren’t brainwashing then there is a good chance he’s wrong about that too.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“In fact many wanted to leave, some did. Some were killed for trying. Why? If they were brainwashed?

Is that to say some didn’t willingly kill themselves?

Of course not, some surely did. But where they brainwashed or just such true believers in the cause that they truly thought their suicide was a rebellion of sorts?”
————-

Some were killed for trying? How? They made them drink the poison?

– They could have refused to drink it.

– They could have refused to kill their kids.

– They found only 2 people who were killed with bullets not including the airplane attack and one of them was Jones himself and a woman who was a close member to Jones who shot herself.

> Everyone else died by poison.

> Did Crackpipe miss that part?

– How about this part where the shooter of the plane escaped going jail?

> What was his defense?

As shown:

“Larry Layton, who had fired a gun at several people aboard the Cessna, was originally found not guilty of attempted murder in a Guyanese court, employing the defense that he was “brainwashed”.[170] ”

> Obviously some people seen that he was brainwashed.

> So Crackpipe can disagree with the lawyers and judge on that one if he wants, but that won’t change a thing.

– Now why Crackpipe thinks that people can’t escape brainwashing for some reason is mindblowing.

– Just because Crackpipe is so far down the hole for being brainwashed to christianity, which is a completely nonsensical lie which has no evidence, doesn’t mean other people can’t escape it.

> I escaped brainwashing from religion and if you look on Twitter you’ll see tons of Atheists who escaped christianity, in fact most of the Atheists on Twitter were religious at one time but escaped.

> It really isn’t that hard when you consider the facts.

> Crackpipe is just too weak and pathetic to handle the truth.

– The fact that some people left to go with the senator just proves that some people realized the situation was a bad deal, BECAUSE IT WAS!

> Not everyone was as brainwashed and stupid as the assumed majority?were.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Well, let’s looks at what’s needed for brainwashing again:

1) isolation
2) total dependence
3) small group”
————-

Ugh This is just painful to have to deal with. What is wrong with this idiot Crackpipe?

– It seems that Dr. Crackpipe is attempting to tell us these are his 3 ways he knows about that cause people to be brainwashed.

– This couldn’t be farther from the truth.

– I guess I will just have to repaste Dr. Zimbardo again from the wikipedia link that Crackpipe sent me.

“Zimbardo, Philip G. (November 2002). “Mind Control: Psychological Reality or Mindless Rhetoric?”. Monitor on Psychology. Retrieved 2008-12-30. “Mind control is the process by which individual or collective freedom of choice and action is compromised by agents or agencies that modify or distort perception, motivation, affect, cognition and/or behavioral outcomes. It is neither magical nor mystical, but a process that involves a set of basic social psychological principles. Conformity, compliance, persuasion, dissonance, reactance, guilt and fear arousal, modeling and identification are some of the staple social influence ingredients well studied in psychological experiments and field studies. In some combinations, they create a powerful crucible of extreme mental and behavioral manipulation when synthesized with several other real-world factors, such as charismatic, authoritarian leaders, dominant ideologies, social isolation, physical debilitation, induced phobias, and extreme threats or promised rewards that are typically deceptively orchestrated, over an extended time period in settings where they are applied intensively. A body of social science evidence shows that when systematically practiced by state-sanctioned police, military or destructive cults, mind control can induce false confessions, create converts who willingly torture or kill ‘invented enemies,’ and engage indoctrinated members to work tirelessly, give up their money—and even their lives—for ‘the cause.”

– Let’s list what he says that causes brainwashing and specifically list them so Crackpipe finally gets it:

Mind control is…

– When agents modify and alter perception, motivation, affect, cognition and/or behavioral outcomes.

> This would be religious people pushing religion on people and convincing them that it’s true.

> Religion is pushed on people even though it makes no sense and has no evidence.

> Victims of religious brainwashing refuse to see that there is no difference of their religion and all other religions that they don’t believe in and make no sense to them.

> Part of their brainwashing causes them to refuse to see.

– A process that involves a set of basic social psychological principles. Conformity, compliance, persuasion, dissonance, reactance, guilt and fear arousal, modeling and identification.

> Conformity- When everyone is just so force fed religion and they see religion everywhere and believed by everyone, they find it unlikely that so many people are deceived and lied to.

> They find it highly unlikely that people they trust and respect and think are highly intelligent could possibly be wrong and are in denial that they could be.

> Compliance- People just go with the flow and refuse to question anything, or even question themselves.

> Persuasion- People are fed colorful lies from people they trust and encouraged to deny truth and reassured to believe things without evidence that make no sense.

> Guilt- As I said before, religion makes people think they are broke and in need of fixing.

> It makes people think they have an imaginary disease and need an imaginary cure.

> It attempts to say that there is even such a thing as a “sin” even though there is no logical reason that even if a god did exist that it would care what anyone did.

> There is afterall no such thing as “sin”, there is only RIGHT or WRONG as determined by socially evolved standards and definitions.

> It attempts to say that even though there is shown to be no truth to the bible at all and nothing about the bible makes any sense, that a nonsensical psychopath named Yahweh and a hippi rabbi are the same person and are loving and have made a list of things they don’t want you to do, like masturbate and be gay.

> Religion attempts to make us ashamed of ourselves because of how we are born and because it wants people to believe an omnipotent sky being will convict us of “thought crime”.

> Social isolation- This is what Crackpipe keeps refering to, but in a way he hasn’t realized, because he keeps refering to “isolation”.

> If people are “socially isolated” with religion by making them feel like outcasts from their friends, family, community and even their country, then that will have a strong influence on people and will not only affect their judgement, but make them too subconciously afraid to even test their faith.

> Dominant ideologies- Things like hating gays and hating yourself if you are gay can become a mutual and harmful ideology brought on by religion.

> Fear- Religions push fears onto people whether they are already child indoctrinated or not.

> Religion causes people to be talked into the idea that invisible beings with no evidence and who make no sense have nothing better to do than punish and torture people for ridiculous things that they would have no reason to care about.

> Religion forces the “better safe than sorry schtik” on people who really are simply taking peoples words and not taking the time to research and don’t know how.

> Again I recommend the Michael Sherlock book “I am Christ” for a full grasp on how christianity really is based on nothing but a lie. Michael really breaks everything down.

http://www.michaelsherlock.org/my-books.html?m

> The promised rewards- Christianity is just full of those promised rewards that religious people become psychologically addicted to.

> Religious people become so psychologically addicted to their promised rewards that they become completely mentally dependent on believing the lies so much that to merely entertain the idea to them that they are lies becomes mentally painful and extremely uncomfortable.

> This type of mental pain and uncomfortability relgious people feel when you tell them anything about their religion being a lie and their imaginary rewards being untrue is called “cognitive dissonance”.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“They certainly were isolated.

As they had given all their worldly possessions to the cause, so They did have dependence on JJ, as their leader, and each other.

Perhaps one could argue that JT wasn’t a small group, but then if that’s the case we lack ideal conditions for brainwashing to occur.”
————–

I just listed a bunch of reasons above. Do look again.

– There are plenty of ideal conditions though.

> Child indoctrination (as repeatedly mentioned).

> Media with television and the religions that are mostly dominant in the countries that they are pushed onto people.

> Social and family pressure where being non-religious or of another religion are bigotted against.

> Religious people like this vile douchbag Crackpipe who tries to push his lies and religion on people to try to get them to believe it.

– That brings up a good point that I just thought of.

> Crackpipe wants evidence of brainwashing then he should look into a mirror.

> How does Crackpipe not see that not only is he brainwashed, but that he is HIMSELF evidence of brainwashing spreading like the disease that it is?

> If Crackpipe thinks of himself good at apologetics and defending his religion, then he just admitted that he is a form
of brainwashing.

> As I said before though that the only people who will listen to him are people who are emotionally vulnerable.

> The only type of people, that people like Crackpipe will convince though are people who are emotionally vulnerable and will mostly convince themselves and won’t do any research.

> They are afterall the perfect victims that people like Crackpipe hope to find.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“However this needs to be an example of pure brainwashing for BB(s)J’s argument to hold ANY water.

It would have to be shown, undoubtedly, that all 700 plus adults were brainwashed into drinking the poison and no force/coercion can be evident.

But we clearly don’t have that here, even with the ideal conditions in place.

Why?”
—————–

LOL That’s hilarious that Crackpipe is attempting to tell us that this only applies to HIS standards of brainwashing.

– Obviously there are different levels and different types of brainwashing and I’ve listed different types and psychological experts have listed them too.

– For Crackpipe to imply that every single member had to be the exact same level of brainwashing and the exact same types is just ridiculous and pathetically misleading.

– Everything about Jonestown was completely ridiculous and there had to be some people who had started to get their head on straight and realized it was a bad thing.

– Everyone there was there for a reason and you can guess that it was to share Jones’ mission and dream and to worship Jesus, since Jesus and the bible were what Jones was using to control everone with.

> They already had a headstart being child indoctrinated, so the rest of the lies that Jones fed them were easy for them to eat up.

> Like all churches the Peoples Temple was no different in the sense that some people came to their senses with the nonsense and woke up to reality.

– The whole Jonestown situation was a bad deal and to deny that there were probably some people who woke up from the brainwashing situation and possibly weren’t brainwashed at all, would be unlikely to think there weren’t a few.

– To think however that most of these lunatics in Jonestown were not stone cold nuts and a few donuts short of a baker’s dozen because they were brainwashed, would just be insane

– The fact that they were christians and religious at all indicates that they were brainwashed whether they ever even moved to Jonestown or not.

– If idiots can be convinced that they can get bitten by snakes and not die, well if that isn’t brainwashing then I don’t know what is.

> Jonestown was far more psychotic then the snake handlers because they at least knew they were going to die after they drank the poison, but still did it.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“And let’s not forget that multiple forms of coercion were used, especially at the end…

So again we do not have a clear case of actual brainwashing. Especially for a larger group, which BB(s)J needs to establish can happen to show it IS happening…”
—————

Of course we do and I will gladly list them.

– We have the fact that they were religious in the first place which is brainwashing.

– We have parents killing their kids without a fight.

– We have a bunch of people who willingly killed themselves.

– We have people who aimed guns and crossbows at people who wanted to leave and then the people with crossbows and guns willingly poisoned themselves.

– We have one of the shooters of the plane escaping his jail sentence by using the “brainwashing” defense.

– So this bull that Crackpipe is muttering about me not having a clear case of brainwashing is completely misleading and ridiculous, or he doesn’t know this and really is an idiot.

> I say that it’s because he’s an idiot and a liar.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“3) Waco Texas, The Branch Dividian and David Koresh: “I don’t hear anyone saying that Koresh and people from the Branch Dividian shouldn’t have been told that Koresh was crazy and that following his cult was a bad idea.”

Well, doing something that’s a bad idea doesn’t require brainwashing. Nor is just believing something that is wrong…”
————

In what way is stockpiling guns with women and children in a compound waiting for the end of the world and following a guy who claims to be the next incarnation of Jesus ….not a bad idea?

– What part of crazy and brainwashed is Crackpipe not seeing here?

– What part of “bad idea only believed because of brainwashing” is Crackpipe not seeing here also?
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“In addition, decades after the events at Waco if folks were truly brainwashed, the should not be any longer. His influence is no longer in play, they no longer are isolated from the outside world, not dependent upon him.

But are there still believers?

At least one: http://m.nydailynews.com/news/national/waco-survivor-waiting-david-koresh-resurrection-article-1.1734205#bmb=1

If even under IDEAL circumstances brainwashing is short term, how then is it that this man STILL believes?”
—————–

LOL This is unbelievable. Crackpipe is trying to disprove brainwashing by presenting me with a complete whacko who thinks David Koresh was Jesus and is coming back soon resurrected.

– Meanwhile Crackpipe is brainwashed believing in just plain old Jesus who supposedly died almost 2000 years ago, even though he has no evidence.

– So what part of this man’s story does Crackpipe believe, or disbelieve?

– If Crackpipe doesn’t believe the man then Crackpipe needs to tell us why he doesn’t believe the man and why?

– If Crackpipe doesn’t believe Clive Doyles’s “story” (as in his religious belief) then Crackpipe needs to tell us what makes Crackpipe’s belief true as opposed to Doyle’s?

– This talk from Crackpipe about why the survivor Clive Doyle shouldn’t be brainwashed anymore because he is no longer “isolated” is so completely hypocritical and laughable.

> He still is brainwashed to a sect of christianity.

> He still is associated with people from the cult who reinforce the belief with each other.

> The members never stopped isolating themselves to their absurd delusion, which is only slightly different than the every day ridiculous christian version that Crackpipe believes in.

> If Crackpipe doesn’t think that religion is brainwashing then how come Clive Doyle’s belief about David Koresh being Jesus and coming back someday sounds crazy to Crackpipe.

> There really is a big similarity between Crackpipe’s religion and Doyle’s but Crackpipe can’t explain why Doyle believing Koresh coming back isn’t brainwashing if Crackpipe doesn’t believe it to be true.

> Why does Doyle believe it, but Crackpipe doesn’t and why do muslims believe islam if Crackpipe doesn’t and why do mormons believe in mormonism if Crackpipe doesn’t?

> The most important of course is why do Atheists, agnostics, or even theists not believe in any of those religions?

– The fact is that Doyle was most likely child indoctrinated to christianity anyway, which means that he is used to believing things without evidence.

> Like the People’s Temple members who had an indoctrinated christian base, it doesn’t take much to get them to believe even further stupidity that makes no sense and has no evidence.

– The cognitive dissonance of Doyle is what prevents him from waking up to reality, because at 72 the fact that he has wasted his entire life on a lie is just far too mentally painful to deal with.

> Which is the same with Crackpipe because he is simply too much of a mental weakling to be able to mentally deal with the truth.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“BB(s)J believes there’s only one possible answer…”
———–

No I gave many answers but will list them again so they’re clearer.

– Child indoctrinated people are people who have had their brain rewiring done at a very young age and have been conditioned to believe the lies they were raised to believe and disregard everything that goes against it.

– Crackpipe can’t deny child indoctrination exists and how that is why muslims are muslims and christians are christians.

– The branch davidian members have stuck together and isolated themselves socially from allowing anyone from affecting their belief.

– They have reinforced their beliefs to each other and kept up their delusion and even had more kids and indoctrinated them and stengthened their beliefs.

– Very similar to whether Jesus existed or not and how people reacted to either the myth, or the fact that he died and couldn’t have been the messiah.

> People were forcefed a delusion and that delusion could be altered at will to change to fit any way they wanted to in their minds to tell themselves that delusion is true.

> No different than when some christians change their story and beliefs as new evidence appears such as evolution evidence and the age of the Earth, but still believe the bible, or Jesus being God.

> Lying and changing someone’s story in their head in order to make them feel more comfortable, is nothin more than a self defense mechanism for the mind and just an affect made from cognitive dissonance.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“4) People who have a cult leader who say they are Jesus.

What other reason is there that people follow these men besides brainwashing?

Um…choice?

BB(s)J sounds very familiar to the anti-cult movement cited in the Wikipedia article…can’t see any other way…

He can’t fathom that people would willingly choose to follow someone or believe what someone tells them. Or that they would TRULY believe these men…”
—————

Ok I really have to be honest and say that after I finish this article and a list of all Crackpipe’s lies and then finish the “Evidence of Jesus is meaningless 2 article” and post them, that I am just going to ignore him, ignore his blog and forget that Crackpipe christian even exists.

– I really can’t mentally deal with the reality that a person as stupid and pathetic as Crackpipe really exists.

> Crackpipe wastes so much of my time and I can only take so much of his stupidity then I have to walk away.

> The funny thing is that Crackpipe then doesn’t understand why I have my comments section disabled.

– There is no other way that someone believes supernatural nonsense that has no evidence and makes no sense unless they have been child indoctrinated, or an emotional vulnerability has been exploited that they forced themselves to believe something.

– Then Crackpipe says that I “don’t understand why people would willingly follow these men”.

> Not true because I KNOW that the only reasons are because of child indoctrination and brainwashing someone, because they are child indoctrinated to believe things, or brainwashed by having an emotional vulnerability exploited.

> They have been mentally conditioned to believe something and also mentally conditioned to deny that their psychotic beliefs aren’t true.

> Crackpipe still has not given us any reason why people would believe things that make no sense and have no evidence and why they don’t listen to truth and evidence.

– Crackpipe mutters something about how I can’t understand how people could just believe and follow someone!

> Yes of course I do and it’s called “brainwashing”.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“5) Tricking people into being brainwashed to a religion, or cult really isn’t that hard. It just takes a person who knows what to say and do and people who are vulnerable and want to be brainwashed.”

“Want to be brainwashed.”

Interesting.

So BB(s)J at least admits that not EVERY case of alleged brainwashing is not voluntary. Well, that would make it unnecessary. That would make it…not brainwashing…”
—————-

Crackpipe really is desperate and pathetic and grasping at straws.

– So let’s examine what Crackpipe says above here:

> (Correcting Crackpipe) I never said that all cases of brainwashing were not voluntary and in fact said the opposite.

> I said that people are religious because of child indoctrination, or because they have had an emotional vulnerablity exploited.

> After being child indoctrinated, christians are quite willing to volunteer themselves to things like cults after being open to believing in nonsense that has no evidence.

> Brainwashing IS child indoctrination.

> Brainwashing IS ALLOWING yourself to become vulnerable.

> People who are confused and troubled in life will be open to deluding themselves with ridiculous things like “signs” and they will embrace the brainwashing.

> After believing the lies they will continue to believe in more lies.

– Though religous brainwashing can victimize the unsuspecting….

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

“Meanwhile, in Influence, Science and Practice, social psychologist Robert Cialdini argues that mind control is possible through the covert exploitation of the unconscious rules that underlie and facilitate healthy human social interactions. He states that common social rules can be used to prey upon the unwary. Using categories, he offers specific examples of both mild and extreme mind control (both one on one and in groups), notes the conditions under which each social rule is most easily exploited for false ends, and offers suggestions on how to resist such methods.[33]

> Religious brainwashing most definitely takes advantage of the “lost” and confused though since they are obviously easier to influence.

> People who take advantage and corrupt these people are predators afterall, like Crackpipe is a predator.

– As Kathleen Taylor explains in her book “Brainwashing: The Science of Thought Control”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainwashing:_The_Science_of_Thought_Control

She explains that repetition is an integral part of brainwashing techniques because connections between neurons become stronger when exposed to incoming signals of frequency and intensity.[10]

> This shows how Lee Strobel and Jim Wallace got converted against their will.

> However they had the illusion that they were willingly converting themselves.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“They’re everywhere.
As shown here how easy it is:
http://content.time.com/time/video/player/0,32068,971515233001_2075202,00.html”

Interesting teaser to the film, hope it gets on Netflix, I would be interested in seeing it.

Seems BB(s)J 1) missed the point of the film (if he saw it).
—————

Crackpipe is such a loser. Of course I watched the clip and Crackpipe is the one who obviously missed the point.

– My points were these:

> How easy it is to seduce others into a state of “spirituality”.

> How easy it is to seduce people into believing in a supernatural connection with something, or somebody.

> How the gullible are so easy to manipulate into believing someone is a prophet.

> How someone doing exactly what he did 2000 years ago could have easily started a religion of his own.

– These points above show exactly how easy it is to brainwash people.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“But from the clip what we DO see is people WILLINGLY coming to follow (or at least listen to) this “guru.” In addition, the director (and star) makes no bones about what he is doing, and doesn’t say he trying to brainwash people.

I would argue that INTENT of the person DOING the brainwashing is important – we have no intent of brainwashing here. The director stated his purpose, brainwashing wasn’t one of them.”
—————-

Crackpipe is AGAIN showing how stupid he is. I mean seriously, I can’t believe it!

– The director was showing how easy it is to mislead people.

– If he did want to brainwash people he easily could have, in fact many people WERE.

– They were deluded into following Kumare and believing in him.

> They believed in his lies (that he was a prophet) Yes I am aware of his honesty that he wasn’t a prophet.

> They believed he was divine somehow.

> They believed he was a “prophet”.

> They were brainwashed.

> Just like people believed that Jesus was divine and a prophet and that belief evolved into “God”.

> Just like Crackpipe is brainwashed.

> Here’s a different 5 minute youtube vid talking about the film:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Liqtk_qV0PE

> He says in this clip that he had Jesus in mind when he made the film and also says he wanted to show the absurdity of religious leaders.

> A woman even calls him divine in the movie.

> Crackpipe is an absolute imbecile if he watches this and doesn’t see that one of the things the filmmaker is trying to show is how willing people are to be fooled.

> Crackpipe is a complete idiot if he doesn’t see that the filmmaker is trying to show how easy it is to develop a religion and have people worship you.

> Crackpipe is an unbelievable moron if he thinks that the filmmaker isn’t saying how easy it is to brainwash people into believing a lie and dedicating themselves to it.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“We don’t even have the IDEAL conditions: isolation, dependence, etc.

BB(s)J is equates someone erroneously believing something with brainwashing.

That is, telling someone a lie and them believing it is NOT brainwashing. Brainwashing needs to manifest the belief they otherwise wouldn’t have…

So this bit of “evidence” for brainwashing, really isn’t…”
————–

Crackpipe is of course wrong and doing nothing but attempting another one of his little dismissals that he does, that Crackpipe thinks just makes him magically right.

– Crackpipe’s pathetic, misinforming and dishonest words do nothing but show how desperate he is and how lacking a defense he has.

– He lists TWO ideal conditions, “isolation and dependence” and then “etc”, which are not dismissing of anything other than any hope of Crackpipe proving religion isn’t brainwashing.

– This “isolation” that Crackpipe keeps talking about is not a necessary thing that is needed for brainwashing, no matter how many times Crackpipe tries to say that it is.

> Regardless anyways, Kumare’s disciples were doing their best to isolate themselves to him and to what he was saying.

> The “dependence” part is not a necessary thing either to be brainwashed to a religion, but as it turns out there were several people who were developing a dependence on Kumare and his teachings.

– Last I checked “etc” was meaningless.

– So let’s go through it again:

> Believed a lie and thought Kumare was “divine” or supernatural.(brainwashing)

> Thought of Kumare as a religious leader which would mean he was the leader of a religion. (brainwashing)

> If people follow a religious leader then they follow a religion also. (brainwashing)

> The religion wasn’t real, but people followed it and Kumare and based their lives around him, so they were brainwashed to both Kumare and his religion. (brainwashing)

– It is undeniable that Ghandi had fooled and brainwashed them with Kumare and if he had wanted to he could have easily completely taken advantage of thousands of people.

– He simply took advantage of something that many people desperately look for which is “a need to believe in the supernatural”.

> This is of course one of many emotional vulnerabilities that are exploited.

> This need to believe is what Kumare exploited and showed the world how truly easy it was.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“6) Also we know for a fact that child indoctrination is brainwashing and nothing else.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uYtYQ0a7btQ
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ppQhleVuWPM
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LY8WCAkXEp8

This is completely undeniable that this is brainwashing and completely unavoidable that this is true that this is evil and a complete violation.”

Well, none of the videos BB(s)J actually gives us any scientific evidence of this….”
—————

Ok now I hope that anybody reading this will now see how desperate and dishonest and absolutely misleading that Crackpipe really is.

– What scientific evidence is necessary that I didn’t show?

> The kids were fed a belief since they were very very young that they were discouraged from not believing.

> They were subjected to fear and threat of punishment for not believing.

> They were fed the belief that there was a great reward, which of course is a lie, has no evidence and is just something used to control them.

> The kids were fed the same lie that their parents were fed and mentally conditioned to not know any different and psychologically rewired to ignore evidence against that belief.

> Crackpipe cannot say that there’s no evidence of this.

> This IS child indoctrination, just like the definitions say.

http://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/indoctrinate

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indoctrination

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?rd=1&word=indoctrination

http://eepat.net/doku.php?id=habermas_and_the_problem_of_indoctrination

> They CLEARLY SAY how raising a child into believing a religion and programming their beliefs into them is CHILD INDOCTRINATION.

> They CLEARLY say how child indoctrination is BRAINWASHING.

– Crackpipe is attempting to make people dismiss simple deinitions that speak the TRUTH.

> Unlike Crackpipe’s life of lies and dishonesty, to both other people and himself.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“But let’s say BB(s)J is right…that a parent PUSHING their belief on their child is indoctrination – is it indoctrination if an atheist parent does it as well?

Let’s wait for BB(s)J to answer that before moving forward here on this specific issue…”
————

No Atheism is not indoctrination, just like Atheism is not a religion, or a belief.

Let’s compare….

– Just like Atheism is not a religion, or a belief, but the lack of a religion, or belief.

> Atheist parents are not indoctrinating their kids to anything because they are only showing children things that are scientific and observable, or they just leave children to figure things out for themselves.

> Just like christians don’t indoctrinate their kids to other people’s religions, just their own, Atheists just so happen to not indoctrinate kids to ANY religions.

> Atheism is simply the fact that we do not believe in any gods, or religions because there is no evidence to believe ANY religions, so why would we?

> List all the reasons Crackpipe doesn’t believe mormonism, or islam and I will use those exact same reasons to say why I don’t believe christianity.

> Atheism is simply the NEUTRAL position and the same reasons that Crackpipe wouldn’t push scientology on a child and raise them that way are the same reasons Atheists don’t push ANY religions on kids.

> Crackpipe has no evidence any religion is true and can’t say how ANY religion makes any sense.

> The ONLY reason that Crackpipe believes his religion is because that is the one that he was child indoctrinated to, or brainwashed later on because he was caught in a state of emotional vulnerability.

> As I mentioned earlier Crackpipe gives us no details about how he became a christian and which of the 2 types of brainwashing was used on him.

> The reasons he does not disclose the method that he became a christian was not mentioned on purpose.

> Crackpipe knows that any answer he gives regarding HOW and WHY he was made a believer in christianity would just expose him as brainwashed.

> So Crackpipe knows the evidence shows him to be brainwashed, but he is just pretending to not realize. Nice.

– If a kid asks their parent “why are there rainbows?” an Atheist parent says “I don’t know” or tells them the reason, or looks it up on wikipedia…..

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

> A christian parent will then pull out the bible and quote Genesis chapter 9 and tell them “God created rainbows to remind us of the flood and that he won’t kill everyone in a flood ever again”.

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

> But won’t tell them that the story is just a rip off of the way older story “The Epic of Gilgamesh”.

– An Atheist parent isn’t indoctrinating their kids with evolution for the following reasons….

> Evolution isn’t indoctrination, it’s sound PROVEN science.

http://ideonexus.com/2012/02/12/101-reasons-why-evolution-is-true/

> If an Atheist doesn’t know something they say “I don’t know”.

> What we do know is that no religion makes any sense and there is no evidence for any religion being true, so WHY would we tell them anything that is the equivalent of “magic did it”?

> Not infecting kids with lies without evidence that make no sense is the same as not infecting them with a mental illness that affects their judgement.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“7) How are muslim suicide bombers who blow themselves up to please Allah and have sex with 72 virgins, not brainwashing again?”

Well, I can’t speak to what Muslim suicide bombers believe and whether or not it’s the result of brainwashing.

But let’s ask ourselves a simple question first: is a person who simply commits suicide brainwashed?”
————–

Ok this is just another example of why I am just going to ignore Crackpipe and his stupid blog after I post all these things I said I would post and reply to.

– Crackpipe can’t seriously be for real can he?

– No, someone who simply commits suicide is not brainwashed.

– Someone who dies to please a god however, IS brainwashed.

– Someone who kills themself because they think that a god wants them
to, is brainwashed.

– Someone who thinks that killing themself will get them a reward and that when they die they really aren’t dying, is brainwashed.

– Killing yourself for a mythical being that you have been child indoctrinated or conditioned when older to believe in IS brainwashing and if you don’t believe that then you’re either brainwashed yourself, or an idiot!

– These kids are brainwashed to be child martyrs:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/When_We_Die_As_Martyrs

And if you can’t watch this clip and see that it is brainwashing then I really can’t say anything else other than how much you disgust me with how stupid you are.

I mean seriously what is wrong with you?
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“In any event, we see that BB(s)J can’t fathom ANY other reason a person would believe they would please Allah – outside of being brainwashed (which we have seen is an illogical argument).”
————

Ok this is the part where Crackpipe was supposed to tell us his reasons why he believes in Allah and that when they die as martyrs they will get rewarded.

– Oh wait a second, Crackpipe doesn’t believe in Allah either, or that when they die blowing themselves up to kill people they get rewarded.

> I wonder why Crackpipe is thus wasting our time.

– Since Crackpipe can’t tell us how brainwashing and child indoctrination are not real after I’ve given several undeniable examples, then his point of saying brainwashing is illogical argument is itself illogical.

– Here’s why Crackpipe is illogical and my arguments are not…..

> I’ve shown several examples.

> Crackpipe has shown the dishonest unreliable and untrustworthy writings of a man who worked under the payroll of a dishonest, unreliable and untrustworthy religious organization, pretending to be a science organization, that has an agenda to mislead people.

– I’ve shown genuine textbook definitions of brainwashing and child indoctrination and backed up everything I said to be true.

– Crackpipe just simply said “his argument is illogical, or invalid” with never showing how, other then quoting an untrustworthy specialist and a brainwashed cult member who Crackpipe tried saying wasn’t brainwashed.

– I quoted unbiased experts, with specific points and quotes that agreed with and backed up everything I said.

– Crackpipe said several times that brainwashing could exist and other times said things weren’t brainwashing because they weren’t isolated and other examples that actually only applied to Korean war prisoners.

– I repeatedly said the truth, which was that brainwashing is child indoctrination, or being exploited while being in a state of being emotionally vulnerable when older.

> AGAIN I’ll remind everyone how I showed this with the quotes of experts who said the same thing to back what I say up.

– I stand by my claim that the only way someone could be religious is if they are brainwashed.

– Crackpipe repeatedly keeps saying how I can only see someone being religious if they are brainwashed, but then never gives us any reason to think otherwise.

> Been waiting for Crackpipe to tell us how someone could believe something that makes no sense and has no evidence, while not believing another religion that has no evidence and makes no sense, but is believed by billions.

> He doesn’t ever tell us though.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“But, again, I’m not a Muslim so I can’t really speak to this. Even so, as a non-Muslim I still can think of at least TWO reasons other than brainwashing that someone would believe and do such a thing…”
—————-

Ugh

So again Crackpipe says something so stupid that it’s just painful to deal with him now.

– WHY would Crackpipe say that he can think of 2 reasons and then never say what those reasons are?

– Does he not know how stupid and pathetic he actually sounds? WTF is wrong with him?

– So Crackpipe knows of 2 reasons why people would martyr themselves in the name of Allah because they think Allah wants that, but they aren’t brainwashing?

> So why wouldn’t Crackpipe tell us?

> How are these not the words of a total
loser out to waste everyone’s time?
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“BB(s)J then just runs through a list of things:

“a) There’s no evidence for any religion being true.”

So BB(s)J believes…there’s another belief he has!”
————–

Nope. Not a belief at all. FACT.

– There is no evidence that any religion is true.

– Crackpipe has not provided any evidence that any religion is true.

– All evidence of Jesus that Crackpipe has submitted has been completely meaningless and non-existent.

> The gospels have shown to be fiction in every sense.

> The outside sources of Jesus have all been shown to be fake, parrotted hearsay, or not talking about Jesus at all.

> The sources of Paul that were written by possibly him, do not talk about him knowing Jesus’ brother, but “brothers” in the christian sense.

> All references of Paul about Jesus were from scripture, revelation, or talking with Jesus in outer space.

> There is no difference between Paul and Davd Koresh really and Crackpipe doesn’t think Koresh was divine, or anything of the sort.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Koresh
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“b) Strong evidence no religion is true.”

According to BB(s)J… ”
————

No, according to actual evidence such as history, science, proven facts and simple logic, that proves every religion to be nothing but nonsense.

– Crackpipe completely failed at showing any evidence of christianity being based on truth, or any other religion for that matter.

– If there was any evidence saying how any religion was true then I would know about it and the rest of the world too.

– Since their isn’t any evidence and everything points to all religions being nonsense, then that means that the only reasons people believe religions are because of child indoctrination and brainwashing when older from having an emotional vulnerablity exploited.

> Simple as that.

– Crackpipe provided nothing to prove any religion.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“c) Believing the universe had an intelligent design connects nothing to any religion.”

Not sure what he’s trying to argue here… ”
————–

More stupidity then demonstrated by Crackpipe.

– It is quite common for believers to say that Atheists can’t disprove a creator and that everything had to have a designer.

– I don’t agree on this above point about everything having a designer, but am open to evidence if it should appear, however there is nothing that connects intelligent design to any religion.

– Religion is on it’s own.

– I don’t know why Crackpipe found this point so difficult to grasp.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“d) No religion makes any sense.”

Again, because they don’t make sense to BB(s)J NONE can be true…another logical fallacy.”
—————

No, it’s not that no religion makes sense to me, it’s that no religion makes any sense for any reason whatsoever.

– I’ve repeatedly asked Crackpipe to explain how christianity makes sense, but he just simply ignores answering and deflects with the same answer every time.

– Since Crackpipe can’t tell me how christianity makes sense, then by Crackpipe not explaining how it does make sense, then Crackpipe has failed to even make an argument.

– Do people kinda see Crackpipe’s pattern here of simply not dealing with anything and not giving any real answers?

– Another reason I will not be dealing with Crackpipe after I post these.

– Crackpipe is just a time wasting idiot who does nothing but show how stupid religious people and christians in particular really are.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“e) Science explains how the universe works and functions and has nothing to do with any religion.”

Okay, but explaining how something works and functions doesn’t always answer HOW it was made and designed…”
————

There is no evidence of any intelligent design.

– AGAIN however, there is NOTHING connecting a simple belief in intelligent design to any religion.

– Crackpipe needs to do research on stellar nucleosynthesis, evolution and panspermia.

http://www.scribd.com/mobile/doc/27304046

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uKqvjEE0wFg

http://ideonexus.com/2012/02/12/101-reasons-why-evolution-is-true/

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller–Urey_experiment

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Timeline_of_evolutionary_history_of_life

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

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_3PFfMdZ9c

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qdLFCz1Y508&list=WL
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“f) Strong evidence religions are just recycled from other religions that make no sense.”

Here I would agree with certain religions. Not necessarily “recycled” but certainly dependent. Which IS an argument against them, given what is known from the “base” religion…However, this doesn’t really address the “brainwashing.”
————

Seriously?’ WTF?! Nobody can be this stupid.

– It means that the religions are just plagarized and are based on religions that Crackpipe doesn’t believe in.

– It means that Crackpipe is brainwashed to a lie.

– A recycled and plagarized lie.

> As Richard Carrier explains.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XORm2QtR-os
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“g) Without child indoctrination and dececeptively brainwashing people religion would just disappear.”

Another illogical argument we can disregard…”
————–

Another example of what a poor apologist Crackpipe is.

– He basically implies and says he’s going to address my brainwashing article and defend christianity.

– How does he do that? By simply ignoring everything I say, because Crackpipe is too much of a coward to defend christianity.

– Since Crackpipe knows there is no defense about me saying this, so he yet again does another one of his classic dismissals.

> What a brilliant way to defend christianity (sarcsasm) by simply not defending it.

– This was the whole point of Crackpipe addressing this article and the issue of brainwashing, so WTF?!

– Proving again what a pathetic time wasting loser Crackpipe is and I suggest that anyone who comes in contact with Crackpipe should do what I just realized and just block and ignore.

> You will have just wasted your time talking to one of the most obnoxious and stupid human beings on Earth who really is just out to waste people’s time and has nothing relevant or of value to say whatsoever.

– I will simply repeat what I said then and remind all who read this that Crackpipe couldn’t defend what I said, so he simply chose to deflect like a coward.

> Without childhood indoctrination and if parents weren’t allowed to subject children to religion til they were 18, then religions would all disappear.

> As now rational adults, uninfluenced by complete nonsense that has no evidence and is OBVIOUSLY ridiculous fiction, they would find the religions laughable.

> If people also were not allowed legally to prey on people who are emotionally vulnerable, then religions would have no way to sustain their numbers.

> Since religion is all based on lies, the only way to keep people believing those lies is through brainwashing.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“h) That if religions were simply TRUE they would be obviously true and not in need of apologists LYING about everything to make people believe them.”

Another illogical argument we can disregard…”
—————–

Well guess what folks? I’m not the only one who says this point. Crackpipe’s pathetic tactic of simply dismissing everything, again just exposes how christianity and all religions have no defense.

– Richard Carrier says the exact same thing here that I say about how things should just be obviously true:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B4WBTlAPJ-4

> The entire 11 minute video makes the same point.

> It would be interesting if Crackpipe did a blog piece attacking this entire video clip of Carrier, but of course Crackpipe wouldn’t, because Crackpipe is too much of a coward.

> I suggested he attack Robert Price’s article I sent him and he just ignored that challenge.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- Saying things over and over again about there being overwhelming evidence when they know that not to be true.”
—————–

This quote Crackpipe took from me is a popular apologist statement, but this is of course an absolute lie that they know is a lie.

– Typical apologist dishonesty.

– If apologists didn’t lie then they wouldn’t be able to do apologetics.

> Simple as that.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- They know that there’s no reason to believe any religion whatsoever and have to lie and say there is.”
If you are religious YOU ARE BRAINWASHED!
If you make someone else religious YOU ARE BRAINWASHING THEM!
That’s all religion is IS BRAINWASHING and nothing else!”

In the end, science is against BB(s)J on this topic, and he really only hinges this argument on his faulty logic…no surprise.”
————–

BWAHAHAHA SCIENCE IS AGAINST ME?!! HAHAHAHA That’s hilarious!

– Crackpipe says that science is against me, but clearly has this confused with himself.

– Science and history disprove all religions.

– There is no science that supports any religion and Crackpipe is of course lying.

– As for the brainwashing I’ve given many examples of how it is real.

– Crackpipe himself has said that certain things could be brainwashing, but his only defense was “that there weren’t many”.

– Child indoctrination to religions are not only OBVIOUS, but undeniable and Crackpipe never really did address child indoctrination, but simply said “his argument is illogical and invalid” which was of course a meaningless and pointless argument.

– Crackpipe has submitted unreliable and dishonest scientific research from a man who is backed by an unreliable and dishonest agency on a undeniable mission to deceive and convert.

> Like seriously look at how the Templeton foundation is all over this guy.

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

> Research about religious brainwashing from Finke is as reliable as if the nazis did a scientific paper in WW2 on the ethical treatment of jews.

– I have shown unbiased expert research quotes from people who specialize in all forms of brainwashing and psychology, not just ones that show things in religion’s favor.

– There is factual evidence of science regarding the big bang, evolution and nucleosynthesis using observable scientific data.

– There is no evidence of any religion being true and no reason why any sane human being would believe any religion unless they were child indoctrinated, or brainwashed when older from being exploited by being caught in a state of emotional vulnerability.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“But let’s take a moment to see if ANY of the above can be attributed to Christianity.

Remember, to make brainwashing effective (even for just the short term) we need 1) isolation and 2) dependence, and 3) a brainwasher…

However, in my case (and the majority of Christians) we have neither.”
——————-

Seriously though, how much stupidity can I take from Crackpipe? I’ll be so glad after sending all these out on a post and then never hearing, or thinking about Crackpipe again.

Okay so let’s AGAIN obliterate Crackpipe’s words…..

1)
– We DO NOT need isolation to be brainwashed.

> That is false in the sense that one needs to be PHYSICALLY isolated.

> People can also feel emotionally and mentally isolated, even in a crowded highly social lifestyle.

> This is AGAIN because someone is exploited while being caught in a state of being emotionally vulnerable.

> If someone has been child indoctrinated since birth, or very young, then the isolation issue is irrelevant because children’s brains are simply rewired and programmed to believe and disregard whatever the parents or priests want.

> If Crackpipe or any christian were child indoctrinated then whether or not they were “isolated” becomes an irrelevant issue.

2)
– Crackpipe says “dependence”.

> Yep. The last I checked, Crackpipe was pretty dependent on living a lie.

> Also it seems that Crackpipe is also too cowardly to handle the truth.

> If Crackpipe is too dependent on believing a lie because he is too cowardly to deal with the truth, then there goes Crackpipe’s point about not having “dependency”.

3)
– And a brainwasher? Seriously?

– If the child is indoctrinated then the brainwashers are the parents and church and also brainwashed peers who reinforce the delusion.

– If the person is in a state of being emotionally vulnerable when older, then whatever is available at the time and convenient in the form of a religion would be the “brainwasher” that Crackpipe is refering to.

> As in Lee Strobel’s case and also Jim Wallace’s case, they attended church regularly as Atheists and through repetition and conditioning they gradually had those emotional vulnerabilities formed.

> Once someone has an emotional vulnerability formed then they are officially “victims” who cling to the delusion that they use as a mental self defense.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“In my daily life, I encounter people who are 1) atheists (even have friends who are), 2) a different religion, 3) a different denomination than mine, 4) agnostic, etc.

My job puts me out into the community, more so than most people’s jobs…

I am in any number of places and encountering any number of people on any given day.

Personally, I have obvious access to the internet and various news sources and media outlets…

In short, I am not isolated by any stretch of the imagination…”
—————–

More misleading, pointless timewasting from Crackpipe about this irrelevant “isolation” issue he keeps bringing up that disproves nothing, but how desperate he is to make a point.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“I have no dependence upon anyone other than myself and my wife…I have no spiritual leader that my faith is hooked to or dependent upon…”
—————-

Unbelievable. Does Crackpipe not think, or put any thought into this? WTF?!

– Jesus, Crackpipe’s fictional leader is who Crackpipe is hooked on and who his faith is dependent.

> Which has no evidence.

> The gospels are completely made up.

> Paul is not evidence of Jesus and if you examine thoroughly what Paul says you’ll see that there is no evidence of Jesus.

– If Crackpipe was child indoctrinated then he would already be conditioned to believe a lie and also conditioned to deny the truth.

> He wouldn’t even need to be dependent on the lie of his religion, but if Crackpipe was child indoctrinated then he would simply be conditioned to believe something is true that isn’t and conditioned to deny evidence.

– Crackpipe is very dependent on his religion and if he weren’t dependent on his belief then he wouldn’t need only FAITH and nothing else.

– In no way do I need FAITH to be an Atheist when all I have is a simple understanding of provable science and facts.

– I am only an Atheist for the simple reason that there is no evidence for any religion, or any gods.

– Crackpipe is an Atheist to every other god but his, Atheists just go one more than him.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“While I do follow and listen to various teachers of my faith, I do not agree with what they say one-hundred percent of the time. Other teachers I have come across I don’t listen to at all, or pay attention to them…

NO example BB(s)J can be shown to be a part of my life, and yet I’m a believer in my faith.”
——————

If Crackpipe already doesn’t agree with some of what who he considers to be “teachers” are saying, then he should go a lot further and realize that anything they say about christianity being true is a lie.

– The fact that Crackpipe simply believes in christianity at all is the problem since christianity is a complete lie and has no evidence.

– If Crackpipe actually had any evidence then he wouldn’t need faith.

– It’s called “faith” because it’s not knowledge.

– The fact remains that Crackpipe’s religion, like all religions, have no evidence and have nothing about them that makes any sense.

– That fact remains that whether Crackpipe only believes his religion because of child indoctrination, or exploited when older because of he was caught in a state of being emotionally vulnerable, he is still only believing because he is brainwashed and mentally conditioned to believe things without evidence.

> Crackpipe is still conditioned to believe a lie.

– The only “evidence” Crackpipe finally only admitted to having was Bart Ehrman saying “Paul knew Jesus’s brothers”.

> While meanwhile Bart Ehrman doesn’t believe in God, doesn’t believe Jesus was God and also thinks that the gospels are fiction.

> Then Richard Carrier proved in fine detail how Paul’s writings are anything but evidence and are actually evidence there WAS NO JESUS!

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/2839

> Paul really did know nothing about Jesus.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2012/12/what-did-paul-know-about-jesus-not-much/
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“How can this be from brainwashing, when my faith exists far beyond IDEAL conditions for such a thing to take place?”
————–

Well let’s go over several points and issues that show the absurdity of Crackpipe’s above statement:

– People who are brainwashed don’t know they’re brainwashed.

> If they realize they are brainwashed then they are no longer brainwashed.

> Since Crackpipe doesn’t know that he’s brainwashed he can’t say that he isn’t.

> I CAN say that I’m not brainwashed to a religious belief, but that’s because there is nothing I believe that isn’t scientifically shown.

> I might be brainwashed to things that I’m not aware of but it isn’t a religious belief because I don’t have any.

– There still is no reason for Crackpipe to believe his religion for any other reason than the fact that he is brainwashed.

Let’s go over why:

> There is no evidence of Jesus.

> There is no evidence of any religion, but Crackpipe just happens to believe the one he is brainwashed to believe.

> It takes more faith to believe in the “evidence” of Jesus than the faith to believe in Jesus. Now that’s just pathetic.

> The bible is shown to be a fictious book of fairytales and fiction and completely disproven because of history science and common sense.

> The above statement is supported by multiple experts and scholars.

> Crackpipe can’t tell us why he believes christianity and not any other religion.

– Crackpipe has not told us anything about how he was introduced to his religion and as I said before the reason for him not telling us is because it shows Crackpipe to be brainwashed any way you look at it.

> If it didn’t then he would have told us.

– No rational human being if they were a full grown adult raised with science and logic, if they were hearing about the bible for the first time and not exposed to any religions, would give any part of the bible any credibility, or seriousness of being true.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“See the real problem with BB(s)J’s contention is that HE is the one that has the burden of proof in EVERY CASE.”
——————-

Well that is of course a flat out lie and for several reasons and I will explain why.

– I do not have to prove a “god” exists since there is no evidence that a “god” does exist and thousands of “gods” throughout history and through the existence of man, have had no evidence either, even though they are very very different.

> I do not have to prove anything without evidence, just like Crackpipe doesn’t have to prove that a 900 year old timelord is travelling through time and space in a phone booth spaceship.

– Crackpipe might have a claim that there is intelligent design, but that is no argument for how Crackpipe’s religion is true, that is merely an argument for deism and nothing else.

– If Crackpipe wants the burden of proof about why christianity is false well that I can do I suppose.

> The bible goes against science and history.

> The bible has been shown to be based on fairytale stories.

> Nothing in the bible makes any sense.

> There is no evidence that Jesus even existed.

> There is evidence that christianity was merely created to replace jewish law and oppress jews in general.

> Alll outside sources of Jesus have been shown to be completely meaningless.

> Paul is not evidence of Jesus and actually is evidence Jesus probably did not exist.

– I’ve repeatedly shown everything I just said over and over throughout this exchange.

– Crackpipe needs to show the burden of proof that he isn’t brainwashed to a lie, since I don’t have a belief, but instead have a lack of belief to all religions, I do not need to prove anything.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“That is, while he may make a broad statement and generalization – his “facts” do not support MOST cases.”
————–

Crackpipe is of course lying, but these responses should more than thoroughly support everything I say.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“His belief is based solely on his inability to accept that someone can honestly come to believe their faith – yet this is an illogical argument, and one that can only be addressed on an individual level, and ignores evidence to the contrary.”
—————–

Crackpipe was supposed to have given several examples of how someone could believe a religion other than if they were brainwashed to believe it, but he doesn’t.

– So my point that people can only believe a religion if they were child indoctrinated, or exploited when older by being emotionally vulnerable, still stands and still is backed by the references I quoted throughout this response article.

– There is no logical reason other than brainwashing that shows how people can believe in nonsensical supernatural religions that have no evidence.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“In short, he has to show that there cannot be ANY OTHER way someone comes to a faith and belief…even his examples don’t show this – as we see in every case people willingly believing and seeking…”
——————-

If Crackpipe is referring to victims of child indoctrination and having kids brains rewired and programmed, well there really is no defense against saying this exists.

– If Crackpipe is trying to say that people willingly choose to believe in Christianity without being brainwashed, well Crackpipe is not only wrong, but lying.

– Here is why you have to be brainwashed to believe christianity, or ANY other religion if you aren’t already child indoctrinated to do so…..

> There is no evidence for ANY religion, not just christianity.

> No religion makes any sense and in order for it to make sense you have to be brainwashed to bipass all the many reasons why religions do not.

> The same lack of evidence, lack of thought processes and reasoning that cause suicide martyrs in islam, are the same lack of evidence, lack of thought processes and reasoning that goes into believing christianity.

> Believing that God wants children to die as suicide martyrs has the same logic and evidence as the belief that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.

> The evidence that people only believe the one of many multiple religions that make no sense and that that religion is either the one they were child indoctrinated to by their parents, or the one that was convenient to them while they were being exploited in their emotionally vulnerable state….. is undeniable as evidence.

> The fact that there are people out there whose life and financial income DEPENDS on people believing in christianity whether they believe it, or not, or whether or not it hypothetically is real, or false, really should wake people up.

> The fact that people’s lives would only be any different if they stopped believing in christianity in the sense that they would no longer be slaves of a lie and no longer be afraid of committing “thought crime” and being guilty of it.

> I even made a checklist for people to do self diagnostics of their own religious brainwashing:

https://thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com/2014/02/13/religious-people-need-to-ask-themselves-questions/

> I’ve yet to have anyone show me how Atheists could be brainwashed.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“The argument is actually in reverse – I don’t have to show BB(s)J that I’m NOT brainwashed, he has to show that I was and still am…

ONLY in these broad, generalize, and illogical arguments does BB(s)J’s argument exist…

So, I will challenge BB(s)J to this: prove I AM brainwashed with SPECIFICS and not broad strokes…

If you can show that, maybe you can enlighten me.
—————

Well I of course would show Crackpipe quite easily how he is brainwashed if Crackpipe had actually given me any personal details about how he became a christian, but of course he did not.

– I had suggested in previous responses even before this big whack of responses that Crackpipe sent me that I’m responding to all at once, that he give me details, but of course he did not.

– Crackpipe knows that I can’t give specific answers as to how and why Crackpipe is brainwashed without details of his life, so his silly little challenge is laughable and extremely sleazy on his part

> If he was child indoctrinated is one thing, but other details if he became religious later were not disclosed, so that is no different than Crackpipe saying “I’m thinking of a number from 1-10, so which one is it?”

– So there you have it….

> If he was brought up and programmed and conditioned from very young then Crackpipe was child indoctrinated.

> I would need the details that Crackpipe knowingly and dishonestly left out.

> It wouldn’t be difficult.

> However I don’t want the details or any further contact from Crackpipe ever again after I post all these.

> Now after a month and a half of using much of my spare time I will finish a list of all Crackpipe’s lies then finish my “Evidence of Jesus is meaningless 2” article and then try to forget Crackpipe even exists because his stupidity is so painful.

– I would be lying though if I didn’t say I was glad about all the articles I’m going to post by copying and pasting stuff that was in the responses to Crackpipe that wouldn’t exist if Crackpipe didn’t say so many stupid things and cause me to research and respond.

Tuesday May 27, 2014

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).

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/bbsj-replies-yet-again.html?m=1

Crackpipe says….

“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.

http://news.discovery.com/history/bible-new-testament-forgery-110518.htm

– 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).
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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:

http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/04/03/children.slain/

> You know the way God was said to have told Abraham?
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

” 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.

4:50 mark:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HRDqTh4y46c

> 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.

> Hilarious.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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:
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HRDqTh4y46c
“- 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“> 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=59txpioPYJI

– 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

-” 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.

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

and then

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

> 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…..

“- 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!”
————-

Actually no.

– 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”.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…..

“- 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!”
—————

Really?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A3qXQt6dYME

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!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A3qXQt6dYME

– 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Crackpipe continues….”
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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

” 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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:
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HRDqTh4y46c”
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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.”

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13%3A1-7&version=NKJV

> 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”.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.

http://michaelsherlock.org/my-books.html

(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)
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“His response?
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:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A3qXQt6dYME

> 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”.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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!!
Blatantly so!!
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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.”
—————

HAHAHA Again!

– 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

” 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.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A3qXQt6dYME
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A3qXQt6dYME

– 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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:
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A3qXQt6dYME
—————

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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“> 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

” 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:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A3qXQt6dYME
.
.
Crackpipe continues…..

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“> 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…..

“> 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.”
Wrong…
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”.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2012/12/what-did-paul-know-about-jesus-not-much/

– 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)
.
.
Crackpipe continues…..

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

>” 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.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=WL&v=ML2Oa4Oigvo

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=W2Cv5hZfOmk
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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?”

(Sigh)
:)”
—————

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.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HVuw1wEuaAQ

Ricard Carrier says how and why the gospels and Acts are nothing but nonsense.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pX4LvKvIWJw
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.”
Too funny!!
—————–

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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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:”
Okay…
– 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- I have good reasons to be angry and I should be angry, in fact EVERYONE should be angry about religion.”
https://thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com/2014/04/09/reasons-i-hate-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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- 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.
Lol.”
————–

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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…

“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.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HMyudP5z2Xw

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mwUZOZN-9dc

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XORm2QtR-os

– Here’s even a jewish historian who really did a big number on christianity.

http://mama.indstate.edu/users/nizrael/jesusrefutation.html

> Says Jesus was based on a bunch of nobodies.

– Then there’s Bart’s hypothetical situations.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1nT9lfqlx8I

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YftlQ-Ox9VM

– 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“> Credible muslim apologists will say that Mohammed flew to heaven on a winged horse and split the moon.”
So?”
——————

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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/1026

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/1151

This one here really says it all though:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/1794
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Smart for him to not answer and tell us how he became religious, because it basically just proves brainwashing.”
Okay…

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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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…”
——————-

AAAAAHHHRRRGGHH!!!!’

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.

As shown:

http://goodreasonnews.tumblr.com/post/10395005659/do-you-believe-that-alexander-the-great-existed-we
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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).
(Brackets mine)
————–

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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“> 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“> 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:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/2839

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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“> 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“> 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).
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.”
Huh…”
———–

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).
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.”
Guess not.
——————-

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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Onto TOPICS!
“- 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- 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…”
————-

http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?rd=1&word=talk+out+of+both+sides+of+mouth

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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“I don’t have to prove God doesn’t exist because God has no evidence and the “null hypothesis” does the trick nicely.”
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cAR29P6L4rM
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!
Logic, BB(s)J…”
—————

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!

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Oju_lpqa6Ug

> 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“then:
“- 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”.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- 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.

http://www.godchecker.com

– 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.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fmz9SMFYI6g

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.

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

> 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.

http://ideonexus.com/2012/02/12/101-reasons-why-evolution-is-true/

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?

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior

> 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.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1nT9lfqlx8I

– Propaganda to make Jesus’ church monopoly still active by his followers telling people that they saw him resurrected.

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

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=jJ_K6VzsCVA

– 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.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HMyudP5z2Xw

> 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.

https://m.facebook.com/nogods/posts/10151793741548936

– 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.

http://humanistcanada.ca/content/all-about-humanism

– 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]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2012/12/what-did-paul-know-about-jesus-not-much/

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/2839

> With a pretty good case from
Richard Carrier saying that Jesus never even existed at all.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HMyudP5z2Xw
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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”.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- 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.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamanite

> 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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”.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

” 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?
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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?

http://leviticusbans.tumblr.com

> 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.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B4WBTlAPJ-4

http://infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/whynotchristian.html
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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”….

http://www.amazon.ca/gp/aw/d/1936185806/ref=redir_mdp_mobile

….but instead did a review of another one of his books?

http://www.amazon.ca/gp/aw/d/B00GMALXJY/ref=mp_s_a_1_9?qid=1404274490&sr=8-9&pi=AC_SX110_SY165_QL70

> 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.
http://rationalrevolution.net/articles/jesus_myth_history.htm”
—————

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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Then says:
“> 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.

May 23 Part 2

Well by the looks of things I won’t be making my deadline of getting all Crackpipe’s responses done, plus the list of all his lies, plus the new “Evidence of Jesus is meaningless 2” article based on all the smashing of the defenses and arguments that Crackpipe helped me find. Not by the time school starts again. Oh well.

I guess the thing that annoys me the most is that Crackpipe will have these all replied to and posted within a day with extra stupidity and just more repeating of the same old things.

Where he finds the time I do not know.

So anyway, here Crackpipe asks another ridiculous question that you can tell he thinks is so brilliant, when meanwhile I’m wondering how he could be this dumb and ask such a pointless stupid questions. Oh, I think I just answered it.

Like seriously seriously seriously WTF?!
.
.
Crackpipe asks….

“What’s the world supposed to be like?
I had noticed before, but just now it jogged something in my brain pan.

BB(s)J said this:”Thanks also for helping my articles sound better and better to show christianity to be nothing but a big meaningless waste of time and everything that is wrong with this world.”

How can there be something wrong in the world?”
————

Well I guess it really isn’t Crackpipe’s fault that he asks such stupid questions, because he is brainwashed and it does impair and blind his thinking.

– I’d apologize, if I didn’t completely hate Crackpipe’s guts for wasting so much of my time and for him being such an obnoxious, unfunny douchbag, that has his mind set on poisoning and infecting the world with brainwashing and mental illness.

– What’s wrong in the world is that religion is destroying it.

– Religion is clouding people’s minds and blinding them from real problems and real issues.

– The mostly non-religious countries have proven to be happier, more peaceful and more economically successful than religious countries and the evidence is undeniable.

– Atheist populations in prisons in the US alone is .21 % not 21% but point two one percent.

– Religions all over the world have become a thing that spreads hate and causes hate.

– Religion is everything that is wrong with this world because of what it actually is…. a tool.

> A tool to scam people.

> A tool to control people.

> A tool to scare people.

> A tool to enslave people.

> A tool to murder people.

> A tool to abuse children.

> A tool to justify human rights violations.

> A tool to torture people in the worst, most painful and despicable ways possible.

> A tool to waste peoples time and distract them from things that really matter, like disease, hunger, energy, medicine, science, global warming, pollution and space travel.

> A tool so evil that it’s victims are the ones who defend it!

> A tool so evil that it can only be described as “a virus” or “social parasite”.

> A tool so evil that it causes brain damage with it’s brain washing.

> A tool to make people proud to be stupid and encourage others to do the same.

> A tool that divides and seperates families and causes some of them to disown their children.

> A tool that causes people to both kill themselves and sacrifice their lives all for a lie.

> A tool that puts a book over the lives of human beings.

> A tool that makes people ashamed of themselves and hate themselves just for the simple fact of being born.

> A tool that causes rioting over petty delusions that make no sense and have no evidence.

> A tool that causes in mass what only idiots and lunatics could believe alone.
.
.
Crackpipe ends with this even more stupid question….

“What’s this accidental world supposed to be like, BB(s)J?”
————-

Well at least we can set things straight then.

– You can’t consider the Earth accidental when there are dozens of Earth-like planets being discovered every year in other solar systems.

– You can’t consider the Earth accidental when natural explanations are observed and both scientifically analyzed and proven regularly.

– You can’t consider the Earth accidental when you don’t understand how actual science works and explains things.

– You can’t consider the Earth accidental when we see supernovas exploding and creating all the elements that are in the periodic table using stellar nucleosynthesis from what was created with the Big Bang’s nucleosynthesis.

– You can’t consider the Earth accidental when you consider the scale of things:

> There are between 100 BILLION-500 BILLION stars in just our galaxy alone.

> There are 200 BILLION galaxies in the universe.

> The universe is 58 BILLION light years across, or more.

> The universe is 13.8 BILLION-14 BILLION years old.

> The Earth is but a tiny speck of dust that is merely nothing in the entire universe.

> Earth is only 4.54 BILLON years old.

– The fact that Crackpipe tries to delude himself into thinking how important he is is simply just evidence that religious people have been conditioned to be in denial and brainwashed to be ego maniacs.

– This world isn’t an accident.

> A blade of grass isn’t an accident.

> Algae and moss growing on Earth a billion years ago wasn’t an accident

> The universe evolves and the universe has life all over it in probably most, but most likely every galaxy.

> Human beings and the Earth and everything in our solar system are all simply just a biproduct of nature, the Big Bang, exploding super novas, gravity, evolution and regular occurences.

– What this accidental world is supposed to be like is supposed to be like 2000 years more advanced than it is now.

> Blasphemy laws and people interpreting science and math as witchcraft never helped matters.

> People being put to death for believing anything other than their religion never helped either.

– Religion has hindered progress of science and human standards and distracted us from beneficial goals and discouraged academic acheivement and held back the world mentally.

– If a global catastrophe hits Earth within the next 50 years then there won’t be a single surviving human left in existence.

> We should have been living in space and flying huge Earth made space ships at the very least, throughout the solar system by now.

> We should have conquered hunger and conquered clean energy and synthesized artificial meat by now.

> We in all reality should have conquered every single disease, virus or medical issue in existence by now.

> We should have even conquered death itself.

– So what kind of world is this supposed to be like Crackpipe asks?

A WORLD WITHOUT RELIGION!!!
—————–

So I have decided to turn this into another blog article with the content, so as much as it pains me I know that a thank-you is in order to Crackpipe for the content of another article that exposes religion for the negative qualities it has.

If it wasn’t for Crackpipe writing the above article I responded to then I wouldn’t have such an awesome article for my main blog to post.

Friday, May 23, 2014

Well whether or not Crackpipe was simply hoping I’d waste more of my time and address this beyond stupid article he posted I have no idea. Maybe simply for the purpose of wasting my time.

http://justonecan.blogspot.ca/2014/05/are-we-born-atheists.html?m=1

I think Crackpipe is responding to this article I wrote recently.

https://thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com/2014/05/07/reasons-to-be-an-atheist-and-not-religious/

I really didn’t want to bother and I almost think that Crackpipe posted this just to annoy and irritate me because he thought that it would.

I mean this short article he wrote really went to a whole new level of stupid.

Regardless, I will address it….
.
.
Crackpipe says….

“Are we born atheists?

More than once I’ve seen the argument that we are all born atheists.

But is this true?”
————

Yes it’s true. We are born Atheists until:

– We’re mentally poisoned with religions which are all lies and nonsense.

– We’re child indoctrinated and mentally conditioned to deny any other reality.

– We’re brainwashed when older by being exploited from being in a state of being caught while mentally, or emotionally vulnerable.

– We’re lied to and deceived by people who are so amazing at brainwashing people because they themselves are brainwashed (which is why it feels so natural).

> Deceivers like cult leaders though are true masters.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Atheism, at its core and true definition, is the belief that God doesn’t exist.”
————

Crackpipe is soooo wrong on this, but I gather that the reasoning behind Crackpipe’s thinking is because he is superimposing and projecting his own brainwashed thinking into the minds of Atheists (so he thinks).

– What Crackpipe doesn’t understand is that a mind that is free to think on it’s own and not brainwashed to be the slave of a delusion, thinks differently than his.

– Crackpipe has it completely wrong when he says that “Atheists believe there is no god” because that is NOT how our brains work.

– The correct term is “ATHEISTS DO NOT BELIEVE IN GOD”

– Atheist’s brains work on evidence and rationality you see and religious people’s brains work on faith and delusional belief.

> Carl Sagan said it best when he said:

“You can’t convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it’s based on a deep seated need to believe.”

Also Bertrand Russell:

“What is wanted is not the will to believe, but the will to find out, which is the exact opposite”.

– Atheism is the neutral position.

– Atheists simply DO NOT BELIEVE because we have no reason to believe.

– Atheists simply acknowledge what we know to be real because of evidence and science.

– Atheists are not religious and not believers of gods because there is no reason or evidence that we should be.

– Deists believe in intelligent design and various other beliefs, but not a religion.

– Religious believers believe in all kinds of things.

– Atheists DO NOT BELIEVE in gods, or the truth of religions, because there is no evidence to believe.

– If Atheists had evidence to believe in gods, or religions being based on real things then we would believe.

As Richard Carrier brilliantly explains:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=B4WBTlAPJ-4

– Even Crackpipe’s hero Million Lame Eggs agrees:

http://www.reasonablefaith.org/definition-of-atheism
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“A belief requires a certain amount of cognitive ability. With this ability one forms a belief through various means of knowledge acquisition.”
————-

So what kind of belief is something if you don’t believe it because there is no evidence, or sound scientific theories?

– Believing something that has no evidence and makes no sense is in no way interpretted as knowledge, but of delusion.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“As babies we lack this ability to form meaningful beliefs.”
—————-

Until child indoctrinated to only believe nonsense, or to be brought up having a SOUND KNOWLEDGE OF THE SCIENTIFIC WORLD instead.

– Science makes sense.

– Science isn’t always right and can change with evidence.

– Religion teaches to ignore evidence.

– Religion teaches to believe things that make no sense and have no evidence.

> Case in point:

The belief that a cosmic Jewish zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree…

> Crackpipe has yet to explain how that makes any sense, just that “because it doesn’t make sense to me doesn’t mean it doesn’t make sense”.

LOL Yeah like that’s an answer.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“My niece just turned six the other day, and while she knows what she likes and doesn’t like, and I love her to death I wouldn’t trust her on making certain decisions, or trust her on some beliefs she may currently hold: such as she should ALWAYS get her way.”
————–

Yeah we sure don’t want people thinking for themselves, or turning into freethinkers do we?

– I guess Crackpipe is saying one of 2 things.

1) His niece hasn’t been shown and taught what is universal and demonstratably true through scientific interpretation.

2) She hasn’t been brainwashed enough yet to completely make her deny all evidence against anything that might disprove christianity.

> So she must have religious delusions programmed into her because Crackpipe doesn’t want her to have the ability to doubt, or think for herself.

> Crackpipe does not want his niece to have the ability to rationally say “this religion and all other religions make no sense and have no evidence”.

Reminding me of this:

and this:


.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Hell, I know some people my age that have trouble making good, knowledgable decisions…”
————

Seriously?! You’re kidding?

– I think Crackpipe is talking about himself here.

– Let’s talk about Crackpipe’s bad decision to follow a religion that makes no sense whatsoever.

– Let’s talk about Crackpipe’s bad decision to follow any religion at all because none of them make any sense.

– Let’s talk about Crackpipe’s bad decision to simply ignore the fact that his religion is based on greed, deception, murder, lying, hate, bigotry, ignorance, political control and power.

> Another Bertrand Russell quote:

“So far as I can remember there is not one word in the Gospels in praise of intelligence.”
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“For sure, at some point we develop our cognitive abilities to the degree that we feel we can make rational decisions and form rational beliefs.

But as babies, since we lack this ability does that make us atheists at birth?

No.
————-

Actually yes it does.

– Babies are born not believing in god, or gods and their religion is programmed into them later through child indoctrination rather than allowing them to come to their own conclusions through scientific theory, or simple observation.

– If they were simply raised in a colony of people that weren’t necessarily Atheists, but simply kept religions to themselves and were schooled and educated on science and demostratably real things, then how would they be subjected to any religion?

> Is Crackpipe implying that they would just naturally be religious?

> Even if that were true it would mean that they created a religion themselves from scratch and it wouldn’t be any religion that would resemble Crackpipe’s religion, or any other religion.

– The only reason Crackpipe believes his non-sensical lie religion is because that is the one he was brainwashed to.

> Just like other people are religious because that was the religion that they were brainwashed to, no matter what religion they are, that us why they believe it.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“At this moment and for some time beyond we truly lack the ability to form meaningful beliefs.”
—————

What Crackpipe fails to tell us is why it’s meaningful to believe in things that make no sense and have no evidence and are no different than any other religion that makes no sense and has no evidence.

– If Crackpipe means “beliefs” as “a simple way of thinking” then he fails completely since people don’t need religions, or belief in gods to be good, or to be defined as a moral human being.

> In fact people are better off without religion when it comes to morality and are far superior in the morality department if they aren’t religious.

> Religion itself actually blinds people from being moral and knowing right from wrong.

– If we look at my list you can see what I mean:

https://thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com/2014/04/09/reasons-i-hate-religion/

There are many points I make but specifically regarding morals let’s talk about 1,2,4 and 8.

– As an Atheist I know what right and wrong actually are far better than any religious person who is doing nothing but following the guidelines of an imaginary telepathic crime boss.

– Even now Crackpipe is attempting to fuel the world’s lack of morality by spreading his faith virus to others.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Now, as I wrote in the post where I called bullshit on atheism being just a “lack of belief”, I explained how that definition makes it meaningless – for a rock can be considered an atheist then. Or (God help us) a can of beer!

(Guess that means I drink atheists for dinner!)
——————

Crackpipe is so unfunny and so stupid.

– Does Crackpipe believe in smurfs?

> Does he have reasons to believe that smurfs exist, or don’t exist?

> They’re based on a cartoon.

> They would have been discovered by now,

> They would have all been dead by now.

> Whatever reasons Crackpipe might have.

> So Crackpipe BELIEVES smurfs do not exist because he has reasons, or EVIDENCE.

– Now try the same thing with God….

> Atheists have no evidence, or reasons to believe, or disbelieve in God simply for the reason because there is no evidence of God, nothing.

> Atheists have no belief in God because there is no reason to believe, or disbelieve, there simply is no evidence.

> There is no reason to believe a god exists, but no reason to believe God DOESN’T exist, but it just seems highly unlikely and illogical, but we await evidence that would change our minds.

> So in other words “I have no belief in God”.

> You could say that “I have no belief in God NOT existing” also, but it still wouldn’t be a belief because there still wouldn’t be a reason for that either if there isn’t any evidence either way.

– Now if you wanted to go the other route and say “Atheists believe christianity to not be true and every other religion” well that would be true.

> There are many reasons why Atheists believe christianity and all other religions are not true and are complete lies and delusion.

> Coincidentally though, the same reasons that Crackpipe has for believing all other religions to be false are the same reasons that I have for believing christianity and all the other religions are false.

– The only reasons that Crackpipe BELIEVES in God is because he is brainwashed to believe in christianity and brainwashed to somehow believe that the god of his religion is the omnipotent master of the universe.

> Both are a belief and both are a delusion.

> More specifically is that the “god” of his belief is a delusion.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Atheism IS a belief.

Thus, we are not born atheist, theist, agnostic, or anything.

We are born into pure neutrality.”
————-

Crackpipe just gets dumber and dumber with every article and every sentence.

Seriously.

– Crackpipe is defining Atheism like a religion.

– Atheism IS THE NEUTRAL POSITION! Why is this so hard for Crackpipe to realize?

– Let’s give some examples here…..

> Atheism is a religion like bald is a hair color.

> Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.

> Atheism is a religion like abstinence is a sex position.

> Atheism is a religion like “off” is a TV channel.

> Atheism is a religion like “barefoot” is a shoe.

> Atheism is a religion like “unemployed” is a career.

> Atheism is a religion like “clear” is a color.

> Atheism is a religion like being sane is a mental illness.

> Atheism is a religion like following the law is a crime.

> Atheism is a religion like “healthy” is a disease.

> Atheism is a religion like invisible is something you see

GET IT?!
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“We can’t form any belief. We need evidence based on facts and evidence.
—————–

Of course we can form beliefs.

– What is Crackpipe even talking about now?

– He seriously must have written this article just for the reason of wasting my time.

– We form beliefs on what we see as ethical and moral and what right and wrong are.

> What society, or different parts of society and the world believe is ethical, or moral.

> What we ourselves believe we are capable, or incapable of doing when it comes to moral, or ethical boundaries we set in place for ourselves.

– We form all kinds of beliefs in regards to personal views and perspectives.

– HOWEVER, what Crackpipe is confusing “belief” with is the same thing that billions of other people confuse belief with, which is “religion” which is “delusion”.

> Unless Crackpipe gives any credit whatsoever to scientology, hinduism, buddhism, islam, Zeus, Odin, Aztec sun gods, or aboriginal spirits.

> Being brainwashed to a delusional belief takes outside influence.

> Simply living your life and observing the world around you, without being force fed religious delusion and then coming to your own conclusions, isn’t brainwashing, but just “not spreading that particular strain of faith virus to others”.

– We evolve our thinking to adjust to the world around us.

> We do this evolving with, or without religion, but the difference is that without religion we learn to be good people because we want to fit into society better, not simply because we feel we have to because of a delusional sky daddy.
.
.
Crackpipe finishes….

“So are we born atheist?

No.”
—————

Not only are we born Atheists, but some (in fact most) also born to be victims.

– Victims of parents who want nothing more than to infect their kids with the same mental illness that they are infected with and are oblivious to.

– Crackpipe just wasted his time, my time and everyone else’s time by his statement that “We are not born Atheists”.

Crackpipe truly is a loser.

May 20 Part 6

Ok just 2 weeks left before school starts again. Hope I can get the rest of Crackpipes 9 responses done by then.

Then I have to do the talley of all Crackpipe’s lies and get the new “Evidence for Jesus is Meaningless 2 article done after that.

So let’s hopefully get this one on Josephus done soon. Looks pretty easy. Same old apologist stuff, so like I said “let’s hope”.
.
.
So Crackpipe says….

“BB(s)J vs. Jesus Part Nine: Josephus!
Okay, so we are making it ever closer to the end of BB(s)J’s list. This post: Josephus!

Here’s what BB(s)J give us:
“9) TITUS FLAVIUS JOSEPHUS 37-101 AD was said to have written about Jewish history in 93-94 AD in Antiquities of the Jews” and makes references to Jesus in a section of it now called “The Testimonium Flavium”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiquities_of_the_Jews
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testimonium_Flavianum
http://michaelsherlockauthor.blogspot.ca/2013/11/forging-historical-jesus-josephus-fraud.html?m=1
http://www.truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm”
—————-

Pretty solid it seems with everything I show above about WHY and HOW Josephus and his “evidence” of Jesus is meaningless.

However, Crackpipe christian will not be deterred.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Okay so let’s get to BB(s)J’s arguments:
“a) Jospephus didn’t believe in Jesus, or christianity and was simply referencing the religion and Hebrew scriptures.”
“- Josephus was an orthodox Jew.”

BB(s)J is assuming Josephus didn’t believe in Jesus – that’s what the discussion is about.

If Josephus DID write about Jesus, then he believed Jesus existed. Which is why we are discussing the passage.
————

As evidence?! No.

– Did Josephus know Jesus? No.

– Could Josephus provide anything that even remotely passes as evidence? No.

– Was everything Josephus saying, that wasn’t overly said to be a forgery, just simple hearsay? Yes.

– Of course the entry is a confirmed forgery by multiple scholars, so it really is a waste of time because this automatically makes these Josephus pieces completely non-credible and non-reliable as evidence of Jesus.
.
.
Crackpipe confinues….

“For sure, in either case Josephus didn’t believe Jesus was the Messiah.

“b) This wasn’t written til 94 BC which was 61 years after Jesus supposedly died.”

The classics never DIE!

Like Tacitus, Josephus was a historian sure a biased one and a sloppy writer (as we will see) but a historian nonetheless.

Of course though, we know that BB(s)J believes it impossible for any facts in history to get passed along…(especially when Jesus is involved!).”
————

So let’s see what else Josephus had in common with Tacitus:

– No proof that Josephus was reading references that would have anything with information on Jesus the man.

– Josephus isn’t saying anything that isn’t complete hearsay and common knowledge.

– Not credible because his Jesus entries were said to be forgeries.

– There still is no evidence Jesus existed.

– Also the fact regarding how dishonest, lying manipulative and misleading the church has been throughout history doesn’t help matters either.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“c) Also that scholars have confirmed the Josephus Jesus references to have been forgeries that were inserted over 250 years later.
– Assumed to be Eusebius who did the forgeries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eusebius_of_Caesarea
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_History_(Eusebius)”

Scholars confirm CERTAIN parts of TF were inserted, not the ACTUAL references to Jesus. Plus there was another reference. Yep two seperate references.

Okay so there is a (weak) theory that Eusebius wrote the whole dang thing and/or at least inserted some stuff about Jesus that Jo wouldn’t have written.

A few scholars, yes, hold the view that the whole passage was written by E. A few. Not many, but a few, yes.
—————-

All of it forged, or some of it forged. Forged is forged.

– Richard Carrier will tell you it’s forged also:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/4391

– Hector Avalos thinks it’s forged too.

Goto the 34 minute mark:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?list=WL&v=BP5LdELd_0o

> Hector Avalos is professor of religious studies at Iowa State University and the author or editor of six books on Biblical studies and religion.

– Countless scholars will tell you it’s forged.

– Even if it wasn’t forged, it still is just about hearsay and nothing else.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“E does appear to be suspect #1 for the insertion, but in reality it’s just a guess.

The “E DID it” theory is based on 4 basic issues, with some variance.
1) E was a known forger.
2) silence from early Church fathers about what Jo wrote on Jesus.
3) the passage doesn’t seem to fit with those around it
4) wording supposedly not used by Jo

(There are a few more, but my links address them as well)
—————-

Yep. Eusebius like all of christianity did a lot of lying and forging.

http://www.christianity-revealed.com/cr/files/fathereusebiustheforger.html

> It’s no secret.

– The church fathers sure never mentioned anything Josephus said about Jesus, even though they were quite familiar with his work.

– Multiple scholars will agree that the passages don’t fit.

> It doesn’t matter how many times Crackpipe argues about this, scholars will still tell you that the passages don’t fit.

– Also no matter how many times Crackpipe implies the wording isn’t an issue, it still is an issue and scholars say so.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“These four represent what BB(s)J has provided within the links.

Now to offer up point one: E is a liar liar pants on fire!

If you click on the first non-Wikipedia link you’ll find the author lays out a case the E was a shitty historian and liar of sorts. To support this he uses a quote from…

Can you guess?

Yep, my buddy Bart!

“The Bible scholar, Professor Bart Ehrman, reports on Eusebius’ dishonest character in the following words:
“Eusebius stands at the end of this process. It was his rewriting of history that made all later historians think that his group (Orthodox Christianity) had always been the majority opinion. But it did not really happen that way.”(7)

Now I will give the writer the benefit of the doubt and believe that he was just using my buddy there to ONLY establish E’s character as a historian, and not imply that Bart believes E forged Josephus.”
—————

Funny then that Eusebius had access to ALL information then and at that time who provided Eusebius access and the ability and resources to do all the changes?

– Well Crackpipe’s buddy Constantine of course.

– Is Crackpipe seriously this mental and desperate?

> How is a forged reference found over a 1000 years later that was in the possession of a known forger and liar, credible again?

– Yep, there really is no way that anything from Josephus can be considered credible, or reliable as evidence and Crackpipe really is in desperation mode now.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Because as we know:” And he (Jesus) is almost certainly referred to twice in the Jewish historian Josephus, once in an entire paragraph.” – “My buddy” Bart Ehrman.

Read more here:
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/bibleandculture/2012/06/07/bart-ehrman-on-did-jesus-exist-part-three/

Bart likes Jo!”
————-

LOL Yeah wonderful.

– Bart says “And he is almost certainly referred to twice in the Jewish historian Josephus”

– This simply says that Josephus’ writings mentioned him.

– He was of course talking about common knowledge that christians blabbed and blabbed about to everyone.

– He mentioned a myth and a delusion.

– Bart merely mentions that Jesus’ was mentioned in Josephus’ work AS A FORGERY.

– I also enjoy in the article how Bart basically says he doesn’t give Suetonius credibility.

> Funny that Crackpipe gives it potential and argued in Suetonius’ defense, but then later on changed it to “maybe” so I guess because he heard Bart Ehrman did.

> Pathetic.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“But what’s really funny about the blog post is the quotes from people that say Josephus is a forgery.

Here they are: ”
“Bishop Warburton declares it to be a forgery: “If a Jew owned the truth of Christianity, he must needs embrace it. We, therefore, certainly conclude that the paragraph where Josephus, who was as much a Jew as the religion of Moses could make him, is made to acknowledge Jesus as the Christ, in terms as strong as words could do it, is a rank forgery, and a very stupid one, too” (Quoted by Lardner, Works, Vol. I, chap. iv).” (8)

The Rev. Dr. Giles, of the Established Church of England, says:
“Those who are best acquainted with the character of Josephus, and the style of his writings, have no hesitation in condemning this passage as a forgery..(Christian Records, p. 30).” (9)

The Rev. S. Baring-Gould, in his Lost and Hostile Gospels, says:

“This passage is first quoted by Eusebius (fl . A.D. 315) in two places (Hist. Eccl., lib. i, c. xi; Demonst. Evang., lib. iii); but it was unknown to Justin Martyr (fl . A.D. 140), Clement of Alexandria (fl . A.D. 192), Tertullian (fl . A.D. 193), and Origen (fl . A.D. 230). Such a testimony would certainly have been produced by Justin in his apology or in his controversy with Trypho the Jew, had it existed in the copies of Josephus at his time. The silence of Origen is still more significant. Celsus, in his book against Christianity, introduces a Jew. Origen attacks the argument of Celsus and his Jew. He could not have failed to quote the words of Josephus, whose writings he knew, had the passage existed in the genuine text. He, indeed, distinctly affirms that Josephus did not believe in Christ (Contr. Cels. i).” (10)

Dr. Chalmers ignores it, and admits that Josephus is silent regarding Christ. He says:

“The entire silence of Josephus upon the subject of Christianity, though he wrote after the destruction of Jerusalem, and gives us the history of that period in which Christ and his Apostles lived, is certainly a very striking circumstance” (Kneeland’s Review, p. 169). (11)

The following, from Dr. Farrar’s pen, is to be found in the Encyclopedia Britannica:
“That Josephus wrote the whole passage as it now stands no sane critic can believe.” (12)

Seems pretty damning!

Buuuuuuut: run to the bottom of the page and read WHERE the quotes come from:”John E Remsburg. The Christ: A Critical Review and Analysis of the Evidences of His Existence. The Truth Seeker Company. (1909) pp. 32-35.

9. Ibid.

10. Ibid.

11. Ibid.

12. Ibid.”

Yeah, they all come from 4 pages in ONE book written in 1909!

Gotta love it!
———————

BWAHAHAHA! Oh that’s so funny!

– Of course I’m not laughing at the same thing Crackpipe is laughing at but laughing AT Crackpipe specifically.

– Can you believe this hypocrisy?

> Crackpipe is giving me crap for saying something has no validity because it was written a 100 years ago? WTF?

> Meanwhile this is within a MODERN century with VERIFIED mass media!

> This is documented proof that these scholarly people said this.

> Who the fudge is Crackpipe to say who and what these men are saying isn’t accurate or credible when Crackpipe is attacking me for saying things aren’t credible 60-200 years after Jesus’ supposed death? WTF?!

– Gotta love religious people and their double standards. Pathetic.

– Regardless how much Crackpipe tries to give us the impression that all these people WHO SHOULD HAVE AND WOULD have used the Josephus Jesus references are irrelevant, they are quite RELEVANT.

– It’s quite the evidence that the Jesus entries were forged by someone.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Okay, maybe the other link is better.

Well for one it says this: “So thorough and universal has been this debunking that very few scholars of repute continued to cite the passage after the turn of the 19th century.”

Eh….not really.”
—————

So this is evidence of Jesus how again from what Josephus says?

– I guess that the guy who made the quote about the 19th century obviously underestimated the delusion, desperation, patheticness and stupidity of people like Crackpipe.

– That is a problem that Atheists have when dealing with religious people and that is that we are expecting completely irrational, brainwashed lunatics to act and think rational.

> This is like expecting faith healing families to not kill their kids because they’re idiots.

> This is like expecting a creationist congregation to do research into the Big Bang, evolution and stellar nucleosynthesis and not put up a stink.

> This is like telling a brainwashed religious lunatic that there isn’t any truth or evidence of their religion and expecting them to rationally understand…. oh wait, that’s exactly what it is.

– Either way, All this is is Crackpipe doing nothing but a pathetic attempt at misleading us into thinking that all this evidence AGAINST the evidence isn’t evidence.

> Crackpipe is implying that he somehow made a point when he clearly hasn’t.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Now if you do a search on your own you will find that pretty much EVERYONE agrees that part of a paragraph from Josephus has some Christian inserts. E may have done it, maybe not, but there it is regardless.

This isn’t new information.
————–

So why is Crackpipe wasting our time?
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

As BE says: “The Testimonium that we have in the late manuscripts of Josephus has clearly and obviously been “doctored up” by a Christian scribe, since Josephus himself (as we know, e.g., from his autobiography) never became a Christian and so did not himself believe that Jesus was the messiah who was raised from the dead in fulfillment of the Scriptures (as the Testimonium relates).
But Josephus did refer to Jesus, and he does give us some valuable information about him. And he is the first non-Christian source to do so.”
————–

So we have someone parroting some lunatic’s delusions.

– YAAY!

– Still not evidence of anything.

– Did I mention that these passages of Josephus were forged?
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Now you can look and find this doctored up part. It’s in the first non-Wikipedia link.

But guess what happens when you remove the contended parts?

Yeah, it still references Jesus. Scholars know this, which is WHY they still accept it as an authentic reference to Jesus and STILL cite it today.”
————–

SMFH

– What Crackpipe doesn’t seem to grasp is that there is a big difference between REFERENCING Jesus and EVIDENCE of Jesus.

– When Tacitus REFERENCED Heracles was he showing EVIDENCE Heracles existed, or referencing?

– Josephus can reference Jesus all he wants, but it still isn’t evidence, or proof of anything.

– Oh and those references of Jesus were said to be forgeries by the way.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“So the claim that NO real scholar says this is evidence for Jesus is…well, dare I say a lie? Either that or complete ignorance of historical scholarship.”
—————

How is this evidence again? Because Josephus parrotted a faith based delusion?

– How is this evidence again because some forgery was inserted that referenced someone whose existence is based on hearsay?
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Anyway, this post also says this:”Hence, by the 1840’s, when the anonymous author of Christian Mythology Unveiled wrote, the Testimonium Flavanium was already “universally acknowledged to be a forgery.”

Yeah, okay.

I guess historical critisism hasn’t improved at all since then…in fact it’s gotten worse! Before 1900 it was universally thought to be a forgery, we read the quotes!

Now the opposite is true!

What happened?

I blame the parents…

Okay so let’s deal with if E wrote Josephus’ TF: Not So Much!”
————-

As Richard Carrier says.

> Eusebius did the interpolation.

http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier/archives/4391

– Also, I just wanted to say how Crackpipe is not funny and above just sounds desperate and stupid and also very loserish.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Scroll down to number 10 and read: “10. Eusebius as the Interpolator
The argument that Eusebius himself interpolated the entire TF has been most recently advocated by Ken Olson. I have already addressed his arguments in my Response to Ken Olson on the Testamonium Flavianum. From the conclusion:
An examination of three types of evidence reveals that Olson’s theory is unpersuasive. First, the internal evidence reveals distinctly, and sometimes uniquely, Josephan language in parts of the TF. Olson’s attempt to point to uniquely Eusebian language is unavailing. Two of the phrases are arguably Josephan. Second, Olson completely ignores the probable existence of Antiquities manuscripts independent of Eusebius which also contain the TF. The existence of such manuscripts is fatal to this theory. Third, Olson’s more important argument about Eusebius’ apologetic purpose is entirely unconvincing. Simply put, Eusebius never uses the TF as Olson’s theory predicts. In sum, Olson has failed to offer any serious reason to believe that Eusebius interpolated the TF.”
You can read the full reply: http://www.christiancadre.org/member_contrib/cp_josephus.html
——————

WOW! If that wasn’t the most pointless and boring article I’ve ever read in my entire life!

– There wasn’t one single convincing argument in that article and was nothing but the ramblings of a lunatic!

> All Crackpipe’s articles he links to me are the most boring I’ve ever read and no matter how many times I read them they just say nothing and have no point.

– I’m starting to wonder if Crackpipe is actually a group of really stupid brainwashed christians with no lives instead of just one moron.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

As Price notes: “If Eusebius invented this overt attestation of Josephus’ belief in Jesus as the Christ, why does he take no advantage of it at all? Nowhere does Eusebius claim that Josephus, a prominent Jew, believed Jesus was the Messiah. Again, therefore, Eusebius misses an opportunity to make any use whatsoever of his literary creation. But the problem remains if the original passage – as discussed above – stated that Jesus was the “so-called Christ.” Olson offers no explanation for why Eusebius would invent the Testimonium only to call into question his overriding apologetic purpose.”
—————-

Who knows what Eusebius’ motive was?

– The way Eusebius IMPLIED and worded it was so OBVIOUSLY christian and inserted that it’s just as believable as someone claiming that I wrote the same thing on my blog because I believed Jesus was a real person.

– Who knows what goes through the mind of a madman like Eusebius?

– Who knows what goes through the mind of someone who works for a madman? (Constantine).

– All religious people are insane in a sense because their brainwashing makes them that way.

– I still can’t figure out what possibly goes through Crackpipe’s head (or heads).

> Nothing sane.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“And: “Simply put, Eusebius never uses the Testimonium for the apologetics purposes that Olson ascribes to him and the Testimonium itself fails to include basic material about Jesus that would have advanced Eusebius’ apologetic purposes.”

In short: if E wrote it, how come he didn’t use it?”
—————–

Has anyone ever heard the term “whoever smelled it dealt it”?

– If someone forges things and they don’t want it to look like it was them, then maybe they might want to just keep quiet about it.

– Maybe Eusebius forged so many things that he couldn’t keep track of them all.

– Again, what goes through the mind of crazy lying dishonest people?
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Okay, but what about the church fathers not mentioning Josephus?

Okay, so let’s as the obvious question: why would they?

For what purpose would citing Josephus is this case be useful to them?

Even WITH the Christian addition, Josephus’ writing is of little value to the early Church fathers. It adds nothing of value to what they already believed about Jesus. Since it was clear and known that Josephus didn’t believe Jesus was the Messiah.”
—————

Oh come off of it! You’ve got to be kidding and Crackpipe can’t be this stupid!

– Any reference at all of Jesus would have been used!

> Christians then were just as delusional and desperate as they are now.

> If people like Crackpipe desperately TRY to use it NOW, even after world renowned experts say it’s a forgery, then you can bet that THEY would have 1800 years ago.

– This is so incredibly the stupidest question ever.

> WHY would they use it? Seriously?

> Why wouldn’t the christian writers and church leaders try to use it to prove Jesus? Why the fark do you think?

> Why is Crackpipe trying to use it?

– This is the same as me asking the question “why would an Atheist debate crazy religious people on the Atheist’s own blog”.

> I’m stunned.

– OF COURSE THEY WOULD USE IT! WTF?!

– Christians use anything and everything to fuel their lies and delusion, or has Crackpipe forgotten all of the Apocrypha and the many forgeries inserted into the bible?

– If Crackpipe tries to tell us that christianity isn’t about lying, manipulating and deception, or doing whatever it takes to fuel peoples delusion, then maybe Crackpipe never heard of blasphemy laws.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“It’s been claimed that the Christians used Josephus heavily, and thus would have.

Here’s a cool link about the issue, with an exhaustive look at the use of Josephus by Christians
:http://www.tertullian.org/rpearse/josephus/josephus.htm
—————

Yes that sure was exhaustive all right and took me an entire day to read with several naps inbetween.

– It was also misleading and a complete waste of time. Kinda like dealing with Crackpipe

> I’ve been working on responses to Crackpipe for over a month and this is only what Crackpipe wrote in just a few days.

> Crackpipe is a timewasting vampire.

> Crackpipe truly has no life.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Okay, let’s move on from the forgery for a sec, we will come back to it I promise!”
————–

Whatever Crackpipe wants to do is fine with me.

> Crackpipe is still just a brainwashed slave of a lie with zero evidence and all he can do is attempt to make people temporarily second guess themselves.

> I feel like I’m Neo from the Matrix when I’m debating Crackpipe.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“BB(s)J throws this out:
“d) There have been many copies of Josephus’s work discovered WITHOUT the Jesus references also throughout the centuries.”

This is a new line of argument that I haven’t heard prior. But looking into it I found it is a faulty argument.

“It is sometimes claimed that manuscripts before Eusebius do not have the passage in question. This is simply not true; there are no extant manuscripts before Eusebius. It is also sometimes pointed out that the Josippon, a medieval Hebrew version of Josephus, lacks the passage in question. However, Josippon is dependent on the text of the Antiquities preserved by Christians, so it is clear that the author of Josippon does not represent an independent manuscript tradition but rather purposely omits the passage.”

Read here: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/testimonium.html#spurious

BB(s)J may need to clarify exactly what he is saying here…and perhaps provide a link or two.
——————–

What’s to understand? Why is this so difficult?

– The 2 forged Jesus references put there by Eusebius, or some other christian source are the ONLY references to Jesus AT ALL.

– Josephus had countless writings and none had Jesus in them when they totally should have.

– Why didn’t Josephus’ father tell Josephus stories about Jesus?

– Checkout number 9 here:

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/testimonium.html

> It explains it best about the lack of Jesus being brought up anywhere in Josephus’ works except for the 2 forged parts.

– Also number 6 explaining how the Testimonium Flavianium wasn’t even in a discovered table of contents:

“Louis H. Feldman writes (Josephus, Judaism and Christianity, p. 57): “The fact that an ancient table of contents, already referred to in the Latin version of the fifth or sixth century, omits mention of the Testimionium (though, admittedly, it is selective, one must find it hard to believe that such a remarkable passage would be omitted by anyone, let alone by a Christian, summarizing the work) is further indication that there was no such notice…” I regard this as an important and powerful piece of evidence, although one that doesn’t get much attention.”
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Okay, back to the forged issue!

“The evidence of Josephus’s work regarding Jesus being forged is overwhelming, with countless reasons why it IS FORGED!
Shown again here:
http://www.truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm
http://jesusbirthermovement.tumblr.com/post/52467518618/christian-apologist-jewish-secular-source-evidence”

Countless to be sure.

Okay so what we have left to address in the argument is 3) passage doesn’t fit the flow, 4) funny word use by Jo.
——————

Well let’s go over them shall we?

– Not Josephus’ words he used to describe a religious group (tribe).

– The ‘Testamonium Flavium’ uses the Greek term ‘poietes’ with the meaning “doer” (as part of the phrase “doer of wonderful works”), but elsewhere, Josephus only uses the term poietes to mean “poet,” while it is Eusebius who uses poietes to mean “doer of wonderful works” when referring to Jesus in some of his other works.
(copied directly from Michael Sherlock’s book “I am Christ” because I just want to get this finished).

– The fact that Eusebius was the only one with any copies of Josephus’ works, but they weren’t discovered for over a 1000 years since Eusebius died and anybody could have forged them within that time.

– The fact that Josephus wrote the passages and they had parts about Jesus in them and nobody brought this to anyones attention for 1400 years.

– The fact that this again still isn’t evidence of Jesus and is nothing more than merely talking about someone else’s delusional beliefs that people heard from hearsay.

– Then on top of this he even bothers to argue about this in the first place when there’s so much CONFIRMED forgery in the new testament and gospel.

> Mark 16:9-20 and John 8:1-11 are some good examples on top of entire chapters.

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

“We already looked at the first link, so let’s turn to the new one.

Does it give the “countless” reasons?

Well…not really. It rehashes the arguments already presented. It even links the TBK link BB(s)J did as well.

So it’s not completely a new source, but it’s a better source!

However in regards to the forgery claim, the writer brings up a point that the passage in question “interrupts” the flow and thus is an insertion and forgery.

However: “Jeffrey Lowder, co-founder of the Secular Web, could “see no reason to believe the Testimonium occurs out of context.” Even if it could be said to be out of context, Lowder remarks “that would still not make it likely that the passage is an interpolation. It was common for ancient writers to insert extraneous texts or passages which seemingly interrupt the flow of the narrative (whereas today the material would be placed in a footnote).” (Lowder, Josh McDowell’s Evidence for Jesus: Is it Reliable? 2000).”

So it’s not a real issue, happened frequently in ancient writings.

Also:
“We have emphasized another aspect of Josephus’ work: his inveterate sloppiness. Texts suitable for tendentious revision as well as passages which contradict his motives are sometimes left untouched. The narrative is frequently confused, obscure, and contradictory.”

(Shaye J.D. Cohen, Josephus in Galilee and Rome, page 233).

So the “flow” argument isn’t really one…
————–

Oh listen to Crackpipe here. Unbelievable.

– Of course it’s an argument.

– So because one Atheist spokesperson says it doesn’t seem out of line in a sorts that is supposed to make it all ok?

> Crackpipe can just keep dreaming.

– What other quotes does Lowder say in the same article? Let’s post some.

“Unlike Josephus’ shorter reference to Jesus, this passage is extremely controversial. Indeed, even McDowell admits this when he writes that the Testimonium Flavianum is “a hotly-contested quotation.”[26] Most scholars suspect there has been at least some tampering with the text on the basis of some or all of the italicized sections. Thus scholarly opinion can be divided into three camps: those who accept the entire passage as authentic; those who reject the entire passage as a Christian interpolation into the text (perhaps authored by the fourth-century church historian Eusebius); and those who believe that the original text contained an authentic reference to Jesus but was later embellished by Christian copyists.”

Also….

“There was one objection which McDowell and Wilson did not discuss, but which I think deserves to be taken seriously by anyone who defends a reconstructed Testimonium. According to that objection, the fact that there has been any tampering with the text at all makes the entire passage suspect; a heavy burden of proof falls upon anyone who defends partial authenticity. I will leave it as an exercise for the reader to decide what to think about this objection.”

– Also the fact that it still is nothing but evidence of a delusional belief that was common knowledge, whether it is real, or fake.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“And the last one: funny words.

The claim here is that there are words an phrases that Jo wouldn’t and didn’t ever use, thus TF is a forgery.

Well, if you read the link: http://www.christiancadre.org/member_contrib/cp_josephus.html

You saw that argument laid to rest before we got to it.
—————

Ugh. I gotta go to that pointless hunk of garbage again? Great. Ok, oh well.

– Crackpipe truly is the time waster of timewasters and I guess I really should have listened to my advice, but in the end I will get that great article “Evidence of Jesus is meaningless part 2” out of it, so I guess it was worth it.

– So Professor Meier (a brainwashed delusional) says regarding for the term “doer”.

“It is used elsewhere in Josephus only in the sense of “poet”; but Josephus . . . has a fondness for resolving a simple verb into two words: a noun expressing the agent and the auxiliary verb (e.g., krites einai for the simple krinein). Moreover, Josephus uses such cognates as poieteos, ‘that which is to be done,” poiesis, “doing, causing” (as well as “poetry, poem”), and poietikos, ‘that which causes something” (as well as “poetic”).

> An explanation, but not anything that actually says how it isn’t a forgery placed word.

> The word is still out of place and suspicious and completely out of character for Josephus.

> There are still multiple scholars who see this as nonsense for a defense.

– I have an explanation on how Crackpipe actually believes Jesus is God and christianity to be true based on zero evidence and how everything about christianity is proven false due to science, logic and facts.

> Brainwashed through being caught in an emotional, or mental vulnerability.

or

> Child indoctrinated.

– Meier also says that Josephus says “incredible deeds” in 2 other places.

> Still doesn’t escape the fact that Josephus wouldn’t have said “incredible deeds” in regards to Jesus in the first place because he didn’t believe there was anything magical, or incredible about Jesus, the fictional character that Josephus heard about through hearsay.

– Josephus still only uses the term “tribe” for ethnic groups NOT religious groups, while Eusebius does use the term “tribe”.

> Meier saying that Eusebius copied the term “tribe” from the Testimonimum is pure hilarity and screams of desperation.

– Josephus was talking about another person named Jesus who had a brother named James in the second passage.

> Jesus and James in the way they were said and written were quite common then. The “christ” part was an obvious insertion.

– I don’t believe the entire TF was forged, just certain forgeries inserted.

> They obviously were and even if they weren’t they are nothing but the parrotting of a delusion.

– There is nothing credible about anything in Josephus’ writings regarding Jesus being a real person, which results as “evidence”.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“To BB(s)J this adds up to:
“e) Christianity’s greatest piece of evidence of Jesus is actually christianity’s greatest evidence how it is nothing but, fraud, lying, deception and brainwashing.”

Eh…sure! IF you hang with the scholarship of the 1900’s, which must be far superior than today’s!

What it boils down to is this: we saw BB(s)J had only two core arguments: 1) date (as always) and 2) forgery.

1) as we know, but BB(s)J has trouble with it, is not a great argument. (especially when you have little else)
2) we see is weak and just grasping at straws and is only convincing to those who already believe Josephus
Is: “STILL DEFINITELY NOT PROOF OF ANYTHING! LIKE REALLY REALLY DEFINITELY NOT!

LIKE REALLY!
——————-

Isn’t it funny then that Crackpipe went from 4 arguments to now only 2?

Before Crackpipe said:

1) E was a known forger.
2) silence from early Church fathers about what Jo wrote on Jesus.
3) the passage doesn’t seem to fit with those around it
4) wording supposedly not used by Jo

– Now he’s adding #5 which is “time”, which Crackpipe never even brought up this whole time wasting article he wrote.

– So that’s fine, we’ll just go through them all again.

1) Eusebius was a well known forger and the fact that Eusebius was the ONLY one to have copies of Josephus’ works and that these Josephus quotes of Jesus were never referenced until the 15th CENTURY (well over 1000 years) is undeniable.

– The fact that Josephus was as jewish as you can get and that what was found was completely not what he believed, or thought makes it completely unbelievable.

– Multiple biblical scholars agree that it was Eusebius, or someone else who forged the Jesus references.

> Some say all of the TF was forged.

> Some say part of it was forged.

> Forged is forged.

> Even if the Josephus parts weren’t forged it would still be about someone parrotting a religious belief and nothing else.

2) For no one to have referenced the Josephus writing about Jesus passages for well over a 1000 years AND NOT BEFORE, with people having full access and constantly searching for evidence of Jesus, is just insane.

> Crackpipe is insulting his intelligence and anyone else’s intelligence who he tells that this is an insignicant point.

> This is Crackpipe doing his best to make us simply dismiss something by doing nothing but imply that they aren’t important.

> The most Crackpipe can do is give us references of people who also imply we should overlook this fact simply because they say so.

> Meanwhile the reasons they give to ignore the silence are as empty and irrelevant as using rainbows to prove the flood and Noah’s ark happened.

3) They don’t fit with what was around them and the fact that Josephus was a jew who didn’t believe in Jesus being the messiah and didn’t talk like a brainwashed faith based christian can’t be denied.

> No matter how many times Crackpipe attempts to mislead anyone from again just dismissing something, because Crackpipe, or someone else implied we should just ignore it, doesn’t change the fact that a devout jew, does not talk like a christian glorifying christianity.

4) It is highly suspicious about some of the wording that were in the passages and multiple scholars note the same thing.

– Crackpipe referenced people who gave empty, meaningless answers that disproved nothing about the fact that the wording was suspicious and out of place for Josephus.

– Like the fact that you can’t disprove God because you can disprove something that does not exist in the first place, you can’t disprove something from being suspicious if it never wasn’t suspicious, especially by not giving any reasons, but instead just simply implying that it isn’t suspicious.

5) As for the time issue, since Crackpipe didn’t bring that up until the end, well yeah of course that’s an issue.

– What I am curious about is why Crackpipe never addressed the time issue til the very end of this.

> Because Crackpipe knows that there really is no defense of the time issue.

> Because the time issue is undeniable no matter how many times Crackpipe tries to imply to us that it isn’t an issue.

> The time issue is definitely an issue and gives the existence of Jesus even less credibility.

> The fact that what is written in Josephus whether it is forged, or not forged, is nothing but talking about the christian religion and a character within that religion, for which we know that Josephus did not believe in and is simply told even longer ago.

– Bringing up the time issue, let’s talk then AGAIN about how these Jesus references were NEVER referenced UNTIL the 15th century.

> Josephus was often quoted and read throughout the centuries by people looking for Jesus references and quotes, so OVER A 1000 YEARS?!! WTF?!

– Speaking again of the time issue:

> Josephus never knew Jesus and wasn’t born til after his supposed death.

> Josephus’s father never told him anything about Jesus.

> Josephus wrote these works that Jesus was referenced in over 60 years after Jesus’s supposed death and the Jesus references weren’t discovered til over 1000 years later, in the possession of a known forger.

– The fact that every year that goes by with zero evidence and nothing to back it up with eyewitnesses, video, audio, pictures and is based on nonsensical hearsay, just becomes more and more absurd the more time goes on.

> Crackpipe can go “haha he said video, audio and pictures” all he wants but since there isn’t any, then I’m pretty sure there really isn’t any other way to confirm that a man-god came back to life who is the omnipotent master and creator of the universe.

> When you actually think about it, think about how easy it actually would be to make people think you were a god back then.

> David Blain and Chris Angel would just have to tell some people they were gods and they would believe them.

> Crackpipe is the one grasping at straws by saying that 60-200, to even 1000 years later is credible, or believable, especially when there is zero evidence and there are several factors that say that the belief isn’t even true in the first place.

6) Crackpipe forgot the point about how Josephus’ writings simply aren’t evidence of anything, even if they weren’t partly forged, or wholly forged.

> Just repeating hearsay and parrotting a delusion that a bunch of suckers believed in simply for the reason that back then people didn’t know anything and religion and superstition are what gripped the world.

7) Crackpipe also didn’t bring up the fact that Josephus was a devout jew who didn’t believe in the messiah, or christianity, so he wouldn’t have believed in Jesus since he never knew, or met him.

8) Let’s also remind Crackpipe of the fact that in Josephus’ writings….

He made mention of approximately twenty different people, all with the name Jesus, and that some of these characters included; Jesus the son of Sapphias, Jesus the son of Gamala, Jesus the son of Phabet, Jesus the son of Sie, Jesus the son of Fabus, Jesus the son of Thias, Jesus the son of Gamaliel, Jesus the son of Damneus, Jesus the brother of Onias, Jesus the brother of John, Jesus the Galilean, who was a great military commander and many others. (From Michael Sherlock’s Forging the Historical Jesus- The Jesus Fraud).

– Probably more reasons but I just want to get these responses done now at this point.

> I will just try to rush through them if possible.

As I said before though for multiple reasons Josephus is definitely not evidence for Jesus’ existence but merely evidence for the following:

> Evidence of the desperation of christians.

> Evidence of the dishonesty of christians.

> Evidence that christians will say anything.

> Evidence that christians simply just dismiss everything and try to pass off their dismissals as some kind of an answer.

> Evidence that if christians didn’t lie, mislead and deceive people then they couldn’t do apologetics at all.

> Evidence that christianity is nothing but a waste of time.