Well it seems I have a return of the annoying pest who calls himself the “Beer Can Christian”. Probably the creepiest person I’ve ever come across on Twitter which says a lot.

It says a lot because of the fact that I more than welcome a religious believer to write a blog article with me in mind, or even better to attack something I’ve written, afterall I am a narcissist. BeerCan however is the exception.

It’s not just the fact that he tells me he loves me over and over (I swear I’m not making this up).

The fact that he has the most painful use of the word “rhetoric” over and over that I’ve ever seen, to the point that I don’t even think he knows what it means, is not the only reason.

The fact that he is a brainwashed, delusional slave of a lie that thinks an imaginary being actually needs BeerCan to come to it’s defense and INSISTS upon it, is not the only reason.

It’s the fact that everything he writes he just comes across as a total douchbag and actually thinks he’s making a point when he isn’t.

Also the fact that all he does is make christianity sound dumber and dumber everytime he writes, or tweets something to someone in christianity’s defense.

It’s the fact that he THINKS the reason so many Atheists don’t want to have anything to do with him is because he’s so brilliant, or because he is making sense and they can’t deal with his overwhelming apologetics skills, but doesn’t understand that it’s because he comes across as such an obnoxious douche. He is so mind numbingly irritating that they just have to get away from him, because dealing with him is as painful as stepping in dog feces barefoot and being unable to wash it off.

So after a few months he has opened up a new account and begged for attention from me and I said “yes”. So at first I was tempted to just block him, but then I became curious to see what he would say even though I knew it would be it’s usual irritation and stupidity.

Now I’m glad I did because I’m going to log his stupidity, gloat at my own articles I’ve written and show the world that religion is only something to be believed by both the delusional, the brainwashed, the stupid and the insane.

Thanks BeerCan.
————-

April 30/ 2014-Wednesday

I posted this article on Twitter.

https://thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com/2014/01/21/please-convince-me/

Which was a series of questions for religious people to answer to prove to me that they aren’t brainwashed, or stupid to believe their religion. I specifically say at the bottom of the article to send me a personal blog link if someone has one and answer the questions.

I have my response section disabled, or I would never get anything done, but only for that reason.

BeerCan then sends me a tweet.

@CMeyer_77: @BuybullJournal is there a way we could answer them? Or no?

So he obviously didn’t read the part where I said “Please answer all the above questions on a blog and send me the link”.

Which is funny because he knows he has a blog and could have simply answered the questions and sent me the link, minus the shpeel and moaning and groaning.

I did suggest he send me the link, but then after reading some of his handywork he sends me to a response that he wrote a few months ago that I never read, I’m reminded why I didn’t want to. I then tell him not to bother and tell him why.
—————-

May 1/2014-Thursday

BeerCan writes to me that he’s basically going to respond anyway.

So rather than block and ignore BeerCan like my better judgement tells me to I will be giving christianity’s insung hero his big opportunity to show the world how stupid christians are. ElijiahT has already shown us how dishonest and misleading christians are, let’s see how well a christian does without lying, or deflecting and actually using just evidence and facts.

So right off the bat the next day Beercan sends me a link.

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

Well isn’t that surprising that this is a response to a DIFFERENT article then the one that he said he was going to respond to in the first place? Funny that.

Instead of responding to THIS article that he said he would:

https://thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com/2014/01/21/please-convince-me/

He responds to this one for some bizarre reason:

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

The article he responds to is where I expose the “evidence” of Jesus outside of the bible and before the second century apologists present. I expose as both meaningless and fraudulent because I’m tired of seeing it pop up and used as evidence when it isn’t.

So here is BeerCan’s ramblings and self-deluded points if you actually read his article, or care to:

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

Let’s see what his wonderful rebuttals are as christianity’s new greatest champion….

Well he seems to have already done half my job for me it seems because he’s also mimicked my wonderful bullet style the deflecting christians talk to me so much about. Makes things so much easier and clearer to destroy and dissect.

Let’s address some of his points.

1) I never said I was a historian, but thanks for bringing that up BeerCan.

– I do however give some credit to EVIDENCE of historians AND of historians themselves.

– Historical records and historical evidence and research are pretty easily available BeerCan, it’s just a simple matter of looking with your keyboard.

a) As for your buddy Bart Ehrman well let’s hear what your self admitted agnostic, hero says about how credible and historical the gospels are:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A3qXQt6dYME

Please do give that a watch will you?

Do note the multiple times he refers to the gospels and NT as non-historical and non-reliable.

b) Also, BeerCan, why would you say I have beliefs when you know I’m an Atheist?

– What exacty do I believe in again?

2) Ok, you say something here about how much I “love to use Youtube”.

– Yeah youtube is great isn’t it?

– Still not sure what your point was, or why you brought that up.

– Whatever.

3) Ok this next part had me wonder why you even wrote this:

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

Ok Beercan here’s a thought…

– How about redefining what this even means? I have no idea.

– How about some examples that don’t look like pointless name calling?

– Do you even know what your point, or what you’re trying to say here is?

4) You then said “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.”

– That’s funny, because I thought I was simply listing how and why things were meaningless, unreliable and not evidence here? Simple listing of history here.

– I can’t help that Beercan knows that I think “Jesus sacrificing himself to save us from himself because Jesus needed to kill himself, even though he’s omnipotent, unless something is made of iron, like a chariot wheel, because a talking snake and 2 people defied all evidence of evolution and they ate an apple, because it was a special magic apple, that god knew they would eat anyway, but decided to give women periods and labor pain and torture their grandchildren for thousands of years because he’s so forgiving and loving and let’s not forget morally superior and a supreme being who cures leprocy by cutting birds heads off and splattering their blood on people.”

– Does BeerCan expect me to just stop thinking this makes no sense? Kinda hard.

5) Ok, so more of BeerCan’s rambling. Let’s simply go down the list and not leave anything out.

– You ramble on again about my “belief” again which I don’t have.

– I actually don’t get the final say about “evidence” as you say Beercan, it’s simply defined like this:

> Is it an outside source of the bible?

> Is it in the 2nd century, or 1st, or much closer to our time?

> Was it a forgery?

> Is it common knowledge that it’s not credible by multiple scholars and thoroughly researched sources?

> Is it rationally non-credible by even the stupidest human being on the planet?

– Oh here’s a great comment that says you haven’t even read the article yet and are critiquing as you go for the first time.

– So all the insults and swearing towards me were done why again then if you hadn’t read anything? Well this is making you look brilliant BeerCan. Good job.

Oh, okay, so now we get to BeerCan’s response to what I wrote….

– So far another pointless use of the word “rhetoric” again for no reason (BeerCan’s trademark). He loves the word “rhetoric”. He really does.

BeerCan says….

“Now, what does BB(s)J think of non-theists such as Bart Ehrman who IS a historian and DOES study ancient history as a profession and says, “No SERIOUS historian believes that Jesus DIDN’T exists.”

– Well I do believe I showed how Bart Ehrman thought about how the gospels and NT are not historically reliable didn’t I?

– The fact that Ehrman actually has an interest and benefit from saying that Jesus was a real historical person is something to consider.

– The fact that Bart gives no sources of WHY, or WHAT makes him think Jesus was a historical person after saying “nothing about the gospels and NT are historically reliable” make me curious if it’s anything other than his opinion, which he gives after publicly admitting he is an agnostic and often said to be an Atheist.

– When you actually think about it really the “existence” of historical Jesus is about as beneficial to the people in Lochness that people believe in Nessie so the tourism industry there will benefit.

– As for how many serious scholars don’t believe Jesus existed, there are several and why wouldn’t there be?

Here’s just a few:

Richard Carrier

D.M. Murdock

Robert Price

Kenneth Humphreys

Robert Eisenman

Dr. Rod Blackhirst

Timothy Freke

John Hudson

Earl Doherty

Hector Avalos

Robert R Cargill

There’s countless others who don’t also.

I also wanted to add that many scholars are corrupted by brainwashing and merely give Jesus’s existence on opinion only and biased reasoning.

– Let’s all please await BeerCan’s telling us what evidence Bart Ehrman has said about the evidence of Jesus. I’m sure he has so much of it.

– If BeerCan is referring to Paul’s letters then let’s just remind ourselves of a few things…

> There are no originals of Paul’s letters in the entire 1st century, only copies of copies done in the 2nd and 3rd centuries and closer to our time.

> The entire article I wrote was about how there isn’t any evidence of Jesus outside of the bible and not in the entire 1st century. Paul’s letters are not outside of the bible.

> BeerCan is basing the entire existence of Jesus off of one man (Paul) if this is the case, because this was all the “historic” evidence that Ehrman provided in BeerCan’s link that only worked on copy paste.

> Funny how if you listen to this link of this vid that’s made 4 years later than BeerCan’s Ehrman video, Ehrman talks for a good minute about how unreliable Paul was and non-credible.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A3qXQt6dYME

Give that a listen BeerCan how Ehrman basically says “Paul never met Jesus” and “20 years later is not credible”.

> Guess Ehrman’s done some thinking and research in the past 5 years.

– If BeerCan really wants to impress the world then maybe he should try attacking bible scholar elite Robert Price’s article here who says Jesus didn’t exist.

http://rationalrevolution.net/articles/jesus_myth_history.htm

I’m sure a great bible scholar like BeerCan can easily make Mr. Price look silly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_M._Price

Ignoring the fact of course how Price completely destroyed Lee Strobel’s book like it was a case of twigs getting fed through a wood shredder, not A Case For Christ.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9KQaBxRt_bM

– So moving right along. BeerCan attempts to discredit me by saying that Claudius reigned from 41-54 AD but was born in 10 BC.

– Let’s explain again why that doesn’t work to BeerCan…

> It’s still only a reference and quote 80 years after Jesus supposedly was killed.

> Still in the entire different century.

> The term and time period was 10 years after Jesus died, NOT when around the time he was supposed to have lived.

> No evidence the quote was even about Jesus.

> Nothing credible about a quote 80 years later, from a source that’s been dead for 60 years and passed on from other sources (this is credible how again?)

> The point is also that Claudius was dead 16 years before the writer was even born (credible again how?)

– I wasn’t off base by the way by simply stating the reign and not his age BeerCan, as u can see, the reason your point is irrelevant is overwhelming, but thanks to you showing us even more why, I see it as even more irrelevent.

Thanx.

– Yes Beercan the bible is HEARSAY, but the difference between the bible and history is the political agenda and motivation that religion involves.

– Let’s also not forget the part about there is no gods and the part about the evidence (the NT) is fabricated fiction.

– Because I don’t know what historians have fabricated through history doesn’t make me ignorant, since there is no way of knowing and history’s truth doesn’t dictate how I live, or who I have sex with. It simply is what it is.

> Religion can be shown to be false and fabricated however and quite easily if you aren’t brainwashed to disregard the facts and evidence and only mentally conditioned into believing a lie.

> I really couldn’t care less if I am being fed inaccurate history, but I do care about being brainwashed into worshipping one of thousands of non-existent nonsensical deities throughout history that have been worshipped on no evidence, brainwashing and lies.

> These lies which are responsible for endless billions of atrocities in history and responsible for unsurpassed misery and human rights violations!

– Beercan then goes on to “nitpick” about how I am “nitpicking” that there isn’t any evidence of Jesus outside of the bible in anything earlier than the 2nd century and over 80 years after Jesus’s supposed death. (How is this not important again?) I’m pretty sure that’s important.

> Uh I think that was the whole point I was trying to make BeerCan since on no level of rationality does that make it credible.

> I mean think think about what you just said, how does this count as any credible evidence whatsoever?

– As for bringing up Paul again do remember how your buddy Ehrman said how unreliable Paul’s letters were.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A3qXQt6dYME

Please watch AGAIN til you finally grasp what we’re trying to tell you.

– Reminding BeerCan again how little I could care if historians got actual history wrong, or not, they most likely did get most of it wrong. WHO CARES?! It doesn’t affect my life!

> Please never waste my time with this irrelevant point that you have brought up again that you think has some significance when it doesn’t.

– The earliest COPIES of Paul’s letters is anywhere from 180-220 AD

> That’s pretty non-credible and pretty non-reliable and I fail to see how you could basically base your entire life off of the existence of one man and I don’t mean Jesus, I mean Paul.

> Reminding you again BeerCan that Paul never even met Jesus

> And I thought I was gullible when I was 14 and they told me wrestling was real.

> Let’s remove the supernatural and stick to actual realistic possibilities and see what we come up with…

Oh look:

https://inpursuitofhappiness.wordpress.com/2012/12/22/was-christianity-a-roman-government-plot/

– As for BeerCan’s ramblings and time wasting about the Osiris thing being beaten to death he might actually want to do some research on Roman gods.

> I don’t think BeerCan knows about how many gods Romans worshipped before christianity and who.

> He might wanna investige that.

Here’s a good one Beercan needs to watch in it’s entirety:

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

> I believe Osiris is mentioned about 18 minutes in, but it explains through unbiased historical research how christianity only exists because of the vanity of a mad man.

> There are many gods mentioned.

> BeerCan might also be curious to hear about what is seriously hijacked from other religions as told by unbiased professional historians.

– Then BeerCan starts rambling about if he were to show a blog I would be against it and I’d freakout.

> Whatever BeerCan.

> Why would I if it was unbiased and historically accurate and listed sources that could be verified and demonstrated organization and perspective?

– So let’s go over the sources of gods that Murdock mentions that BeerCan is so against and in such a huff about:

Serapis:

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

Osiris:

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

Explains how Osiris evolved into Serapis eventually.

– So BeerCan then finishes up by saying I cherry pick and don’t expect people to check my sources. He then finishes with how I’m failing miserably.

> So not only has BeerCan not made any relevant point that really affected anything I said in the article I posted, but he completely wasted his time saying he was demonstrating how he bested me in any way, which of course he didn’t, but was completely rude and obnoxious and came across as a total douche as usual.

Way to go BeerCan. You just demonstrated 6 things in my favor and I really didn’t have to do anything but respond back to you.

1) You demonstrated typical religious stupidity.

2) You showed everyone exactly how I described you.

3) You made no valid point whatsoever, but stupidly thought you did, which makes you look even worse.

4) You reaffirmed my points about how and why there is no evidence of christianity.

5) You amused everyone by how you grasped at straws and wasted time nit-picking irrelevant things and saying irrelevant pointless insults.

– This simply demonstrates what happens when christians attempt to defend the validity and evidence of their religion.

6) You also demonstrated the mind and behavior of someone who is a completely brainwashed victim of a lie who believes things based on no evidence whatsoever.

So thank you. Look forward to your next obnoxiously rude, or creepy exchanges that go nowhere and show christianity to be nothing but a pointless lie that has no evidence.
———-

May 6-Tuesday/2014

So I notice that Beercan has posted another blog link attacking my article on the meaningless evidence of Jesus.

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

He really is a weirdo. He actually found a mistake I made, which was very helpful to me that he told me and for the cause of Atheism, which helps me more expose biblical nonsense and also gave me an article link of world renowned historian Richard Carrier to prove what I was saying even further.

Very similar to as if Beercan worked for the mafia and and I was a cop and he just told me I looked in the wrong place to find the bodies. With all the lies and nonsense in the bible who can keep track.

Still proves nothing on Beercan’s part though and he even admits that the link he provided by Richard Carrier debunks anything that Thalius had supposedly written even further. This of course merely makes me wonder if he even knows how to dress himself in the morning.

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 Beercan latching on to believing that happened.

Like this very brainwashed muslim Richard Dawkins talked to and debated:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GGgw9YvXK-A

Beercan then says:

“Now, BB(s)J fails to mention Thallus is NOT a Christian. He was a pagan historian.”

Right, which means nothing when being forged by a christian hundreds of years later.

He then pathetically offers a quote from Phlegnon which is supposed to be evidence of anything even though Phlegnon was born 47 years after Jesus supposedly died and supposedly wrote his quote, as shown here from Beercan in the Phlegnon quote of 137 AD:

“Greek Historian Phlegon wrote: In the fourth year of the 202nd Olympiad, there was an eclipse of the Sun which was greater than any known before and in the sixth hour of the day it became night; so that stars appeared in the heaven; and a great Earthquake that broke out in Bithynia destroyed the greatest part of Nicaea.”

Again as I show the reference to several reasons why it’s meaningless here:

http://jesusbirthermovement.tumblr.com/post/39070539535/christian-apologist-secular-source-evidence-for

Beercan then rambles about how I am merely giving my OPINION that this quote is meaningless, but I fail to see on what level this quote could be anything else BUT meaningless?

Let’s review:

– Born 47 years later, so wasn’t there

– Written 80 years later by hearsay sources

– No records that the above quote was said except from biased christian sources only, hundreds of years later.

As I say in the article that Beercan is attacking and for which he pretends I didn’t say these things:

[1]- Sextus Juilius Africanus (200 years after Jesus supposedly died)

[2]- Origen (200 years after Jesus supposedly died)

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

[3]- Eusebius (300 years after Jesus supposedly died)

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

[4]- Saint. Jerome (300 years after Jesus supposedly died)

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

[5]- Philipon (500 years after Jesus supposedly died)

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

c) Again the same thing as with Thallus, Phlegon’s work is only supported by christians who’s life consisted of being brainwashed and worshipping Jesus.

Now Beercan says that we have reasons to believe that Thallus wasn’t lying, but I don’t think that Beercan seems to grasp what I was even saying.

– I never said that Sextus was lying (though I do think he was but that isn’t the point) I never said that. Though yes I did imply it, but whether Sextus thought he was telling the truth, or not is irrelevant.

– I said that the evidence is completely non-credible (because it is) and no court in the world could logically accept it as such, or does Beercan think that Mohammed fly to the moon on a winged horse?

– This is not evidence for anything and there is more evidence that Joseph Smith found golden plates and talked to an angel in the 1800s which I’m sure Beercan doesn’t believe.

Then Beercan says the following opinion about me about my views:

“1) Time alone is not enough reason to discount a writing as “non-credible.”
2) Nor is that all we know of what a person said or wrote comes from second hand sources.”

So let’s see here….

As for number one well that is a silly thing and pointless statement to say when you consider how vague that is and circumstantial.

– No eye witnesses
– Biased writers
– Hundreds of years later
– Motive and agenda for lying
– We have to take their word

Beercan continues to imply that I’m delusional for saying this isn’t credible. Is he for real?

As for number two. There still is no possible way any sane or rational being takes these as credible sources as evidence of a rabbi who created the universe and was squashed like a mosquito.

Anyway, Beercan seems to be doing nothing but implying that I’m only giving opinions, but then agrees with my opinions that he doesn’t find Thallus credible either.

I thought I would also add the confirmed forgeries added to the new testament itself. Since Beercan keeps implying that christians lying and forging are such a silly concept. Let’s remind him of how many there are and in the gospel canon:

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

Also the gospels themselves.

http://edward-t-babinski.blogspot.ca/2013/04/christian-forgeries-endings-of-gospel.html?m=1

Mark 16:9-19 (think of how many people died from poison snakes)

So I present you ladies and gentleman Beercan christian, my latest tool (and I do mean tool) of showing the stupidity, brainwashing and denial of the christian mind and how there is no logical reason to be a christian, or any other religion for that matter.
—————

Wednesday, May 7, 2014

Then in more pointless Beercan fashion he writes the following short article, which is so short that I’ll just paste the whole thing here:

“I’m famous! (Not really)

BB(s)J decided to do a blog post me! I haven’t read it yet, but you can here: https://thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/the-beercan-chronicles/

I did skim and see he did offer questions and challenged, which I may address some at a later time.

Since you can’t comment on his blog, feel free to do so here, especially if you feel he’s made a valid point.

Peace and Love folks!”

Beercan then goes the next step further and tweets that he hasn’t gotten around to reading this yet and will do it some time which is of course him trying to play some kind of “annoying game” for some reason and then says “I thought you said you weren’t going to read my stuff”. So of course we know he’s read this and Beercan is just saying that, but it isn’t surprising he’s doing this cause it is the kind of small minded behavior someone like Beercan would do.
————

May 7, Wednesday/2014

Ok here’s a new update from Beercan attacking my article on why all “evidence” of Jesus is meaningless, because it isn’t in the entire 1st century and not from outside sources of the bible, which is a work of fiction.

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

He’s made a part 3 (oooh exciting). Let’s see how he proves any of the “evidence” as “not-completely meaningless”. So far he hasn’t shown anything to be credible evidence and even agreed with me and provided more evidence to say that it further proves the evidence to be meaningless, but let’s hear what he has to say.

Let’s dissect what Beercan says in the following:

“As we have seen BB(s)J’s aresnal is quiet lacking. That is, the tools he uses are pretty much all him: opinion, rhetoric, logical fallacies, bias, and attacks. Oh and ignorance of facts. And lo and behold! He comes to the conclusion that none of the evidence is evidence of anything!”

So let’s just examine this:

Opinion- No Beercan. Let me explain again since you don’t seem to get that I’m not giving OPINION, that would be YOU.

a) Outside of the bible (which has no evidence and is complete fiction with multiple contradictions and a political agenda for control, power and financial gain). That’s what I’m looking for.

b) Within the 1st century.

c) Not hundreds of years later based on hearsay alone.

d) The writer was alive DURING the time of the events, not decades to centuries later.

e) The sources were non-christian and not said by multiple scholars that they were simple forgeries with an agenda.

These aren’t my OPINION Beercan these are how a rational human being thinks and if you can’t read a-e and see how this truly does discount any evidence of Jesus as meaningless, then it really does show people how illogical and stupid the brainwashed christian mind is.

So thanks again.

Rhetoric- Beercan looooves to say “rhetoric” over and over and for some reason thinks merely saying the word “rhetoric” even makes a point. I mean he really is an imbecile.

– Let’s go over the dictionary what it means.

As a noun- “Rhetoric is the art of using words well when speaking or writing.”

“The art of using language, especially public speaking, as a means to persuade.
Meaningless language with an exaggerated style intended to impress.
It’s only so much rhetoric.”

– There really is nothing I’m saying Beercan that isn’t truth or fact and everytime you use the word “rhetoric” is nothing more than pointless and meaningless and you again just make christianity look bad.

– I really would love to hear your definition, or what you think it means.

– If things ARE NOT evidence, they’re NOT EVIDENCE and no amount of faith, or denial will change that.

– By the way Beercan, you have NO RHETORIC.

– You don’t even check your grammer in your blog and your use of the english language and how you word things is beyond painful.

Logical fallacies- Well Beercan can say that all he wants, but…

– He’s still brainwashed
– He still has no evidence to believe his religion
– His religion still makes no sense whatsoever
– There still is no difference than Beercan’s religion and the thousands of others throughout history that are not believed by him
– When he dies he will still simply fade into non-existence and will have wasted all his time defending his stupid religion which is the most evil and destructive thing that ever existed.

Bias- Actually no. The reasons I’m listing are simply the facts and I simply listed above how and why the “evidence” of Jesus is meaningless, BECAUSE THEY ARE.

– The fact that these completely meaningless pieces of evidence are being pushed to be believed by Beercan, demonstrates HIS bias, not mine.

Attacks- Yes I will continue to attack religion as long as there are people like Beercan who exist and show the world how irrational, stupid, delusional and overall insane people can be.

Ignorance of facts- Beercan still has not shown how any evidence of Jesus has any credibility.

There is nothing in the above opinion section a-e that doesn’t demonstrate how nothing of the “evidence” of Jesus I talk about isn’t completely non-credible and completely unreliable, so I think Beercan is the one who is completely ignorant of what a fact even is.

Beercan then brings up the Alexander the great argument again, because he thinks that because history accepts information about a person who wasn’t supernatural and there was no evidence for, except for stories hundreds of years later, it automatically makes the non-credible Jesus stories credible.

Isn’t that again hilarious that Beercan doesn’t believe the multiple supernatural stories from other religions that have the same amount of evidence as Jesus and christianity.

The same evidence of Adam and Eve, Noah’s ark and the flood and bears killing a bunch of kids for calling a guy “baldie”.

Evolution of course disproves Adam and Eve (Jesus talks about Adam and Eve).

Real evidence and real science disproves Noah’s ark and the flood.

And seriously? Who are we kidding about the kids and the bears? How loving and compassionate of God. Great story. Derp derp.

Beercan then says I use my usual bias and faulty logic. HAHAHAHA

That really hurts coming from someone who is religious.

Beercan is saying I’m biased because I don’t believe things that make no sense, have no evidence and are not credible for multiple number of reasons. That hardly counts as biased, but rational.

Beercan is saying he isn’t biased I guess, or not acknowledging that he believes non-credible things without evidence and believes his contradictory, evidenceless religion and messiah are real. He also is biased that he isn’t brainwashed, when that is the only way anyone could believe such ridiculous religions based on no evidence and denying science and counter evidence.

Beercan next says I’m using faulty logic, but is of course either insane, lying, stupid, or really never put any thought in what this means.

Let’s go over this ONE MORE TIME!

a) No reliable, or credible evidence OUTSIDE of the bible.

– The bible is not proof of anything and the bible cannot prove the bible.

b) Within the first century and not based completely off of hearsay.

Like maybe from some of these people:

http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/rmsbrg02.htm

c) Not hundreds of years later and based on hearsay.

d) The writer was alive and not born decades to hundreds of years later from previous events.

e) The sources are supposed to be non-christian and not said by multiple historians and scholars to be forgeries.

So this is faulty logic how this is credible, or reliable again how?

Beercan then ends this entry by saying this:

“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.”

So let’s go over this AGAIN and maybe, just maybe Beercan will finally get it:

– A hundred years later was SUPPOSEDLY written about by someone WHO WASN’T THERE.

– Was ONLY quoted 200-500 years later by christians.

– They talk about an ECLIPSE anyway, not Jesus.

– Documented by people with an agenda ( since when has Beercan been able to give a defense that the church hasn’t lied, deceived and been completely corrupt since the beginning?)

Whether Beercan accepts it, or not, these make it completely non-credible. The funniest thing again is how Beercan agrees with me in his last article before this one and straight out agrees that it isn’t credible about Thallus being credible. That was funny.

Am I the only one who wishes that Beercan would go over his entries and fix the grammer and spelling by the way?

Look forward to more articles from Beercan to show how delusional, pathetic and brainwashed christians can be. Beercan seems to have slowed down though. Hope he doesn’t stop and he keeps on going.
————-

May 10/Saturday 2014

So I’ve been pretty busy with school and work and rather irritated lately with the approximately 20 Atheist defenders of religion on Twitter that defend religion for some reason, attack my brainwashing confrontations I have, say things that imply that I’m childish while they behave childishly and say childish things. In fact I have my suspicions about one of the Atheist religion defenders in particular being Beercan himself, but I can’t confirm this.

Beercan is so warped and demented that I wouldn’t put it past him to pretend to be an Atheist on Twitter. Either way I really couldn’t care less anymore about what he says or the what the Atheist religion defenders say. I have my own things going on.

So being both bored and completely disgusted with these 20 in the Atheist community, I have closed my Twitter accounts and will be focusing on my education of science, biology and philosophy as I have been doing, in my war against religion, aswell as psychology. I have decided to get involved in psychology in order to prove and expose the harms, dangers, and all the negative things about religion and brainwashing being the only reason people are religious. A degree in each field should be more than helpful.

Anyways, let’s respond to Beercan and his ridiculous blog posts of misleading lies, nonsense and unbelievable delusion.

Here we have Beercan responding to these blog chronicles this far and it’s past responses to his responses….

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

Enjoy.

Beercan says

“BB(s)J Responds!
Back on the 6th of this month, BB(s)J posted a response to my critique of HIS critique of the extra Biblical evidence that Christians have provided for him.

You can find his post here: https://thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com/2014/05/02/the-beercan-chronicles/

You will have to scroll down a ways to get to it.

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.”
—————

LOL Who does Beercan think he’s kidding? He thinks that simply dismissing what I say is actually doing anything.

Beercan is simply doing the classic apologetics move where he implies things that aren’t true, simply by saying something is a certain way, but doing nothing more than projecting something that absolutely ISN’T true.

Let’s list a few things that I have said that Beercan has not done.

1) He has not given any “evidence” of Jesus outside of the bible any credibility.

2) He has not given reason to believe any of the evidence was not one or more of the following:

– Not evidence within the 1st century

– Not rewritten hundreds of years later by biased christian scribes

– Had no convincing evidence the person that was talked about was even Jesus

– Believed and shown by multiple scholars to be forgeries.

– Not outside of the fictional bible and fictional gospels, which contradicts itself and is historically inaccurate

I will remind you that any of the above demonstrates that the evidence is non-credible, funny how all the “evidence” each has multiple ways that they are non-credible.

Beercan continues….

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

No, Beercan is simply projecting his nonsense and lying. Beercan has still not made any of the evidence of Jesus outside of the bible credible, believable, or real in any way shape, or form.

He has done nothing but do what he has done from the start of his belief. Whether that was from childhood indoctrination, or brainwashed at a later age by being caught in an emotional vulnerability that was exploited. I think he told me many months ago, but I forget. This is the thing that is called “faith” that Beercan has and nothing else.

This is what “faith” is:

– Believing things without evidence.

– Wanting something to be true.

– Not a reason to believe something but a lack of a reason to believe something.

Again, the only reason Beercan believes HIS religion and not someone else’s is because of brainwashing to christianity and not another religion that told him “evidence” and he blindly would have believed every word. Simple as that.

Beercan continues….

“Lastly, he goes off on a different line of discussion, most likely due to the lack of actual argument in the first place. Common tactic for those with weak arguments, change the argument.

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.

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

Fascinating. Beercan is simply now deflecting my point by saying that the point was irrelevant, but thinks that saying that “there is more evidence of Jesus (which is zero) than Alexander the great (a non politically motivated, non-religious figure which by all chances could be wrong) is relevant to any sort of “proof”.

I will of course go over my point again to explain to Beercan how relevant it was (which he of course knows it was, but is just deflecting).

– 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.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GGgw9YvXK-A

– 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)

– What I would like Beercan to explain to everyone is how he has “faith” that a letter written from someone who doesn’t mention Jesus, but mentions people of the time frame of Socrates and Pythagoras which are 5th century and 6th century B.C (which are in the same paragraph as the “wise jewish king” reference, could possibly be perceived as credible?

– 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)

– So Mara Bar-Seropian could easily have been referring to someone else in the past 600 years.

– Again, no name was mentioned.

– This is “faith” and Beercan is basing someone whose entire existence is politically and financially motivated that people MUST believe, or Trillions of dollars are lost, on nothing but faith.

Now as for ME defending myself, let’s get somethings clear right now:

– I’m not the one who believes things without evidence (that’s Beercan)

– 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

– Everything I acknowledge to be true is proven by science, archaeology, chemistry and NASA

> Evolution

> Big Bang

> Every single religion exposed as both a lie and having no evidence

– The last time I checked, not one single thing in the bible, or christianity was backed, or supported by science, or even history
————

So bottom line:

– Beercan hasn’t disproved a single thing

– Beercan has lied

– Beercan has projected his lies and deluded himself into thinking that he is actually making a point when he isn’t and deluded himself to think that anyone would accept anything Beercan says
———————————-

May 14/Wednesday/ 2014

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

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

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

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

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

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

So let’s begin.

Beercan says….

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

“On to number five!

BB(s)J tell us what it is:

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

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

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

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

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

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

See here if he hasn’t fixed it yet:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

– Lucian wasn’t there.

– Lucian never knew Jesus.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

– Or within the entire 1st century

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Beercan continues…

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

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

Let me explain why:

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

> Seriously?

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

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

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

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

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

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

Beercan continues….

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Beercan continues….

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

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

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

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

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

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

> 400 years?

> 500? 600? 800? 1000? What?

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

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

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

> Forgeries

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

> Biased christian ONLY sources

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ok Beercan is making no sense here.

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

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

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

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

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

– He wouldn’t.

– He thought they were delusional anyways.

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

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

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

Oh I read it alright.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But I wasn’t even saying that actually.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Seriously Beercan?

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

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

– The power of hearsay is all that is necessary.

As Beercan’s buddy Ehrman explains:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

> Born 92 years later.

> Wrote about Jesus 130 years later.

> Never knew Jesus.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Now Beercan is just outright lying.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

c) Lucian wasn’t even born til 125

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

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

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

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

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

– No body of Jesus

– No eyewitnesses despite what the gospels said

– Nothing but biased christian sources

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

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

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

In a way, BB(s)J is right!”
—————

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

> Beercan would be the slave of a lie

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Let’s list a bunch of reasons and examples:

– Child indoctrination

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

> Preying on people who are emotionally and mentally vulnerable

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

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

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

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

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

– There’s brainwashed, or not brainwashed.

– Curable, or uncurable
.
.
Beercan continues….

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

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

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

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

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

> The motivation was there.

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

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

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

Yep, more irrelevance…”
———–

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

– A lie that Beercan has no evidence for

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

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

Ok now Beercan is both deflecting AND being stupid.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

> Nothing about Jesus makes any sense.

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

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

Except when the statements are NOT irrelevant.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

More irrelevance!”
————

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1) was written 100 years after Jesus’ death.

2) doesn’t address Jesus by name.

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

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

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

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

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

– Lucian wasn’t there.

– Lucian never knew Jesus.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

– Or within the entire 1st century.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

May 15-Thursday-2014

YAAY! Another article of christianity’s last hope, Beercan christian. With more projection, deflection, delusion, lying, dismissals, moving the goalposts and telling us that he is proving things when he clearly isn’t.

So let’s go on to see what he says about Tacitus…..

Ladies and gentleman I give you Beercan christian….

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

“BB(s)J vs. Jesus Part 6: Tacitus
Well according to BB(s)J’s list we only have five more to go through! Well, no need for ceremony let’s get to it!

6) TACITUS 56-117 AD was a Roman historian and in 115 AD wrote a document which mentions how stupid and crazy he thought christians were, mentions “Christus” and talks about Pontius Pilot killing Jesus.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacitus_on_Christ

It’s was a bit more than just a “document.”

In case you don’t want to bother with the links, here’s the important info:

• the passage in question is but a part of a larger work called Annals, in book 15, chapter 44.

• Annals, according was a 16 book work, however books “7-10 and parts of books 5, 6, 11 and 16 are missing. Book 6 ends with the death ofTiberius and books 7–12 presumably covered the reigns of Caligula and Claudius.”

• “The context of the passage is the six-dayGreat Fire of Rome that burned much of the city in AD 64 during the reign of Roman Emperor Nero.[2] The passage is one of the earliest non-Christian references to theorigins of Christianity, the execution of Christ described in the Canonical gospels, and the presence and persecution of Christians in 1st-century Rome.[3][4]”
—————

Well just look at Beercan acting all confident and proud of himself for saying nothing at all of any significance.

Well let’s break this down then shall we?

http://jesusbirthermovement.tumblr.com/post/53407323586/christian-apologist-secular-source-evidence-for

http://www.truthbeknown.com/pliny.htm

– As the story goes Nero blamed christians for the great fire of Rome in 64 AD. However the only record of this persecution of “christiani” (who they weren’t even called yet) was through sources shown to be talking about people that were simple common knowledge.

> There were no multitudes of christians living in Rome yet at that time and barely in Judea, even if the passage were truly written by Tacitus.

> The accounts of Tacitus’ christian references with the improperly spelled “Christus” and talk of christians wasn’t discovered til the 14th century and has been said for many reasons to be a forgery.

> Funny that christians were the only people with access to this information for 14 centuries.

There are evidence and reasons to show the Tacitus references of Jesus to be a forgery and explain why:

http://www.mountainman.com.au/essenes/author_Tacitus.htm

http://www.fromchristtojesus.org/English/DrillDown/Tacitus.htm

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2UgO8fAJVVM

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlE89XULcrk

– I mean the evidence of these christian references being forgeries just from these two websites above really is great stuff.

– The fact that what I put in my article was quite sufficient enough and that Beercan caused me to look up more demonstrations of how Tacitus’ quotes were meaningless and non-credible, really helped me out.

> I’m going to right now add the 2 above website links to my “Evidence of Jesus Is Meaningless” article that will make it indeniable that the Tacitus stuff were forgeries.

> Thanks Beercan. These exchanges really do help my war on religion and showing how fake, nonsensical and evil christianity and religion in general really are.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“• Tacitus is thought of as one of the greatest Roman historians.

As Wikipedia puts it: “Tacitus makes use of the official sources of the Roman state: the acta senatus (the minutes of the session of the Senate) and theacta diurna populi Romani (a collection of the acts of the government and news of the court and capital). He also read collections of emperors’ speeches, such as Tiberius andClaudius. He is generally seen as a scrupulous historian who paid careful attention to his sources. The minor inaccuracies in the Annals may be due to Tacitus dying before he had finished (and therefore proof-read) his work.”
—————–

– Well it is interesting that Eusubius had access supposedly to all, or most of Tacitus’ work and is the one who made a collection of references to christianity and Jesus, but that these references were not quoted until the 14th century by anyone.

– Even more interesting that Tacitus and Sulpicius Severus had very similar quotes, except that Sulpicius only mentions christians.

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

Here is the quote from Sulpicius. Let me know if this sounds similar, or sounds suspicious?

“In the meantinme, the number of the Christians being now very large, it happened that Rome was destroyed by fire, while Nero was stationed at Antium. But the opinion of all cast the odium of causing the fire upon the emperor, and he was believed in this way to have sought for the glory of building a new city. And in fact Nero could not, by any means he tried, escape from the charge that the fire had been caused by his orders. He therefore turned the accusation against the Christians, and the most cruel tortures were accordingly inflicted upon the innocent. Nay, even new kinds of death were invented, so that, being covered in the skins of wild beasts, they perished by being devored by dogs, while many were crucified or slain by fire, and not a few were set apart for this purpose, that, when the day came to a close, they should be consumed to serve for light during the night. In this way, cruelty first began to be manifested against the Christians.”

– Interesting again that Sulpicius never referenced Tacitus to anyone.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“In short, Tacitus was no dummy and took great pride in getting this accurate. And more importantly HAD the means and want to check his facts.

In short: he didn’t make shit up nor should we expect him to write anything he didn’t think was a reliable source.”
—————-

– More interesting that this wasn’t til the 14th century that Tacitus’s quotes about christianity were even mentioned when so many christians would have jumped on the chance if they knew, such as Eusebius. Interesting that he never did, but was fully aware of Tacitus’ writings.
.
.
Beercan continues….

“So let’s see what BB(s)J has to say about this:

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

I continue wonder if BB(s)J reads what he talks about, or doesn’t fully comprehend what he reads, or just assumes he knows and needs not look any further…

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.”
—————-

Ok I think that we have now established that this isn’t really “Beercan christian”. This is either someone else I’m talking to, or maybe Beercan christian never existed.

This is definitely “Crackpipe christian”.

– Since when was I talking about ALL of Tacitus’s work? I wasn’t.

– I was talking about the Christus section that talked about christians. Duh.

– Let’s throw an example for Crackpipe to hopefully follow.

> Say that tomorrow a bunch of buddhist monks lit themselves on fire in a protest for something, maybe broke a bunch of bricks over their heads even.

> Say that someone asked Crackpipe what a buddhist was.

> Say that Crackpipe looked it up and discovered what a buddhist was.

> Part of being a buddhist is following BUDDHA!

> Does Crackpipe believe in Buddha? NO he doesn’t.

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

> If someone were to ask Crackpipe to describe “buddhists”, Crackpipe would then give a brief description of buddhists and ADD and DESCRIBE the fact that Buddha ate his last meal and became ill and left his mortal body to transcend to that religion’s version of heaven because of his acheivement of a certain “state of mind”.

> Crackpipe would be ADDING TO THE STORY, like Tacitus was adding to the story when he explained some details about what the crazy christians he thought were such idiots, believed.

> Is Crackpipe aware of any HISTORICAL evidence of Buddha? NO!

> Does Crackpipe think that maybe the stories of Buddha could have simply evolved on their own from just MYTH and HEARSAY alone? Curious.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“The passage in question is available in the links provided.

Tacitus wrote: “.”Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace..Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome,”

Then he continues on about the torture of Chtistians.”
————-

Right Crackpipe. That is what christians believed.

– Not written within the 1st century, but the 2nd century.

– Strong evidence of forgery.

– Even if Tacitus did write it, there’s no reason he would have called him “Christus”.

– No mention of Jesus name, or whatever it was.

– Tacitus never knew Jesus.

– Tacitus wasn’t there.

– If the quote was real he was simply repeating what it was that christians believed.

– Again, just like Mormons pass on to everyone that Joseph Smith received golden plates from an angel and Mohammed flew to heaven on a winged horse and split the moon, even people who don’t believe it and think it is ridiculous.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“BB(s)J continues with:

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

Well as we know, from the links BB(s)J gives us, Tacitus wasn’t one to just “repeat” claims or rumors. He was a proud and “scrupulous” historian”.
————–

– Ok let’s try and explain this to Crackpipe nice and clear because he just doesn’t seem to be getting it.

> Say that someone asked Crackpipe about what a “Mithraean” was….

> So Crackpipe looked it up, or explained to the person what he might have possibly known already….

> That Mithreans worshipped Mithra, or as some called him “Mithras” who was a “savior god” and “god of the sun”

> Is there any evidence Mithras really existed? No, just hearsay and stories.

> Are the many stories of Mithras true? Does Crackpipe believe them? I highly doubt it. A lot of Romans did though.

– The fact that Crackpipe might know of the story behind Mithra isn’t evidence, but simply evidence that he looked it up, or knew something about Mithreans and Mithras.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…..

“And we know of two ways the Christians made this “claim” about Jesus. Spoken word and writings, that eventually became the Gospels.”
———–

Crackpipe confuses the above for being something that’s not what it is, which is hearsay, making up stories, being gullible, child indoctrination, being brainwashed by having an emotional vulnerability exploited, being a victim and being a predator also.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Tacitus is no friend of the Christian. Yet BB(s)J wants us to believe that Tacitus is “just repeating” what Christians are saying and that Tacitus would use Christian sources at all, and ONLY, for his material.

Tacitus also says “one of our procurators” when referring to Pilate. Note “our.”

Does BB(s)J truly want us to buy into the idea that Tacitus knows about Pilate ONLY via Christian sources and wouldn’t use Roman sources?”
————-

LOL Actually that’s not quite what I’m saying there Crackpipe, well kinda actually, but the problem is that that wasn’t my point.

– My point is that this ISN’T EVIDENCE for many reasons and the fact that there’s nothing proving otherwise regarding where Tacitus got his info is one of them.

– Also the fact that there is evidence that the “Christus” reference was just an inserted forgery added sometime from 130-1400 AD.

– Also the fact that this chapter 15 paragraph 44 wasn’t written in 64 AD it was written in 116 AD and last I checked all information about christianity and what THEY BELIEVED was quite common knowledge by then.

> Since when did common knowledge of what a bunch of crazy people believed become evidence of anything?

> A belief is a faith and faith is believing something to be true.

> Believing something to be true because you have “evidence” is very close to “KNOWING” but believing something without evidence is just that (believing).

> Linus BELIEVING in The Great Pumpkin…. doesn’t make The Great Pumpkin real.

What do you think? Linus sure had faith didn’t he? What a blockhead!

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7ushQ_mMSqw
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Highly unlikely given what we know about how Tacitus operated and his “love” of Christians.”
————–

So Crackpipe is now saying that just because Tacitus didn’t like christians and thought they were idiots, that he wouldn’t just be repeating what the silly twits believed.

– This isn’t hard to put as a likely scenerio whatsoever.

– It especially isn’t hard to believe if it amused him and he didn’t give 2 farts and thought their story so ridiculous that he just assumed everyone reading it would be just as amused and knew the joke.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

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

Instead all the paragraph had was something that could have been the following:

– A forged verse with “Christus” added.

– Repeating what was common knowledge to everyone about what they believed and what he thought was ridiculous.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

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

Yep. Like repeating that story in Leviticus that so many christians believe about curing leprocy by splashing them with doves blood.

– If someone merely told the story about what christians believed about the leprocy cure wouldn’t justify it as evidence, but of the retelling of a ridiculous story and belief.

– Similar to the omnipotent master of the universe getting crucified, being some sort of benefit and significant anything to anyone, because of no reason whatsoever.

> Just another nonsensical story that’s not any more or less stupid then the many thousands of religions and stupid stories, customs and beliefs that go along with it.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Bb(s)J is showing lack of understanding of what is written, of history, and of names.

Tacitus wrote:
“… called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin …”

Though the name “Jesus” isn’t used, Christus (Christ) is: by which we get the word “Christian” from. As Tacitus rightly says.”
————–

At this point Crackpipe’s dead horse is so dead from me beating it with a sledge hammer that I could start canning it as dog food.

– This is proof of nothing that Crackpipe is saying.

– Telling stories of Batman does not make Batman real.

– Telling the story of someone else’s insanity does not make their insanity real.

– “Buddha” was also the name of an interesting title. Buddha means “awakened one” or “the enlightened one.” “Buddha” is also used as a title for the first awakened being in an era.

> No evidence of Buddha existing outside of just myth and story either.

> Just because Buddha has a name that means something doesn’t mean something is true.

– Crackpipe’s explanation and marvellng of what Tacitus might, or might not have said is no different than if someone was talking about Spiderman.

> “He has the powers of a spider, with his speed, strength and webs and he’s a man…. he’s a spider man. This is where we get the name Spiderman from”

DUH! So what?
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Most people WOULD and DO understand this IS a reference to Jesus, BB(s)J tries to argue it isn’t:

– “Christus” means “messiah”, or “anointed one”.
– This just means that “they followed some guy”.
————

Except that….

– It could be based on a forgery.

> I showed multiple reasons why here:

http://www.fromchristtojesus.org/English/DrillDown/Tacitus.htm

http://www.mountainman.com.au/essenes/review_EVOCC.htm

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2UgO8fAJVVM

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlE89XULcrk

– It could be talking about the simple common knowledge about christians that everyone knew about at that time that Crackpipe is trying to make us forget.

– So evidence of nothing for Crackpipe AGAIN!
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Point one: correct.

However, this doesn’t dispute that Tacitus is referring to Jesus and not just “some guy.”
————–

Of course it does and as many times as Crackpipe says otherwise doesn’t change the fact that Tacitus is either simply parroting a definition that is common knowledge to everyone, or this is a meaninglesss forgery.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“I find it interesting that while BB(s)J gave us the etymology of the name “Jesus” he doesn’t for “Christ.”
—————–

Isn’t that common knowledge though about “Christ”? The definition I mean?

– Just figured everyone knew.

– Also, isn’t the thought process that you get “christian” from “christ” kind of well…. a given?

> I wonder how long it took Crackpipe to make the connection that “christ” is where the word “christian” comes from?

> I say “10 years”.

> I also say that when he discovered that “christian” comes from the word “christ”, he felt like he just learned how to fold time and space, or something.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Well I will: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ”
——————

LOL See what I mean?

– Who hasn’t looked at this before?

– What differerence does this definition of “christ” make if it’s just a forged document?

– What difference does it make if he is just documenting common knowledge that everybody knew at that time in HISTORY?

> This is no different than a historian in the 80’s documenting that the band “The Thompson Twins” had 3 members, not 2 and one of them was a girl and they looked nothing alike. (Common knowledge at that time).
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“So by the time of Tacitus’ writings (and well before) it was well established that “Christ” was synonymous with “Jesus.” That is, it was common knowledge.
—————

Yep. That is what I said. 😉
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.

Thus we have EVERY reason to accept that Tacitus was referring to Jesus.”
————-

Argh. This has become painful dealing with Captain Obvious Crackpipe here.

– Yeah, no kidding.

> I thought he was talking about Bababooey or maybe Fred the elephant boy.

– Again, there is some strong suggestions and reasonable demonstrations of how it could be forged.

– AGAIN he was speaking about things that were common knowledge that everyone was aware of about what the crazy christians believed.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Point two: not really correct given what we just addressed in point one.”
————-

Ok. Whatever that means and whatever this is refering to.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“It is quite clear that Tacitus IS talking about Jesus.”
—————-

Which scenerio? The forgery, or the fact that it was common knowledge, or both?

– Both right?
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Then BB(s)J says this: “- 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.”
——————

I really don’t know how many times I can write this same stuff over and over to Crackpipe before it sinks in.

– I also am thinking these exchanges will be great to use on my someday university paper on religious brainwashing when I eventually take psychology.

> Evidence about how religion harms thinking processes and in a sense causes brain damage.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Well, we know Tacitus wasn’t an idiot and there were Romans sources upon which he got his information on, that his writing were IN te second century is of little concern.”
—————-

I never said Tacitus was an idiot.

– The 2 points that Crackpipe thinks were such a big deal were just common knowledge, even if it wasn’t a forgery, they were things that the christians blabbed and blabbed the same way Crackpipe blabs about christianity.

> Christus, meaning “christ” being where the word “christians” comes from.

> Whoopty-do. Big secret about what the crazy christians believed then WOW!
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“So it’s not based on hearsay but of historical record and investigation.”
————-

Not only is it based on hearsay, but stuff that the christians wouldn’t shut up about and made sure everyone knew about.

– In otherwords, just like every religion.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Now, BB(s)J has said he’s looking for evidence of Jesus: “Within the 1st century.”
—————–

Yes. This definitely wasn’t it.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…..

“As if centuries are some capsule, in which events happened in, rather than just a marking of time. That someone outside that century cannot know any facts about it.”
———————

These AGAIN are the facts:

-There are many many MANY good points and reasons why it could be a FORGERY.

> Please go over these reasons again:

http://www.fromchristtojesus.org/English/DrillDown/Tacitus.htm

http://www.mountainman.com.au/essenes/review_EVOCC.htm

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2UgO8fAJVVM

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlE89XULcrk

– This is SUPPOSEDLY written over 82 years later and not in the 1st century, but in the 2nd century from someone who wrote everything from hearsay and common knowledge regarding what psychotic brainwashed delusional people believed and preached to everyone.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“To look ONLY in the first century gives us ONLY 70 years at best. And ONLY that because Jesus’ death happened around 33AD. So we are down 33 years right off the bat!
—————

So at least we know he has grade 2 math skills and that’s more than I gave him credit for.

– I think what Crackpipe isn’t thinking about, or possibly is avoiding talking about, is the amount of delusion and made up nonsense through gossip that can happen in just 10 YEARS.

– There was no video, audio, internet, newspapers, radio, or trustworthy media of any kind.

– It was a superstitious world.

> People were gullible.

> People had no explanations for the world so they just made things up.

> There were thousands of gods and thousands of religions all over the world that were made up by superstitious, gullible people who made things up to explain the world.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Is that BB(s)J’s cut off then? Nothing written BEYOND 70 years can be counted for evidence? No history can accurately be recorded past that?”

What’s the magical difference between 99AD and 100Ad that history can’t overcome?

How about 80 years? Ten more years isn’t that much further in time. Well Tacitus’ writing in question is dated 83 years later. So 13 years shy of BB(s)J’s self-imposed cut off.”
—————–

Well this is rather pointless and irrational of Crackpipe, but whatever.

Let’s list some reasons and explanations since Crackpipe is basically telling us that he’s too stupid to think of any of these reasons on his own:

– The circumstances vary.

– There is no video, or audio, or pictures that happened while Jesus was supposed to have been alive.

– NOTHING was reliable, or trustworthy back then, but again let Crackpipe’s buddy Bart explain how things worked back then.

Goto the last 3 minutes of this 9 minute clip:

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

– Anything 5-10 years later in a time where people everywhere were superstitious, gullible and gossip almost had a life of it’s own, made things highly unreliable.

– In a time where historians could easily make things up and alter things of supernatural nature at will, if there were 10 honest historians, all that was needed was 1/10 dishonest historians that everyone got their past info from to screw everything up.

> For example:

Tacitus on Hercules and Ulysses im Germania Chapter 3

http://www.northvegr.org/histories%20and%20chronicles/tacitus%20germania%20in%20english%20and%20latin/001.html

> According to Crackpipe, since Tacitus is talking about Hercules and Ulysses then they must be real.

> Does Crackpipe believe in Hercules the son of Zeus? Of course not, or does he?

– The bottom line is that Crackpipe is the one who is basing the definitions of time being something that can be measured to be believable and said to have a standard of being believable, or not.

> I’m simply saying that if something has no evidence, or eyewitnesses and is nothing more than the hearsay of someone else, then it isn’t “credible” or “reliable” no matter how many years it is.

> If it’s 5 years with no credible witnesses, supernatural and far fetched stories, with motives that contradict otherwise non-political, or religious motivated stories, they are shown to be unreliable.

> The more years go by, the more time that people can get stories wrong, make stories up, forget details, lose data, memories and details are remembered differently and rewritten and they have forgeries done, change the stories to the way the rewriter scribe wants.

> These factors really aren’t hard to think of and I really don’t know why Crackpipe is telling us he doesn’t know why these factors are FACTORS.

> I mean seriously it took me like 2 minutes to think of those and could have thought of a lot more probably, but this reply chronicle is taking a long time and I’m almost done and at this point I just want to get this finished and post it, but Crackpipe just keeps saying the dumbest most pathetic things ever and I have to reply and expose every time wasting delusional thought of his.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Damn…

Now, of course we would expect that the knowledge of what is written was known PRIOR to the writing itself.”
————

Argh. Do you see what I mean?

– How would Crackpipe even have any idea what is genuine?

> What is reliable?

> What is trustworthy?

> What is fake?

> What is forged?

> What has an agenda?

> What is plagarism of another story?

– Crackpipe has shown us 3 THINGS

> If Jesus is in the story we should just believe it.

> If there is good reason to doubt something we should just make up every excuse to justify something and say that scenerio that works, no matter how outrageous is probably what happened.

> Never put any effort into seeing how something is unreliable and untrustworthy if it is something that doesn’t go along with proving Jesus, or conflicts with supporting your faith only religion that makes no sense.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…

“That is to say, what Tacitus wrote, while 83 years later, WAS known and/or recorded before: such as the fire during Nero in 65 AD. Tacitus’ recording of that event wasn’t in the first century either…”
————–

The reasons being:

– They all could have been forged by Eusebius.

> He had the motivation.

> He had the ability.

> He was highly suspicious on multiple occasions.

http://www.christianity-revealed.com/cr/files/fathereusebiustheforger.html

– They were talking about christians years later of which were common knowledge.

– Still not evidence of Jesus, but evidence that there were people who had a delusion and were brainwashed to a lie.

– No different than evidence that people were brainwashed and deceived to believe thousands of other religions that have no evidence, make no sense and were created from lies, stupidity, delusion, brainwashing and hearsay.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“In any case, we know this is only an issue for BB(s)J in which he provides NO justification for why it is an issue.”
—————–

No. I repeatedly showed how and why all the the things that are being attempted to be passed off as evidence, really are not evidence at all of anything and are completely non-credible and non-reliable. Take your pick.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Now, BB(s)J will continue his argument with his irrelevant points:”
————

Crackpipe can say that my points are irrelevant as many times as he wants, but I clearly show how things are NOT evidence because they are not reliable and clearly meaningless to be presented as evidence for Jesus.

– My demonstrations of identical forms of thinking are there to help Crackpipe see how his thought processes fail.

– If Crackpipe cannot relate to the thought comparisons and similar examples I provide, well that isn’t my fault, that’s his for being unwilling to acknowledge the comparisons.

– If Crackpipe is unwilling to accept my reasoning of how and why Crackpipe and others like him refuse to accept the evidence against the “evidence” being credible, or reliable, well that isn’t my fault.

– If I mention repeatedly how and why people like Crackpipe are religious in the first place, it isn’t irrelevant to him for some reason, but of course that is just deflection for him and nothing else.

> I’m clearly showing the base of how and why Crackpipe and others with his religious condition are religious in the first place which is what is causing Crackpipe to believe this non-reliable evidence and not other religions non-evidence.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- 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?
Tell me what u think:

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.”
————

So let’s get this straight Crackpipe:

– You saying that Alexander the great is accepted history because there is just as much evidence that is based on stories that can’t be proven, is relevant to you? (Which I did respond to by the way).

– My saying there is more evidence for mormonism and islam than christianity but that you weren’t brainwashed to them, just christianity, is irrelevant?

> Funny how whenever I expose CRACKPIPE’S brainwashing as the only reason Crackpipe accepts the ridiculous non-evidence of HIS religion as opposed to the ridiculous non-evidence of OTHER religions, that Crackpipe says that it’s irrelevant.

> If that isn’t evidence of deflection, dishonesty, delusion and brainwashing then I don’t know what is.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“To sum up: BB(s)J wants you, dear reader, to believe (despite ALL evidence to the contrary) that Tacitus (no lover of Christians, one of Rome’s BEST historians, who prided on using actual sources over “gossip”) took Christian sources over Roman sources in regards to the events and people involved in Christ’s crucifixion….”
————-

Ok well let’s just dissect what Crackpipe says here in the above paragraph:

– AGAIN, strong points on how and why this could easily be a forgery (which I have repeated several times AND posted links.

> Here they are AGAIN:

http://www.fromchristtojesus.org/English/DrillDown/Tacitus.htm

http://www.mountainman.com.au/essenes/review_EVOCC.htm

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2UgO8fAJVVM

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlE89XULcrk

– And AGAIN even if the lines about christians and christus were real….

> Where is all the other evidence if as you claim that Tacitus was using his “Roman sources” as you say?

> One paragraph in Tacitus’ entire writings that references “christianity” and the “title” of someone where the “christians” get their name from does not take an entire library of Rome to write.

> How was this not completely common knowledge what the paragraph said?

> Since when don’t christians blab to everyone everywhere about their delusional belief?

> I really would like Crackpipe to say what part about christianity the christians weren’t blabbing about?

> Interesting that Pilate’s name is mentioned (because he is written about in the fictional gospel stories that people were brainwashing others with) however Jesus’ name (whatever it was at that time) was not.

> Interesting that Tacitus mentions Hercules name, but not Jesus (he didn’t call him “the son of Zeus” but his name).

> Indicates that Crackpipe is willing to ignore anything and everything against his delusion, but accept ANYTHING to promote it in his mind.

> What Crackpipe is not willing to accept is that there is no truth to his entire religion, he is wasting his time and making a fool of himself, that all the thousands of religions on Earth are no different than Crackpipe’s, that no religion makes any truth, or has any evidence.

> Mostly though, what Crackpipe can’t accept and refuses to accept is that he is brainwashed and needs to free himself from the brainwashing.

> Why would anyone WANT to be brainwashed and be the slave of a lie?

> If Crackpipe would simply realize that there really is no evidence of christianity and that it is just a lie and a scam that is only believed because of brainwashing, then I’m sure he would respect himself a lot more.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.”
———–

So let’s dissect this now….

– 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!
.
.
Crackpipes continues….

“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.”
—————

I give multiple reasons over and over on why to not only reject it, but why it isn’t evidence, but I just know that Crackpipe isn’t getting this. That would just be too normal and too easy.

– I know I will just have to repeat things multiple times more, but I hope at some point things will sink in and register.

– I hope that any Atheist, agnostic, or maybe even a deist who is reading this, at least sees what I am talking about religious brainwashing and how illogical and irrational it is and helps me in my fight to try to reason with them and show them the truth until they eventually see it and stop indoctrinating children and brainwashing vulnerable people.
.
.
Crackpipes finishes this response….

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

No, we not only have no evidence of Jesus, but we have even more reason to believe that christianity only exists for the following reasons.

– Christianity started out small and barely noticable.

– Christianity was just one of many many religions that happened to be believed at for the first few 300 years and was no bigger, or more popular than any other.

– If it wasn’t for this psychopath Constantine who wasn’t even a christian, but used it anyway (just like Hitler used christianity as a tool for manipulating people) then christianity would have simply died out and faded away.

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

– If it wasn’t for this man Eusubius forging things and being conveniently THE ONLY source of multiple pieces of so called “evidence”, then christianity really would have lost a lot of push and pull and not had the deceptive propaganda it needed to get christianity where it is today.

http://www.christianity-revealed.com/cr/files/fathereusebiustheforger.html

– Also, if Crackpipe really can’t grasp certain facts about his religion and realize that there is no truth to it and that he and everyone else have just been force-fed nothing but lies, then he has again shown how brainwashed and unwilling to be rational he really is.

– If Crackpipe is unwilling to examine information that exposes his religion as delusional brainwashing and fictious fraud, then again I hope that non-religious people observing this exchange can at least see the harm caused by religious brainwashing and how it makes people stupid and irrational.
.
.
Then lastly Crackpipe says….

“Up next: Pliny The Younger!

(Note: I am aware that BB(s)J went on a about BE in one of his replies. I will address it in the near future, no worries!)”
—————-

That’s nice.

Keep em coming Crackpipe. I appreciate you helping me come up with more ways to show christianity and all religion to be nothing but brainwashing, fraud and lies.

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.
————-

Part 2 May 15-Thursday/2014

Well it seems that the Crackpipe christian really has no life and just keeps dishing these out one after the other. This is great cause it gives me something to do on the exercise bike for an hour at the gym, subway and fills in the void I have where Twitter used to be. Be great if I had more time to work on these, but unlike Crackpipe christian I have a life.

So currently Crackpipe christian has me with 6 more replies after this one. He’s on a real mission to make christianity and religion look badly and at the same time giving me lots of ideas for blog ideas and finding more great articles to use against religion.

So this is an article Crackpipe has done on Bart Ehrman and some of the quotes and things I said from him. Great, I can hardly wait to read it and reply.

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

Here we go…..

Crackpipe says….

“Buy-Bull Journal MISQUOTES Bart Ehrman…Looks silly in process.

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).
Now this is true and well known to those who actually follow him and read and listen to him- which I have!
But let’s see what BB(s)J says: ” Let’s all please await BeerCan’s telling us what evidence Bart Ehrman has said about the evidence of Jesus. I’m sure he has so much of it.”
Well certainly I will!
But I’ll let Bart do all the talking.
A short while back Bart Ehrman wrote a book in an attempt to answer the question: Did Jesus Exist?http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0062206443/ref=redir_mdp_mobile
He did an interview (many I’m sure) that we can read here: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/bibleandculture/2012/06/05/bart-ehrmans-on-did-jesus-exist-part-one/
—————–

Amusing that Crackpipe really has put his foot on his mouth here.

– The link that Crackpipe provided contains no evidence whatsoever and just states Ehrman’s OPINION.

Here is a great interview he did where Ehrman again provides nothing but opinion and says flat out that it won’t convince anyone Jesus existed, but that it just simply says why HE THINKS Jesus existed historically:

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.

> How could the omnipotent master of the universe not be able to read? WTF?! He made a good point about that too.

– Clearly says there is no evidence or writings about Jesus in the entire 1st century.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“In this interview Bart says: “Some of these people indicated that they had heard that I thought Jesus did not exist, and they wanted to know if it was true. In fact, it was nowhere close to being true:”
And so? “And so I wanted to write a book that showed that whatever else one might want to say about Jesus, he certainly existed.”
So, Bart Ehrman believes Jesus DID exist.”
——————-

As I said, no evidence of Jesus that is credible. Bart Ehrman BELIEVES Jesus existed but he has no evidence that he did.

Just Bart’s opinion, nothing else.

– Here is part 2 to the link that Crackpipe provided that I am now providing:

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

> Still no evidence of anything in it.

> Ehrman says that he agrees with mythicists on the harm of religion too:

“In my book I argue that it is not an accident that the mythicists are all (to my knowledge) atheists or agnostics who find organized religion highly dangerous. In my view, they have a point about that, as religion has indeed been used for very hateful and harmful purposes over the years, from the crusades and inquisition to the justification of slavery to the oppression of woman, minorities, gays, and other people. So I understand the problem.”

> Which is of course because religion is the most evil thing on the planet and people are just brainwashed to a psychotic delusion (never a good thing).

> What makes religion so evil is that it makes people who are religious unable to see how harmful religion is.

– 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Okay, so let’s get to the evidence that Bart uses. I will list but you (and BB(s)J) can read Bart’s own words here:http://www.patheos.com/blogs/bibleandculture/2012/06/07/bart-ehrman-on-did-jesus-exist-part-three/
Evidence outside the Bible:
1) Pliny
2) Tacitus
3) Josephus (twice)!
So what does Bart day this means? “But it’s something, and since these are not sources that based their views on the Gospels (since these authors hadn’t read the Gospels), it shows that Jesus was indeed known to exist in pagan and Jewish circles within a century of his life.”
————-

Well I find this above paragraph and link that Crackpipe has provided highly amusing, for the following reasons:

– 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.

– Bart also says again that there ISN’T any evidence for Jesus outside of the bible.

– Bart says that the only evidence of Jesus is IN the bible.

> This is not evidence for anything since there is nothing credible about the bible whatsoever.

> Crackpipe really messed up with this article.

> The bible cannot prove the bible, especially the gospels.

Need I remind you?:

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

“Okay, but what does Bart say about Biblical evidence?
The really compelling evidence, though, comes in the Christian sources.
Wait, what?
Did Bart Ehrman, former believer, just say that the REALLY COMPELLING evidence comes from Christian sources?
Yep.”
—————–

Again, this is not evidence of anything and all Ehrman is saying now is that he is basing the entire existence of a historical person off the stories of one man and that the stories couldn’t have been made up.

> If course they could have been made up.

> The mere suggestion that someone thinks that the copies of copies of copies couldn’t be made up specifically to tell a propaganda story in order to hype a delusional religion with a political purpose that replaced judaism is crazy.

– He is also simply giving his opinion that the stories were not simply created as a tool to elevate with propaganda the greatest scam and fraud in Earth’s history.

– If anyone doesn’t see that the new testament is nothing but a tool used to replace and cripple jewish power, control and belief, then they’re blind.

> If you read the gospels it’s completely obvious that jewish law that was said to be put in place by a powerful prophet of God (Moses) is simply dismissed and replaced by what is described as a more powerful prophet of God (Jesus).

> How do you make one prophet of God more powerful, wiser and with the authority to dismiss another prophet of God? You make him GOD’S SON who is actually GOD HIMSELF.

> Pretty good idea to over authorize don’t you think?

> It was created with the purpose of giving certain people power and to make certain people lose power.

> Did anyone ever wonder why the jews are written about as total scumbags and that the betrayer of “the son of God” had a name like “Judas”? Think about it. Judas represents the jews. DUH!

> Did anyone ever notice that Paul tells people to obey the government and pay their taxes? Nobody ever noticed that Paul was simply manipulating people and nothing else?

Romans 13:1-7

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+13%3A1-7&version=NKJV

– Strange how christians who were out preaching and worshipping Jesus were getting tortured by Nero and others don’t you think?

> Kinda like God didn’t care, or wanted them to get tortured, or DOESN’T EXIST AT ALL!

> Funny how there is nothing supernatural recorded EVER of any godly activity and especially today.

> Interesting also that faith healers lose so many multiple children, as though prayer does nothing whatsoever, as if no one was listening and God didn’t exist.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“And: “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.”
————-

I guess Bart means like Eusubius and the many things he forged and quoted that we have copies of copies of.

http://www.christianity-revealed.com/cr/files/fathereusebiustheforger.html

Just like what christianity has done since the beginning, which is lie and make things up in order for people to believe their nonsense.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Well shit, man…
Okay so why does Bart consider as this compelling evidence?
“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.”
————-

So again we’re basing a religion off of one man and his stories. This is no different than Mohammed getting an angel to tell him what to write in the koran and basing islam off of that, or Joseph Smith having an angel give him the golden plates and starting mormonism, which has 15 million members.

– There were even witnesses to Smith:

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

– As is explained here:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HVuw1wEuaAQ
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Okay, enough of Bart for now, let’s get back to BB(s)J’s argument:
-” If BeerCan is referring to Paul’s letters then let’s just remind ourselves of a few things…
> There are no originals of Paul’s letters in the entire 1st century, only copies of copies done in the 2nd and 3rd centuries and closer to our time.
> The entire article I wrote was about how there isn’t any evidence of Jesus outside of the bible and not in the entire 1st century. Paul’s letters are not outside of the bible.
> BeerCan is basing the entire existence of Jesus off of one man (Paul) if this is the case, because this was all the “historic” evidence that Ehrman provided in BeerCan’s link that only worked on copy paste.”
———–

Yep. Pretty good points I make.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.”
————–

Unfortunately for Crackpipe the 3 sources that Bart lists have all been repeatedly shown why they are non-reliable and non-credible.

– Do I have to list the 3 references of “evidence” and the reasons they are NOT reliable and NOT credible no matter what Bart or anyone says? Ok fine. I seriously don’t mind because eventually they will sink in to Crackpipe I hope.

Here we go:

– Strong evidence and reasons why they were forged (many many reasons).

http://www.christianity-revealed.com/cr/files/fathereusebiustheforger.html

http://www.fromchristtojesus.org/English/DrillDown/Tacitus.htm

http://www.skeptically.org/newtestament/id13.html

– The fact that Bart’s 3 sources are referencing CHRISTIANITY which was just as common knowledge then as it is now.

> This was of course 80 years later or longer and in the 2nd century where like all other religions, christianity had a life of it’s own and the more time went on back then the more hearsay, lies and gossip became worse and worse.

> No evidence from anyone significant of when Jesus was said to have lived and there were MANY:

http://jdstone.org/cr/files/nohistoricalevidenceofjesus.html
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“So, no BB(s)J, neither Bart nor I base our conclusions SOLEY on Paul.
But let’s go back to when I linked up Bart (and sorry BB(s)J you had to copy and paste, that must have been traumatic for you ; ) ).
———-

No you base your conclusions on things that aren’t evidence and other things that aren’t evidence.

– Did Bernie Madoff have any evidence for his “investments”? No, just a story.

> Did countless people say to have “faith” in him? Yes, but with no evidence. It was just a scam.

– No evidence plus no evidence is the equivalent of 0 + 0= 0

> Paul = zero evidence
since it’s just the words of ONE man in the bible with nothing he said even being confirmed as real, in a book that is completely non-historical and based on fictious nonsense.

> The 3 writers of non-biblical evidence = zero evidence
since there are strong leanings toward forgery, things that don’t make sense and the fact of simply talking about christianity and common knowledge.

Wasn’t traumatic, just stupid that Crackpipe doesn’t use a better site and it’s beyond pathetic that Crackpipe doesn’t realize how bad his spelling is that he doesn’t see it and correct it.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“I wrote: “Most NT scholars and historians (religious AND secular) have no issue whether or not the historical Jesus existed. Again, as BE says, “We have more evidence for Jesus than ANY OTHER person during his time.Now, don’t take my word for it. Here’s Bart in his actual words: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUQMJR2BP1w&list=PLWvahZRxLnLPy7vpMWj1i9Km-DWGqk2AX
—————–

So 3 stories that aren’t credible, or reliable that back a multi-billion dollar a year agenda for power and control is supposed to be more evidence than other people who are based on stories, but don’t have an agenda, or motive to be fabricated?

> Again I remind Crackpipe of the many things taken out of the bible after 16 centuries. Some of which because they were so ridiculous and were created to tell stories about Jesus, but were such ridiculous stories that the church took them out because they didn’t want to lose members because of how stupid they were, even though they weren’t much different than all the other things in the bible.

> Here’s one that even depicted Jesus as gay and having sex with a boy in his tomb for 6 days:

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

– Many forgeries and many things the church just buried because they knew how badly they made the church sound.

– The church has no limits on anything to be forged, or to bury anything that might expose their lies.

> If the church covers up it’s child raping scandals then what is to say they have any limits of what they can, or cannot do?

> Many popes sure had no idea what their limits on evil were:

http://listverse.com/2007/08/17/top-10-most-wicked-popes/

> I think it quite insane that christians think that their god out of thousands of gods believed throughout history is the right god and that their god simply lets all these evil things happen in not only it’s name, but to it’s butt kissing followers, but that’s just fine with it.

> It’s like Epicurus supposedly said:


.
.
Crackpipe continues…

“So either Bart Ehrman is a complete IDIOT or there IS actual evidence for Jesus and one can either accept or reject it.”
————-

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

The vid is 26 minutes long and I think you even sent me this at some point.

I’d like you to fast forward to some parts in this vid:

14 min 40 sec in- “There is no hard physical evidence, or archeological evidence of any kind for Jesus”

(Glad Bart cleared that up).

15 min 30 sec in- “We have no writings made by Jesus of any kind”.

(Wouldn’t God the narcissist at least have his writings preserved and read)

16 min 15 sec in- “No Greek or Roman author mentions Jesus in the entire 1st century”.

(As I repeatedly keep saying).

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).

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?

– As for what Bart was saying about Jesus being a rising god….

Here’s Richard Carrier to say how Jesus DID NOT EXIST:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mwUZOZN-9dc
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Now, obviously BB(s)J missed the point. I quote BE, then say here’s Bart in his actual words, lest I be accused of quoting Bart for something he didn’t actually say.”
————

No Crackpipe YOU are definitely the one who missed the point.

– There is no evidence of Jesus.

– All “evidence” of Jesus is either non-existent and non-reliable, or forged by a scribe of the church.

> It really isn’t that hard to figure out.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….
.
.
“I was NOT presenting Paul here, into the argument as it isn’t part of the topic (I like to stay on topic). However, Bart’s quote does fit in the regards to he states we have more evidence for Jesus than ANY OTHER person during his time and this DOES include evidence outside the Bible.”
—————

This is no different than saying we have more evidence for flying horses, than snuffalupaguses. Remember, because Mahommad flew to heaven on a flying horse?

– No evidence is still no evidence.

> Unless Crackpipe believes in flying horses, but like the muslims that is just an overwhelming need to believe.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Thus, SINCE Bart believes there is evidence outside the Bible – he must be an idiot, in BB(s)J’s mind (though he does use Bart in one of his “arguments”).”
————-

No I do not think Bart is an idiot, that is just Crackpipe putting words in my mouth. I will continue to use quotes from Ehrman and think he gave WLC a trashing like nobody else I’ve ever seen.

– 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.

> By Ehrman simply saying that he has nothing to gain by saying otherwise and people believing that are just fooling themselves.

> 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?

> 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.

> This is like Koch brothers saying they have nothing to gain by stealing money from the banks from before and after the bailout because they are successfull bankers.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“But what else does BB(s)J have to say:
“Funny how if you listen to this link of this vid that’s made 4 years later than BeerCan’s Ehrman video, Ehrman talks for a good minute about how unreliable Paul was and non-credible. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A3qXQt6dYME
Give that a listen BeerCan how Ehrman basically says “Paul never met Jesus” and “20 years later is not credible”.
Funny how BB(s)J must have watched a different video than he linked. At NO time did Erhman say “20 years later is not credible.”
NOR did he say Paul was unreliable and non-credible. Though BB(s)J uses quotes, which usually denotes ACTUAL words spoken, not misinterpreted.
Just because I’m that type of person, I will transcribe here EXACTLY what Bart says about Paul’s letters. Now, in case you don’t watch the video it’s about the RESURRECTION of Christ and the sources for it. NOT for sources pertaining to Jesus’ existence (context BB(s)J). So Bart is going to go through what sources there are for the resurrection of Jesus ONLY. Again, not IF Jesus existed.
Bart’s discussion on Paul Starts at 2:43 when Bart says “…Well Paul was writing before that wasn’t he? (40 years after is the earliest record of resurrection) Yes Paul was writing before that. Paul talks about the resurrection in 1st Chorinthians, well that’s 20 years after the event so that’s BETTER.”
Note: See how Bart is just talking about the resurrection here? NOT Jesus’ existence. Note too, that even though he’s talking about resurrection, he STILL says Paul’s letters are what? Better. So far, he hasn’t said “unreliable” and “non-credible.” Maybe he will, let’s continue…
“The Gospels give us the narrative, Paul makes reference to it, but there’s a 20 year gap. You don’t have somebody who was there, writing about it. Second point: none of the authors were eyewitnesses. Paul himself indicates he was not an eyewitness. And none of the Gospel writers was an eye witness.”
And this sentence ends at 3:16. No further reference of Paul is made…but don’t take my word for it. Watch it yourself, and hear EXACTLY what Bart says.”
————–

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)

– As for Crackpipe saying I said something that wasn’t true, I used the word “basically” which any one with common sense knows that it means “to sum it up without typing a gazillion words (because I have a life, unlike Crackpipe christian).

– Thanks though Crackpipe for writing my points out though for me to prove my points even more. Look what you wrote above and we’ll just go through it.

> “20 years after the event” Exactly, which is not credible, or reliable because it was 20 years later.

> “You don’t have somebody who was there writing about it”. Right again, so not credible, or reliable.

> “Second point: None of the authors were witnesses. Paul himself indicates he was not an eyewitness”. So not credible, or reliable.

– I think that these 3 points that Crackpipe himself was nice enough to quote, say quite nicely how Paul was not reliable, or credible BASICALLY.

– There is no way that Crackpipe can say that these things are credible, or reliable, despite how many times he attempts to say that it is.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Should I make a joke about BB(s)J’s math too about how long Bart actually talked about Paul?”
———-

No Crackpipe can attempt to make a joke if he wants, but he will still be the one who has imaginary friends that sacrifice themselves to save us from them and hundreds of other ridiculous things that make no sense, such as talking snakes and long hair giving super powers.
.
.
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.
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.”
————–

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.

– 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?

> If Crackpipe says “yes” then I hope people see what kind of person we’re dealing with here in Crackpipe and how delusional and psychotic the religious mind truly is and I hope that if someone is religious and they read this that they see how stupid and insane they sound.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…..

“So what is he talking about? The Gospels. NOT Paul’s letters.
As to the other points BB(s)J makes re: Paul, Bart and the video:
Of COURSE Paul never met Jesus (pre-crucifixion)! I just quoted about how I used Bart’s quote and Paul MEETING Jesus was never in there! Wow, BB(s)J has to make up an argument that was never made…
———–

So what part of “not an eye-witness, not being there and 20 years later writing about it” says that Paul was there?

– Bart, like everybody else, including Crackpipe, knows that Jesus never met Paul, it’s quite common knowledge and that that is why Bart SAID “not an eyewitness”.

– What else was he implying then?

> Is Crackpipe saying Paul knew Jesus and he was there when he was crucified?

> Now Crackpipe is just wasting everyones time.

> Belief in any religion of course wastes everyones time.

> I prefer living in reality myself.

> I prefer not being brainwashed to a lie.

> I prefer not being a slave to a lie.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“So what does BB(s)J think this video shows?
“> Guess Ehrman’s done some thinking and research in the past 5 years.”
Hmmm…..Oh there’s more.
—————

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.

– As I said about this video Crackpipe:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=A3qXQt6dYME

> 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.

> He implied that 20 years later and not an eyewitness was non-credible and non-reliable.

> Again, what does 20 years later and not an eyewitness mean?

> Again I will bring up if a man is on the stand of a trial and tells the judge he didn’t know the victim and didn’t know the murderer and wasn’t even there, what is the court and judge supposed to say?
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- If BeerCan really wants to impress the world then maybe he should try attacking bible scholar elite Robert Price’s article here who says Jesus didn’t exist.”
Then he puts up a link where Price is to have said Jesus didn’t exist and this somehow supports that Bart Ehrman agrees.”
————–

Actually no, that wasn’t what I meant at all.

– What I meant was that Price had some great convincing arguments about why he believes Jesus didn’t exist and thought he should simply read a well educated bible scholars take on it.

> I also meant exactly what I said, which was “that Crackpipe should attack Price’s article since he likes attacking articles so much”. I mean as it is it’ll be weeks catching up just to all the articles that Crackpipe has up right now attacking my articles since Crackpipe has no life.

> Let’s go see how many articles Crackpipe has up dedicated to me now… BRB

> WOW! I just looked and Crackpipe has put up 3 new articles all basically dedicated to me. 15 in total. What a psycho.

> I can hardly wait for summer holidays from school so maybe I can spend an extra hour a day working on responding back to the world’s creepiest apologist.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Well, Bart has since published his book – and I showed you what was written and said. This video, while PUBLISHED to Youtube in 2014 doesn’t have a date – or at least I didn’t find one.
In any case, at NO TIME did Bart say he didn’t believe Jesus existed. He just doesn’t believe he was raised from the dead! Nor did ANYTHING that BB(s)J contradict what I claimed Bart has said.”
————-

As I said before Crackpipe, but I will repeat these though so maybe you get it this time.

– Bart says there is no hard evidence for Jesus, or archaeological evidence for Jesus.

– He says that the gospels are not historical evidence.

– All the same reasons he gives for why the gospels aren’t historical are why Paul isn’t historical.

> Too many unreliable years.

> Not an eyewitness.

> Paul never knew Jesus.

> Paul wasn’t there.

– How is this evidence because of ONE MAN? It isn’t!
.
.
Crackpipe continues…

“So I will restate what I claim Bart has said and BB(s)J can try again to show where I am wrong.
1) Bart believes Jesus existed.”
————-

I never said that he didn’t believe Jesus existed.

> I said there is no evidence of Jesus outside of the bible for which Bart is perfectly aware of.

> I repeatedly showed how Bart said the gospels were non-historical.

> 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.

> I also said why despite what Bart says, he does have strong motive for giving his OPINION that Jesus existed.

> Notice how he says that people who are NOT convinced will NOT be convinced by reading his book…. Now why is that?
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“2) Bart believes there is evidence outside the Bible.”
————–

Which I clearly explained multiple multiple times why nothing Bart says will make those THREE pieces of evidence credible. (It’s no wonder that I’m 15 articles behind Crackpipe’s articles).
.
.
Crackpipe continues…

“3) Bart believes Paul’s letters are great evidence.”
————-

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?
.
.
Crackpipe continues….
.
.
“4) Bart does not believe Jesus was raised from the dead.
It’s no shock, really, that BB(s)J did such a shitty job in this retort…we’ve seen his argument style before. Additionally, one can understand why I don’t reply much to what he chucks at me in his replies…”
————

Well why would anybody think Jesus was raised from the dead unless they were brainwashed, insane, or stupid?

Yawn

– No Crackpipe, there really is no way I can do a bad job when you think about it.

> You’re living a lie. I’m not.

> Your religion is no different than thousands of religions that have no evidence…. all of which feel the same way you do about their religion, that you do yours.

> All religions (like yours) are brainwashing.

> You are brainwashed to a lie that makes no sense.

– I do an amazing job replying and trashing Crackpipes blog replies and exposing them as meaningless nonsense, LIES, brainwashing, stupidity and showing the harm that the disease called religion does.

– Crackpipe says he doesn’t reply much to what I chuck at him in my replies? HUH?!!

> I have a backlog of currently 15 of Crackpipes blog responses to reply to that says otherwise.

> I guess that is more evidence of how psychotic Crackpipe really is since he thinks he doesn’t reply much to me.

> LOL What a loser Crackpipe is. Seriously.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“BB(s)J has still been silent, but no matter. If he wishes to reply further, I welcome it and even welcome him to comment directly to this blog!
If you think that something is wrong here, please correct me!
If any reader wishes that I address something BB(s)J challenged me on (though I couldn’t really see what), let me know and I’ll take a look!”
———–

Uh I’m silent because I have a life.

– Crackpipe has no life obviously.

– A response could take 4 days because I really don’t have any free time with with school, the gym and homework.

> Using all my free time to get as much education in science, psychology as possible and eventually philosophy, in order to fight religion takes time.

> My many hours training and exercising help make sure that I live long enough to acheive all my educational desires since I am getting up there in years.

– 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.

> This would explain all his freetime and seems that writing blog responses to me has become his entire life.

> It seems that writing blog responses to me has become more of an obsession than his delusional religion is.

> At least I’m real and Crackpipe is talking to a real person when he exchanges with me, which is a step up for him I guess.

> I highly doubt anyone would bother replying to Crackpipes blog on Crackpipe’s blog, in a way he’d like, unless they are as psychotic and demented as Crackpipe is.
——————–

May 16-Friday/2014

So my cyber stalker “Crackpipe christian” has written another blog response. This time he responds to a blog response and rambles on and simply does his usual lying, misleading and attempting to sound intelligent, but completely fails.

He does again prove though that he really does have no life as he is currently 15 blog responses ahead of me and it seems that Crackpipe has now dedicated his entire life to my blog. As if being the slave of a lie didn’t make Crackpipe enough of a loser already.

Here is the link:

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

So let’s go through Crackpipe’s wonderful response attacking my responses.
.
.
“As I mentioned and linked to BB(s)J while gone from Twitter is still keeping his blog alive and has responded again!

So I got at least one blog reader that I know of!!

Again I invite him to reply directly on the blog and is more than welcomed to email me at justoneministries@hotmail.com.

I doubt either will happen, but the invites out there and always will be!”
————–

Never will I reply on Crackpipe’s psychotic blog site, or email. Probably the creepiest person I’ve ever had the displeasure of exchanging words with. He’s lucky I even bother replying to him on my blog. He’s also lucky that the only reason I’m responding to him at all is because it fills in the void where Twitter used to be. This has worked out quite well.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Okay, let’s get to it!

BB(s)J: So I’ve been pretty busy with school and work and rather irritated lately with the approximately 20 Atheist defenders of religion on Twitter that defend religion for some reason, attack my brainwashing confrontations I have, say things that imply that I’m childish while they behave childishly and say childish things. In fact I have my suspicions about one of the Atheist religion defenders in particular being Beercan himself, but I can’t confirm this.

Beercan is so warped and demented that I wouldn’t put it past him to pretend to be an Atheist on Twitter.

Well put your conspiratorial mind at ease, BB(s)J ’tis not I.”
————

Crackpipe is certainly psychotic enough to do something like this (pretending to be an Atheist on Twitter) and from my experience from many decades of people watching, I say “never underestimate the craziness of a crazy person”. As Crackpipe has shown already, he’s completely nuts.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.”
—————-

No, what Crackpipe has misunderstood is this:

– I am extremely busy with school and do not have time to be arguing with people who are Atheists already.

– It bothers me that my time gets wasted arguing with Atheists when I need to be spending time waking up crazy brainwashed religious people.

– 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.

– 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.

> Last I checked, child indoctrination was brainwashing.

> Last I also checked there is no reason someone could be religious to one of the many religions unless they were brainwashed.

> If someone is religious then they are brainwashed.

> Having just A BELIEF in intelligent design does not make one brainwashed, maybe just a deist.

> Having just a BELIEF that a “god” exists, or possibly exists does not make somebody religious. Again, maybe just a “deist”.

> Not believing a “god” exists, does not make somebody brainwashed, it just makes them an Atheist, or agnostic.

> Having a RELIGION and believing things that make absolutely no sense and have no evidence, are completely illogical and have no rational reason to be believed…. is nothing more than brainwashing.

– It’s that simple really, so I really don’t understand why that group of idiots couldn’t understand.

> It really isn’t that hard to grasp.

> I can understand how brainwashed religious people couldn’t understand, because they’re brainwashed, but ATHEISTS?! WTF?!

– I have good reasons to be angry and I should be angry, in fact EVERYONE should be angry about religion.

> As I explain:

https://thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com/2014/04/09/reasons-i-hate-religion/

> Religion really is the most evil thing on the planet and the fact that people are unable to see this is one of the biggest reasons.

– 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.

> Getting “under someones skin” is if the person is attempting to irritate them.

> There is no irritation, just disgust for these group of Atheists who defend religion and are complete idiots and douchebags.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Oh well…

Fast forward to:

“Anyways, let’s respond to Beercan and his ridiculous blog posts of misleading lies, nonsense and unbelievable delusion.”

Let’s! Oh and wait for the list of lies he referenced!

BB(s)J quoting me: “BB(s)J Responds!
Back on the 6th of this month, BB(s)J posted a response…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.”
————–

Ok, well there’s a lie Crackpipe just said coincidentally.

– I do not JUST repeat my points, though I will repeat them if Crackpipe needs to be reminded of things I’ve said that show him to be wrong as he always is.

– I explain things further and give examples many times to compare, since Crackpipe is not the swiftest snail in the slime, I try to show him things so he can compare them to…well…reality.

– Either way, Crackpipe is lying and even if Crackpipe is too stupid to know what he’s saying, it still isn’t true.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“To which BB(s)J writes: LOL Who does Beercan think he’s kidding? He thinks that simply dismissing what I say is actually doing anything. Beercan is simply doing the classic apologetics move where he implies things that aren’t true, simply by saying something is a certain way, but doing nothing more than projecting something that absolutely ISN’T true.”

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!)”
—————

Congratulations for saying how the reason you dismiss arguments without answering is because you dismiss arguments without answering.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.

– I really must be thorough and explain how there really is no evidence for any religion and how no religion has any truth and how the only reason anyone believes a religion is because of brainwashing and no other reason.

– The brainwashers of course are the religious apologists themselves who are themselves religious, which shows how religion really is nothing but an infectious disease.

> Religion spreads itself like a virus and infects the mind, has a life of it’s own and spreads itself to others.

> Crackpipe is evidence of the faith virus spreading itself.

> If he only knew what a truly sick person he really is.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…..

“Not everything you say BB(s)J deserved a response. I know you think otherwise, guess we will have to disagree there as well!”
———–

Well I mean it really isn’t surprising to be honest.

– If apologists tried to address things that exposed them as brainwashed slaves of a lie and they couldn’t really defend their predicament well that would be smart to ignore, dismiss and not answer right?

> It wouldn’t be honest though for them.

> It would prove the person they were debating right if they addressed the issues, so it is kind of cowardly really.

> I personally answer and address everything someone throws at me, but I guess that makes me a bad debater in the religious apologist’s eyes.

– Why answer something that makes you look bad when you can always deflect it right?( apologist thinking).
———-

Crackpipe continues….

“BB(s)J goes on: Let’s list a few things that I have said that Beercan has not done.

1) He has not given any “evidence” of Jesus outside of the bible any credibility.

That, I believe, is for the reader to decide. My main point in the entire discussion, as it always has been, was to show BB(s)J’s use of faulty logic, opinion, and rhetoric as the means to reject the evidence.”
————-

I repeatedly showed how, but I guess I could list reasons again since Crackpipe just doesn’t seem to get it:

– Not within the 1st century.

– Nothing but hearsay.

– Christian sources giving the non-christian sources and many hundred years later.

– Referencing common knowledge about christians and what christians BELIEVE.

– Evidence of forgery.

– Motivation of forgery.

– The fact that there is no physical evidence of Jesus anywhere, or his writings.

– Jesus’ only historical sources are the gospels, which for many reasons are non-reliable, non-historical and contradict themselves and contain forgeries like Mark 16:9-20 and others.

– Just 5 years without eyewitnesses and everything coming from hearsay is not credible, or reliable, but 80 years is insanity and 200 years and over is completely brain dead.

– Very simple really if you think about it:

No evidence + No evidence = Still no evidence.

– If all the evidence is exposed as non-credible and non-reliable then you have no evidence.

> Evidence is supposed to be reliable and credible and not having a political motive, or delusionally backed motive for being lied about to by whoever is saying it.

– 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.

> Shows that Crackpipe isn’t serious about finding the truth also, or he would be opening them and examining what I send him and that I specifically tell him to look at.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.”
————-

LOL No he didn’t. Besides what other way is there than delusional faith?

– Because none of the evidence is credible for various reasons then what other way could Crackpipe be talking about besides blind faith?

– If there is no way to tell which baseball was hit by a famous hitter and the ball gets mixed with a 1000 identical baseballs and someone grabs one of the balls and says “it’s the ball because he just knows” then the ball is NOT CREDIBLE!

> Despite how many times the guy says “it’s the ball” if he has no evidence that it is then IT’S NOT RELIABLE!

> In fact maybe someone even stole the ball and the ball isn’t even mixed up, so there might even be MORE factors that make ALL THE BALLS non-credible and non-reliable.

> If all the balls are unreliable and all the “evidence” of Jesus is not credible, then I really don’t know how Crackpipe can still be having his dead horse beaten when I sold it all for dogfood days ago.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Also, I admitted when I felt the evidence wasn’t strong enough (because intellectually honest people admit such things) to be considered evidence. BB(s)J finds this funny. Guess I haven’t been brainwashed enough!”
————–

LOL Of course Crackpipe said he thought Thallus wasn’t convincing. So what? There isn’t any evidence of Jesus that’s convincing for a multiple number of reasons.

– It doesn’t matter what evidence of Jesus is mentioned (and there aren’t many) there are many reasons why they are no good.

– The only logical thing to do is disregard them all as non-credible. Why stop at one?

– You have to wonder if Crackpipe thinks that Suetonius is not a worthy source as Bart Ehrman doesn’t think so and Crackpipe clearly thinks Suetonius is a worthy source and clearly parrots every thought Ehrman has except that he thinks Jesus was divine.

> Well it appears that Crackpipe thinks Suetonius is definitely worthy, as you see:

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

“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.

– There are multiple reasons why each piece of “evidence” of Jesus is non-credible.

– It doesn’t matter how many pieces of non-credible evidence there are (and again there aren’t many) because if nothing is credible then it isn’t evidence.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

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

Of course brainwashed believers will BELIEVE some of the evidence based on faith and people whose life work involves Jesus existing.

– However each piece of “evidence” presented of Jesus has multiple numbers of reasons that make it not credible, or reliable.

– Non-credible and non-reliable still mean the same thing whether someone has faith in them, or not.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“BB(s)J aligns himself with Jesus Mythers:http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_myth_theory”
————

Yep. Sure am. Aswell as every other religion that has no evidence and makes no sense, I am a mythicist to them. Just like Crackpipe is a mythicist to every religion that he isn’t brainwashed to.

– I see the logical possibility Jesus didn’t exist at all.

– I see the logical possibility Jesus was just a meaningless nobody and his identity evolved from hearsay the way any gullible cult tells themself lies and nonsense about their cult leader.

– I know that Jesus wasn’t a god, or the son of a god and that people could only believe that he was if they were brainwashed to do so.

– Brainwashing is what determines the religion people believe, whether it’s child indoctrination, or having an emotional vulnerability exploited, or not.

> All believers of religions think they have evidence for theirs and disregard all others as meaningless nonsense.

> This isn’t a councidence that Crackpipe isn’t a mormon, hindu, jehovah’s witness, muslim, buddhist, or follower of Zeus and Odin.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“While catching on with young atheists, the scholarly world is pretty firm on its view: Jesus existed.”
———

Just like many Bigfoot scientists and experts will tell you that Bigfoot exists.

> They have no credible evidence, but all the scholars on Bigfoot who devote their life to Bigfoot research will tell you that Bigfoot exists.

> Credible muslim apologists will say that Mohammed flew to heaven on a winged horse and split the moon.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UBt2XPpJ25I

– However AGAIN telling the plain truth that there are too many reasons listed that any of the so called “evidence” of Jesus is completely not credible and not reliable and are really overwheliming why they aren’t.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Now no one should find the writings credible based soley on what I say about them. In fact, I challenge every reader to dig into the work out there about them and make up their own minds.”
———–

Yes and they will find multiple reasons why they are not credible and not reliable and that there really is no evidence of Jesus.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“BB(s)J of course thinks you should take his word ONLY despite his illogical arguments.”
—————

No matter how many times Crackpipe says that my arguments are illogical does not make them so and does not make any “evidence” of Jesus reliable, or credible.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“2) He has not given reason to believe any of the evidence was not one or more of the following:

– Not evidence within the 1st century”

I’m guessing he didn’t read the post where I go into this yet.

There is no non-Christian writings regarding Jesus in the first century. This isn’t new. Even seminary students learn this!

But does that mean the sources are unreliable from the get-go then?

No.”
————-

If they can be non-reliable and non-credible after 5 years with no evidence and multiple reasons to think that they are non-reliable and non-credible, every year that goes by just makes them even more non-credible and non-reliable.

– The bottom line is that belief in Jesus is nothing but a faith issue and that just like believing in Jesus, the faith is about non-credible and non-reliable “evidence” being said to be real.

> Last I checked, if something is not credible and not reliable it is not evidence, bottom line.

> Every year that goes by just makes things more non-credible and non-reliable, so of course 80-200 years or more is outrageous.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- Not rewritten hundreds of years later by biased christian scribes”

Lucian and Tacitus CERTAINLY were not!

(He must have forgetten about those)

And we will get to two more in future posts.”
————–

No wonder I call him Crackpipe. He really must be smoking some serious rock if he thinks I was talking about them in the first place REWRITING THEMSELVES DUHHH!

– Obviously Tacitus’ reference to Jesus being forged was meant because it wasn’t discovered until the 14th century when people like Eusubius who had full access to Tacitus in the 3rd century never mentioned the references and would have.

– Eusebius was said to have forged many things for Constantine and created multiple christian propaganda and could have easily done the forgery and never presented it.

– Why is Crackpipe being misleading now and attempt to imply that I meant that every standard I set out needed to be met and not just a few for every piece of the Jesus “evidence” given?

– Just because Lucian wasn’t rewritten by scribes doesn’t mean that none of the references were.

– Just because Lucian wasn’t rewritten by scribes doesn’t mean there weren’t several reasons that what he said wasn’t credible.

– I will just repost them again then:

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

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

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

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

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

“- Had no convincing evidence the person that was talked about was even Jesus”

According to him. 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!”
———

Worst and most pathetic apologist line ever that Crackpipe says there.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

” Believed and shown by multiple scholars to be forgeries.”

Not sure which piece he’s talking about here as this hasn’t yet come up as an argument by him in our piece by piece look at his examples (unless I missed something, I’ll double check). However, if he’s talking about Josephus…well, we will get to that no worries! I’m doing them in the order he presented them.”
————

No I mentioned about the forgeries in this and thanks to Crackpipe I really did get some great research done that help expose it even further in my blog.

I guess I will just go back and add some more links and make sure that people reading the article really see the info about the forgeries.

Thanks Crackpipe christian for showing me that I wasn’t exposing the forgery enough, especially about Tacitus. You really do make this exposing christianity as complete stupidity, pretty easy.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- Not outside of the fictional bible and fictional gospels, which contradicts itself and is historically inaccurate”

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.”
—————–

No the Tacitus reference has a good possibility of being forged as I will show again:

http://www.fromchristtojesus.org/English/DrillDown/Tacitus.htm

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=2UgO8fAJVVM
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Now BB(s)J can try and knock down my points (that would be an actual argument) or he can just SAY I didn’t (but that’s NOT an argument).”
————-

I’ll do both.

– I’ll knock down his arguments by showing the forgery stuff.

– Crackpipe made no point because clearly the Tacitus reference could have been a forgery.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“And as I said, we will be seeing two more coming up!

BB(c)J quotes me: “He also shows a lack of understanding of what is being argued…”

“No, Beercan is simply projecting his nonsense and lying.”

Okay, BB(s)J if you can accuse, you can back it up. If you don’t, well…that would speak for itself.

I await my list of the lies I have told! Still none listed yet…

Thanks!”
——————

Alright Crackpipe I will do as you asked and go back and document all your lies since you want me to do that so badly.

However I will only do that after I am caught up to all your articles and last I checked there’s still 14 articles after this one, so you should probably do as I suggested and spend some time attacking Robert Price’s article here while I get caught up.

http://rationalrevolution.net/articles/jesus_myth_history.htm

That way I can document all of your lies so far.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“He has done nothing but do what he has done from the start of his belief. Whether that was from childhood indoctrination, or brainwashed at a later age by being caught in an emotional vulnerability that was exploited. I think he told me many months ago, but I forget. This is the thing that is called “faith” that Beercan has and nothing else.”

Nope, BB(s)J I never told you how I came to my faith in Christ.”
————

Then Crackpipe doesn’t even tell me how. What a dummy.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…

“Then BB(s)J uses a common tactic: redefining words:

This is what “faith” is:

– Believing things without evidence.

– Wanting something to be true.

– Not a reason to believe something but a lack of a reason to believe something.

Well, as a creative writer and avid reader I LOVE words. And moreso I love that words have actual definitions and meanings!

So what is faith exactly?

Here’s the definition: http://i.word.com/idictionary/faith

Now let’s correct BB(s)J on his use (not to mention show that he too has faith)!

Faith isn’t believing without evidence, but without proof.

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.

Sure, someone can have faith in which no evidence exists, however that’s called blind faith.”
————-

Surprise surpise though for Crackpipe.

– Since there’s nothing reliable, or credible about any of the outside evidence of Jesus outside of the bible, then that is blind faith.

– Since you can’t use the bible to prove the bible then that is not evidence either and THAT is blind faith also.

– Let’s not forget, if Crackpipe’s fictional wife were real and actually showed him that she loved him, then that really would be EVIDENCE and not FAITH.

– The difference that Crackpipe doesn’t get is that if the wife were actually a real person and showed him she loved him then that would be completely different, because we would be seeing and talking to A REAL PERSON and of course WITH OUR OWN EYES!

– Last I checked we have no evidence of Jesus and nobody can varify anything about him, so that would be a big difference wouldn’t it?

– Crackpipes definition link did not disprove anything I said by the way.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.

Example: I can want it to be true that I am the 3rd baseman for the Twins, but I KNOW that I am not (thankfully for them)
————–

Crackpipe has completely flipped his lid and is just talking stupidity now.

– If you want something to be true, but know it won’t happen then that is NOT called “faith” that is called “knowing something won’t happen”.

> If you knew something was going to happen because of evidence then you wouldn’t have faith, you would have “knowledge”.

– A famous Christopher Hitchens quote:

“It’s called faith because it’s not knowledge”.

– So definitely Crackpipe’s biggest FAIL yet.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

Lastly: “Not a reason to believe something but a lack of a reason to believe something.”

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.”

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

BWAHAHAHA WHAT?! Seriously?!

– Did Crackpipe really write that?

– That’s funny because I just said that Crackpipe did his biggest FAIL yet, then the next line he made an even bigger fail here with what he just wrote.

– If you have EVIDENCE then you don’t have faith, you have FACT! Why is this so hard?

– If you have no evidence and simply want something to be true because you WANT it to be true, then that is “FAITH”.

> So much for Crackpipe showing us how much of a wordsmith he is.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

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

WOW! Crackpipe just keeps topping himself one after the other today.

– I don’t have faith in any belief.

– I simply don’t believe any one of thousands of religions that have no evidence and make no sense.

– Everything I know to be true I KNOW is because of scientific theory, or evidence that is scientifically shown to be true and accurate.

– I am not “bound” to believe something, or any theory and if evidence presents itself to things like evolution, or alien created populations then my views will change too.

> Religious faith however has mentally conditioned people to not listen to any evidence because of no other reason than “faith”.

– If I don’t know something then I say “I don’t know”, not “God did it”.

– There is nothing about my Atheism that has anything to do with “faith”, but EVERYTHING about Crackpipe’s religion revolves around FAITH.

– Crackpipe is no different than “Million Lame Eggs” and how he says he believes even if he has no evidence.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ALj8-L9VJf8&feature=youtu.be&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DALj8-L9VJf8%26feature%3Dyoutu.be

Brilliant…. NOT!
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“”Again, the only reason Beercan believes HIS religion and not someone else’s is because of brainwashing to christianity and not another religion that told him “evidence” and he blindly would have believed every word. Simple as that.”

BB(s)J has NO idea who I am…he doesn’t know my history. He doesn’t know how I came to my faith. Yet he seems to think he does! Impressive!”
———-

Again Crackpipe doesn’t tell me anything about himself and just leaves us hanging. How convenient.

– It’s very simple really:

> If Crackpipe wasn’t child indoctrinated, then he was “born again” which is another way of saying that he was caught in an emotional vulnerability and that vulnerability was exploited SOMEHOW by his current religion and brainwashed to it.

> Either way, the fact that Crackpipe won’t tell us what caused him to be religious is reason enough to see that he knows that he can’t deny the fact that he was brainwashed and knows what I will say to him.

> Smart for him to not answer and tell us how he became religious, because it basically just proves brainwashing.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…..

“But what of people who believe one religion only to change and believe a different one? Just better brainwashing? Lol!”
————-

Well actually yes.

– Part of brainwashing is deception and if someone can be deceived to something as opposed to another, then that is still ” brainwashing”.

– If someone is insane and believes they are Napoleon and then through conditioning they are convinced they are George Washington, they are still insane, just in another form of it.

> If the person instead goes from thinking they are Napoleon to actually being cured and seeing that they are their real self, then that is instead going from insane to normal.

> Brainwashing is a sort of artificial insanity that has been forced on people against their will and against their knowledge.

> Being brainwashed = being insane

> Being not religious = sane in that regard
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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.

– Crackpipe should read a few:

https://thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com/2013/12/28/religion-is-brainwashing/

https://thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com/2013/12/31/the-definition-of-brainwashing-and-how-it-fits-religion/

https://thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com/2014/01/05/why-nobody-tells-you-youre-brainwashed-to-your-religion/

https://thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com/2014/04/29/its-no-conspiracy-theory-religion-is-brainwashing-its-fact/

https://thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com/2014/02/23/youre-brainwashed-to-a-religion-if/
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“BB(s)J quotes me: “Lastly, he goes off on a different line of discussion, most likely due to the lack of actual argument in the first place. Common tactic for those with weak arguments, change the argument.

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.

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

As explained, it was just another example of showing religious brainwashing by showing that whatever is in someone’s holy book and what THEIR religion believes and says, is not believed by people who are not brainwashed to ANOTHER holybook and ANOTHER religion.

– I really didn’t think it was that hard to figure out, but I guess that shows how Crackpipe’s religious mind works, or I should say “doesn’t work”.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…

“BB(s)J says this : Fascinating. Beercan is simply now deflecting my point by saying that the point was irrelevant, but thinks that saying that “there is more evidence of Jesus (which is zero) than Alexander the great (a non politically motivated, non-religious figure which by all chances could be wrong) is relevant to any sort of “proof”.”

Wow…BB(s)J really got things confused didn’t he!

Let’s go look back at what I said regarding Alexander The Great.

I never said there was more proof for Jesus than ATG. Read the first post here:http://justonecan.blogspot.com/2014/05/buy-bullshit-journal-vs-jesus-part-one.html?m=1

Won’t find it, never said it. The context within which I was speaking of ATG was the DATES of the writings that we had about him. That the earliest writings were 200 years after ATG death.
——–

WTF?! Who does Crackpipe think he’s kidding?!

– Obviously I meant because Crackpipe gave the example of ATG as a larger date that is believed, therefore more unbelievable.

– What other meaning then was Crackpipe even saying then?

– If that wasn’t what he meant, then what was his point even?

– Crackpipe seems to be saying that he was talking about something different and if he was then let’s please hear from him what his point was?

– I brought up Mohammed riding a flying horse because it is historically documented in the koran and believed by muslims everywhere, just like Jesus is in the bible.

> Evidence of brainwashing and evidence of a religious faith agenda, UNLIKE Alexander the Great, which did not need to be attached to a religious faith agenda, or brainwashing.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

This IS relevant because part of BB(s)J’s argument is regarding the dates of documents about Jesus and how far removed they were from Jesus’ death.

I was showing that DATE ALONE is not enough to discredit a writing as BB(s)J does. And it can ONLY be an argument if you provide justification why.”
———-

Alright then, let’s go through things again then shall we:

– Just even 5 years with nothing reliable, no eyewitnesses, no one who was there and based on hearsay only, is not credible.

– If Crackpipe actually took the time to think about something that happened 5 years ago, but no one was there, there were no eyewitnesses and no evidence whatsoever except from people who weren’t there and heard everything about what happened from anonymous sources, that is not evidence.

> Every year that goes by after that makes it even more ridiculous to believe.

> 80-200 years later is absolute insanity!

– Now let’s consider that anyone who would even be alive at the time of the “incident” would be dead anyway.

– Let’s also consider that 2000 years ago there were no cameras, no video, no audio, no radio, no TV, no internet and nothing that could even be considered “media” or that could confirm anything.

– Let’s also then consider the facts of how absolutely ridiculous and nonsensical the entire Jesus story, or anything to do with Jesus is.

> No writings from the omnipotent master of the universe because he couldn’t read and couldn’t write.

> Saved people by getting people to torture him and kill him.

> Billions of people since that time have killed, tortured, hated others, started wars and committed genocide all in the omnipotent “master of the universe’s” name.

> There is no evidence whatsoever and there have been countless people who have brainwashed others to make them think that they were “Jesus”.

> The book that Jesus supposedly promoted and that christians follow is anti-science and proven to be wrong and untrue through both science, archeology and history.

> There are billions of people on Earth right now worshipping different gods with the exact same amount of evidence and the same amount of faith, if not more.

….. Yeah that just makes sooo much sense and so ridiculous that it could only be believed because of brainwashing.

– Oh and also the fact that brainwashing exists and that people are shown to be just fine not believing in gods, or religions, while others are conditioned to have a mental addiction and codependency on belief in religions.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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).”
————

Well yeah, of course the date is important. Who does Crackpipe think he’s kidding by implying that it isn’t?

– I also explain a lot more than just the date, but considering that time era’s lack of media and other reasons such as forgery and christian only sources, hundreds of years later, well Crackpipe is just being overall dishonest and misleading really, which is common for apologists to do.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“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 was (which he of course knows it was, but is just deflecting).

– 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.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GGgw9YvXK-A”

Nope, he still failed to make it relevant!”
————

Well that isn’t my fault though that Crackpipe is so stupid. I mean it really isn’t that hard to see what I am saying.

– 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.

> The same can be said about Mohammed riding a flying horse and splitting the moon.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UBt2XPpJ25I

> Muslims only believe this because they were brainwashed to believe it and nobody else in any other religion, or non-religious affiliation believes it.

> 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.

> 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…..

“So let’s try it this way.

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?

Hint: there is no way. But you are welcomed to try again!”
————

Well for the billionth time it feels like, I’ll just keep repeating it.

– There is no evidence of Jesus that is credible, or reliable.

– Nothing about christianity makes any sense whatsoever and it is a religion of nothing but illogical insanity.

– 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.

– 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.

> This is evidence of religious brainwashing, which all religions are.

> This is evidence of either Crackpipe’s dishonesty, or proof of his stupidity, possibly both, because he thinks that anybody is dumb enough to not see how obvious the point I’m making is and is just playing stupid.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“But then BB(s)J throws up another irrelevant argument:

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…

However, if and when we get to discussing the Quran I will give my justifications.”
———–

So in other words Crackpipe knows that he has no defense of what I am saying and is just simply deflecting.

> I hope everyone can see how obvious it is at this point about Crackpipe’s dishonesty, or stupidity.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

-” What I would like Beercan to explain to everyone is how he has “faith” that a letter written from someone who doesn’t mention Jesus, but mentions people of the time frame of Socrates and Pythagoras which are 5th century and 6th century B.C (which are in the same paragraph as the “wise jewish king” reference, could possibly be perceived as credible?

I went through all of this in the original post on this writing found here:http://justonecan.blogspot.com/2014/05/bbsj-vs-jesus-part-four-mara-bar.html

So, if you wish BB(s)J you can argue why you feel my points are wrong and you are right.

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

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

So this is what Crackpipe is reduced to:

– Crackpipe pretends to be making a point when he isn’t.

– He pretends that I’m not making any points.

– He pretends that I am not showing how nonsensical christianity is and how there is no logical reason to believe there is any evidence for it.

– He pretends that he is somehow telling us how Christianity makes any sense and doesn’t defy all logic on every level in every way.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- 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)

Tell you what BB(s)J. When I am done with this current article I will let you choose which one I reply to next. So get thinking!

I don’t want you to feel bad because I’m not choosing the ones YOU want me to reply to. ;)”
———–

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.

– 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.

http://rationalrevolution.net/articles/jesus_myth_history.htm

Would be overjoyed to hear Crackpipe’s reply to that article which pretty much nails it.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- This is “faith” and Beercan is basing someone whose entire existence is politically and financially motivated that people MUST believe, or Trillions of dollars are lost, on nothing but faith.”

Huh? Didn’t know my faith was worth Trillions of dollars! Where can I get a piece of this $? I haven’t seen a dime of it! I could put it to good use!”
————

Well since Crackpipe is too stupid to realize that I wasn’t referring to him since he is just a sheep begging to get sheered and doesn’t have the intelligence to sheer anyone.

– Unfortunately he does have the ability to lead other sheep to get slaughtered.

– Since Crackpipe doesn’t seem to have the ability to see what I’m talking about, or is just pretending to act stupid, then I’ll show him some examples.

http://www.therichest.com/celebnetworth/category/celeb/televangelists/#

http://nakedlaw.avvo.com/money/6-outrageously-wealthy-preachers-under-federal-investigation.html

– The fact that religion is just something for predators to use to prey upon their willing victims and that Crackpipe has been mentally conditioned to turn a blind eye to it.

– Religion is nothing more than something to take advantage of the gullible and the stupid and that is that.

– If Crackpipe is saying he would like to know how to make tons of money off of religion, well then what he is basically saying without realizing it is “how do I become a predator instead of the prey?”
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“Now as for ME defending myself, let’s get somethings clear right now:

– I’m not the one who believes things without evidence (that’s Beercan)”

So you have evidence God doesn’t exist? Please share!”
———–

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.

– What I can do is disprove all religion as lies and brainwashing.

> The fact that people are disproving religions left and right and over and over again is the evidence.

> The fact that religious people are unable to see, or accept the evidence that is shown to them is the evidence of brainwashing.

> The fact that Crackpipe is unable to see that his religion makes no sense, has no evidence and has the same amount of evidence and makes as much sense as any other religion is AGAIN proof of religious brainwashing.

> If it weren’t for religious brainwashing then religion would simply not exist and fade away and be replaced by rationality, reality and science.

– Countries that have mostly non-religious populations and are the happiest and most successful countries in the world, proves how unimportant religion is and how people are better off without it.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/20/travel/happiest-countries-to-visit/index.html?c=&page=0

http://www.city-data.com/forum/religion-spirituality/1571809-non-religius-countries-do-much-better.html

http://www.utne.com/mind-and-body/the-worlds-happiest-countries-are-the-least-religious.aspx#axzz31GYzNXjw

– 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.

– However I really have no problem with deists.

> A deist usually just keeps their belief that a “god” exists to themselves (unless they are Deepak Chopra).

> A deist has no religion and simply believes in a god, or intelligent designer, that’s it. BIG DEAL!

> As I explain how religion is the problem, not beliefs in gods:

https://thebuybulljournal.wordpress.com/2014/02/21/what-if-the-whole-world-were-deists/
.
.
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.”

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!

And is wrong on many counts, but off topic. Maybe we will get to it if BB(s)K oils it for our next topic!
———–

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.

– There is no evidence of your religion.

– There is no evidence for ANY religion (Atheism, agnosticism and deism are not religions).

– Each religion makes absolutely no sense and goes against history and science and anything else logical.

– Each religion only makes sense to the people who have been brainwashed to THAT religion that those particular people have.

> All other religions make no sense and are nonsense because they have been brainwashed to that particular religion.

> This is evidence that all religions only make sense to people because they have been brainwashed to believe it and to ignore evidence against their religion.

– At this point I think any claim of Crackpipe saying he doesn’t understand is just dishonesty and deflection.
.
.
Crackpipe continues….

“- Everything I acknowledge to be true is proven by science, archaeology, chemistry and NASA

> Evolution

> Big Bang

> Every single religion exposed as both a lie and having no evidence”

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.”
———–

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.

– 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

> 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.
.
.
Crackpipe continues…..

“- The last time I checked, not one single thing in the bible, or christianity was backed, or supported by science, or even 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).

All you did was use: r-word.

So, if he’s an honest person I know he will in another post. Especially the lies. Sooner rather than later I hope. But I’ll keep asking until he does, so he doesn’t forget to!”
————

Sure will Crackpipe. Be more than happy to, but will have to backtrack and go through all of them and since you are currently ahead 14 responses, then I suggest you stop replying for now and reply to Robert Price’s article cause I’m going through all of your responses first.

– I will say though that I really can’t tell if you’re being serious about not seeing your lies and think that I’m just making it up, or you know how obvious you’re lying and think I actually won’t take the time to expose them.

> Either way, I will gladly backtrack all your articles and expose you, but as I said I will have to catch up first.

> 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.

> Have you thought about a therapist?
—————–

Please enjoy the rest of the exchange of myself and Crackpipe the idiot here:

https://buybulljournalresponses.wordpress.com/2014/08/03/the-crackpipe-christian-chronicles/

Advertisements