This episode of the Rational Response Squad features a Christian Intervention in an attempt to help our Christian brethren overcome their primitive and archaic book of lies.  Sapient, Mike, and Rook all work on Travis for about a half an hour to try and show him the path to a life based more in reality than superstitious nonsense.  The end of the show features Meme and his cool song, "Original Sin."

SHOW TIMELINE

12:15 Brian Sapient introduces Travis.

13:28 Brian asks Travis if he is open to the possibility of god not existing. Travis answers "all things are possible" but says he is sure there is a god.

13:53 Brian asks Travis if there is any universal evidence that could convince us(atheists). Travis says the bible is evidence. Brian asks if other holy books are also evidence. (NOTE, demonstrates "circular reasoning", using a holy book to prove a holy book)

14:45 Travis argues while there are no original copies of the "letters" there are plenty of copies of the NT. Claims there is very little conflict between them.

15:45 Mike asks Travis how he knows those books are true brings up "Herod’s slaughter of the innocence". Asks Travis if he thinks that was a real event. Travis argues that even without original copies, the multiple versions can give us an idea of what was in the originals. Mike explains he wasn't arguing the differences, but asking if Travis thinks the event was a real event. Travis says yes.

17:10 Mike explains that even if we had the original copy of Moby Dick, that does not make the story a real event.

17:40 Brian explains what we(atheists) would like as concrete proof. Challenges Travis over "archeological proofs". Brian points out the multitude of contradictions in the bible.

18:33 Brian asks Travis if he thinks the bible is the "inerrant word" of God or was it written by man with contradictions. Travis says he has not seen any contradictions himself.

18:55 Brian asks Travis "If I could show you one contradiction, would that be enough to show you that that this god is not possible". Travis says no. Brian asks Travis if he understands how contradictions work, and if a story contradicts itself wouldn't that lead you to believe that the story is false?

20:15 Rook points out flawed "eyewitness testimony" using metaphor of multiple traffic accident witnesses giving conflicting cop reports. Relates the conflicting testimony to the Gospels.

21:22 Rook takes on the contradictions of Matthew, Mark, and Luke. He points out the conflict in the time that the story's say people arrived at the tomb. Travis fails to understand the question. Rook restates the questions about the details of the resurrection story.

22:04 Rook gets Travis to admit he would not be able to tell who was telling the truth in the traffic metaphor if some of the witnesses were lying. Points out the differences in the amount of witnesses to the tomb story between the books.

22:53 Both Rook and Brian tell Travis and listeners not to simply take their word for the verses in the bible, but to research it themselves.

23:50 Brian asks how if God's word is "infallible" but has contradictions can Travis still square it? Travis says after doing his own research he says there are no contradictions just people taking them "out of context".

24:49 Rook points out the "Biblical Errancy" forum on Rational Responders.

25:50 Brian explains while it might be a nice thought that a god exists there simply is no evidence. He also says that if there was a god he would hope it would not be all powerful(omnipotent), because if he loves us, and he is all powerful then clearly he fucked us. (Note, argument made by Epicurus in the problem with evil. Negates the concept of all loving(omnibenevolent). Brings up hurricane Katrina. Travis argues that God would not interfere with our "free will". Mike asks "whose free will caused the hurricane?" Travis argues that the hurricane just happened, that it was nature. Brian asks “God doesn't have any control on nature?” Travis then parrots some bullshit pedaled by religious zealots, “If god were to have stopped that[Katrina], it would mess with people's free will.”

26:27 Sapient asks how stopping Hurricane Katrina would've messed with people's free will. You believe it was created by nature and in your belief system, “what rules over nature?” Travis then tries to slip away from the idea that the hurricane wasn't caused by god but Sapient uses the Socratic Method to get Travis to admit that God created nature and that the hurricane was natural. This thereby inferred that God created the conditions allowing Hurricane Katrina to happen and he knew the hurricane would come into existence to kill people “at the moment he created everything.” “We could have all still had free will without that hurricane coming.”

27:30 Brian continues to use hurricane Katrina to show the contradiction in the claims of an omnimax god. Mike points out the illogical nature of this god claim having the power to stop bad things happening but sits on his hands.

31:10 Mike says he could not call a parent loving if it allowed it's child to drown. Travis admits if he had the power to stop something bad he would. Brian points out that god is "all powerful" basically pointing out the contradiction in what we actually see in reality because not all bad is stopped by this god. Rook asks why this God could not create a world without natural disasters. Travis says we all have doubts but "that is where faith comes in". Brian responds that this is not only belief without evidence, but belief in spite of evidence. "faith". Travis says he doesn't in "blind faith".

32:55 To prove Travis uses blind faith, Brian asks what scientific evidence Travis has for his God's existence. Travis brings up the resurrection of Jesus. Travis brings up "fatal format" and then when asked what it is, says “I forget.” Brian makes the point that this isn't scientific, the resurrection and proof of it aren't scientific, they are taken on faith. And thus we have just been spun in a circle in order for Travis to dodge the point that he uses blind faith. Travis claims old scrolls were found. Brian responds "We've also found the Flying Spaghetti Monster at Barns & Noble.”

32:45 Rook points out that the earliest full compilation of the NT was compiled in the 300s and the John Gospel itself as the fragment came a century later after the alleged time of the Jesus character. Also points out that 98% of the manuscripts were written in modern times after 1940.

36:15 Brian points out that the hosts, them, were all at one time believers. Advises again to everyone including believers not to blindly accept what Brian is saying but to investigate it for yourselves.

37:14 Mike points out that when you go to your preacher it is a contrived answer and calls it "apologetics". (Note, this is not searching for answers in an unbiased manner, but looking for excuses to cling to the belief) Mike advises Travis to make up his own mind, not to take what he says on faith or what his preacher says on faith either.

37:39 Rook brings up passages from Mathew, Mark, Luke and John........ Mathew 28-1. vs Mark 16-1 Luke 24-10 vs John 21. Uses them to show the conflicting accounts as to the numbers and names of the people who showed up to the tomb. Also conflicts on the issue of the Sabbath. Only one mention in one account of bringing spices, where the others don't mention it.

40:00 Travis admits the guys who wrote the NT were not there. Claims that the girls told them about it. Brian points out that it does not change that the story was written over a century after the alleged life of the Jesus character. Brian brings up the "story down the line". (Note.....making the point that when we tell stories as kids in a circle, by the time it gets back to us it is completely different.)

42:00 Rook explains the most close gospel of Mark to the alleged life of Jesus is 75CE. 40 years after the alleged death of Jesus. Explains that there is no direct written at the time eyewitness testimony DURING when the bible claims Jesus lived. Those claims reside in the bible only. Outside the the claims in the NT there is no contemporaneous evidence. Rook explains again this on top of the contradictions are why the bible should be viewed as suspect.