Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: rbwinn on 29 Jun 2008 18:58 On Jun 29, 12:59 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jun 29, 12:08 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >>> On Jun 28, 2:08 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>> On Jun 28, 12:11 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>>>> On Jun 27, 6:37�pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On Jun 22, 12:57 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>>> ask other readers here to help me recompose them with a grammar and > >>>>>>>>>>>> vocabulary appropos for a first or second grade pupil so you can comprehend > >>>>>>>>>>>> and then answer them. > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn > >>>>>>>>>>> All public schools are required to teach atheism. > >>>>>>>>>> Please explain how, specifically, they are doing that. Sounding like > >>>>>>>>>> another sacred lie...- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>>>>> Teachers hired to teach in public schools are trained in college to > >>>>>>>>> teach atheism. > >>>>>>>> Is it explicit in their contract? Can you justify that claim? <chirpiing > >>>>>>>> crickets>- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>> Well, yes it is explicit in their contract.  If someone prayed in > >>>>>>> school the way my sixth grade teacher did, he would be fired. > >>>>>> I didn't know they had a prayer clause in there. You learn something new > >>>>>> every day. Don't you think religion belongs at home, not at school?- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>> Well, the Bible says that true religion is to help the widow and the > >>>>> fatherless in their time of affliction.  Why shouldn't widows and > >>>>> fatherless people be helped at school? > >>>> Feel free to offer some actual help rather than religion. Unless you can > >>>> show that you're right and everyone else is wrong, but you're not doing > >>>> well on that score.- Hide quoted text - > >>>> - Show quoted text - > >>> Well, we religious people spend time helping widows and fatherless > >>> people.  How are you atheists doing with that? > >> Deluded people do not have the altruism market cornered, no matter what > >> you'd like to believe.- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > So you are saying that you actually believe some religious people are > > helping widows and orphans.  That is very open minded for an atheist. > > Ummm... thanks? What you think I believe is clearly hugely different > from what I really believe. Is this your mischaracterisation, or have > you been lied to?- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Well, no, Paul was telling the truth when he said that true religion was caring for widows and the fatherless. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 29 Jun 2008 18:59 On Jun 29, 1:01 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jun 29, 12:13 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >>> On Jun 28, 2:15 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>> On Jun 28, 7:04�am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >>>>>> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 07:01:05 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > >>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: > >>>>>>> On Jun 28, 12:21�am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>>> ... > >>>>>>>>> No, you were trying to hedge your bets. �You do not believe in faith, > >>>>>>>>> but you are "on the edge of faith", so that counts in case you need to > >>>>>>>>> have faith. �I know how atheists think. > >>>>>>>> Why would I need to hedge my bets? I believe in faith, I just don't > >>>>>>>> think it's rational. And believe me, you really *don't* know how > >>>>>>>> atheists think.- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>>> I know far better than atheists how they think. �They have made a > >>>>>>> wrong choice, so their options are limited. > >>>>>> Your lies are indefensible. You celebrate the evil that you have fallen > >>>>>> into. > >>>>> I thought you atheists did not believe evil exists.  If there is no > >>>>> devil, everything is good, isn't it? > >>>> Evil sounds like a religious concept to me, but why would you think that > >>>> we can't differentiate right from wrong. Another strawman? > >>>> We seem to be able to discuss without lying, can you?- Hide quoted text - > >>>> - Show quoted text - > >>> Sure.  A while back you were saying that there was nothing wrong with > >>> killing children before they are born.  So are you saying that killing > >>> children before they are born is a good thing? > >> Where did I say that? Can you show me, or is that another lie? Abortion > >> is deeply unpleasant, however I don't think it should be banned. They're > >> not children yet, by the way.- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > Not children yet?  What do you think they are? > > A human embryo =/= a human child. One has been born.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - So you are saying that people who speak of unborn children are lying. Robert B. Winn
From: Free Lunch on 29 Jun 2008 19:06 On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 15:29:33 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in alt.atheism: >On Jun 29, 8:44?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 07:26:23 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >> wrote in alt.atheism: >> >> >> >> >> >> >On Jun 29, 12:13?am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> >> rbwinn wrote: >> >> > On Jun 28, 2:15 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> >> >> rbwinn wrote: >> >> >>> On Jun 28, 7:04?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> >>>> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 07:01:05 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >> >> >>>> wrote in alt.atheism: >> >> >>>>> On Jun 28, 12:21?am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> >> >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >> >> >>>> ... >> >> >>>>>>> No, you were trying to hedge your bets. ?You do not believe in faith, >> >> >>>>>>> but you are "on the edge of faith", so that counts in case you need to >> >> >>>>>>> have faith. ?I know how atheists think. >> >> >>>>>> Why would I need to hedge my bets? I believe in faith, I just don't >> >> >>>>>> think it's rational. And believe me, you really *don't* know how >> >> >>>>>> atheists think.- Hide quoted text - >> >> >>>>>> - Show quoted text - >> >> >>>>> I know far better than atheists how they think. ?They have made a >> >> >>>>> wrong choice, so their options are limited. >> >> >>>> Your lies are indefensible. You celebrate the evil that you have fallen >> >> >>>> into. >> >> >>> I thought you atheists did not believe evil exists. ?If there is no >> >> >>> devil, everything is good, isn't it? >> >> >> Evil sounds like a religious concept to me, but why would you think that >> >> >> we can't differentiate right from wrong. Another strawman? >> >> >> >> We seem to be able to discuss without lying, can you?- Hide quoted text - >> >> >> >> - Show quoted text - >> >> >> > Sure. ?A while back you were saying that there was nothing wrong with >> >> > killing children before they are born. ?So are you saying that killing >> >> > children before they are born is a good thing? >> >> >> Where did I say that? Can you show me, or is that another lie? Abortion >> >> is deeply unpleasant, however I don't think it should be banned. They're >> >> not children yet, by the way.- Hide quoted text - >> >> >> - Show quoted text - >> >> >Not children yet? ?What do you think they are? >> >> Embryos and fetuses.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > >So you are saying that people who call them unborn children are lying? It depends on why they are calling them that. If it is the prospective parents, it is wonderful, it shows their great love for their baby-to-be. If it is a religious zealot trying to destroy the rights of Americans, then they are telling lies at the legal level because they just cannot stop trying to tell other people what to do. Funny how many of these people follow a despot who is not married and does not allow a single one of his priests to marry. The Pope knows nothing about babies and mocks God with his foolish teachings. You, on the other hand, keep yourself from learning and repeat lies the way it rains in the Amazon.
From: Free Lunch on 29 Jun 2008 19:12 On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 15:23:58 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in alt.atheism: >On Jun 29, 7:07?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 07:06:07 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >> wrote in alt.atheism: >> >> >> >> .... >> >I did not lie. ?There actually is a conduit for water between Gihon >> >spring and the pool of Siloam. >> >> And, as you know, that is not the lie I have pointed out to you. You lie >> here by falsely and intentionally trying to distract us from the lie >> under discussion. You know that no one imposes abortion in the United >> States. That is another in a long line of lies that you refuse to repent >> of.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > >The Supreme Court and other atheists imposed abortion on the United >States. Abortion is not imposed. You know that. No one is ever forced to have an abortion by our government. Stop lying to us.
From: Free Lunch on 29 Jun 2008 19:14
On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 15:15:20 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in alt.atheism: >On Jun 28, 6:06?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 17:26:59 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >> wrote in alt.atheism: >> >> >> >> >> >> >On Jun 28, 12:50?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 12:11:54 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >> >> wrote in alt.atheism: >> >> >> >On Jun 28, 7:17?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> >> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 07:05:42 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >> >> >> wrote in alt.atheism: >> >> >> >> >On Jun 28, 12:26?am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> >> >> >> rbwinn wrote: >> >> >> >> > On Jun 27, 6:42?pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> Jack wrote: >> >> >> >> >>>> I am upset by *people* who >> >> >> >> >>>> believe that the Bible is anything more than mythology and try ?to impose >> >> >> >> >>>> their >> >> >> >> >>>> beliefs on me ?using the Bible as evidence. >> >> >> >> >>> How can someone impose a belief on you? ?Just believe whatever you want to >> >> >> >> >>> believe. >> >> >> >> >> The wrong part is when people attempt to use the myth to formulate >> >> >> >> >> public policy or indoctrinate children or inform foreign policy. >> >> >> >> >> > Well, actually they use fables. ?The apostles Paul said they would be >> >> >> >> > turned to fables in the last days. ?A fable is a story about animals >> >> >> >> > like the story about monkeys turning into humans. >> >> >> >> >> Wow, you're ignorant about evolution. Colour me surprised. >> >> >> >> >In what way am I ignorant about evolution? >> >> >> >> Monkeys and humans do share a common ancestor. Your denial of the fact >> >> >> does not change that fact.- Hide quoted text - >> >> >> >> - Show quoted text - >> >> >> >Charles Darwin was not my ancestor. >> >> >> So? >> >> >> Evolution happens. Learn to deal with reality.- Hide quoted text - >> >> >> - Show quoted text - >> >> >I never have believed in evolution. ?I think it is a fable, just as >> >Paul said it was. >> >> Paul knew nothing about it. You mock the Bible with such silly >> interpretations of it.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > >I just believe what Paul said. You seem a little upset that I do not >believe your fable. Your problem is that you _lied_ about what Paul said. He _never_ said that evolution was a fable. That was the lie you told, one you cannot back up with _anything_ in the Bible, not from Paul, not from anywhere. |