Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: rbwinn on 1 Jul 2008 10:07 On Jun 30, 8:08 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > On Jul 1, 10:21 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 30, 1:03 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > > rbwinn wrote: > > > > On Jun 29, 11:50 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > >> rbwinn wrote: > > > >>> On Jun 29, 10:57�am, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > >>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > > >>>>news:1c31d316-2b91-43f6-b6c0-3fb4dbf97774(a)z72g2000hsb.googlegroups.com... > > > >>>> 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? > > > >>>> =============== > > > >>>> Technically speaking, they are parasites living off a grown female.- Hide quoted text - > > > >>>> - Show quoted text - > > > >>> Well, thank you for your answer, Alex.  So human beings are nothing > > > >>> except parasites in atheist theology. > > > >> Read it again, this time trying to understand as you go.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > I understood it exactly the first time I read it. > > > > Then why the misrepresentation of what was said? No implication was made > > > that "human beings are nothing except parasites". You misunderstood, or > > > lied. Which was it?- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > This guy says that a baby in its mother's womb is nothing but a > > parasite on the mother, and you say,  No implication was made that > > "human beings are nothing except parasites".   I believe that if > > something is a parasite when it is in its mother's womb, then it is a > > parasite after it leaves its mother's womb.  A parasite is never > > anything except a parasite. > > Robert B. Winn > > Well, you've just once again flaunted your ignorance on the internet. > This time about biology, which isn't very surprising. > > Al- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - So atheists claim that a baby inside its mother's womb is a parasite. I already knew that. I think we can expect to start to see a requirement in public education that students acknowledge that an unborn baby is a parasite, or they could be marked wrong on a test. Weren't you atheists just trying to tell me that atheism is never imposed on public education? Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 1 Jul 2008 10:10 On Jun 30, 11:55 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > Steve O wrote: > > > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > >news:291c27c6-c718-49d9-b9cd-c3d3df7d18b6(a)p25g2000pri.googlegroups.com.... > >> On Jun 30, 3:05 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: > >>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > >>>news:5421b8a8-3b91-4b3b-b6a6-d6db5f4ce845(a)s33g2000pri.googlegroups.com.... > > >>> > On Jun 29, 9:46�am, raven1 <quoththera...(a)nevermore.com> wrote: > >>> >> On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 07:23:07 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > >>> >> wrote: > > >>> >> >No, I do not have difficulty following conversations. �Atheists said > >>> >> >that there was nothing in the Bible that could be proven. > > >>> >> No atheist claims such a ridiculous thing. Obviously there are things > >>> >> in the Bible that can be proven. It is trivial, for example to > >>> >> demonstrate the existence of the city of Jerusalem, so I don't know > >>> >> why you're so insistent on the existence of a particular tunnel being > >>> >> significant. > > >>> Because he has nothing else? > >>> Sad, really, isn't it? > > >>> snip > > >>> > Well, you claim to believe in Jerusalem even though it is mentioned in > >>> > the Bible. So why is it so impossible for an atheist to admit the > >>> > existence of Hezekiah's tunnel? > >>> > Robert B. Winn > > >>> I have already agreed that the tunnel, together with others not > >>> mentioned in > >>> the bible, does exist. > >>> Your move. > > >>> -- > >>> Steve O > >>> a.a. #2240 (Apatheist Chapter) > >>> B.A.A.W.A. > >>> Convicted by Earthquack, > >>> Exempt from purgatory by papal indulgence > >>> "I have a miraculous picture of Jesus - if you look really closely at > >>> the > >>> face, you can see a burnt tortilla" > > >> I don't think you are really being sincere about this, Steve.  You > >> seem to be more of a tunnel believer impersonator than a true > >> believer. > > > Nope- I've done a little research, and found out more about your tunnel > > and a couple of others too, one older than yours. > > I am a sincere tunnel believer. > > Weird huh? He hasn't been able to say why this is of critical > importance. After more than 3500 posts in the thread, I'm still none the > wiser. > > He seems to be of the opinion that this means that God exists, but I > don't know how he drew that conclusion. > > > > >  > However, believing in the tunnel will not save you. > > > Save me from what? > > >> Disbelieving in the tunnel will not condemn you.  Well, now we have > >> reached this point in our conversation.  By the way, this has probably > >> been the longest conversation between atheists and a Christian that > >> ever took place. > >> Robert B. Winn > > > I hardly think so.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - It is not of importance. The tunnel was just a topic that atheists would discuss. Now that they have discussed it, they will continue to discuss it. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 1 Jul 2008 10:17 On Jun 30, 11:58 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jun 30, 12:57 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >>> On Jun 29, 11:47 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>> 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. > >>>> That's a religious opinion that I don't share. "True religion" is a > >>>> difficult phrase to talk sensibly about - no religion is able to > >>>> demonstrate much objective truth more impressive than an old tunnel.- Hide quoted text - > >>>> - Show quoted text - > >>> Well, the only reason I used the old tunnel was because it was > >>> something that atheists could come to understand after a long time. > >>> After enough repetitions, even an atheist cannot make a disconnect > >>> between what was written and what exists. > >> There are much more mundane examples in the Bible that prove just as > >> much. Egypt, Jerusalem, the Nile, they're all places mentioned in the > >> Bible that really exist. What's your point. People write nice stories > >> about real places, so what? > > >> Why would you base your life around one? And why that one?- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > If I were to mention the Nile or Jerusalem, or the Jordan River that > > would have been something that atheists already knew about. > > So what? They prove just as much. > > > This way > > I get atheists scrambling all over the internet looking up Hezekiah's > > tunnel.  Then they all pretend they already knew all about the tunnel > > but are not going to admit it exists.  The tunnel is a much more > > effective demonstration of atheistic reaction to truth. > > Didn't exactly have to scramble, a quick trip to Wikipedia was all that > I required. Not exactly bulletproof, but much more reliable than the > Bible! ;-) > > Do you have some other point to make about it, I really don't know what > your basic claim actually is. Just that the Bible is partially based on > real places?- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Well, yes, this is a verse in the Bible that atheists will discuss. Even though they continue to claim it means nothing, they are taken back a little because they cannot make it disappear, even with the magical powers of Harry Potter. So we Christians have established this common bond with our atheistic brethren. We can discuss Hezekiah's tunnel, even though it is mentioned in the Bible. Just look at how long this conversation has been. Now when atheists say, We will not discuss anything in the Bible, we can just say, What about Hezekiah's tunnel, and we have something we can talk about. This is a perfect example of Paul's statement that all scripture is profitable. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 1 Jul 2008 10:23 On Jul 1, 12:20 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jun 30, 1:19�pm, Enkidu <fox_rgf...(a)trashmail.net> wrote: > >> rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in news:22183802-cf28-4305-af11- > >> 7d254b106...(a)d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com: > > >>> You are the one being deliberately obtuse. � The existence of the > >>> tunnel validates many other things said in the Bible about the > >>> Assyrian invasion of Judea. > >> "The Hobbit" talks of ale, axes, and forests which we know exist. Does that > >> validate Orcs, Elves, Dwarves, trolls, magic rings, walking trees and Tom > >> Bombadil? > > >> -- > >> Enkidu AA#2165 � > >> EAC Chaplain and ordained minister, > >> ULC, Modesto, CA > > >> Doesn't anything socialistic make you want to throw up? Like great public > >> schools, or health insurance for all? > >> � � �-Kurt Vonnegut > > > Why don't you decide for yourself?  You were the one who thought of > > it. > > Why don't you try to defend your assertions? How can we know we can > trust what you say?- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - It does not matter to me what you trust. You decide what you are going to trust. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 1 Jul 2008 10:29
On Jul 1, 12:32 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jun 30, 12:25�am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> Free Lunch wrote: > >>> On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 15:15:20 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(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.. > >> It's gotta be tough to keep 'em all in a row this far down the road!- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > Well, if Paul had named Charles Darwin by name, atheists would claim > > he was not talking about evolution. > > So he wasn't explicitly talking about evolution? That was a lie, wasn't it?- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - No, Paul was talking about evolution. That is where animals turn into humans. See a fable is a story about an animal with human characteristics. Robert B. Winn |