Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: rbwinn on 20 Jun 2008 01:33 On Jun 19, 7:48�am, Ye Old One <use...(a)mcsuk.net> wrote: > On Thu, 19 Jun 2008 04:56:42 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > enriched this group when s/he wrote: > > > > > > >On Jun 18, 6:01?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 15:29:16 -0700 (PDT), "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA > >> Al)" <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote in alt.atheism: > > >> >On Jun 19, 8:19 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > >> >> On Jun 18, 12:10 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > >> ... > > >> >> > You say all this on the basis of absolutely no evidence. > > >> >> OK, so once again you are saying that the earthen ramp and Hezekiah's > >> >> tunnel do not exist because there is no evidence of the Assyrian > >> >> invasion of Judea. ?Well, what about the pillar in Ninevah with > >> >> Sennacherib's account? ?Are you saying that does not exist also? > >> >> Robert B. Winn > > >> >Do you ever stay on topic? ?Have you finished accusing people of > >> >saying things they didn't? > > >> Isn't it amazing how completely dishonest he is in his reading of what > >> others say? > > >The topic was the Assyrian invasion of Judea. �An atheist said there > >was absolutely no evidence of this topic. > > Who? When? > > > I was saying there was. > > But little of it matches up with the characters of the fictionalized > biblical version. > > >Robert B. Winn > > -- > Bob.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - The Biblical version is obviously the true one. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 20 Jun 2008 02:26 On Jun 19, 8:18 am, Darrell Stec <darrell_s...(a)webpagesorcery.com> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jun 18, 3:59�pm, Darrell Stec <darrell_s...(a)webpagesorcery.com> > > wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >> > On Jun 17, 5:34�pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > >> > Well, Al, we have the ideas of atheists living today , and we have the > >> > writings of the apostles. > > >> I hate to break this to you, but there is not one apostle for which we > >> have any writings. �None of the New Testament books (except for the > >> Pauline epistles) have any names associated with them. �And in fact the > >> earliest manuscripts did not have the names of the biblical books in > >> them. �It is apparent that the titles were added by a second or third > >> copier because the lettering is not in the hand of the first and oldest > >> scribe. > > >> > Who should I believe? �This is really a > >> > tough one. > > >> It isn't a tough one at all. �Your first statement is false. �So YOU are > >> not to believed because you wallow in ignorance. > > >> > Well, I think I will believe the apostles. > > >> How will you do that? �They wrote nothing. > > >> > Robert B. Winn > > > Let's see, Matthew was an apostle, John was an apostle, Peter was an > > apostle, James was an apostle, Paul was an apostle, > > Paul was not an apostle.  He never met Joshua but rather made up his > theology using Hellenistic philosophy from the Greek classics, Hebrew > theology from the Old Testament, and epileptically induced hallucinations > of imagined conversations with god the father.  He even admits to that.  In > fact he goes further and says he learned nothing from any man.  That means > he never had any conversation with any apostle, nor any other human that > either met the apostles or Joshua.  It was not until he wrote a couple of > epistles and was well into his ministry by several years that he met James > and Peter. > > So far you have named four out of twelve apostles.  That is a grade of 33 > and 1/3 percent a solid 'F' if you were to give such sloppy results while > attending seminary.  Can't you open up a bible and type what you see about > the named apostles? > > > then there are > > writings of some people who were just disciples. > > What writings were those?  We have no writings from any apostle nor any > disciple concerning Joshua.  As you have been told, and as you can find out > by looking at perfect facsimiles of the earliest manuscripts and bibles, > there were no names attached to the books of the New Testament until the > second or third copyists.  And none of the authors name themselves in the > books themselves. > > > All of these people > > seem more believable to me than you do Darrell.  Maybe it is just your > > attitude. > > Mine and the attitude of honest Christian scholars of higher biblical > criticism.  In fact prefaces in many versions of the bible say the same > thing. > > But all you have is a knowledgeless opinion based solely on faith. > > > Robert B. Winn > Well, that bodes well for me. James says in his epistle, Without faith it is impossible to please God. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 20 Jun 2008 02:30 On Jun 19, 8:22 am, Darrell Stec <darrell_s...(a)webpagesorcery.com> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jun 18, 3:50 pm, Darrell Stec <darrell_s...(a)webpagesorcery.com> > > wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >> > On Jun 18, 10:11�am, Darrell Stec <darrell_s...(a)webpagesorcery.com> > >> > wrote: > >> >> rbwinn wrote: > >> >> > On Jun 17, 2:53�am, Darrell Stec <darrell_s...(a)webpagesorcery.com> > > >> >> >> > Well, I analyzed the Bible. �What I find is that God would not > >> >> >> > want His children to die and just cease to be or to be punished > >> >> >> > forever, so He sent his Son to overcome death. �Because of > >> >> >> > wickedness, we see today that most people will reject God's gift > >> >> >> > of eternal life. Robert B. Winn > > >> >> >> Let me ask you a question. �Who would know more about LDS theology, > >> >> >> one of the churches twelve apostles, or a Hari Krishna monk> > > >> >> >> -- > >> >> > Who do you think would know more about LDS theology? �Why do you > >> >> > ask? Robert B. Winn > > >> >> Evasion noted. �Why are you afraid to answer a couple of easy > >> >> questions? Why do you think I would ask? �Could it be the answer might > >> >> be obvious? > > >> > Well, if the answer is obvious, then there was no reason to ask the > >> > question.  Go ahead and say whatever you were going to say. > >> > Robert B. Winn > > >> Why are you afraid to tell us whether or not one of the 12 apostles of > >> the Mormon church would know more about LDS theology than an Hari Krishna > >> monk? What are you afraid of?  I know the answer, but I don't know if you > >> do and that is why I am asking. > > >> -- > >> Later, > >> Darrell Stec    dars...(a)neo.rr.com > > > Well, why don't you just make up your own mind about that? > > Robert B. Winn > > I already have made an informed and knowledgeable opinion.  I am trying to > find out what you believe (asking what you think would be unfair because > you are shooting without bullets) to be the case.  Why are you afraid to > answer the question?  Is it because it has never been discussed in bible > school and you have nothing to copy and paste?  Go ask your bishop what he > thinks, as you allow others to think for you until you pull stupid things > out of thin air. > > -- Well, why don't you ask my bishop yourself? I told you athiests before that I was not going to be your researcher. If you want to know what I believe,I can give you name to the missionaries as a referral , and they can tell you what I beleive. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 20 Jun 2008 02:35 On Jun 19, 8:34�am, Darrell Stec <darrell_s...(a)webpagesorcery.com> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jun 18, 3:54�pm, Darrell Stec <darrell_s...(a)webpagesorcery.com> > > wrote: > Right now, just about every reader on these newsgroups is convinced you are > nothing but a liar and cannot defend your absurd statements by providing > evidence. > > > Well, I > > could not remember Andrew and Thaddeus when I tried to think of them. > > What do we do now? > > Read your bible and tell us the names of the twelve apostles (which you > claim, not I). �Why are you avoiding answering this very easy question? �Is > it because you actually know you cannot reliably number them even using the > bible? �Is it because you actually know you cannot reliably name them even > using the bible? > > > Robert B. Winn Well, I have seen atheists gert worked up about this before. What difference does it make to an atheist? I thought you did not believe in the apostles. So why are you so worried about what their names were? Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 20 Jun 2008 03:12
On Jun 19, 8:30 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > On Jun 20, 10:00 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 19, 12:06�am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > > rbwinn wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > > > Well, what you are saying is that the Biblical account of the Assyrian > > > > invasion of Judea is fiction. �What part of it do you claim is > > > > fiction? �So far we have discussed the earthen ramp and Hezekiah's > > > > tunnel. �Are you still claiming that those are fiction? > > > > You're still claiming London doesn't exist, huh? > > > > I don't know either account, so really don't have an opinion. Have you > > > considered that maybe neither account is accurate? If pressed, I would > > > go with the explanation with the best evidential support. I don't have a > > > reason to decide at this point. > > > > Happy to be agnostic on something! > > > OK, well, my opinion is that unless an atheist has an opinion about > > Hezekiah's tunnel and the earthen ramp, it is a waste of time to try > > to discuss the Bible with that person. > > Robert B. Winn > > Then why do you keep trying to discuss the bible with everyone?  You > were the one to raise the issue of the tunnel.  No-one since has > argued that the tunnel doesn't exist.  Was there some other detail of > the tunnel you wanted to discuss?  The methods of stone work maybe? > The previous two water courses? > Well, atheists were saying the Bible was not true. So I just pointed out that it was true. Atheists became very upset that I would say this. Robert B. Winn |