Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Free Lunch on 1 Jul 2008 19:51 On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 07:07:53 -0700 (PDT), in alt.atheism rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in <e0e2b989-cbff-4f38-890a-b45fc0e5da48(a)b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com>: >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: .... >> > 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? Whatever education someone gets in any school, it has to be better than the awful education you received.
From: Free Lunch on 1 Jul 2008 19:52 On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 10:14:25 +0100, in alt.atheism "Alex W." <ingilt(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in <6cuavhF3i77aoU1(a)mid.individual.net>: > >"rbwinn" <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in message >news:6b4ffde3-6dd2-42e1-ae8b-31dca39a4aee(a)f24g2000prh.googlegroups.com... > > 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. > >======= > >Actually, that sentiment is not entirely unknown to parents of teenagers and >students .... But, they somehow grow out of it, just in time to think their own will be that forever.
From: Free Lunch on 1 Jul 2008 19:56 On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 00:11:02 -0700 (PDT), in alt.atheism rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in <a57da6d4-58ca-427c-a644-c4d80fbc13ac(a)m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com>: >On Jun 30, 3:56?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 00:02:36 -0700 (PDT), in alt.atheism >> rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in >> <c3447487-ef74-4a5a-9197-58ff3792a...(a)f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>: >> >> >> >> >> >> >On Jun 29, 4:06?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 15:29:33 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(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? >> >> >> >> >> > 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. >> >> >> >> >Not children yet? ?What do you think they are? >> >> >> >> Embryos and fetuses. >> >> >> >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. >> >> >Well, I would suspect that one of the religious zealots you are >> >talking about would be Luke. ? Luke wrote in his gospel, Luke 2:5 ?To >> >be taxed with Mary his espoused wife being great with child. >> >No wonder you think the writers of the Bible were religious zealots. >> >To those of us who believe that children exist before they are born, >> >Luke seems to have the right idea, unlike atheists of today. ? In >> >fact, if the Bible is true, which it is, atheists of today are lying >> >about not being able to tell that an unborn human being is a child. >> >Robert B. Winn >> >> Once again you show that you are nothing but a mendacious fool, >> misrepresenting what I wrote.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > >Well, there is no way to misinterpret what you said. You claim that >you cannot tell it is wrong to kill an unborn child. Since you claim it was impossible to misinterpret, that must mean that you intentionally lied about it. That is consistent with your prior behavior. Can you tell me why you insist on lying, defaming, bearing false witness, and misleading people? Do you really think that God demands that you be dishonest? Can you show me where in the Bible or the Book of Mormon God commanded you to lie to us?
From: Free Lunch on 1 Jul 2008 19:58 On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 00:21:59 -0700 (PDT), in alt.atheism rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in <a51c6f82-b11d-4393-8cf6-c6d68f8a88ad(a)p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>: >On Jun 30, 4:13?pm, John Locke <johnlocke98...(a)comcast.net> wrote: >> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 17:57:05 -0500, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 00:06:02 -0700 (PDT), in alt.atheism >> >rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in >> ><4d47e464-df75-43c4-94bd-383dbd74f...(a)m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>: >> >>On Jun 29, 4:12?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >>> On Sun, 29 Jun 2008 15:23:58 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(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. >> >> >>Women have been forced to have abortions in order to get welfare >> >>assistance. >> >> >Point us to the evidence. >> >> >Based on your track record, I do not believe you. >> >> He can't site any evidence. For one thing, it would be highly illegal >> to force a woman into an abortion. >> >> "There is not enough love and kindness in the world >> to give any of it away to imaginary beings." - Friederich Nietzsche- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > >The government does it all the time. This is the second time I have seen you write that defamatory claim. Neither time have you backed up your claim with any reference to any evidence. Why is that? Is it because you know that you have lied to us, again?
From: Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al) on 1 Jul 2008 19:58
On Jul 2, 12:07 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > 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 You really do live in your own little fantasy land don't you? I have a suggestion; Don't embark on any career that involves discussing things with humans. You seem incapable of keeping a divide between what is said and what you imagine someone might have said. You can't use your distorted paranoid fantasies as proof in an argument. It fails to convince anyone of anything other than that you are not to be trusted. Al |