Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: BuddyThunder on 2 Jul 2008 02:56 rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 1, 1:04 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: >> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >> >> news:13339a2a-8599-41b2-ac22-cb13fde245ce(a)l42g2000hsc.googlegroups.com... >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Jul 1, 3:58 am, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: >>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >>>> news:12bd9c5a-fc7c-437c-862b-33e48b270a59(a)m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com... >>>>> On Jun 30, 6:37 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: >>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >>>>>> news:6b4ffde3-6dd2-42e1-ae8b-31dca39a4aee(a)f24g2000prh.googlegroups.com... >>>>>>> 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 >>>>>> Please try an educate yourself and read up a little on the parasitical >>>>>> nature of the cytoblast before you really make a fool of yourself. >>>>>> Again. >>>>> Why would I want to read what some atheist says about a cytoblast? >>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>> What makes you think that only atheists have studied fetal development or >>>> agree with the parasitical nature of the cytoblast? >>>> Could it perhaps be your ignorance on the subject? >>>> -- >>>> Steve O >>>> a.a. #2240 (Apatheist Chapter) >>>> B.A.A.W.A. >>> The cytoblast is doing exactly what it is supposed to do. That means >>> it is not a parasite. >>> Robert B. Winn >> Parasites do exactly what they are supposed to do, and you think that means >> trhat they are not parasites? >> What a strange fellow you are. >> >> -- >> 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"- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Well, I am sorry I said something considered politically incorrect by > parasite protection societies. So how are your efforts to save the > tapeworm going? No, you said something factually incorrect and utterly banal. They're different concepts.
From: BuddyThunder on 2 Jul 2008 02:59 rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 1, 1:04 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> 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. >> If you can't provide any sensible reason to believe your fanciful >> claims, then I guess we're done.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Fanciful claims? I said that the Jews dug a tunnel as a conduit for > water between Gihon spring and the pool of Siloam. Why do you think > that is a fanciful claim? That is not a fanciful claim. You and I both know that I'm referring to your supernatural claims. Those would be the ones you're completely unable to support with any evidence.
From: BuddyThunder on 2 Jul 2008 03:01 rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 1, 8:57�am, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >> >> news:331f3679-c6d3-4823-a60e-ab10d5db820e(a)2g2000hsn.googlegroups.com... >> >> Well, Adolph Eichmann felt much the same way about the final >> solution. >> >> ========= >> >> Now that's definitely Godwin's Law ... > > Yes, Godwin's law is a rule made by atheists forbidding any reference > to the Nazi Party. Your total inability to learn should be a serious concern to you! You're still wrong about that.
From: BuddyThunder on 2 Jul 2008 03:07 rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 1, 1:13�pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: > >>>> atheists.- Hide quoted text - >>>> - Show quoted text - >>> Well, I am sure you will not. �What would their reaction be to >>> discover that the apostle Paul had identified the theory of evolution >>> as a fable? >> They would accuse you of lying too. It's the only sensible reaction to >> your lies.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Well, I think that is exactly right. Atheists accuse anyone who > disagrees with their atheistic doctrines of lying. Not so much. I will call someone a liar when they lie to me. Call me old fashioned. Like that time you told me that I didn't believe in the tunnel. That was a lie. Or where you said that a post was made up-thread claiming that nothing in the Bible was true. Another lie. Need I continue?
From: BuddyThunder on 2 Jul 2008 03:09
rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 1, 1:14 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Jul 1, 12:34 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>> On Jun 30, 12:25 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>> 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. >>>>>> Can you please identify what he said about it? Please?- Hide quoted text - >>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>> 2 Tim 4:3 For the time will come when they will not endure sound >>>>> doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves >>>>> teachers, having itching ears; >>>>> 4 And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be >>>>> turned unto fables. >>>> I can't see any mention of evolution. I can't even see any description >>>> of the theory, or even a theistic strawman description. Can you help me >>>> out? You made a claim that seems difficult to substantiate.- Hide quoted text - >>>> - Show quoted text - >>> Well, I think we are getting into subject matter that is too difficult >>> for you. Maybe we should go back to Hezekiah's tunnel. >> I'm not struggling, maybe you could point out the verse where evolution >> is singled out. Maybe he's talking about the germ theory of disease. I'm >> sure you believe that demons are behind illness, rather than pathogens.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Well, Paul said that in the last days, men would be turned to fables > to explain things. So today we see science explaining most things by > fables. Ah, so you were telling another lie. No explicit mention of evolution. I'm sorry for you that science is making your religion more difficult to square with reality. It must be uncomfortable. |