Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Daniel Mandic on 2 Jul 2008 17:10 Steve O wrote: > unless he's brought them on himself as a result of drug > misuse or something --
From: BuddyThunder on 2 Jul 2008 17:15 rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 1, 8:49�pm, raven1 <quoththera...(a)nevermore.com> wrote: >> On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 18:14:36 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Jul 1, 1:07?pm, raven1 <quoththera...(a)nevermore.com> wrote: >>>> On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 00:17:22 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >>>> wrote: >>>>> On Jun 30, 3:58?pm, raven1 <quoththera...(a)nevermore.com> wrote: >>>>>> On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 00:06:02 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> 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. >>>>>> Bullshit. Citation, please. >>>>> And our government still recognizes our right to trial by jury, >>>>> right? >>>> Nice attempt at distraction, but completely irrelevant. This has >>>> absolutely nothing to do with women being forced to have abortions in >>>> order to get welfare assistance. Which is still a completely bogus >>>> claim on your part. >>>>> How gullible do you think I am about "our government"? ?Or >>>>> maybe you are just including atheists when you say "our government". >>>> I didn't say you were gullible, I said you were lying. Your pathetic >>>> attempt to change the subject, rather than support your claim, just >>>> confirms my assessment. >>> I personally know one woman who was subjected to governmental >>> reproduction control. >> Was she Chinese? Seriously, put up, or shut up. You made a claim; now >> either back it up or retract it.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Do atheists have some special program for Chinese women in the United > States? We know they do in China. However, there are a lot of women > in the United States you do not even seem to consider, women in mental > institutions, women in prisons, etc., but the one I know personally > was just a woman who applied for welfare assistance. Playing a slippery game, aren't you Robert? ;-)
From: BuddyThunder on 2 Jul 2008 17:17 rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 2, 12:45 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Jul 1, 5:00�pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>> On Tue, 1 Jul 2008 07:27:47 -0700 (PDT), in alt.atheism >>>> rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in >>>> <6ec0a32a-3255-47d6-b573-5ace27ba6...(a)26g2000hsk.googlegroups.com>:>On Jul 1, 12:29�am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>> ... >>>>>>> No, you didn't. �I told you from the beginning that I was a Vietnam >>>>>>> veteran. >>>>>> Did you? I don't remember it. >>>>>> Your record of lying has not served you well, it was an honestly-held >>>>>> suspicion. I have been corrected. See how easy it is to admit that I was >>>>>> wrong? >>>>> How do you know I was telling the truth about being a Vietnam >>>>> veteran? �Do you see how you are getting onto shaky ground here? >>>> We don't. We also know that you lie to us all the time. Still, it >>>> doesn't matter in this discussion whether you have lied to us about your >>>> service in Vietnam or not. Do you have PTSD? >>> What they accused me of was paranoid schizophrenia. At the time I did >>> not pay much attention to it until they started to try to kill me with >>> tranquilizers. The reason why I still talk to atheists is because >>> they act exactly like people who work in psychiatry. >>> They are people who hate me for no reason at all. That is behavior >>> that seems very strange to me. >> I don't hate you at all, I just vigourously disagree with you. Actually, >> I don't even understand you.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Well, I am sure there were SS concentration camp guards who would say > that they did not hate the Jews. Actions sometimes speak louder than > words. Do you really think I'm comparable to a Nazi guard? No need to be so defensive about your faith, no-one's forcing you to post! No-one's forcing you to renounce your faith. Easy tiger, it ain't that bad! I've even tried to be nice, but it's hard when you're being unfairly compared to Nazis.
From: BuddyThunder on 2 Jul 2008 17:22 rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 2, 12:07 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> 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?- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Well, it may be that you do believe in the tunnel, but if it was to > the advantage of atheists to deny its existence, then you would say it > does not exist. The tunnel does not present that kind of opportunity > because it is well documented, so you pretend that it exists but does > not mean anything. You do not need to continue. I would personally > like to see you just talk to other atheists. But I think you will > continue to post to me. I've never denied the tunnel. That was your lie about me. I will ask you again politely to stop. You're right, I will reply because I want to understand why you believe the tunnel should sway my atheism. I really can't see the hand of God in anything you've posted. He always seems to be hiding to me when he should be most obvious. Almost like he doesn't exist. A tunnel exists, Jerusalem exists, some ramp exists (probably, again no evidence here), Jews exist. These things are in the Bible. So what? Medina is in the Qu'ran. London is in Harry Potter. I don't claim their literal truth on that basis.
From: BuddyThunder on 2 Jul 2008 17:26
rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 2, 12:50 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Jul 1, 6:43 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" >>> <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: >>>> On Jul 2, 11:27 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> 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. >>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>> Please explain how "evolution" counts as a fable? And we'll show you >>>> how you understanding of evolution is horribly wrong. >>>> Al- Hide quoted text - >>>> - Show quoted text - >>> Well, as Paul pointed out, in the last days men would be unable to >>> endure sound doctrine and would devise a fable to try to explain the >>> existence of mankind without a God. >> That's such a reassuringly reinforcing doctrine, ain't it?! A great way >> of ensuring that the meme endures. >> >> "They said you'd say that!!"- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Well, you seem very open minded for an atheist. So you are saying > that you can see that it would be an advantage for God to have > prophets. But I am sceptical that if you had been in Jerusalem when > Jeremiah prophesied that the city would be taken by the Babylonians, > you would have believed him. Many atheists are open-minded, shame you can't see that. I'm actually saying (not that you're interested I'm sure - this is more for the other troops) that it's an advantage for religions to instruct the faithful that bad people will come and try to sway their faith. Then you get to say that the holy text has foresight and contemporary relevance. Any successful religion has its version of this doctrine, it reinforces the belief against reason. |