Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: rbwinn on 4 Jul 2008 11:26 On Jul 4, 2:57 am, The Natural Philosopher <a...(a)b.c> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jul 3, 4:15�pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 03:44:40 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote > >> in alt.atheism: > > >>> On Jul 2, 5:28?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> ... > > >>>> Your claim is completely without support. Since you rely on an > >>>> indefensible claim for the rest of your doctrine, your doctrines are not > >>>> worth considering. > >>> Well, I consider God to be sufficient support. �If you think He is > >>> not, �go ahead and try to prove it. > >>> Robert B. Winn > >> Please provide any evidence that any claim ever made about God is true.. > > > Well, there is an earthen ramp that the Assyrian army built to get > > over the city wall at Lachish.  > > So? I have built several earthen ramps. > Am I then God? > > > Atheists do not believe in the earthen ramp. > > well firstly that is false, because I do believe in earthen ramps, > having built many, and I am an atheist. > > And secondly what has the fact that  person B may or may not believe > statement X, have to do with the existence, or not, of personality Z? > God did not build the earthen ramp. The Assyrian army did. God would have preferred that they did not build it and had left the city of Lachish and its inhabitants alone. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 4 Jul 2008 11:28 On Jul 4, 3:03�am, The Natural Philosopher <a...(a)b.c> wrote: > Alex W. wrote: > > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > >news:9fadb87c-6364-49eb-9ca6-c8fd555f6cd3(a)a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com.... > > On Jul 3, 6:05?am, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > >>news:f807e4d0-b40f-4cb8-bb4c-12f00021898d(a)34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com.... > > >> Well, the scriptures say that the wicked would be more miserable in > >> the presence of God than with the devils in hell. > > >> =========== > > >> In other words, since we are all sinful by definition, the smart choice is > >> to aim for hell in the first place. ?Nice morality .... > > > No, the smart choice is to repent of sins. �However, atheists claim > > that nothing they do is sin, so they are not going to repent. > > Which to me indicates you have no idea what sin, or repentance, is. > > > > > ========== > > > Sin is a social construct. �It exists irrespective of the god(s) worshipped > > ... or not, as the case may be.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Sin is wilful disobedience of God. Repentance is confessing and forsaking sin. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 4 Jul 2008 11:29 On Jul 4, 3:06 am, The Natural Philosopher <a...(a)b.c> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jul 3, 5:32�pm, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > >>news:9fadb87c-6364-49eb-9ca6-c8fd555f6cd3(a)a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com.... > >> On Jul 3, 6:05?am, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > >>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > >>>news:f807e4d0-b40f-4cb8-bb4c-12f00021898d(a)34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com.... > >>> Well, the scriptures say that the wicked would be more miserable in > >>> the presence of God than with the devils in hell. > >>> =========== > >>> In other words, since we are all sinful by definition, the smart choice is > >>> to aim for hell in the first place. ?Nice morality .... > >> No, the smart choice is to repent of sins. �However, atheists claim > >> that nothing they do is sin, so they are not going to repent. > > >> ========== > > >> Sin is a social construct. �It exists irrespective of the god(s) worshipped > >> ... or not, as the case may be. > > > Well, there is no sin in heaven.  Maybe that is why atheists do not > > want to go there. > > It's more true to say that by removing what you loosely term sin, you > arrive at a place you loosely call heaven. > > However it is only one point on a certain map: there are many other > places to visit.. > > As the Jewish mystics were well aware.. > > Well, for instance, you could visit hell. Why anyone would want to visit hell, I do not know. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 4 Jul 2008 11:31 On Jul 4, 3:14 am, The Natural Philosopher <a...(a)b.c> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jul 3, 6:39 pm, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: > >> On Jul 3, 9:43 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > >>> On Jul 3, 6:05�am, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > >>>>news:f807e4d0-b40f-4cb8-bb4c-12f00021898d(a)34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com.... > >>>> Well, the scriptures say that the wicked would be more miserable in > >>>> the presence of God than with the devils in hell. > >>>> =========== > >>>> In other words, since we are all sinful by definition, the smart choice is > >>>> to aim for hell in the first place. �Nice morality .... > >>> No, the smart choice is to repent of sins.  However, atheists claim > >>> that nothing they do is sin, so they are not going to repent. > >>> Robert B. Winn > >> So, what you have written so far is sin, please repent fast, real > >> fast. > >> However, since you loons always can ask for forgiveness, whatever sin > >> committed never matters. > >> We, OTOH, always careful to make sure we do the lawful and un-sinful > >> things. > >> That is the real difference between loons and atheists (or normal > >> people).- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > Right.  So when atheist Josef Stalin killed 12 million people, he was > > careful to do it in the lawful and un-sinful way. > > Yup. He slept as peaceful as a babe. > > He had redefined sin to be anything he personally wasn't and didn't > like, or want to happen. > > About the same as your average fascist Christian. > > Sin is what you think it is. > > > I think sin is wilful disobedience to God. Robert B. Winn
From: Free Lunch on 4 Jul 2008 11:32
On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 08:26:53 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in alt.atheism: >On Jul 4, 2:57�am, The Natural Philosopher <a...(a)b.c> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >> > On Jul 3, 4:15?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 03:44:40 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote >> >> in alt.atheism: >> >> >>> On Jul 2, 5:28?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> ... >> >> >>>> Your claim is completely without support. Since you rely on an >> >>>> indefensible claim for the rest of your doctrine, your doctrines are not >> >>>> worth considering. >> >>> Well, I consider God to be sufficient support. ?If you think He is >> >>> not, ?go ahead and try to prove it. >> >>> Robert B. Winn >> >> Please provide any evidence that any claim ever made about God is true. >> >> > Well, there is an earthen ramp that the Assyrian army built to get >> > over the city wall at Lachish. � >> >> So? I have built several earthen ramps. >> Am I then God? >> >> > Atheists do not believe in the earthen ramp. >> >> well firstly that is false, because I do believe in earthen ramps, >> having built many, and I am an atheist. >> >> And secondly what has the fact that �person B may or may not believe >> statement X, have to do with the existence, or not, of personality Z? >> >God did not build the earthen ramp. The Assyrian army did. God would >have preferred that they did not build it and had left the city of >Lachish and its inhabitants alone. Are you saying that God was powerless to stop them? |