Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: hhyapster on 4 Jul 2008 21:46 On Jul 4, 7:27 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > On Jul 3, 10:55 pm, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: > > > > > On Jul 4, 12:42 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 3, 4:50�pm, raven1 <quoththera...(a)nevermore.com> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 15:15:28 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > > > > wrote: > > > > > >On Jul 3, 1:21?pm, raven1 <quoththera...(a)nevermore.com> wrote: > > > > >> On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 21:57:37 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > > > > >> wrote: > > > > > >> >On Jul 2, 5:50?pm, raven1 <quoththera...(a)nevermore.com> wrote: > > > > >> >> On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 17:01:29 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno..com> > > > > >> >> wrote: > > > > > >> >> >On Jul 2, 1:32?pm, raven1 <quoththera...(a)nevermore.com> wrote: > > > > >> >> >> On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 05:35:47 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > > > > >> >> >> 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 - > > > > > >> >> >> >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. > > > > > >> >> >> IOW, you have nothing to support your claim. Thanks for clearing that > > > > >> >> >> up. > > > > > >> >> >You are free to believe or disbelieve what I said about this woman, > > > > >> >> >just as you are free to believe or disbelieve anything else I say. > > > > >> >> >Does this seem unfair to you? > > > > > >> >> What seems unclear to me is why you insist on violating your > > > > >> >> religion's commandment against bearing false witness. Quite frankly, > > > > >> >> you're insulting everyone's intelligence by telling such a transparent > > > > >> >> lie, although when combined with the fact that you seem to doubt > > > > >> >> everything anyone else tells you, however innocuous, it suggests that > > > > >> >> the reason might be that you're a pathological liar, projecting your > > > > >> >> problem onto everyone else.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > >> >> - Show quoted text - > > > > > >> >Sorry, but I do personally know a woman who was given that choice. > > > > > >> Repeating your claim does not make it any more believable. Perhaps if > > > > >> you were to provide a detailed account of > > > > > >> -what State and city this occurred in > > > > >> -what agency made such a demand, and > > > > >> -in what context, and on what legal or procedural basis > > > > > >> it might be slightly more believable. Until then, it's not the > > > > >> slightest bit credible. > > > > > >Uh huh, and you do not believe that it happens in China > > > > > Nice try, but you're not weaseling out of this. The question is not > > > > what happens in China, but what happens in the US, specifically to the > > > > woman you claim to know. Put up or shut up.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > Well, I would certainly not want to cause a bunch of atheists to > > > bother that woman. I think we need to talk about Hezekiah's tunnel > > > instead. > > > Robert B. Winn > > > If you want to emphasize the tunnel for the existence of your god, > > isn't the London going to be the existence of Harry Porter? > > If you recognize the fiction of Harry, shouldn't you know the human > > invention of a " god"? > > Or you wish to remain as hypocrite as any loon?- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > No, the tunnel is just a reference of something that atheists have > trouble denying, although they make every effort. The same with the > earthen ramp. Three different books of the Bible describe the > construction of the tunnel. The New Testament mentions the Pool of > Siloam , which is where the water goes which flows through the > tunnel. So there are verses in the New Testament as well as in the > Old Testament which the tunnel verifies. > Robert B. Winn Your argument here shows either your state of mind or you want to believe in bible, regardless of the parallel analogy in the two story books.
From: rbwinn on 4 Jul 2008 22:26 On Jul 4, 8:42�am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 08:28:00 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote > in alt.atheism: > > > > > > >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. > > As far as we can tell, God is a human invention. God never told us to do > anything. Sin, therefore, is also a human invention.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - So once an atheist enters into sin, there is no turning back from it. I guess that was why Josef Stalin killed 12 million people. Robert B. Winn
From: Free Lunch on 4 Jul 2008 22:29 On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 19:26:01 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in alt.atheism: >On Jul 4, 8:42?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 08:28:00 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote >> in alt.atheism: >> >> >> >> >> >> >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. >> >> As far as we can tell, God is a human invention. God never told us to do >> anything. Sin, therefore, is also a human invention.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > >So once an atheist enters into sin, there is no turning back from >it. I guess that was why Josef Stalin killed 12 million people. God is still a human invention. Clearly the fear of God does not stop you from lying in almost every post. I will not respond to you for a while, you have become far too nasty in your discussions here.
From: rbwinn on 4 Jul 2008 22:34 On Jul 4, 8:47�am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 08:37:10 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote > in alt.atheism: > > > > > > >On Jul 4, 5:25?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 04:27:50 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote > >> in alt.atheism: > > >> >On Jul 3, 10:55?pm, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: > >> >> On Jul 4, 12:42 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > >> ... > > >> >> > Well, I would certainly not want to cause a bunch of atheists to > >> >> > bother that woman. ?I think we need to talk about Hezekiah's tunnel > >> >> > instead. > >> >> > Robert B. Winn > > >> >> If you want to emphasize the tunnel for the existence of your god, > >> >> isn't the London going to be the existence of Harry Porter? > >> >> If you recognize the fiction of Harry, shouldn't you know the human > >> >> invention of a " god"? > >> >> Or you wish to remain as hypocrite as any loon?- Hide quoted text - > > >> >> - Show quoted text - > > >> >No, the tunnel is just a reference of something that atheists have > >> >trouble denying, although they make every effort. ?The same with the > >> >earthen ramp. ?Three different books of the Bible describe the > >> >construction of the tunnel. ?The New Testament mentions the Pool of > >> >Siloam , which is where the water goes which flows through the > >> >tunnel. ? So there are verses in the New Testament as well as in the > >> >Old Testament which the tunnel verifies. > > >> The actual evidence about the tunnel shows us that the stories in the > >> Bible about it are wrong. Please, by all means, keep telling us of the > >> evidence that the Bible is made up.- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > >Well, atheists, of course, are required to say that the Bible is > >wrong. � So what is the Bible wrong about? > > Why do you repeat that lie after you have been corrected repeatedly? > > Atheists are not required to do anything. Stop claiming otherwise. > > The Bible contains many mistakes, from the creation stories, the Flood > story, the Exodus, to the story about the Slaughter of the Innocents and > the darkness at noon on Good Friday. It even got the provenance of a > tunnel wrong. > > What do you think the Bible is right about?- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - The Bible is right about salvation. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 4 Jul 2008 22:36
On Jul 4, 8:47�am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 08:35:53 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote > in alt.atheism: > > > > > > >On Jul 4, 5:22?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > >> On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 21:42:00 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote > >> in alt.atheism: > > >> >On Jul 3, 4:50?pm, raven1 <quoththera...(a)nevermore.com> wrote: > >> >> On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 15:15:28 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > >> >> wrote: > > >> >> >On Jul 3, 1:21?pm, raven1 <quoththera...(a)nevermore.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 21:57:37 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > >> >> >> wrote: > > >> >> >> >On Jul 2, 5:50?pm, raven1 <quoththera...(a)nevermore.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 17:01:29 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno..com> > >> >> >> >> wrote: > > >> >> >> >> >On Jul 2, 1:32?pm, raven1 <quoththera...(a)nevermore.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 05:35:47 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > >> >> >> >> >> 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 - > > >> >> >> >> >> >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. > > >> >> >> >> >> IOW, you have nothing to support your claim. Thanks for clearing that > >> >> >> >> >> up. > > >> >> >> >> >You are free to believe or disbelieve what I said about this woman, > >> >> >> >> >just as you are free to believe or disbelieve anything else I say. > >> >> >> >> >Does this seem unfair to you? > > >> >> >> >> What seems unclear to me is why you insist on violating your > >> >> >> >> religion's commandment against bearing false witness. Quite frankly, > >> >> >> >> you're insulting everyone's intelligence by telling such a transparent > >> >> >> >> lie, although when combined with the fact that you seem to doubt > >> >> >> >> everything anyone else tells you, however innocuous, it suggests that > >> >> >> >> the reason might be that you're a pathological liar, projecting your > >> >> >> >> problem onto everyone else.- Hide quoted text - > > >> >> >> >> - Show quoted text - > > >> >> >> >Sorry, but I do personally know a woman who was given that choice. > > >> >> >> Repeating your claim does not make it any more believable. Perhaps if > >> >> >> you were to provide a detailed account of > > >> >> >> -what State and city this occurred in > >> >> >> -what agency made such a demand, and > >> >> >> -in what context, and on what legal or procedural basis > > >> >> >> it might be slightly more believable. Until then, it's not the > >> >> >> slightest bit credible. > > >> >> >Uh huh, and you do not believe that it happens in China > > >> >> Nice try, but you're not weaseling out of this. The question is not > >> >> what happens in China, but what happens in the US, specifically to the > >> >> woman you claim to know. Put up or shut up.- Hide quoted text - > > >> >> - Show quoted text - > > >> >Well, I would certainly not want to cause a bunch of atheists to > >> >bother that woman. ?I think we need to talk about Hezekiah's tunnel > >> >instead. > >> >Robert B. Winn > > >> As I understand the evidence, the tunnel is evidence that the Bible is > >> wrong. If I am mistaken, please provide evidence to the contrary.- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > >The Bible says that a conduit for water was dug between Gihon spring > >and the Pool of Siloam. > > But it was wrong about when it was dug.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - It was dug in 701 B.C. That was the year that the Assyrians besieged Jerusalem. Robert B. Winn |