Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Enkidu on 6 Jul 2008 23:48 hhyapster(a)gmail.com wrote in news:0689f94c-2c92-449a-a20f-b7918d66bef2 @c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com: > You are not talking any sense here. > What I am saying is that you have a god in the heaven and he is > supreme. When a being is supreme, he would give orders for things to > be done, or not allowing any thing he is not happy. > You can't talk, laugh, eat, smile, wonder around, move, run, look or > even breath, unless commanded. > Why do you think that's the better place to be? > No ***sane*** human would want to be there. ***sane*** That explains everything. -- Enkidu AA#2165 EAC Chaplain and ordained minister, ULC, Modesto, CA Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. -Mark Twain
From: Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al) on 7 Jul 2008 00:15 On Jul 7, 1:13 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > On Jul 6, 7:18 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > > > <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > On Jul 5, 1:07 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 3, 11:58 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > > > rbwinn wrote: > > > > > On Jul 3, 2:35 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > > > > >> rbwinn wrote: > > > > >>> On Jul 2, 6:11 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > > > >>> <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > > >>>> On Jul 3, 9:59 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > >>>>> On Jul 2, 1:28 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > > > >>>>> <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > > >>>>>> On Jul 2, 11:30 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > >>>>>>> On Jul 2, 12:13 am, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > > > >>>>>>> <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > > >>>>>>>> On Jul 2, 3:34 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> 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. > > > > >>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn > > > > >>>>>>>> That doesn't relate evolution to a fable. > > > > >>>>>>>> Do you ever answer a question that isn't just from your own > > > > >>>>>>>> imagination? > > > > >>>>>>>> Al- Hide quoted text - > > > > >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > > >>>>>>> It happened just the way Paul said it would. > > > > >>>>>>> Robert B. Winn > > > > >>>>>> If you want to converse with the voices in your head, could you just > > > > >>>>>> leave out alt.atheism in your replies? Your posts are clearly not > > > > >>>>>> related to anything you're clicking reply on. > > > > >>>>>> Al- Hide quoted text - > > > > >>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > > >>>>> As I understand it I have given a response to one of your posts that > > > > >>>>> does not comform to atheistic rules. > > > > >>>>> Robert B. Winn > > > > >>>> Those would be those rules about not lying blatantly? > > > > >>>> They're more like guidelines, and more Human than specifically > > > > >>>> atheist. > > > > >>> Well, Al, I always try to tell the truth. Sometimes I am given > > > > >>> information by atheists that turns out to be false, such as a large > > > > >>> portion of what I was taught in school. > > > > >> I'd love some examples of these "atheistic lies". You won't provide any > > > > >> though, right?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > Well, we could start with Albert Einstein's description of > > > > > transmission of light, which is not a lie, but turns out to be false. > > > > > It requires a bona fide miracle to work. This is one miracle that > > > > > atheists never criticize. > > > > > Can we get a real physicist with a loony filter here to translate?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > The Lorentz equations are > > > > x'=(x-vt)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) > > > y'=y > > > z'=z > > > t'=(t-vx/c^2)/sqrt(1-v^2/c^2) > > > > These equations require that a moving object contract in length in the > > > direction of movement. When the object reaches the speed of light its > > > length is 0. > > > Robert B. Winn > > > An object can't reach the speed of light. Get over it. > > > Al- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > So what about photons? The Lorentz equations have them as little flat > disks with circumference but no length. > Robert B. Winn And? Al
From: Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al) on 7 Jul 2008 00:17 On Jul 7, 1:16 pm, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: > On Jul 5, 8:30 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 4, 7:29�pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 19:26:01 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(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.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > I think that is wonderful. > > Robert B. Winn > > Yes, Free Lunch may be feeling just as tired as I do. > You don't have a sane mind and cannot argue logically and reasonably. Yeah, well. I gave up the logical argument thing a while back. I just call him on the obvious lies and physcis gibberish now. The rest is just messing about. Al
From: BuddyThunder on 7 Jul 2008 00:26 rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 6, 4:45 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Jul 6, 1:53 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>> On Jul 6, 12:44 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>> On Jul 5, 2:31 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Jul 5, 2:42 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 4, 3:22 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 3, 11:28 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 3, 1:55 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 2, 8:35 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 2, 2:03 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 1, 11:59 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 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.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have not made any claims to atheists except that the Jews dug a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tunnel to be used as a conduit for water, and the Assyrians built a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ramp out of dirt to get over the city wall at Lachish. To an atheist >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these might seem like supernatural claims because there were actually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people working to accomplish both of these tasks instead of just >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> giving orders, criticism, etc., the way atheists do. Since atheists >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have been unable to visualize these two events, there is no reason to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proceed on to anything more complex. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then we're in total agreement. A tunnel was dug a long time ago and it >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> got mentioned in some ancient writings, providing absolutlely no support >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for any supernatural claims. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So why all the posts?- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You do not seem to be visualizing it very well. The Assyrians came >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> into Judea with an army of hundreds of thousands on their way home >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after taking a big chunk of Egypt. Judea was a little dot in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> middle of the Assyrian kingdom, which extended from the Caspian Sea to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Egypt. So why was there still a Kingdom of Judea when King >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sennacherib got back to his capitol city of Ninevah? Sennacherib >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> himself says there was on the column he had erected in Ninevah. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Or so the story goes.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What do you mean so the story goes? The column erected by Sennacherib >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in Ninevah is still there today. He plainly says on it that Hezekiah >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> paid tribute to him, and he was such a nice guy that he just went home >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> after he got the money. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Great. Sennacherib went home and left Jerusalem unsacked. That doesn't >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> mean that it was due to the angel of the lord slaughtering 185,000 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> troops in a night. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you favour the oddly magical Biblical account over Sennacherib's?- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 186,000 troops. Chaldean historians of the same time said that the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Assyrian army died of plague while besieging Jerusalem, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sennacherib fled in great fear back to his own city of Ninevah. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sennacherib made no mention of losing his army on the column he >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> erected. He seems to have pretended to his fellow Assyrians that the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> army was still somewhere doing something, but his own two sons >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> murdered him, probably because they were upset about him losing the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> army. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> So where are God's footprints in all of this? Arguments for both sides >>>>>>>>>>>>>> can be made without invoking magic.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, from a military standpoint, the Jews had no chance whatsoever >>>>>>>>>>>>> against the Assyrians. But when it was all over, it was the Assyrian >>>>>>>>>>>>> king who lost everything, including his own life. So I would say, let >>>>>>>>>>>>> atheists of today explain it their way, and let Christians explain it >>>>>>>>>>>>> their way. The Jews explained it by saying that an angel of the Lord >>>>>>>>>>>>> killed 186,000 Assyrian troops. That is a matter of record. It is >>>>>>>>>>>>> recorded in three different books of the Old Testament. >>>>>>>>>>>> The Old Testament isn't particularly compelling evidence, it suggests >>>>>>>>>>>> that there was a global flood and special creation over the course of >>>>>>>>>>>> six days. It might be a "matter of record" on some things, but it is >>>>>>>>>>>> definitely not on others.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>> Well, I am sure the Jews feel bad that you do not like the Old >>>>>>>>>>> Testament, but it says what it says. It says in three different >>>>>>>>>>> books that an angel of the Lord went through the camp of the Assyrians >>>>>>>>>>> and slew 186,000 soldiers. >>>>>>>>>> It also says that the universe was created a handful of thousands of >>>>>>>>>> years ago. The Bible is not reliable.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>> Well, as I said before, you atheists believe in relativity of time >>>>>>>>> unless you are talking about the earth. Then you insist on absolute >>>>>>>>> time. >>>>>>>> Instead you make some ridiculous claims about the relativity of time >>>>>>>> completely without evidential basis, or... any rational support at all. >>>>>>>> The Earth is older than 6500 thousand years old. Much older. I'll go >>>>>>>> with the many independent lines of verification on that one.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>> Well, that is fine, but why is relativity of time something that >>>>>>> exists except when talking about the earth? >>>>>> Because Earth isn't travelling at near light speed. I'm no physicist but...- Hide quoted text - >>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>> So what makes you believe that motion is the only factor that would >>>>> affect time? >>>> Gee, I dunno. Until you back up your notions, it's hard to know what >>>> you're on about. >>>> What makes you think that you know better than every mainstream >>>> peer-reviewed physicist on the planet?- Hide quoted text - >>>> - Show quoted text - >>> Every mainstream peer reviewed physicist on the planet uses the >>> Lorentz equation. There is no way that the Lorentz equations could be >>> more than a close approximation. >> I don't have the grounding in physics to sensibly contend the point. I >> will delegate anything beyond my high-school physics to mainstream >> scientific consensus. You seem to be at odds with them, if you believe >> you really have a breakthrough for physics, you should publish so we may >> all benefit from the new knowledge.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > It cannot be done. I talk to scientists in sci.physics.relativity. > That is all I am ever going to do. Then you'll forgive me for backing the mainstream. Hate to be a sheep, just gotta go where the evidence points.
From: BuddyThunder on 7 Jul 2008 00:29
rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 6, 4:26�pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> On Mon, 07 Jul 2008 08:59:50 +1200, BuddyThunder >> <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote in alt.atheism: >> >> >> >> >> >>> rbwinn wrote: >>>> On Jul 6, 12:57 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>> On Jul 5, 2:40 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>> On Jul 4, 8:37?pm, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Jul 4, 11:32 pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 4 Jul 2008 08:26:53 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(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? >>>>>>>>> The bible contains enormous mistakes to glorify god yet plainly >>>>>>>>> telling us that god is a useless being. >>>>>>>>> The early Jews who wrote it were not educated, or might be drunk. Yes, >>>>>>>>> more drunk than wake.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>> Well, as you say, if you think God is a useless being, then you will >>>>>>>> choose to be with the beings you think of as being useful, other >>>>>>>> atheists. >>>>>>> So you concede there are many mistakes or untruths in the Bible then?- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>> Why does it depend on me? � The Bible is what it is. �If you do not >>>>>> like the Bible, read something else. >>>>> No answer? I just wanted to know how reliable you thought the Bible was. >>>>> I know it to be full of errors and distortions, just wondered what your >>>>> position on it was. You seem to think it better than other sacred texts >>>>> for some reason.- Hide quoted text - >>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>> I think the Bible is very reliable. �The Jews were very meticulous as >>>> far as preserving ancient writings. �For instance, the Dead Sea >>>> scrolls of Isaiah are a good example of how accurately the Bible was >>>> translated. >>> The Bible was very accurately transcribed - for humans. They did an >>> amazing job. Not a perfect job, there are lots of differences between >>> the early versions we have, but not bad for a bunch of people. >>> It's the content that I find even less reliable though, that's what I >>> was driving at, and I think you know that. >>> Much reported as history in the Bible simply never happened. No global >>> flood, no special creation, no exodus... >> Yes, copying a mistake faithfully does not make the mistake go away.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Well, that is something atheists have a lot of experience with. Well, ------------------------------- Ho! <whack> |