Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Linda Fox on 7 Jul 2008 17:48 On Mon, 7 Jul 2008 05:16:30 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote: >On Jul 6, 8:35�pm, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: >> Why was he killed? >Bercause certain people in power wanted him dead. Oh, right. Those "people in power" means God, right, since his death was the fulfilment of the prophecies, since I'm sure you'll tell us that it was by his death that salvation was brought about? You may use both sides of the paper for your answer. Linda ff
From: rbwinn on 7 Jul 2008 20:06 On Jul 6, 9:42 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jul 6, 5:06 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >>> On Jul 6, 11:02�am, The Natural Philosopher <a...(a)b.c> wrote: > >>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>> My definition of sin was willful disobedience of God. �Bearing false > >>>>> witness about me would fall under the category of willful disobedience > >>>>> of God. > >>>> In that case you are totally guilty of that exact sin. > >>>> We have already established by your own definitions that you are a > >>>> sinful person (onkl Jesus is free of sin you said) , and your lack of > >>>> charity excommnunicates you as a Christian. (you wont talk to God on > >>>> anyones behalf..) > >>>> I think you are in deep trouble, dude. > >>> No, I am fine.  I say a little prayer every once in a while about > >>> atheists. > >> That one ever get answered? ;-)- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > Well, I know one atheist who became a Christian. > > Ah nice. I was just such a man. I eventually grew out of it though. :-)- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Well, you were just an atheist working undercover. If you were going back to atheism, you were never really a believer. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 7 Jul 2008 20:09 On Jul 7, 3:37�am, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > news:db983fc6-d541-4907-ba1e-103490e27a51(a)79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com... > > > > > It cannot be done. �I talk to scientists in sci.physics.relativity. > > That is all I am ever going to do. > > Robert B. Winn > > I have a sneaking suspicion that they never talk to you. > Rather like your relationship with God. > > -- > Steve O At one time when I was making mistakes, about half of the posts in sci.physics.relativity were directed to me. Since I arrived at equations that hold together, scientists do not post to me. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 7 Jul 2008 20:13 On Jul 7, 3:48�am, The Natural Philosopher <a...(a)b.c> wrote: > BuddyThunder wrote: > > rbwinn wrote: > >> On Jul 6, 12:58 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>> rbwinn wrote: > >>- > > >> Well, look spirit up in the dictionary. �If you do not believe in > >> spirit, then there is no way to explain it to you. > > > I looked it up and found lots of vague notions of intermediaries between > > body and soul. That kind of nonsense. > > > So there is no meaningful definition of "spirit" in reality? You made a > > positive claim about my "spirit", then choosing to define it in terms of > > itself. A kind of "spirit is spirit, what's wrong with you" argument. > > I'm none the wiser as to what you're actually referring to. > > The mediaeval understanding of spirit,was essentially what we today > would call the mind, as distinct and somewhat independent of, the body. > The concept of the 'objective observer' grew out of this particular > worldview. Science owes religious philosophy that much, at least.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Spirit could also be called intelligence. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 7 Jul 2008 20:15
On Jul 7, 4:31�am, The Natural Philosopher <a...(a)b.c> wrote: > hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: > > > Since we know that when human die, every thing is gone. > > The body decays and the consciousness disappear too. Nothing, except > > memory and children, stay. > > This is the human cycle and you are blind to it? > > As I have said before, lots of human like you are greedy, they want to > > be eternal. But an imaginary eternal heaven is for their god/gods, and > > not for human. > > Why are you always wanting to equate heaven for human, when it is > > supposed to be the home for god/gods? What sane sense do you have? > > The point is, that people who have nothing to lose except their lives, > are not controllable politically. If you give them something to lose > beyond that - their immortal souls - and tell them if they go against > the particular political institution you put in place to control them as > slaves - the church, they will lose even that, �then they may just be > stupid enough to go along with the fiction. > > Christianity offers two things to slaves: It makes them feel self > important, and it tells them that if they are good little slaves, they > will be equal to the highest in the land - possibly more than equal. > > Cui Bono? > > The slavemasters and priests, of course. > > Robbo is just a good little member of the Church of Latter Day Slaves, > that's all. > > The thought that he is an unimportant person, and will always be that > way, and that no one, not even God, actually gives a toss about him, and > once he is dead they will care even less, is so unappealing to his ego, > that he cannot bear to even consider the possibility it is true. It > takes great courage to be an Atheist, courage and humility. Robbo has > neither. > > All he has is his Faith. Remove that and he has nothing. Well, atheism has nothing to offer. Robert B. Winn |