Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Smiler on 7 Jul 2008 22:58 "Alex W." <ingilt(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:6d934qF1eu8nU1(a)mid.individual.net... > > "Smiler" <Smiler(a)Joe.King.com> wrote in message > news:m6zbk.192976$NN3.170950(a)newsfe08.ams2... >> >> "rbwinn" <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in message >> news:211e4c29-e783-4569-b7f9- > >> >> Well, his sheep know his voice. Atheists do not. >> ---------------------------------- >> >> Jesus loves ewe! >> > > Jesus was Welsh? > More likely, from Norfolk ;-) Smiler, The godless one a.a.# 2279
From: Smiler on 7 Jul 2008 23:17 "rbwinn" <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in message news:560a31f7-65ac-4989-949b-224ea4c84f58(a)k30g2000hse.googlegroups.com... 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, ============================ Ho! <whack> Smiler, The godless one a.a.# 2279
From: hhyapster on 7 Jul 2008 23:24 On Jul 7, 9:06 pm, rich...(a)rmeredith.co.uk (Richard Meredith) wrote: > In article <sba274h0m6sfce2dq2q7nqsrh2lca5p...(a)4ax.com>, > > > > lu...(a)nofreelunch.us (Free Lunch) wrote: > > *From:* Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> > > *Date:* Sun, 06 Jul 2008 15:24:39 -0500 > > > On Sun, 6 Jul 2008 16:25 +0100 (BST), rich...(a)rmeredith.co.uk (Richard > > Meredith) wrote in alt.atheism: > > > >In article <dv3v641nlblt9lrl26j45pnb5v085e8...(a)4ax.com>, > > >lu...(a)nofreelunch.us (Free Lunch) wrote: > > > >> >Atheists, theists - what's the difference? They're both equally > > >> dogmatic > > >> >that what they happen to believe is the one and only version of > > the >> truth, > > >> >despite a complete inability to prove it - or even put up a > > decent >> set of > > >> >repeatable and verifiable evidence that supports their position. > > > >> What rubbish. Atheists say they don't believe in gods. The lack of > > >> evidence for gods is sufficient not to believe in them. It is not > > >> necessary for atheists to prove that gods do not exist to not > > believe >> in > > >> them. Do you believe in Thor because you cannot prove he does not > > >> exist? > > > >I don't believe in Thor but that doesn't give me any authority to > > insist > > >on his nonexistence to someone who does: if someone does, or claims > > to, > > >that's their business and none of mine. The atheists who have the > > marked > > >similarity to theists are not those who happen not to share the > > beliefs > > >of the theists, but are content to let them believe whatever they > > want to, > > >but those who get in longwinded, dogmatic and frequently ill-tempered > > >arguments about who is right, despite neither side having any real > > >evidence either that they are right or that their opponent is wrong. > > > Once again, you erroneously equate the lack of evidence that the > > theists > > have with the lack of evidence that those who reject the doctrine of > > the > > theists. They are not equivalent. In all analysis of whether A exists, > > it is appropriate and necessary to start with the assumption that A > > does > > not exist and find evidence to disprove it. You defend silly claims, > > the > > flakier the better, because there is no evidence that the silly claim > > is > > false. > > If a claim is silly then evidence will exist that it is silly. If no such > evidence exists there is no justification for describing it as silly. > Your argument, therefore, is one of defending prejudice, since you are > assuming that the position you are attacking is silly, without evidence > that it is anything of the sort. > > There is an equal lack of evidence that the doctrines of theists and > strong atheists are correct; in the lack of such evidence there is no > justification for assuming that there is any fundamental difference in > the status of a viewpoint supported by faith. You are banking on a philosophical context, or approach. When we talk about evidence, we are then sure of things or event or happening. Anything solid in this world would have the possibility of a definition. But a god...can you provide a definition and his existence? You very well know that a heaven and hell thing are the invention of human imagination and yet you believe we should not doubt them? And the god is showering this world with diseases, right? Why is that? A decent human can have a brain that is full of sense, in search of logic but a clouded mind will never be cleared of dogma.
From: Smiler on 7 Jul 2008 23:41 "rbwinn" <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in message news:ccfc2d95-1e69-423c-bc40-d83d5b11ab67(a)f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com... On Jul 6, 8:33 pm, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: > On Jul 5, 8:41 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> 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. > > Robert B. Winn > > You do not realize that your bible has been projecting your god to be > useless all the time? > Just an example, Jesus, being the son of god, was not saved by the > god? > Another one, your god flooded the world to kill all human? > What sort of god you think he is?- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Where ............................................... Ho! <whack> Smiler, The godles one a.a.# 2279
From: hhyapster on 7 Jul 2008 23:54
On Jul 7, 11:35 pm, ben_dolan_...(a)reet.com (Ben Dolan) wrote: > rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > Well, I would not want to be relying on athiests if I ever got a > > heatstrroke. > > Robert B. Winn > > Well, apparently you already suffered heatstroke or other affliction > which severely impaired your ability to think like an adult... Yes, he is 60 now but he has wasted his time on earth. The trouble is also that he does not realize that there is no heaven to go to. |