Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: rbwinn on 10 Jul 2008 18:27 On Jul 10, 5:20�am, The Natural Philosopher <a...(a)b.c> wrote: > Alex W. wrote: > > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > >news:08134c4b-46c5-454f-9a5f-47756eddfd59(a)s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com.... > > > Without religion to oppose, atheists would do nothing at all. > > Thats not true. They just would walk away from any discussion on the > subject thankfully, and get on with living, and in some case, trying to > understand the extraordinary universe we seem to find ourselves in. > > Really the transition fom a Gaia type animism picture of the universe, > to a personalised supernatural creator and law giver, to an impersonal > set of amoral laws..is not as abrupt as the fanboys would like to think. > > What is unusual, historically, is the fanatical faith needed to maintain > the concept of a personal and moral God, in the face of Reason. > > Mediaevally speaking, no one questioned that the world and events moved > according to some vast and ineffable and mysterious pattern, and the > concept of a supernatural intelligence and a plan, was pretty > reasonable..until science started uncovering the rules, which turned out > to be mindlessly simple, totally impersonal and implacable, and > impervious to personal appeal. And no evidence of intelligence at all. > > Note that none of this necessarily negates the proposition that faith, > belief, prayer, and a live lived AS IF there were an afterlife,is not a > Good Thing for people and civilisations. > > But none of these even indicate that what is believed in must of > necessity be true. > > Archers were able to hit targets long before Newton identified the Force > of Gravity. > > Understanding of the presumed science behind phenonmena is no > pre-requisite for learning to deal with them. Any ad-hoc theory that has > pragmatic use will do. > > If you look at religion in that light, it makes a lot of sense. > > Mired in dogma however, the fanatical Theist simply persists in the > useless, long past its sell-by date. > > > > > > > ========== > > > ..... other than get on with our lives ....- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - If atheists want to believe that they are not intelligent, I see no problem with that. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 10 Jul 2008 18:34 On Jul 10, 5:23�am, The Loan Arranger <no...(a)nowhere.invalid> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jul 9, 7:06 am, The Loan Arranger <no...(a)nowhere.invalid> wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >>> People who get heatstroke usually die fairly soon. > >> You clearly know as much about medicine as you do about Biblical history. > > >> That's not a compliment, by the way. > > > Well, you obviously do not know what heat stroke is. �A person with > > heatstroke is almost dead. �You are thinking of heat exhaustion.. > > I know exactly what heatstroke is, you berk. I wouldn't have made my > comment if I didn't. > > Your claim that sufferers "usually die fairly soon" �is completely > incorrect. It is potentially fatal, particularly in the weak, if > untreated, but the simple fact is that most sufferers manage a complete > recovery after treatment. > > TLA Heatstroke is caused by the brain shutting down from being overheated. A person with heatstroke is unconscious, their body is red and overheated, their brain is failing because of heat. A medical doctor who taught a mine safety class I was in said that heatstroke is fatal more than half of the time. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 10 Jul 2008 18:43 On Jul 10, 10:47�am, Linda Fox <linda...(a)ntlworld.com> wrote: > On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 03:46:09 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > wrote: > > > > >The Atonement of Christ did not happen on the cross. �It happened in > >the Garden of Gethsemane. � > > Oh, bloody Mary mother of dog! Is THAT what they are teaching in your > church? I'd stop going there if I were you. It goes completely against > all Christian doctrine. But then I'm beginning to suspect that you're > not a real Christian at all > > Linda ff The Atonement took place in the Garden of Gethsemane. Now, tell me, why does that make an atheist so irate? I thought you atheists did not even believe in an atonement. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 10 Jul 2008 18:48 On Jul 10, 12:56�pm, The Natural Philosopher <a...(a)b.c> wrote: > Linda Fox wrote: > > On Thu, 10 Jul 2008 03:46:09 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > > wrote: > >> The Atonement of Christ did not happen on the cross. �It happened in > >> the Garden of Gethsemane. � > > > Oh, bloody Mary mother of dog! Is THAT what they are teaching in your > > church? I'd stop going there if I were you. It goes completely against > > all Christian doctrine. But then I'm beginning to suspect that you're > > not a real Christian at all > > Allegedly he's a mormon. The guys that built Las Vegas , with govt money... > > > > > Linda ff- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - I have never been to Las Vegas. Anyway, Las Vegas was built by organized crime and Howard Hughes. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 10 Jul 2008 18:50
On Jul 10, 3:04 pm, James Burns <burns...(a)osu.edu> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jul 8, 1:20�pm, James Burns <burns...(a)osu.edu> wrote: > >>rbwinn wrote: > > >>>Well, all you are doing is saying that God is guilty of > >>>murder every time a natural death occurs. �I do not > >>>think you will get far with that idea. > > [...] > > >>Assuming that you choose to clarify what you are trying to > >>say, thanks in advance. > > Well, according to the Bible, natural events are controlled > > by humans on the earth. > > If I take this as the clarification I asked for, of what > you mean by "natural death" (which I think most people > would consider a death that is not caused by humans, > not cause by diseases, not caused by anything identifiable), > then I suppose you are saying that no deaths are > natural deaths. Do I understand you properly? > > If this is what you mean, then you shouldn't be > surprised if others have difficulties understanding you. > > >              If the people obey God's > > commandments, they prosper in the land, the elements are > > tempered in their favor, and their lives are safe an > > protected by heaven.  This does not happen very often. > >   We know that in the last days, wickedness on earth > > will be greater than at any other time in the history > > of earth.  So we cannot expect favorable conditions. > >    The choice to have things this way was not God's. > > It was made by men who reject God.  If the people in > > Noah's day had listened to Noah, there would have been > > no flood.  So how do you figure it was God's faullt? > > You seem to be arguing that God is not responsible for > anything. That seems to fit well with my own position, > although we do arrive there from very different > directions. > > Keep up the good work. We'll make an atheist of you yet. > > Just kidding. I don't really believe you're serious when > you argue this way. A few posts after you post how God > is responsible for nothing, you will post that God is > responsible for everything. > > There is no consistency in what you write, but maybe > you see no problem in that. Do you see logic as a trap for > the conscience? > > Jim Burns Well, you atheists were the ones who were saying God should be indicted for murder because natural deaths occur. Which court do you plan to file that case in? Robert B. Winn |