Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: BuddyThunder on 21 Jun 2008 07:22 rbwinn wrote: > On Jun 20, 4:37 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Jun 20, 2:40 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>> On Jun 20, 5:34 am, TT <tte...(a)wowway.com> wrote: >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>> On Jun 19, 5:55 am, TT <tte...(a)wowway.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>> Well, go ahead and talk about God, but I can tell you ahead of time, >>>>>>>>> you do not know anything about God. No atheist does. >>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>>>>>> nahh...we'll discus what we want...you choose your fiction..and >>>>>>>> that's all you have been expressing faith in..nothing else...and we'll >>>>>>>> point out our fiction...and we won't base a worldview on our inability >>>>>>>> to deal with reality like you do....Don't like it? Pray for >>>>>>>> us...otherwise..tough... >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> �Cowardice asks the question, 'Is it safe?' Expediency asks the >>>>>>>> question, 'Is it politic?' But conscience asks the question, 'Is it >>>>>>>> right?' And there comes a time when one must take a position that is >>>>>>>> neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but because conscience tells one >>>>>>>> it is right.� >>>>>>>> Martin Luther king Jr.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>> Well, people would do better if they learned to do their own praying. >>>>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>>>> Thinking is preferred by everyone else here..it actually does >>>>>> something... >>>>> Well, so you think that you can destroy Christianity. That was what >>>>> this conversation was about when it began. That was why I was >>>>> pointing out that the Bible was the best selling book in the world. >>>>> Not so, said atheists. Harry Potter is the best selling book in the >>>>> world. >>>> That's a bit melodramatic, isn't it? I'm just interested in your beliefs >>>> and how they're rationalised. Destroying Christianity is a ridiculous >>>> aspiration, you'd constantly be disappointed!- Hide quoted text - >>> So why do atheists have schools teaching that Christianity is false? >>> If they do not have the aspiration, why are they trying to do it? >> Do we? What schools? What fresh hell is this?!- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Public schools. Could you explain how they teach that Christianity is false?
From: BuddyThunder on 21 Jun 2008 07:23 rbwinn wrote: > On Jun 20, 4:56�pm, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: >> "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote in messagenews:0031b0a4-7361-43c8-a329-7be595f6a1bf(a)j1g2000prb.googlegroups.com... >> On Jun 19, 10:40 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: >> >>> On Jun 18, 9:19 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" >>> <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: >>>> On Jun 19, 1:18 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: >>>>> On Jun 18, 5:41?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>>>> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 13:07:49 -0700 (PDT), asilentskeptic >>>>>> <asilentskep...(a)gmail.com> wrote in alt.atheism: >>>>>>> On Jun 18, 12:51 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Jun 16, 11:29 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 16, 1:19 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> >>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 16, 12:50 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> >>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 15, 6:32?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 05:46:58 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 14, 6:33?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 12:48:13 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 14, 6:52?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 06:45:55 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote in alt.atheism: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 12, 9:45?pm, none <""doug\"@(none)"> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think you should explain your ideas to the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> twelve apostles after the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resurrection takes place, Darrell. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So you do not know how many there are (if any) or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> their names >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and you just hide behind the statement above to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cover your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ignorance. ?Just like in your failed attempts to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> argue >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> physics, you do not even know enough to argue your >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> religious >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> beliefs and have to retreat to claiming ignorance. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I did not claim ignorance. ?I just told Darrell to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> look them up >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> himself. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You admit failure, no matter how you describe it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why, because Darrell is not going to look them up? ?I >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do not care what >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Darrell does. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You told him to look it up because you didn't have the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evidence. You ran >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> away from the question.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nope. ?I told atheists a long time ago I was not going >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be their >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> researcher. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You refuse to do the research to back up your own >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> claims. You are no >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one's researcher. You worship ignorance.- Hide quoted >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> text - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, I did a little ?better than the atheists on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hezekiah's tunnel >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and the ramp over the city wall at Lachish. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> No. You only think you did. For some reason. Could you >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tell us why?- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, I can do that. ?There is an actual earthen ramp built >>>>>>>>>>>>> by the >>>>>>>>>>>>> Assyrian army that still exists today. ?There is an actual >>>>>>>>>>>>> conduit for >>>>>>>>>>>>> water between Gihon spring and the Pool of Siloam, just as >>>>>>>>>>>>> the Bible >>>>>>>>>>>>> says there is. ?The problem that atheists have is that J.K. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Rowling is >>>>>>>>>>>>> from northern England. ?When she wrote about Harry Potter >>>>>>>>>>>>> leaving from >>>>>>>>>>>>> the train station in London, probably the only thing she >>>>>>>>>>>>> knew about >>>>>>>>>>>>> the train station was its name. ? So comparing the Biblical >>>>>>>>>>>>> account, >>>>>>>>>>>>> which can be easily verified by going to Israel and looking >>>>>>>>>>>>> at the >>>>>>>>>>>>> ramp and the conduit for water, to what J.K. Rowling wrote >>>>>>>>>>>>> in a book >>>>>>>>>>>>> which she said was fiction means nothing to me, however >>>>>>>>>>>>> sacred it may >>>>>>>>>>>>> be to you atheists. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>>>>>>>>>> So, substituting ... >>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, I can do that. ?There is an actual major city founded >>>>>>>>>>>> by the >>>>>>>>>>>> Romans that still exists today. ?There is an actual railway >>>>>>>>>>>> station, >>>>>>>>>>>> just as Harry Potter says there is. >>>>>>>>>>>> We know that Harry Potter is fiction. You're claiming >>>>>>>>>>>> Biblical authority >>>>>>>>>>>> SOLELY on the existence of some mentioned ancient sites. >>>>>>>>>>>> We're pointing >>>>>>>>>>>> out that by the same logic, you would be forced to admit >>>>>>>>>>>> Harry Potter's >>>>>>>>>>>> authority. If can't t accept its authority, then your >>>>>>>>>>>> argument need >>>>>>>>>>>> reexamination. Maybe the Bible needs more support for its >>>>>>>>>>>> extraordinary >>>>>>>>>>>> claims.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>> There is also a woman who calls herself J.K. Rowling who says >>>>>>>>>>> she >>>>>>>>>>> wrote the Harry Potter books as fiction, regardless of how >>>>>>>>>>> many >>>>>>>>>>> atheists believe them. >>>>>>>>>>> I am not claiming Biblical authority SOLEY on the existence >>>>>>>>>>> of some >>>>>>>>>>> mentioned ancient sites. ?An atheist claimed that there was >>>>>>>>>>> nothing in >>>>>>>>>>> the Bible that could be verified by anything that exists >>>>>>>>>>> today, so I >>>>>>>>>>> mentioned Hezekiah's tunnel. ?It was not an argument. >>>>>>>>>> We'll have to take your word about the claim, but okay. You >>>>>>>>>> were >>>>>>>>>> correct, and I don't think that point is contended. Some >>>>>>>>>> things in the >>>>>>>>>> Bible are verifiable. >>>>>>>>>>> It was information about something mentioned in the Bible >>>>>>>>>>> that can be seen >>>>>>>>>>> today. ?And as we can see, atheists still claim that >>>>>>>>>>> Hezekiah's tunnel >>>>>>>>>>> is exactly like Harry Potter leaving for wizard's school, >>>>>>>>>>> including >>>>>>>>>>> you. ?No, Hezekiah's tunnel is not exactly like Harry Potter >>>>>>>>>>> leaving >>>>>>>>>>> for wizard's school. ?You atheists are not going to be able >>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>> convince me that Hezekiah's tunnel is exactly like Harry >>>>>>>>>>> Potter >>>>>>>>>>> leaving for wizard's school. ?As long as you continue to try >>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>>>>> convince me that Hezekiah's tunnel is exactly like Harry >>>>>>>>>>> Potter >>>>>>>>>>> leaving for wizard's school, I will continue to say that you >>>>>>>>>>> do not >>>>>>>>>>> believe Hezekiah's tunnel exists because Harry Potter does >>>>>>>>>>> not exist >>>>>>>>>>> and wizard's school does not exist. >>>>>>>>>> Then you would be persisting in your error. If you were simply >>>>>>>>>> trying to >>>>>>>>>> say that at least SOME of the Bible is true, then okay, you've >>>>>>>>>> made your >>>>>>>>>> point. We thought you were arguing for the accuracy of the >>>>>>>>>> WHOLE on the >>>>>>>>>> basis of these minor points. Okay, a whole lot of arguing over >>>>>>>>>> nothing >>>>>>>>>> now that we know what your claim really is. (Is that it?) >>>>>>>>>> If you are saying that Hezekiah's >>>>>>>>>>> tunnel is exactly like Harry Potter leaving for wizard's >>>>>>>>>>> school, then >>>>>>>>>>> you are saying that Hezekiah's tunnel does not exist. >>>>>>>>>> That is of course a deliberate misrepresentation, but I think >>>>>>>>>> I can >>>>>>>>>> understand why you're making it now.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>> It is not a deliberate misrepresentation. ?The Biblical account >>>>>>>>> of the >>>>>>>>> Assyrian invasion of Judea is much more believable than any >>>>>>>>> other >>>>>>>>> account of the same events, including the account of >>>>>>>>> Sennacherib, the >>>>>>>>> Assyrian king, which is the account that atheists promote >>>>>>>>> because it >>>>>>>>> is different from the Biblical one. >>>>>>>> You would need to say WHY you find it more believable than the >>>>>>>> mainstream account if you want any support for your views. I >>>>>>>> don't have >>>>>>>> any familiarity with the events in question, so I don't have an >>>>>>>> opinion >>>>>>>> either way (or some third, unexplored option), depite being an >>>>>>>> evil atheist. >>>>>>>>> But none of these ancient >>>>>>>>> accounts have anything to do with Harry Potter, a character in >>>>>>>>> a >>>>>>>>> modern work of fiction. >>>>>>>> I agree, they don't have anything to do with it, except that >>>>>>>> drawing >>>>>>>> support for the Bible's claims on this basis is like trying to >>>>>>>> support >>>>>>>> Harry Potter by mentioning London. If you believe the Bible is >>>>>>>> Truth >>>>>>>> because of these sites, then you should believe that Harry Potter >>>>>>>> is >>>>>>>> Truth for the same reason. >>>>>>>> ? ?Nevertheless, all I had to do to get a >>>>>>>>> response about Harry Potter was mention Hezekiah's tunnel, a >>>>>>>>> conduit >>>>>>>>> for water constructed during the Assyrian invasion or the >>>>>>>>> earthen ramp >>>>>>>>> that the Assyrian army built to get over the city wall at >>>>>>>>> Lachish. >>>>>>>>> According to atheists, these evidences of the Assyrian invasion >>>>>>>>> were >>>>>>>>> exactly like Harry Potter leaving for wizard's school. >>>>>>>> We believe you're trying to show Biblical authority by mentioning >>>>>>>> these >>>>>>>> sites. While you persist in this logical fallacy, we're going to >>>>>>>> stick >>>>>>>> with the Harry Potter comparrison. :-) >>>>>>>> Anyone hysterical yet? >>>>>>> I gave up after using two further examples and some further >>>>>>> comments. >>>>>>> Spiderman and the Iliad. >>>>>>> I don't like to deal with the deliberately obtuse. >>>>>> Yes, Mr. Winn has gone beyond merely being obtuse to being >>>>>> intentionally >>>>>> dishonest. Even the LDS and other Christians should chastise him for >>>>>> his >>>>>> lies. I don't expect him to ever repent of his foolish dishonesty.- >>>>>> Hide quoted text - >>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>> Well, I mentioned two things, a ramp and a conduit for water >>>>> constructed during the Assyrian invasion of Judea. �Which of those do >>>>> you claim I lied about? >>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>> You lied about the reason for posting those two "facts". �The bible >>>> mentions cows too, and there are cows. �We'll ignore the cud-chewing >>>> rabbits for the moment, but no-one said everything mentioned in the >>>> bible was falsehood. �Just that it was generally a work of fiction. >>>> You then leapt in and told everyone that "Atheists are always saying >>>> everything in the bible is false." �LIE. >>>> Al- Hide quoted text - >>>> - Show quoted text - >>> Well, no, it is not a lie, Al. �Even if an atheist appears to say that >>> something in the Bible is true, there is always something in the >>> statement they make that claims it is also false. �For instance, with >>> regard to the two things I mentioned, it is impossible for an atheist >>> to discuss these two things without also discussing Harry Potter, >>> Spiderman, or some other fictional thing that shows what they really >>> think about it. �Look at your statement. �The Bible mentions cows, but >>> the Bible mentions rabbits chewing cud, so the mention of cows in the >>> Bible proves that the Bible is untrue. �Atheists are incapable of >>> discussing the Bible rationally. >>> Robert B. Winn >> I'm thinking you're incapable of discussing the bible rationally. �I >> didn't at any stage say that the bible mentioning cows makes it >> false. �Your interpretations of what people are saying is massively >> out of line with what is being said. >> What I think we can all agree on is that pretty much every book has >> some truths and some falsities. �Yes, Cows and Tunnels do exist. �But >> they can't be used to prove other aspects in the book. �If there were >> hundreds of other sources claiming Rabbits chewed their cud then we >> might start to think it's true, and if we could physically verify that >> this happens, we would accept it as true. �But we're not discounting >> it simply because it's in the bible. �We're saying that is false >> because it's verifiably false because of what we can see about rabbit >> behaviour and several million dissections. >> It would be logically inconsistent to say something is wrong because >> it's in the bible. �That would be a circular argument. >> ---------------------------------------------- >> He's quite comfortable with circular arguments.....He uses them all the >> time. >> > I am not the one denying Christ. And what is your evidence forming the foundation of that belief?
From: Alex W. on 21 Jun 2008 07:50 "BuddyThunder" <nospam(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote in message news:485c8ff5$1(a)clear.net.nz... > Alex W. wrote: >> "BuddyThunder" <nospam(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote in message >> news:485c2855$1(a)clear.net.nz... >> >> >>> Please don't mention cricket, I'm a Kiwi. >>> >> >> Ah, an Aussie with manners! >> Good on yer. >> :-) > > Cheers mate! No worries. Just be gentle with our rugby lads .... > >> >> >>> You're right though, Marmite is actually the best reason to believe in >>> God that I've seen. Greases axles and puts hairs on your chest! >> >> Marmite, WD40 and gaffer tape -- what more does a man need? > > Just a shed to chuck it all in. Hey now, why do you want to chuck it all in? There's a world out there full of famous rugby victories, chardonnay and lamb chops, marmite and warm women ....
From: Alex W. on 21 Jun 2008 07:52 "BuddyThunder" <nospam(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote in message news:485ce2dc$1(a)clear.net.nz... > I wasn't aware anyone was trying to stop you doing anything. Fire away my > boy, maybe we should discuss your persecution complex? "Infamy, infamy, they've all got it in for me!" -- julius Caesar
From: rbwinn on 21 Jun 2008 08:36
On Jun 20, 10:30 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jun 20, 3:14 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >>> On Jun 20, 5:44�am, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > >>>>news:91aff9de-ef71-4690-8e27-742500d48b32(a)b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com.... > >>>> Well, you atheists have some strange ideas. �Your problem is that all > >>>> you have is talk. �We have the Bible. > >>>> ============= > >>>> OK then, different tack. > >>>> What do you have? > >>>> What is the Bible? > >>>> What makes up the Bible? > >>>> Who decided what is and is not part of the Bible? > >>>> Even if you believe, how can you TRUST a collection of documents that were > >>>> transcribed from oral tradition, that have been edited, redacted, translated > >>>> from previous translations, whose components were added or omitted according > >>>> to pervailing theological fashion over several millennia? > >>> Well, in the church I belong to, we do it because we have further > >>> revelation on the same subject. > >> The golden plates?- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > No, we do not have the golden plates. > > Yes, I know. I was asking if that was the further revelation you rather > mysteriously referred to?- Hide quoted text - > The golden plates were just golden plates. They were not revelation. Robert B. Winn |