Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Alex W. on 15 Jul 2008 05:44 "Smiler" <Smiler(a)Joe.King.com> wrote in message news:%jUek.31218$Zm1.15905(a)newsfe27.ams2... > > "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" <alwhipp(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote in message > news:2b347d93-22e1-42e2-8b63-1dee7c850c50(a)d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... >> On Jul 14, 10:17 am, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: >>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >>> =========================================== >>> Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. >>> ======================================= >>> They had landscape artists in the 1st century? >>> >> >> No, they had Roman road builders, dang it! >> And sanitation, ... >> > > Clean water! > And don't forget education... > Romanes eunt domum!
From: Alex W. on 15 Jul 2008 07:11 "BuddyThunder" <nospam(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote in message news:487c48bf$1(a)clear.net.nz... > Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al) wrote: >> Most scientists today are atheists, yes. But it's like saying most >> people with blonde hair have blue eyes. The two things aren't >> actually related. >> And you keep lying about how you started this. One fruitcake who >> claims to be both a scientist and a christian (but bizarely doesn't >> understand rainbows) cross-posted originally and you waded in with >> your lies and confusion into a topic that was already about proving >> this god thing. And proceeded to lie about everyone. >> And now you keep using this myth you've invented about atheists >> posting into YOUR conversation about physics. > > I think the two could be related. Not saying they are, I think that it's > likely though. Just my opinion. Given that scepticism and incurable curiosity are necessary traits for any scientist, I think that you think right.
From: Alex W. on 15 Jul 2008 07:52 "Antares 531" <gordonlrDELETE(a)swbell.net> wrote in message news:k40o74pg4tkilt0j8mr1lnkibela0rrgcg(a)4ax.com... > On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 02:21:17 +0100, "Alex W." <ingilt(a)yahoo.co.uk> > wrote: > >> >>"Antares 531" <gordonlrDELETE(a)swbell.net> wrote in message >>news:72in74drr47ktr9l98raqph18ep0s1h4cp(a)4ax.com... >>> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 17:25:09 -0400, Brian E. Clark >>> <reply(a)newsgroup.only.please> wrote: >>> >>>>In article <4d2a74pf351she9f40vri1ku32c7s40a9j@ >>>>4ax.com>, Antares 531 said... >>>> >>>>> Fulfillment of prophecies is the most convincing "evidence" for the >>>>> reliability of the Bible, >>>> >>>>Most convincing of all are those prophecies written >>>>after the events they predict. >>>> >>> Bryan, I see your point, but I maintain that there are many Biblical >>> prophecies that were written LONG before they were fulfilled, and the >>> history/dating can not have been manipulated. Even if the dating of, >>> say the prophecies of Daniel can be argued a bit, it can't be >>> stretched to a date later than the time of Jesus's life. If you >>> haven't already done so, please visit this site and check some of >>> these items out. >> >>There is no need to "stretch" anything when you are dealing with a work of >>multiple authors writing over a millennium or two. You take it on trust, >>pure and simple. >> >>Moreover, those prophesies are really quite vague (part of their intrinsic >>nature). Any major religion has predictions about the appearance of a >>redeemer figure, about salvation and whatnot. You merely latched onto >>Jesus -- it might just as well have been Mohammed, Bab, Baha'u'llah or a >>host of others. >> > Alex, I've seen this rebuttal before but I've never had anyone point > out to me any list of successfully filled complex prophecies other > than those revealed in the Bible. Can you please direct me to a source > such as this one, but for some of the other major religions? > > http://www.reasons.org/resources/apologetics/prophecy.shtml > http://bci.org/prophecy-fulfilled/ http://www.jefflindsay.com/LDSFAQ/FQ_prophecies.shtml http://www.alislam.org/library/articles/prophecies.html http://allreligionsprophecies.com/default.aspx
From: DanielSan on 15 Jul 2008 08:21 <piggybacking> This is to Antares 531, not Natural Philosopher... The Natural Philosopher wrote: > Antares 531 wrote: >> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 05:57:14 -0700, DanielSan >> <danielsan(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> (snip) >>> Antares 531 wrote: >>>> This mortal phase of our existence is temporary, and is primarily a >>>> means for learning about sin and rebellion. We learn jointly and >>>> separately about sin and rebellion, and when we've moved on to >>>> immortal existence we should never want to go back and explore it any >>>> further. Gordon >>> There is no evidence of this "immortal existence", is there? >>> >> Daniel, there is no objective proof, Then, I'm sorry, but you haven't backed up your assertion. -- ****************************************************** * DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 * *----------------------------------------------------* * "I distrust those people who know so well what God * * wants them to do because I notice it always * * coincides with their own desires." * * --Susan B. Anthony * ******************************************************
From: DanielSan on 15 Jul 2008 08:24
rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 14, 8:27 pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Jul 14, 5:12�pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: >>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >>>> news:44f19f98-4d96-4419-a87a-d6bdbd73f31b(a)c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com... >>>>>>> Their idea is that if Hezekiah's tunnel exists, then Harry Potter has >>>>>>> to be true because the train station in London is mentioned in Harry >>>>>>> Potter. >>>>>> Exactly. Since we know therefore that harry potter isn't true, the fact >>>>>> of hezekiahs tunnel means the bible is obviously false. Since we have >>>>>> true facts referred to in works of complete fiction. >>>>>> By your reasoning at least. >>>>> Well, you have it exactly as atheists have been telling me it is. >>>>> Don't ask me what it is supposed to mean. >>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>> Here is an example of rbwinn's logic. >>>> Sheep are mentioned in the bible >>>> Sheep exist today >>>> The bible is accurate and there is a God >>>> -- >>>> Steve O >>> Well, no, Steve O. Here is an example. Atheists were claiming that >>> nothing existed on earth today that could prove anything in the >>> Bible. So I said, What about Hezekiah's tunnel? These atheists had >>> never heard of Hezekiah's tunnel. So after they looked it up, they >>> said, The fact that a tunnel exists no more proves the Bible to be >>> true than Harry Potter leaving from the train station in London to go >>> to wizard's school. >> The original assertion remains in force. Hezekiah's Tunnel does not >> prove anything. >> >>> I really believe that it certainly does prove certain verses in the >>> Old Testament to be true which describe the digging of Hezekiah's >>> tunnel. Otherwise, atheists need to explain why there is a tunnel >>> exactly where the Bible in three books of the Old Testament says a >>> tunnel was dug as a conduit for water. >> For the same reason that King's Cross Station exists. >> >> Wow, you REALLY aren't getting the analogy, are you? >> > There is nothing in the Book of 2 Chronicles about the construction of > King's Cross Station. Wow, you REALLY aren't getting the analogy, are you? -- ****************************************************** * DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 * *----------------------------------------------------* * "I distrust those people who know so well what God * * wants them to do because I notice it always * * coincides with their own desires." * * --Susan B. Anthony * ****************************************************** |