Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Antares 531 on 15 Jul 2008 09:17 On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 07:56:34 GMT, Linda Fox <linda.ff(a)ntlworld.com> wrote: >On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 20:23:59 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> >wrote: > >> 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. > >Not all of the OT is theology - quite a fair amount of it is standard >Jewish history, whether by aural tradition or, in the later books, >written. As a parallel, we don't know how much of what we have from >Homer is true of Greece and Troy, since that too is based on aural >tradition which means it would have been embroidered, or even >falsified, along the way. My own feeling about that is that much of >the dynastic detail (apart from things like Helen being born out of >Leda by Zeus as a swan) is possibly more reliable because when it was >being passed down that was likely to have been the only kind of >chronicle they could make; just a theory, though, and I doubt we'll >ever know. > >Linda ff > Linda, are you saying these "aural" traditions don't shed enough light on the matter? ;-)
From: Antares 531 on 15 Jul 2008 09:37 On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 04:06:39 +0100, "Smiler" <Smiler(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: > >"Antares 531" <gordonlrDELETE(a)swbell.net> wrote in message (snip) >> >> Atheists and those who believe in God but decline to align with Him >> can, and do indeed do good things. But, their choice > >Why can't you understand that there is NO CHOICE involved? >If you think there is, please explain how you CHOSE to not believe in >Leprechauns. > >Smiler, >The godless one >a.a.# 2279 > Smiler, I haven't yet visited all the planets in the multiverse, thus I haven't confirmed that there are no Leprechauns anywhere in the multiverse, but I have exercised my "choice" to believe that no Leprechauns or fossilized remains of any Leprechauns have ever been found on this planet. Gordon
From: The Loan Arranger on 15 Jul 2008 09:39 rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 14, 10:38 pm, The Natural Philosopher <a...(a)b.c> wrote: >>> So are you admitting that you have sins? This would be a first for an >>> atheist. All other atheists tell me that they do not have sins >>> because whatever they do is not sin. >> I have what YOU call sins. They aren't, because the concept is >> meaningless. In absolute terms. >> > Right. Atheist Josef Stalin said the same thing when he killed 12 > million people. As opposed to Adolf Hitler ("I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so." - quoted in John Towland's biog). Not to mention several Popes, who were happy to ordain the indiscriminate massacres of Moslems in the name of the Cross. Not to mention the Christian fundamentalist GWB (and his father), who seems happy to go to war against the people of any Moslem country that has the audacity not to kow-tow to his government's wishes. There is no point in claiming that atheism breeds immorality, or that Christianity is the cure, because there are so many counter-examples in both cases that the only conclusion any sensible person can draw is that some people are good, some people are bad, and anyone can be drawn to or away from religion. TLA
From: G=EMC^2 Glazier on 15 Jul 2008 09:36 To YA All To let for Gods The hand writing is caved in stone. "HUMANKIND WILL BE DEAD BEFORE THEY HIT THE GROUND" Bert
From: Ben Dolan on 15 Jul 2008 10:37
Antares 531 <gordonlrDELETE(a)swbell.net> wrote: > All we have on this is the information given us in the Word of God, > the Bible. But this Biblical information seems to fit so congruently > with the known physical world properties we do understand, I don't see > how it can be tossed aside. You don't? Hmmm. I suspect your obsession with string theory is much like Michael Behe's laughable views on irreducible complexity. You began by assuming the Bible is true and then go looking for scientific theories to support that. In your case it is this kooky idea of multiverses and heaven. That's a really poor way to conduct science and it's a poor way to conduct spiritual investigation, because you presuppose what you're trying to prove. In your case (like Behe's), you're trying to reconcile ancient Bronze Age mythology with the modern world, but are unwilling or unable to allow the idea that the mythology is just that--myths. You are convinced that proving the existence of "eternal life" is just around the corner if you can somehow just shoehorn it into some established scientific theory--or even some unproven but sciency-sounding theory like multiverses. That's a fool's errand. |