Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Alex W. on 21 Jun 2008 11:16 "Steve O" <nospamhere(a)thanks.com> wrote in message news:6c4ja8F3erpl2U1(a)mid.individual.net... > > If you think that Harry Potter is fiction then you must also think that > London doesn't exist right? > You'd better tell that to all of the people who live there, it may come as > a surprise to them. Like the esteemed Mr Winn Esq, London councils have no doubt whatsoever about the existence of London. At least, that is what they profess when they send out council tax demands.
From: Alex W. on 21 Jun 2008 11:19 "rbwinn" <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in message news:5de9de62-15db-436d-a09c-db8e21818eef(a)d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... Well, no. Neither Stuart Dowling nor I suscribe to sorcery. Atheists, on the other hand always have something about sorcery in their signatures and nicknames similar to Ku Klux Klan members. ========== Do I now ... amazingly, I never noticed. Would you be so kind and point out these features about my nanem and signature? Or is it something invisible which I will only be able to see using my special-issue super-sikrit decoder ring?
From: Alex W. on 21 Jun 2008 11:20 "Steve O" <nospamhere(a)thanks.com> wrote in message news:6c4j1tF3e0cf4U1(a)mid.individual.net... > > > "rbwinn" <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in message > news:7400364b-46e0-4427-b422-c4439607cf7f(a)27g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... >> On Jun 21, 3:54?am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>> rbwinn wrote: >>> >>> >> - Show quoted text - >>> >>> > Well, you seem to have faith in Spiderman and Harry Potter. >>> >>> And you don't believe that London exists.- Hide quoted text - >>> >> I don't? So where does the Queen of England live? >> Robert B. Winn > > We know where she lives. > You're the one who doesn't believe in London, not us. I popped over and asked her. She said "We are not amused."
From: rbwinn on 21 Jun 2008 13:19 On Jun 21, 4:13 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jun 20, 3:39 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >>> On Jun 19, 12:02�am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>> <snip> > >>>>>>>>>> Says the believer in a magic sky fairy that magically inseminated a virgin > >>>>>>>>>> so that she could magically remain a virgin and magically produce his magic > >>>>>>>>>> son who went on to do magic tricks, like magically turning water into wine, > >>>>>>>>>> magically walking on water and and magically feeding 5000 people with the > >>>>>>>>>> scantest of supplies. This magic son, although supposedly dead, magically > >>>>>>>>>> came back to life and then magically disappeared. All evidence, outside of > >>>>>>>>>> the of the only book supposedly describing these magical happenings, > >>>>>>>>>> magically disappeared. This believer apparently also believes that a magic > >>>>>>>>>> angel magically came to earth with a magic set of golden disks and gave them > >>>>>>>>>> to a well known fraudster to magically translate into English and then, > >>>>>>>>>> magically, the disks disappeared. This believer also talks to the magic sky > >>>>>>>>>> beings to magically get them to work their magic in his favour. Does he also > >>>>>>>>>> wear magic underwear...curious minds and all that. > >>>>>>>>>> And I haven't even started on the OT, yet. > >>>>>>>>>> Smiler, > >>>>>>>>>> The godless one > >>>>>>>>>> a.a.# 2279- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>>>>> You haven't started on anything. > >>>>>>>> This is a scant rebuttal. How is he wrong?- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>> I did not spend any great amount of time studying his statement. �As > >>>>>>> far as I could tell there was nothing true in it. > >>>>>> This seems to read like "I don't like it, so I won't accept/believe it". > >>>>>> What specifically rings false about it? I'd like to know how you assess > >>>>>> statements for truth.- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>> The entire thing was false as far as I could tell. �What was there in > >>>>> it that you thought was true? > >>>> Your religion believes that Jesus was born of a virgin? Jesus reportedly > >>>> turned water into wine.... There are no known natural mechanisms by > >>>> which these things could happen, hence the characterisation as magic. > >>>> Should I go on? > >>>> You haven't been able to tell me how you assay for truth, maybe you > >>>> don't know yourself? There's no shame in that, a lot of people don't > >>>> think about these things.- Hide quoted text - > >>>> - Show quoted text - > >>> I do not worry about mysteries like that.  Whatever their explanation, > >>> they will not save any souls.  The atonement of Christ is what > >>> Christians need to understand. > >> What if your religious leaders are lying to you? Maybe it's not > >> deliberate, maybe they're just deluded. Could you tell? > > >> I would feel totally unarmed to make sensible decisions about the world > >> without a rational and questioning nature.- Hide quoted text - > > > Well, no doubt it is difficult for you. > > It certainly can be, but not as difficult as having to deal with > religious-thinking as well.- Hide quoted text - > Well, the basic idea of atheists is that whatever atheists do is just fine. Who needs Josef Stalin when you can kill 2,000,000 people every year in the United States before they are even born? Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 21 Jun 2008 13:20
On Jun 21, 4:14 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jun 20, 3:40 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >>> On Jun 19, 12:06�am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>> <snip> > >>>>> Well, what you are saying is that the Biblical account of the Assyrian > >>>>> invasion of Judea is fiction. �What part of it do you claim is > >>>>> fiction? �So far we have discussed the earthen ramp and Hezekiah's > >>>>> tunnel. �Are you still claiming that those are fiction? > >>>> You're still claiming London doesn't exist, huh? > >>>> I don't know either account, so really don't have an opinion. Have you > >>>> considered that maybe neither account is accurate? If pressed, I would > >>>> go with the explanation with the best evidential support. I don't have a > >>>> reason to decide at this point. > >>>> Happy to be agnostic on something! > >>> OK, well, my opinion is that unless an atheist has an opinion about > >>> Hezekiah's tunnel and the earthen ramp, it is a waste of time to try > >>> to discuss the Bible with that person. > >> Wow, why would you say that? It's a minor Biblical detail. > > >> They exist, is that opinion enough?- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > Well, any person who will not admit that someing exists which can be > > seen is not going to admit the existence of things which cannot be > > seen.  So conversation with atheists is totally unprofitable. > > No-one *ever* denied their existence. If they did, then you have > consistently denied that London exists too. > > All we demand is logical consistency. Would you like to talk about Harry > Potter again? ;-)- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - No reason to talk about Harry Potter. There never was. Robert B. Winn |