Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: BuddyThunder on 16 Jul 2008 15:55 Alex W. wrote: > "BuddyThunder" <nospam(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote in message > news:487d9ce4(a)clear.net.nz... >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Jul 14, 11:29 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>> On Jul 14, 8:01?am, The Loan Arranger <no...(a)nowhere.invalid> wrote: >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>> Only an atheist would want all choices made for >>>>>>> them. >>>>>> Now there was me thinking that that was the mark of a worshipper. It >>>>>> seems to me that atheists make their own choices, because they don't >>>>>> have decisions ready-dictated to them. >>>>> So you think it is a mistake to decide ahead of time not to commit >>>>> murder, not to steal, to attend church, not to commit adultery, etc. >>>> Why would you be so morally deficient so as to need to perform morning >>>> affirmations in order not to kill people? >>>> >>>> My moral decisions are made as the occasion demands it. Seems to work >>>> okay. >>> So are you saying that for each person you encounter, you make a >>> decision to kill or not to kill? >>> Robert B. Winn >> No, I'm saying exactly the opposite. I need not make that decision at all, >> because I'm not filled with murderous rage. >> >> As moral decisions need to be made, I make them according to my own >> values. > > Sort of yes, but not quite, IMO. > There is a level of decision-making which is sub-conscious much of the time. > You probably don't realise it at the time, but when you encounter someone, > there is a whole routine you go through, a checklist for friend/foe, > fight/flee, us/them, relative dominance. This does feed into any moral > decisions you make regarding that person, such as whether and how much > respect I accord the other person, or -- in a business setting -- how honest > I will be in my dealings with him. Absolutely, I accept all that, most of the time those unconsious decisions are not controversial. I was talking about those concious moments of weighing-up when you're kicking around some questionable course of action.
From: Stan-O on 16 Jul 2008 16:38 On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:42:35 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote: >> > Well, the construction of Hezekiah's tunnel was very remarkable. �But >> > atheists do not like seeing remards about it. �Why is that? >> >> I have nothing against the tunnel. No, what I dislike is your butchery >> of logic.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > >Well, choose for yourself what you like or dislike. It means nothing >to me. If you or any other atheist decides to discuss the tunnel, >come back and do it some time without trying to change the subject to >Harry Potter. Making a comparison between two pieces of literature is hardly changing the subject.
From: Stan-O on 16 Jul 2008 17:04 On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 07:29:26 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote: >> Stalin was a Russian Orthodox and an alcoholic... > >Josef Stalin said he was an atheist. So atheists of today claim he >was lying about that? >Why did he try to end the Russian Orthodox Church if he believed in >it? You'd have to understand Russian culture - they love to have tyrants as rulers, regardless of what their philosophical beliefs are.
From: Smiler on 16 Jul 2008 12:37 <hhyapster(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:28be0ed1-17c0-4089-8117-c9b9f0392293(a)f36g2000hsa.googlegroups.com... On Jul 15, 4:30 pm, The Natural Philosopher <a...(a)b.c> wrote: > Steve O wrote: > > > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > >news:a3c2b9ae-59ae-4bfd-b7cf-fcda98b26225(a)d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com... > >> 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. > > > Here's where you get confused every time. (or deliberately lie) > > When they said "nothing exists on earth today that could prove anything > > in the bible" they were talking about the SPECIAL claims in the bible, > > not the ordinary mundane things such as tunnels, sheep, goats or > > shekels. > > Yet, for some reason, you choose to lie about this and attribute claims > > to atheists which don't exist. > > You are either a complete liar or you are stuck on stupid. > > Both. > Its fairly clear our robbo is probably schizoid, probably desperately > confused, and probably on medication, and has access to a terminal.And > is not the brightest candle in the coal mine. > > He's desperately trying to put some meaning in his life, to make some > sense of it, and the Bible is his latest bag. It probably puts some > hope in a hopeless life. > > He's just smart enough to see what a mess his life is, but not smart > enough to work out how to change it by himself: so naturally he looks > for help. No one has probably given him any, but the bible makes him a > promise. By fixating on the Jesus symbol, he at least has one constant > thing to cling to and some hope. In short, he is addicted to Jesus. > > It's probably slightly better than being addicted to smack, and its > certainly a lot cheaper. > > I've met more than a few robbos in my time. There's probably some > intelligence there, but coupled to an unusual mental condition. Such > peoples experience is not ordinary, and their attempts to make sense of > it result in some pretty weird ways of thinking about it and dealing > with it. Often they get involved in some cult or other. Or end up > prematurely dead from drug overdoses and the like. Or go off the rails > and start seeing visions and end up in the funny farm. Probably very true of rbwinn. When he told us that he is a welder, I actually wrote some real advise for him to work hard and look forward towards a retirement, instead of wasting time in the church on Sundays. Sundays pay thrice as much. However, my email could not get through... ==================================== Does anything ever 'get through' to him? I very much doubt it. Smiler, The godless one a.a.# 2279
From: Linda Fox on 16 Jul 2008 17:39
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:37:39 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote: >On Jul 15, 11:45?pm, Linda Fox <linda...(a)ntlworld.com> wrote: >> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:08:58 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >> wrote: >> >> >If you are not posting in sci.physics and sci.physics.relativity, then >> >I will never see your posts. >> >> And neither will anyone else who is getting these fascinating >> exchanges through the physics ngs. Why should he stop communicating >> with the rest of them because _you_ don't want to read them? >> >> Linda ff > >Well, for one thing, discussions of atheism are off topic in science >newsgroups. Then why are you discussing it? Linda ff |