Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: BuddyThunder on 17 Jul 2008 15:53 rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 16, 12:48 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Jul 15, 5:24 am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >>>> 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? >>>> -- >>> Well, if you can provide a description of the construction of Kings >>> Cross station from the time it was built, maybe we could compare it to >>> the Biblical account of the construction of Hezekiah's tunnel. >> Totally irrelevant to the point. Just to remind you: people make stuff >> up about real places then write it down. Like in Harry Potter, like in >> the Bible. Why believe it just because it includes a real place?- Hide > > I don't believe it because it includes a real place. I believe it > because it is true. Why have you been unable to demonstrate it's truth to us? We've been asking for confirming evidence, where is it?
From: BuddyThunder on 17 Jul 2008 15:55 rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 15, 11:57 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Jul 14, 11:23 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> 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. >>>> And yet you've been unable to produce these mythical posts. Well, you do >>>> seem to like myths... >>>>> 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. >>>> In a slightly mangled sense, yes that was me. I'd never heard of >>>> Hezekiah's tunnel. Now I have. I still can't see how it supports the >>>> existence of any gods. Assuming it's the same tunnel (which hasn't been >>>> established AFAIK), so what? People sometimes write things about stuff. >>>> Does that automatically render it true? >>>>> 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. >>>> I might point out that the physical evidence doesn't accord well with >>>> the account of the tunnel's construction. Even if you're right, it's >>>> simply shows that a tunnel was built, not that gods exist. >>>> If you want to infer more than is logical from this, go for it! But to >>>> maintain a degree of intellectual honesty, I cannot follow.- Hide quoted text - >>> Well, obviously, you have not studied the history of that time. >>> Robert B. Winn >> I haven't much, and yet I still know that. Additionally, the Bible >> contains some history, but doesn't qualify as a whole. It's far too >> unreliable.- Hide quoted text - >> > > Well, I understan why atheists would want to believe Sennacherib's > account of the Assyrian invasion of Judea over the Biblical account, > but, obviously, Sennacherib was lying. Chaldean historians agree with > the Biblical account. Sennacherib lost his entire army at Jerusalem. Obviously. Ummmm..... why again? Why would either of them have to be the "gospel truth"?
From: BuddyThunder on 17 Jul 2008 15:56 rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 16, 9:37�am, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: >> <hhyaps...(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- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > I do not plan to retire. What did you think, that I want to be > useless like an atheist? Wanting has very little to do with it.
From: BuddyThunder on 17 Jul 2008 15:59 rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 16, 1:38�pm, Stan-O <bndsna...(a)aol.com> wrote: >> On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 12:42:35 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(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. > > So you think the Bible is like a Harry Potter book. What is the point > of discussing it further with you then? Can you not defend your beliefs? If the Bible is anything like you say it is, there shouldn't be so much far removed from reality in there. Flying broomsticks are more believable than a global flood.
From: BuddyThunder on 17 Jul 2008 16:02
rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 16, 12:01 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> 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.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > So you would only decide to kill someone if you were filled with > murderous rage. A lot of serial killers seem to be the same way. I would've thought that would've gone without saying. Yes, to kill someone I'd have to be seriously enraged. It generally runs contrary to my nature. Is that somehow defective under the doctrines of your myth? |