Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Smiler on 17 Jul 2008 21:49 "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" <alwhipp(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote in message news:5febef81-a197-4404-b7a2-c48d51bee4e1(a)34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... On Jul 17, 5:22 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > On Jul 15, 7:49 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > > > <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > On Jul 16, 12:08 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 15, 12:57 am, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > > > <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > > On Jul 15, 3:58 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Jul 14, 8:30?pm, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: > > > > > > > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > > > > > >news:66e61aa9-559f-4671-a2ea-6bc1905bebe9(a)a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > On Jul 13, 6:28?pm, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > > > > > > >news:fc9d57b1-a5d8-4dea-b10c-2de186d77c39(a)m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > On Jul 12, 5:43?pm, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > > > > > > > >news:43c4adf8-d379-4a72-815c-bc35c1c84eaf(a)b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > On Jul 11, 5:04?pm, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > > > > > > > > >news:6ebcae55-3c20-4ea3-960e-25f802c31860(a)s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > > On Jul 10, 8:51?pm, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > > > > > > > > > >news:1b629e70-db18-4208-a3da-4381dcebabb4(a)p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 8, 8:45?pm, ben_dolan_...(a)reet.com (Ben Dolan) > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > There were some atheists who said Harry Potter went > > > > > > > > > > > > on the train > > > > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > > > > London to wizard's school. > > > > > > > > > > > > And once again, child, you have confused fiction with > > > > > > > > > > > reality... > > > > > > > > > > > Harry Potter is fiction. ?The woman who wrote the books > > > > > > > > > > said it was > > > > > > > > > > fiction. ?I know this may come as a shock to atheists. > > > > > > > > > > =================================== > > > > > > > > > > > The bible is also fiction. We don't even know who wrote > > > > > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > I know this may come as a shock to christians. > > > > > > > > > > Get over it. > > > > > > > > > > No, Smiler, the Bible tells about the construction of > > > > > > > > > Hezekiah's > > > > > > > > > tunnel. ? Didn't we discuss this before. > > > > > > > > > ================================ > > > > > > > > > And the Harry Potter books tell us about Kings Cross > > > > > > > > > station and > > > > > > > > > London. > > > > > > > > > Both the Harry Potter books and the bible are fiction. > > > > > > > > > Get over it. > > > > > > > > > > Smiler, > > > > > > > > > If you want to believe that the Bible is fiction, it seems > > > > > > > > to me that > > > > > > > > you are free to believe that the Bible is fiction. ?I will > > > > > > > > tell you > > > > > > > > what. ?Why don't you decide for yourself what you believe, > > > > > > > > and I will > > > > > > > > decide for myself what I believe? ?Does this seem unfair to > > > > > > > > you? > > > > > > > > ============================================== > > > > > > > > Not unfair if you keep your stupid beliefs out of a.a. > > > > > > > > > Smiler, > > > > > > > > The godless one > > > > > > > > a.a.# 2279- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > > > As I said, take sci.physics and sci.physics relativity out of > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > header. > > > > > > > ==================================== > > > > > > > That won't stop your stupid comments from appearing in a.a., > > > > > > > will it. > > > > > > > You take a.a. out of your header. > > > > > > > Think about it, Smiler. ?I am not going to go to alt.atheism. ?I > > > > > > have > > > > > > no interest in atheists. > > > > > > ============================ > > > > > > Then why do your lying posts appear in a.a., LIAR? > > > > > > > Smiler, > > > > > > The godless one > > > > > > a.a.# 2279- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > Because you have not yet taken sci.physics and sci.physics > > > > > relativity > > > > > out of the header. > > > > > Robert B. Winn > > > > > To remove your posts from alt.atheism, you would need to take a.a > > > > out > > > > of your headers. Us changing ours isn't going to change yours. > > > > Are you going to stop lying soon? > > > > > Al- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > If you are not posting in sci.physics and sci.physics.relativity, then > > > I will never see your posts. > > > Robert B. Winn > > > We don't care if you see our posts. We care that appropriate answers > > are given to your lies in the forum the lies are posted in. Secondary > > to that, is a wish that you will go away and stop posting to > > alt.atheism. > > > Al- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Well, I will believe that when you take sci.physics and > sci.physics.relativity out of the header. > Robert b. Winn I don't know why you keep bringing up flower pots. ==================================== Because he's potty? Because he's a Little Weeeeeeed? Because he talks gibberish like Bill & Ben? "Blobalob Slobadob." :-) Smiler, The godless one a.a.# 2279
From: BuddyThunder on 18 Jul 2008 18:50 rbwinn wrote: > On Jul 18, 12:33 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Jul 17, 1:08 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>> On Jul 17, 4:11 am, The Loan Arranger <no...(a)nowhere.invalid> wrote: >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>> On Jul 15, 6:39�am, The Loan Arranger <no...(a)nowhere.invalid> wrote: >>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> So was this John Towland an atheist? >>>>>> I have no idea, and it's not relevant anyway. He just wrote a biog of >>>>>> Hitler. >>>>>>> Anyway, Hitler was a politician saying what would make him popular >>>>>>> with the German people. His actions in his life show that he did not >>>>>>> believe he would be punished for sins, much like atheists of today. >>>>>> ...and any psychopath with temporal lobe epilepsy or schizophrenia who >>>>>> believes that massacring groups or whole races is OK, because they've >>>>>> God on their side. However, the point that you're trying to dodge, and >>>>>> failing, is that as much evil is done in the name of religion, in this >>>>>> case Christian religion, as is done by those with none - probably more. >>>>>> If you don't find that an uncomfortable truth, you need to recalibrate >>>>>> your humanity. >>>>>> TLA- Hide quoted text - >>>>> Well, I don't really see much evidence of it. Stalin and Pol Pot were >>>>> both atheists. But politicians who killed large numbers of people >>>>> cannot compare with the numbers of people killed by abortion, which >>>>> was done by governments controlled by atheistic political factions. >>>> Your vitriol against atheists is kinda cute in a psycho sort of way. >>>> Where do I sign up for the genocides? I need to do my atheistic duty. Is >>>> it the same place Mormons get their brains removed?- Hide quoted text - >>>> - Show quoted text - >>> All you have to do is vote for your pro-abortion politicians. That >>> makes it pretty easy for homicidal people of today, doesn't it? >>> However, my observation is that the blood of unborn children is not >>> going to satisfy homicidal people forever. Eventually, they are going >>> to demand a more active role in homicide. >> Yeah, we'll start coming after the religious nuts! Woohoo!! *slaver* >> *drooooool*- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > The prophecy is that almost all people will be at war in the last > days. Well, you go and have a war if you want, but I don't fancy it at all.
From: rbwinn on 18 Jul 2008 18:58 On Jul 18, 2:44 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > news:1e64c2c8-43f1-426f-a7d2-56a68fc05742(a)p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > On Jul 17, 7:44 am, Jon Green <jo...(a)deadspam.com> wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >> > On Jul 17, 5:24�am, Jon Green <jo...(a)deadspam.com> wrote: > >> >> rbwinn wrote: > >> >>> No, since you were in sci.physics.relativity, I posted equations for > >> >>> relativity, which atheists did not want to discuss. > >> >>> Robert B. Winn > >> >> Why would they want to? �Perhaps we (from cam.misc) ought to post > >> >> random > >> >> stuff about Cambridge (UK), in the hope that physicists would want to > >> >> comment. �It's about as relevant. > > >> >> Blame the brain donor who cross-posted this selection of groups, not > >> >> their members. > > >> > Well, since you do not want to discuss relativity, why are you posting > >> > to sci.physics.relativity? > >> > Robert B. Winn > > >> I'm only pitching in to make a point, not to perpetuate a thread that's > >> long past its use-by date. > > >> And you're seeing my post because (1) I wanted to make my point to you > >> specifically, and (2) because the damn thread is cross-posted to all > >> four newsgroups. > > >> If you don't want the traffic anywhere but s.p.r, remove all but that > >> newsgroup from your responses, and the thread will fade away, because > >> the a.a people won't see your comments any more, and won't feel the need > >> to respond. Or simply don't respond to anyone who's clearly posting > >> from a.a. But that would spoil your "fun", wouldn't it? > > >> Most of the reason why the thread won't die is that a certain Robert > >> Winn has "contributed" about 560 messages to it so far, and won't stop > >> doing so, and won't remove any newsgroups from his replies. > > >> Physician, heal thyself. (Luke 4:23, in case you wondered.) > > >> Jon > > > I am not the one complaining about it.  I do not really care.  I was > > just pointing out to atheists that they have the means of making > > certain that they never see any posts from me.  All they have to do is > > remove sci.physics and sci.physics.relativity out of the header.  So > > far, none have done it. > > Robert B. Winn > > How would you know? > D'uh!! > > -- > Steve O > a.a. #2240 (Apatheist Chapter) > B.A.A.W.A. > Convicted by Earthquack > Exempt from purgatory by papal indulgence- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - The same people are talking to me now who have been complaining all along. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 18 Jul 2008 19:00 On Jul 18, 2:46 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > news:f2b0bce9-bf0b-49e3-ba87-207059add46d(a)f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > On Jul 17, 12:53 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> 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?- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > Well, for instance, I used the example of Hezekiah's tunnel which > > proves the veracity of certain Old Testament verses which describe the > > construction of the tunnel.  No, say atheists, we do not accept that > > as evidence of anything.  This shows that atheists will say the same > > thing with regard to any evidence.  If they will not accept something > > that can be seen and even walked through, then it shows that their > > minds are closed, their opinions are already dictated to them, and any > > evidence shown to them will receive the same reaction. > > Robert B. Winn > > What are you talking about? > We accepted your evidence that a tunnel exists. > We accepted your evidence that there is a tunnel mentioned in the bible. > How does that make us close minded? > > -- > Steve O Well, your answer is a little different from answers given by other atheists. Other atheists have always mentioned Harry Potter in their answers. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 18 Jul 2008 19:01
On Jul 17, 6:14�pm, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: > "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message > > news:6ea404F63ha8U1(a)mid.individual.net... > > > > > > > > > "The Loan Arranger" <no...(a)nowhere.invalid> wrote in message > >news:5d-dnbl8Ndd98eLVRVnyvgA(a)bt.com... > >> Smiler wrote: > >>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > >>> > The only writer of the new Testament who was a Roman citizen was Paul. > >>> ================================ > >>> All the writers were Roman citizens. > > >> I'm sorry to say, Smiler, Robbie's probably right for once. Roman > >> Citizenship was distinct from being a citizen of a country under Roman > >> jurisdiction, and was very hard to earn. > > >> What I'm unsure about is whether he was a full Roman Citizen, or whether > >> he held the Latin Right, which was a kind of halfway-house between > >> non-citizenship and being a full Citizen. Ordinary people in a subjugated > >> country probably wouldn't really appreciate the difference, or could be > >> blinded to it. It wasn't uncommon for LR holders to claim to their peers > >> to be RCs, to enhance their standing, but they definitely wouldn't try > >> that to an official, at least not if they valued their life or position. > > >http://www.jgames.co.uk/title/Roman_citizenship > > > Luke may or may not have been a Roman citizen; there is even speculation > > that he had been a slave, in which case he certainly would not have been a > > full citizen. > > > Being natives of Palestine, it seems unlikely that Mark or Matthew had > > been full citizens. > > Mark, Matthew, Luke and John were not the writers of the gospels attributed > to them. > The gospels were written long after the supposed disciples would have been > dead. > > Smiler, > The godless one > a.a.# 2279- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Well, discuss your ideas with Mark, Matthew , Luke and John after the resurrection. Robert B. Winn |