Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al) on 20 Jul 2008 17:05 On Jul 18, 10:41 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > On Jul 17, 7:10 pm, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: > > > > > On Jul 16, 10:20 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> 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? > > > 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. > > > Robert B. Winn > > > You must be a hateful person, simply because of your lousy life. > > Sin is always in your mind that had been brainwashed into your brain > > cells...see the evil of your religion? > > Human being, regardless of who they are, are born not with any > > "sin"....sin is what is being planted into your head. > > The term sin is a meaningless word which is beyond your ability to > > comprehend. > > The children are all born beautiful and innocent. They learn, they > > grow and they contribute to this world...this is fundamental for > > human. > > The loons are different....they are born with sin and always need to > > ask for forgiveness, then commit sin again, then ask...a cycle and > > finally depart to serve their god, never contribute to this world. Yet > > they are as human as all others.\ > > > Think deeply, if your brain cells can still function.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Well, you left out the children who are killed before they are born by > abortion. > Robert B. Winn You left out the several billion (women, children and fetuses) that die during childbirth due to unwanted and ill-advised pregnancies. You left out the trillions of fetuses that die of natural causes due to lack of good health-care, or simply because the mother wasn't nourished enough. Al
From: Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al) on 20 Jul 2008 17:11 On Jul 19, 1:44 am, ben_dolan_...(a)reet.com (Ben Dolan) wrote: > rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > Well, believing some of the Bible does not constitute faith in Jesus > > Christ, which is the first principle of salvation. > > The first rule of Christ Club is, everyone talks about Christ Club... rofl genuinely. :-) My cat's looking at me funny. Al
From: Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al) on 20 Jul 2008 17:16 On Jul 19, 3:21 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > On Jul 18, 5:32 am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > > > > > rbwinn wrote: > > > On Jul 17, 6:47 pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > > >>>> -- > > >>> George W. Bush is completely irrelevant, as the next President of the > > >>> United States will be. All major decisions are made by the atheistic > > >>> Supreme Court, which at the present time holds the position of > > >>> Judicial dictatorship in the United States. > > >> Religious affiliations of Supreme Court Justices: > > >> Roberts: Roman Catholic > > >> Stevens: Protestant > > >> Scalia: Roman Catholic > > >> Kennedy: Roman Catholic > > >> Souter: Episcopalian > > >> Thomas: Roman Catholic > > >> Breyer: Jewish > > >> Alito: Roman Catholic > > >> Ginsburg: Jewish > > > >> The Supreme Court follows the Constitution of the United States of > > >> America, the federal law of the land. > > > >> What were you saying again? > > > >> -- > > > During my lifetime the Supreme Court has not made even one decision > > > that did not promote atheism. It does not matter if they all claim to > > > be religious. Actions speak louder than words. > > > Perhaps you can name me one decision that "promoted atheism". > > > > - Show quoted text - > > Roe v. Wade > > Robert B. Winn Roe v Wade was a decision made on the grounds of violation of privacy. Not a theological argument anywhere. Any more? Al
From: Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al) on 20 Jul 2008 17:19 On Jul 19, 3:40 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > On Jul 18, 5:49 am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > > > > > rbwinn wrote: > > > On Jul 17, 8:00 pm, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: > > >> On Jul 17, 11:30 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> 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? > > >>> Robert B. Winn > > >> The Harry Potter book is another bible story book...and you fail to > > >> recognize this fact simply because of your mental problem. > > >> Now, I have pointed this out and you should be clear about it. > > > >> I have actually thought that you should check out this fact with your > > >> doctor, but since you distrust those psychiatrist, may be you should > > >> then seek second opinion from scientist/atheists. However, since your > > >> brain frequency is not in line with scientist/atheists, may be the > > >> final choice would be the theist. > > >> One advise, if one theist were to play a trick on you by confirming > > >> Harry Potter the same as Bible, your state of mind may get such a > > >> shock that the hospital would have to lock you up forever.- Hide quoted text - > > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > > I think that what you just wrote will one day be canonized as > > > atheistic scripture. > > > There's no such thing as "atheistic scripture". > > > -- > > ****************************************************** > > * DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 * > > *-------------------------------------------------- > > So what about the writings of Albert Einstein? Don't you consider > them to be scripture? > Robert B. Winn No. Those "writings" are science. Not atheism. And scientists will throw them out with glee when someone manages to prove they have something more accurate. But you and all the rest of the crackpots haven't managed that yet. Al
From: rbwinn on 20 Jul 2008 17:37
On Jul 20, 10:00 am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jul 20, 6:29�am, Stan-O <bndsna...(a)aol.com> wrote: > >> On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 04:43:08 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > >> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> Most of whom are 'beleivers' in one god or another. > >>>>>>> We've got one on trial over here at the moment. He shot a guy, then > >>>>>>> tried to decapitate two women with a katana. Apparently God told him to > >>>>>>> do it. Hopefully the jury disagrees.- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>> Almost every murderer today says that because they know the atheistic > >>>>>> court system will reward them for saying it. > >>>>>> ================================= > >>>>>> Why would an "atheistic court system" reward someone who claimed to believe > >>>>>> in gods, skippy? > >>>>> Lawyers reward anyone who adds to their power and financial security. > >>>> You've got a whole "reward" thing going on at the moment, why is that?- Hide quoted text - > >>> I do not have anything going at the present time. �Lawyers were the > >>> people who started "plea bargaining" and did away with the right to > >>> trial by jury. > >> That's odd, because my boss was just on a jury trial last month. I > >> guess that makes you a liar again, doesn't it?- Hide quoted text - > > > No, it does not.  The right to trial by jury no longer exists. > > Eh, wha?  Article 3 of the United States Constitution was repealed? > > >  People > > who commit crimes serious enough to be profitable to lawyers are given > > the privilege of trial by jury.  That means if you commit a murder, > > you can have a lawyer and a trial by jury.  If you are arrested on > > misdemeanor charges by police who have decided to harrass you, you > > cannot get a trial by jury even though the Constitution guarantees you > > that right. > > Um, no.  You might want to look up the difference between criminal and > civil charges... > > -- I do not need to look anything up. Misdemeanors are crimes. It says criminal complaint right on the complaint of a misdemeanor case. Robert B. Winn |