Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Stan-O on 1 Aug 2008 05:46 On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 21:04:53 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote: >> Your goal posts move faster than the eye can follow, don't they? >> No-one made the claim that "There is Nothing in the bible that can be >> proven." >> Several people pointed out that just because there is a tunnel where >> the bible says there is a tunnel,doesnot mean that anything else it >> said (even about the tunnel) is true. ?Because we would expect the >> authors, (fiction authors or historians) to know about the tunnel back >> then. ?They may not have known where it came from though, so we can't >> trust their account of that until it has been established by other >> methods. >> >> Al- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > >Well, I can trust their account. They were Jews, not atheists. Do you have to start every post with "Well"? It's quite annoying...
From: Stan-O on 1 Aug 2008 05:49 On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 20:40:30 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote: >> >> >Lev 18:22 ?Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind; ?It is >> >an abomination. >> >> You can still do it standing up, just don't lie down...- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > >Don't explain your problem to me. I cannot help you with it. Yet, you still replied. You are really an obsessed individual...
From: rbwinn on 1 Aug 2008 07:01 On Jul 31, 6:11�pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > On Aug 1, 6:19 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 30, 10:32 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > > <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > > On Jul 31, 2:57 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 30, 6:07 pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 17:57:19 -0700 (PDT), in alt.atheism > > > > > rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in > > > > > <4937d184-9c40-4146-a3bb-b72b0333d...(a)z66g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>: > > > > > > >On Jul 30, 3:43?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > >> On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 21:46:16 -0700 (PDT), in alt.atheism > > > > > >> rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in > > > > > >> <5756c0f4-924c-42b6-b121-8d1294e14...(a)m44g2000hsc.googlegroups..com>: > > > > > > >> >On Jul 22, 4:36?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > >> >> On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 20:27:01 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > > > > > >> >> wrote in alt.atheism: > > > > > > >> >> >On Jul 21, 6:51?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > >> >> >> On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:58:47 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi....(a)juno.com> > > > > > >> >> >> wrote in alt.atheism: > > > > > > >> >> >> >On Jul 21, 5:15?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > >> >> >> >> On Mon, 21 Jul 2008 06:27:20 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> > > > > > >> >> >> >> wrote in alt.atheism: > > > > > > >> >> >> >> >On Jul 20, 4:53?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > >> >> >> >> >> On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 14:57:06 -0700, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> > > > > > >> >> >> >> >> wrote in alt.atheism: > > > > > > >> >> >> >> >> >rbwinn wrote: > > > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> On Jul 20, 10:18 am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > > > > > > >> >> >> >> >> ... > > > > > > >> >> >> >> >> >>> So, Jesus didn't say it. > > > > > > >> >> >> >> >> >> Paul said it. ?He was one of the twelve apostles. > > > > > > >> >> >> >> >> >So, Jesus didn't say it. > > > > > > >> >> >> >> >> And, as we all know, Paul was not one of the Twelve. > > > > > > >> >> >> >> >Well, if you doubt that Paul was one of the twelve, why don't you wait > > > > > >> >> >> >> >until after you are resurrected and ask Paul if he was one of the > > > > > >> >> >> >> >twelve? > > > > > > >> >> >> >> You are really ignorant about the Bible. No wonder you insist on making > > > > > >> >> >> >> a fool of yourself. > > > > > > >> >> >> >> Clue. Even Paul tells us he wasn't one of the Twelve. > > > > > > >> >> >> >> If there were a God, He would strike you down for being such a bad > > > > > >> >> >> >> example.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > >> >> >> >> - Show quoted text - > > > > > > >> >> >> >The book of Acts says Paul was ordained an apostle, Paul says he is an > > > > > >> >> >> >apostle. ?Paul was an apostle, regardless of how many atheists of > > > > > >> >> >> >today say he was not. > > > > > > >> >> >> Once again, you choose to lie rather than admit your error. Nowhere in > > > > > >> >> >> the entire Bible does it say that Paul was one of the Twelve. That was a > > > > > >> >> >> claim you made up that was not true. > > > > > > >> >> >> Keep lying. Prove to us how much of a fake you are.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > >> >> >> - Show quoted text - > > > > > > >> >> >Acts 14:14 ?Which when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard of, they > > > > > >> >> >rent their clothes, and ran in among the people crying out.. > > > > > > >> >> So, as you can see, apostle does not mean 'one of the Twelve'. > > > > > > >> >> Please, learn the myths you are trying to sell us. Your god would be > > > > > >> >> embarrassed by your ignorance if he existed.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > >> >> - Show quoted text - > > > > > > >> >Well, yes it does mean ?one of the Twelve. > > > > > > >> Then you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Go waste some > > > > > >> time reading the Gospels, Acts and letters to find out that _no one_ > > > > > >> thought that Paul was one of the Twelve.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > >Well, Paul thought he was. I don't think he would have gone around > > > > > >lying about it. > > > > > > You are lying about what Paul said. He never claimed to be one of the > > > > > Twelve.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > He said he was an apostle. He would not have said that if he had not > > > > been ordained. > > > > Robert B. Winn > > > > I am an apostle. > > > > Al- Hide quoted text - > > > So who ordained you an apostle? > > Robert B. Winn > > Me, just then. > Much more direct evidence now, that I am an apostle than you have for > these other characters. > Hebrews 5:4 And no man taketh this honor unto himself. An apostle has to be ordained by an apostle. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 1 Aug 2008 07:11 On Jul 31, 6:21�pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jul 31, 5:52 am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >>> On Jul 30, 10:15 pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > >>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>> On Jul 30, 6:14 pm, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: > >>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > >>>>>>news:9dcddedb-bce6-457f-b0c5-d9a6d2bb6bd7(a)m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com... > >>>>>> On Jul 22, 10:04?am, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > >>>>>>>news:8ab589a3-2731-4a92-a41e-d6870a4e6f4b(a)k13g2000hse.googlegroups..com... > >>>>>>>> On Jul 21, 10:08 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > >>>>>>>>>news:efa8da13-56b6-4386-bfe5-c571b689a669(a)d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > >>>>>>>>>>>> God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. > >>>>>>>>>>> You have no evidence at all about God.- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>> Would you like me to send you a copy of the Bible? > >>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn > >>>>>>>>> You could, but it would be much better if you could provide some > >>>>>>>>> evidence > >>>>>>>>> of > >>>>>>>>> God as well. > >>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>> Steve O > >>>>>>>> God sent His Only Begotten Son, Steve. ?If that was not enough for > >>>>>>>> you, nothing I could do or say is going to convince you of anything. > >>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn > >>>>>>> Got any evidence that Jesus was the son of God? > >>>>>>> Please don't say, "the Bible" - that isn't evidence of anything at all, > >>>>>>> it's > >>>>>>> just an old, old story. > >>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>> Steve O > >>>>>> Well, actually the Bible is evidence of Hezekiah's tunnel. Three > >>>>>> different books of the Old Testament describe the construction of > >>>>>> Hezekiah's tunnel. > >>>>>> ================================ > >>>>>> Several of the Harry Potter books mention Kings Cross station. > >>>>>> Does that make the Harry Potter stories true? > >>>>>> Smiler, > >>>>> Why don't you spend some more time studying it, Smiler, and decide for > >>>>> yourself? I know that atheists are a little lacking in self- > >>>>> confidence, but I think you could decide this question for yourself.. > >>>> I've studied Hezekiah's Tunnel since you brought it up. I still fail to > >>>> see what its existence has to do with the truthfulness of the Bible. > >>>> -- > >>>> ****************************************************** > >>>> * DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 * > >>> Well, first you would have to make a decision about Hezekiah's > >>> tunnel. Does the tunnel really exist or is it just a hoax the way one > >>> atheist claimed? > >> Which atheist? Provide a quote. > > >>> Then if you decide it exists, how does that relate > >>> to the description of its construction in the Old Testament? Was the > >>> tunnel seen today the tunnel described in the Old Testament, or is it > >>> some other tunnel the way atheists continue to say in this newsgroup? > >> Which atheists? Provide quotes. > > >>> I know this is difficult, but it really is possible for an atheist to > >>> make a decision about this. > >>> The verses of the Bible that describe the construction of Hezekiah's > >>> tunnel are either true, or they are false. So far, having said that > >>> the Bible is only myth, atheists are not willing to admit that there > >>> are verses describing the construction of Hezekiah's tunnel that are > >>> obviously true. > >> How about this mindblower: > > >> Hezekiah's Tunnel exists. The Bible talks about it. The Bible is > >> true...on this fact only...but has nothing to do with the truthfulness > >> of the Bible. > > >> Look at every fiction story ever written. A great majority of them > >> write about the Earth. An even greater majority talk about humans. > > >> Does that mean that the book itself is now nonfiction since it describe > >> the Earth exactly how we see it today and how humans are? > > > Well, we have made progress to a point, that an atheist has admitted > > that the Biblical account of the construction of Hezekiah's tunnel is > > true. �First of all, not all fiction books describe the construction > > of something that can be observed. > > And that's irrelevant. > > > But your premise is wrong. �Just because you can find a fiction book > > that describes something that can be seen does not prove that all > > books that describe something that can be seen are fiction. > > Doesn't prove they're nonfiction, either. �You're starting to get it. > Just because a book talks about the construction of something is > irrelevant to the veracity of the book. No, it is not irrelevant. > > �The > > furthest you can go �would be to say that the book that describes > > something that can be seen could be fiction or non-fiction, but you > > cannot say that you have proven it to be fiction. �So you would have > > to find something else in the book that you claim is fiction, not > > Hezekiah's tunnel, which has been proven to be non-fiction. �I hope > > this will help you in your studies. > > When you get on to proving that God thing as non-fiction, do let me know. > > -- God already proved it. If you reject the atonement of Christ for your sins, it is your problem, not mine. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 1 Aug 2008 07:23
On Jul 31, 7:05�pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > On Aug 1, 8:10 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 31, 5:52 am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > > > > rbwinn wrote: > > > > On Jul 30, 10:15 pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > > > >> rbwinn wrote: > > > >>> On Jul 30, 6:14 pm, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: > > > >>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > > >>>>news:9dcddedb-bce6-457f-b0c5-d9a6d2bb6bd7(a)m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com... > > > >>>> On Jul 22, 10:04?am, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: > > > >>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > > >>>>>news:8ab589a3-2731-4a92-a41e-d6870a4e6f4b(a)k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com... > > > >>>>>> On Jul 21, 10:08 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: > > > >>>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > > >>>>>>>news:efa8da13-56b6-4386-bfe5-c571b689a669(a)d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... > > > >>>>>>>>>> God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. > > > >>>>>>>>> You have no evidence at all about God.- Hide quoted text - > > > >>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > > > >>>>>>>> Would you like me to send you a copy of the Bible? > > > >>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn > > > >>>>>>> You could, but it would be much better if you could provide some > > > >>>>>>> evidence > > > >>>>>>> of > > > >>>>>>> God as well. > > > >>>>>>> -- > > > >>>>>>> Steve O > > > >>>>>> God sent His Only Begotten Son, Steve. ?If that was not enough for > > > >>>>>> you, nothing I could do or say is going to convince you of anything. > > > >>>>>> Robert B. Winn > > > >>>>> Got any evidence that Jesus was the son of God? > > > >>>>> Please don't say, "the Bible" - that isn't evidence of anything at all, > > > >>>>> it's > > > >>>>> just an old, old story. > > > >>>>> -- > > > >>>>> Steve O > > > >>>> Well, actually the Bible is evidence of Hezekiah's tunnel. Three > > > >>>> different books of the Old Testament describe the construction of > > > >>>> Hezekiah's tunnel. > > > >>>> ================================ > > > >>>> Several of the Harry Potter books mention Kings Cross station. > > > >>>> Does that make the Harry Potter stories true? > > > >>>> Smiler, > > > >>> Why don't you spend some more time studying it, Smiler, and decide for > > > >>> yourself? I know that atheists are a little lacking in self- > > > >>> confidence, but I think you could decide this question for yourself. > > > >> I've studied Hezekiah's Tunnel since you brought it up. I still fail to > > > >> see what its existence has to do with the truthfulness of the Bible. > > > > >> -- > > > >> ****************************************************** > > > >> * DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 * > > > > > Well, first you would have to make a decision about Hezekiah's > > > > tunnel. Does the tunnel really exist or is it just a hoax the way one > > > > atheist claimed? > > > > Which atheist? Provide a quote. > > > > > Then if you decide it exists, how does that relate > > > > to the description of its construction in the Old Testament? Was the > > > > tunnel seen today the tunnel described in the Old Testament, or is it > > > > some other tunnel the way atheists continue to say in this newsgroup? > > > > Which atheists? Provide quotes. > > > > > I know this is difficult, but it really is possible for an atheist to > > > > make a decision about this. > > > > The verses of the Bible that describe the construction of Hezekiah's > > > > tunnel are either true, or they are false. So far, having said that > > > > the Bible is only myth, atheists are not willing to admit that there > > > > are verses describing the construction of Hezekiah's tunnel that are > > > > obviously true. > > > > How about this mindblower: > > > > Hezekiah's Tunnel exists. The Bible talks about it. The Bible is > > > true...on this fact only...but has nothing to do with the truthfulness > > > of the Bible. > > > > Look at every fiction story ever written. A great majority of them > > > write about the Earth. An even greater majority talk about humans. > > > > Does that mean that the book itself is now nonfiction since it describe > > > the Earth exactly how we see it today and how humans are? > > > Well, we have made progress to a point, that an atheist has admitted > > that the Biblical account of the construction of Hezekiah's tunnel is > > true. �First of all, not all fiction books describe the construction > > of something that can be observed. > > But your premise is wrong. �Just because you can find a fiction book > > that describes something that can be seen does not prove that all > > books that describe something that can be seen are fiction. > > Your misapprehension of his premise is noted. > > > The > > furthest you can go �would be to say that the book that describes > > something that can be seen could be fiction or non-fiction, but you > > cannot say that you have proven it to be fiction. �So you would have > > to find something else in the book that you claim is fiction, not > > Hezekiah's tunnel, which has been proven to be non-fiction. �I hope > > this will help you in your studies. > > Yes. > Using that logic and one data point, this means the bible is fiction > or non-fiction. > Using a second data point, say global flood, proves the bible is a > work of fiction. > > Al- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Well, no it does not. What you are claiming is that if you can find a mistake or something debatable in a non-fiction book, then you have proven it is fiction. What makes a book fiction or non-fiction is the intent of the author or authors. A fiction book is an account of imaginary events. A perceived mistake in a non-fiction book can happen because of a misinterpretation of events by either the author or reader of the book. Robert B. Winn |