Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Free Lunch on 3 Aug 2008 00:37 On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 18:43:56 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in alt.atheism: >On Aug 2, 1:17?pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: .... >> You presume to speak for God? >> >I absolutely do. Anyone can say anything and claim that he is speaking for God and God _never_ contradicts the speaker. It's almost as if God does not exist or just doesn't care. Anyway, I have no respect for your teachings or your hubris.
From: Free Lunch on 3 Aug 2008 00:38 On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 00:14:24 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in alt.atheism: >On Aug 1, 3:35?pm, Matthew Johnson <matthew_mem...(a)newsguy.org> wrote: >> In article <e41a1737-acad-4cdc-ae31-4f6523f32...(a)p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>, >> rbwinn says... >> >> >So what exactly is it >> >that you are trying to do? >> >Robert B. Winn >> >> I could ask you the same question, Robert. All you are doing is rattling cages. >> You aren't actually accomplishing anything else. >> >> Worse yet, you are still crossposting. You posted this to all of the following >> groups, whether you know it or not: >> sci.physics,cam.misc,alt.sci.physics,alt.atheism. >> >> Crossposting is always irritating, so it is almost never the right thing to do. >> It certainly isn't right here. Pick one group and stick with it. Pick one where >> it is on topic. >> >> Finally, make sure you know how to use your news client. Do you know how to coax >> it to display all the groups it is about to post to? Do you know how to turn OFF >> crossposting? > >Well, scientists were all done talking to me about the theory of >relativity two years ago when I finally figured out how the Galilean >transformation equations describe relativity of time If any >scientists decide they want to talk to me, I would certainly rather >talk to them than these atheists. You already demonstrated to us how confused you are in that area. Please, don't bring it up again. Didn't you learn anything from those who critiqued your 'work'?
From: Free Lunch on 3 Aug 2008 00:39 On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 06:44:14 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in alt.atheism: >On Aug 1, 7:51?pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >> > On Aug 1, 7:34 am, ben_dolan_...(a)reet.com (Ben Dolan) wrote: >> >> rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: >> >>> 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. >> >> Exactly so, and THAT is why the Bible is fiction. I'm glad you >> >> understand that, you may be making progress. >> >> > The proclamation of an atheist has no real power. ?It does not change >> > reality. >> >> And the proclamation of a religious nutter such as yourself has even >> less power. ?It doesn't even acknowledge reality. >> >So why was I the one who acknowledged that Hezekiah's tunnel exists >while atheists tried to claim that tour guides in Jerusalem were >taking tourists through solid rock? You are lying again. No one "tried to claim that tour guides in Jerusalem were taking tourists through solid rock?"
From: Free Lunch on 3 Aug 2008 00:42 On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 06:18:45 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in alt.atheism: >On Aug 1, 5:33?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> On Fri, 1 Aug 2008 14:38:28 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote >> in alt.atheism: >> >> >> >> >> >> >On Aug 1, 2:46?am, Stan-O <bndsna...(a)aol.com> wrote: >> >> On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 21:04:53 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(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...- Hide quoted text - >> >> >> - Show quoted text - >> >> >Well, I don't have to, but I do. ?If it annoys atheists, there must be >> >a reason. ?I learned that pattern of speech from Ronald Reagan. ?Just >> >look how successful Ronald Reagan was. >> >> Ronald Reagan was successful in deluding his followers. As a leader he >> was mediocre at best. In honesty, he earned failing grades. I can see >> why you would be proud to follow a liar.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > >Well, he always answered questions by starting with the word well. >Nobody got upset when Ronald Reagan did it. So why does it bother you >so much when I do it? People did get upset when Reagan lied to us, but his followers worshipped him so blindly that they still refuse to admit that he was a mediocre president who made some serious mistakes.
From: rbwinn on 3 Aug 2008 02:11
On Aug 2, 7:16�pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > >>> Most independent voters do not have the means to meet the requirements > >>> for ballot access that party politicians have imposed. > >> Most PEOPLE do not have the means to meet the requirements for ballot > >> access that the party politicians have imposed. > > > Well, I am sure that you Europeans are very impressed by that, but we > > Americans would like to have our own system of elections in effect. > > Democrats and Republicans see the voters as their personal property > > the same way Nazi party members saw the people of Germany as their > > personal property before World War II. > > I notice you TOTALLY ignored the demolition of your claim. > Well, you Party members do not like to be ignored, I know that much. Sorry, but I registered as an independent voter the first time i voted. Robert B. Winn |