Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Free Lunch on 3 Aug 2008 19:29 On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 15:24:56 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in alt.atheism: >On Aug 3, 8:12?am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >> > On Aug 2, 8:53 pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 00:08:55 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote >> >> in alt.atheism: >> >> >>> On Aug 1, 2:30?pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> >>>> rbwinn wrote: >> >> ... >> >> >>>>> Discuss it with John after the resurrection. >> >>>> No proof of this alleged "resurrection", is there? >> >>> Well, actually there is. The apostles were witnesses of the >> >>> resurrected Christ on two separate occasions. >> >> No evidence backs up your claim. >> >> > Well, I could send you a copy of the Bible if you want one. >> >> I have a Bible. ?There's no evidence in there to back up your claim. >> >John 20:19 Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the >week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for >fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto >them, Peace be unto you. > >John 21:9 As soon then as they were come to land, they saw a fire of >coals there, and fish laid thereon, and bread. >10 Jesus saith unto them, Bring of the fish which ye have now >caught. >11 Simon Peter went up, and drew the net to land full of great >fishes, an hundred and fifty and three: and for all there were so >many, yet was not the net broken. >12Jesus saith unto them Come and dine, And none of the disciples durst >ask him , Who art thou? knowing that it was the Lord. >13 Jesus then cometh , and taketh bread, and giveth them, and fish >likewise. > >14 This is now the third time that Jesus shewed himself to his >disciples, after that he was risen from the dead. The Bible still is not evidence. I asked for evidence.
From: DanielSan on 3 Aug 2008 19:30 rbwinn wrote: > On Aug 3, 8:54�am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 07:50:37 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote >> in alt.atheism: >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Aug 2, 7:23?pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>> The word in question is "egkuos". This word can be defined as: >>>>>> swelling inside, i.e. pregnant -- great with child. >>>>>> You are using "great with child" and assuming that's what the writer of >>>>>> Luke meant. Not sure how you get that, actually. Most people today >>>>>> would use the word "pregnant", not the phrase "great with child". >>>>> Well, what you are saying is that you believe that Luke was so feeble >>>>> minded that he would have believed there was something other than a >>>>> child in the womb of a pregnant woman. ? Nothing he wrote would >>>>> indicate that he was feeble minded. >>>> No, I'm not saying that at all. >>> Well, you absolutely are. �You regard me as so stupid that you think >>> you can convince me that a pregnant woman does not have a child in her >>> womb. �Why would you treat Luke any different? >> Once again, you misrepresent the discussion.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > The discussion was whether a pregnant woman has a child in her womb. > You claimed she did not. There is a fetus in the womb from 9 weeks from conception to birth. Prior to 9 weeks, there isn't even a fetus. Did you parents ever teach you about the birds and the bees? (Hint: It has nothing to do with avians or insects.) -- **************************************************** * DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 * *--------------------------------------------------* * Can God create a Thai dish so spicy that even He * * can't eat it? * ****************************************************
From: Free Lunch on 3 Aug 2008 19:32 On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 15:30:11 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in alt.atheism: >On Aug 3, 8:14?am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >> > On Aug 2, 8:54 pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> On Fri, 1 Aug 2008 23:40:30 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote >> >> in alt.atheism: >> >> >>> On Aug 1, 8:29?am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> >>>> rbwinn wrote: >> >>>>> On Jul 31, 8:56 pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>> Why don't we just wait for him before judging them then? >> >>>>>>>>>> I happen to think that if anyone needs judging it is the liars and >> >>>>>>>>>> hypocrites. But you don't see me campaigning to remove their human >> >>>>>>>>>> rights. >> >>>>>>>>> Well, yes, I do. Like other atheists you campaign for abortion, >> >>>>>>>>> which removes the right to live of the people who are killed. >> >>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn >> >>>>>>>> Please show me evidence that I've campaigned for abortion. Because >> >>>>>>>> that's a flat out lie. And is that your best effort at demonising >> >>>>>>>> atheists? >> >>>>>>>> Al- Hide quoted text - >> >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >> >>>>>>> Atheists have caused more abortions than any other group of people. >> >>>>>> So, you can't show evidence where atheists (like Al) have campaigned for >> >>>>>> abortion. You have lied. >> >>>>>> -- >> >>>>> Josef Stalin was an atheist like Al. ?While Josef Stalin was dictator >> >>>>> of the Soviet Union, the number of abortions in Russia increased to >> >>>>> about five per woman. >> >>>>> In the People's Republic of China, women who have had one child are >> >>>>> required by the state to abort any children conceived after the first >> >>>>> child is born. >> >>>> So, you have lied. >> >>> No, I did not lie. >> >> You lie to us all the time. This was one such example.- Hide quoted text - >> >> > So you are claiming that abortions in Russia did not increase while >> > Josef Stalin was dictator of that country. >> >> Stalin prohibited abortion and contraception. >> >So how did abortions in Russia reach an average of five per woman in >the lifetime of Russian women? That is a problem for you in your simplistic misunderstanding of the world.
From: DanielSan on 3 Aug 2008 19:33 rbwinn wrote: > On Aug 3, 9:09�am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 08:04:16 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote >> in alt.atheism: >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Aug 2, 8:53?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>>> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 00:08:55 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote >>>> in alt.atheism: >>>>> On Aug 1, 2:30?pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>> ... >>>>>>> Discuss it with John after the resurrection. >>>>>> No proof of this alleged "resurrection", is there? >>>>> Well, actually there is. ?The apostles were witnesses of the >>>>> resurrected Christ on two separate occasions. >>>> No evidence backs up your claim. >>> Well, I could send you a copy of the Bible if you want one. >> We've been over this you mindless fool. The Bible is not evidence in any >> way, shape or manner. I have read the Bible from cover to cover. Your >> claims just don't hold water.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > It helps to comprehend what you read if you read something. Why? Do you think he didn't comprehend it? -- **************************************************** * DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 * *--------------------------------------------------* * Can God create a Thai dish so spicy that even He * * can't eat it? * ****************************************************
From: Free Lunch on 3 Aug 2008 20:29
On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 16:02:46 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in alt.atheism: >On Aug 3, 9:09?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 08:04:16 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote >> in alt.atheism: >> >> >> >> >> >> >On Aug 2, 8:53?pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> >> On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 00:08:55 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote >> >> in alt.atheism: >> >> >> >On Aug 1, 2:30?pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> >> >> rbwinn wrote: >> >> >> ... >> >> >> >> > Discuss it with John after the resurrection. >> >> >> >> No proof of this alleged "resurrection", is there? >> >> >> >Well, actually there is. ?The apostles were witnesses of the >> >> >resurrected Christ on two separate occasions. >> >> >> No evidence backs up your claim. >> >> >Well, I could send you a copy of the Bible if you want one. >> >> We've been over this you mindless fool. The Bible is not evidence in any >> way, shape or manner. I have read the Bible from cover to cover. Your >> claims just don't hold water. > >It helps to comprehend what you read if you read something. What helps? |