Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: DanielSan on 3 Aug 2008 23:50 rbwinn wrote: > On Aug 3, 4:22�pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: > 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? >> I looked for this statistic and couldn't find it. �Where did you come by >> this figure? >> >> -- > It was a statistic that Russians were very proud of before the > collapse of Communism. When there were western governments that > prohibited abortion, Communists used this statistic to show how free > Russian women were. What does this have to do with Stalin's Russia and abortion therein? Do try to stay on topic. <snip irrelevancies> -- **************************************************** * DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 * *--------------------------------------------------* * Can God create a Thai dish so spicy that even He * * can't eat it? * ****************************************************
From: rbwinn on 3 Aug 2008 23:50 On Aug 3, 4:29�pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 15:24:56 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(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.- Hide quoted text - > The Bible is accepted as evidence in court. So why don't you accept it as evidence? Robert B. Winn
From: DanielSan on 3 Aug 2008 23:50 rbwinn wrote: > On Aug 3, 4:25�pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Aug 3, 8:21 am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>> On Aug 3, 4:29 am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>> 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. >>>>>> So did I. And your claim that Independent voters cannot run for office >>>>>> was demolished. >>>>> Independent voters cannot run for public office. >>>> Then how did Bernie Sanders get into office? >>>>> You said it >>>>> yourself. >>>> Where? >>>>> As recent as the 1970's there were states where an >>>>> independent voter could run for President of the United States with 24 >>>>> nomination petition signatures. That is no longer true. Party >>>>> politicians have passed laws in almost all states since that time >>>>> putting candidacy for office out of the reach of independent voters. >>>>> Unless a person running for office has a party faction behind him, he >>>>> cannot meet the requirements to get on the ballot. Party politicians >>>>> make certain that a person running for office has to solicit money and >>>>> organize faction, making all candidates automatically part of the >>>>> corruption of party politics. Until recently in American government >>>>> this was not true. When the government first started, elections were >>>>> conducted to include ordinary citizens. >>>> Then why can I find evidence of Independents running for office >>>> throughout our nation's history...up to this election? >>> Up until this election independent voters were allowed and able to >>> register as candidates in the United States, although since 1800, the >>> party controlled news media has never publicized anything except party >>> candidates. >>> Now in this election, Green Party candidate Ralph Nader is running as >>> an independent candidate. �However, Mr. Nader is not an independent >>> voter. �You would also discover that almost all independent candidates >>> in the United States have not been independent voters. >> How do you define "independent voters"? >> >> -- > An independent voter is a voter who is not registered as a member of a > political party. Originally all voters in the United States were > independent voters. How about a voter who is registered as an Independent? -- **************************************************** * DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 * *--------------------------------------------------* * Can God create a Thai dish so spicy that even He * * can't eat it? * ****************************************************
From: rbwinn on 3 Aug 2008 23:52 On Aug 3, 4:30�pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > 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.) > I was taught from the time I was born that a pregnant woman has a child inside her. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 3 Aug 2008 23:53
On Aug 3, 4:32�pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > On Sun, 3 Aug 2008 15:30:11 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(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.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - It is not a problem for me. I have never been involved in abortion. Robert B. Winn |