Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: hhyapster on 4 Aug 2008 23:35 On Aug 4, 8:02 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > On Aug 3, 8:56 pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > > > rbwinn wrote: > > > 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. > > > For what kinds of cases? > > For any kind of case. A lawyer can request that a Bible be entered as > evidence in any court case. Clarence Darrow had the Bible entered as > evidence in the famous "monkey trial". > Riobert B. Winn A judge must be mad or loony if he were to allow for bible as evidence. You mean that ancient time recording can be the evidence for modern time crime or cases? This would also mean America is declining, at a rate faster than I thought.
From: rbwinn on 4 Aug 2008 23:45 On Aug 4, 8:35�pm, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: > On Aug 4, 8:02 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Aug 3, 8:56 pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > > > > rbwinn wrote: > > > > 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. > > > > For what kinds of cases? > > > For any kind of case. �A lawyer can request that a Bible be entered as > > evidence in any court case. �Clarence Darrow had the Bible entered as > > evidence in the famous "monkey trial". > > Riobert B. Winn > > A judge must be mad or loony if he were to allow for bible as > evidence. > You mean that ancient time recording can be the evidence for modern > time crime or cases? > This would also mean America is declining, at a rate faster than I > thought.- Hide quoted text - > Well, it happened in 1934, or whenever it was. So we have that precedent in American jurisprudence. Robert B. Winn
From: hhyapster on 4 Aug 2008 23:53 On Aug 5, 6:35 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > On Aug 3, 8:57 pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > > > rbwinn wrote: > > > 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. > > > Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but you were taught wrong. > > > -- > > You are saying that my mother was lying to me about my younger > brothers and sisters? > Robert B. Winn A child is of a few years old......and your brothers and sisters were a few years old in your mother's womb? Your mother was not lying but was not conscious/careful of what she said and of course wrong.
From: hhyapster on 5 Aug 2008 00:03 On Aug 5, 6:53 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > On Aug 3, 11:28 pm, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: > > > > > On Aug 3, 2:21 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > On Aug 2, 9:38 pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > On Sat, 2 Aug 2008 00:14:24 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(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'?- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > x'=x-vt > > > y'=y > > > z'=z > > > t'=t > > > > w=velocity of light > > > x=wt > > > x'=wn' > > > > x'=x-vt > > > wn' = wt -vt > > > n'=t(1-v/w) > > > > w = x/t = x'/n' = (x-vt)/(t-vt/w) = (x-vt)/(t-vx/w^2) > > > = (x-vt)gamma/(t-vx/c^2)gamma > > > = x'Lorentz/t'Lorentz > > > > Robert B. Winn > > > What are these nonsense? > > If you want to put forward any formula, be very clear about every step > > and what do they mean. > > There is no head and no tail to the above, and certainly nothing in > > between. > > Do you see any physicist respond to you?- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > Anyone who took physics in high school should be able to follow these > equations. > Robert B. Winn Yes, unless the equations do not make sense. I am telling you that your equation did not have any meaning and was insufficiently represented. Where did you take them from? You being a high school standard has no capability or ability to make up a physics formula of any useful form, except to show your stupidity or insanity.
From: hhyapster on 5 Aug 2008 00:22
On Aug 5, 11:08 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > On Aug 4, 5:34 pm, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 4 Aug 2008 05:02:25 -0700 (PDT), in alt.atheism > > rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in > > <df36fbb3-4bc6-4217-93a7-eb8537d50...(a)s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>: > > > >On Aug 3, 8:56?pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > > >> rbwinn wrote: > > >> > 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. ? > > > >> For what kinds of cases? > > > >For any kind of case. A lawyer can request that a Bible be entered as > > >evidence in any court case. Clarence Darrow had the Bible entered as > > >evidence in the famous "monkey trial". > > > When did you last check the rules of evidence?- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > The last time I was in court. I attempted to introduce the > Constitution of the United States as evidence. > Robert B. Winn Yes, the constitution was written in modern time and is not a story. The bible was written more than 2000 years ago and was a collection of tales meant to con the young into sleep. You do not know the significance of a constitution and a fictional story book. |