Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: rbwinn on 22 Jun 2008 21:46 On Jun 22, 10:06 am, TT <t...(a)noburn.net> wrote: > On Sun, 22 Jun 2008 11:13:28 -0400, rbwinn wrote > (in article > <b632d03c-1575-41fa-8b21-2d50f3586...(a)f63g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>): > > > > > > > On Jun 21, 6:43 pm, TT <tte...(a)wowway.com> wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >>> On Jun 20, 4:37 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>> On Jun 20, 2:40 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>>>> On Jun 20, 5:34 am, TT <tte...(a)wowway.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>>>>>> On Jun 19, 5:55 am, TT <tte...(a)wowway.com> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> Well, go ahead and talk about God, but I can tell you ahead of > >>>>>>>>>>> time, > >>>>>>>>>>> you do not know anything about God. No atheist does. > >>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn > >>>>>>>>>> nahh...we'll discus what we want...you choose your fiction..and > >>>>>>>>>> that's all you have been expressing faith in..nothing else...and > >>>>>>>>>> we'll > >>>>>>>>>> point out our fiction...and we won't base a worldview on our > >>>>>>>>>> inability > >>>>>>>>>> to deal with reality like you do....Don't like it? Pray for > >>>>>>>>>> us...otherwise..tough... > >>>>>>>>>> -- > >>>>>>>>>> Cowardice asks the question, 'Is it safe?' Expediency asks the > >>>>>>>>>> question, 'Is it politic?' But conscience asks the question, 'Is it > >>>>>>>>>> right?' And there comes a time when one must take a position that is > >>>>>>>>>> neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but because conscience tells > >>>>>>>>>> one > >>>>>>>>>> it is right. > >>>>>>>>>> Martin Luther king Jr.- Hide quoted text - > >>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - > >>>>>>>>> Well, people would do better if they learned to do their own praying. > >>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn > >>>>>>>> Thinking is preferred by everyone else here..it actually does > >>>>>>>> something... > >>>>>>> Well, so you think that you can destroy Christianity. That was what > >>>>>>> this conversation was about when it began. That was why I was > >>>>>>> pointing out that the Bible was the best selling book in the world.. > >>>>>>> Not so, said atheists. Harry Potter is the best selling book in the > >>>>>>> world. > >>>>>> That's a bit melodramatic, isn't it? I'm just interested in your beliefs > >>>>>> and how they're rationalised. Destroying Christianity is a ridiculous > >>>>>> aspiration, you'd constantly be disappointed!- Hide quoted text - > >>>>> So why do atheists have schools teaching that Christianity is false? > >>>>> If they do not have the aspiration, why are they trying to do it? > >>>> Do we? What schools? What fresh hell is this?!- Hide quoted text - > > >>>> - Show quoted text - > > >>> Public schools. > >>> Robert B. Winn > > >> It carries the same weight in a science classroom as say, the stork > >> theory, and the multitude of other religious fantasies about how present > >> day humans came to be. It's main work is studied in literature classes, > >> and in sociology classes, it's effect on believers and the societies > >> they live in is reviewed. History classes abound with christian > >> references(well..in the West,anyway...in the east, they could care > >> less). You have no reason to complain...it gets far more respect than > >> it deserves... > > > When I was in school, we had a Baptist preacher who taught grades 5 > > through 8. He used to pray right in school. > > Robert B. Winn > > I'm truly sorry for you then...child abuse in the guise of education is a > horrible thing. It explains a lot though...therapy is the first healing > measure you can do for yourself...- Hide quoted text - > Well, I know all about therapy. When an atheist says therapy, they mean thorazine or some other tranquilizer drug. Robert B. Winn
From: Smiler on 22 Jun 2008 21:47 "BuddyThunder" <nospam(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote in message news:485e30dc$1(a)clear.net.nz... > rbwinn wrote: >> On Jun 21, 4:05 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>> rbwinn wrote: >>>> On Jun 21, 4:01 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>> On Jun 20, 3:24 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>> On Jun 18, 11:42 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Jun 18, 4:45 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>> news:21d2e037-7498-4d49-bb95-5a308e107d58(a)j33g2000pri.googlegroups.com... >>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 18, 12:14 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>> news:c44cff96-90ef-45f4-badc-413fcf95321e(a)m36g2000hse.googlegroups.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 17, 10:41?am, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> news:f8121cc3-37c1-4561-b7cc-b6292578b7f1(a)34g2000hsf.googlegroups.com... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> All atheists I talk to indicate to me that if they do not >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have a >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> written record of something, then it did not exist, and if >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> written >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> record is the Bible, then it still did not exist. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Liar. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> We have simply told you on many occasions that the magical >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> events >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> were >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> supposed to have taken place in your Bible are >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uncorroborated by any >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> source. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Meanwhile, all you can do is bleat about ramps and conduits, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> which >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> offer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> no >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proof at all that the supposed magical events actually >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> happened, or >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> main characters depicted in the book actually existed. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You are either incapable of listening, or unwilling to >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> listen. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hey, you atheists thought Harry Potter was going to make the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tunnels >>>>>>>>>>>>>> and ramps disappear. >>>>>>>>>>>>> We did no such thing. >>>>>>>>>>>>> You simply offered that as a straw man argument to disguise >>>>>>>>>>>>> your weak >>>>>>>>>>>>> position. >>>>>>>>>>>> I was not arguing about anything. If you atheists want to >>>>>>>>>>>> believe in >>>>>>>>>>>> Harry Potter, go ahead and believe in him. I just said that >>>>>>>>>>>> there was >>>>>>>>>>>> a tunnel between Gihon spring and the Pool of Siloam, exactly >>>>>>>>>>>> the way >>>>>>>>>>>> three books of the Old Testament say there is, and there is an >>>>>>>>>>>> earthen >>>>>>>>>>>> ramp over the city wall at the ruins of Lachish. You want to >>>>>>>>>>>> be cute >>>>>>>>>>>> about it, so go ahead and be cute. >>>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>>>>>>>>> Now explain why the existence of this tunnel and ramp and the >>>>>>>>>>> fact that they >>>>>>>>>>> are mentioned in the bible is evidence that the rest of the >>>>>>>>>>> magic story is >>>>>>>>>>> real. >>>>>>>>>> So what you would have me believe is that there are only two >>>>>>>>>> things >>>>>>>>>> mentioned in the Bible that are real, an earthen ramp and a >>>>>>>>>> conduit >>>>>>>>>> for water. I think that there are other things mentioned in the >>>>>>>>>> Bible >>>>>>>>>> that are real. >>>>>>>>> I'm sure there are other things that are true in the Bible, but >>>>>>>>> they >>>>>>>>> require independent verification before we'll know. >>>>>>>>> As you well know, London exists just as decribed in Harry Potter, >>>>>>>>> but >>>>>>>>> that's no reason to accept flying broomsticks. Flying broomsticks >>>>>>>>> would >>>>>>>>> require independent evidence. We don't have any. So there's no >>>>>>>>> compelling reason to believe in it. >>>>>>>>> Jerusalem exists, just as described in the Bible, but that's no >>>>>>>>> reason >>>>>>>>> to accept a six-literal-day creation. A six day creation would >>>>>>>>> require >>>>>>>>> independent evidence. We don't have any. We have overwhelming >>>>>>>>> evidence >>>>>>>>> for an old earth. So there's no compelling reason to believe in a >>>>>>>>> young >>>>>>>>> earth.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>> Well, you atheists insist on relativity of time except in one >>>>>>>> circumstance, the creation of the earth. When it comes to >>>>>>>> dinosaurs, >>>>>>>> you insist on absolute time, just like Isaac Newton. >>>>>>> You think that a 6000 year old planet that looks 4.5 billion years >>>>>>> old >>>>>>> can be accounted for by the theory of relativity? Could you explain >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> mechanism in layman's terms? I'm not an expert.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>> Well, as I said, you atheists do not want relativity of time applied >>>>>> to this particular thing, which the Bible does in more than one >>>>>> place. There are two definitions of time at the present, only one of >>>>>> which scientists will discuss, what they call local time or >>>>>> scientific >>>>>> time. This is defined by a certain number of transition of a cesium >>>>>> isotope molecule. Then Einstein's theory shows that if a cesium >>>>>> isotope molecule is moving relative to another cesium isotope >>>>>> molecule, then the time of its transitions will be slower than the >>>>>> transitions of the molecule that is not moving. So time is relative, >>>>>> except when scientists are talking about dinosaurs or the time of the >>>>>> planet earth. >>>>> Where can I read the peer-reviewed publication of this fascinating new >>>>> theory? That's quite something, you should write it up if no-one has, >>>>> it's Nobel Prize material!- Hide quoted text - >>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>> I write it up all the time in sci.physics.relativity. >>> Posting in a usenet group is not an effective way of getting a >>> challenging new theory taken seriously. Why wouldn't you go through >>> accepted scientific channels? Do you not really believe your new >>> theory?- Hide quoted text - >>> >>> - Show quoted text - >> >> I am the only one who does. I would suspect that sometime in the >> coming centuries that someone in science will decide to think about >> time, and then it will be accepted. Right now scientists are making >> too much money selling Einstein's idea. > > Read that back slowly and tell me if it sounds kooky. I only needed to read the first sentence for that! What's this about 'coming centuries' from someone who believes that the 'Second Coming' is immenent? Kind of destroys his beliefs, doesn't it? Smiler, The godless one a.a.# 2279
From: rbwinn on 22 Jun 2008 21:51 On Jun 22, 12:17 pm, Darrell Stec <darrell_s...(a)webpagesorcery.com> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Jun 21, 7:11 pm, Darrell Stec <darrell_s...(a)webpagesorcery.com> > > wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >> > On Jun 21, 4:02 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: > >> >> rbwinn wrote: > >> >> > On Jun 21, 8:19�am, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > >> >> >> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > >>news:5de9de62-15db-436d-a09c-db8e21818eef(a)d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com.... > > >> >> >> Well, no. �Neither Stuart Dowling nor I suscribe to sorcery. > >> >> >> Atheists, on the other hand always have something about sorcery in > >> >> >> their signatures and nicknames similar to Ku Klux Klan members. > > >> >> >> ========== > > >> >> >> Do I now ... amazingly, I never noticed. > >> >> >> Would you be so kind and point out these features about my nanem > >> >> >> and signature? > >> >> >> Or is it something invisible which I will only be able to see using > >> >> >> my special-issue super-sikrit decoder ring? > > >> >> > Well, actually, Darrell Stec has yours included with his, since you > >> >> > support everything Darrell Stec says. > > >> >> Aaaaaah, the old atheist hive-mind canard again. You couldn't support > >> >> it before, will you now? > > >> >> YOU WILL BE... ASSIMILATED! RESISTANCE IS FUTILE!- Hide quoted text - > > >> >> - Show quoted text - > > >> > Yes, Darrell's signature specifically mentions sorcery.  Other > >> > atheists call themselves witches, demons, etc. > > >> Idiot.  An atheist does not believe in gods, or demons or supernatural > >> forces.  Witches and demons cannot be atheists. > > >> > Yours mentions thunder. > >> > Robert b. Winn > > > So why all the references to sorcery? > > What all? > > > Robert B. Winn > > -- > Later, > Darrell Stec    dars...(a)neo.rr.com > > Webpage Sorceryhttp://webpagesorcery.com > We Put the Magic in Your Webpages- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Webpage sorcery http://webpagesorcery.com Magic in Your Webpages Robert B. Winn
From: Smiler on 22 Jun 2008 21:52 "Alex W." <ingilt(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message news:6c6rqqF3esk78U1(a)mid.individual.net... > > "BuddyThunder" <nospam(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote in message > news:485e3107$1(a)clear.net.nz... > > >> I bet it's always Christmas in Londonland, and all the women look like >> Angelina Jolie. > > I wish .... > Not the bit about always Christmas (All those annoying stupid carols and all that conspicuous consumption all year round!), but I'll go along with the second part ;-) Smiler, The godless one a.a.# 2279
From: Smiler on 22 Jun 2008 21:57
"BuddyThunder" <nospam(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote in message news:485d8a1f$1(a)clear.net.nz... > rbwinn wrote: >> On Jun 21, 8:16?am, "Alex W." <ing...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote: >>> "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote in message >>> >>> news:6c4ja8F3erpl2U1(a)mid.individual.net... >>> >>> >>> >>>> If you think that Harry Potter is fiction then you must also think that >>>> London doesn't exist right? >>>> You'd better tell that to all of the people who live there, it may come >>>> as >>>> a surprise to them. >>> Like the esteemed Mr Winn Esq, London councils have no doubt whatsoever >>> about the existence of London. ?At least, that is what they profess when >>> they send out council tax demands. >> >> Taxes. Well, that is something that should convince some atheists. >> Taxes are something they will never deny. > > Are taxes evidence that any gods exist? Just the opposite. Taxes are evidence that there are no such things as gods. Smiler, The godless one a.a.# 2279 |