Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: hhyapster on 6 Aug 2008 05:52 On Aug 6, 4:48 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > news:a04d0d60-f3af-4b79-9456-cda339136385(a)e53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com... > > > > > On Aug 5, 1:49 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: > >> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > >>news:e323a763-6e98-4845-981c-800015e7a2e3(a)s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com... > > >> > On Aug 4, 10:33 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > >> > <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > >> >> On Aug 5, 8:48 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > >> >> > On Aug 3, 10:42 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > >> >> > <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > >> >> > > On Aug 2, 11:44 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > >> >> > > > 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? > >> >> > > > Robert B. Winn > > >> >> > > This is another of your more persistent lies. No-one said at any > >> >> > > stage that there is no tunnel. > > >> >> > > Al- Hide quoted text - > > >> >> > You continue to say that the Bible is nothing but mythology. If you > >> >> > say that the Bible is nothing but mythology, you are saying that the > >> >> > tunnel is mythology because the Bible describes the construction of > >> >> > Hezekiah's tunnel in three different books of the Old Testament. > >> >> > Robert B. Winn > > >> >> No. You continue to not see the point. It is quite disturbing. > >> >> Greek mythology mentions Mount Olympus and Athens, both of which exist > >> >> today. This does not mean that Athens is mythological. > >> >> Surely you can't be THAT stupid. > > >> > I am not so stupid as to believe that an atheist would ever do > >> > anything but deny that Hezekiah's tunnel exists. If you tell me that > >> > you believe the tunnel exists, all you are doing is saying that you > >> > would tell the next person it does not exist. That is how you do > >> > things. Since that is the way you are, I just keep it simple by > >> > saying that you continue to deny the existence of the tunnel. Denying > >> > the veracity of anything in the Bible is more important to you than > >> > the existence of the tunnel. As long as it remains that way, you do > >> > not admit that the tunnel exists. All you are doing is just putting > >> > words together in an attempt to deceive. > >> > Robert B. Winn > > >> Would it make you happy if an atheist walked through the tunnel? > >> For f**ks sake, I'd be willing to pay out to visit the bloody place and > >> walk > >> through it just to shut you up. > > > What would that accomplish? You would still deny that the Bible > > describes the construction of the tunnel. > > Robert B. Winn > > BECAUSE IT DOES NOT DESCRIBE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE TUNNEL AT ALL YOU > IDIOT! > > A tunnel and a pool gets a brief mention in 2 Kings 20 ;20 and a conduit is > briefly mentioned Isaiah 1, 36;2 and there is even a brief reference to a > conduit and an upper pool in 2 Kings 18;9- but none of those passages, > describe any kind of construction at all. > There is no detail about how it was built, what materials were used, the > type and amount of labor used - all of these things do not get mentioned at > all. > That is the normal meaning of the word CONSTRUCTION > Certainly, a tunnel in roughly the same location exists today (and a couple > of others in different locations too)- but the only passage that refers to > Hezekiah is 2 Kings 20, and there is certainly not enough detail to confirm > that the tunnel used today by tourists is the same one referred to in the > bible > It's the first time I bothered to getting around to check the biblical > claims you've been talking about- you've been exaggerating the significance > of the references to the tunnel, almost as if it described in detail about > how the tunnel was built. > A significant and misleading use of the word, construction, I think. > Even so, what the hell does it matter? > ALL of the special claims in the bible are complete junk, and heavily > mythologised. > What does it matter about your tunnel? > > -- > Steve O > a.a. #2240 (Apatheist Chapter) > B.A.A.W.A. > Convicted by Earthquack > Exempt from purgatory by papal indulgence Hi, Steve, You are talking to a mentally problem sucker who is probably belonging to the institution. We are just entertaining him with our common sense and it's enough to overcome him. There is no need to refer to the story book at all, since all the stories were ancient tales. What is truly undesirable is that the bible claimed god which was supernatural then, but had never bothered to appear before mankind, and showered this world with killing diseases, calamities, etc. Kind and conscious human cannot buy this at all.
From: DanielSan on 6 Aug 2008 06:25 rbwinn wrote: > On Aug 5, 7:29�pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: >> On Aug 6, 12:05 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Aug 4, 10:38 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" >>> <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: >>>> On Aug 5, 8:52 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: >>>>> On Aug 3, 10:54 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" >>>>> <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: >>>>>> On Aug 3, 6:16 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Aug 1, 11:57 pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>> 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 said that Al campaigned for abortion. Are you going to provide >>>>>>>> evidence for this? >>>>>>> Sure. Ask Al if he is in favor of right to life. >>>>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>>>> What does that have to do with whether I've campaigned for legal >>>>>> abortions? >>>>>> Al- Hide quoted text - >>>>> Well, I am certainly sorry if I have misjudged you, Al. I think you >>>>> are pro-abortion. >>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>> That is because you are pidgeon-holing people based on misinformation >>>> from your church. >>>> I am neither pro- nor anti- abortion. I think it's something for women >>>> to decide on. It doesn't directly effect me, and I think it >>>> presumptuous for men to have a say. Not an opinion, but a say. >>>> Al- Hide quoted text - >>> So you are pro-abortion. >>> Robert B. Winn >> No. �I'm pro letting women make their own minds up. �If asked, I would >> warn against it. �But I'm not arrogant enough to tell women what to >> do. >> Just because you think the state should control women's bodies does >> not mean that my position that I (and the state) should have no say in >> it, is in any way pro-abortion. >> >> So you're pro-death then? >> >> Al- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Pro-life. I think you're pro-death. -- **************************************************** * DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 * *--------------------------------------------------* * Can God create a Thai dish so spicy that even He * * can't eat it? * ****************************************************
From: DanielSan on 6 Aug 2008 06:26 rbwinn wrote: > On Aug 5, 7:32�pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Aug 5, 6:31 am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>> On Aug 4, 9:22 pm, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: >>>>>> 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.- Hide quoted text - >>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>> I said I attempted to enter the Constitution as evidence. Judges in >>>>> America today do not allow the Constitution in their police state >>>>> courts. >>>> Just like they do not allow independent voters to run for public office, >>>> right? I demolished that claim. Want me to demolish this one? All I >>>> need to do is to find ONE case wherein the Constitution was used as >>>> evidence. >>>> Want me to do that? >>> You did not demolish anything. �Independent voters are prevented from >>> running for office every way party politicians can think of to prevent >>> them from running. >>> That is just a fact. >> And, as I showed, that's NOT a fact. �It's a downright, bald-faced lie. >> � The existence of Bernie Sanders demolishes your claim. >> >>> As for the other matter, you would have to find a case where a police >>> state judge allowed a defendant to refer to the Constitution or >>> Constitutional rights. >> Want me to do that? >> > Bernie Sanders is not an independent voter. I say he is. > He is a political party > member just as Joseph Lieberman is a party member. So, you're moving the goalposts now? -- **************************************************** * DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 * *--------------------------------------------------* * Can God create a Thai dish so spicy that even He * * can't eat it? * ****************************************************
From: DanielSan on 6 Aug 2008 06:26 rbwinn wrote: > On Aug 5, 7:32�pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Aug 5, 6:42 am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>> On Aug 4, 9:36 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" >>>>> <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: >>>>>> On Aug 4, 9:40 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Aug 3, 8:38 pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Aug 3, 4:18 pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> 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. >>>>>>>>>> No, that's not evidence. That's a claim. >>>>>>>>> Well, you have to understand something about rules of evidence. If >>>>>>>>> something exists, it can be entered into evidence. The Bible >>>>>>>>> exists. >>>>>>>> This post exists. This post says that unicorns exist. Therefore, this >>>>>>>> post can be entered into evidence and unicorns must exist. Right? >>>>>>>> Or is "unicorns exist" just a claim? >>>>>>> No, it is evidence that you are not telling the truth. >>>>>>>>> So what is your position, that the Bible does not exist, therefore it >>>>>>>>> cannot be entered into evidence? >>>>>>>>> This is the same tactic you have used from the beginning concerning >>>>>>>>> Hezekiah's tunnel. >>>>>>>> Um, no. And you cannot prove that any atheist has ever said anything >>>>>>>> about Hezekiah's tunnel not existing, so you might as well give up that >>>>>>>> tripe. >>>>>>> One atheist a few years back said that Hezekiah's tunnel was a hoax >>>>>>> perpetrated by Jerusalem tour guides. >>>>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>>>> And none in this discussion and no citation to back up this claim. >>>>>> And yet you ascribe all atheists with the property of denying tunnel >>>>>> exists. >>>>>> Why is that? Could it be that you're another Liar-for-jesus? >>>>>> Al- Hide quoted text - >>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>> No, it is just that knowing the way atheists are, >>>> You have shown time and again that you have NO knowledge of the way >>>> atheists really are. >>>>> if an atheist tells >>>>> me that he believes the tunnel exists, I do not believe that atheist >>>>> is really conceding its existence, but will continue to say that the >>>>> Bible is nothing but mythology even after being shown that it is not. >>>> Why? Because the tunnel exists? >>> The tunnel exists. �It is right where the Bible said a tunnel was dug >>> as a conduit for water. >> And what does that have to do with anything? >> > Well, you atheists claimed that the Bible was nothing but mythology. > So I have gtiven you a tunnel to consider that you say is mythology. Not equivalent. Mythology can reference real life objects. -- **************************************************** * DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 * *--------------------------------------------------* * Can God create a Thai dish so spicy that even He * * can't eat it? * ****************************************************
From: DanielSan on 6 Aug 2008 06:32
rbwinn wrote: > On Aug 5, 7:34�pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Aug 5, 6:42 am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>> On Aug 4, 9:39 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" >>>>> <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: >>>>>> On Aug 4, 10:13 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: >>>>>>> On Aug 3, 9:31 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" >>>>>>> <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: >>>>>>>> On Aug 2, 1:07 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Aug 1, 8:14 am, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >>>>>>>>>> news:f012c137-ec7a-4f41-acf8-81a047bcb82d(a)8g2000hse.googlegroups.com... >>>>>>>>>>>> Smiler, >>>>>>>>>>> I never go to alt.atheism. >>>>>>>>>> Idiot - you are never out of it. >>>>>>>>>> Every time you hit that send button with alt.atheism in your headers, you go >>>>>>>>>> there. >>>>>>>>>> All I am doing is responding to posts in >>>>>>>>>>> sci.physics and sci.physics.relativity. >>>>>>>>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>>>>>>>> And alt.atheism, cretin. >>>>>>>>> I don't care what is in the headers. I have already told you how to >>>>>>>>> avoid talking to me. Just take sci.physics and sci.physics.relativity >>>>>>>>> out of the header. I never go to alt.atheism. >>>>>>>>> Robert b. Winn >>>>>>>> The issue is really that some of us really object to lies. And when >>>>>>>> we see lies, we feel the need to publicly denounce them to the same >>>>>>>> audience as they were originally disseminated to. >>>>>>>> Al- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>> If you object to lies, then you should stop posting lies in >>>>>>> sci.physics and sci.physics.relativity. Lies are off topic in these >>>>>>> newsgroups. >>>>>>> Robert B. Winn >>>>>> I haven't posted any lies. You however, have demonstrably posted many >>>>>> lies >>>>> It did not happen. I was the person who said that Hezekiah's tunnel >>>>> exists, which was demonstrated to be true. >>>> And King's Cross Station exists. >>> Does the Bible say that King's Cross Station exists? >> No, because, when the Bible was written, the station was not built yet. >> � When the Bible was written, it didn't even REFERENCE the entire >> country that would later be known as England. >> > Well, then you cannot prove the Bible wrong by using King's Cross > Station. You would have to use something in the Bible. Well, then you cannot prove the Bible right by using Hezekiah's Tunnel. You would have to use something else in Bible. (Oh, by the way, there was no world-wide flood.) -- **************************************************** * DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 * *--------------------------------------------------* * Can God create a Thai dish so spicy that even He * * can't eat it? * **************************************************** |