Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Don Martin on 6 Aug 2008 08:39 On Aug 6, 12:13 am, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: > "JM" <JM20000...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > > news:6db979c1-79a0-4d30-8eab-e33e41c81e40(a)u6g2000prc.googlegroups.com... > On Aug 4, 10:47 pm, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > > > <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > > On Aug 5, 1:05 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > On Aug 4, 3:54 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: > > > > > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > > > >news:147d2d46-ff33-4aac-b29a-7e24af243840(a)k37g2000hsf.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 all kinds of cases. Clarence Darrow had the Bible entered as > > > > > evidence in the monkey trial. > > > > > Robert B. Winn > > > > > All kinds if cases? > > > > You mean, "one type of case"? > > > > No, a lawyer can attempt to introduce any physical object as evidence > > > in a court case. > > > Robert B. Winn > > > Relevant evidence > > > Al > > Does the parents have to condescend to their children? > ========================================== > Is that supposed to be English? Well, he's doing the best he can. So far as I can make out what he is trying to say, it would seem he raises a moot issue: the parents, by BEING there, demonstrate their existence daily. The supernatural superspook demonstrates not, neither doth he spin, but if proof of his existence is important to him, he had better suck it up and have at it. No one else can do it as well as he, presumably, should he happen to actually exist.
From: rbwinn on 6 Aug 2008 09:37 On Aug 6, 1:49�am, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > On Aug 6, 4:19 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> 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. > > Robert B. Winn > > OK, I'll rephrase that. > You're anti-woman. What makes you think I am anti-woman? Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 6 Aug 2008 09:46 On Aug 6, 1:48�am, "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? > Thank you, Steve. I think you have just spoken for all atheists. You are saying that the tunnel found by members of the British military after looking for a conduit for water where the Bible says a conduit for water exists is not the tunnel described in the Bible. Then you say that because the word construction was not used in the Bible, there is no evidence that a tunnel was constructed. The workers who built the tunnel left an inscription on the wall that said they constructed the tunnel if you think the Biblical account is not specific enough, but how exactly do you think the tunnel got there if it was not constructed? At any rate, you have proven what I have said all along. Atheists still deny the existence of Hezekiah's tunnel. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 6 Aug 2008 09:53 On Aug 6, 1:28�am, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: > "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > news:256a94a9-8283-4a9e-873c-a47bf89b6198(a)c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com... > > > > > > > On Aug 5, 1:46 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: > >> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > >>news:558164f1-39f1-48fe-9b6f-90c711472882(a)k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com.... > > >> >> I will say it. You have serious mental disturbances. But that is as > >> >> far as it goes. I am not a psychiatrist so I cannot prescribe you > >> >> medications or enforce any institutionalisations. I think you would > >> >> benefit from both, but as an uneducated opinion, it holds no weight.. > >> >> You have tried to get people to say they would like to lock you up on > >> >> several occaissions. Why is that? > > >> >> Al- Hide quoted text - > > >> > Because it is true. If you were able to do it, that is what you would > >> > do. However, I know more about the atheistic court system than you do > >> > and would be able to stop it from happening. Secondly, if it did > >> > happen, all I would have to do is talk to a psychiatrist, and I would > >> > be released. > >> > The reason I know so much about it is because I have already been > >> > declared insane and institutionalized. It is just a system of > >> > accusation in which no proof is required. All it takes are the > >> > signatures of a judge and two medical doctors. > >> > Robert B. Winn > > >> In any court, expert medical opinion is classed as valid evidence or > >> proof.. > >> Sorry. > > >> -- > >> Steve O > > > Well, here in the United States, defendants were supposed to have the > > right to defend themselves. > > As far as I am aware they still do. > I expect you are referring to your own personal experiences in court, and I > assume that it didn't go the way YOU planned. > Maybe you feel hard done by, which might explain your outrageous and > incorrect claim that defendants in the US don't have the right to defend > themselves... > If , as you claim ,you were denied that right, then all you would have to do > is produce three qualified doctors in court to counter- testify against the > three who were trying to commit you, and your rights would not have been > violated. > I expect you were unable to do that > > >I do not think you are sorry at all. �You atheists found a way to take away > >all rights of United States citizens > > by just getting signatures from three corrupt individuals. > > Robert B. Winn > > That's an incredible claim, but I suspect it has more to do with your > delusional condition rather than reality or court procedure. > Maybe you should talk to your doctor about that. > The fact remains - expert medical opinion is regarded as evidence in court. > You were committed to a mental health institution on the strength of that > expert opinion, for which there clearly must have been plenty of evidence - > you've certainly shown evidence of you mental ill- health here in this > forum. > > -- The only evidence the doctors presented was that I refused to speak with either doctor before the hearing. I was committed to a mental health institution because two doctors and a judge were angry with me because they felt I was not showing them the proper respect. A person accused of insanity has no means of getting other doctors to testify in their behalf, expecially not if they are being held in jail as I was. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 6 Aug 2008 09:58
On Aug 6, 1:50�am, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > On Aug 6, 4:29 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Aug 5, 7:47 pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > > > > rbwinn wrote: > > > > On Aug 5, 6:50 am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > > > >> rbwinn wrote: > > > >>> On Aug 4, 10:10 pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > > > >>>> rbwinn wrote: > > > >>>>> 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. > > > >>>> In only one type of trial, if it happened at all. Your credibility is > > > >>>> nil at this point. > > > >>> Well, judges of today are very careful to make certain that only > > > >>> atheism is allowed in courtrooms. > > > >> You mean, they'll only allow secular evidence? > > > > >>> That does not mean that the Bible > > > >>> is not evidence. No matter how hard atheists try, they are unable to > > > >>> make the Bible disappear. That is why it is evidence. > > > >> Atheists are not trying to make the Bible disappear. > > > > >> It also isn't evidence, no matter hard you try to make it evidence.. > > > > >> -- > > > > > So you are saying that the Bible is like Hezekiah's tunnel, it does > > > > not exist. > > > > Um. No. > > > � If the Bible exists, then it is evidence. �So does it exist or not? > > Robert B. Winn > > Yes, several of them exist. �Several Harry Potter books exist too.. > What was your point here anyway? > If you want to talk about Harry Potter books, we can talk about Harry Potter books, Al. Do you believe that Harry Potter is going to save you? Robert B. Winn |