Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: rbwinn on 6 Aug 2008 14:23 On Aug 6, 2:37�am, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: > On Aug 6, 2:39 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Aug 5, 7:52 pm, hhyaps...(a)gmail.com wrote: > > > > On Aug 5, 9:30 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> 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. > > > > Robert B. Winn > > > > Are you try to lie? > > > Any one can introduce the Constitution as evidence, but this must be > > > done by the lawyer. > > > And you should know that the judges have much more knowledge in the > > > Constitution than any one else? > > > If he refuse your lawyer's request, he must have seen the > > > irrelevance. > > > And you lied again that the courts are police state court.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > I have never hired a lawyer or been represented in court by a lawyer. > > Citizens of the United States have the right to represent themselves > > in court. > > Robert B. Winn > > Yes, but it did mean you are not a law graduate and you did not know > about constitution, let alone the interpretation of it. > And you refuse the right of the judge to throw out your request ?- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - The judge can do whatever he chooses. If he declares me guilty, I appeal the case on the grounds that I was denied trial by jury. The appeal takes the case to a different court. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 6 Aug 2008 14:27 On Aug 6, 3:25�am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > 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. > You are certainly welcome to your own opinion. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 6 Aug 2008 14:30 On Aug 6, 3:32�am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > 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? � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �* > ****************************************************- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - The verses describing the construction of Hezekiah's tunnel were certainly proven true. Were there some other verses you were interested in? Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 6 Aug 2008 14:32 On Aug 6, 3:33�am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On Aug 5, 7:47 pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >>> On Aug 5, 6:45 am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > >>>> rbwinn wrote: > >>>>> On Aug 4, 10:01 pm, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > >>>>>> rbwinn 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. > >>>>>> But, will it be ACCEPTED as evidence? > >>>>>> You keep trying these clever games with your debating tactics. Clever, > >>>>>> to you. Lame and flimsy to everyone else. > >>>>> Not today. A judge today in the United States will not even allow the > >>>>> Constitution of the United States to be entered as evidence. > >>>> Want me to demolish that claim, too? > >>> Go ahead and try. Show where one of these police state judges has > >>> allowed the Constitution in police state court. > >> So glad for your permission. > > >> United States v. Donald Fell > >> Case summary: Is the Federal Death Penalty Act of 1994 unconstitutional > >> as per the 8th Amendment?http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/crim/usfell92402opn.pdf > > > This defendant was obviously given a trial by jury. �This case does > > not apply. > > This case most certainly applies. �You asked for a case wherein the > Constitution was used as evidence. �The Constitution was used as > evidence in this case. > If there was a jury, then police state justice was not imposed on the defendant. You need to find another case. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 6 Aug 2008 14:33
On Aug 6, 3:33�am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > rbwinn 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? > > It exists, but is not evidence. > If it is not evidence, then in what way does it exist? Robert B. Winn |