Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: rbwinn on 6 Aug 2008 14:36 On Aug 6, 4:18�am, mizlee <miz...(a)aol.com> wrote: > On Aug 6, 6:37 am, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > > > > > > > Steve O wrote: > > > > "DanielSan" <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote in message > > >news:E8adnZh0I57JjATVnZ2dnUVZ_gKdnZ2d(a)speakeasy.net... > > >> rbwinn wrote: > > >>> On Aug 5, 1:38 pm, "Steve O" <nospamh...(a)thanks.com> wrote: > > >>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message > > > >>>>news:b869657a-8ad3-4d4d-9f10-5440569a3345(a)34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com... > > > >>>>> 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. > > >>>>> Robert B. Winn > > >>>> It depends on what you are trying to prove. > > >>>> Why were you trying to introduce the Constitution as evidence, and > > >>>> how could > > >>>> it prove or disprove anything in relation to your particular > > >>>> circumstabces? > > > >>>> -- > > >>> The sixth amendment to the Constitution says that the defendant has > > >>> the right to trial by jury in "all criminal prosecutions". The judge > > >>> in my case had just denied my right to trial by jury. > > > >> Then you can appeal. > > > > Not on those grounds he can't. > > > ;-) > > > > The only grounds for appeal he has would be to provide evidence that the > > > judgment of the three doctors who declared him insane was mistaken and > > > incorrect. > > > Not much chance of that, is there? > > > He is acting like he's the only sane one in a sea of insane people. :-) > > > -- > > **************************************************** > > * 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 - > > It's been a couple weeks since I even looked at this thread, so I > decided to check in. �rbwinn is still drooling, and several of you are > still trying to engage him. �It's like trying to deal with an > Alzheimer's patient; they have their own reality, and NOTHING you can > do can get through to them - ever. Your excuse that onlookers might > become more knowledgeable by seeing what nutters are really like long > ago reached the point of diminishing returns. �Are you so locked into > this ridiculous dance you simply cannot stop? �Do you really think the > looney will "win" if he has the last word? �rbwinn is best left to > babble on his own - please trust me on this.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - I think that some of these atheists may be genuinely interested in relativity, mizlee. Since they are posting in sci.physics.relativity, I need to give them the benefit of the doubt. Robert B. Winn
From: Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al) on 6 Aug 2008 20:13 On Aug 6, 11:37 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > 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 What makes you think I'm pro-abortion? I have this idea of you in my head, and it said you were anti-woman. That's all I need to make up my mind aparently. Al
From: Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al) on 6 Aug 2008 20:15 On Aug 6, 11:58 pm, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > 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 No. What makes you think I need saving? I think the H Potter books draw heavily on pre-existing fairy tales to create a mythology that feels vaguely right. Much like the bible drew on pre-existing mythology to create it's own. A clear sign of fiction is that it is derivative of prior fictions. Al
From: DanielSan on 6 Aug 2008 20:38 rbwinn wrote: > 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. Yep. But it's also a fact that 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 20:45
rbwinn wrote: > 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.) > > The verses describing the construction of Hezekiah's tunnel were > certainly proven true. And irrelevant. > Were there some other verses you were > interested in? Acts 5. Luke talks about Gamaliel's speech. Gamaliel's speech was given sometime between 35-40 CE. Luke refers to the revolt of Theudas...in the past tense...even though the revolt wouldn't happen for at least another 6 years (between 46-47 CE). Furthermore, Gamaliel is claimed to have said that "Judas the Galilean" raised the revolt of Theudas...even though Judas' revolt was FORTY YEARS BEFORE the Theudas revolt. Can you explain? Also, did God create animals in Eden first...or man? -- **************************************************** * DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 * *--------------------------------------------------* * Can God create a Thai dish so spicy that even He * * can't eat it? * **************************************************** |