Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Smiler on 7 Aug 2008 01:26 "Don Martin" <drdonmartin(a)comcast.net> wrote in message news:cc78bc26-6b83-499b-8c56-f2cba69000f6(a)l64g2000hse.googlegroups.com... On Aug 6, 8:39 am, Don Martin <drdonmar...(a)comcast.net> wrote: > 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. An afterthought: being there for the children is practically the first item of any definition of GOOD parenting. Since the semi-anonymous "JM" proposes the analogy between a god and a parent, I suspect that it is up to him to show us how this god's absentee "parenting" is Good Parenting (and one would humbly expect that what a god does must needs be far superior to the poor efforts of humans). ================================================= The absent father. No wonder his 'children' turned out so bad. Smiler, The godless one a.a.# 2279
From: rbwinn on 7 Aug 2008 01:49 On 6 Aug, 20:29, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On 6 Aug, 17:13, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" > > <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: > >> 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- Hide quoted text - > > > Abortion has been an atheistic agenda for centuries. � > > Is that why most people getting abortions are Christian? > > > Atheists claim > > that abortion is necessary in order to control the population of the > > earth. > > Even though the population does need to be controlled, I don't remember > any atheist saying that abortion is the only way to do it. > So in addition to Josef Stalin, you now have the leaders of China as devout Christians. Robert B. Winn
From: rbwinn on 7 Aug 2008 01:54 On 6 Aug, 20:53, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On 6 Aug, 17:46, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >>> 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. > >> Sorry, bub. You moved the goalposts. I won't play your games. You lose.. > > > I said police state court. �A police state court has only a judge who > > denies the right to trial by jury. > > For instance, what kind of cases? > Criminal prosecutions. United States citizens are guaranteed the right to trial by jury in all criminal prosecutions by the sixth amendment. Whenever a judge denies that right, it becomes a police state court. Robert B. Winn
From: DanielSan on 7 Aug 2008 01:55 rbwinn wrote: > On 6 Aug, 20:29, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On 6 Aug, 17:13, "Dogmantic Pyrrhonist (AKA Al)" >>> <alwh...(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote: >>>> 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- Hide quoted text - >>> Abortion has been an atheistic agenda for centuries. � >> Is that why most people getting abortions are Christian? >> >>> Atheists claim >>> that abortion is necessary in order to control the population of the >>> earth. >> Even though the population does need to be controlled, I don't remember >> any atheist saying that abortion is the only way to do it. >> > So in addition to Josef Stalin, you now have the leaders of China as > devout Christians. Now you seek to lie about what I say. Do you really want to converse on an adult level or are you going to snipe? I don't have time, energy, or motivation to respond to snipes. -- **************************************************** * DanielSan -- alt.atheism #2226 * *--------------------------------------------------* * Can God create a Thai dish so spicy that even He * * can't eat it? * ****************************************************
From: rbwinn on 7 Aug 2008 01:55
On 6 Aug, 20:54, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > rbwinn wrote: > > On 6 Aug, 17:46, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > >> rbwinn wrote: > >>> 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? > >> As a fiction book. > > > OK, so what things exist besides fiction books that you claim are not > > evidence? > > What do you mean? You just said that fiction books are not evidence. Are there any more things besides fiction books that exist but are not evidence? Robert B. Winn |