Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: Steve O on 7 Aug 2008 04:40 "rbwinn" <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in message news:206e5969-0e0b-40f3-8a11-4410f42d8955(a)34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com... > On 6 Aug, 22:57, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >> > 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. >> >> Can you give me an example? �Give me a case. >> > Certainly. Police officers are unhappy with some individual, so they > arrest him on a false misdemeanor charge to harrass him. The > defendant appears in court and asks for trial by jury. Your right to > trial by jury is denied, says the police state judge. So the > arresting officer states his version of why the defendant was > arrested. The defendant must now prove that the police officer is > lying to a judge who sent the police officer out in the first place to > bring in people to pay fines to the court. Without a jury, it > accomplishes nothing in that court for the defendant to say anything > unless he is going to appeal the case. The case was decided before > the defendant was ever arrested on false charges. > Robert B. Winn The right for trial by jury is further codified by the Seventh Amendment. Misdemeanors do not receive a jury trial- they are reserved for felonies and certain civil cases only -- Steve O a.a. #2240 (Apatheist Chapter) B.A.A.W.A. Convicted by Earthquack Exempt from purgatory by papal indulgence
From: hhyapster on 7 Aug 2008 04:51 On Aug 7, 2:30 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> 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.) > > > -- > > **************************************************** > > * 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 So, point taken. Then your god must be real. Now, can we summon your god to the criminal court to be tried? The crime is that he permitted diseases to exist in this world to kill people. More specifically, he planted the HIV. Trial by jury in this case definitely find him guilty.... We hereby assign you to find a way for us to execute your god.....when do you come back with this proud assignment? You will be famous, you know.
From: hhyapster on 7 Aug 2008 05:08 On Aug 7, 11:25 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> 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. Atheists claim > that abortion is necessary in order to control the population of the > earth. > Robert B. Winn You have no standing to talk about this subject, period.
From: hhyapster on 7 Aug 2008 05:12 On Aug 7, 11:39 am, rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote: > On 6 Aug, 17:45, DanielSan <daniel...(a)speakeasy.net> wrote: > > > 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? > > I guess you have never read Josephus. About every other person was > named Theudus, Judas, or Jesus, or John. I have no idea what persons > Gamaliel was talking about in his speech, and neither do you. > > The Bible says that animals were created first and then Adam was > created. > Robert B. Winn What about plants, insects, dinasours, virus, tsunami, typhoon, Thor's lightning bolt, etc
From: Masked Avenger on 7 Aug 2008 06:56
Smiler wrote: > "DanielSan" <danielsan(a)speakeasy.net> wrote in message > news:z-GdnRZdGrg4iwTVnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d(a)speakeasy.net... >> Smiler wrote: >>> "rbwinn" <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> wrote in message >>> news:1082fbd6-2ddd-4605-8acb-e9482c479d0c(a)25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com... >>> On Aug 4, 6:27?am, Masked Avenger <cootey...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>> On Aug 1, 6:47 am, Masked Avenger <cootey...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>> rbwinn wrote: > > <snip of winn's lunacy> > >>> 1 Corinthians 1:18 For the preaching of the cross is to them that >>> perish foolishness, but unto us which are saved it is the power of >>> God. >>> ======================================== >>> Harry Potter left for Hogwarts from platform 9 3/4 at Kings Cross >>> station. >> Arthur Dent witnessed the construction of the Earth. The Earth exists. >> Therefore, we are descended from Golgafrinchams. >> > > He also witnessed it's destruction at the hands of the Vogons > The mice were very upset about that! > > Smiler, > The godless one > a.a.# 2279 > > but the dolphins managed to get out in time ........... so long and thanks for all the fish ........ -- MA ....Yoiks .... and away ..... Only two things are infinite, the Universe and human stupidity .............. and I'm not sure about the Universe .......... - A. Einstein Does Schr�dinger's cat have 18 half lives ? |