Does God need to prove He exists?
in [Physics]
|
From: BuddyThunder on 28 Jun 2008 17:32 rbwinn wrote: > On Jun 28, 12:26 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Jun 27, 6:42�pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>> Jack wrote: >>>>>> I am upset by *people* who >>>>>> believe that the Bible is anything more than mythology and try �to impose >>>>>> their >>>>>> beliefs on me �using the Bible as evidence. >>>>> How can someone impose a belief on you? �Just believe whatever you want to >>>>> believe. >>>> The wrong part is when people attempt to use the myth to formulate >>>> public policy or indoctrinate children or inform foreign policy. >>> Well, actually they use fables. The apostles Paul said they would be >>> turned to fables in the last days. A fable is a story about animals >>> like the story about monkeys turning into humans. >> Wow, you're ignorant about evolution. Colour me surprised. > > In what way am I ignorant about evolution? Your strawman concept of "monkeys turning into humans" is revealing. If you have specific issues with the theory of evolution, bring them up like an adult and we can talk about them. I'm no expert, but I'll do the best I can.
From: BuddyThunder on 28 Jun 2008 17:33 rbwinn wrote: > On Jun 28, 7:17�am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 07:05:42 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >> wrote in alt.atheism: >> >> >> >> >> >>> On Jun 28, 12:26�am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>> On Jun 27, 6:42?pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>> Jack wrote: >>>>>>>> I am upset by *people* who >>>>>>>> believe that the Bible is anything more than mythology and try ?to impose >>>>>>>> their >>>>>>>> beliefs on me ?using the Bible as evidence. >>>>>>> How can someone impose a belief on you? ?Just believe whatever you want to >>>>>>> believe. >>>>>> The wrong part is when people attempt to use the myth to formulate >>>>>> public policy or indoctrinate children or inform foreign policy. >>>>> Well, actually they use fables. �The apostles Paul said they would be >>>>> turned to fables in the last days. �A fable is a story about animals >>>>> like the story about monkeys turning into humans. >>>> Wow, you're ignorant about evolution. Colour me surprised. >>> In what way am I ignorant about evolution? >> Monkeys and humans do share a common ancestor. Your denial of the fact >> does not change that fact.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Charles Darwin was not my ancestor. You're probably right, are you starting to understand common descent? You're both close to being leaves on a really, really big tree.
From: BuddyThunder on 28 Jun 2008 17:35 rbwinn wrote: > On Jun 28, 7:00�am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 06:47:11 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >> wrote in alt.atheism: >> >>> On Jun 27, 9:26�pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>> rbwinn wrote: >> ... >> >>>>> Well, I was the one who pointed out that the Bible in three books of >>>>> the Old Testament describes the construction of Hezekiah's tunnel. >>>>> Atheists still do not believe Hezekiah's tunnel exists. >>>> And you think London is a myth.- Hide quoted text - >>>> - Show quoted text - >>> No, I actually have a friend from London. �He says that Harry Potter >>> does not exist. �I think you should actually consider that >>> possibility. � I know this might be difficult for an atheist to do. >> There is a tunnel called Hezekiah's tunnel. That does not mean that the >> supposed authors of the Bible ever existed or wrote what was claimed >> that they wrote or that what was written ever happened. >> >> A few random facts in the Bible does not make the Bible true. This has >> been explained to you, so, it appears to me that you are just being >> stiff necked in playing your dishonest game. You mock the God you claim >> to worship with this behavior. Maybe you are just playing Loki. > > Well, if you do not want dto discuss Hezekiah's tunnel, go talk to > another atheist. If you're happy living under the shadow of indefensible logic, then go and talk to another theist. It doesn't really matter of which persuasion.
From: BuddyThunder on 28 Jun 2008 17:37 rbwinn wrote: > On Jun 27, 9:31 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >> rbwinn wrote: >>> On Jun 27, 6:17�pm, "Smiler" <Smi...(a)Joe.King.com> wrote: >>>> "rbwinn" <rbwi...(a)juno.com> wrote in message >>>> news:2612b88d-8906-4340-beae-1823b6ea0d69(a)b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com... >>>> On Jun 22, 1:09 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>> On Jun 21, 4:17 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>> On Jun 21, 4:14 am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Jun 20, 3:40 pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> On Jun 19, 12:06?am, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> rbwinn wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> <snip> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, what you are saying is that the Biblical account of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Assyrian >>>>>>>>>>>>>> invasion of Judea is fiction. ?What part of it do you claim is >>>>>>>>>>>>>> fiction? ?So far we have discussed the earthen ramp and >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hezekiah's >>>>>>>>>>>>>> tunnel. ?Are you still claiming that those are fiction? >>>>>>>>>>>>> You're still claiming London doesn't exist, huh? >>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know either account, so really don't have an opinion. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Have you >>>>>>>>>>>>> considered that maybe neither account is accurate? If pressed, I >>>>>>>>>>>>> would >>>>>>>>>>>>> go with the explanation with the best evidential support. I don't >>>>>>>>>>>>> have a >>>>>>>>>>>>> reason to decide at this point. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Happy to be agnostic on something! >>>>>>>>>>>> OK, well, my opinion is that unless an atheist has an opinion >>>>>>>>>>>> about >>>>>>>>>>>> Hezekiah's tunnel and the earthen ramp, it is a waste of time to >>>>>>>>>>>> try >>>>>>>>>>>> to discuss the Bible with that person. >>>>>>>>>>> Wow, why would you say that? It's a minor Biblical detail. >>>>>>>>>>> They exist, is that opinion enough?- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>>>> Well, any person who will not admit that someing exists which can be >>>>>>>>>> seen is not going to admit the existence of things which cannot be >>>>>>>>>> seen. So conversation with atheists is totally unprofitable. >>>>>>>>> No-one *ever* denied their existence. If they did, then you have >>>>>>>>> consistently denied that London exists too. >>>>>>>>> All we demand is logical consistency. Would you like to talk about >>>>>>>>> Harry >>>>>>>>> Potter again? ;-)- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>>>> No reason to talk about Harry Potter. There never was. >>>>>>> Then there was no reason to talk about Hezekiah's tunnel or earthern >>>>>>> ramps either. I agree with you. :-)- Hide quoted text - >>>>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>>>> You said you wanted to talk about the Bible. So now are you saying >>>>>> that you only want to discuss the parts of the Bible that you select? >>>>> I don't remember saying that, maybe if you could point me to the post? I >>>>> don't remember selecting the topic of discussion either, you brought up >>>>> Hezekiah's tunnel and invading army ramps. Discuss what you like Robert, >>>>> we might even find some common ground!- Hide quoted text - >>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>> Well, actions speak louder than words. �You do not want to discuss >>>> Hezekiah's tunnel. �You do not want to discuss the earthen ramp. �You >>>> will discuss certain verses of the Bible you can find fault with. >>>> ---------------------------------------- >>>> That would be most of them. >>>> Smiler, >>>> The godless one >>>> a.a.# 2279- Hide quoted text - >>>> - Show quoted text - >>> So what fault did you find with the verses that describe the >>> construction of Hezekiah's tunnel? >> Is this what you think? >> >> 1. Hezekiah's tunnel is described in the Bible. >> 2. Hezekiah's tunnel really exists. >> 3. Therefore, God exists.- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > Well, all three statements are true, but you have them in the wrong > order. Therefore , God exists, should be the first statement. How can you claim to have a reasoned belief in god? This is blind faith.
From: BuddyThunder on 28 Jun 2008 17:38
Free Lunch wrote: > On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 12:02:17 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwinn3(a)juno.com> > wrote in alt.atheism: > >> On Jun 28, 7:01?am, Free Lunch <lu...(a)nofreelunch.us> wrote: >>> On Sat, 28 Jun 2008 06:50:12 -0700 (PDT), rbwinn <rbwi...(a)juno.com> >>> wrote in alt.atheism: >>> >>>> On Jun 27, 9:31?pm, BuddyThunder <nos...(a)paradise.net.nz> wrote: >>> ... >>> >>>>> Is this what you think? >>>>> 1. Hezekiah's tunnel is described in the Bible. >>>>> 2. Hezekiah's tunnel really exists. >>>>> 3. Therefore, God exists.- Hide quoted text - >>>>> - Show quoted text - >>>> Well, all three statements are true, but you have them in the wrong >>>> order. ?Therefore , God exists, should be the first statement. >>> There is absolutely no evidence that God exists, so you are wrong in >>> drawing that conclusion. >> There is no evidence that an atheist would accept. So why do atheists >> worry about it so much? > > There is no evidence. > > Don't try to make excuses. You have no evidence at all. You know that. Right. And so maybe some old tunnel shows simply that there are old tunnels that sometimes get written about. Therefore God exists. Or something. |