HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org (Mike A. McAngus)
Subject: Re: Tax the Church
Organization: Homebrew Virtual Reality Labs
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 1993 05:29:06 GMT

Paul Ciszek (pciszek@nyx.cs.du.edu) wrote:
: mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org (Mike A. McAngus) writes:
:
: >I'm in full agreement.  I find it appalling that more and more property gets
: >bought up by religious organizations and taken off the tax rolls.
:
: Now it's my turn to ask for a citation.  I had not noticed any such explosion
.
:

No "explosion", but from the "Yearbook of American and Canadian Churches" years
1989 thru 1991, The number of church buildings reported rose from 346,102 in
1988 to 350,337 in 1991.

Unfortunately, this report does not include non-christian churches.  I have a 
request in with the local headquarters of my U.S. Senator, and we will see if 
they can get information from the IRS that I couldn't.

So, Where is your citation Paul?
-- 
Mike McAngus                    |You are a fluke of the Universe.  You have no 
mam@jcnpc.cmhnet.org            |right to be here, and whether you can hear it
The Truth is still the Truth    |or not the Universe is laughing behind your 
Even if you choose to ignore it.|back.  -- National Lampoon, Deteriorata
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: bskendig@netcom.com (Brian Kendig)
Subject: Re: BELIEVERS: WHAT WOULD MAKE YOU NOT BELIEVE IN GOD?
Organization: Starfleet Headquarters: San Francisco
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 15:21:20 GMT

house@helios.usq.EDU.AU (ron house) writes:
>"Robert Knowles" <p00261@psilink.com> writes:
>
>>Also, since a fair number of god believers also read this newsgroup, I am 
>>curious what would make them no longer believe that god existed.
>
>What would make you believe that no-one named Pietr Arbuthnotfinkle
>Levinwarkldom II ever existed?
>
>My point: It is hard to think up proofs of the non-existence of an entity.

Good point: but what if I were to say, "Pietr Arbuthnotfinkle
Levinwarkldom II is a small cloud floating directly above your head
and guiding your every action with invisible puppet-strings," or
"there are little gremlins behind you sticking their tongues out at
you and everybody can see them but you, because they hide from you
when you turn to look, and nobody will admit to you that they exist
because nobody wants to let you in on the joke"?

It's very difficult to say that a specific entity never existed.  But
as soon as you begin tacking qualifications onto that existence --
such as "God is above the laws of physics, & God can cause miracles, &
God knows what is in your mind, &c." -- you can draw on your own
experience to cast considerable doubt that an entity with these
qualifications could exist in your world.

If you say God is just another person like you or I, then I'd have no
way to argue with you that he doesn't exist.  But since your other
claims about him contradict what I believe I know about the universe,
you've got to back them up.

>(However, as many atheists on this board claim to have previously been
>theists, there obviously are quite a few theists who do have a non-belief
>threshhold, whether they can articulate it or not.)

It's not as easy as that.  Atheists say, "If you can show me x, y, and
z, then I will believe that your god exists."  Theists say, "It is
impossible to conceive that God does not exist.  Usually when a theist
becomes an atheist it isn't because he's been shown something he
didn't see before, but rather because he grew disillusioned with his
religious teachings and finally realized how empty they are.

-- 
_/_/_/  Brian Kendig                             Je ne suis fait comme aucun
/_/_/  bskendig@netcom.com                de ceux que j'ai vus; j'ose croire
_/_/                            n'etre fait comme aucun de ceux qui existent.
  /  Nolite te bastardes     Si je ne vaux pas mieux, au moins je suis autre.
 /    carborundorum.                                             -- Rousseau
Xref: sparky alt.atheism:25708 alt.slack:3667
From: eng10524@nusunix1.nus.sg (RAMASWAMI VISHWANATH)
Subject: confused
Organization: National University of Singapore
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 19:10:30 GMT

If 'God' created Adam and Eve and nobody else (except of course the
apple and the snake )then did 'our ancestors' practice incest ? How else
could the entire human race come from just two people ? Oh dear I am a
sinner ( can hear the Xians say 'Join the ranks') ; CLEANSE ME , cleanse
me ..... oooh the bloood , the Holy Blood from the wounds .....but wait
a minute - whaddyathink , it is my Fathers blood . Gee , now it all
makes sense ....!!!!
From: mathew <mathew@mantis.co.uk>
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Faulty IQ reasoning (Was: Re: iq<->religion: connection?)
Date: Tue, 05 Jan 93 15:14:17 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.

John A. Johnson <J5J@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
> In article <X9yuwB4w165w@mantis.co.uk>, mathew <mathew@mantis.co.uk> says:
> [in response to an incredibly long thread I stopped reading months ago]
> >The "sincere observation" that high IQ correlates with atheism is certainly
> >an interesting one.  I'm afraid that the last time I did an IQ test it
> >indicated that I had an IQ of 68, and so I'm rather predisposed to (a) doubt
> >the correlation you suggest and (b) doubt the usefulness of IQ tests as a
> >measure of intelligence of any variety.
> 
> I'd like to suggest that both the "sincere observer" and mathew are
> conducting pretty shoddy psychological research.  Casual observation,
> however sincere, lacks the necessary rigor for determining the
> correlation between intelligence and theistic beliefs.

I wasn't suggesting that my observation constituted any sort of evidence for
anything whatsoever.  I said that it predisposed me against IQ tests.  That's
exactly what I meant, no less, no more.

>                        Is one justified in doubting the quality of
> Honda Accords generally (without checking the available overall repair
> records) on the basis of your car which doesn't run well?  I think not.

No, but if one buys a Honda Accord and it falls to bits within six months,
one is unlikely to buy another, and more likely to pick an alternative car.


mathew

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: mccreary@sword.eng.hou.compaq.com (Ed McCreary)
Subject: Re: Why? (was Re: THE MIND OF THE BIBLE BE
Organization: Compaq Computer Corp.
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 16:00:22 GMT

In article <merlyn.726461346@digibd> merlyn@digibd.digibd.com (Merlyn LeRoy) writes:
>geoff@tyger.East.Sun.COM (Geoff Arnold @ Sun BOS - R.H. coast near the top) writes:
>>%T The Existence of God (Revised Edition)
>
>The book or the god?

Hehehe, the New Testament, otherwise known as Jehovah 2.0

And you thought it took Microsoft a long time to come out with a
new release.  Jehovah 3.0, the ultimate in vaporware.
--
Ed McCreary                                               ,__o
mccreary@sword.eng.hou.compaq.com                       _-\_<,
"If it were not for laughter, there would be no Tao."  (*)/'(*)
Xref: sparky alt.atheism:25313 talk.religion.misc:25498
From: bobbe@vice.ICO.TEK.COM (Robert Beauchaine)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: THE MIND OF THE BIBLE BELIEVER
Date: 8 Jan 93 01:14:01 GMT
Followup-To: alt.atheism
Distribution: world,public
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.

In article <1993Jan7.181801.9242@ra.royalroads.ca> mlee@post.RoyalRoads.ca (Malcolm Lee) writes:
>
>Love God.  Love your neighbour as yourself.  Do not murder.  Do not bear false
>witness.  Do not commit adultery.  Do not covet thy neighbour's possessions.
>Do you find fault with any of these?  What is wrong about being a Christian?
>Is your life diminished in any way by following these rules?  What have you got
>to lose?

  Exception?  Well, the first two are meaningless statements to the
  atheist.  And why can't I covet?  You should see my next door
  neighbors wife!  

  But tongue removed from cheek, where's your causal connection
  between the behavior you hold so dear above and your religion?  If
  most of the atheists on this forum are truthful, they are as a
  group as moral as your beloved fellow christians by every metric I
  use.

  As for what I have to lose, forcing myself to believe in god when
  I can't see he's there would probably reduce my self esteem to
  a psychologically dangerous level.

>
>What do you believe?  Where is your book of life?
>

  What do I believe?  You're going to have to be a bit more specific
  in your query or this post will soon prove unwieldy.  My book of
  life?  My book of life says you're born, you live, you die and
  become worm fodder.  Exactly which part are you unclear on?


/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ 

Bob Beauchaine bobbe@vice.ICO.TEK.COM 

"Look, I tried the cat experiment.  On the third trial, the cat was
dead.  On each of the subsequent 413 trials, it remained dead.  Am I
doing something wrong?"
			James Nicoll

Q.  How many Heisenbergs does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A.  If you know the number, you don't know where the light bulb is!

Xref: sparky alt.atheism:25394 talk.religion.misc:25565
From: v22964qs@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Mike Cluff)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Why? (was Re: THE MIND OF THE BIBLE BELIEVER)
Date: 8 Jan 93 18:24:00 GMT
Distribution: world,public
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1993Jan8.044716.15942@julian.uwo.ca>, roberts@gaul.csd.uwo.ca (Eric Roberts) writes...
>In article <C0GqGn.CwF@acsu.buffalo.edu> v22964qs@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Mike Cluff) writes:

>Simply because he chose not to impose His will upon us. God gave us
>the right to choose to be with or without Him. He knew that people would
>sin and he told them that, as long as they repented, he would forgive.
>So what is the problem? Why should God force you to do something that
>you do not wish to do?

This would make sense to me if God's existence were clearer.  However, God
seems to like to "hide out" and play guessing games.  After all, the question
is not only whether or not we choose to be with him, but whether or not he
even exists at all!  So, one has to first *believe* in god's existence before
even deciding on being "with" him.  

As I've said before, if the stakes are so high, why doesn't he make his presence
absolutely certain to absolutely everyone?  If your reply to that is "but then
*everyone* would decide to follow god", realize that this is entirely my point.
Why the peek-a-boo games?

******************************************************************************
For God so loved the world that He gave Man Free Will and then got pissed when
we didn't meet his arbitrary standards.  Oh, and he had his Son offed when he
realized how impossible those standards were.  -- Michael 4:23
******************************************************************************
Xref: sparky alt.atheism:25880 talk.religion.misc:26063
From: charlie@lindy.Stanford.EDU (Charlie Channel)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: THE MIND OF THE BIBLE BELIEVER
Date: 12 Jan 1993 17:21:28 -0800
Organization: Stanford U
Distribution: world,public
NNTP-Posting-Host: lindy.stanford.edu

In article <1ivpfgINNnpa@fido.asd.sgi.com> livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
>
>So is God just "trusting" or is he really omniscient.    When are you good
>people going to make up your minds?
>
>jon.

God's personal attributes include omniscience and other qualities.
"We people" may simply see more of those other attributes than "you
people" care to admit exists.  That's OK.  But, it's not a matter of
making up anyone's mind.

C
From: cjhs@minster.york.ac.uk
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: I still wouldn't worship it.
Date: 11 Jan 93 21:38:22 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of York, England

Ron Williams (ron@syacus.acus.oz.au) wrote:
: cjhs@minster.york.ac.uk wrote:
: > 
: > Curious... are you saying God cannot heal? If not, how do you decide
: > what actions are "material"?
: > 
: > Cheers -- Chris Ho-Stuart
: 
: 
: God? 
: 
: You (and other theist writers) are using an undefined entity as if it were a 
: commonly agreed phenomenon.

I (cjhs) am an atheist. Furthermore, I was asking a question of a
theist in an attempt to get at *his* definition of God.

The theist (Ron House) proposed that God was not detectable in the
material world. Here are his words again which prompted my question:

ron house (house@helios.usq.EDU.AU) wrote:
>: Surely, any being that acts like a super-powerful being can NOT be god,
>: for that very reason.  God is outside time and space, so anything that acts
>: in a material fashion within t&s cannot be god.  Therefore the behaviour
>: described above would prove to me that it was not god.

I call myself an atheist because the proposed entity God *does* have
just enough of a commonly accepted definition that I can state that
this entity apparently does not exist.

However, Ron House appears not to use the usual definition!  Although
he is a theist, I suspect that he is very close to being an atheist,
since he has already gone so far as to throw out any God which acts in
a materially detectable fashion -- I think.

To Ron House -- thanks for your reply: I read it and considered
myself well answered. I invite your further comment on my perception
of the implications of the position you seem to adopt.

By the way -- to both Rons -- I'm an Aussie myself. And it is snowing
here in York. What ludicrous weather to have around about Christmas!

Felicitations -- Chris
From: jeon@carson.u.washington.edu (Sangyong Jeon)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: logic, omni-, theism, and atheism
Date: 11 Jan 1993 20:32:52 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
NNTP-Posting-Host: carson.u.washington.edu

In article <house.726719348@helios> house@helios.usq.EDU.AU (ron house) writes:
>jeon@carson.u.washington.edu (Sangyong Jeon) writes:
>
>>we atheists tend to
>>be very strong in logic.
>
>Whenever someone says anything like this about themselves, you just _know_
>a real logical howler is coming soon...
>

I'll admit this much, that generalization of any kind is apt to be
illogical. 

However,

>>If a theist accept the validity of logic, he/she cannot even conceive of
>>converting atheists because the (non-) existence god is an axiom.
>
>and there you go!  Last time I looked, most sane atheists had reasons for
>their non-belief in god, even if only the reason that far too little
>evidence was forthcoming in his favour.  Their atheism was a conclusion,
>not an axiom.  
>
>Ron House.                 USQ

if you want to assert something, back it up. If what I said was logically
wrong, then point it out why it was logical fallacy. 
If you want to say the existence of god cannot be categorized as axiom,
show your logical reasoning. If you want to use deduction, do so,
if you want to use induction, provide veritable evidence.
(Note that any induction short of mathematical induction is too broad a
generalization.)
If you want to say you are smarter than atheists

>(Apologies to any atheists to whom I have credited too
>much intelligence.   :-)  )

directly say so, and back it up with veritable evidence.

Opinions here are mine and mine only.
jeon
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: epowers@mccoy.NMSU.Edu (POWERS)
Subject: Re: Evolution implied by the Bible
Organization: New Mexico State University
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 23:07:35 GMT

In article <martin.726047840@marsh> martin@cs.curtin.edu.au (Martin Dougiamas)  
writes:
> Christians among you: explain this.
> 
> If Man was created only thousands of years ago, and we are all
> descended from common stock... why is there such a wide variety
> in our genetic pool today?
> 
> Do you believe that the ancestors of people as diverse as South
> American forest pygmies, Zulus, Europeans and Japanese were the
> same as yours only a few thousand years ago?  If you do (and you
> must, if you take the Bible at all seriously) then you must believe
> a great deal of evolution has occurred since then.  If not, I 
> would like to hear your arguments.
> 
> If you do admit this much evolution can take place in such a short
> time (hundreds of generations) then what objections can you take
> against the extension of the idea to the theory of Darwinian
> evolution as it stands today?
> 
> Martin



	Most of the objections from my fellow Christians comes from huge  
misunderstandings about evolutionary theory, and therefore an inability to see  
the real enemy.  Most of the challenges to Christianity from my atheist friends  
(from an evolutionary standpoint) come from the same misunderstandings of  
evolutionary theory.  Evolutionary theory, in and of itself, contains no threat  
to Christians or anybody else, and it can be freely ignored without effect on  
anyone's life.  The challenge to Christianity is not in evolutionary theory  
itself, but in the assumption that all observed phenomena are the result of  
natural occurrences.  You can arrive at a great deal of evolutionary theory  
from either the Christian viewpoint (as you have stated above) or this  
assumption of science.  It is the basic assumptions that are opposed to each  
other.
					Erik Powers
From: bb099@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Adam Trent Phillips)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Why it sucks to be an atheist...
Date: 12 Jan 1993 03:18:41 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: bb099@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Adam Trent Phillips)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc10.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) says:

>In article <1993Jan11.021552.3064@cnsvax.uwec.edu>, nyeda@cnsvax.uwec.edu (David Nye) writes:
>>
>> I am comforted to know that the moment I die, all experience will cease,
>> so I can't be unhappy about it.  The fear of death is hard-wired into
>> the limbic system for its survival value, but realistically there is
>> nothing to fear about death, although dying may sometimes be unpleasant.
>> While I certainly enjoy life a great deal and have no wish for it to
>> stop, I wouldn't give that much for immortality.
>
>Good point.   When people talk about fear of death, I often ask if they
>experience the same fear about the time before they were born.   After
>all, they didn't exist them, either.
>
>jon.
>
	Yeah, but the nice thing I LIKE about Atheism is you get...

	ALL OF THE SEX AND NONE OF THE GUILT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


-- 
A. TRENT PHILLIPS |" A mirror is a negative space with a frame and a place for
  also known as   | your face, it reveals what the rest of us see. It conceals
   WHITE  ROOK    | what you'd like you to be."--Blue Oyster Cult
-------bb099@cleveland.freenet.edu-----aa1439@freenet.lorain.oberlin.edu-------
Xref: sparky alt.atheism:25638 talk.religion.misc:25805 alt.pagan:15234
From: drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc,alt.pagan
Subject: About This: Madeleine Murray O'Hare
Date: 11 Jan 93 14:25:16 GMT
Organization: Castle WetWare Philosopher and Sniper

lib1p@jane.uh.edu (Tammy Stark Blandino) writes:
] In article <1i63h6INNi2u@fido.asd.sgi.com>, livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes...
] >In article <3JAN199300363050@elroy.uh.edu>, lib1p@elroy.uh.edu (Tammy Stark Blandino) writes:
] >|> In article <1i2raqINN8rh@fido.asd.sgi.com>, livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes...
] 
] *SIGH!*
] 
] It's an example of christian fundamentalism and how it affects society in an 
] area where it is strong and some of the STUPID laws and combination of laws
] that get passed.
] 
] WAKE UP JON AND SMELL THE COFFEE!
] 
] Tammy the exasperated!
] 

with Just the Right Eye makeUp you could
become the First NonChristianTeleVangelist.....


ciao
drieux

ps: I love it when folks try to rescue america
for me, and protect me from the EvilMenaceLurkingOutThere.....




-- 
MajorModernDayProblems: 
Just because you are a homicidal maniac
doesn't mean you don't have a sense of humor.
		- Barry Sadler
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: schnitzi@cs.ucf.edu (Mark Schnitzius)
Subject: Re: Genital-grabbing
Keywords: humor
Organization: University of Central Florida
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 03:07:45 GMT

martin@cs.curtin.edu.au (Martin Dougiamas) writes:

>I was just browsing through the bible (Good News version) and came
>across this little gem:

>"If two men are having a fight and the wife of one tries to 
> help her husband by grabbing hold of the other man's 
> genitals, show her no mercy; cut off her hand."
>	- Deuteronomy 25:11-12

Hmmm... Do you think we can get somebody to put "Deuteronomy 25:11" on
a big yellow sign and hold it up for the camera at this weekend's NFL playoff
games?


------------------------------------------------------------
mark schnitzius           |  seeking guitar songbook for the
schnitzi@eola.cs.ucf.edu  |  clash's "london calling".  does
univ. of central florida  |  one even exist?  will pay top $
------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky alt.atheism:25687 talk.religion.misc:25864
From: bb099@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Adam Trent Phillips)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: looking for God
Date: 6 Jan 93 20:03:58 GMT
Reply-To: bb099@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Adam Trent Phillips)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc10.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, BLD110@psuvm.psu.edu () says:

>After wading through many posts on this list I am amazed at two things.  One
>that so many seem to be saying that the behavior of some people has anything
>to do with the existance of God.  Does the fact that someone says they believe
>in God and then behave violently toward others mean that God has failed in
>some way?  Does the fact that the christian religion as a whole does not hold
>up to reasonable inquiry mean that their is no God?  Does the fact that people
>of all religions seem prone to go to war and commit all kinds of violence in
>the name of what they believe to be God mean that there is no God?  It seems to
>me that it would indicate that these view of God are not acceptable to me.
>
>The second is the use of the Bible as an athority.  If this book was given to
>the world today and we were told that here we would find all we needed to know
>about God - I dare say not one organization would be formed to preach from it.
>It has taken on the form of a God in itself, and has frozen people into a
>place where they can not have a relationship with God if they are lead past
>what it says in the Bible.  Sad.  But not worth trying to argue with.
>
>I have a question for those of you who are sure that there is no evidence that
>God exists.  What is the life force?  What is that leaves that body when it
>dies?  When you pick a flower what flows from it that causes it to wilt?  What

	Life force ? Your question presupposes that a "life force" exists. 
I have yet to see a proper definition of "life force", once you define this 
thing and show it exists, then I could answer your question properly. I
have read somewhere that CO2 and H2O leave the human body after death. I
do NOT remember the details so don't ask, I saw the post on the Cleveland
FreeNet Beliefs sig. (you can get to it via USENET)

>do you use to explain our complex ecosystem which can not operate without the
>full circle of elements, i.e. soil can not produce vegitation without humas.

	Previous posts have dealt with this better than I could. I am not
a botanist. =) Just a Tech, Hacker & SWL.



	
-- 
A. TRENT PHILLIPS |" A mirror is a negative space with a frame and a place for
  also known as   | your face, it reveals what the rest of us see. It conceals
   WHITE  ROOK    | what you'd like you to be."--Blue Oyster Cult
-------bb099@cleveland.freenet.edu-----aa1439@freenet.lorain.oberlin.edu-------
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc