HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mtx014@cck.coventry.ac.uk (Robert Low)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Homosexuality & the Bible (Erratum & apology)
Date: 15 Apr 92 12:37:48 GMT
Distribution: talk.religion.misc
Organization: Plato's rest home for the incurably geometric

In article <wwshb18g@cck.coventry.ac.uk> mtx014@cck.coventry.ac.uk (Robert Low) writes:
>
>This is (at least partly) in response to a longish
>article by Mike Siemon, in which he discusses (in
           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

My apologies to all: the article was by Charles Hedrick. Damfino
what happened to my memory there. (And I tried to cancel
the article with a notable lack of success, so this apology
is the best I can do.)
-- 
Robert Low  email(JANET): RobLow@uk.ac.coventry.cck
	    smail : Mathematics Department, Coventry Polytechnic,
		    Priory Street, Coventry CV1 5FB, England.
Keep an open mind---but not so open your brain falls out.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.jewish
From: goehring@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Scott Goehring)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: THE DARKSIDE OF CHRISTIANITY
Date: 15 Apr 92 21:58:27 GMT
	<1992Apr14.045451.29678@en.ecn.purdue.edu>
Reply-To: goehring@mentor.cc.purdue.edu
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center

muehlhau@en.ecn.purdue.edu (John Muehlhausen) writes:

>John 1:1, 14:

[scriptural quote deleted]

>Jesus was and is God.

What compelling reason do I have to believe you?  Recall that I do not
accept the Bible as factual.
--
As to Jesus of Nazareth.... I think the system of Morals and his religion, as
he left them to us, the best the world has saw or is likely to see; but I
apprehend it has received various corrupting changes, and I have, with most of
the dissenters in England, some doubts as to his divinity.  -- Ben Franklin
Xref: sparky talk.religion.misc:7480 a.bsu.religion:8
From: corvette@bsu-cs.bsu.edu (Jeff Cox)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,a.bsu.religion
Subject: tThe hammer and the anvil!
Date: 17 Apr 92 18:48:47 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: CS Dept, Ball St U, Muncie, Indiana


     I just remeberd a quote that I think many people might be interested
in hearing. It deals with christianity and those who wish to abolish it.

I think it went something like this: 

     "There once was a king who wanted to wipe out all the christians
      in his kingdom. His man in charge of the army said to him though
      'I think this would be unwise sir. For many before us have been
        beating the anvil of christianity with thier hammer and all
       that results is that the hammer breaks and the anvil is untouched'
      so sire I plead with you do not do as yoy say".

      another interesting fact. In all of the world over 60,000 people
ask Jesus to be their lord ans savior year. NOt to mention the thousands
of people who each day die as martyr's for Jesus Christ. Only about 2 of 
those each day are from the USA.

-Vette
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell)
Subject: Re: Homosexuality and Christianity
Organization: Free Software Foundation, Cambridge, MA
	<MIB.92Apr10095022@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
	<1992Apr10.165851.15812@en.ecn.purdue.edu>
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 22:07:21 GMT

In article <1992Apr10.165851.15812@en.ecn.purdue.edu> muehlhau@en.ecn.purdue.edu (John Muehlhausen) writes:

   In article <MIB.92Apr10095022@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu> mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell) writes:
   >   Tell me something...  Why would he do this to you?  If I thought
   >   God had made me gay in todays society I would probably be more than
   >   a little angry with him.  God doesn't do anything without a
   >   purpose, so I am wondering what this purpose is.  If it exists I
   >   realize that we can't know what God is thinking, but I would like
   >   to hear any thoughts.
   >
   >Gee.  Do you go around telling Black people that they should be angry
   >with God for making them Black in today's society?  *Think*.  *Think*.

   _You_ think: is there anything inherently "bad", "non-natural", "ungodly",
   "deviant", etc. about being black?   No.  About being homosexual?   Depends
   on how you view the Bible...

The point is, God makes me gay, with deleterious effects from cretins
like you, and God makes people Black, with deleterious effects from
cretins like David Duke.  God creates both gay people and American
Blacks for the same reasons.

	-mib
--
Michael Innis Bushnell	  | This is a virulent meme.  Whether or not you place
Email: mib@gnu.ai.mit.edu | this into your signature file is irrelevant.  You
Phone: (617) 625-4518	  | have already participated in its further trans-
			  | mission, and will doubtless continue to do so.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: smith_w@apollo.hp.com (Walter Smith)
Subject: Re: Homosexuality & the Bible
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 14:15:20 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.221728.29250@athena.cs.uga.edu> hudson@athena.cs.uga.edu (Paul Hudson Jr) writes:
>many Christians would agree that suicide is a sin.  Homosexual acts harm
>the participants,  (They recieve "in themselves that recompense of their
>error which was meet.")  spiriutal and physically.  (They "dishonor
>their bodies."  verse 24.)  

How exactly do homosexual acts harm the participants spiritually and physically?
From: gclapp@javelin.sim.es.com (Glenn Clapp)
Subject: Re: Oaths & Fervor (was `MORMONISM')
Keywords: zeal, znake, zloth, zailfish, zalamander, zcorpion, `Zoof!'
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 23:06:15 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.224755.18331@spdcc.com> dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:
>In article <1992Apr9.151128.14198@hellgate.utah.edu> jwindley%asylum.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Jay Windley) writes:
>
>>As I said before, if Mormonism is
>>so inherently evil, and if the Mormon temple ceremony is so inherently
>>immoral, why can't our authors simply display a more pleasing
>>alternative?
>

Haven't they?  It was changed in (hmmm, was it 1934?... I'll have to look)
where the wording of the penalties was changed from specific acts of 
voilence producing death to more abstract "That my life be taken" although
the gestures were left intact.  It was further _toned down_ to make it
"more pleasing?" in 1990 when the penalties were removed altogether, and
the depiction of a Chritian minister as a dupe/employee of Satan was
also removed.  This presumably to appear more palatable to Christians
who aren't _in the know_ who might be offended upon hearing about this
depiction.  So, it seems that mormon authors ARE trying to display a more
pleasing alternative.  At least the authors of the cerimony.  

This whole thing about secrecy/sacredness seems just a bit silly to me
when it is the LDS church that publishes the news releases about the
changes in the temple cerimony.

(good to hear from you again Jay)




-- 
| Glenn Clapp                          |  gclapp@javelin.sim.es.com        |
| Evans and Sutherland Computer Corp.  |  My opinions are my own, but then |
| Salt Lake City, Utah  (801) 582-5847 |  that's my opinion.               |
From: ptgarvin@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (PTed Garvin)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Mathematical Miracle in Quran?
Date: 12 Apr 92 17:58:26 GMT
Organization: Discordian Information Production and Distribution, Ltd

gsmith@concour.cs.concordia.ca (Gene Ward Smith) writes:

>it must be something.  Supposedly a book (in Hebrew) is available (in
>Israel) about all this computer-aided geomatra (if that's the word.)

I think the word is 'gematria'.


>--
>     Gene Ward Smith/Brahms Gang/CICMA/Concordia University 
>                  gsmith@concour.cs.concordia.ca
-- 
"...just when I had you wriggling in the crushing grip of reason, too..."
ptgarvin@aardvark.ucs.uoknor.edu/SCA: Padraig Cosfhota o Ulad / Namron, Anst
Disclaimer: Fragile. Contents inflammable. Do not use near open flame.
## Write In Crash! # yerazunis@cthulu.enet.dec.com for President, '92! ##
From: emarsh@hernes-sun.Eng.Sun.COM (Eric Marsh)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: I Am Not Judging Homosexuals!!
Date: 9 Apr 92 16:33:39 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Mt. View, Ca.
NNTP-Posting-Host: hernes-sun

>In article <1992Apr8.190224.17172@ncsu.edu> cmgrawbu@eos.ncsu.edu (CHRISTOPHER M GRAWBURG) writes:

>   The Bible is relevant to all. To say that some action is evil
>   because the Bible says it is evil is not "passing judgement."

You are wrong. The bible is irrelevent to me.

Eric
--
*  Eric Marsh   ---   email: emarsh@sun.com / standard disclaimers apply  *
*  DoD # 1332                                    dragbike pilot for hire  *
*  986cc Ninja street scooter   ----   GS1260 Suzuki Pro-Stock drag bike  *
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: jim@rand.org (Jim Gillogly)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: More on Mormon temple ceremonies
Date: 12 Apr 92 21:21:09 GMT
Organization: Banzai Institute

In article <1992Apr12.202200.1000@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu> arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee) writes:
>
>If the anti-Mormon writers really didn't know _any_ facts, that'd be different.
>But even you admit they know something; you just claim that facts are omitted
>and that explanations are distorted.  Of course they claim the same thing about
>you.

I'll volunteer to step into the midst of this shell fire and adjudicate it
for you (don't all thank me at once).  I'm an ex-Mormon elder, and last
attended the temple about 20 years ago.  I'm not inclined to spill any
more beans than have already been spilled about the ceremonies, but can
confirm that Jay's got it right on this.  If it adds to my credibility at
all, I'm an atheist (to forestall the obvious question, I used to be more
of a hypocrite than I am now).  I'm not a Mason, and never have been, so I
won't comment on the relationships, other than to say that some of what
I've *read* about Masonic ceremonies looked superficially similar.

This business about breaking oaths puts me in mind of Chauvelin, the
villain of The Scarlet Pimpernel, by Baroness Orczy, who blithely broke
oaths saying that an oath to a scoundrel is meaningless.  Of course, he'd
made the oath to Our Hero... it really gives me a pain to see all these
people who think they've got a lock on absolute truth.  I consider that
the oath of secrecy I took was to people.

-- 
 Jim Gillogly | Actually the Bush administration is just preparing the public
 jim@rand.org | for its planned confiscation of Panama under RICO. Dan Eldred
From: ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Homosexuality & the Bible
Date: 11 Apr 92 17:19:40 GMT
Distribution: talk.religion.misc
Organization: MacDTS Mongols

In article <1992Apr8.194025.9703@athena.cs.uga.edu>, hudson@athena.cs.uga.edu
(Paul Hudson Jr) writes:
> 
> I have recently read a book writtten by David Wilkerson called The Vision.
> If I remeber correctly, it was written in or before 1973.  Wilkerson
> told of how homosexuals would be given places of authority in churches,
> and be recognized by religious establishments.  This would be done under the
> guise of love and understanding.  He wrote that a day would come when in
> nearly every major city, there would be a church that catered to homosexuals
> and lesbians.  Sunday school literature would describe homosexuality as
> a valid means of sexual expression.  He also wrote that it would not
> be long (from when he wrote it) that homosexuals would begin to flaut 
> their perversion on national tv talk shows.  
> Instead of offering to help homosexuals, churches would tell them to accept
> their weaknesses as "gifts from God."
> 
> Nearly every one of these things has happened or started to happen.  I heard
> of a homosexual church opening up in Washington D.C. not long ago.

I guess the most natural thing would be to not accept homosexuals and
lesbians joining Christian churches.

Cheers,
Kent
From: davidh@cascade.ens.tek.com (David Hatcher)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Homosexuality and Christianity
Date: 11 Apr 92 01:05:53 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.

In article <1992Apr10.200116.11303@en.ecn.purdue.edu> muehlhau@en.ecn.purdue.edu (John Muehlhausen) writes:
>In article <22632@zephyr.ens.tek.com> davidh@cascade.ens.tek.com (David Hatcher) writes:
>>In article <kubcgsINNnpo@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> emarsh@hernes-sun.Eng.Sun.COM (Eric Marsh) writes:
>>>It is because of people like John that I don't even bother to consider
>>>what Christianity has to say any more. 
>>
>>  I too am one of those who, because of big time bummer experiences with
>>people like John, went looking out side of the Christian tradition for
>>my spiritual connection with the Divine.
>
>All I have done is present what the Word of God says about these matters.

  You have also presented an attitude that speeks very loud.

  I have ran into it before by the very same people who presented those
bummer experiences. In fact, I still run into it more than I care to.
It's an attitude that many Christians carry around with them.

>a dynamic relationship with God based on his _infallible_ Word.

  Here is where I greatly dissagree with you.

  To me, Christianity is a dynamic relationshop with God that is 
based upon Uniting with God through Jesus Christ.
 
 One need not know a thing about the Word in order to do this.

 But I feel that way too many Christians are taking Christianity
everywhere except towards that Unity and Oneness with God.



	Ecstatic Love is an ocean, and the Milky Way
	is a flake of foam floating on it.
					Rumi

	David Hatcher
From: muehlhau@en.ecn.purdue.edu (John Muehlhausen)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Radical departure
Date: 17 Apr 92 04:15:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: en.1992Apr17.041517.21060
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <23280@goofy.Apple.COM> ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik) writes:
>In article <adams.702931279@spssig>, adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>> 
>> birdman@nwu.edu (Christopher Kush) writes:
>> 
>> >How about a new newsgroup for those of us (cheers, Kent!!!) who are thinking 
>
>> >clearly? It could be called "talk.life." 
>> So any of us who truly believe in God are not thinking clearly?  I don't
>> understand how you can claim this to be the universal case.  I for one like
>> science, and respect scientists.  Science doesn't get in the way of God any
>> more than God gets in the way of science.  I like the physical sciences and
>> accept most of the theories promulgated.  
>> 
>> Religion and science can coexist nicely.  They do not need to be at odds
>> with each other.
>
>..not even in the case of homosexuality, where the scientific clues 
>point at the fact that homosexuality is hardwired into the brain
>*before* the birth...

These clues do not exist to my knowledge, so please elaborate.

The only such study I know of had 100% AIDS victim gay participation, which 
could have altered the results significanlty, especially where the physical 
state of being is concerned.

John M.
From: aabdalla@pollux.usc.edu
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Does the Bible have any contradictions
Date: 16 Apr 1992 16:11:13 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: pollux.usc.edu

Someone asked me if there are any contradictions in the Bible, and I
could not answer.  Can anyone point out some to me (if, in fact, they
do exist)?  I'm looking for two different types of contradictions, the
first being far more important:

1.  A self-contradiction:  some fact described in one place in the Bible
is described in unambiguously different, mutually exclusive terms in another 
place in the Bible.

2.  A contradiction with empirical fact/science:  some fact about the
natural world is described in the Bible which is unambiguously contrary to 
modern scientific knowledge.

Thanks in advance, though it would seem that not many of these exist 
seeing as the Bible has been around for centuries.  Please try and
email me any answers you may have (no matter how long or short) because
I will be posting this to a lot of newsgroups (too many to review for
replies).  Thanks again...

Email address: aabdalla@pollux.usc.edu

AAA
From: davidh@cascade.ens.tek.com (David Hatcher)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: A Jealous God (was Re: Fundamentalism)
Date: 17 Apr 92 17:21:22 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.

In article <18323@oasys.dt.navy.mil> lung@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Terence Lung) writes:
>I don't think Christians' belief in alchemy would amount to anything.


  Yet, there is an alchemy like process that seems to happen 
within the spiritual life of a person as they are transformed 
into a new person.




	Ecstatic Love is an ocean, and the Milky Way
	is a flake of foam floating on it.
					Rumi

	David Hatcher


Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: adams@spss.com (Steve Adams)
Subject: Re: I Am Not Judging Homosexuals!!
Date:  9 Apr 92 14:02:43 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: SPSS Inc.

mls@cbnewsm.cb.att.com (mike.siemon) writes:

>In article <1992Apr8.190224.17172@ncsu.edu>, cmgrawbu@eos.ncsu.edu
>(CHRISTOPHER M GRAWBURG) writes:

>> The Bible is relevant to all. To say that some action is evil
>> because the Bible says it is evil is not "passing judgement."

>It sure as Hell is (and the expletive here is deliberate, not mere
>cussing.)  Read the parable of the wheat and the tares.  Read the
>Sermon on the Mount.  Read Romans (and try to get past chapter 1 to
>Chapter 2, where the rhetorical myth ends and the argument begins).

>Whatever God's judgment is, YOU DON'T KNOW IT and are incompetent to
>deliver it.  Even if you are quite "correct" and I will burn in Hell
>for all eternity for not repenting of homosexual sex, while you are
>eternally gloating in your "I told you so", you are STILL condemned
>in Hell with me for your judgmentalism.  I hope you have great joy
>in gloating over me while YOU burn, as you seem as unrepentant in
>YOUR sin as I am in (what you think is) mine.

Christopher, I agree with Mile.  Look at these verses:

[Matthew 23, NIV]

   "(Jesus says)(13)Woe to you teachers of law and Pharisees, you
    hypocrites!  (14)You shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces.
    You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are 
    trying to."

Christ is warning against trying to shut others out of the kingdom.  That
is not for man to do, but only for God.

>If God condemns me, then I am lost.  If *you* condemn me, then YOU are.
This subject comes up a number of times in the Gospel, with Jesus
continually warning about judging others.

 -Steve
--
 The opinions expressed above are those of the author and not SPSS, Inc.
                        -------------------
     adams@spss.com                           Phone: (312) 329-3522
     Steve Adams                              Fax:   (312) 329-3558
From: hudson@athena.cs.uga.edu (Paul Hudson Jr)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Homosexuality and Christianity
Date: 14 Apr 92 20:07:14 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

In article <adams.703272915@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>hudson@athena.cs.uga.edu (Paul Hudson Jr) writes:
>>Suppose there was a man who was "in love" with his sheep, but he did not
>>want to fornicate with it.  Could he Biblically get married to a sheep?
>>Can people marry rocks, fish, or trees?  You can perform a ceremony and
>>call it a "marriage' but this is not what God ordained as marriage
>Sheep do not have souls.  They are created and at the mercy of man.  Men
>and women have souls and free will.  Sheep do not.  Rocks, etc are
>inantimate objects which also do not have souls.
>
>This is a false analogy.  Try again.
>
>     Steve Adams             

I do not agree with you.  (Of course it is my analagy.)  What specifically
makes the analagy false?

God ordained a marriage between one woman and one man.  Two were to be one
flesh.  Jesus quoted this is Matthew 19 in His teachings against divorce.
Paul associated two becoming one flesh with the sex act when he was 
discussing staying away from prostitution in I Corinthians 6.  

Both male homosexuality and beastiality are specifically condemned in the
Bible.  I think this is a good analagy because, Scripturally speaking,
a man cannot marry a man, and a man cannot marry an animal.  The sex
acts between a man and an animal, and between a man and a man are both 
forbidden in the Torah.  The Scriptures never institute such perverse
"marriages."  When marriage was created it was between a man and a woman.

Do you believe that beastiality is sinful.

Link Hudson.
From: hudson@athena.cs.uga.edu (Paul Hudson Jr)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Homosexuality and Christianity
Date: 16 Apr 92 17:40:47 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

In article <1992Apr15.224553.21084@menudo.uh.edu> kevin@taronga.taronga.com (Kevin Brown) writes:
>Indeed.  What Christians like John Muehlhausen completely ignore is
>that some people's feelings for each other are *strengthened* by
>sex.  Meaning, of course, that sex in some cases may help strengthen
>the union between two people to the point that they will marry for
>a reason most highly regarded by this society: love.
>In such a case, would sex not be regarded as a *positive* act?  That
>it occurs outside of marriage in that case is at least irrelevent, and
>at most a necessary precondition for it to be a positive act.

Look around.  Look at society today.  Look at marriage today.  Before the
sexual revolution, sex outside of marriage was looked down upon.  
Notice that the divorce rates were very low.  Look at the divorce rate now.
Look at how many children are born without having a father present to 
raise them.  Has this strengthened society.

>Then *why* do so many
>of you treat the rules in the Bible as absolute law when you *know*
>that the consequences of following them are sometimes detrimental
>and the consequences of not following them are sometimes beneficial?

I don't know how many Christians would even agree with your premise that the
laws God gives are detrimental.  Sometimes it is possible to suffer for
obedience.  Take martyrdom for example.  Several martyrs refused to deny
Christ.  They paid with their lives.  Though there were consequences for
being obedient, the negative consequences for disobedience were greater, and 
the rewards for obedience is also great.  I suppose many of the martys 
refused to deny Christ because they loved God, rather than because of
reward or punishment.


Link Hudson.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: muehlhau@en.ecn.purdue.edu (John Muehlhausen)
Subject: Re: Homosexuality and Christianity
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 92 19:30:12 GMT

In article <MIB.92Apr10101158@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu> mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell) writes:

>This is what you will hear from me.  The only two absolutes are these:
>
>``You shall love the Lord your God with all your heard and with all
>your soul, and with all your strength, and with all your mind; and
>your neighbor as yourself.''

For me loving God means listening to the rest of his Word.

John M.
From: lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Louie Crew)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Homosexuality & the Bible
Date: 14 Apr 92 15:58:15 GMT
Reply-To: <lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu>
Distribution: talk.religion.misc
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

muehlhau@en.ecn.purdue.edu (John Muehlhausen) writes:


>Is it OK for men to love men?  I do!
>I just don't have sex with them.

>John M.

Whew!  Bless you, sugar.  I was beginning to think that you had no good news 
to proclaim.  You have made my day.  I hope you will keep this vow
forever and ever.  AMEN.

H. R. H. Q. Lutibelle
(a.k.a. Monsieur I. Beam Extractor)

("Happy are you when homophobes say all amount of evil against you falsely
for my sake!")


-- 
  ==========================================================================
  Louie Crew, Assoc. Prof., Academic Foundations Dept., Rutgers U./NWK 07102
  lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu                                   201-485-4503