HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: allegra!lieuwen@allegra.att.com (Dan Lieuwen)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Subject: Re: World Congress Media Advisory 1
Date: 16 Nov 92 14:49:02 GMT
Article-I.D.: ogicse.46064
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ

>>WHY:	The Baha'i Faith has managed in 100 years to do
>>	something that no other religion has been able to
>>	accomplish:  to remain unified.	 Alone in this
>>	achievement among world religions, only the Baha'i
>>	Faith has remained free of sectarian division and
>>	schism.

Please.  You have your schismatics.  I forget the name, Bahais under the
Covenant or some such name.  One of my best friends is a Bahai, and when
I saw a poster for them at UW-Madison, I told him you're postering more.
He asked questions, and then said "oh, them.  They're not real Bahais."

Reading statements in newsgroups by people who consider themselves
Bahais, but make up their religion as they go also belies this claim.

Any religion can claim that it has no schisms by just declaring its
heretics not of the fold.  The first major schism in Christianity
didn't occur until the council of Chalcedon in the middle to late 400s.
All the little heretical sects of Christianity up to that point have
died out.

So, you have about 250 years to go until you can claim to have met
Christianity's level of unity.  I would imagine that similar examples
can be found in other religions.

So, please be careful with the truth.  Statements like this can only
harm your credibility.

Dan
From: Terry Maton <maton@herald.usask.ca>
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Subject: From the Baha'i Writings
Date: 13 Nov 92 02:20:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: ogicse.45970
Organization: -

O SON OF WORLDLINESS!

Pleasant is the realm of being, wert thou to
attain thereto; glorious is the domain of
eternity, shouldst thou pass beyond the world
of mortality; sweet is the holy ecstasy if thou
drinkest of the mystic chalice from the hands
of the celestial Youth.  Shouldst thou attain
this station, thou wouldst be freed from
destruction and death, from toil and sin.

#70 The Hidden Words of Baha'u'llah
                      (From the Persian)

Terry Maton
University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada

INTERNET:   maton@sask.usask.ca   or   maton@herald.usask.ca
FREENET:    ap322@cleveland.freenet.edu

  "The earth is but one country, and mankind its citizens" -- Baha'u'llah
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
From: ashkon_k@apollo.hp.com
Subject: Reading for Thursday, November 19, 1992
Organization: Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 22:40:25 GMT


     
        "Verily I say, this is the Day in which mankind can
     behold the Face, and hear the Voice, of the Promised One. 
     The Call of God hath been raised, and the light of His
     countenance hath been lifted up upon men.  It behoveth every
     man to blot out the trace of every idle word from the tablet
     of his heart, and to gaze, with an open and unbiased mind,
     on the signs of His Revelation, the proofs of His Mission,
     and the tokens of His glory.
         Great indeed is this Day!  The allusions made to it in
     all the sacred Scriptures as the Day of God attest its
     greatness.  The soul of every Prophet of God, of every Divine
     Messenger, hath thirsted for this wondrous Day.  All the
     divers kindreds of the earth have, likewise, yearned to
     attain it.  No sooner, however, had the Day Star of His
     Revelation manifested itself in the heaven of God's Will,
     than all, except those whom the Almighty was pleased to
     guide, were found dumbfounded and heedless.
         O thou that hast remembered Me!  The most grievous veil
     hath shut out the peoples of the earth from His glory, and
     hindered them from hearkening to His call.  God grant that
     the light of unity may envelop the whole earth, and that the
     seal, "the Kingdom is God's", may be stamped upon the brow
     of all its peoples."

                        -Baha'u'llah, Gleanings, P.10
From: gagrawal@cs.tamu.edu (Gopal Agrawal)
Subject: Re: CFV: soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya moderated
Organization: Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 18:23:59 GMT


In article <BxxAtG.1A2@mail.boi.hp.com> rdetweil@boi.hp.com (Richard Detweiler) writes:
>>As for the Bahais, they consider themselves an extension of not just 
>>Islam, but also that of Hinduism/Christianity etc. They couldn't 
>>possible prefix all the known religions to the ".Bahai" in s.r.bahai.
>
>It is true that we accept the divinity and legitimacy of the previous
>religious dispensations and see the fulfillment of their promises in 
>the coming of the Founder of our Faith, Baha'u'llah. But the body of 
>Baha'i scripture, teachings, and religious laws are seperate and distinct 
>from these other religious systems.
>

Ok, I stand corrected here.

regards,
--   
   ______ ______ ______ ______ __  |\/\/\/|
    ____/  __  /  __  /  __  /  /  |  \  /|  LIFE's COMPLEX - IT HAS
   / __   /   /  /   /  /   /  /   | (o)(o)  REAL & IMAGINARY PARTS.
  /   /  /   /   ___/  __  /  /    C      _) 
_____/ _____/ __/   __/ __/ ______/ | \___|  
E-mail - gagrawal@cs.tamu.edu       |   /   All Std. Disclaimers apply.
From: CHESLEY@fox.nstn.ns.ca (John Chesley)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Subject: World Congress on Vision TV Network in Canada
Date: 13 Nov 92 17:29:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: ogicse.45967
Organization: Industry Science & Technology

As a supplement to Mark Towfiq's posting giving details of how to
receive the Broadcast live from the World Congress in New York,
Canadians (and anyone else) who have access to the Vision TV channel
(on most cable networks in Canada) will be able to see the broadcast
at 4 different times:

    Nov. 26th at: 7 pm EST
    Nov. 27th at:Midnight,
                :10 am EST, and
                : 3 pm EST

Be sure to watch this and to tell your friends.  I am sure it will
"knock your socks off".

Regards,

John Chesley
Dartmouth, N.S. Canada
JohnC@hfx001.ns.istc.ca
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
From: deb@spectra.eng.hawaii.edu (David Barrett)
Subject: Re: Contradiction with science
Organization: Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 01:58:17 GMT


In article <46057@ogicse.ogi.edu> arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee) writes:
>
>OK, I rechecked my facts, I tried to keep a hypothesis that both systems may
>be correct, and I found I couldn't do it.
>
>Now what?
>
>I still think you're dodging the question. 

There have been lots of answers to the question from every angle but maybe the
one you expect.  It works both ways sometimes, dodging the answers to one's own
question until the audience is stumped and you're left victorious with a 
problem you discovered and defend without any reasonable acknowledgement of 
possible solutions.  That's a game, Ken, and we're into discussions for the 
purpose of learning about the purpose of our existance rather than for our
own entertainment.

> I've been getting lots of answers
>of the form "well, if you can't reconcile science and religion, try harder".
>I tried harder; now what?  Are you always going to tell me I didn't try hard
>enough, just because I didn't get the answer you expect?
>

If you assume because you did not agree with the answers we have provided that
the answers cannot be correct then there is nothing that will change the 
attitude you have chosen to take.  It comes down to a matter of believable 
reference source of information.  We believe the information that comes from
God and his Manifestations is infallible and what comes from man can be quite
fallible.  Facts discovered by man is not absolute, just alot of agreement
to an observation.  Us humans can set ourselves up if we believe that our
single mind awareness of facts is always right.  Not everybody in the world
will agree with every fact presented.  Even a majority of agreement will not
convince some minorities.  So what's left?  

The best anyone can do is to honestly try to investigate truth as best he can
and make their own conclusions.  In time they will either prove themselves or
fade away.  This issue of body dissolution will be obvious or unimportant 
to each one of us sometime in the future anyway.  Right now the issue
is really not science or religion, it is one's own belief in what reality 
really is and what place one has in it and who or what set it all up.

dB
From: vahid@codes.ICS.UCI.EDU
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Subject: Re: Unity between Science and Religion
Date: 16 Nov 92 05:35:30 GMT
Article-I.D.: ogicse.46058
Organization: -

Ken Arromdee writes:

> Your holy scriptures were quoted as saying that if the human body is
> cremated, its atoms spread so fast that they cannot become parts of other
> organisms.   There doesn't appear to be much room to read the passage as 
> saying anything else, ...

I understand `Abdu'l-Baha's statement differently (see Rick Troxel's earlier 
post for the statement I am refering to).  It seems he is saying that 
gradual composition and decomposition are part of the order of nature and
a necessary component of the interdependence of all living things, and 
cremation is not.

> ... and it clearly contradicts science.
	  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Does it?  Having just encountered a dead bird which my son so kindly
discovered ("peep peep!" he said), it is clear to me that the decomposing 
body certainly served as food for a wide range of little critters, which in 
turn serve as food for other beings.  If the body were burned, that energy
currently being used as food for others would instead be released as heat 
and serve mainly to speed up the surrounding air molecules.  Doesn't seem 
like that supports the natural cycle of things.  Is there something I'm 
missing Ken?

> If I am a Baha'i and have been taught that bodies should not be cremated 
> because the atoms dissipate too fast to enter the ecosystem, and my scientific
> knowledge tells me that this is not so, what should my will say?

I would think that it's up to you.  The Baha'i Faith is not a rigid set of
rules which, if followed, lead to eternal life or something like that.  
It is a set of general principles that Baha'is believe reflect basic truths.
Baha'u'llah states that "none knoweth what his own end shall be" (Gleanings
from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, pg. 266), so it seems to me that we should
all just do what we feel is most in accord with the basic admonition of
Baha'u'llah that one "should regard all else beside God as transient, and
count all things save Him ... as utter nothingness" (Ibid.), and with the 
primary purpose of Baha'u'llah's mission: to establish unity among the 
peoples of the world.  

> If science and your religion seem to contradict, which of the seemingly
> contradictory teachings get taught in schools, for instance?  Or do you teach
> both?

The Universal House of Justice was established by Baha'u'llah with one
its purposes being to provide guidance on questions raised by individuals
or institutions of the Faith.  So I suppose if a school has a question, 
they would ask.  Sometimes an explicit answer is given, and other times 
things are left to the judgement of the person or group with the question.

Frank
From: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Subject: Re: Contradiction with science
Date: 16 Nov 92 23:25:14 GMT
Article-I.D.: ogicse.46057
Organization: Johns Hopkins University CS Dept.

In article <45966@ogicse.ogi.edu> deb@spectra.eng.hawaii.edu (David Barrett) writes:
>>If I am Baha'i and have been taught that bodies should not be
>>cremated because the atoms dissipate too fast to enter the ecosystem,
>>and my scientific knowledge tells me that this is not so, what should
>>my will say?
[actually it was 'elements', my mistake, which doesn't change things much]
>Recheck your facts and unassumingly try to keep a hypothesis that both
>systems may be correct.

OK, I rechecked my facts, I tried to keep a hypothesis that both systems may
be correct, and I found I couldn't do it.

Now what?

I still think you're dodging the question.  I've been getting lots of answers
of the form "well, if you can't reconcile science and religion, try harder".
I tried harder; now what?  Are you always going to tell me I didn't try hard
enough, just because I didn't get the answer you expect?

If not, then what do I do after I tried hard enough and still got the answer
that there's some mistake?
--
"the bogosity in a field equals the bogosity imported from related areas, plus
the bogosity generated internally, minus the bogosity expelled or otherwise
disposed of."  -- K. Eric Drexler

Ken Arromdee (UUCP: ....!jhunix!arromdee; BITNET: arromdee@jhuvm;
     INTERNET: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu)
From: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Subject: Search for Truth (was: Contradiction with science)
Date: 20 Nov 92 21:40:49 GMT
Article-I.D.: ogicse.46251
Organization: Johns Hopkins University CS Dept.

In article <1992Nov20.140320.4903@newscan.canada.sun.com>
deb@spectra.eng.hawaii.edu (David Barrett) writes:

>ka> I've been getting lots of answers of the form "well, if you can't
>ka> reconcile science and religion, try harder".  I tried harder; now
>ka> what?  Are you always going to tell me I didn't try hard enough,
>ka> just because I didn't get the answer you expect?

>If you assume because you did not agree with the answers we have
>provided that the answers cannot be correct then there is nothing
>that will change the attitude you have chosen to take.  It comes down
>to a matter of believable reference source of information.  We
>believe the information that comes from God and his Manifestations is
>infallible and what comes from man can be quite fallible.  Facts
>discovered by man is not absolute, just alot of agreement to an
>observation.

In other words, if I didn't get the answer you have provided, my
approach to seeking truth is incorrect.

It seems you are not as different from other religions as you think.
I can examine the issues myself, on my own, as long as I want to... as
long as I get the same answer as you did.  If I examine something on
my own, and I still disagree...  well, tough, your religion calls me
wrong.
--
"the bogosity in a field equals the bogosity imported from related areas, plus
the bogosity generated internally, minus the bogosity expelled or otherwise
disposed of."  -- K. Eric Drexler

Ken Arromdee (arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu, arromdee@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu)
Date: 18 Nov 92 22:12:44
Distribution: world
From: Guillaume.Petraud@babbage.imag.fr (PETRAUD guillaume)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Organization: University of Grenoble (France)
Subject: The grace of god

One day there was a little young french boy, wondering about life,
God, society and everything (yes, me).

On the road of life, I met a guy in my town (Grenoble, France). After
a few conversations, I realized he was quite different than other
people.  Yes, indeed, he was a BAHA'I.

I think I've never feel the same as this day: I begin to see that this
faith has principles ( such as unity of the world, unity of science
and religion,...)  which I had tried to find everywhere around me, But
THIS TIME, it was TRUE.

Beleive me, there's nothing like this elsewhere. But it was so
outstanding to me to find such a faith that even today, I have not yet
realized what happenned.  Two years that I know this religion, and
now, each day I'm improving.  But I'm still too frightened, I think
I'm not yet ready to enter this faith.  One day, soon or never, I will
feel better and I'll ask to be one of those great men and women, one
day...yes...but not yet.  All I can do is to advise people around me
that we can't wait anymore for salvation:

IT'S HERE!

One day I will be ready and join the band, for the moment, I just try
to improve myself, help people, spreading the ideas of this religion.

For you baha'is: I would like to thank you, go ahead and... WAIT FOR
ME!

                                                THANKS
                           
                                        Guillaume  
                                        There...but for the grace of god
From: andyrose@netcom.com (San Francisco Fractal Factory)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
Subject: Life in prison...
Date: 18 Nov 92 17:50:18 GMT
Article-I.D.: netcom.1992Nov18.175018.1970
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)


I am nearly certain that commutation of death to
life in prison is required by law.

I feel that life in prison is worse for a prisoner than
death although perhaps not such an affront to 
life respecting people.

The focus of Friends Committee on Legislation
of California and the Criminal Justice Committee
of AFSC, Pacific Mountain has been to hold vigils
in response to executions, lobby for lethal
injection as an option to gas, and generally 
oppose death penalty.  I have seen little
discussion regarding life imprisonment.

Consider the Twilight Zone where a man signs
his soul away for eternal life, with an escape
clause, where if he wants to die, he goes to hell.
Thinking he is untouchable (after holding onto
a hot radiator) he goes to the roof to jump off 
his apartment building.  His friend thinks he's
crazy and falls trying to stop him.  He laughs
at the judge, who he thinks is sentencing him
to death, and cries when he is sentenced to life.
His lawyer pats him on the back saying
"All right, he spared your life."


I feel that life imprisonment is not life spared.

Read _Life Sentences_, Rage and Survival Behind Bars,
@1992 Times Books, Random House, New York, Toronto
Wilbert Rideau and Ron Wikberg editors of
The Angolite at the Louisiana State Penitentiary.

Tell me, what do you do with a lifer?


-- 
Andrew Rose andyrose@netcom.com FAX   end killing
 
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
From: hoosiers@carson.u.washington.edu (Mary Loveless)
Subject: Re: Life in prison...
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 16:51:20 GMT

In article <Uf2vl8q00VpNIwcVIy@andrew.cmu.edu> js06+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jason Lee Smith) writes:
>>Since he is so anxious to die<<<< (it's clear that he murdered the boys in an
>>attempt to get the state to kill him)>>>>>> I say a fitting punishment for him
>>is to lock him in a small cell and throw away the key.  That way, if he
>>is still hell-bent on self-anihlition, he'll have to do it himself.
>
>Is this clear, though? That's pretty convoluted thinking, even for a
>psychopath. There are much easier ways to end one's life, that don't
>involve a conscious decision, merely a subconscious death wish. 
>
>Certainly someone like this should be imprisoned, but I think someone
>that sick really deserves as much help as he could be given. I mean, he
>is clearly insane and should be given as much treatment as possible to
>restore his sanity, if for no other reason, than if you just lock him in
>a hole and forget about him, there's always the chance that he somehow
>get out, and he'd probably be even more disturbeb. If it turns out that
>he isn't insane, or is untreatable, and he still persists in his desire
>to be killed, what is necesarrily wrong with allowing him a fatal
>injection? If he is clearly in torment being alive, why should we force
>him to remain alive?
>
>However, I couldn't give him the injection, but that's another story.
>
>
>		Jason
>
>
>"Only the mediocre are always at their best."
>
>			-Jean Giraudoux
__________________________________________________________________________

I missed something, in accidentally deleting some messages before reading
them.  This is an interesting discussion, but how did it get into this
newsgroup--through the tradition of Quaker service to those in prison? 
Was there a discussion about the morality of the death penalty?  Is there
a position held by any of the Yearly or Quarterly Meetings or by the AFSC?

While not a Friend I have a 20 years' association with University Friends
Meeting in Seattle (I can not in any honesty call myself an Attender) and
have soaked up a certain amount of the philosophy.  My impression is that
those who visit the prisons spend more time working for justice and
humanity for the prisoner, than getting caught up in why the crime was
committed.  I don't mean these good people go mindlessly into this
service; I mean that their compassion isn't contingent on a second,
unofficial trial-by-visitor, so to speak.  Even those who commit the worst
crimes don't necessarily receive just treatment, if I understand the
philosophy correctly, and deserve advocacy and service.  Are there any
Friends out there who could speak to this impression of mine...even if you
have posted before?
From: MDT109@psuvm.psu.edu (Michelle Tracey)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
Subject: Re: Life in prison...
Date: 20 Nov 92 16:50:32 GMT
 <1992Nov19.040259.22873@u.washington.edu> <Uf2vl8q00VpNIwcVIy@andrew.cmu.edu>
Organization: Penn State University

I think a vital point is being missed in the discussion.  Tim Bunch claims to
have found the light.  He claims that he is listening to the light in himself
That he is repenting.  He attempts to enlighten his friends note below the two
quotes from his witness in the origional article:

>f the guys when I suggested that whenever he found himself in a
>ituation in which his anger seemed to prevail over reason, he
>hould stop and try to ponder how Jesus would handle it.

>   All I can do is set an example as a Friend and do my best to
>Bathe my buddies in the Light.

I believe that this is an honest representation of the type of repenting that
is hardly ever found in prisons.  I believe that every case should be heard
fairly also.  According to the information i have, Tim Bunch's case was based
on rights violations, including excessive force.  While these are technicalitie
in themselves, so is the judgement.  The jury was not unbiased, the confession
was taken in violation of the Fifth Amendment, and many other problems.  While
I may believe there are many ills in the Judicial system, It is the only one
we have, and i think that its use should be along the terms which were set
forth by the constitution.


As to the other issue, the man in Washington:
In article <Uf2vl8q00VpNIwcVIy@andrew.cmu.edu>, js06+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jason Lee
Smith) says:

>>Since he is so anxious to die<<<< (it's clear that he murdered the boys in an
>>attempt to get the state to kill him)>>>>>> I say a fitting punishment for
>him
>>is to lock him in a small cell and throw away the key.  That way, if he
>>is still hell-bent on self-anihlition, he'll have to do it himself.

I believe in a way this is correct.  I believe if he honestly wants to be
killed, he should be forced to have to do it himself.  If the State
were to kill him, the responsibility for his death would not be on him,
But if it is possible to save him, to save the Light in him, then should he
not recieve all the help we can give?  A box with no key is punishment.  I feel
we should turn from "punishment" towards correction and repentance.  I feel it
is my place to stand for this type of change.

In standing for this change, I feel all available channels should be used,
including the courts themselves. This is as much of the soul searching that
i was able to do so far on this issue.  My mind is opened to the discussion,
and i hope to see more discussion on this subject, to help me meditate on this
topic.
Miki
From: bill@bessel.as.utexas.edu (William H. Jefferys)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.quaker
Subject: The Devil's Queries
Date: 20 Nov 92 14:52:36 GMT
Organization: McDonald Observatory, University of Texas @ Austin

I've been reading Kenworthy's _Quakerism_ recently and
came upon a reference to "the devil's queries," put
together by a group in New York City's Morningside
Meeting. Two were listed:

o Am I careful to come late enough to Meeting so that
  I disturb the maximum number of people?

o Do I bolster my ego each day by putting someone else
  down?

I'm wondering if anyone would be willing to post the
entire list. (Or to post their own additions!)

Bill