HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: slhw4@cc.usu.edu (Jason Hunsaker)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Mormon Claims Answered 7
Date: 28 Sep 92 16:10:36 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <1992Sep27.045436.12065@newsgate.sps.mot.com>, 
ACUS10@WACCVM.SPS.MOT.COM (Mark Fuller) writes:
[...]
> I'll say Joseph Smith's Inspired Translation is NOT based on the
> greek.  Take a look at what he did to Matthew 4:1
> 
>   The Bible says:
>     'Then was Jesus led up of the spirit into the wilderness
>     to be tempeted of the devil.'
>   Joseph Smith said:
>     'Then Jesus was led up of the Spirit, into the wilderness
>     to be with God.'
> 
> So, who was Jesus was with -- God, or the devil?

Well, if you'd continue quoting the JST, then you'd find the
answer to your own question in the phrase:

"And was afterward tempted by the devil."

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Hunsaker  -|-  Logan, Utah  -|-  Internet: slhw4@cc.usu.edu
From: ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Stop thinking? (Was: Why I am an atheist)
Date: 27 Sep 92 21:31:43 GMT
Followup-To: talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism
Organization: Apple

In article <exukjb.245.717432636@exu.ericsson.se>, exukjb@exu.ericsson.se
(ken bell) wrote:
> In article <1992Sep20.184352.8683@hilbert.cyprs.rain.com> max@hilbert.cyprs.rain.com (Max Webb) writes:
> >From: max@hilbert.cyprs.rain.com (Max Webb)
> >Subject: Re: Stop thinking? (Was: Why I am an atheist)
> >Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1992 18:43:52 GMT
> >Our _understanding_ of 'good' and 'bad' are based purely on experience,
> >both individual and collective.  Good is rational desire adjusted for
> >translational invariance. 

> "Translational invariance", uh Kent?  I'm trying to understand. But oh, wait,
> "all models are models of something which transcends models"!  What am I 
> doing? I--a finite human spec of dust--cannot hope to understand your words.
> Everything now is undiscussable! 

Sorry, I didn't write this. I'm no fan of nice buzz words that sound good,
but don't contain any substance. I belong to the Sagan/Gould/Asimov school
of writing, not that I'm as good as they are/were. 'Translational
invariance'
sounds great, but I don't think it really implies anything meaningful.
 
> Kent, you need to study Gorgias's philosophy.  He should provide you with
> great inspiration.  I'm outa here.

I have to check this out back home in my library. I myself belong to the
Heidegger/Wittgenstein school of thought. As as a student of these grand
masters I don't deal with unknowable items. Metaphysics is a dead end.

Cheers,
Kent

	Faith is often the boast of the man who is too lazy to	investigate. -F.M.
Knowles
-------------------
Kent Sandvik (UUCP: ....!apple!ksand; INTERNET: ksand@apple.com)
DISCLAIMER: Private activities on the Net.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla)
Subject: Re: The Adam and Eve Thing
Organization: Rescorla for himself.
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 15:06:59 GMT

In article <fTg7Sxw@quack.sac.ca.us> pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey) writes:
>In article <1992Sep29.233203.6672@cs.yale.edu> 
>rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla) writes:
>>Why don't you just answer the question, Mr. Harvey?
>I did, but I guess it went right over your head.
No, Mr. Harvey, you didn't.
I asked a simple question, which needed simply two words. You did not
answer it. Your posturing is simply annoying, particularly when combined
with your amazing ignorance.

-Ekr


-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Rescorla, DoD#431 (Nighthawk S)              rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu
Former chemist now CM400 mechanic                 ekr@eitech.com(preferred)
   "Base 8 is just like base 10, really...if you're missing two fingers."
From: agr00@ccc.amdahl.com (Anthony G Rose)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Mormon Claims Answered 2.......
Date: 27 Sep 92 14:31:42 GMT
Reply-To: agr00@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Anthony G Rose)
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <Bv5xuD.7AA@acsu.buffalo.edu> psyrobtw@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Robert Weiss) writes:
>In article <1992Sep25.161353.59180@cc.usu.edu>, slhw4@cc.usu.edu (Jason Hunsaker) writes...
>
>[...]
>
>>> This is in print in every copy of the book MORMON DOCTRINE, 
>>> and he was an Apostle of the church.  
>> 
>>I don't believe he was an apostle when he wrote it.
>>He became one some time after the book was published.
>
>[...]
>
>	McConkie was sustained a member of the First Council of the 
>Seventy October 6, 1946 at 31 years of age. 
>
>	After he wrote _Mormon Doctrine_, he was ordained an apostle 
>on October 12, 1972.
>
>	For those who wish to distance themselves from _Mormon 
>Doctrine_, the question arises: If the book was full of holes, why was 
>McConkie awarded as an Apostle *after* he wrote it?
>=============================
>Robert Weiss
>psyrobtw@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu


To further stress the point.  The dates are really insignificant if you
ask me.  Does the fact that he was not an Apostle when he wrote it mean
that he was evil when he did and that the book is all wrong? Was he not
educated enough before he became an Apostle?  And if any of these things
are so, why didn't he correct his "mistakes" when he became Apostle?
Looks like since the Church continued to publish it without change
after he became  Apostle, that it tas approved as Apostle quality
writing.  If not, then why wasn't it pulled or changed?  I mean, the
church has a record of pulling books that it doesn't agree with.
From: ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: The Adam and Eve Thing
Date: 27 Sep 92 20:14:52 GMT
Followup-To: talk.religion.misc
Organization: Apple

In article <Bv3GH4.A1L@nntp-sc.Intel.COM>, pharvey@mipos3.intel.com (Paul
Harvey) wrote:
> >> Myth is neither true nor false, it is metaphorical.
> ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik) writes:
> >So that implies that the myth that the Earth is on top of a turtle
> >is not false. Merely metaphorical.

> Correctamente!
> 
> >I guess I have to dig a huge
> >hole on my back yard so I could verify if I see the legs of the turtle
> >or not.
 
> You will not find them in that way, they are metaphorical.
> You don't know what metaphorical means, do you?

Metaphor, a figure of speech in which a word or phrase literally
denoting one kind of object or idea is used in place of another
to suggest a likeness or analogy between them.
The online Websters dictionary is a nice thing to have!

So to get back to the turtle, instead of talking about a planet
hovering in space, we are dealing with a turtle moving across the
universe. I don't think this is true; it's false. Thus the metaphor
is false, dear Watson. I could substitute the notion of a metaphor
with a notion of a false picture. And this was the original wondering,
or what.

Cheers,
Kent
Example of common sense, part 1:
Reporter: What would happen if science discovered some fact
          that contradicted Buddhist doctrine?
Dalai Lama: The doctrine would have to change.
-------------------
Kent Sandvik (UUCP: ....!apple!ksand; INTERNET: ksand@apple.com)
DISCLAIMER: Private activities on the Net.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: lfoard@Turing.ORG (Lawrence C. Foard)
Subject: Re: Arrogance (was Family values defined)
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 12:15:25 GMT

In article <69627@hydra.gatech.EDU> rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts) writes:
>No.  It is a word of promise and warning from the Lord to His servants.

Well obviously if there is a God of love, those fighting against hatred and
bigotry are his servants. Lets see how this applies to Christian GBL's
fighting the forces of hatred and darkness.

>   John 15:18   "If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first.

No comment needed.

>   John 15:19   If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As
>      it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the
>      world. That is why the world hates you.

No comment needed.

>   John 15:20   Remember the words I spoke to you: 'No servant is greater than
>      his master.' If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also. If
>      they obeyed my teaching, they will obey yours also.

Think about this before you support the thugs in Oregon. 
-- 
------          Join the Pythagorean Reform Church!               .
\    /        Repent of your evil irrational numbers             . .
 \  /   and bean eating ways. Accept 10 into your heart!        . . .
  \/   Call the Pythagorean Reform Church BBS at 508-793-9568  . . . .
From: dale.lature@cccbbs.UUCP (Dale Lature) 
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: WHAT IS ALL THIS?
Date: 26 Sep 92 02:38:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Cincinnati Computer Connection BBS - Cincinnati, OH - 513-752-8248
Reply-To: dale.lature@cccbbs.UUCP (Dale Lature) 

I wonder if there's anyone who looks through this stuff that gets as
sick as I do at the level of discussion.  Sure, it's very intellectual
and many participants ave well thought out positions,  but is any of
this really crucial?  What about society and the world?  Is there any
interest in something like what the church can be doing to have a
positive influence?  No one is impressed with the kind of theological
tennis that goes on here.  I've been looking for some people who might
be interested in putting together an on-line place for , yes, some
discussion, but also a place to find contacts with others who share
common concerns about social issues, technological issues and
theological community, and ways that those in the church who can use a
computer and a modem can hook up with others across the country (and the
world) to share resources, common experiences, etc.  How's that sound?
Anyone else want something different.  Drop me a response
                                                                    
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: johnf@HQ.Ileaf.COM (John Finlayson)
Subject: Re: Are Mormons Christians? (Was: WANTED: Former LDS, ...)
Organization: Interleaf, Inc.
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 18:03:50 GMT

In article <1992Sep25.042456.18239@newsgate.sps.mot.com> ACUS10@WACCVM.SPS.MOT.COM (Mark Fuller) writes:
>> From: johnf@HQ.Ileaf.COM (John Finlayson)
>..
>> This discussion is starting to sound
>> rather like the theological wrangling between Jews and Samaritans 2000
>> years ago, the latter claiming to be a part of the chosen people, the
>> former trying to exclude them.  I think Jesus posed a more appropriate
>> question in the parable of the Good Samaritan.
>
>     I think your comparing apples to oranges.  You are correct about
>the arguments concerning who were the chosen people, but a parable about
>a good Samaritan does not equate to them being the chosen people.
>Consider:
>
> (long discourse on Samaritans and the nature of God deleted)

I appreciate the time and thought you put into your analysis, which 
I did read with interest, although it doesn't address the point I was 
trying to make (except perhaps to underscore it).  I suspect you 
misread the last sentence.

Yes, the parable does not prove that Samaritans were of the chosen 
people.  Indeed, I have no quarrel with your studied assertion that 
they were not.  The purpose of this parable wasn't to *settle* the 
question "Who are the chosen people?"  It was to encourage people 
to move beyond the divisiveness of that question to one that is 
more important:

"Who is my neighbor?"  

I think the answer to this question transcends the preoccupation 
with dividing the world into US and THEM, which darkened the religious 
dialogue of His day (and, unfortunately, ours).

Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: agr00@ccc.amdahl.com (Anthony G Rose)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: WANTED: Former LDS, now Born Again Christian for Thesis Project
Date: 6 Oct 92 23:37:08 GMT
Reply-To: agr00@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Anthony G Rose)
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <1513@esl.ESL.COM> markwc@barney.esl.com (Mark Christiansen) writes:
>In article <cb4m02gc24pD01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com>
>agr00@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Anthony G Rose) writes:
>>
>>[...]
>>
>>To answer the above question: If someone claims to be Christian and
>>subscribes to the evolution theory, I have to wonder what else they
>>deny about the Bible?  Why would God lie to us about Creation if
>>evolution was true?  If you gonna doubt one part, what else do you
>>doubt?
>>
>>[...]
>
>When did God say that evolution was not used to create the
>Earth?  The writer of Genesis claims that God created the Earth and
>everything on it, but makes no claims about how it was done.
>
>Mark

Let's not pick bones here please!  You and I both know what the original
poster meant by "evolution".  If he didn't mean "evolution" as opposed to
the creation in Genesis, he wouldn't have asked the question in the
manner that he did.  Please!
From: bj368@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mike E. Romano)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Mennonite Questions
Date: 1 Oct 1992 12:33:33 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


   I am a Christian but not presently alligned with a church.

 I have done some reading about the work of the Mennonites
 and have a great deal of respect for their work and community
 projects.

 Anyone involved in this church with experiences they wish
 to share may E mail me at above address.
 I would especially like to find out if I may be qualified
 to work in one of their programs.
 peace and love.      mike romano


-- 
Capt. Kirk: let's head for that planet, third from the sun, it
            looks promising.... |-)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: johnson@offroad.chem.wisc.edu (Arthur Johnson)
Subject: Re: Are LDS Christians?
Organization: Physical Sciences Lab, UW-Madison
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 92 17:25:10 GMT

In article <1992Sep26.035343.25963@newsgate.sps.mot.com>  
ACUS10@WACCVM.SPS.MOT.COM (Mark Fuller) writes:

>      I dont think you understand.  Much of Mormonism's attack on
> Christianity is in recent years, as were some of the qoutes you
> reference.  Before 1990, the Mormon temple services portrayed
> Christian ministers as following Satan.  These services are considered
> to be from the lds god, and so sacred that they cannot be discussed
> in public.
> 
>      Here are just a few quotes from Mormon Apostle McConkie and what
> he thinks of Christianity.  These are from the last 25 years or so.
> 
> The Mormon Apostle Bruce R. McConkie stated:
> 
>   'It is all the rage in this modern world to worship false gods of
>   every sort and kind. There are those who bow before idols of wood and
>   stone, and others who lisp their petitions to icons and images. There
                      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>   are those who worship cows and crocodiles, and others who acclaim Adam
>   or Allah or Buddha as their Supreme Being. There are those who apply
>   the names of Deity to some spirit essence that is immaterial,
>   uncreated...
> (A Letter to Mr. Eugene England, February 19, 1981, p. 4)

     Sounds like Mr. McConkie was easily susceptible to the sin of pride.  
Not to mention confused about what an icon is. It's nice to know that he  
was aware of our existence, anyhow. ;-)

     [...some stuff deleted...]
  
>   'It follows that the devil would rather spread false doctrine about
>   God and the Godhead...than almost any other thing he could do. The
>   creeds of Christendom illustrate perfectly what Lucifer wants
>   so-called Christian people to believe about Deity in order to be
>   damned.
> (BYU Devotional, March 2, 1982, p. 3)

     This seems like a rather defensive position for those of the "One  
True Faith" to take, IMO. ;-)
 
> Mark
> <standard disclaimer>

Arthur Johnson
johnson@offroad.chem.wisc.edu

"We glorify not three Gods but one Godhead.
 We honor the persons that are truly three,
 The Father unbegotten,
 The Son begotten from the Father,
 The Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father,
 One God in three:
 And with true faith and glory we ascribe to each the title God."
                               (From the Lenten Triodion)
From: ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Rich men and Heaven
Date: 5 Oct 92 00:00:00 GMT
Followup-To: talk.religion.misc
Organization: Apple

In article <69231@hydra.gatech.EDU>, rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard
Pitts) wrote:
> Not the four little words, but the whole parable and the whole of the
> detailed illustrations Jesus used.  Maybe I should have included the 
> whole parable, but I didn't - here is the introduction with the above
> scripture, agian:
> 
>    Luke 19:11   While they were listening to this, HE WENT ON TO TELL THEM A
>      PARABLE, BECAUSE HE WAS NEAR JERUSALEM AND THE PEOPLE THOUGHT THAT THE
>      KINGDOM OF GOD WAS GOING TO APPEAR AT ONCE.
>    Luke 19:12   He said: "A man of noble birth went to a distant country to
>      have himself appointed king and then to return.
>    Luke 19:13   So he called ten of his servants and gave them ten minas.
>      'Put this money to work,' he said, 'UNTIL I COME BACK.'

Sigh, speaking about filters in brains. The text above clearly states
that a man of noble birth told his servants that he would get back. 
Richard, it does NOT say anything at all about Jesus coming back. Nothing.
Nil, zip, nada. I would still like to know the logical explanation how
you could map this story of the noble man to Jesus. I guess
you need a lot of faith to make the direct connection. Note that there
are people out there that are not that keen to make such connections
automatically.

> Additionally, you can look in Matthew 24 and Luke 21 and see where Jesus 
> tells of many events to happen before His return.  The fall of Jerusalem,
> many dreadful signs and wonders in heavens and on earth, false prophets 
> and false christs, famines, wars, rumors of wars, etc, BEFORE the Son
> of Man returns in the clouds with great glory, with angels and the
> trumpet call of God.

And this is the dilemma! Certain Christians assume that the Kingdom
of Heaven happened long time ago, or it's part of the inner revelation.
However they can't explain the missing signs Jesus told his disciples,
neither that all this would happen during the lifetime of the disciples.
 
Cheers,
Kent
	Faith is often the boast of the man who is too lazy to	investigate. -F.M.
Knowles
-------------------
Kent Sandvik (UUCP: ....!apple!ksand; INTERNET: ksand@apple.com)
DISCLAIMER: Private activities on the Net.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: simon@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Simon Clippingdale)
Subject: Re: Jesus For President
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Warwick University, England
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 20:06:45 GMT

In article <b04Q02vE23EG01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> agr00@juts.ccc.amdahl.com (TONY ROSE) writes:
>
> Can we say Blasphemy?

Wibble gurgle. Sh*t, apparently I can't, no.

>"You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will
> not hold anyone guiltless who misuses His name."
>                                                    Exodus 20:7

"Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender
 with a diverse kind: thou shalt not sow thy field with mingled seed:
 neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woollen come upon thee."
                                                     Leviticus 19:19

"They shall not make baldness upon their head, neither shall they
 shave off the corner of their beard, nor make any cuttings in their
 flesh."                                             Leviticus 21:5

You'd better have a full beard and no polycotton shirts, or one
less charitable than I might call you a self-righteous and selectively
judgemental hypocrite.


> God will not be mocked!

Indeed not, as will not my own favourite deity, the 19-dimensional
Divine Blue Banana, and for precisely the same reason.

Cheers

Simon
-- 
Simon Clippingdale                simon@dcs.warwick.ac.uk
Department of Computer Science    Tel (+44) 203 523296
University of Warwick             FAX (+44) 203 525714
Coventry CV4 7AL, U.K.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism
From: pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey)
Subject: Re: Faith
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: +1 408 249 9630, log in as 'guest'.
	<BvGGy5.5Kv@inews.Intel.COM> <1992Oct1.214819.4097@blaze.cs.jhu.edu>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 04:46:19 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.214819.4097@blaze.cs.jhu.edu> 
arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee) writes:
>I would indeed say that that meaning of "slave" is fairly useless, unless you
>want to distinguish degrees or types of slavery.
>Do you care to distinguish different kinds of faith?

Sure, why not? OK, you first.
From: simon@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Simon Clippingdale)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: ECUNET
Date: 29 Sep 92 19:35:28 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Warwick University, England

In article <14404.156.uupcb@cccbbs.UUCP> dale.lature@cccbbs.UUCP (Dale Lature) writes:
>Anyone out there heard of ECUNET? It's an interdenominational
>(ecumenical) bulletin board for , well , anyone, but I don't know how to
>access it.  Any knowledge ot there about how?  Anyone heard of it?
>I'd like to try it out to see what's going on elsewhere.  I also
>wouldn't mind if someone would respond to what I said in 14403.

Can't help you with the first bit, but as to the last, article numbers
are site-dependent. To refer to an article, use its message ID, which is
unique.

Having said that, I've never tried to haul back an article by reference,
so I dunno how you do that....

Cheers

Simon
-- 
Simon Clippingdale                simon@dcs.warwick.ac.uk
Department of Computer Science    Tel (+44) 203 523296
University of Warwick             FAX (+44) 203 525714
Coventry CV4 7AL, U.K.
From: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: WANTED: Former LDS, now Born Again Christian for Thesis Project
Date: 30 Sep 92 15:17:00 GMT
Reply-To: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh Computer Science

In article <2azy02.I23ud01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> agr00@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Anthony G Rose) writes:

>respond and say, "we believe these things too".  If they define their
>terms when they say this you will most certainly see why Mormonism does
>not fit into the guidelines of orthodox Christianity by any stretch of
>the imagination.
>
I don't think many Mormons would think of themselves as orthodox
Christians.  There is no question that Mormonism is a pretty
radical form of Christianity.  But it is too restrictive to
classify a religion that considers Jesus to be God and Savior
and teaches its people to try to follow his ethical prinicples
non-Christian because of departures from orthodox theological
views.  

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "I have given you an argument; I am not obliged
geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  to supply you with an understanding." -S.Johnson
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc