HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: zmbenhal@netcom.com (Zeyd M. Ben-Halim)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: You should be a Christian because (30 words max):
Date: 17 Dec 92 22:56:08 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

In article <1992Dec16.070843.13073@mr.med.ge.com> bednarek@picard.med.ge.com (Dennis Bednarek Mfg 4-6971) writes:
>
>Well that can only be because you do not know him in the least amount.
>If someone gives you a gift you are thankful.  Yet here you are saying
>that you don't even want to know the individual that has given you
>everything you have.  Jesus's Father (OUR FATHER) has given you life
>and exesistance, besides that he gave us his most precious possession
                                              ^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^
>his son so you would not have to bear an eternity lost.

Could you please explain (WHY)? Why does GOD have to give up anything in order
for you not "to bear an eternity lost".
Assuming that (for some reason) that he did have to, why can't he just have
another son?

>: 
>: What is there about either Jesus the Christ or the Father that you
>: don't want to be like or even know?
>: What does it require of you
>: to let go of?

The concept of the Trinity is most unnatural one I've ever heard of. Assuming
man (or woman) is seeking an answer to the mystries of the universe, they
figure there is some power that created it and keeps it going. Now, you can
say that there is a god in charge of each aspect (sun god, moon, wind, etc.)
as in greek and roman religions or that there is ONE GOD in charge of the
whole lot. No one comes up with the idea that "Oh, there must this guy, his
son, and this other thing the holy ghost" who collectively act as the Almighty.
Not only that but this guy who created the universe and controls everything in
it was so worried about those sinners he'd put on earth that he was compelled
to sacrifice his son temporarily (3 days) so that their sins can be forgiven
(by whom?)

>
>My guess is that Alan is one of the millions of poor souls that seems
>threatened by the fact that if he accepted God he would end up changing 
>his life.  Change is what he fears and his ignorance leads him to fear
>of the unknown.  If only his fear were of the eternal flames of hell
>perhaps he would open his mind up to reality.

My guess is that Alan still has his brain :-) Accepting your version of God
would change his life. He'd become a brain-washed person, devoid of any reason-
ing ability, accepting as truth a bunch of man-made BS story about how God
loves all but unless we believe in his son we'll burn in hell.
You sum up the reason for being christian: fear of being burnt in hell which
you only accept if you are already a christian!

>: 
>: For Christ and His Kingdom,
>: Richard Pitts
>: -- 
>: rpitts@cerl.gatech.edu      |  Love and Worship God, the Creator of the Earth. 
>:                          
>: Pro-Life!                  Come bow down in worship, let us kneel
>: Pro-Responsibility!        before the Lord Our Maker.  Psalm 95:6 

Crosses deleted, no religious advertizing please :-)
From: hedrick@farside.rutgers.edu (Charles Hedrick)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Luke, Derrida, Papists, Luther...and Steve Adams.
Date: 15 Dec 92 20:51:22 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

hartigan@ac.dal.ca writes:

>In article <Bz8BKK.EB1@spss.com>, adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:

>> Yep.  Of course, note that this particular criticism is in Mark - a
>> non-apostalic Gospel.  Mark also simply ends with an empty tomb, and 'they
>> were all afraid.'  Someone will likely pop in with the 'lost ending'
>> comments, but there is no evidence that is stronger than any other for that
>> position vs. others.  Why would John Mark, who was writing from Peter's
>> teachings (so it is believed) leave out the Resurection and the 40 days???
> 
>Wow...really? Tell me more! What do people think the implications of this
>are? That the Resurrection is a relatively late idea? 

Huh?  Mark ends with women coming to the tomb, finding it empty, and
being told (presumably the entity is a angel, though it's not said)
that Jesus is risen.  This is the Resurrection story.  The additional
endings include post-resurrection appearances by Jesus to the
disciples, but the basic Easter story is in the main text.  Mark 14:28
also refers to the Resurrection.

Our earliest source of information is actually Paul's letters, which
certainly are based on the Resurrection.  So are the sermons which
Acts reports as being preached within weeks of the event.  (Of course
that depends upon the accuracy of Acts in reporting sermons preached a
number of years previously.)

I don't know of any serious suggestion that the Resurrection is a late
story.  Sceptical scholars (aside from a lunatic fringe) generally
believe that it was a subjective event which grew in the telling, not
that the whole thing is a late invention.
From: pmy@vivaldi.acc.virginia.edu (Pete Yadlowsky)
Subject: Re: Bible verses for two days
Organization: University of Virginia
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 16:46:19 GMT

whitsebd@nextwork.rose-hulman.edu writes

>This is one of my favorites-
>verse 11
>"Blessed are you when they revile and persecute you and say all kinds of  
>evil against you falsely for My sake."

I understand and appreciate the sentiment. Unfortunately, many
christians of questionable maturity take this as a license to behave
like arrogant, sanctimonious jerks. They imagine they're being
reviled for their faith (admittedly, they occasionally are) and so
crank up the repugnance in the delusion of standing taller in God's
light. The cycle continues to saturation, leaving the pious believer
convinced he's a saint and his detractors convinced he's a menace to
society. People of conviction (most of us) should remember to ask "Am
I being cruelly persecuted or justly ridiculed?" Being open to both
possibilities is difficult, as evinced in this group. 

--
Peter M. Yadlowsky              |  Wake! The sky is light!
Academic Computing Center       | Let us to the Net again...
University of Virginia          |    Companion keyboard.
pmy@Virginia.EDU                |                      - after Basho
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: sirbyte@brewich.hou.tx.us (William hancock)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.pagan
Subject: Re: PAGAN, was You should be a Christian because (30 words max):
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 92 14:19:35 CST
Organization: The Brewers' Witch BBS, +1 713 272 7350, Brewich.Hou.TX.US

key@soda.berkeley.edu (peter li'ir key) writes:

I HAVE HAD ENOUGH!!!! Who gives an ounce of S**T what 'title' you go by 
if you are so insecure that you have to claim one name so you belong than 
you reaaly should look else where.  Figure out who and what you are and 
be that, don't stagger around and try to argue what name fits your 
perticular belief system, just be quite and be who you truley are inside!

-insist onyour self never immitate-
            -uhhh.... that transendental guy said this :)



-SirByte'*

------------------
sirbyte@brewich.hou.tx.us (William hancock)
Origin: The Brewers' Witch BBS -- Houston, TX -- +1 713 272 7350
From: iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Heaven/Hell (was: Re: Perfect Love)
Date: 14 Dec 92 18:37:17 GMT
Organization: Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh, UK

In article <1992Dec10.171541.7798@engage.pko.dec.com> pub@riscee.pko.dec.com (Publius) writes:
>In article <1992Dec10.021022.3866@nmsu.edu> sdoe@nmsu.edu (Stephen Doe) writes:
>>Jesus' teachings of hell prominently feature pain and suffering, not
>>just separation from God.
>
>Where?  Where in the Bible did Jesus teach in the manner you described?

Mt  5:22 [...] but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger
         of hell-fire.

Lk 16:23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, [...]
      24 [...] send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in
         water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.
      28 [...] lest they also come into this place of torment.

There were also references to Sodom and Gomorrah.

>If you can not find any Bible verse to support the above claim, as
>I don't believe you can, please refrain from making that
>irresponsible statement.

If you had any sense of responsibility, never mind dignity,
you wouldn't call people irresponsible just because they have read
the New Testament more closely than you have.

-- 
 `D'ye mind tellin me whit the two o ye are gaun oan aboot?' (The Glasgow
Ivan A Derzhanski  (iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk; iad@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu)    Gospel)
* Centre for Cognitive Science,  2 Buccleuch Place,  Edinburgh EH8 9LW,  UK
* Cowan House, Pollock Halls, 18 Holyrood Park Road, Edinburgh EH16 5BD, UK
From: agr00@ccc.amdahl.com (Anthony G Rose)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Anthony Rose
Date: 20 Dec 92 04:18:12 GMT
Reply-To: agr00@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Anthony G Rose)
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <78563@hydra.gatech.EDU> rob@excalibur.gatech.edu (Rob Lester) writes:
>
>  I am not seeking to excuse anything that Kermit did or is purported to have
>  done. But just how do his own gaffes and mistakes show the "true Mormon" in
>  him ? Are we to assume that all "true Mormons" engage in this kind of 
>  behavior ? 

Absolutely not. I didn't  mean to insinuate that. Sorry if it sounded as
such

>>Tell me Kermit, when I "accept Christ" according to your standards, will
>>I then posts sexually nasty jokes on alt.jokes like you do? 
>
>>Remember the marching band and the virgins and the girls in the south
>>you are so fimilar with?  Want me to refresh your memory?
>
>  Just an observation...you seem to have some sort of guilt/fascination
>  thing going with sexuality. Why is it that sexual themes keep continually
>  creeping into your posts ? First you bring up allegations (totally without
>  proof, none the less) of large numbers of LDS missionaries being homosexual.

Mormonism is a very sexual religion in my views.  Therefore, it is hard
to discuss a sexual religion without bringing in the aspects of it.
(1) God came to earth and had sex with Mary.
(2) God is having eternal sex to beget spirit children.
(3) You plan to be a God and have eternal sex with your wife/wives.

When a religious organtization has beliefs like this, it is really hard
not to discuss them when talking about that religion.  Thus such
conversation should not determine I have a fascination with sex, just as
if a religion believed they would become cars, my discussing that would
not mean I have a fascination with cars.

As to the homosexual comment.  I didn't feel it necessary to post "proof"
to something that is common knowledge around Salt Lake City. Would you
like the support group number?

>>Why in email?  I only talk with sincere Mormons in email.  And many of
>>them can testify that I talk very kindly with them. 
>
>  I hope you talk MUCH more kindly ! Otherwise, your email would end up
>  in the old bit bucket!


Me too!

It is much easier to when the issues can be discussed, and them mud is
left in the mudhole.

>Rob 

-tony
Xref: sparky talk.religion.misc:23930 alt.atheism:23759 alt.slack:3495
From: ses2@po.CWRU.Edu (S. E. Stansfield)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism,alt.slack
Subject: Re: You should be a Christian because (30 words max):
Date: 16 Dec 1992 07:33:38 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: ses2@po.CWRU.Edu (S. E. Stansfield)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc12.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, rodmoten@cs.cornell.edu (Roderick Moten) says:

>>What sort of geometry is necessary to construct this
>>god-shaped hole, given that god cannot even produce
>>a good approximation of pi?
>
>God doesn't have to approximate pi; He knows it.
>
>
Then why did he report it's value as 3.0 at a time when all the geometers
knew that it was closer to 22/7?

-- 
All propositions are true in some sense, false in some sense and
meaningless in some sense.  
                               --Hagbard Celine H.M. S.H.
<this is a signature virus, to spread it, just copy into your sig-file>
From: viviana@igor.tamri.com (Vivian Aldridge)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Origin of XMAS tree and XMAS wreath?
Date: 17 Dec 92 20:16:48 GMT
Organization: TOSHIBA America MRI, South San Francisco, CA

Hi,

Does anyone where and how the Christmas wreath and the
Christmas tree originated?  Is it Christian? Is it
Pagan? .....???

Thanks!
Vivian
              .     .  .      +     .      .          .
         .       .      .     #       .           .
            .      .         ###            .      .      .
          .      .   "#:. .:##"##:. .:#"  .      .
              .      . "####"###"####"  .
           .     "#:.    .:#"###"#:.    .:#"  .        .       .
      .             "#########"#########"        .        .
            .    "#:.  "####"###"####"  .:#"   .       .
         .     .  "#######""##"##""#######"                  .
                    ."##"#####"#####"##"           .      .
        .   "#:. ...  .:##"###"###"##:.  ... .:#"     .
          .     "#######"##"#####"##"#######"      .     .
        .    .     "#####""#######""#####"    .      .
                .     "      000      "    .     .
           .         .   .   000     .        .       .
    .. .. ..................O000O........................ ...... ...




-- 
Vivian Aldridge

viviana@tamri.com
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu (Dr Nancy's Sweetie)
Subject: Non-Christian Religions & Sexual Morality
Summary: Any dissidents?
Organization: Rowan College of New Jersey
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 01:32:05 GMT


In a post in bit.listserv.christia, Michael Kline quotes Pat Robertson as
saying this:

> [ Sodomy ] is a sexual practice that is condemned by every major religion.
> [...]  EVERY MAJOR RELIGION, you name it, and they're opposed to sodomy.

Mr Robertson goes on to list `Christian, Jewish, Muslim, etc' as major
religions, and another person on his program says that the only group which
does not condemn sodomy is the `New Age movement'.  (No attempt was made to
define "New Age movement".)

Anyway, Mr Robertson did not mention eastern religions.  According to my
almanac, there are 700 million Hindus, and almost 400 million Buddhists; those
both sound `major' to me.  Also, since they are thousands of years old, they
hardly qualify as `New Age'.  I was under the impression from some of our
Hindu and Buddhist posters that their religious traditions did not include
the detailed proscriptions of sexual activity found in Judiasm &c.

So then: are there any adherents of any `major religions' that wish to take
issue with Mr Robertson's statement?

(I will post a summary of the answers over in bit.listserv.christia.  While
 this discussion should go on in talk.religion.misc, I wouldn't want the
 people over in b.l.c. to be ill-informed.)


Darren F Provine / kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu
"Un-American, adj.  Wicked, intolerable, heathenish." -- Ambrose Bierce
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: ivaliote@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Lotus )
Subject: Re: You should be a Christian because (30 words max):
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 02:05:20 GMT

rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts) writes:
>|>|>To be Christ like and obtain a relationship with the Father.
>|>|But I don't want to be like Christ and I don't want a relationship
>|>|with his dad.
>|>What is there about either Jesus the Christ or the Father that you
>|>don't want to be like or even know?  What does it require of you
>|>to let go of?
>|
>|My intellect.
>In all sincerity, isn't it a little presumptious to think that one's own
>understanding of understanding is the best one out there?
Maybe.  But what else do we have to go on?

>Do you think there is any other level of wisdom or understanding in the
>universe today?
Yes, I do.  I am not so silly as to think I can define it, however.  To
me, THAT is presumptuous.

>Also, on my first question above, what is there, if anything, about Jesus 
>or the Father that you don't want to be like or even know?
The Father is cryptic, capable of killing for the sake of His laws and His ego, 
willing (according to Christians) to create us so we can 'glorify' Him, and 
basically self-engrandizing and petty.  Jesus, on the other hand, had a lot of
very beautiful, true ideas, which an amazingly small number of his 'followers' 
even try to follow up on, and even then, they pick and choose which ones they 
like.  How many Moral Majority Communists do you know?

Matt I.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: bskendig@netcom.com (Brian Kendig)
Subject: Re: The riches of Christ
Organization: Starfleet Headquarters: San Francisco
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 14:55:55 GMT

John, you're "preaching to the choir".  ;-)

Your post tells Christians nothing they didn't already know.  To
atheists and members of other faiths, your words are empty and
meaningless.  In either case, your post seems like little more than a
demonstration that you can quote the Bible.

I'll admit to being curious, though; is it possible for you to post
that again -- but this time without any Biblical quotations nor
abstract adorations?  That is, could you post what your faith has
meant to you, personally, and what sorts of things you've accomplished
that you could not have accomplished without your faith?

-- 
_/_/_/  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
From: slhw4@cc.usu.edu (Jason Hunsaker)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Summary, Trinity vs LDS View fo the Godhead
Date: 11 Dec 92 12:02:45 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <1992Dec9.050734.9245@blaze.cs.jhu.edu>,
 arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee) writes:
> slhw4@cc.usu.edu (Jason Hunsaker) writes:


>>Isn't the important thing that one is trying to live ones life
>>and do what they think God wants them to? (ie: have faith,
>>believe in God, repent from sin, seek the guidance of the Holy
>>Spirit, help others, etc.)
> 
> Of course.
> 
>>Why must there be so much nit-picking about tenets instead of
>>directing those energies to helping those around us and trying to
>>improve their condition?
> 
> Because we need to understand and believe the tenets as a prerequisite for
> doing those other things.

But how many tenets, and how deep must these tenets go in order
to do these other things?

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Hunsaker  -|-  Logan, Utah  -|-  Internet: slhw4@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism,alt.pagan,alt.mythology
From: magi@polaris.utu.fi (Marko Gr|nroos)
Subject: Re: Afterlife theology in Judaism and Christianity and ...
Followup-To: talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism,alt.pagan,alt.mythology
Organization: University of Turku, Computer Science
Date: 14 Dec 92 18:26:32

In article <ByzzLC.An0@unix.amherst.edu> nwbernst@unix.amherst.edu (Neil Bernstein) writes:
> : Hell: The word *hell* has existed since Old English times as a name for
...
> 	What about "hell" [German] = "bright, fiery"?  Or does that come from
> a different root, and a later set of conventions (i.e., guys with pitchforks,
> lots of bonfires, torture by flame...)

Hmm, the nearest resembling word in finnish is 'hella', the thing with
round metal plates on in that you use for cooking by placing pots,
frying pans and other objects on it (sorry, my english doesn't include
household terminology). Does this mean that Hell is a place where
not-so-careful travelling mythologists captured by jungle natives end
up?
  How about english 'Hello'? As you know, the Evil One welcomes
everyone under his service and eventually his kingdom.. "Hello,
worms!"..."Hell-o'!  Hello, Hell's Master! Hell-o'!"

-- Marko Gronroos, Karvataskunkatu 10 H, 20610 Turku, Finland, t#+358-21-445613
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: tensmekl@infonode.ingr.com (Kermit Tensmeyer)
Subject: Re: Mormonism
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 14:40:33 GMT

  Hi Barry, nice to see that you'r still around

In article <1992Dec16.000221.14664@cbnewsd.cb.att.com> press2@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (barry.o.olson) writes:
>In article <1992Dec14.133740.3213@infonode.ingr.com>, tensmekl@infonode.ingr.com (Kermit Tensmeyer) writes:
>> Let's summarize this argument:
>[Kermit's summary of Tony R. deleted]
>> 
>> Oh just for comparison's sake Tony thinks that Mormons should be beliving
>> in ever little part of McConkie's MD while Barry Olson thinks that Mormons
>> should be nailed to the wall because they don't execept everypart of
>> Brigham Young's JoD.  It's very frustrating because those mormons
>
>I think Tony stated that the mormons he runs into and knows in
>his private life, pretty much use McConkies's MD book to help
>their arguments or mission raps. So Tony feels he can use the 
>Same book for counter arguments. You thinks wrong Again.
>However, net lds mormons are a different breed, the open forum
>demands it:-)
>
>Once again Kermit proves he cannot coordinate a coherent summeral
>conclusion from what he reads once the words pass through his
>clouded filter(it really gets tiring after some time).
>My argument was that Bringham Young was a prophet ansd president
>which gives him the big three titles. Yet nothing he wrote was ever
>considered scripture, yuet he himself thought much of his words
>were scripture:-) Some prophet. The net lds downplay most of his
>bizarre statements hiding behind the noninfallible veil. Some prophets.

	Ah so there is _no_ parellel between the <barnyard material>
	that Tony seems to think that Mormons _should_ believe, because
	it is contained in a book called "Mormon Doctrine", and the
	stuff that you think that we _should_ believe because it
	was contained in Young's "JoD".

	You both seem to think ("slippery theology", that was _your_
	phrase?) that not having something that can nail mormons to the
	wall, is a major failing in the religion, nicht wahr?

 I thought that it was a neat "coherent summeral conclusion". 
 I am sorry if you thought that I was comparing your brillent posts with
 those of tony's, no really, I have much more respect for you than that.
 If you really think that you have been insulted, I apoligise, I wouldn't
 want your feelings to get hurt.
>


-- 
         Kermit Tensmeyer                         | Intergraph Corporation
   klt@kt8127.b23a.ingr.com                       | Deep in Dixie
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism