HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ed_l1@verifone.com
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage
Subject: Re: absolute truth
Date: 21 Jul 92 10:41:36 -1000
Organization: VeriFone Inc., Honolulu HI

Hope these attributions are right.  If not, oh well...
In article <1992Jul14.202709.12884@tc.fluke.COM>, emery@tc.fluke.COM (John Emery) writes:
> In article <GOEHRING.92Jul9154018@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> goehring@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Scott Goehring) writes:
>>emery@tc.fluke.COM (John Emery) writes:
>>
>>>To kill an innocent person in cold blood is wrong.
>>
>>>Does anyone disagree that this is not an absolute truth?
>>
>>First, define "kill", "innocent", "person", "in cold blood", and
>>"wrong".  Then, perhaps we can talk.
> 
> I trust, Scott, that this is not just an attempt to skirt the issue.
> How about a guy who walks into a restaurant and randomly blows people
> away.  Like that which occured at the San Diego McDonnalds a few years
> back and like what happened at a Post Office a couple years ago.  Nothing
> tricky about the question.

To be an absolute truth it must have universal applicability.  For me to
kill an innocent person in cold blood would be wrong for me and for
that person and probably for our society.  

For the Mae Enga of New Guinea, it is very right (or was till we re-educated
them, if indeed that has happened...) for them, for the victim and for
their society - not sure about their religion.

For wolves, it is very right.  It provides food for them and their
offspring (and along with wolves I would add sharks and thousands of
other life forms up to and including intestinal parasites.

So, NO, it is not a universal truth.  Try again.

Plus, if killing someone in cold blood is "wrong," then what about
slapping someone, or flaming them on the net?  Isn't that just a matter
of degree? What about convincing someone that you are right and then it
turns out you are wrong?

There _are_ no absolutes!  Absolutely!!!

;^)
 
-- 
 //=====================================================================\\
|| Ed L'Esperance - P.O. Box 4635, Kane`ohe, Hawai`i 96744  U.S.A. Earth ||
|| Anthropologist, Writer, Editor, Earth Native       Ed_L1@VeriFone.Com ||
|| * Opinions Copyright (c) 1992 Ed L'Esperance.  All Rights Reserved. * ||
 \\=====================================================================//
From: danoc@earlybird.Eng.Sun.COM (Dan O'Connell)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage
Subject: Re: absolute truth
Date: 23 Jul 1992 18:21:06 GMT
Organization: How do you do dat voodoo dat you do, hoodoo guru?
Distribution: world
Reply-To: danoc@earlybird.Eng.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: earlybird


>> >In article <1992Jul17.165608.2064@tc.fluke.COM>, Arnold E. Nordeng writes:
>> >
>> >> 
>> >> Webster states: existence, a state of existence.  See why its undeniable, now? 
>> >> If God were to exist, how could he not be a "being". 
>> >> It is self defeating to assume otherwise, thus by my tests of absolute 
>> >> truth, if God is to exist, he must be a being.

Not necessarily so! Paul Tillich (probably the foremost theologian 
of the 20th century) says that god is "the ground of all being"; to posit
a god as a being means that god is a being like any other being and
this limits god.

Dano

Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage,alt.alien.visitors,sci.skeptic
From: lawson@acuson.com (Drew Lawson)
Subject: Re: The Prime Directive
Reply-To: lawson@acuson.com (Drew Lawson)
Organization: ACUSON, Mountain View, CA
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 20:48:37 GMT

In article <62709@cup.portal.com> John_-_Winston@cup.portal.com writes:
>Dear Fellow Earthlings: Here it is Friday morning 0607 and things look
>pretty good.  If  it's God's will and if the creek doesn't rise 
>I hope to go down to Southern Calif. and go on a tour of  the ruins
>of a 30,000 year old city.

No, John.  Los Angeles only _seems_ 30,000 years old.

-- 
Drew Lawson                      If you're not part of the solution,
lawson@acuson.com                you're part of the precipitate
From: nkraft@bkhouse.cts.com (Norman Kraft)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage
Subject: Re: absolute truth
Date: 22 Jul 92 23:10:56 GMT
 <VO-mr*zf1@bkhouse.cts.com> <1992Jul20.175927.641@tc.fluke.COM>
Organization: Argus Computing, San Diego, CA
X-Newsreader: Arn V1.00 beta rel2

In article <1992Jul20.175927.641@tc.fluke.COM>, Arnold E. Nordeng writes:

> In article <VO-mr*zf1@bkhouse.cts.com> nkraft@bkhouse.cts.com (Norman Kraft) writes:
> >In article <1992Jul17.165608.2064@tc.fluke.COM>, Arnold E. Nordeng writes:
> >
> >> In article <1992Jul15.185951.4958@linus.mitre.org> tucker@maestro.mitre.org (William Tucker) writes:
> >> >
> >> >Define "being" ........ I dare you.
> >> 
> >> Webster states: existence, a state of existence.  See why its undeniable, now? 
> >> If God were to exist, how could he not be a "being". 
> >> It is self defeating to assume otherwise, thus by my tests of absolute 
> >> truth, if God is to exist, he must be a being.
> >
> >Ah!, but prove that you exist, or that anything exists! If one cannot prove
> >existence beyond undeniability, one can neither prove nor define being 
> >either. 
> 
> It is independent of whether there is existence or not.  I start of
> on the premise, "if there is existence", and follow up, then God must
> be a being.

Ah, you are right. I overlooked the suppositional premise when I posted
my comment, and responded more as if you had said "God exists and is a 
being". Sorry about that.

On the relation between existence and being, however, I've adressed that 
in another post.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Norman R. Kraft 			   INET  : nkraft@bkhouse.cts.com
Senior Partner				   UUCP  : ucsd!crash!bkhouse!nkraft
Argus Computing 			   GENIE : N.KRAFT3
San Diego, CA				   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky talk.religion.newage:3586 alt.alien.visitors:4933 sci.skeptic:13395
From: John_-_Winston@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage,alt.alien.visitors,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: John's Astral Convoy (Was: Re: The Prime Directive)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 06:26:49 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <1992Jul30.094008.7946@klaava.Helsinki.FI>

Dear Astral Trekies: Now before I read any of your mail or postings
please let me inform you what happened last night on the second weekly
Astral Convoy. I programmed myself to go see quite a few people, went to
sleep and then my wife came in and touched me. I nearly jumped out of 
my skin and thought I saw something  big looking at me through my open
window (it was just cause by the way the wooden shutter was placed in 
a certain position). I then took off for all of USA then Europe then
England. Then something happened that another person said had happen to 
him during this Astral Train, I started riding a horse. This morning
I awoke seeming to be in a three layer deep conciousness.  I had to wake
up in three layers of conciousness, so that's it.  John Winston
From: kambic@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (Bonus, Iniquus, Celer - Delegitus Duo)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage
Subject: Re: absolute truth
Date: 22 Jul 92 11:38:02 EST

In article <1992Jul17.213059.20168@tc.fluke.COM>, emery@tc.fluke.COM (John Emery) writes:
[...]
... The problem:  it was tuned totally off from all the
> other instruments and if played would cause total musical confusion and
> dissonance.  You see, in music, an A note is 440Hz and the harmonics of that
> frequency.  To have order and beauty, everyone must tune to this standard.
> Otherwise there would be a trainwreck!  While each instrument is different
> and unique, it must adhere to the absolute standard.
Wrongo!  This is tyranny, to say that all must adhere to the same standard to
have order and beauty.  Sounds like Nazism.

[...]
> I didn't write this to claim which one is right but to show that if there
> were an Absolute Truth and that Truth wanted to make itself known in a
> clear way so that we would know Truth, it would seem unlikely that the
> the following two viewpoints would both represent that truth.

Only if your above _assumption_ is true.

GXKambic
standard disclaimer
"You can't win, you can't break even, you don't even know what game you're
playing."
From: gt0009b@prism.gatech.EDU (rahim)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage
Subject: Robert Bly
Date: 30 Jul 92 21:59:19 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

Does anyone read Robert Bly's poetry or have read his book, _Iron John_?
I have some trouble understanding what he's talking about, and I would
really appreciate some insights on this subject.

rahim
-- 
                  "All I ever wanted / All I ever needed
                          Is here in my heart"
					   -Depeche Mode
From: walsha@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (Beginning to think is beginning to be undermined - Albert Camus.)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage
Subject: Re: absolute truth
Date: 27 Jul 92 17:46:16 EST

In article <sbuckley.712213251@sfu.ca>, sbuckley@fraser.sfu.ca (Stephen Buckley) writes:
> walsha@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (Beginning to think is beginning to be undermined - Albert Camus.) writes:
>>for an excellant overview of this from a scientific point of view,
>>check out the latest SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN - the article on
>>Quantum Philosophy. Great stuff. 
> 
>>  ando.
> 
>   well, i've quite the background in quantum philosophy--enough to know
> that it leads to more despair than hope.

please explain. do you mean despair in finding your "absolute truth?"
existential despair? are you looking for some sort of god whose
picture you have in your mind and are being driven to despair
when you don't find him? If He's not in quantum mechanics, where
is He? Is "absolute truth" your codeword for something divorced from
the reality we see around us?  

there seems to be a great deal of background to this thread that 
you are not communicating.

   ando.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage
From: theresa@cmatter.physics.indiana.edu (Theresa Vaughan)
Subject: Re: absolute truth
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 20:47:25 GMT

In article <7uqaoB5w164w@uuisis.isis.org> doug@uuisis.isis.org (Doug Thompson) writes:
<a whole series of posts offending, Catholic, Jews, Buddhists, and
cartesian philosophers>

   Well, after reading the rest of your posts, I see that you do
not reserve your ignorent narrow-mindedness for Catholics, 
but pretty much for anyone that isn't like you.

   The only thing I have agreed with more or less is the second
half of your first post. But now that your general attitude
has become apparent, I am sorry I wasted my breath (or fingers)
bothering to respond.

   Most of this stuff should be directed to other newsgroups, IMHO.
Doug, I hope the stuff that Jesus taught about compassion and
the dangers of judging others get through to you one of these
days. I know at the moment I am having trouble with it myself in
your case.

                                    -THeresa


Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage
From: moskowit@tronsbox.xei.com (Len Moskowitz)
Subject: Looking for the Self (was Re: absolute truth)
Organization: Xanadu Enterprises Inc.
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 19:19:36 GMT

Marc Wachowitz writes:

>Better yet, look directly within and find out what this so-called "I" is
>or isn't. Put aside all concepts, be they from any religion, from psychology
>or convictions from previous experiences. That's all baggage.
>Just look silently.

Aha!  A teacher!  (Quick!  Pounce on him!)

Many of us have done this (looking silently within) and continue to do
so.  In day-to-day life, almost all of us acknowledge a self, a
personal continuity mirrored in our memories.  While it can be said
that when we are in "thusness" (the term my Ch'an monk friend uses for
being in the moment), there is no observer, no observed, no separation
of subject and object, and therefore no self, in retrospect it is
clear that we have personal identity and continuity.  This I've
experienced first hand.

The wood must get cut, the water carried, and the children fed.  We
remember ourselves.  Isn't there a self?

Care to expound?

-- 
---

Len Moskowitz
moskowit@tronsbox.xei.com (preferred address)
moskowit@panix.com (alternate address)
From: kambic@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (Bonus, Iniquus, Celer - Delegitus Duo)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage
Subject: Re: absolute truth
Date: 29 Jul 92 12:32:46 EST

In article <1992Jul28.153339.19569@tc.fluke.COM>, emery@tc.fluke.COM (John Emery) writes:
> In article <1992Jul22.101906.8532@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> kambic@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (Bonus, Iniquus, Celer - Delegitus Duo) writes:
>>In article <1992Jul9.185030.9988@tc.fluke.COM>, emery@tc.fluke.COM (John Emery) writes:
[...]
> 
> Even if the person is insane, that doesn't justify the act, does it?
> Are you saying it is right for insane people to kill people?

Please don't apply your own spins to my statements.  Here we go into the
relative world of right and wrong.  How do you know the context of what goes on
in the insane person's mind when they commit an act of murder?  What if they do
not know, let's say for the sake of argument, your concept of right and wrong
and how to respond to it.

GXKambic
standard slightly cynical disclaimer
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage
From: John_-_Winston@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage,alt.alien.visitors,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Get Off John's Back Please!
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 19:04:05 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <1992Jul29.185219.29352@nntpd2.cxo.dec.com> <45868@shamash.cdc.com>

Dear Denice: Thanks for taking up for me. I need all the help I can get.
Two days ago I got some E=mail from a person who said that he was 
having a hard time paying his long distance bill for his posting. I 
replied to him then erased his message. I've been thinking about it 
and would appreciate it if he would E=mail me again and maybe something
could be worked out. I've even had the space people do me a favor before
and without me begging too hard they did something to where my long
distance calls didn't come out on my bill. I don't know how they did it
but it was appreciated. Thanks again Denice.
John Winston.
From: khan@davidsys.com
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage
Subject: Sufi Master HISHAM KEBBANI
Date: 29 Jul 92 14:28:29 PST
Organization: DAVID Systems Inc, Sunnyvale CA





              INVITATION TO BASK IN THE LOVE AND 
                        THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE SUFI MASTERS!


      Whether you are from a Muslim background or a non-Muslim
background [Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Atheist, etc.],
you will experience unusual spirituality when you come to
our friendly gatherings. 

      Sufism deals with a universal truth, and cleansing 
of the Spiritual Heart, the Essence of every human being.

                 SHAIKH HISHAM KEBBANI
                 Naqshbandiyya Sufi Order
                 of Bukhara, Central Asia.

                 Phone: [415] 941-7916
                        [408] 425-1382 Dr. Wm. Sperrling
                        [408] 749-8322 Khalid Khan

      Weekly meetings at San Francisco South Bay [Silicon Valley]
and Oakland locations. 

      ALL INVITED, WITHOUT ANY OBLIGATION, TO JOIN IN
OUR HALAQA, EVEN IF YOU TEND TO DISAGREE WITH THE SUFI
WAY OF APPRECIATING THIS UNIVERSE.




Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage
From: moskowit@tronsbox.xei.com (Len Moskowitz)
Subject: Re: Flames, Don Disappointed
Followup-To: talk.religion.misc
Organization: Xanadu Enterprises Inc.
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 05:30:43 GMT

(This discussion has little or no New Age content.  I've set followups
to talk.religion.misc.)

Doug Thompson writes:

>1) Jesus was a Jew. From the perspective of *that* Jew, He met all the
>criteria.

One Jew, no matter who he is, can't redefine the Jewish religion's
criteria for messiah-ship.  From the Jewish perspective, Jesus didn't
meet the criteria.

> ...
>3) Many Jews today recognize Jesus as Messiah, so I quibble with your 'from
>the Jewish perspective'. "From the perspective of non-believing Jews . . ."
>ok.

Nope.  All Jewish denominations (and I mean *all*, without exception)
agree that Jews who believe in Jesus's divinity are Christians.  They
may one day resume their Jewish practice, but until then they are
treated as non-Jews.

>4) The Old Testament contains two very different messianic traditions. One
>is the messiah as conquering hero, King David's heir. A warlord. The other
>is that of the suffering servant most poignantly prophesying Jesus in Psalm
>22. There is a great deal in Isaiah also.

This interpretation of Tehillim (Psalm) 22 is a Christian one that is
used to buttress Christian theological claims.  It is based partly on
badly forced mistranslations.  Jews interpret it quite differently.

>5) By any analysis Jesus did not fail to meet *any* criterion. He
>just failed to raise armies and conquer Rome . . .

"Any analysis?"  Wrong again.  From the Jewish perspective Jesus
failed to meet any of the specific criteria.

>6) This is not a subject very usefully argued. 

I agree wholeheartedly.

>There are various points of
>view on the matter, and having sifted through them and weighed the evidence
>of science as well as the evidence of our own hearts, we have come to
>different conclusion.

Indeed we have.  Now if your missionary-spirited co-religionists would
respect others' religious choices and not be quite so rude and
aggressive, we would all be better off.

>... But please don't imply that there is any one "Jewish
>Perspective" or that you are the spokesperson for it. 

I certainly am better qualified than you in this regard.  I speak what
I have been taught as an Orthodox Jew, an heir to the Rabbinic tradition.

-- 
---

Len Moskowitz
moskowit@tronsbox.xei.com (preferred address)
moskowit@panix.com (alternate address)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage
From: sbuckley@fraser.sfu.ca (Stephen Buckley)
Subject: Re: Alignment of will, asking for help!
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 05:37:54 GMT

moskowit@tronsbox.xei.com (Len Moskowitz) writes:

>Doug Thompson writes:

>>But the point here is that to get to know God, the Bible and the traditions,
>>for a Jew or a Christian, are just - well - aids, so to speak. They do not
>>'contain' the truth and I think very few Jews or Christians look on
>>Scripture or Tradition as infallible. 

>I suggest, lest he mis-state their perspective, that Doug speak as a
>Christian and let the Jews speak for themselves.

  and that might be pretty hard to do.  doug doesn't sound like any christian
i know when he says the bible does not contain truth.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage
From: moskowit@panix.com (Len Moskowitz)
Subject: Re: Enlightenment (was Re: about absolute truth; Krishnamurti)
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 15:07:47 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC

Greg writes in response to my saying:

 "Why don't you go sell water by the riverside!  Ha!"

>I think Marc has a valid point, so lighten up (figuratively speaking).
>The one great thing about us as humans is free will or freedom of
>choice. If somebody has a difference of opinion, fine, it is their opinion.
>You have the choice to agree or disagree or totally ignore. 
>IMHO!!! your particular brand of religion and philosophy seems
>quite limiting to me. It does not mean it is wrong or right, it just has no
>significance to me. My point is that if somebody does not see the 
>world through your eyes that does not necessarily mean you should flame
>them. Little comments like the one above can be damaging. I've read your
>posts in the past and like alot of what I read, you seem to talk alot about 
>respect for things, love, etc. Well, practice what you preech. Your 
>comment was not directed to me but I feel the pain of your negativity. 
>We are all connected, your joy is felt, your pain is felt. There is enough
>unrest in this world already...lets not add to it. In the words of 
>The Frugal Gourmet, "I bid you peace!" 

I think you misunderstood the allusion.  It was not a flame.  Selling
water by the riverside is a Buddhist saying for what a teacher does.
Just as water is ever present along the river, so is the Buddha-mind
ever present, even if one is blind to it.  The Buddhist teacher simply
tries to make you aware of what is ever present, your Buddha nature.
I'm sure that Marc understood this.

I believe Marc and I are having a very exciting, very positive
discussion.  Please join us if you care to.

-- 
Len Moskowitz
moskowit@panix.com
From: jil@linus.mitre.org (Jon Leivent)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage
Subject: Jiddu Krishnamurti
Date: 27 Jul 92 22:07:07 GMT
Distribution: talk.religion.newage
Organization: Research Computer Facility, MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA


I am new to this newsgroup.  I have been following the threads about
Krishnamurti, and was wonderring if any one would like to engage in
direct email discussions.  I stumbled on Krishnamurti's teachings
several years ago, and have since read about 10 of his books (I can't
make a list off the top of my head).  However, for some time, I have
felt that reading, even as much as I have, is not very meaningful.  I
suppose one might say that this feeling is entirely appropriate to the
philosophy.


-- Jon Leivent
Xref: sparky talk.religion.newage:3464 alt.alien.visitors:4751 sci.skeptic:13151
From: John_-_Winston@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage,alt.alien.visitors,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: The Prime Directive
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 92 22:36:43 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
  <cass8806.108@elan.glassboro.edu> <l6u3buINN9fc@news.bbn.com>

Sorry everybody I don't have any time to read or post anything except
this posting today. Catch you people later if possible.
John Winston.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage
From: nordenga@tc.fluke.COM (Arnold E. Nordeng)
Subject: Re: New Thread, an impersonal God
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 20:12:17 GMT

In article <3927@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us> jethro@cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us (Firewalking Tantrika) writes:
>In article <1992Jul15.181101.1347@tc.fluke.COM>, nordenga@tc.fluke.COM (Arnold E. Nordeng) writes:
>
>So, what is your _intention_ in posting to t.r.n.? To _learn_ or
>to save us heathen new-agers with your brand of belief system?

Oh, come on now Jeffery.  I'm trying to be nice and not mention that
J-word.  Even my .sig doesn't mention Him. ;-)

I can't possibly save you with my brand of belief system, only the J-word
Himself can.

So to answer your question, I am pushing now to see where I can find
logic in your belief system.  So you can either support your belief
system (if its worth supporting) and maybe I can learn something.
Again, I am not trying to "flame" anyone.  Although I will challenge
what I read.  If its worth believing, its worth defending.

Thanks for reading my articles, I appreciate it.
>
>Namaste,
>Jeffery
>
>-- 
>======================================================================
>Jeffery Tye                             cruzio.santa-cruz.ca.us!jethro
>Beyond Your Limits                                      (408) 688-6712
>======================================================================

-Arnold
-- 
_______________________
-Arnold Nordeng           
 nordenga@tc.fluke.COM

"You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill 
 Him a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord
 and God.  But let us not come up with any patronising nonsense 
 about His being a great human teacher.  He has not left that 
 open to us.  He did not intend to."
                                        -C.S. Lewis.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.newage