HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,sci.med
Subject: Re: Rationality does not port so easily
Date: 14 Dec 92 16:36:59 GMT
Reply-To: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
Followup-To: talk.religion.misc
Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh Computer Science

In article <li7dheINN856@news.bbn.com> levin@bbn.com (Joel B Levin) writes:
>
>I consider it tacit verification that he considers your remarks not
>worth a response.
>

Exactly.  I don't respond to bigots.  I'll discuss my religious
views with the appropriate people in the appropriate place.
I gave some facts about Mormon beliefs, but I'm not going to discuss
my personal views here.  The resort to religious slurs when someone
has their ignorance of a completely different topic exposed is dispicable.
Responding back and forth to him will merely encourage this sort
of behavior and allow him to deflect scruitiny from his own behavior.



-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
From: gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga)
Subject: Re: Reconciling OT with NT
Organization: Gizmonic Institute - Home of the "Super G Burger"
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 00:40:19 GMT

<1992Dec7.115337.12633@waikato.ac.nz> arron@waikato.ac.nz writes:
>> <1992Dec4.044322.7917@netcom.com> gordons@netcom.com (Gordon Storga) :
>>Who created "the big sleep" in the first place?  According to your bible
>>your god created death to punish Adam and Eve and all of their creations.
>>It compares to you hanging your kid off a cliff by a rope and when her
>>arms get too tired to hold on any more and she lets go and falls to her
>>death you just say, "Well, it was her choice to let go."  You created the
>>death-situation, then blame her for dying.
>>  
>It's more like this ...
>
>God warned Adam and Eve, like our parents SHOULD HAVE warned us about what is
>right and wrong, and how to protect ourselves. They chose to run away from God,
>they even hid from God like any common runaway after they were found to be
>naked.

So, your parents should have inflicted disease and death upon you for
*one* act of disobediance?  Will you do so to *your* children?

>God then offered them the key to come back to Him in the laws, but they had so 
>much trouble following the laws, God had to offer Christ to do all the hard
>work for them. 

He could have just <gulp> FORGIVEN THEM.  Gosh, wouldn't that be novel.

>               Now God is waiting for us exactly as Christ said in the parable 
>of the Prodigal Son. 

I assume you have proof of this.

>                     I have received the Holy Spirit, and I can assure you God
>is very real, and DOES protect me, and answers my prayers. 

Really?  I've issued this challenge before, but since you have a
*personal* _in_ with this god please tell him to be at my place, oh say,
Friday the 18th of December this year.  I'll be waiting for him, he can
let himself in.  If he shows up I'll ask him several questions and if the
answers are reasonable then I might believe.  If this happens I'll post
to the net.

Now, this should really be a very very minor task for an omnipotent
god, and since you talk with him regularly it shouldn't be a problem.
I'll wait for him to show up.  If he needs to reschedule he can call
me.  (BTW, I'm not listed in the phone book, but he shouldn't have
_too_ much trouble finding me, now should he.)

>                                                           He loves both you 
>and I and wants to spend eternity with us all, death doesn't mean much when you
>have a future after death.

Then I guess all he has to do is make us immortal.  Gee, if he wants it so
bad then who am I to argue.

>Praise God !!!

For what?


Gordon
-- 
The opinions expressed are my own, and not the beliefs or opinions
of whatever company you think I work for.  So there, thhhbbbt!
Message to Kodak:  Freedom for Dan Bredy.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey)
Subject: Re: Reply to Charles Hedrick
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: +1 408 249 9630, log in as 'guest'.
	<Dec.6.18.04.23.1992.3606@geneva.rutgers.edu> 
	<1992Dec12.060923.16481@midway.uchicago.edu>
Date: 12 Dec 1992 19:57:24 UTC

In article <1992Dec12.060923.16481@midway.uchicago.edu> 
dsoconne@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>hedrick@geneva.rutgers.edu (Charles Hedrick) writes:
>>fairly stable since 1978.  There was a big change from 1963 to 78,
>>with "literal" dropping from 65% to 38%, and it has stayed around 40%
>>since.  Conventional wisdom (and statistical evidence) says that
>>conservative churches are growing, while liberal ones are shrinking.
>I will go out on a limb and predict that this trend is about
>to change in a big way. I'd say the next 10 years. Either that
>or a resurgence and jihad.

Probably a jihad or Kulturkampf as the two Pat's put it. Unless by some
miracle Clinton is able to solve the mess we call the best government
money can buy.

>>...  Many
>>of our conservative brothers and sisters have very warm hearts.  While
>>I do not like their legalistic approach to ethics, I see every sign of
>>lives centered around the desire to show love to the people around
>>them.  It's necessary to keep in mind the distinction between Usenet
>Generally (IMO), when people say "conservative" either about religion
>or about politics, they are either referring to a social or fiscal
>conservatism. Liberation theologians would argue that Jesus's life was 
>a testament to provoking conservatives of either stripe.
>If Jesus had a prophetic message, if Jesus was challenging the 
>unquestioned societal structures and strictures conservatives
>espouse, isn't it incumbent upon Christans to follow his example,
>and where does this leave the conservatives?

Teacher says follow me and be free. Students do - what?
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: dsoconne@quads.uchicago.edu (Daniel S OConnell)
Subject: Re: On faith  (was: ... least common denominator)
Reply-To: dsoconne@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 05:37:18 GMT

Russell Turpin in an interesting set of definitions for "faith",
writes:

>The universal failure of apologists to find a kind of faith
>that supports religious belief without being contrary to reason
>makes it a word that should raise flags for any critical and
>rational reader.  

Paul Tillich would argue that the "faith" required for religion
(perhaps contrary to your assertion) is trans-rational, i.e., 
that it transcends both rationality and irrationality.

Another point to consider is that not everything need be
subject to empirical tests in order to ascertain validity,
or need require rational justification.

Dano

P.S., I hope you and Dave keep up the discussion.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism,alt.pagan
From: dsoconne@quads.uchicago.edu (Daniel S OConnell)
Subject: Re: Calvin
Reply-To: dsoconne@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Distribution: world,public
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 05:20:17 GMT

pub@riscee.pko.dec.com (Publius) writes:

>separation from God (as held by the true Calvinism - as stated by
>John Calvin in his Institutes of the Christian Religion.)
>I have shown in another thread ("Afterlife theology in Judaism
>and Christianity") that Calvin's interpretation, that the

Calvin mentioned twice in two sentences? Do I espy a Calvinist?
Calvin who gleefully supported having his theological enemies
burned at the stake? Uh, you don't carry matches do you Publius?
:)

Hmmm,

Dano
From: mls@panix.com (Michael Siemon)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: How to choose a Bible Translation
Summary: petitio principi
Date: 21 Dec 92 01:51:11 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC

In article <fWStRGu@quack.sac.ca.us> pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey)
writes:

>was found with child, she could be stoned to death if someone felt the
>need to accuse her. However, if someone took responsibility for the
>woman and child, I don't think she would be punished. The story of Mary
>is a prime example.

umm, if you are going to take Mary as "a prime example" then you are
simply begging the question.  I might (indeed, I do to some extent)
agree with the general principle on sociological grounds -- but then
you can't go and *cite* Mary in support of it when your desired appli-
cation of the principle is to CONCLUDE that Mary wasn't a virgin.

Unless you have a sound body of *independent* evidence on this point,
you can't use your *desired* conclusion to establish a damned thing.

The only thing in all of this which is demonstrable is that the early
Christians *did* think Mary was a virgin and *did* think that Isaiah
7:14 applied as "prophecy" -- presumably with a certain degree of con-
fusion entering because of the Septuagintal translation.

(and anyone who takes this as a "defense" of Mary's virginity don't
know me very well, do he? :-))

-- 
Michael L. Siemon	"We honour founders of these starving cities
mls@panix.com		 Whose honour is the image of our sorrow ...
			 They built by rivers and at night the water
			 Running past the windows comforted their sorrow."
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: gclapp@javelin.sim.es.com (Glenn Clapp)
Subject: Re: Satan Persecutes Mormons
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Corp.
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 00:48:49 GMT

In article <13DEC199214543291@acad3.alaska.edu> ksjwr@acad3.alaska.edu (REDELSS JOHN W) writes:
>The widespread persecution of Mormons is evidence that Jesus Christ did indeed
>organize the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and leads it today.
>
>Those who persecute Mormons do so because they are deceived by Satan.
>
>There are many humble followers of Christ outside the Mormon church.  They do
>not rail against the Mormon church.  Those who do are not humble followers of
>Christ.
>
>It's not real complicated.
>

Well Yukon John, that is certainly a very imaginative interpretation of
history.  Sheesh!  Take a look around you.  I'm sure you'll see the
Christian church persecuted far, far more than the Mormon church ever
has been or will be.  I find it interesting that you interpret caring
Christians trying to point out the errors of Mormonism as persecution.
I'm sure next time someone points out to you that your left rear tire
is low on air, that you'll accuse them of persecution.  If you really
want to find out the kind of persecution the Christian church has
been subjected to since it's initiation to the period BEFORE joseph
smith got the idea for mormonism, I suggest you read "Foxes Book
of Christian Martyrs."  NONE of these people were Mormon!  Count them.
You'll find thousands.  It is also interesting to note that this book
recounts the cases of people who died for Jesus Christ, or were persecuted
in ways you can not imagine, for Jesus Christ, during a time when there
was soposed to be a total apostacy (acording to mormonism).  How could
that be?  Could it be that there has NEVER been an apostacy?
-- 
=============================================================================
= Glenn Clapp                          |  gclapp@thunder.sim.es.com         =
= Evans and Sutherland Computer Corp.  |  My opinions are my own, but then  =
= Salt Lake City, Utah  (801) 582-5847 |  that's my opinion.                =
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: ldh@eedsp.gatech.edu (Lonnie D Harvel)
Subject: Re: Atheist, speak up.
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology - DSP
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 17:45:19 GMT

In article <1992Dec17.220721.13429@netcom.com>, bskendig@netcom.com (Brian Kendig) writes:
|> rodmoten@cs.cornell.edu (Roderick Moten) writes:
|> >What does it mean to be a Christian?
|> 
|> It means that right and wrong are spelled out for you,
|> that you have the comfort of feeling that some powerful being
|>   is on your side,
|> that you can look forward to living forever in a perfect world
|>   and being very happy if you satisfy your god,
|> that you feel you are pursuing absolute truth,
|> that you have a place to congrerate with other people
|>   who share your faith,
|> that you can count on other people to help you in times of trouble,
|> and that you are obliged to do all you can to bring other people
|>   to Christianity.
|> 
|> Have I spoken enough, Christian?
|> 
|> -- 
|> _/_/_/  Brian Kendig                             Je ne suis fait comme aucun


Well put.  I don't agree that right and wrong are spelled out
in EVERY case, but certainly in many cases.  Overall, a fair
summary of the results of being Christian.

-- 
     The comments and spelling herein are mine and nobody
                     else lays claim to them.
================================================================
Lonnie D. Harvel                 |  ldh@eedsp.gatech.edu
From: rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: You should be a Christian because (30 words max):
Date: 16 Dec 92 18:00:42 GMT
Organization: CERL-EE, Georgia Institue of Technology

In article <1992Dec15.213146.28033@blaze.cs.jhu.edu> arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee) writes:
|In article <78352@hydra.gatech.EDU> 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?

Do you think there is any other level of wisdom or understanding in the
universe today?

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?

Sincerely,
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 
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: muehlhau@en.ecn.purdue.edu (John Muehlhausen)
Subject: Re: How to choose a Bible Translation
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 92 03:02:45 GMT

In article <BzJD0s.9r9@world.std.com> rjk@world.std.com (robert j kolker) writes:
>Take prospective translation and turn to Isaiah 7:14. If you find the word
>"virgin" therein, consign the translation to the flames. It is NOT a
>correct translation from the Hebrew.  The word in question is ALMAH which
>in Hebrew means a young woman of marriageable age, not virgin, although a
>virgin of marriagable age could be so designated. The Hebrew word for
>virgin is B'TULAH which is not in that verse from Isiah.

You have conveniently ignored that in the OT Hebrew culture the two are
synonymous.  A "young woman of marriageable age" had better be a virgin or
she would be killed.  It is not stretching it to call all such women of this
time period virgins, in my opinion.  Besides, you will never find a
translation without such minor errors.  Thats what notes in the border are
for, and you would have to burn every translation if you were this strict
with all of them.

John M.
From: psyrobtw@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Robert Weiss)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: 12/20/92   God's Promise in Titus 1:2
Date: 20 Dec 92 02:35:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


	In hope of eternal life,
	which God, that cannot lie,
	promised before the world began;

	Titus 1:2
From: kalki33!system@lakes.trenton.sc.us
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: In response to Jack Carroll on Hinduism?
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 02:23:35 EST
Reply-To: kalki33!system@lakes.trenton.sc.us
Organization: Kalki's Infoline BBS, Aiken, SC, USA

prasanth@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Ravi K. Prasanth) writes:

> The concepts of negative karma, good karma, bad karma etc are
> really alien to Vedic/Vedantic beliefs. They were (probably)
> brought in to keep the average person interested/lead a "moral"
> life.

Another lie, as anyone who actually reads Bhagavad-gita and
Vedanta-sutra will see.

Sincerely,
Kalki Dasa


       -------------------------------------------------------
      |  Don't forget to chant:   Hare Krishna Hare Krishna   |
      |                           Krishna Krishna Hare Hare   |
      |                           Hare Rama Hare Rama         |
      |                           Rama Rama Hare Hare         |
      |                                                       |
      |   Kalki's Infoline BBS Aiken, South Carolina, USA     |
      |        (kalki33!kalki@lakes.trenton.sc.us)            |
       -------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: ivaliote@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (Lotus )
Subject: Re: Bible verses for two days
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 03:18:19 GMT

rodmoten@cs.cornell.edu (Roderick Moten) writes:
>|> "Rejoice and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven, for  
>|> so they persecuted the prophets who were before you."
>|> Matthew 5:11,12 NKJV
>Having a hope that is above the things in this world allows us to continue
>caring for those who less fortunate than us. 
>Praise Him!
No.  Bite Me!  (joke, joke, take it easy)

>Rod
Matt I.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism,alt.slack
From: lungtt@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Terence T. Lung)
Subject: Re: You should be a Christian because (30 words max):
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 92 02:38:35 GMT

In article <1glaalINNfjm@lily.csv.warwick.ac.uk> maupb@csv.warwick.ac.uk (Mr J L Saunders) writes:
>In article <1992Dec11.045805.22624@CSD-NewsHost.Stanford.EDU> amorgan@csd-d-4.Stanford.EDU (Crunchy Frog) writes:
>%In article <1992Dec10.172246.1@cubldr.colorado.edu> 
>%  holt_c@cubldr.colorado.edu writes:
>% 
>%>I don't know why, but this reminds me of the absolute weirdest sin I've ever
>%>been accused of.  It came during my infiltration of the Church of Christ here
>%>on campus...
Is this a branch of the Church of Christ known in Indianapolis or Boston?
If it is, be careful!  These guys are nuts.  Christ purportedly said
"I am the vine, you are the branches..."  If this group is not connected,
they're simply not part of the vine.  Period.

>%This sounds like the most sensible thing I have ever heard a religion
>%say...
This group (the ones in Boston/Indianapolis/etc) has very little
to do with Christ.  One of their prerequisites for your salvation 
involves getting baptized on *their* premises and becoming a member
of *their* particular congregation.  Otherwise, you're just a heathen.
Then they attempt to envelope your life within their membership, 
isolating you from the rest of the world--other religious folk 
(others that call themselves Christians included).  If you're 
not interested, they try to alienate you and send you on a guilt 
trip for *not being with them*.  Most mainstream churches might 
come across as sending you on a guilt trip for *being who
you are* not *being with any particular ORGANIZATION*.
Does this sound like JWs?  JWs are tame compared with these guys.
Don't shudder yet, more of these kind of religions are popping
out these days.  If you're interested, pray in Christ's name
and let the Holy Spirit convict you, NOT the deceiving names
of man-made organizations--Christians that shamefully bear
Christ's name, Witnesses that haven't witnessed anything, and churches
of Christ that aren't of Christ...

>Brings a whole new meaning to "I'm on a mission from God"
>
>Jason

Check them out.  See if I'm wrong.  If this group has nothing
to do with that Indianapolis or Boston group, I've jumped the
gun big time.  In that case, write more.  Let's see what else
these guys want from you.

If you desire that I see a response to any inquiries, please
send me mail directly as I will be doing research in absentia
for a couple weeks and won't be back until New Year's Eve.

Terence
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism,alt.slack
From: MANDTBACKA@FINABO.ABO.FI (Mats Andtbacka)
Subject: Re: You should be a Christian because (30 words max):
Organization: Unorganized Usenet Postings UnInc.
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 19:52:36 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24

In <1992Dec11.232659.22699@cbnewsh.cb.att.com> young@cbnewsh.cb.att.com writes:
> You can continue to sin out of your own weakness 
> but always be forgiven when you admit your guilt.

      Yeah, sure - now try getting a judge to swallow that! :-)

-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-^-
 If you think I'm gonna be responsible for this crap, you're madder than I am.
    "No logic here today / Do as you got to, Go your own way..." -- G 'n' R
From: slhw4@cc.usu.edu (Jason Hunsaker)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Straw Poll: Mormon Specific Newsgroup
Date: 12 Dec 92 04:21:50 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

I know I'm gonna regret doing this *again* but ....

Since the volume of traffic in talk.religion.misc regarding
Mormon related postings has leveled off somewhat, I'd like to
conduct a straw poll.

Don't post to the net.  Email your reply to: slhw4@cc.usu.edu
(Replying to this post *should* do the trick.)

Questions:

1a.  Do you think that a separate newsgroup should be created for
     discussing Mormon specific things on Usenet?

1b.  Why or why not?



2a.  If you do think that a Mormon specific newsgroup should be
     created, should it be moderated?

2b.  Why or why not?



3.   If you do think that a Mormon specific newsgroup should be
     created, what hierarchy and name should the newsgroup have
     and why?



4.   (Optional)  Just to get an idea of who is providing feed
     back, what is your religious persuasion?


-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Hunsaker  -|-  Logan, Utah  -|-  Internet: slhw4@cc.usu.edu
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: cshort@nmsu.edu (MetaPope, Internet in a Day Tour.)
Subject: Re: You should be a Christian because (30 words max):
Organization: Computing Research Lab
	<1g85r4INNnlt@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>
	<SUOPANKI.92Dec11010230@stekt2.oulu.fi>
	<1992Dec14.135452.1344@lut.ac.uk>
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 23:21:35 GMT


Christians stay crispy in milk.

c.
--
                                                                    |V
                                                                    |A
  |------------------------|                                        |T
  |agent orange health club|-------------------------------         |I
  |    lifetime member     |   cshort@crl.nmsu.edu is spamgod       |C
  |------P|-----                                                    |A
         O|      Silica Gell. Do Not Eat. Stays Crispy In Milk.   --|N ------|
         P|                               ----------------|vietnam theme park|
	 E|				                  |------------------|
From: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Why Anthony Rose Wouldn't Answer
Date: 14 Dec 92 17:43:09 GMT
Reply-To: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
Distribution: na
Organization: Univ. of Pittsburgh Computer Science

In article <1992Dec8.124154.13062@cbnews.cb.att.com> wcsa@cbnews.cb.att.com (Willard C. Smith) writes:
>
>Quite frankly, the only people who seem to consider _Mormon Doctrine_
>official are Anti-Mormons. It is not to say that many Mormons, like
>myself, do not consider _Mormon Doctrine_ to be valuable resource.

This shows the wisdom of Pres. McKay in not wanting the book to
be called Mormon Doctrine.  This use may have harmed the church
more than the book helped the members.



-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
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