HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: shirriff@sprite.berkeley.edu (Ken Shirriff)
Newsgroups: alt.fractals
Subject: Re: fractal types (?)
Date: 9 Sep 1992 05:18:13 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: hijack.berkeley.edu

In article <-t4y_4q@rpi.edu> rogerj@aix.rpi.edu (Jeffrey C. Rogers) writes:
>Simulate a forest fire of types: start with 1 point, and all adjoining
>points have a given probability of turning on. It's really a life program
>where you adjust the probability of spreading.

The other key concepts are that burning squares extinguish after a certain
amount of time, and burnt squares turn back into flammable forest with
some probability.  The system can demonstrate "self-organized criticality":
the fire doesn't go out or destroy the entire forest, but reaches a sort-
of-steady-state where large chain reactions keep happening on all scales.

See: "A forest-file model and some thoughts on turbulence", Physics Letters,
V147 N5 p780-782, Dec 14, 1989.

>I don't think it's in fractint - why not?

Because nobody has implemented it yet. :-)  You could fix this. :-)

Ken Shirriff				shirriff@sprite.Berkeley.EDU
From: bub@qut.edu.au
Newsgroups: alt.fractals
Subject: fractal image
Date: 15 Sep 92 14:46:23 EST
Organization: Queensland University of Technology

Who has the program in PC or Xwindow to show mountains and see by fractal
methods? Or some one know a ftp site for this? I am interest in this. Thanks
for telling me.
From: bert.tyler@satalink.com (Bert Tyler) 
Newsgroups: alt.fractals
Subject: Fractint for Mac?
Date: 15 Sep 92 11:20:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Datamax/Satalink Connection * Ivyland, PA (215) 443-9434
Reply-To: bert.tyler@satalink.com (Bert Tyler) 

TP> I do however have a Mac LC. Is there a version of Fractint
TP> that will run on this machine?

To the best of our knowledge, Fractint has never been ported
to the Macintosh environment.  Wish I had a better answer for
you, but I don't.

                   Bert Tyler   (bert.tyler@satalink.com)
---
 . DeLuxe./386 1.25 #343sa . Did you expect mere proof to sway my opinion?
      
Newsgroups: alt.fractals
From: rogerj@aix.rpi.edu (Jeffrey C. Rogers)
Subject: fractal types (?)
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 02:33:10 GMT

I was wondering about some fractals that aren't in fractint (I think).

The first is a type of diffusion fractal. 
Simulate a forest fire of types: start with 1 point, and all adjoining
points have a given probability of turning on. It's really a life program
where you adjust the probability of spreading. I don't think it's in
fractint - why not?

The second are worms. 
I remember seeing them in some book by Martin Gardener. Quadrille and
isomeric worms, that eat grid lines by predetermined rules. Maybe they could
be done using lsystem fractals. (Anyone ever hear of these besides me? I
don't recall all the details)

Diversion

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I can see 'em                          | "Want me to create a diversion?"
    I can see 'em                       | Diversion
        Someone wake me when it's over" | rogerj@rpi.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I can see 'em                          | "Want me to create a diversion?"
    I can see 'em                       | Diversion
        Someone wake me when it's over" | rogerj@rpi.edu
From: shirriff@sprite.berkeley.edu (Ken Shirriff)
Newsgroups: alt.fractals
Subject: Fractint colormaps wanted
Date: 8 Sep 1992 02:50:18 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: hijack.berkeley.edu

I'm thinking of adding new, exciting colormaps to the next release of
xfractint.  So send me your favorite fractint/xfractint colormaps.  Imagine
how proud you'll be when people around the world use _your_ colormap. :-)

Ken Shirriff				shirriff@sprite.Berkeley.EDU
From: john.gialuco@satalink.com (John Gialuco)
Newsgroups: alt.fractals
Subject: Astrology Help
Date: 14 Sep 92 22:52:00 GMT
Reply-To: john.gialuco@satalink.com (John Gialuco)
Organization: Datamax/Satalink Connection * Ivyland, PA (215) 443-9434


        Hello, I am an artist who also directs a New Age center in Phila., PA. I
have been generating fractals on Fractint 17.* for a while now and I
then print them out and frame them for sale at some art shows. My question
is that I want to create fractals that are based on a person's birth date,
time of birth and/or place of birth, loggitude and latitude being used
as part of the formula. Anyway it may be that I can,t use all of this data
to start a single generation oif a picture but this is the main idea. The
idea I want to express is a personal fractal based on the particular person's
point of birth.
        I believe that there is a symbolic or unconscious relationship
between the person and that unique grown fractal. We have often used fractals
as a mandalla or visual focus during our meditations. I will spread a few
dozen fractals on the floor so as everyone can select one. We then will
lead a meditation using these selected fractals as a focus point during the
meditation. It has a very powerful effect on everyone.
        So if anyone can give me some help as to setting up a way of
donig this I would appreciate it.


---
 . TLX v1.1 . Only in your dreams are you really free.
From: z_youngwd@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.fractals
Subject: X-Cursors available
Date: 12 Sep 92 20:39:44 GMT
Organization: Stephen F. Austin State University


There are alot of X-cursors built into DV-X in case you are interested.
Use xsetroot -cursor_name <cursor> to get them.

cursor, arrow, based_arrow_down, based_arrow_up, boat, bogosity,
bottom_left_corner, bottom_right_corner, bottom_side, bottom_tee,
box_spiral, center_ptr, circle, clock, coffee_mug, cross, cross_reverse,
crosshair, diamond_cross, dot, dotbox, double_arrow, draft_large,
draft_small, draped_box, exchange, fleur, gobbler, gumby, hand1,
hand2, heart, icon, iron_cross, left_ptr, left_side, left_tee, leftbutton,
ll_angle, lr_angle, man, middlebutton, mouse, pencil, pirate, plus,
question_arrow, right_ptr, right_side, right_tee, rightbutton, rtl_logo,
sailboat, sb_down_arrow, sb_h_double_arrow, sb_left_arrow, sb_right_arrow,
sb_up_arrow, sb_v_double_arrow, shuttle, sizing, spider, spraycan, star,
target, tcross, top_left_arrow, top_left_corner, top_right_corner,
top_side, top_tee, trek, ul_angle, umbrella, ur_angle, watch, xterm

They are also available to programs you write for X.

Wayne
z_youngwd@ccsvax.sfasu.edu
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
From: alper@sushi.psych.nwu.edu (Theodore M. Alper)
Subject: Re: My Heritage
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston IL
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 01:34:06 GMT

In article <139985.2AAE8960@paranet.FIDONET.ORG> Bill.Carlson@p0.f18.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Bill Carlson) writes:
> BC>  Nope.  Though you didn't have exactly a Brit-Millah according to
> BC> Torah, (since it was a medical circumcision), you still are
> BC> circumcised and a Jew.  This "re-circumcision" business, applies
> BC> only to proselytes/converts to Judaism, from the Gentiles, who
> BC> are already circumcised, and would include shedding a single drop
> BC> of blood.  That is not necessary for a natural born circumcised
> BC> Jew anyway, so you don't have to worry about it.
> TMA> Is this accurate? Could you cite your source for this? 
> TMA> (Note, I'm too ignorant of halacha to be certain you're mistaken,
> TMA> but I am curious to know how MJs come to decisions on this sort
> TMA> of thing.)
>     The only Commandment/Mitzvah in Torah is that every male child of
>     the Jews are to be circumcised.  But you will notice that in
>     Exodus 4:24-26, as late as Moshe, the L-RD sought to kill him.
>     So his wife, Zipporah, cut off the foreskin of her son and cast
>     it at Moshe's feet, and it stopped the threat of death.  This
>     wasn't a Brit-Millah -(as per Halachah), neither was it done by
>     the father, but a simply circumcision preformed by the mother.
>     Yet, it satisfied the requirements; even though Moshe had put
>     off the circumcision in the first place - (though it almost
>     cost him his life).  Please see more in my reply to Robert
>     Levene.
Three questions: 

1) Zipporah (herself a daughter of a priest) performed the circumcision 
   in the Lord's presence (more or less -- the pronoun references are a bit 
   confusing to me) while her husband was incapacitated. She touched her 
   son's legs with the foreskin and pronounced him a bridegroom of blood. 
   How does a medical circumcision compare to this? What justification do you
   have for saying no more than a medical circumcision is required?

2) In any case, I'm more interested in the methods by which MJs come
   to decisions on these matters. From your response, I gather you
   read and interpret Torah freehand, each man his own Rabbi, so to
   speak. What sort of authorities do you consult in your attempts to
   draw conclusions? How bound are you to accept their judgements?

3) "The only Commandment/Mitzvah in Torah is that every male child of
    the Jews are [sic] to be circumcised." ???? This is news to me.
    Genesis 17 speaks only of circumcision in the covenenant, but there
    seem to be plenty of other commandments throughout Torah.
From: bthurman@uncavx.unca.edu
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Saul of Tarsus married?
Date: 15 Sep 92 17:39:41 GMT
Organization: University of North Carolina at Asheville
Nntp-Posting-User: bthurman

Did you know that the first great church historian Eusebius records the view
that the noted Jewish apostle to the goyim, Shaul of Tarsus, was a married man?
Does Historia Ecclesiastica 3,30 not cite the tradition that, when Saul=Paul
writes to Philippi and uses the expression 'true yokefellow', that he was
addressing his wife?  Would not the conclusion be that the two had agreed for
the sake of carrying out his divine commission to propagate Jesus as the
Messiah among the goyim that they would forego the demands of continuing in a
sexual relationship?  Does this not cut cross grain to the psychoanalytic
criticism one often finds imposed on this problematic personage?
Shalom & may all your 'rl be cut away,
'bearded Bill'
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Paradise (was Re: Clean And Unclean Un / Maccoby Book)
Date: 13 Sep 92 22:01:32 GMT
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

In article <LJMORLY.92Sep11140552@polaris.utu.fi> 


> matter how you interpret the word 'bible'.) Without the sacrifice of 
> Yeshua we are unable to go back. (See Is. 53, Ps. 40:7-9 & Job 19:25,26 
> and forget about the wishful "explanations" of RL.

That's a statement of Christian faith, not an argument.

>  As to the word 'ransom',
> it's 'kofer (nefesh)' in Hebrew, not 'kapparah', although they have the 
> same root.)

The actual expression is "l'chaper" - "to atone."  Kapparah is the
noun form, denoting the concept of "atonement."  The term "pidyon"
denotes "a ransom" and this language is used throughout the Torah to
indicate a redemptive ransom, such as Ex. 13:11-16, and elsewhere such
as numbers 3:49, where "kesef hapidyom" denotes ransom.

Rob

-- 
--
Robert A. Levene     Internet: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu
  "/  //  / /"         Bitnet:   RXL1@APLVM
From: mannk@fshvmfk1.VNET.IBM.COM (Ken Mann)
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 14:02:54 EDT
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Genesis
Reply-To: mannk@fshvmfk1.VNET.IBM.COM
Organization: IBM
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not those of IBM
News-Software: Usenet 3.0

I would like to know what the MJ position is on interpreting Genesis,
specifically the Creation account.
Was it six 24-hour days, or millions of years?
Was Noah's flood worldwide r just figurative?
Does the UMJC has an "official" position?

While we're at it, I'd like to hear Tom A.'s position as well!

 Shalom!  |  INTERNET: mannk@fshvmfk1.vnet.ibm.com            Christ
   Ken    |  VNET:     FSHVMFK1(MANNK)                          is
          |  IBMnet:   mannk@saskatchewan.fishkill.ibm.com    risen!
-----------------------------------------------------------
               You can only coast downhill!
From: Bill.Carlson@p0.f18.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Bill Carlson)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: My Heritage
Date: 13 Sep 92 00:23:08 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:104/18.0 - Midrash, Denver CO


              -=> Quoting Theodore M. Alper to All <=-
 TMA> From: alper@sushi.psych.nwu.edu (Theodore M. Alper)
 TMA> Date: 11 Sep 92 01:34:06 GMT
 TMA> Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston IL
 TMA> Message-ID: <1992Sep11.013406.19885@news.acns.nwu.edu>
 TMA> Newsgroups: alt.messianic

 TMA> Three questions:
 TMA> 
 TMA> 1) Zipporah (herself a daughter of a priest) performed the
     A non-Jewish priest :-)

 TMA> circumcision  in the Lord's presence (more or less -- the pronoun
     In anger, not heartfelt conviction, nor regarding the proper time.

 TMA> references are a bit  confusing to me) while her husband was
 TMA> incapacitated. She touched her  son's legs with the foreskin and
 TMA> pronounced him a bridegroom of blood.  How does a medical
 TMA> circumcision compare to this?
     She did it to save her husbands life, obviously not in deep
     regard for the Mitzvah.

 TMA> What justification do you have for
 TMA> saying no more than a medical circumcision is required?
     What justification do you have for saying that more than a medical
     circumcision is needed, - before, (at least the bare-bones of),
     the Mitzvah is accomplished.  The Torah says to "circumcise"; - a
     Medical circumcision - circumcises!

 TMA> 2) In any case, I'm more interested in the methods by which MJs
 TMA> come to decisions on these matters. From your response, I gather
 TMA> you read and interpret Torah freehand, each man his own Rabbi, so
 TMA> to speak. What sort of authorities do you consult in your
 TMA> attempts to draw conclusions? How bound are you to accept their
 TMA> judgements?
     A variety of ways.  We don't just limit ourselves to the opinions
     of the sages - thought that is one means.  Formost is what the
     Ruach of HaShem has revealed from His Word.  That has to agree
     with the established doctrines of the Written Word; and that is a
     given amongst the majority opinion of the Messianic leadership;
     etc..  So, there are many checks and balances from that way.
     There are also ancient Messianic Writings; and of course, the
     Rabbinic writings which we do not totally throw out, contrary
     to what some may say.  Might make for an interesting study when
     we clear up some of these other articles on this message area.

 TMA> 3) "The only Commandment/Mitzvah in Torah is that every male
 TMA> child of the Jews are [sic] to be circumcised." ???? This is news
 TMA> to me. Genesis 17 speaks only of circumcision in the covenenant,
 TMA> but there seem to be plenty of other commandments throughout
 TMA> Torah.
     Of course there is, 613.  I was refering to the one Mitzvah of
     Brit Millah - Circumcise on the 8th day.  The rest is halachah.

... 012 Think not that I am come to annul the Torah or the Prophets: 210  
--  
Bill Carlson - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Bill.Carlson@p0.f18.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG
From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: Clean And Unclean
Date: 8 Sep 1992 23:39:46 -0500
Organization: Johns Hopkins University
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Bruce Benning writes:

> [...] While some  sins were atoned for initialy without blood,
> they were indeed covered by blood once a year by the High Priest
> on Yom Kippor.
[...]

Mike Brown's essay also makes the same mistake:

[...]
>     we may offer the fruit of our lips." Yet, while  the  Bible  sometimes
>     describes  prayer, repentance and worship with "sacrifice imagery", it
>     never implies that  these  things  were  to  take  the  place  of  the
>     sacrifices themselves.


All the more so, nowhere does the Torah state that the death
of a man-god is a valid atonement sacrifice, let alone for Yom Kippur.


How do Jews get atonement without sacrifices?

The numerous passages which describe how prayer and repentance are
capable of earning atonement are *not* meant to call for the 
elimination of sacrifices, but to show that they can substitute.

  Consider a motorboat which also has oars.  Both the motor and the oars
  can propel the boat.  However, the presence of oars doesn't mean one
  should jettison the motor.  It does mean that in case the motor breaks
  down, you can still reach your destination by rowing, just as Jews
  earn atonement through prayer and recalling the Temple service.

  Even though rowing is sometimes better than powered boating, the
  ideal state of the boat is under its own power.  Psalm 69:30-34
  similarly describes how repentance can be more pleasing to G-d than
  bulls, but we still await the arrival of our Mechanic.

Furthermore, we learn from Lev. 16:31 that the Yom Kippur service is a
law for all time, Temple or not (Sforno).  From verse 34, we learn
that observance of the day itself brings atonement, as explained in
more detail in Yoma 86.

Of course, you're perfectly free to state "According to Christianity,
particularly Hebrews 9, atonement is only through blood, and Jesus'
death accomplishes this."  Go right ahead, but don't call your ideas
Judaism.

Rob

-- 
--
Robert A. Levene     Internet: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu
  "/  //  / /"         Bitnet:   RXL1@APLVM
From: Donna.D'Iorio@f7022.n124.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Donna D'Iorio)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Words Like Arrows
Date: 2 Sep 92 16:02:06 GMT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:124/7022 - MAXUS World H, Dallas TX


    Responding to Robert A. Levene
RA>From: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene)
RA>Date: 31 Aug 92 03:11:52 GMT
RA>Organization: Johns Hopkins University
RA>Message-ID: <9208310311.AA20201@aplpy.jhuapl.edu>

RA>I don't advocate silence, rather make sure that your charges
RA>have a basis in reality so they can be dealt with honestly.

    Well, Robert, I have spent the last several years looking into
exactly that.  What do you think about Tom's latest assertion that your
bloodlines are questionably "Jewish"?  How much more reality do you need
to understand that I'm not making groundless charges?

RA>Because re-defining terms enables them to rationalize misleading
RA>others, who assume that "MJ" terms such as "orthodox Jew" are
RA>equivalent to their non-MJ counterparts.

    You are ascribing motives that have nothing to do with with the
Messianic movement.  It is no attempt to mislead anyone, but to be true
to who they really are.  If you could see this as a line with first
century Messinic Jews on one end and 1992 Messianic Jews on the other
end, then you would see that just about all the Jews that have believed
in Yeshua in between the two ends have been denied the expression of who
they really are!  Denied on one hand by the gentile Church and on the
other by non-believeing Judaism.  But the return to identification as
Messianic Jews is not for the purpose of misleading anyone....who do you
know that is truly confused or mislead by this?  This is a non-argument.

RA>You have it backwards.  "Messianics" calling their religion
RA>Jewish is like Harvey Smith changing his name to Harvey Rockefeller
RA>and demanding a share in the family fortune.  The Rockefellers
RA>can't disown him, but they can stop him from claiming an
RA>inheritance, and insist that for clarity he make clear his
RA>affiliation with the Smith family.

    Don't know how you figure it.  The Messiah is a wholly Jewish
concept.  Yeshua was a Jewish man whose ministry was ONLY to the lost
sheep of the house of Israel and the house of Judah.  All His disciples
were Jewish.  All those who came to faith in Him in the beginning were
Jewish.  Sounds to me like it is the non-Jewish believers that
have changed their family name and come into the family fortune.
So how can Harvey be faulted for making his affiliation clear just
because the adopted children have outnumbered the natural children for
so long?
    Donna D'Iorio

--  
Donna D'Iorio - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Donna.D'Iorio@f7022.n124.z1.FIDONET.ORG
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
From: ljmorly@polaris.utu.fi (Laura Johanna Manninen)
Subject: Re: lifdot & l'chaper (was: Re: Paradise (was Re:
Organization: University of Turku
Date: 15 Sep 92 17:39:10

In article <9209150340.AA20495@aplpy.jhuapl.edu> levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene) writes:
(You could have written here: Laura Manninen wrote:)
> >> > matter how you interpret the word 'bible'.) Without the sacrifice of 
> >> > Yeshua we are unable to go back. (See Is. 53, Ps. 40:7-9 & Job 19:25,26 
> >> > and forget about the wishful "explanations" of RL.
> >
> >> That's a statement of Christian faith, not an argument.
> >
> > Do you include all those Rabbinic views (by Bill Carlson) to this 
> > "Christian faith" as well ?

> There are no Jewish views requiring man-god sacrifice.  There are
> plenty of Christian views which suggest this, which is fine with
> me, as long as you call it Christianity.

But there is this distiction between Messiah ben Yosef and Messiah
ben David. Now, put them two together and you'll get someone who dies
and after that is a king. 

> Please get your words straight.  First you present
> "ka'aru" (pierced) when it's actually "ka'ari" (like a lion)
> in Psalm 22, ending with a yod.  Same with the mistranslation
> of "almah" as "virgin."

The yod's and vav's are easily confused when reading an old text without 
vowels. The word I wrote 'ka'aru' is written with vav in some manuscripts
and translated as 'pierced' in Septuagint and Syriac. 'ke'ari'/'ka'ari'
is not a verb at all; it's the distorted form from which you can (with
good imagination) derive 'like a lion' - 'ke-ari'.

'Almah' in Isaiah 7:14 must mean virgin in the context, no matter do
you translate it as 'virgin' (like Septuagint) or 'marrigeable girl'.

> A term for ransom is:     The term for heretic/atheist is:
> (also 'to ransom')
>  __   __ .___                      __   __ ._ ___ 
>    | |_ |  . |                       | |_ | |  . |
>    | ___| ___|                       | ___| | ___|
>      . .                                ..
>       .

> The infinitive 'to atone' is:      Terms for atonement include
>  __   __  ___                    __  __   __  ___     __   _  __  ___  
>    | |_ |  . |                     |   | |_.|  . |      | .| |_.|  . |
>    | ___| ___|                   | |   | ___| ___|      |  | ___| ___|
>      ..    .                          T    T   -    /               .

(Not infinitive but the past tense form.)

> The expression in Numbers 31:50 and Leviticus 17:11 is
>  __   __  ___  |_ 
>    | |_ |    |   |
>    | ___| ___|  / 
>       ..   _    :  

> which means "to atone," not "to ransom."  

No one has ever claimed it means 'to ransom'.

> Therefore, Numbers 31:50 is describing an atonement, without blood.

You have a bit same kind of logic than TA with "Satan being bound"[sic].
The word used doesn't affect the interpretation of the verse. The folks
were doing against the commandment in Lev. 17:11.
 
> Rob

- Laura
--
Loving the truth is loving God.