HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dgraham@bmers30.bnr.ca (Douglas Graham)
Subject: Re: Thank you for your responses  : ) 
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 93 13:18:26 GMT

In article <C0KBn6.5rz@panix.com> mls@panix.com (Michael Siemon) writes:
>In article <1993Jan8.211847.28021@twisto.eng.hou.compaq.com> mccreary@sword.eng.hou.compaq.com (Ed McCreary) writes:
>
>>No, you have been asked not to preach on alt.atheism, not quite the same
>>thing.  Intelligent discourse is welcome, unsupported assertions are not.
>
>Except, of course, when the unsupported assertions are made by atheists.
>(note -- this is NOT a defense of random [or systematic] abuse of your
>group for xtian apologesis.)

Was this smug bullshit really necessary?  If you come across an unsupported
assertion in a.a, you're more than welcome to challenge it.  However,
if, as I suspect, you don't even bother to read a.a, then you really have
no cause for making remarks like the above, do you?  Even if you do read
it, it indicates a rather high degree of cowardice on your part that
you would take sleazy little potshots at it from the safety of t.r.m.
I don't know what your game is Mr Siemon, but sometimes you come across
as a real jerk.
--
Doug Graham         dgraham@bnr.ca         My opinions are my own.
From: mlee@post.RoyalRoads.ca (Malcolm Lee)
Subject: Re: Why? (was Re: THE MIND OF THE BIBLE BELIEVER)
Organization: Royal Roads Military College, Victoria, B.C.
Distribution: world,public
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 18:48:16 GMT


In article <C0JsEJ.635@acsu.buffalo.edu>, v22964qs@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Mike Cluff) writes:
|> In article <1993Jan8.044716.15942@julian.uwo.ca>, roberts@gaul.csd.uwo.ca (Eric Roberts) writes...
|> >In article <C0GqGn.CwF@acsu.buffalo.edu> v22964qs@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Mike Cluff) writes:
|> 
|> >Simply because he chose not to impose His will upon us. God gave us
|> >the right to choose to be with or without Him. He knew that people would
|> >sin and he told them that, as long as they repented, he would forgive.
|> >So what is the problem? Why should God force you to do something that
|> >you do not wish to do?
|> 
|> This would make sense to me if God's existence were clearer.  However, God
|> seems to like to "hide out" and play guessing games.  After all, the question
|> is not only whether or not we choose to be with him, but whether or not he
|> even exists at all!  So, one has to first *believe* in god's existence before
|> even deciding on being "with" him.  
|> 
|> As I've said before, if the stakes are so high, why doesn't he make his presence
|> absolutely certain to absolutely everyone?  If your reply to that is "but then
|> *everyone* would decide to follow god", realize that this is entirely my point.
|> Why the peek-a-boo games?
|> 
|> ******************************************************************************
|> For God so loved the world that He gave Man Free Will and then got pissed when
|> we didn't meet his arbitrary standards.  Oh, and he had his Son offed when he
|> realized how impossible those standards were.  -- Michael 4:23
|> ******************************************************************************
If God were to come down here and perform some miracles, would you believe?  If
were to feed five thousand people with only a few loaves of bread and two fish,
would you believe He is God?  If He were to raise the dead, would you believe
that He is God?  Well, Jesus did all of this, and still the people did not 
believe.  You would argue that maybe those people weren't hungry or maybe the
guy wasn't really dead.  He has done the miracles before mortal eyes, and still
they would not believe.  I don't think it would be any different especially in
today's skeptical age.
 
Why the peek-a-boo game?  Maybe to test our faith.  God exists on a spiritual
plane as well as the physical.  I have felt Him on that spiritual plane through
my prayers.  You cannot touch or see love but it is real nonetheless.  And God is
love.
From: psyrobtw@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Robert Weiss)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: 1/13/93   God's Promise in 2 Chronicles 7:14
Date: 13 Jan 93 02:40:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


	If my people,
	which are called by my name,
	shall humble themselves,
	and pray, and seek my face,
	and turn from their wicked ways;
	then will I hear from heaven,
	and will forgive their sin,
	and will heal their land.

	2 Chronicles 7:14
From: rpitts@cerl.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Isaiah does not prophesy Christ
Date: 10 Jan 93 20:01:38 GMT
Organization: Georgia Tech CERL/EE, Atlanta, Ga

In article <fXCznoq@quack.sac.ca.us> pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey) writes:
|In article <79251@hydra.gatech.EDU> 
|rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts) writes:
|>In article <fXwN2t9@quack.sac.ca.us> 
|pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey) writes:
|>>Judaism does not reject other religions or Gods. The LORD of the Hebrews
|>>is the only LORD - of the *Hebrews*. Judaism is not a conversion religion
|>>and there is no after death penalty or reward.
|>I think the Jews did convert people - they still do today.
|
|Yeah right. Are you talking about Jews for Jesus by any chance? There

No.  Converts to Judaism.

|was *one* incident of forced conversion in the entire history of Judaism

No one mentioned forcded conversions, but conversions.  However,
Jesus said the relious Jewish people of his day travelled far
to make a convert.

|and that was in Hellenistic Jewry which was far more Hellenistic than
|Jewish. You can't compare the history of Christianity and Islam to any
|other religion. Forced conversion is true evil and that's an absolute
|truth that escapes many Christians and Muslims, even today.

With respect to "forced", I'd agree it is not good, if at all worthy.

|>If there is no after death penalty or reward, why did Job say that
|>he would see God in his flesh?
|
|Context?

Job - OT.

|>To you or in Judaism, is there a life after death?  
|
|Is there a life before death?

Yes, but are you talking physcial, spiritual, or emotional, or what?

|>God is the God of the Living not of the dead.
|
|Hold that thought.

Ok.  I've been busy lately - so I'm not able to keep up with this
as much as I'd like.  I should be back to some degree by Wednesday 
or Thursday.

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
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Time: (was Summary, Trinity vs LDS View fo the Godhead)
From: $stephan@sasb.byu.edu (Stephan Fassmann, Software)
Date: 4 Jan 93 16:18:00 -0700
Organization: BYU

In article <17969@pitt.UUCP> geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks) writes:
>Subject: Re: Summary, Trinity vs LDS View fo the Godhead
>From: geb@cs.pitt.edu (Gordon Banks)
>Date: 4 Jan 93 17:36:02 GMT
>In article <Bzs8pv.AJz@acsu.buffalo.edu> bobweiss@acsu.buffalo.edu (Robert Weiss) writes:
>
>>	Not really. `Creator of all things' includes *time*.
>>	The LDS Jesus didn't create time.
>
>And you have some Biblical statement that God created time?
>I think the notion that God created time flows from philosophical
>idealism and not revealed religion.
>There are LDS who think God is outside time, incidentally,
>although I don't agree with them.  
>
>-- 
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>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
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------

One of my favorite quotes, though I have forgotten where it is from, is:
"Time was invented to keep everything from happening at once."
I really think that time is a man-made definition rather than a physical law,
mainly because we have set it up to be in coincodence with the approximate 
rotation of the earth. God, I believe, is more concerned about the 
circumstances of when something should happen, not it will happen on Jan 7, 
1994.
If we redefine time to mean "flow of the universe" or perhaps loosely 
"entropy" then we might be able to say if God is inside or outside of it.
Then I would say He is in it too, because if He is not in the flow He would 
be in stasis.

Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.pagan,alt.slack
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc


-somewhere in my files is the definition
-A fanatic is a person who redoubles his efforts
-having lost sight of the goal.

-Pyotr aka Peter D. Hampe : eka pyotr@halcyon.com

	Winston Churchill's observation:

	A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't
	change the subject.


	Raghu
Xref: sparky talk.religion.misc:25894 alt.atheism:25721
From: sperry2699@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism
Subject: Re: I feel threatened by Christianity...
Date: 11 Jan 93 22:17:50 -0600
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

> 
> i think that what Pat Robertson is doing is criminal
> and we shouldnt just ignore him. fortunately i am nowhere
> near the asshole and when his cultural revolution comes
> i certainly wouldn't want to be near his environs.
> -- 
> -- Pat Monardo
> -- pjm@cshl.org

Why is what Pat Robertson is doing criminal?  Sorry that you must lower
yourself to the use of those "colourful metaphors" to express your opinion
(a.i. "asshole").  


ECM

Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: muttiah@thistle.ecn.purdue.edu (Ranjan S Muttiah)
Subject: Re: Jihad in Islam (was Re:Islam Revealed #1
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 19:09:12 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.153815.17814@kth.se> d89-gsk@nada.kth.se (Gani Skepi) writes:
>In article <1993Jan10.204803.20891@noose.ecn.purdue.edu>, muttiah@thistle.ecn.purdue.edu (Ranjan S Muttiah) writes:
>|> In article <1993Jan10.130329.28120@kth.se> d89-gsk@nada.kth.se (Gani Skepi) writes:
>|> 
>|> Ok, do you agree then that Salmon Rushdie deserves the death sentence ?
>
>My personal opinion is yes. But there are a lot of other Muslims who wouldn't
>agree with me on this point.....

But what type of offense did Rushdie commit ?  Sure he wrote a lousy book that
I wouldn't spend a penny on.  But that is his right to express.  Why try to
kill someone for that ?  Where's the tolerance for other people in all
of this ??

>
>|> Who decides on what is evil and what is good ?  
>
>There can only be one answer from a religious perspective and that is God
>*alone*.

Yes, but MAN thinks he knows what G_d is saying.  I think there is even the
disclaimer that it is the revealed truth to Mohammed.  Isn't that a BIG
disclaimer ?

>|> 
>|> >In an Islamic state, it is the Caliph who orders jihad when certain
>|> >circumstances prevail.
>|> 
>|> How do you distinguish the political motives of this person ?  
>You can never know that to 100%.
>God has given us a brain to think with so it is ultimately up to each one of
>us to try and figure out if the Caliphs orders are in accordance with the 
>teachings of God. If the Caliph suddenly orders something which is not in 
>accordance with this then we shouldn't obey him.

That is the problem.  The Caliph has enough power to make sure that everyone
obeys him.  Want me to give you an example ?

>There can only be *ONE* God and it is to Him  *only* we submit ourselves 
>too....
>
>|>Do religion and politics mix freely in Islam ?
>
>Every society has a constituion and in a *true* Islamic society this constitution
>is the Laws in the Quran and the Sunnah. Whatever is decide in the frame of this
>is up to the people and the state. 

But the Quran was written many centuries ago.  Why do you want to institute
laws on people who want to live right here and now in the 20th century with
laws of days gone by.

BTW, I think you should answer my last question!  What happened to the
old religious philosophies in the middle east ??  According to a very close
historian friend of mine the govts. in a lot of the muslim countries
are laying waste to their old cultures 'cause it doesn't fit within an
Islamic framework.  What a shame.  Some of my most favorite philosophies
come (that the ancient Greek borrowed whole scale) from the era of Osiris
and Isis.  I will post something about that if I have the time.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.pagan
From: swaim@owlnet.rice.edu (Michael Parks Swaim)
Subject: Re: The meaning of "pagan"
Organization: Rice University
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 07:24:23 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.013543.8389@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com> billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
>This might have some meaning. I will have to check my Bibles. Maybe our
>scholar at Brown will comment on this - from primary sources - not the
>politically correct babbling (for the time) if the KJ version (which is
>frequently the basis for more recent versions.
  It's from the Revised Standard Version. According to the preface, most of
the Old Testament is based on Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. This is an
edition of the Hebrew and Aramaic text as current early in the Christian era
and fixed in the sixth to the nineth centuries by Jewish scholors of the
Masorete sect. (If you find this helpful, you're one up on me.)
-- 
Mike Swaim            | "101 Dalmations? Yeah I saw that."
swaim@owlnet.rice.edu | "You Did! REALLY? The same film?
Disclamer: I lie      | Let's stop driving! We must get out and jump
up and down and up and down and dance around and around!" Matt and Delerium
Xref: sparky talk.religion.misc:25967 alt.atheism:25788
From: mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism
Subject: Re: I feel threatened by Christianity...
Date: 12 Jan 93 13:48:43 GMT
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.
X-Newsreader: rusnews v0.98

sperry2699@iscsvax.uni.edu writes:
>In article <1993Jan11.214149.22353@netcom.com>, bskendig@netcom.com (Brian
> Kendig) writes:
>> He urged his audience to rally together
>> and fight the anti-Christian oppression.  He spoke highly of the fight
>> to put official prayer back into schools, 
> 
>There should be a time set aside for those who wish to pray. Possibly a break
>from the classroom. Is it so bad to have 20 min set aside for people to pray?

No, so long as we can have time set aside for those who wish to fuck, drink
beer, or sacrifice small animals to Satan.

Oops, looks like we ran out of time for lessons.

> There is a lacking of traditional family values in this country.

Perhaps you can tell us what traditional family values actually are.  I'd be
fascinated to know.

>> I'm worried.  What am I to do if much of this comes to pass?  I don't
>> want my children to be singled out by sitting quietly during a school
>> prayer, 
> 
> What's the difference?  Your kids don't have to pray if they don't want to. 
> Isn't that good enough?

Shall we have school orgies?  Your kids don't have to take part if they don't
want.

> Christianity is opressed in the U.S.

Yeah, right.  Only last week a kid was beaten up for being a Christian.


mathew
Date: Sunday, 10 January 1993 11:59:45 MST
X-Mailer: TMail version 1.16R
From: "D. C. Sessions" <dcs@witsend.tnet.com>
Organization: Nobody but me -- really
Subject: Re: God's math accuracy was The meaning of "pagan"
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Distribution: world

In <fXKMWZi@quack.sac.ca.us>, pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey)  wrote:
# 
# In article <1993Jan8.192559.29023@radian.uucp> 
# markbr%radian@natinst.com (markbr) writes:
# >In article <1ii275INN5b0@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> 
# ses2@po.CWRU.Edu (S. E. Stansfield) writes:
# >>If this is true, then how come his book says that pi = 3.0?
# >Aw, c'mon. 3 is perfectly good enough for a scientific approximation. The
# >order of magnitude is even right!
# 
# Exactly! As they say, one digit accuracy is close enough for God! If it
# doesn't fit, hammer it home. That's where the Stark Fist of Removal
# comes in handy. And don't ever contract a pink to put up aluminum siding
# on a round house, they can't do it, it's that one digit accuracy thing.
# Super Naturals and pinks have never done well on the SAT math section.
# On square houses however, their workmanship is seldom equaled. Some of
# the best aluminum siding on aluminum siding on adobe I've ever seen was
# done by pinks, with the aid of their Super Natural of course.

  Take a globe.  Measure the length of the 60th parallel.  Then
  measure the length of the great circle path from 60 degrees
  north 90 degrees west to 60 degrees north 90 degrees east.
  Divide.  Surprise!

  (The instructions say the the 'sea' is to be 30 around and 10
  across, which is a neat way to specify depth if you are going
  to beat the whole thing out.  Otherwise, one of the dimensions
  is redundant, and there's an exegetical axiom that God doesn't
  waste words.)

--- D. C. Sessions                            Speaking for myself ---
--- Note new network address:                dcs@witsend.tnet.com ---
--- Author (and everything else!) of TMail  (DOS mail/news shell) ---
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey)
Subject: Re: 1/3/92   God's Promise in Hebrews 9: 12
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: +1 408 249 9630, log in as 'guest'.
	<1993Jan5.225706.29552@ra.royalroads.ca> 
	<1993Jan6.024339.855@netcom.com>
Date: 6 Jan 1993 20:29:39 UTC

In article <1993Jan6.024339.855@netcom.com> 
bskendig@netcom.com (Brian Kendig) writes:
>mlee@post.RoyalRoads.ca (Malcolm Lee) writes:
>>God is not to blame for all the evils of this world. 

Of cOURse! It's the ChuRCh Lady!

>My point is that there's a lot of suffering in the world, and the very
>fact that God hasn't come down to end it clearly indicates that he
>CAN'T or he WON'T.  If he CAN'T, then why should we put all our faith
>in him to solve the world's problems?  If he WON'T, then why should we
>worship him at all?

Because, He (JHVH-1) is a SuperNATuraL with plans for us pidly humans.

>>And why bring God into the picture, well, he's the one who drew the picture
>>in the first place.
>Yes, but he died, didn't you hear?  He died shortly after he created
>the universe.  That's the only way to explain his absence throughout
>history.

Or He got bored and went off to some other UNIverse to play games. As
for the SuperNATuraL JHVH-1, He wilL return. Revelations is real,
Revelations is 100% accurate prophecy (proficy). The MARK OF THE BEA$T (UPC BAR
CODE) is HERE! NEVER buy any UPC product with plastic or cheque, use
cash only or steal it. Once you are recorded in a UPC transaction,
that's it. It's not easy breathing when The Great HOE of Babylon sits on
yOUR face! She'lL spend yOUR papes and use up alL yOUR plastic, push up
in the wrong one, end up in a casket. Yo X, she was yOUR girl? Yeah, I
had to dropper, she caught onto plastic and I just couldn't stopper.

Rev13:17 - And that no man might buy or selL, save he that had the mARK
(UPC), or the name of the bea$t (The Great HOE of Babylon), or the number of
his name (UPC). Here is wisdom: Let him that hath understanDINg count the
number of the bea$t: for it is the number of THE MAN; and his number is
Six hundred threescore and six (UPC).

The SuperNATuraL JHVH-1 awaits!

UPC-mon, where ya gonna run to, on that day?
Xref: sparky talk.religion.misc:25981 talk.politics.misc:67293
From: kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: How big _is_ Texas?
Date: 12 Jan 93 18:24:13 GMT
Followup-To: talk.religion.misc
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

In article <1993Jan7.214734.11466@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> lungtt@gus.ecn.purdue.edu (Terence T. Lung) writes:

> Kelley Miller:

>> You see, Kaldis, I neve made the claim that I was a good speller.
                      ^^^^

Of course not.  You can't make that claim.  The plethora of misspelled
words in your posts indicate otherwise.

>> You, in flaming me for a misspelling, show that you believe you are.

I do not merely believe I am -- I _KNOW_ that I am.  After all I was
the champion speller in my eighth grade class (when I took part in the
national spelling bee).  (I'm talking about the 8th grade in the whole
school, mind you [about 300 students], not just the 30 or so students
in the same classroom as me.)

> Be nice to bad spellers.  John Wilkes Boothe and Lee Harvey Oswald
> were bad spellers.

Hey, don't include me in those ranks.  I have been posting profusely
to USENET for 5 years now, and you can probably count all the
misspelled words I have ever posted during that period on the fingers
of one hand.  What Miller ascribes to misspelling on my part was
actually an error in _TYPING_.
-- 
The views expressed herein are   ||  Theodore A. Kaldis
my own only.  Do you seriously   ||  kaldis@remus.rutgers.edu
believe that a major university  ||  {...}!rutgers!remus.rutgers.edu!kaldis
as this would hold such views??? ||
From: lungtt@gus.ecn.purdue.edu (Terence T. Lung)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: How big _is_ Texas?
Date: 7 Jan 93 21:47:34 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <1993Jan7.203315.25224@news.ysu.edu> ae642@yfn.ysu.edu (Kelley Miller) writes:
>In a previous article, kaldis@romulus.rutgers.edu (Theodore A. Kaldis) says:
>>> Awwww....poor baby....he doesn't like the humor so he flames on the
>>> basis of a misspelled word.
>>> This idiot flames me for spelling, yet he can't spell a word right
>>> when he has a model a few lines above it...
>>
>>But at least I had the good sense to include alt.flame.spelling in the
>>distribution.
>
>But you still misspelled the word.  You flaming me on the basis that I have
>made a misspelling when you, in that flame, demonstrate that your own
>spelling skills are not superior, especially when you have the model for
>that word on the same screen.  This is what I find so amusing.
>
>You see, Kaldis, I neve made the claim that I was a good speller.  You, in 
>flaming me for a misspelling, show that you believe you are.

Be nice to bad spellers.  John Wilkes Boothe and Lee Harvey Oswald
were bad spellers.
From: psyrobtw@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Robert Weiss)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: 1/11/93   God's Promise in Psalm 37:25
Date: 11 Jan 93 02:53:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


	I have been young, and now am old;
	yet I have not seen
	the righteous forsaken,
	nor his seed begging bread.

	Psalm 37:25
Xref: sparky talk.religion.misc:25873 alt.atheism:25694
From: pjm@isis.cshl.org (Pat Monardo)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism
Subject: Re: I feel threatened by Christianity...
Date: 12 Jan 93 01:11:17 GMT
Organization: Cold Spring Harbor Labs

In article <1istr4INNge2@fido.asd.sgi.com> livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
>In article <1993Jan11.214149.22353@netcom.com>, bskendig@netcom.com (Brian Kendig) writes:
>>
>> I'm overreacting, I know, but just seeing Pat Robertson voicing a lot
>> of arguments so one-sided I'm surprised they don't fall over is bad
>> enough -- seeing him on TV, with the phones around him ringing off the
>> hook with people pledging money to support him, really got to me.  How
>> _dare_ he try to pass _himself_ off as the oppressed one!
>
>I don't think it's so much that you are over-reacting, as reacting in
>a particular way.

i think that what Pat Robertson is doing is criminal
and we shouldnt just ignore him. fortunately i am nowhere
near the asshole and when his cultural revolution comes
i certainly wouldn't want to be near his environs.
-- 
-- Pat Monardo
-- pjm@cshl.org
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism