HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: salerno@ast.dsd.northrop.com (Peter Salerno)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,talk.politics.misc,rec.scouting
Subject: Banner!
Date: 3 Nov 92 17:33:45 GMT
Organization: Northrop Corp - ESD, Rolling Meadows, IL


 I thought some might like this from Reader's Digest July 92.  All four
stanzas of the Start Spangled Banner. Perhaps we should promote the forth
stanza more.

Oh! say, can you see, by the dawns's early light,
What so proudly we hailed at the twilight's last gleaming?
Whose broad stripes and bright stars, through the perilous fight,
O'er the ramparts we watched were so gallantly streaming?
And the rockets' red glare, the bombs bursting in air,
Gave proof thro' the night that our flag was still there.
Oh! say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave?

On the shore, dimly seen thro' the mist of the deep,
Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,
What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,
As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?
Now it cathcesthe gleam of the morning's first beam,
In full glory reflected, now shines on the stream:
'Tis the star-spangled banner. Oh! long may it wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore
That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion
A home and a country should leave us no more?
Their blood has washed out their foul footstep's pollution.
No refuge could save the hireling and slave
From the terror of filght, or the gloom of the grave,
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

Oh! thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand
Between their loved homes and the war's desolation,
Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the Heav'n-rescued land
Praise the Pow'r that hath made and preserved us a nation.
Then conquer we must, for our cause id just,
And this be our motto---"In God is our trust."
And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave
O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

  pete
  
 salerno@ast.dsd.northrop.com

#include std_disclaimers

Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: lungtt@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Terence T. Lung)
Subject: Re: Jesus is a Prophet, not Son of God
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 03:13:13 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.004839.6724@cs.yale.edu> rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla) writes:
>In article <1992Nov11.002823.3933@noose.ecn.purdue.edu> lungtt@gus5.ecn.purdue.edu (Terence T. Lung) writes:
>>...fragments of a copy
>>of the Gospel of Mark have been dated *by scientific methods* as having
>>been *copied* in *50* a.d.  In other words, the thing was well in
>>circulation by that time period.  These fragments are in the custody
>>of Professor Jose O'Callaghan at the Pontifical Biblical Institute
>>in Rome.  You can go date the fragments yourself.
>Please, post a peer reviewed paper that dates this document.
How does one post a peer reviewed paper on this thing?
I can do a literature search under "O'Callaghan" but you'll have
to wait or do it yourself.  In the meanwhile, you can look at
an article and its references in the Glendale News Press, Sat 15 April 1972.
United Press International (UPI), Louis Cassels.

>>The existence of the Coptic Orthodox Church in Alexandria, Egypt
>>(founded by John Mark himself) is a big blow to the above so-called
>  ^^^^^^^
>Allegedly founded....
This is well documented in Eastern Orthodox sources (mostly in Arabic).
The existing members of the Coptic Orthodox are presently being murdered
daily for their faith.  (A prominent Muslim who stood up in protest of the
violence, himself was assassinated in this same spree just last year.)
You suggest that the Coptics live on lies?  
For the present, you can look at A History of Eastern Christianity 
by Aziz Atiya.

Terence

>-Ekr
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,sci.skeptic,alt.censorship,alt.sex
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: A gender neutral pronoun, was Fundamentalist Nightmare
Organization: Homosexual Fascist Lobby, Rampant Paranoia Division
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 00:07:36 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.181642.17360@cs.mcgill.ca> troye@cs.mcgill.ca (Troy ENGLISH) writes:

>>>... the "PC" movement wants to change speech so it resembles "doublespeak"
>>>from George Orwell's "1984."
>>
>>Don't evade the question.  Why drag a nonexistent political entity
>>into the discussion if you can't defend your points yourself?
>
>What kind of rebuttal is this??? He was defending his points by using
>the 'nonexistent political entity' with which we are all familiar as an
>example to help explain his beliefs clearer.

He failed miserably, then.  I recognize no movement that denotes
itself "PC," and consider "the PC movement" to be a meaningless term.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /
From: agr00@ccc.amdahl.com (Anthony G Rose)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Mormonism
Date: 5 Nov 92 03:52:56 GMT
Reply-To: agr00@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com (Anthony G Rose)
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

In article <lfg03dINNr7k@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> farkas@qual.Eng.Sun.COM writes:
>
>
>
>In my response to Anthony G Rose I left out a response to the following:
>
>>Your own prophets say that if God has a body that he is limited to time
>>and space and thus _cannot_ be in more than one place at a time.  This is
>>as logical as it gets.  If this is the case, then how do you explain
>>what God does when a million people pray simultaneously?  This is the
>>logical problem with God having a body!
>
>I don't see the limitations, which you claim, to come with the physical body, 
>because it can be only in one place in any one given time.

Your arguement is not with me, but with your prophets and apostles.  They
said it, I just repeated it.

Likewise,
-t
Xref: sparky talk.religion.misc:20576 alt.slack:3025 alt.discordia:357 alt.pagan:12456 alt.conspiracy:11950
From: jlg@cochiti.lanl.gov (J. Giles)
Subject: Re: A gender neutral pronoun, was Fundamentalist Nightmare
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 21:25:31 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.015251.4376@newstand.syr.edu>, greeny@top.cis.syr.edu (J. S. Greenfield) writes:
|> [...]
|> But in any case, saying that someone is "crippled" happens to be very
|> different from calling someone "a cripple"--at least where I come from.
|> Where I come from, calling someone "a cripple" is an extremely perjorative
|> term.  What's more, I have yet to find someplace where it is not.

I have yet to find a place where is *is* considered perjorative
if it is a true characterisation of someone's physical state.
I know such people who are *very* angry about the mealy mouthed
euphemisms that are circulatimg about their conditions.  This
argument about whether to call someone `crippled' or `something-
challenged' is obviously an attempt by ignorant people to *appear*
caring without having to commit any *real* effort to the problems.

Yes, everywhere I go, calling someone "a cripple" whose physical 
health is normal *IS* considered perjorative.  So what?  In the
meantime, *real* cripples don't want your empty euphemisms.  Nor
do they necessarily want your pity - or even, necessarily, your
help.  What they do want is for you not to discriminate against
them in any respect which is unconnected with their disability.
Your euphemisms *DON'T* help in that regard.

-- 
J. Giles
From: pharvey@mipos3.intel.com (Paul Harvey)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: What is the soul?
Date: 6 Nov 92 23:19:05 GMT
Organization: money for sex, ring it up, it ain't no big deal

In article <HPcTTB8w165w@kalki33> kalki33!system@lakes.trenton.sc.us writes:
>pharvey@mipos3.intel.com (Paul Harvey) writes:
>> And what is true hypocrisy?
>> The setting up of religious standards for others is true hypocrisy.
>> Yudhishthira at the Lake of unquenchable thirst, Mahabharata (Hinduism).
>That is correct.

And ...

>No one but God can set up religious standards for others.

And God is a metaphor left to the student to decipher.

>That is why we follow God's scriptures rather than our own opinions.

If you ever find yourself to be failing, I think this is why. Metaphors don't
write. Now again, what is TRUE hypocrisy?

>In the scriptures, the soul is defined and the purpose of
>human life is given.

That is not the Krishna I know. Do we read the same texts?

>We cannot concoct whatever definition we like, nor
>can we manufacture a purpose for life. These things are already
>established by the Lord.

The best have all been humbled. I am not as enlightened as the best. I am
not the one. Worlds above and worlds below, no one in the world like me.

>In your post, we see a reference to "Hinduism", but the Mahabharata is
>not a "Hindu" book, it is a compiled history of this planet from very
>ancient times. The Mahabharata includes the Bhagavad-gita, which is a
>verbatim transcript of a conversation between Krishna, who is God, and
>Arjuna, who is Krishna's devotee. In this conversation, Krishna sets up
>religious standards for all human beings.

I doubt that. Perhaps you should study more. As for me, my Father is Dharma,
doing the right Spike Lee thang.

>He can do so, for He is the
>Lord. We are not the Lord, and so we simply follow what He has said.

I don't believe Krishna would be very pleased with what you say.

>      |  Don't forget to chant:   Hare Krishna Hare Krishna   |
>      |                           Krishna Krishna Hare Hare   |
>      |                           Hare Rama Hare Rama         |
>      |                           Rama Rama Hare Hare         |

Don't forget to think! Krishna is not the first Krishna nor the last. Krishnas
come amd Krishnas go like ants living in summer, oblivious of the coming death
of winter. Shiva's drum beats, ta-ta-da! ta-ta-da! ta-ta-da-ta-da-ta-da!
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,sci.skeptic,alt.censorship,alt.sex
From: heidi@ucthpx.uct.ac.za (Heidi de Wet)
Subject: Re: A gender neutral pronoun, was Fundamentalist Nightmare
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 13:36:04 GMT
Organization: Dept of Elec Eng, UCT

chak@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Buckshot Willie) writes:
>>In article <Bx5sH7.A6r@unix.amherst.edu> twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
>>>That no insult is consciously intended does not mean that none is
>>>present.
>>
>  If someone says something that unintentionally upsets, outrages, or
>otherwise violates what you find "right", then no insult has occured.
>One must try to insult someone.  Offense taken from an offhand remark
>is not the fault of the person that makes the statement.  It is the
>person that recieves and interprets the message incorrectly that is
>at fault.  An insult must be given, but offense can be taken from 
>anywhere.

Robert Mugabe, president of Zimbabwe, recently caused a national furore
by commenting along the lines that white farmers were as greedy and 
tight-fisted as Jews.  He intended "only" to insult the farmers in
question, but I don't see how anyone can deny that he was also
insulting Jews.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Heidi de Wet                                 >>>  FREE  TSAFENDAS  <<<
heidi@ucthpx.uct.ac.za                       and give him back his job
From: slhw4@cc.usu.edu (Jason Hunsaker)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Is there motivation for "talk.religion.mormon"?
Date: 5 Nov 92 22:27:13 MDT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <40517@sdcc12.ucsd.edu>,
 ph600fcy@sdcc14.ucsd.edu (Matthew Harrington) writes:
> So many of the articles here deal with the Latter Day Saints.
> Perhaps a group devoted to Mormonism should be created?  I certainly
> think that it would have more volume than one devoted to Quakers,
> which I see has recently passed.

Well, I proposed a Mormon specific newsgroup the last time
around.  It's been more than six months since the last proposal
was voted upon.

Some don't want the group.

Some Mormons want the group moderated.

Some don't want the group moderated.

Trying to satisfy all these concerns is likely to result in the
same failure that occured last time around.

If you want to avoid all of that, you could just go ahead and
create alt.religion.mormon or alt.mormon and then see what
happens.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Hunsaker  -|-  Logan, Utah  -|-  Internet: slhw4@cc.usu.edu
From: ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik )
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: God speaks
Date: 6 Nov 92 02:05:48 GMT
Followup-To: talk.religion.misc
Organization: Apple

In article <1992Nov5.174936.2863@newsgate.sps.mot.com>,
weaver@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Dave Weaver) wrote:
> ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik) replies:
> >Eh? I think Russell provided a very clear statement, 
> 
> Yes, very clear. However, you seem to regard this as a severe criticism.
> I think it would be very odd for the gospels to praise the characteristic
> of inherited mental capacity. Praise for effort and endeavor would be 
> something to expect from the gospels, but not praise for inherited traits.
> My point is that Russell's criticism is of little or no value. 

Well, as you know our current society praises intelligence quite
a lot. Smart people make money. Ph.D people know a lot and have 
made a career. I'm sure that this was the norm 2000 years ago,
and if someone deliberately toned down this 'inherited traits' issue
and pushed for the small people values, then he would certainly
get followers.

Anyway, back to Russell's comment. As we all know we are teached
(hopefully) in school to know when something is BS. Need I say
more...

Kent
-------------------
Kent Sandvik (UUCP: ....!apple!ksand; INTERNET: ksand@apple.com)
DISCLAIMER: Private activities on the Net.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik )
Subject: Re: God speaks
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 00:49:57 GMT
Organization: Apple
Followup-To: talk.religion.misc

In article <74174@hydra.gatech.EDU>, rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard
Pitts) wrote:
> We are encouraged to study to show ourselves approved - rightly
> handling the word of truth.  However, I personally don't think
> that college type training is required for one to be a teacher/preacher,
> if this is what you are talking about.  However, one is to study
> and an academic environment is a good place to attempt to do this.
> We (Christians) must remember that the Holy Spirit is our teacher
> and he guides us in all truth.  One should rely upon one's academic
> background in their ministry, but one should rely the Holy Spirit and 
> continue to learn as he teaches and leads us.  

Actually, the point I'm trying to make is that even if the Holy Spirit
guides Christians, it takes 3-6 years of constant training in most
cases to understand what this Holy Spirit thing really implies. In other
words we are not dealing with a natural system, such as learning how
to walk and talk, instead we need more indoctrination from early days
concerning making sure that people stay within the Christian world.

 
Kent
-------------------
Kent Sandvik (UUCP: ....!apple!ksand; INTERNET: ksand@apple.com)
DISCLAIMER: Private activities on the Net.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: God speaks
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 17:43:38 GMT

In article <73887@hydra.gatech.EDU> rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts) writes:
}Good point.  The Christian approach does not meritted high intellect
}else all would not be able to gain membership.  That is not to
}say intellect is to be despised, but I would say that it can keep
}the focus on your ability (i.e., man's ability, in general) and
}so keep you from focusing on God's ability.
}
}By all means, I believe Christianity contains the utmost in wisdom
}and power, if you grant us the fact (which really doesn't depend
}upon your grant, for it is true) that Our Saviour (Our God, Our
}Lord, Jesus of Nazareth) is the Creator of all that you see.  There
}is no small amount of intellect required for that.  Man's ability
}hasn't even come close to doing ANYTHING near that which God did
}through creation. 

Not exactly a consistent position:

ECC 1:18  For in much wisdom is  much  grief:  and  he  that  in-
creaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.

1 Cor.1:19: "For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and wil
bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent."
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: weaver@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Dave Weaver)
Subject: Re: God speaks
Organization: SPS
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 02:11:49 GMT

ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik ) writes:
>Note also how Jesus time after time uses parables based on the concept
>that those that think like children (in other words rely a lot on
>faith, instead of using introspection, something learned later and that
>is part of intelligent thinking) will enter the kingdom of God. I'm
>interested to hear how this interpretation would imply that intelligent
>children will end up in heaven as well. In other words, what's the
>Christian scope concerning 'act like children'?

In other words, what can you make of Luke 18:17 and Mark 10:15? 
Excellent question. I'll give you what I think the scope of that is:

Reformed theology acknowledges three components of saving faith. 
1. An understanding of the salvation plan.
2. A conviction that those events actually happened. 
3. Turning away from the old life, placing vital trust in the Savior.

They happen in order. (1) must occur prior to (2), and (2) before (3).
I think the teaching about a 'childlike' faith refer to element #3.
After one is intellectually convinced the events described in the plan
actually occured, some child-like characteristics are desirable for
faith component 3. Two that I can think of are dependance and trust.
A child is dependant on parents, and a Christian acknowledges total 
dependance upon the Savior, that he cannot earn it on his own. Children
are initially wary of strangers, but after they are sure you can be 
trusted, they will trust you completely. Jesus speaks of entering the
Kingdom like a child. Element 3 gains you enterance. 

---
Dave Weaver 
weaver@chdasic.sps.mot.com
---
Grammar and Challenges from Alt.Atheism 
"What FACT that you think that somebody called Jesus existed?"
   [I had a Jesus Alou baseball card. Does that count?]
From: rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: God speaks
Date: 6 Nov 92 17:48:03 GMT
Organization: CERL-EE, Georgia Institue of Technology

In article <1992Nov6.083227.27235@cs.tu-berlin.de> michti@cs.tu-berlin.de (Michael Tievenow) writes:
>In article <1992Nov2.065604.38338@cerl.gatech.edu> rpitts@cerl.gatech.edu
>(Richard Pitts) writes:
>
>>In Hebrews 1, we see that God IN TIMES PAST spoke through the prophets, but
>>IN THESE LAST DAYS HE SPOKE TO US THROUGH HIS SON, whom he has appointed
>>heir of all things, by whom he also made the worlds.

[some Mother Nature appeal and seemingly reverent use of Jesus name 
as baiting for the following - deleted.]

>Yes, Christ is our salvator. He will reach us. He want to guide us.

Jesus said the Holy Spirit was to come (and He has come) to teach us
and guide us into all truth.

>He want to help as, like a good Father. God sent the prophets to give
>the divine laws. The prophet lives on earth to serve God and the Lord as a 
>prophetic instrument. 
>At this time, our present time on this earth, God has called a new prophet,

You appear to contradict the above passage in Hebrews - Jesus was the
final one.  He finished the work and has sat down at the Father's right hand.

>a teaching prophet, to lead us closer to the Spirit of Truth and to knowing
>God within us. And so this prophet, Gabriele of Wuerzburg, Germany,
>is fulfilling what Christ revealed in John 16: 12-14: 
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>"I have many things yet to say to you, but you are not able to bear them at
>present. However when the Spirit of truth comes he will guide you into all
>the truth, for he will not speak of His own impulses, but things he hears
>he will speak, and he will declare to you the things coming."

Rather he and you are fulfilling the following:

    Matthew 24:23-27 (NIV)   At that time if anyone says to you, 
    'Look, here is the Christ!' or, 'There he is!' do not believe 
    it. {24} For false Christs and false prophets will appear and 
    perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect--if 
    that were possible. {25} See, I have told you ahead of time. 
    {26} "So if anyone tells you, 'There he is, out in the desert,' 
    do not go out; or, 'Here he is, in the inner rooms,' do not 
    believe it. {27} For as lightning that comes from the east is 
    visible even in the west, so will be the coming of the Son of 
    Man. 

Jesus commands:

    Luke 21:7-8 (NIV)   "Teacher," they asked, "when will these 
    things happen? And what will be the sign that they are about to 
    take place?" {8} He replied: "Watch out that you are not 
    deceived. For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am he,' 
    and, 'The time is near.' DO NOT FOLLOW THEM. 

>Michael T. and Peter Z.

I repeat DO NOT FOLLOW THEM.

For The Christ and His Kingdom,
Richard Pitts
-- 
rpitts@cerl.gatech.edu       |    
Atlanta, GA                --|-- 
                        -|-  |  -|-
                         |   |   |
From: kalki33!system@lakes.trenton.sc.us
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: What's your SIQ?
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 92 05:46:59 EST
Reply-To: kalki33!system@lakes.trenton.sc.us
Organization: Kalki's Infoline BBS, Aiken, SC, USA

keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith Allan Schneider) writes:

> >1) What is the soul?
> 
> There isn't one.

Question 1 grade: 0% (isn't one what?)

> 
> >2) What is the purpose of human life?
> 
> There isn't one.  Or, the purpose is to reproduce.  Or, the purpose
> is personal.  For example, my purpose is to learn as much about the
> things I find interesting as possible, and to otherwise enjoy myself.
> I have, however, no purpose imposed on me externally.
> 

Question 2 grade: 25% (simple "I don't know" would have sufficed)

Overall grade: 12.5%
Try again!

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)            |
       -------------------------------------------------------