HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: charless@sco.COM (Charlie Stross)
Subject: Re: Too Political?
Organization: SCO Technical Waffle and Blurb Department
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 11:12:22 GMT


In article <1992Oct13.174449.1811@bradford.ac.uk> S.S.B.Glover@bradford.ac.uk (SSB GLOVER) writes:
>
>PS what's all this about charlie stross only being 82% original?

Quote, unquote .... ;-)

-- 
Charlie Stross aka charless@scol.sco.com ..... UNIX oriented text mangler
WARNING: The opinions voiced in the preceding electronic document are the
product of a warped mind. Take two before meals. 
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: wcsa@cbnews.cb.att.com (willard.smith)
Subject: Re: Joseph a true latter-day prophet
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 1992 10:55:20 GMT


Damned if you do, or damned if you don't :-).

First Mark Fuller tries to tell us that the First Vision didn't happen. He
uses Wesley P. Walters as his principle source. The clash between Walters
and Backman is covered quite well in Marvin Hill's analysis of the
contraversay. But Hill points out a number of important things that Walters
just happens to forget to mention.  In short Hill accuses Walters of
starting with a conclusion, finding the evidence he needs to fit it, and
then formulating his arguments. The problem with Walters is that he allows
for no development in Joseph Smith's thought, and hold up a very
absolutistic model to which he is supposed to conform.  He always assumes
that the worst motives influenced him.  It is a cynical way of
interpreting history which Hill correctly labels "an anti-historical bias."

Then Mr Rose trys another tack, if you can't beat them, join 'um. Sure,
Joseph Smith had the First Vision, but instead of God, it was the devil
appearing as an angel of light. While Mr Fuller is talking history and
of the problems of interpreting the evidence, Mr Rose wants to talk about
things that cannot be verified historically, but must be left up to the
spirituality of an individual.

I happen to believe that Joseph Smith did not see the devil as an angel
of light, but what he saw was a manifestation of the love of God (if you
have ears to hear :-). This kind of knowledge is not based on what I can
extrapolate from the historical record, but from a personal spiritual
experience from God. How do you know that my experience is true? You don't.
And you probably won't (at the rate you're going) until you can go to Radio
Shack and buy a Holy Ghost Detector. :-)

BTW, if you are interested in the "historical evidence," then may I suggest
that you contact:

   Mormon Miscellaneous
   8865 South 1300 East
   Sandy, Utah  84092

And ask for a catalog of their reprint and response series.
-- 

              Willard C. Smith
  Oh God, Make my Words Palatable and Sweet, | att!cbnews!iwtgo!wcsa
   Because I Might have to Eat all of Them.  | wcsa@iwtgo.att.com
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: m23364@mwunix (James Meritt)
Subject: Re: Thebes (was: I'm God.)
Organization: MITRE Corporation, McLean VA
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 18:06:55 GMT

} Jim Merritt quotes my response to a Josh Mcdowell claim, that Thebes was
} be destroyed and never again had native rulers:
} 
} >> 7. Thebes-Memphis
} >> 	destroyed, no more native rulers
} >
} > Memphis is the old Egyptian capital city near Cairo.  It is where the
} > pyramids and Sphinx are located.  While I would not call it in any way 
} > a thriving city, it is definitely ruled by Egyptians.  
}> 
}> And continues with his admission that he got misled by the Greek's odd
}> naming of the upper-Egyptian sometimes capital as Thebes.  I must place
}> a mild objection against the style of "refutation" used in this case
}> against claims of prophecy fulfillment.  If one is going to honestly
}> note the extravagance of interpretation needed by sectarians to conclude
}> that their favorite prophecies HAVE been satisfied, one should be just
}> as careful on the other side.

I find it amusing that someone would complain about the style of a presentation
while misspelling the name of the one complained against.

Does the term "hypocrite" ring a bell?
From: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu (Ken Arromdee)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: "Evidence" for "Jesus" comes from believers
Date: 16 Oct 92 18:18:47 GMT
Organization: Johns Hopkins University CS Dept.

In article <1992Oct16.130020.25102@csrd.uiuc.edu> g-skinner@uiuc.edu writes:
>By the way, Kent, a claim and its inverse are not equivalent (check a
>math or rhetoric book for confirmation*).  As I noted, your "Chineese
>[sic] people" example relies on the inverse of Jesus' claim.

If you claim that people who search for God will have food and clothes, you're
making literally true claim.  But in everyday conversation, this sort of claim
implies not only that it is literally true, but that there is some
significance to the juxtaposition.

By making that claim, you are also making the _implicit_ claim that searching
for God makes a _difference_ in whether or not you get food and clothes.
This implicit clam is _false_, and all the counterexamples proposed, such as
a billion Chinese, certainly _do_ serve to disprove it.  (Of course, since
this is an implicit claim, you can always deny having meant it.  I would bet
you would look pretty silly doing so.)
--
"the bogosity in a field equals the bogosity imported from related areas, plus
the bogosity generated internally, minus the bogosity expelled or otherwise
disposed of."  -- K. Eric Drexler

Ken Arromdee (UUCP: ....!jhunix!arromdee; BITNET: arromdee@jhuvm;
     INTERNET: arromdee@jyusenkyou.cs.jhu.edu)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: press2@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (barry.o.olson)
Subject: Re: Is life too hard? or A Spiritual Exercise
Organization: AT&T
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 23:54:22 GMT
Summary: singing to the porcelin godess

In article <S5KMUK@MPLVAX.SRI.COM>, MSW@MPLVAX.SRI.COM (Mark S. Williams - Ag213) writes:
> 
> If life is too hard, sing HU, and ancient name for GOD. It's a love
> song to GOD. Do it like this: HUUUUUUUU....(pronounced like the man's
> name Hugh). It represents the love of GOD for Soul. And we are Soul.
> 
I've seen this. Many times when people have imbibed too much, they
can be found on the streets, in parks, in the bathroom, bedroom,
everywhere sing HUUUUUUUUU in hopes of feeling better. Sometimes it
works, and sometimes not.

(to the humor impaired and others: Sorry, I couldn't resist)
From: parker@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Fundamentalist shrink:a sting operation
Date: 8 Oct 92 07:56:23 EST

In <1992Oct07.011837.18632@microsoft.com>, John Scarborough writes in part,
>
> [Story of how jesus-worshiping fundie scumbags are ripping off patients
>  in their presumably tax-exempt hospital edited for brevity]
>
>   The "woods": my sister is in the closed ward of a fundamentalist
>funded hospital, where she is under treatment for suicidal tendencies....
>
>   She has been in the hospital now for close to three weeks.  The 
>hospital submitted a bill to my father (thru my sister's husband) after 
>two weeks:  $15,000 on top of the $7000 already paid.  At the $500/day 
>rate they originally quoted, they were billing for 44 days! The 
>psychologist's bill is $4000.
>
>   Having grown up in the same house with the same parents, I know the 
>allegations are outrageous and false.  I smell a sting operation, and 
>suspect they're just getting started....
>
>   I have heard of a group called "Fundamentalists Anonymous" who could 
>refer me to well-informed lawyers and psychologists, but have not been 
>able to locate them.  Does anyone know a contact or telephone number 
>for that group?
>
>  John Scarborough
>
     The most recent information I have is:

          Fundamentalists Anonymous
          PO Box 20324
          Greeley Square Station
          New York, NY 10001
          (212) 696-0421


+---------------------------+------------------------------------------------+
|        Gary Parker        |       E-Mail: parker@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com      |
+---------------------------+------------------------------------------------+
|                      Men make gods in their own image                      |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The views expressed are not necessarily those of the Allen-Bradley Company,|
| its parent company, or subsidiaries.  Your actual mileage may vary.        |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: slhw4@cc.usu.edu (Jason Hunsaker)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Mormons are not Christians
Date: 10 Oct 92 23:09:21 GMT
Organization: Utah State University

In article <1992Oct10.031759.27535@cbnewsd.cb.att.com>,
 press2@cbnewsd.cb.att.com (barry.o.olson) writes:
[...]
> Do you recall my posting what your prophets taught? It matters
> little to me what you believe. The important part is what the
> prophets(LDS) taught. 

So, it doesn't matter how actual Mormons interprete and
*implement* the words of their leaders.  What matters is how
non-Mormons interprete these same words.  Thus the non-Mormon
interpretation is the *only* correct way to understand Mormonism.
And the beliefs of actual Mormons are meaningless, irrelevant,
and non-representative.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Hunsaker  -|-  Logan, Utah  -|-  Internet: slhw4@cc.usu.edu
From: ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Bring On the Cases....
Date: 16 Oct 92 01:54:05 GMT
Followup-To: talk.religion.misc
Organization: Apple

In article <71237@hydra.gatech.EDU>, rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard
Pitts) wrote:
> In article <1992Oct14.141304.18904@wetware.com> drieux@wetware.com (drieux, just drieux) writes:
> |ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik) writes:
> |] > rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts) writes:
> |] > >Depends on the situation - I can see why one would not want a homosexual
> |] > >representing one's company.
> |
> |Please Do feel Free to Clarify this point at any time Richard.
> 
> I don't think a homosexual should be representing a group that 
> sees homosexuality as wrong (e.g., boy scouts) - a group that 
> teaches ethics to youth.

For your information, I don't want to boast about our company,
but we have extremely high requirements concerning ethics in business.
I read the requirements concerning ethics, and we have really few
internal rules (because we thrive on flexibility), but most of 
the internal laws are defined based on ethical business rules.

In addition we have had for a long time the rule not to discriminate
homosexuals as part of these high business ethics. In order words
your statement is not true, one could teach and strive for
high ethical rules. Even worse, discrimination of other people 
are against any ethical rules, unless the rules are originating
from ancient nomadic tribe rules. 

Cheers,
Kent
-------------------
Kent Sandvik (UUCP: ....!apple!ksand; INTERNET: ksand@apple.com)
DISCLAIMER: Private activities on the Net.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: ACUS10@WACCVM.SPS.MOT.COM (Mark Fuller)
Subject: Re: Mormons are not Christians
Organization: Motorola Inc.
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 20:40:11 GMT

From: slhw4@cc.usu.edu (Jason Hunsaker)
> In article <1992Oct15.202458.26857@newsgate.sps.mot.com>,
>  ACUS10@WACCVM.SPS.MOT.COM (Mark Fuller) writes:
> [...]
> > And, how did Eve become deceived?
> >
> > And the serpent said to the woman, Ye will not certainly die; but God
> > knows that in the day ye eat of it, your eyes will be opened,
> > and ye will be as God, knowing good and evil. (Ge 3:4-5)
>   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > And what is the luring promise of Mormonism?  that we may become Gods,
> > Just as God became God.
>
> "And the Lord God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us,
> to know good and evil: ..." (Genesis 3:22.)
>
> Seems to me that the lie Satan told was not "ye will be as
> God, knowing good and evil" but rather "ye will not surely die".

What?(!)  I qoute a verse saying 'will know good and evil',
and you qoute a verse saying 'know good and evil',  and then
you say:

   > Seems to me that the lie Satan told was not "ye will be as
   >God, knowing good and evil" but rather "ye will not surely die".

I think I can see it, if I close one eye and squint.

Mark
<standard disclaimer>
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: ACUS10@WACCVM.SPS.MOT.COM (Mark Fuller)
Subject: Re: Joseph a true latter-day prophet
Organization: Motorola Inc.
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 16:28:42 GMT

From: markwc@barney.esl.com (Mark Christiansen)
>>[...] Did he just make a little mistake in remembering
>>when his sister Lucy was born in his previous listing? [...]
>
>I failed to find the reference to a sister named Lucy in Robert's
>posting.  The closest I came was a reference to his mother, Lucy
>shown below:

        Smith begins by noting that he was born on December 23rd, 1805
in Sharon, Windsor county, Vermont. He indicates that his father moved
the family from Vermont to New York, and "in about four years after my
father's arrival in Palmyra, he moved with his family into Manchester in
the same county of Ontario." Interestingly enough, when he lists the
family members that moved to Manchester, he includes his sister Lucy,
who was born July 18, 1821, in Palmyra. He then immediately enters into
the discussion of the revivals in the Manchester/Palmyra area, and his
own resultant questions about religious truth. But note, that
he writes that these revivals broke out "some time in the second
year after our removal to Manchester." If Lucy was born in 1821, and
this revival took place about two years later, then so far we would have
Joseph Smith asserting that this revival in religion took place no
earlier than 1823, possibly as late as 1824. As we shall see, Smith's
story does not remain consistent on this point.

>or 4) Joseph Smith did not "see" God with the "flesh" (eyes) but in
>some kind of vision (dream).

And forgot about it for 14 years.  Anyone who examines *all* the
facts honestly, can only come to the conclusion that Joseph's story
of seeing 'the Father and Son' developed parallel to his concept
of a 'plurality of gods'.

Mark
From: v22964qs@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Mike Cluff)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: "Mr. Gomes, I've Re-Read My Bible"
Date: 15 Oct 92 14:37:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

topcat!tom@tredysvr.tredydev.unisys.com (Tom Albrecht) writes:

>                    "Mr. Gomes, I've Re-Read My Bible."
>                               by Gary DeMar
>
>                              What's a Right?
>
[...yawn...]

I've got a very simple solution to all this:  

If the Bible really says that homosexuality is immoral, it's simply wrong and
should be flushed down the Proverbial Toilet...  

There, now that wasn't so bad, was it?

******************************************************************************
Mike Cluff				*  "If something about the human	
v22964qs@ubvms or mike%luick@ubvms	*   body disgusts you, complain to
UB Language Perception Laboratory	*   the manufacturer." - Lenny Bruce	
******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: skinner@sp94.csrd.uiuc.edu (Gregg Skinner)
Subject: Re: Idaho
Reply-To: g-skinner@uiuc.edu
Organization: UIUC Center for Supercomputing Research and Development
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 92 15:43:05 GMT

Ken Arromdee made this observation:

>You don't have to believe in Idaho to buy a plane ticket there.  You do have
>to believe the Bible before you can use the Bible as evidence.  The Idaho
>evidence "comes from believers" in the sense that someone who doesn't believe
>in Idaho probably isn't going to sell plane tickets to go there, but not in
>the sense that you already have to believe in Idaho before plane flights are
>any good to you as evidence.

I agree that one must decide to believe the Bible before it becomes
testimonial evidence for Jesus.

In the same way, however, one must believe flight schedules before
"plane flights" can be any good as evidence for Idaho.  And flight
schedules that include Idaho are prepared by believers....
--
Gregg Skinner       I do not speak for any organization.
From: dsoconne@quads.uchicago.edu (Daniel S OConnell)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Religion in a nutshell.
Date: 16 Oct 92 01:41:06 GMT
Reply-To: dsoconne@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

dnvand02@uctvax.uct.ac.za (aka another t.r.m newbie) writes:

>Ok, it's time to wrap this religion debate up.
>
>Fact 1: If God exists, he is omnipotent.

Sez you.

>Fact 2: God refuses to prove his existance because proof denies faith,
>        and without faith he is nothing. (If you don't believe me, read
>        Douglas Adams.)

Sez you, skeezix.

>Fact 3: If God refuses to prove his own existance, he would also make
>        it impossible for a human to prove his existance, as this would
>        have the same effect (removing faith).

Strike 3, you're out.

>Therefore, either God doesn't exist or it is impossible to prove that he
>does. The only reason for believing that I have any respect for is 'because I
>have faith.'

Thanks for playing.

>-------------------------------------------------------------
>Control what you can control. Let everything else take a flying
>fuck at you, and if you must go down, go down with your guns
>blazing.
>-------------------------------------------------------------


Hey! What's so funny about peace, love, and understanding?

Dano
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey)
Subject: Re: Religious Roulette
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: +1 408 249 9630, log in as 'guest'.
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 03:36:10 GMT

In article <1992Oct15.011648.22998@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> 
brian@lpl.arizona.edu (Brian Ceccarelli 602/621-9615) writes:
>If the religion is true, and once you die and were . . .
>                       NOT Following It             Following It
>-------------------+------------------------+----------------------------
>Atheism            !    Nothing Happens     !      Nothing Happens      !
>-------------------+------------------------+----------------------------
>Pantheism          !                        !                           !
>    (New Age,      !    Go around another   !      Go around another    !
>     Buddism,      !    time.               !      time.                !
>     Hinduism)     !                        !                           !
>-------------------+------------------------+-----------------------------
>Monotheism         !                        !                           !
>  Christianity     !     You are in for     !      Eternal Life         !
>                   !     eternal torment    !      in Paradise.         !
>                   !     in hell.           !                           !
>-------------------+------------------------+-----------------------------
>    So what does atheism and pantheism have to offer?

Here Brian, let me make it easier for you:
If the religion is true, and once Brian dies and was . . .
Religion		NOT Believing		Believing
Brian's Christian sect	shit			Eternity with Penthouse Babes
All others		shit			shit

Looks pretty straightforward, don't you think?
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik)
Subject: Re: Idaho (criticism that "evidence" for "Jesus" comes from believers)
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1992 21:07:13 GMT
Organization: Apple
Followup-To: talk.religion.misc

In article <1992Oct12.210748.5350@csrd.uiuc.edu>, skinner@sp1.csrd.uiuc.edu
(Gregg Skinner) wrote:
> 
> ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik) writes:
> 
> >If we use this kind of mental argumentation, we might even wonder if
> >United States exist, because we rely on the testimony of Americans
> >and people that have either visited the place, or live here. In other
> >words this becomes just an absurd reasoning model.
> 
> I see that you have grasped my point.

I hope you have grasped my point as well, because we could take a
non-American,
fly him/her over to Idaho, and let him/her decide that Idaho is real.

While we can't do this simple exersize concerning a religion.

Kent
It is one of the superstitions of the human mind to have imagined that
virginity could be a virtue.  -- Voltaire
-------------------
Kent Sandvik (UUCP: ....!apple!ksand; INTERNET: ksand@apple.com)
DISCLAIMER: Private activities on the Net.
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: bunner@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Dana A. Bunner)
Subject: Re: QUESTION
Organization:  University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center
Date: 12 OCT 92 09:51:24    

In article <1992Oct11.033344.3874@math.utexas.edu>, mike@huevos.ma.utexas.edu (Mike Sullivan) writes...

>2) You (or someone) is reversing cause and effect. The Mormon religion is small
>and largely in Utah, which which happens to have a stable economy. Thus the
>Mormons look to be prosperous.  But its not necessarly because they are 
>Mormons.  This type of "reasoning" has been used to argue that Jewish people
>are greedy!  Its crap.

Just wanted to add a little information here.  At present less than 15% of the 
world-wide population of LDS lives in Utah.  By the turn of this century, it
expected this will drop to below 10%.  Also at present approximately 52% of
all LDS live in the United States.  This should drop below 50% within 3 years
as the vast proportion of current growth is taking place outside of the USA.

If current projections hold, then by 2010 only about 20% of LDS will live 
in the USA, and less than 6% in Utah.  The largest LDS populations will be
in South America, even now I believe Brazil has more than 50% as many 
members as currently living in Utah.  Also California has about 70% as
many members as Utah.

Likewise many recent Church converts are from the lower economic classes,
which results in a decrease in the average LDS "standard of living".

Note, I am not presenting this information as "proof" of the truthfulness
of the LDS position.  I see little correlation between growth/popularity 
and the truth of any issue.

Dana Bunner
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu (Eric Rescorla)
Subject: Re: I'm God.
Organization: Rescorla for himself.
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 20:19:55 GMT

In article <70498@hydra.gatech.EDU> rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts) writes:
>Agreed.  And we have Christianity spread thoughout the world.  It spread 
>from Jerusalem out rather quickly.  Within a few days of Pentecost there
>were 3,000 (Acts 2:41) and then 5,000 (Acts 4:4) believers within 
>Jerusalem.  
I don't BELIEVE Acts? Why should I? If I did, I would be Christian.
You're engaging in circular argument.

>|Well, Osiris rose from the dead, Mitras died weekly in the Mitras cult
>
>Where are their bodies today?   Jesus never died again - he is alive.
So you say. I could say similar things about Mitras.
With exactly the same sort of evidence.

-Ekr

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Rescorla, DoD#431 (Nighthawk S)              rescorla@rtnmr.chem.yale.edu
Former chemist now CM400 mechanic                 ekr@eitech.com(preferred)
   "Base 8 is just like base 10, really...if you're missing two fingers."