HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: v22964qs@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu (Mike Cluff)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Cure the Believers!
Date: 18 Nov 92 21:53:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Nov18.173637.23791@cs.joensuu.fi>, asiivo@cs.joensuu.fi (Antti Siivonen) writes...
>mikel@Apple.COM (Mikel Evins) writes:
> 
>>On the other hand, you can't prove that I'm not Jehovah.
> 
>	If you were Jehovah, then you needn't use computer to tell me 
>	that. 

Ahh, but you weren't listening.  However, I was listening, and I received the
call.  You nonbelievers are all alike.

By the way, I'll be writing my memoirs on my visitation by the Archangel
Mikel...

******************************************************************************
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: alt.atheism
From: cdminter@icaen.uiowa.edu (Corey D Minter)
Subject: best argument for Theism, where is it?
Summary: I wonder where the best arguments for theism would be found?
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 06:49:00 GMT
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
Keywords: theism

Ok,  I have been atheist for a long time.  Recently I found this group and
pored through the FAQ and many of the posts (which were many).  I decided that
I have never formulated a crisp argument for my atheistism;  did I say I 
liked the concise FAQ.  I feel a little uninformed that I haven't studied
theology all my life, and can't point out the fallacies and inconsistencies
of theism (to be general).  My best gut feeling respnse to someone who would
challenge my non belief (though I have never really said this to someone, 
since it is not a good way to keep an otherwise good friendship) has always 
been "Oh, your just not able to cope with life's uncertainties, until you stop
clinging to your religious security blanket, that keeps you from seeing the
real world we live in, we will always be fundamentally different.  Don't you
see that it is even worse, your religion has even a negative effect on society
as a whole and impedes its progress."
    I would like to have anyone's advice on what the best works on theism
and religion are?  I plan to examine them carefully to make myself the most
informed that I can be.
-- 
==============================================================================
Internet: cdminter@icaen.uiowa.edu | Stimpy: "...what will happen if I push
  Q-Link: EarthsWake (was Chaos0)  |          the button"
===================================|    Ren: "Maaaaybe someting goooood...
Opinions expressed imply nothing   |          Maaaaybe someting baaaaad...
about my employer, why should they?|          But I guess we'll neeever know?"
==============================================================================
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld)
Subject: Re: The Supernatural And Science
Reply-To: hau4@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 18:02:59 GMT

>Scott Aaron typed:
>>In the past few decades, scientists have observed evidence for universal
>expansion which leads to the Big Bang model for cosmology.  This model predicts
>>the existence of the microwave background which has been observed so that
>>there is evidence for the model.  Now suppose a hypothetical god actually
>>created the universe 10,000 years ago and created it such that the universe
>>appeared to have evolved from a Big Bang event.  Does this change the
>>observations or the fact that the Big Bang model explains well the observations
>>No.  The universe still appears to have evolved from a Big Bang event 15
>>billion years ago (actually somewhere between 10 and 20 billion) and is
>>nicely modeled by the theory.  Lest this become like the discussion I've been
>>having with Mr. Copelan, I must stress that I'm not advocating any
>>particular religious view on the creation (the god I mention is hypothetical).
>
>>So, the strong assumption you mention above is unnecessary.  Please take the
>>time to criticize anything here or in the previous post.  I want to discuss
>>this because I enjoy it.

Here is THE TRUTH :)

God created the Universe exactly one minute ago. He created it in such a
shrewd way that all physical observation yields such results that it APPEARS
that the beginning of the Universe was in a Big Bang some 10 billion years
ago. He also created us and implanted memories of our "pasts" in our brains.
It only APPEARS to us that we have witnessed events from years ago - it is
all God's work done at the moment of creation. He also created many things
around us that APPEAR to be products of human work. Some of them even APPEAR 
to be created by the person observing them, and even correspond with their
'memories', but it is, of course, just another proof of God's omnipotence.

This is impossible to refute and unlike most established religions doesn't
suffer from inconsistencies.

	Sven

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld)
Subject: Re: Judiasm in an atheist
Reply-To: hau4@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 1992 22:50:42 GMT

In article <gf3S60q00WBL48ptEg@andrew.cmu.edu> "Jordan M. Wolbrum" <jw67+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>
>I enjoy celebration and family unity(who doesn't) and feel that as an
>atheist, I shouldn't be excluded from those joys.  My parents have
>always stressed that they are "observant" not "religious" and I do think
>that there's a major distinction.  Perhaps mere reading of Biblical text
>does not stress education and family unity, but a mere glance at Jewish
>culture shows this explicitly.  I am proud to be a Jew, just as I am
>proud to be an atheist.  Even if I choose to relinquish the religion of
>my roots, I cannot relinquish my blood.  I talk about "Jewish blood" as
>if it is a tangible thing, but I am speaking metaphorically.  
>When I have my own children, I will celebrate the holidays I choose to
>celebrate.  Surprisingly, I want to celebrate Christmas, even though I
>completely disbelieve any divinity of Christ, because I feel it is a
>tremendously beautiful experience(musically and artistically).
>Any comments?

Celebrating doesn't hurt - so why not?

	Sven
From: johnsd2@vccnw04.its.rpi.edu.its1 (Daniel Norman Johnson)
Subject: Re: Prophecies And Word Games
Reply-To: johnsd2@vccnw04.its.rpi.edu.its1
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 18:47:24 GMT

In article 7715@midway.uchicago.edu, hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld) writes:
>In article <9211221405.AA05422@inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com> I3150101@DBSTU1.RZ.TU-BS.DE (Benedikt Rosenau) writes:
>>
>>Humpty Dumpty again. It said the *name* would be immanuel, nothing more -
>>nothing less.
>>
>>Your use of the bible as a Rorschach groups you among the semantically
>>impaired.
>>   Benedikt
>
>Unfortunately, you are wrong, Benedikt. Arguably, that is the way 
>the Bible was *intended* to be used.
>
>	Sven
>

Oh? You mean you are SUPPOSED to bend the words of the Bible to
your own purposes? (well, the purposes of the New Testament if you like)

If thats true, then you can "correctly" say anything you want with it-
just bend it a bit. Or a lot, as in this case. (the prophecy said,
did it not, that his mother would name him Immanuel, right? That's
how I remember it anyway. Saying that the translation of Immanual
matches the character of Jesus makes this true is a rather big bend
imho)

---
			- Dan Johnson
And God said "Jeeze, this is dull"... and it *WAS* dull. Genesis 0:0

These opinions have had all identifiying marks removed, and are untraceable.
You'll never know whose they are.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: rolls@cis.umassd.edu (Frank Pinto)
Subject: Re: ...and Puppies! (WAS:Re: Kittens!)
Organization: University of Massachusetts Dartmouth
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 06:36:59 GMT

In <1992Nov21.021807.22347@midway.uchicago.edu> hau4@ellis.uchicago.edu (sven  hauptfeld) writes:

>One beautiful spring Sunday, Father O'Malley took a walk trough the park. The
>Sun was shining, the skies were blue, the flowers were blooming in rainbow
>colors... and everything was merry.

>Father O'Malley saw a little girl playing with her puppy. With a friendly
>smile on his face, he approached the cute kid:

>"What is your name, my dear child?"

>"Blossom," the girl replied, her blue eyes widely open.

>"That is such a beautiful name! How did you get it?" Father O'Malley asked,
>admiring the child's innocence.

>"While my mother was praying to God to give her a little daughter, a blossom
>fell on her hair. So she said she would call her daughter Blossom."

>"How beautiful that God was so good to your mother" - exclaimed Father O'Malley
>in delight - "and what is your puppy's name?"

>"Porkey." Said the girl in her cute voice.

>"And how did he get that name?"

>"He likes to fuck pigs."


>	Sven

Wtih all due respect Sven, I desagree with you.
As an atheist I feel that you should make your point
in a gracious, justified, logical and diplomatic way.
Don't bring your self down by demening any one, or 
anyones' belief. This was a joke in very poor taste.

Sincerely
From: David.Rice@ofa123.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Allah's not making water today
Date: 16 Nov 92 14:31:18 GMT
X-Sender: newtout 0.02 Nov  5 1992

>RV> In a village in the Punjab Province of Pakistan, a man (who didn't
>RV> happen to be Moslem) was standing in the town square near a public
>RV> water tap, over which was an inscription that mentioned Allah. Two
>RV> Moslems tried to fill buckets at the tap, but it didn't work, they
>RV> asked rhetorically, "What's wrong with the tap?"
>RV> The man quipped, "Perhaps Allah isn't making water today."
>RV> He was executed yesterday for blasphemy under a new, stricter, law.
 
CB> is this anecdotal? an urban legend? or for real? source, if you
CB> still have it, please.
 
R> "For real. On 2 November BBC NewsHour (at 1300 UTC) had a large
R> item on it, including a telephone interview with the man's lawyer
R> in Lahore. Since it was on the radio, I didn't get the spelling
R> of the man's name, or that of his lawyer, or the village.
R> According to the lawyer, such an offense had been punishable with
R> life imprisonment under the previous law and this was the first
R> conviction since the new law making it a capital offense took
R> effect. The execution took place Sunday, which was the same day
R> that Iran announced an increase in the bounty offered for Salman
R> Rushdee.
  
When folks in North America tell me "This is one nation under God," ala George 
Bush, I tell them if they want to live in a nation under God, they can damn
well move to Iraq.

--- Maximus 2.00
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: ***Fatima***
From: G.A.Arias@massey.ac.nz (G A Arias)
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 02:36:13 GMT
Organization: Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand
X-Reader: NETNEWS/PC Version 2c

After reading in this group something concerning to Fatima, I went
to the nearest library to find out more about it. I was overcome
by joy when I read about it. I read almost everything. the Virgin's
message is lovely but I found her quite strict. Anyway, it was almost
the library closing time, I was absorbed by the book when I saw it! I saw
some flashes among the shelves but I couldn't see much. I tell you one
thing: I was not poisoned. Could it be a miracle? 
I'm new in this group so I couldn't read all the postings related
to Fatima... therefore, I'd appreciate any information about it. I'm one 
of the fan club now. Send it to my address or to the group. Thanks.

G.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik )
Subject: Re: who has the open mind
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 06:52:46 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Apple
Followup-To: alt.atheism

In article <1ems59INNqv9@uwm.edu>, randyd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Randall Elton
Ding) wrote:
> Now I was raised in a christian family (sigh) and attended all the
> religious schools (arrg) and think I understand the issues pretty well.
> What RIGHT do they have telling me I don't have an open mind.  My dear
> brother also gives me that crap.  Just to get out of a stupid argument
> I tell him "No, I don't have an open mind, now just leave me alone".

I've noticed this trend as well during long discussions on this Net.
Some (not all) Christians use the weapon of non-understanding as a
way to point out why they are right and you the opponent is wrong.
It does not matter that the opposite end has had a 5-10 year
upbringing in a Christian family and church. You are always
ignorant if you don't faithfully believe the doctrines. 

Anyway, we had some time ago an interesting discussion what 
an 'open mind' comprises of. One attribute might be playing
devil's advocate to find out possible flaws. Anyone not daring
to do this would have a less open mind, IMHO.

Kent
-------------------
Kent Sandvik (UUCP: ....!apple!ksand; INTERNET: ksand@apple.com)
DISCLAIMER: Private activities on the Net.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: I3150101@DBSTU1.RZ.TU-BS.DE (Benedikt Rosenau)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: One Set Of Superstitions Vs. Another
Date: 20 Nov 92 18:42:01 GMT
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA13042; Thu, 19 Nov 92 15:37:40 -0800
X-Received: by inet-gw-1.pa.dec.com; id AA01131; Thu, 19 Nov 92 05:22:27 -0800
X-Received: from DBSTU1 by DBSTU1.RZ.TU-BS.DE (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
   with BSMTP id 0705; Thu, 19 Nov 92 14:21:55 MEZ
X-To: alt.atheism.usenet

Theodore Kaldis typed:

>> The New Tesament CANNOT be reconciled with what you refer to as the
>> 'Old' Testament, and I refer to as the Bible.  The whole idea of the
>> New Testament was that the OT was replaced, not augmented.

>Nonsense!  The Old Covenant was neither replaced nor "augmented", but
>rather fulfilled -- fulfilled by a Jew of Nazareth named Jesus.

>> I am a Jew.  As a Jew, I have no use for, or interest in Jesus or
>> Christianity.

>Rather, ignorance and misinformation seem to be your specialties.
(and rambles on)

Your hate mongering interreligious strife does not belong on alt.atheism.
Time again to judge religion by its fruits,
   Benedikt
From: bobbe@vice.ICO.TEK.COM (Robert Beauchaine)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Circumcision (was Re: God Is Unfair)
Date: 20 Nov 92 21:18:25 GMT
Organization: Tektronix, Inc., Beaverton,  OR.

In article <1992Nov20.203317.27342@watson.ibm.com> strom@Watson.Ibm.Com (Rob Strom) writes:
>In article <10811@vice.ICO.TEK.COM>, bobbe@vice.ICO.TEK.COM (Robert Beauchaine) writes:
>
>|> 
>|>   Thank you for inserting the word ritual; that's all it is.  Ritual
>|>   mutilation.  The AMA also has a word for practices on children
>|>   that 
>|>   1.  cause pain
>|>   2.  have no medical benefit.
>|> 
>|>   It's called abuse.
>|> 
>|>   (BTW, I include ear piercings in that category if the child does
>|>   not choose to have it done.)  But that's just one circumcised
>|>   gentile's opinion.
>
>Can you document this??
>
>I am skeptical that the AMA lumps performing medically
>unnecessary procedures --- e.g. cosmetic surgery, or
>religious rituals like circumcision --- with child abuse.
>I'd like a source.

  No, I can't provide a source.  If I implied that the AMA listed
  ritualistic mutilation as child abuse, then I erred.  I used an
  off the cuff, common sense definition of abuse.

  How about this question:  My religion requires the removal of one
  finger from the hand of young infants of both sexes.  Given that:
  someone w/o a finger can function perfectly normally in life
  (except perhaps when buying gloves), the pain will certainly
  subside and the youngster will probably have absolutely no
  recollection of the event: 

  Should I be allowed to perform this ritual on my children?  If
  not, how is this fundamentally different than circumcision?


/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ 

Bob Beauchaine bobb@vice.ICO.TEK.COM 

"Look, I tried the cat experiment.  On the third trial, the cat was
dead.  On each of the subsequent 413 trials, it remained dead.  Am I
doing something wrong?"
			James Nicoll

Q.  How many Heisenbergs does it take to screw in a light bulb?
A.  If you know the number, you don't know where the light bulb is!
From: kmr4@po.CWRU.edu (Keith M. Ryan)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Cure the Believers!
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 13:36:25 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University
NNTP-Posting-Host: b64746.student.cwru.edu

In article <j1moody-161192032049@lafmacconsultant.lafortune.lab.nd.edu> j1moody@darwin.cc.nd.edu (Humpty Dumpty) writes:

>Many cases of chemical dependency are the result of the person's searching
>to fill the spiritual void within us all that no amount of TV, food, sex
>or any other created thing can fulfill. It's a really sad state of affairs
>when someone calls the concept of believing in a higher Source a "disease."
>From someone who has found completion in coming to know my Creator, please
>don't catagorize a very significant thing in my life and the lives of
>millions as a disease.

	Do I sense denial? 

	The main reason for people on "chemical dependencies" ( I assume you 
mean non-medical drugs, and not meaning any kind of vitamin etc, which you 
were rather careless to include ), IMHO, is they are weak of will. They do 
not have the willpower to stay off. Taking drugs requires voluntary actions, 
they conscious make a choice to do drugs. Many need to fill this lack of 
strength by the belief in an exterior god. Illness? I'll say so.

>The only disease worse than the abuse of religion or
>the ignorant condemnation of religion.
	
	What is the only disease worse than the abuse of religion or the 
ignorant condemnation of religion? Please tell us.
	
>Lord knows how many times I tried to fill my void with everything else.

	Why to you need to fill your void with something other than your- 
self? Why do you feel a need to be inable to cope with yourself? Why do you 
need exterior crutches? Why do you lack the power within yourself ot cope?
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: MANDTBACKA@FINABO.ABO.FI (Mats Andtbacka Ktf92)
Subject: Re: Fundamentalist Nightmare
Organization: Unorganized Usenet Postings UnInc.
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 15:07:15 GMT
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24

In <cLwmuB14w165w@kalki33> kalki33!system@lakes.trenton.sc.us writes:

> sieferme@stein.u.washington.edu (Eric Sieferman) writes:
>> Where in the Bible does it say that animals do not have souls?
>> For that matter, where in the Bible does it say that humans
>> DO have souls, and where is the nature of the soul described?
> 
> The nature of the soul is thoroughly described in Bhagavad-gita and many
> other Vedic scriptures. The fact that humans (animals and plants too)
> have souls is also stated in the Vedas.

      One: Who was talking about the Vedas here?

      Two: How can you PROVE that the vedas (or any similar religious
texts) are, in any real sense, correct - in any of their statements?

      Three: Since the "Holy Bible" is, supposedly, the one and only
Word of God (tm), how do you resolve the conflicts between it and the
Vedic scripts?

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

      Oh, and don't forget to chant: 	Press K for Kalki
					Press K for Kalki
					Press K for Kalki...

-==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==--==-
           ..`Opinions'? What's that, mom - some new kind of dessert?
"Every day for us, something new / Open mind for a different view /
 And nothing else matters..."       -----       Metallica
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: madhaus@netcom.com (Maddi Hausmann)
Subject: Re: Jesus Saves
Organization: Society for Putting Things on Top of Other Things
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 22:06:00 GMT

A marquee in front of a church reads: "Jesus Saves."

And, at the supermarket across the street, a bigger sign:
"Safeway Saves You More."

-- 
Maddi Hausmann                madhaus@netcom.com
Humorist, Satirist, Tech Writer.  Take your pick.

Centigram Communications Corp, San Jose California  408/428-3553
From: bskendig@netcom.com (Brian Kendig)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: PROOF OF GOD
Date: 17 Nov 92 02:29:46 GMT
Organization: Starfleet Headquarters: San Francisco

jcopelan@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (The One and Only) writes:
>In article <1992Nov16.155216.6484@sun0.urz.uni-heidelberg.de> y41@aix320b.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (Jeffrey Hazelwood) writes:
>>     Well, enough nonsense about God. Since everyone seems to have run 
>>out of clever arguments I think it's time to search for God.
>
>God is a great Mystery.
>This is why I became an Atheist, I am not a big fan of mysteries, I'll
>take a good sci-fi over a mystery any day.

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy says this about the Babel fish:

"Now it is such a bizarrely improbably coincidence that anything so
mind-bogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some
thinkers have chosen to see it as a final and clinching proof of the
NONexistence of God.

"The argument goes something like this: 'I refuse to prove that I
exist,' says God, 'for proof denies faith, and without faith I am
nothing.'

"'But,' says Man, 'the Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it?  It
could not have evolved by chance.  It proves you exist, and so
therefore, by your own arguments, you don't.  QED.'

"'Oh dear,' says God, 'I hadn't thought of that,' and prompty vanishes
in a puff of logic.

"'Oh, that was easy,' says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove
that black is white and gets himsellf killed at the next zebra
crossing."

-- 
_/_/_/  Brian Kendig                             Je ne suis fait comme aucun
/_/_/  bskendig@netcom.com                de ceux que j'ai vus; j'ose croire
_/_/                            n'etre fait comme aucun de ceux qui existent.
  /  Nolite te bastardes     Si je ne vaux pas mieux, au moins je suis autre.
 /  carborundorum.                                               -- Rousseau
From: bcash@crchh410.BNR.CA (Brian Cash)
Subject: Re: God Is Unfair (?)
Reply-To: bcash@crchh410.BNR.CA (Brian Cash)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 06:00:40 GMT

From: strom@Watson.Ibm.Com (Rob Strom)
>But I disagree about the lesson about arguing with God.
>God is like an upper bound:  if it's OK to argue with
>God on a matter of principle, then it's OK to argue
>with *anyone* --- your boss, your President, etc.  It
>means don't be passive in the face of injustice.
>Of course, it doesn't mean that you can do what
>you please and argue for it.
>
 
So you do what YOU feel is "right"?  Why go through God, then?
Why not just use your oun sense of justice?
(Which would still mean that you can't just do what
pleases you. -- ex. You would love to get some money, but
stealing isn't right.)

>But if God told me to destroy Amalek, I would argue.

You're wiser than Abraham was!

Brian /-|-\
From: D.J.Butcher@newcastle.ac.uk (Dave Butcher)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Cure the Believers!
Date: 20 Nov 92 18:42:25 GMT
Organization: Computing Laboratory, U of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK NE1 7RU.


In article <1992Nov18.173637.23791@cs.joensuu.fi>, asiivo@cs.joensuu.fi (Antti Siivonen) writes:
>mikel@Apple.COM (Mikel Evins) writes:
>
>>In article <1992Nov16.174430.2817@cs.joensuu.fi> asiivo@cs.joensuu.fi (Antti Siivonen) writes:
>>>simon@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Simon Clippingdale) writes:
>>>>Readers of talk.origins will be aware that deploying logic against him
>>>>is futile, and that he is best regarded as a source of sheer entertainment.
>>>
>>>	I can entertain you, but you can't prove me false. 
>
>>On the other hand, you can't prove that I'm not Jehovah.
>
>	If you were Jehovah, then you needn't use computer to tell me 
>	that. 
>-- 
>
>		Andreas - Siperian Sirri   Siberian Stint
>
>	No ITU, love, evolution.           Tuusniemi ! Siis imein suut !

He doesn't need to, but is perfectly capable and entitled to choose to use
a computer to tell you.

Dave.
Nb.- Witty Quote goes here.

	D.Butcher@ncl.ac.uk
Newsgroups: alt.atheism