HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cc_paul@rcvie.co.at (Wolf Paul)
Subject: Re: *Jesus of Nazareth*
Reply-To: cc_paul@rcvie.co.at (Wolf N. Paul)
Organization: Alcatel Austria - Elin Research Center, Vienna
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1992 15:51:08 GMT

I would have replied to this by e-mail, but this does not seem to
be a personal account. I will not respond to any follow-ups here, since
I know it is perceived as irrelevant here, but am willing to discuss
this further by mail.

In article <1992Oct6.203345.23169@cmcl2.nyu.edu> memco@cns.nyu.edu writes:
>objects. Christians, along with conveying deityship on Jesus,
>also describe him as fully human. If, as they say, he was killed
>to "wash away the sins of mankind", wouldn't this fall into
>the category of human sacrifice?

He was not "killed" to wash away sins, he died, and that had the effect
of atoning for sin. Those who directly caused his death did so for
mostly political reasons and were not thinking of sacrifice in the
theological sense; however, many actions have *unintended*
effects.

>2)	There has also been some suggestion that Jesus went
>willingly (to some extent) to the cross specifically to
>"wash away" said sins. Wouldn't this be considered suicide?

Submitting to the inevitable can hardly be called suicide, can it now?

>3)	Finally, when Christians consume the host and drink the
>sacremental wine, at the moment they enter the mouth, they are
>supposedly transformed into the actual body and blood of Jesus
>respectively. Isn't this cannibalism?

Firstly, only a part of Christendom (Roman Catholic) believes in
"transsubstantiation"; they believe that this takes place as the priest
pronounces the appropriate parts of the liturgy, not as the communicants
participate of the elements.

Secondly, it is evidently not a **physical** or **chemical** change;
As every Catholic can tell you, the stuff is still a wafer and wine -
tastes the same, smells the same and looks the same.

>I'm honestly not trying to be provacative. Every time I think
>on these issues (which isn't often) these are the interpretations
>I come up with.

I hope to have clarified your thinking somewhat; I don't feel provoked.
Sorry I cannot give you a Jewish theological perspective -- and it
would hardly be welcome from an Evangelical Christian.

> I'm also thinking of posting this to
>some Christian newsgroup to hear their interpretations.

Well, you heard one, trying to be objective.

>---
>memco@wotan.cns.nyu.edu

Let me know who you are if you want to continue this discussion in
private.

Regards,

Wolf
-- 
            V              
+-----------------------+  Wolf N. Paul, Computer Center         wnp@rcvie.co.at
|  A  L  C  A  T  E  L  |  Alcatel-Elin Research Center     +43-1-391621-122 (w)
+-----------------------+  Ruthnergasse 1-7                   +43-1-391452 (fax)
      ELIN RESEARCH        A-1210 Vienna-Austria/Europe        +43-1-2246913 (h)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: shteingd@dione.math.ucla.edu (Semion D. Shteingold)
Subject: Jesus
Reply-To: shteingd@dione.math.ucla.edu (Semion D. Shteingold)
Organization: UCLA, Mathematics Department
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 92 19:09:56 GMT

Excuse, me please, but as I remember
Mashiah will be born on tish'be'av, not in december.

Am I right?

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: shimoff@umbc4.umbc.edu (Eliot Shimoff)
Subject: Re: Intermarriage
Organization: Univ. of MD, Baltimore County
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 17:19:25 GMT

In article <92123@netnews.upenn.edu> weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) writes:
>In article <1992Oct8.124259.19474@umbc3.umbc.edu>, shimoff@umbc4 (Eliot Shimoff) writes:
>>Just to clarify a central (but not explicit) point about the Jewish
>>view of intermarriage.  Orthodox traditions -- and, to the best of
>>my knowledge, Reform, Conservative, and Reconstructionist traditions --
>>are NOT opposed to interracial or intercultural marriage.
>
>While this is true, there used to be a long history of a pecking order
>among American immigrant Jews and their children.  It had Yeckies (aka
>Germans) at the top, and Litvaks somewhere near the bottom, but I never
>did learn the particulars.  Marrying down the pecking order was treated
>as a catastrophe in many families.

You are, of course, correct.  And such biases exist today.  A Stamar
boy and a Bobover girl?  A Bobover girl and a Brooklyn mitnagdisher 
boy.  A Burro Park mitnagdisher guy and a Riverdale girl?  YU Torah
u'Mada fellow falls in love with Torah v'Daat (v'Daas?) girl?
Litvak marries Galitzianer?

But the opposition is not religious, but cultural.  (Kinda like
a C coder falling for a COBOL programmer.)  Clearly, these differences
are not of the same stature as interfaith marriage.




-- 
Eliot Shimoff                  |    n   n   n
   shimoff@umbc3.umbc.edu      |   X + Y = Z .  Easy to prove no solutions
Ashamnu, bagadnu, gazalnu ...  |   for n greater than 2.  Darn.  Can't fit
Better luck next year!         |   it into this little .sig file.  Oh well.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.jewish:17775 soc.culture.polish:3211
From: roman@hri.com (Roman Budzianowski)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,soc.culture.polish
Subject: Re: On Polish Anti-semitism
Date: 16 Oct 92 00:07:45 GMT
Article-I.D.: bigbird.7364
Followup-To: soc.culture.jewish
Organization: Horizon Research, Inc.

In article <1992Oct14.001031.25220@scubed.com>, hap@scubed.com (Hap Freiberg) writes:

> Why is this thread reading like a "discussion" with the
> B-cpu types? What a waste of band space...Let the Poles
> think what they will. Logic, reasoning, and/or compassion
> will not change their minds now anymore than it has in
> the past 300 years or so.

> Or maybe someone could give them B-cpu's address and they
> could mutually masturbate...

> Hap


I am impressed by your logic and especially compassion. 
You are left with having to spit on every Pole you come across.
I have always wondered how racism came about. Now I know...
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: gertler@ptms_dev.sbi.com (User - Don Gertler)
Subject: Re: sexism
Originator: scj@israel.nysernet.org
Reply-To: <gertler@ptms_dev.sbi.com (User - Don Gertler)>
Organization: Nysernet
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 14:57:50 GMT

fy@lucid.com (Frank Yellin) writes:
>dic5340@hertz.njit.edu (David Charlap) writes:

>>  5) Separate seating is done because it is a disturbance to
>>  concentration.  I know from my own experience that it is difficult
>>  to concentrate on prayers when a beautiful woman is seated in my
>>  line-of-sight.  The Rabbis knew this also.  The same probably also
>>  goes for women trying to pray while looking at a good-looking man.

>Gosh.  I wonder where I'm supposed to sit.
>
>I shouldn't sit on the men's side of the mechitza because I might be
>distracted by the good-looking men.
>
>I shouldn't sit on the women's side because I might be a distraction to
>some of the women.
>
>I certainly shouldn't be put into a separate section with other gay men.
>I'd both distract and be distracted!

I guess this proves that a homosexual shul is problematic.

-Don Gertler
From: lms@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com (Max Stern 310-524-6152)
Subject: Re: Sinead O'Connor on SNL
Organization: NCR (Torrey Pines Development Center)
Disclaimer: This posting does not neccessarily reflect the opinions of NCR.
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 20:20:00 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.143231.13434@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> abilenko@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Arkady Bilenko) writes:
>	Dear netters, 
>If any of you were as geeky as I to watch SNL on Sat, Oct 3, I was wondering
>whether anyone else but me noticed the "Star of David" pendant on Sinead 
>O'Connor.  If so, what could it mean?  I am aware that that particular Jewish
>symbol became such only sometime last century, so perhaps, some Gaelic or Irish
>ethnic groups would claim it as their own.  Anyway, just random thoughts and 
>questions.

An op-ed piece in this morning's Los Angeles Times speculated on this
question.  The writer thought perhaps the mogen david was related to
O/Connor's trashing of the Pope and, by extension, symbolized her
alignment with the *victims* of the Church.
-- 

 |\/|  /_\  \/
 |  | /   \ /\                      Max.Stern@TorreyPinesCA.ncr.com
From: jones@pyrite.cs.uiowa.edu (Douglas W. Jones,201H MLH,3193350740,3193382879)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Kosher Honey
Date: 15 Oct 92 22:04:09 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.1992Oct15.220409.16313
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA

From article <1992Oct15.214528.12700@cbfsb.cb.att.com>,
by hillel@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (hillel.e.markowitz):
> I have been told that hte main reason is that it is mentioned
> specifically in the Torah as a Kosher food.  Otherwise, there could
> be a problem since it comes from a nonkosher insect.  Perhaps an
> entomologist on the net could give the details on how hony is made

In short, honey is bee vomit.  Bees drink nectar from flowers, concentrate
it in their guts by adsorbing the water and leaving the sugar behind, the
upchucking the concentrate into the honeycomb.

I'm not an entimologist, but my dad was, and I have many friends who raise
bees.

> 
> One Pesach, honey definitely needs a hechsher since many brands of
> honey add corn syrup.

Honey straight out of the comb, then, should be OK, and no self-respecting
beekeeper I know of would doctor their honey, but knowing the food industry
today, I suspect you're right about commercial honey.

				Doug Jones
				jones@cs.uiowa.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: er@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Elie Rosenfeld)
Subject: Re: sexism
Reply-To: er@iscp.Bellcore.COM (Elie Rosenfeld)
Organization: Bell Communications Research (Bellcore)
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 92 17:04:36 GMT

This is certainly one of the most bizarre, infuriating discussions I've ever 
seen in my many years of reading s.c.j.

For a discussion about Orthodox Judaism and sexism to be conducted over the
Sukkot holiday, when Orthodox Jews are prohibited from reading or posting to 
the Net, is, at best, extremely unsporting.  At worst, it seems in direct
violation to the Torah's injunction that judges hear both sides of an argument
before rendering a verdict.

I look forward to this thread continuing in a more balanced manner, now that
the Orthodox, whose beliefs are being ridiculed right and left, are able
to defend themselves (or at least, those of us who, due to unfortunate financial
circumstances, are forced to work over Chol Ha'moed.)  I'd especially be
interested in hearing from Orthodox women, since I suspect anything said by
Orthodox men on this topic might be immediately disregarded.
-- 
Elie Rosenfeld      | "He tasks me!  He tasks me and I shall have him!
Bellcore            |  I'll chase him 'round the Moons of Nebir and 'round
Piscataway, N.J.    |  the Antares Maelstrom and 'round Perdition's FLAMES
(908) 699-8800      |  before I give him up!"  - Khan, "STII-The Wrath of Khan"
From: ehrlich@bimacs.BITNET (Gideon Ehrlich)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: a lulav in the eye
Keywords: poke march
Date: 15 Oct 92 08:12:13 GMT
Organization: Math department, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, ISRAEL

In article <1992Oct14.122321.27865@cbnewsl.cb.att.com>
saal@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (samuel.saal) writes:

>On Monday during davening, while marching with the lulav
> at the end of Musaf, someone got poked in the eye.
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>Yup.  Got one hell of a ho-shiner.


Should you follow the Hasidic Minhag , you will be saved of such
a trubble!
.
The Hasidic Minhag is not to march with the lulav  after musaf  !!!!

( But after the Hallel , Before Tora reading and hence much BEFORE
musaf ).

Moadim lesimha    gideon
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: shimoff@umbc4.umbc.edu (Eliot Shimoff)
Subject: Re: Intermarriage
Organization: Univ. of MD, Baltimore County
Date: Thu, 8 Oct 1992 13:22:56 GMT

In article <2AD3FFFF.13320@ics.uci.edu> mkrawitz@ics.uci.edu (Marc Krawitz) writes:
>In article <1992Oct8.015854.3744@cbnewsk.cb.att.com> alu@cbnewsk.cb.att.com (Alan Lustiger) writes:
>>In article <2AD1E105.6518@ics.uci.edu> mkrawitz@bonnie.ics.uci.edu (Marc Krawitz) writes:

>  I do NOT believe
>that the destruction of Judaism is healthy, nor am I implying that those
>who do not intermarry are racists. 

All the statistics suggest that the children and grandchildren of
interfaith marriages are lost to Judaism.  Suggesting that intermarriage
is "good" (in any sense) is proposing the destruction of Judaism.

> What I am implying (see my original
>article) is that Jews deserve a choice in this matter, without having
>to endure harassment from friends, family, or colleagues.  The key word
>here is *choice*.  I am not saying that it is wrong, or racist to marry
>other Jews, I am only saying that Jews (particularly non-religious Jews
>like myself) have a right to marry anyone they wish.  Is that not a
>fundamental right in any democracy?  If the idea of intermarriage
>represents some kind of irrelevant, extremist philosophy, than why
>is the intermarriage rate among Jews so high?

You, of course, have the right to intermarry, or to abandon Judaism,
or to do any of a variety of acts in a democracy. But Judaism is _not_
a democracy, and you do not have the right to expect Judaism to bend to
your personal desires.  That's not the way Judaism (or, to the best of
my knowledge, any religion) works.  

>I would like to conclude this post by apologizing to anybody who was
>offended by my earlier post.  I guess I just wanted the readers of
>s.c.j. to hear another point of view, particularly from a young person
>like myself, who is strongly effected by this volatile issue.

Do you agree that intermarriage, in most cases, implies that the
children and grandchildren will not identify as Jews?  While there
are some exceptions (some who post to scj), the statistics are pretty
clear.  Given those statistics, how can you reconcile valuing the
survival of Judaism with support of intermarriage?

The only potentially offensive part of your posting was the implicit
suggestion that Judaism opposes interracial or intercultural marriage.
Other than that, I am not offended, but I am puzzled.  How can a person
serious about the survival of Judaism reconcile that seriousness with
support of intermarriage?  (Again, it is important to distinguish between
"support of intermarriage" before the fact [all jewish movements oppose
it], and what to do after the fact [where Orthodoxy, Conservative, Reform,
and Reconstructionist movements disagree]).






-- 
Eliot Shimoff                  |    n   n   n
   shimoff@umbc3.umbc.edu      |   X + Y = Z .  Easy to prove no solutions
Ashamnu, bagadnu, gazalnu ...  |   for n greater than 2.  Darn.  Can't fit
Better luck next year!         |   it into this little .sig file.  Oh well.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish,soc.culture.polish
From: dobo@cs.UAlberta.CA (W. Dobosiewicz)
Subject: Re: A personal experience in Poland
Organization: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 1992 04:48:09 GMT

isaac@etrog.se.citri.edu.au (Isaac Balbin) writes:

>matthew@stats.mu.oz.au (Maciek Blasikiewicz) writes:


[...]
>Good. I am glad you are not the son of murderers.
>I am the son of a survivor who witnessed POLISH attrocities
>and POLISH good.

>Your statement that POLES did not take part in the final solution
>is palpable rubbish. Wash your mouth out. My family is a living
>witness to it.

>By the way, the POLES who actually saved our family decided one sunny day
>that they would report us to the Germans. My Grandfather, of blessed memory,
>who was smart, replied that when the Germans would come, he would report
>that the POLES has assisted his family, and if he got weak-kneed, he would
>dies as well. The Pole decided to change his plans, and that is how
>we survived.

Earlier in your posting, you say that your father was 10 years old. So why
personilise the story if you were not even born (I assume).

When it comes to the main part, let us distinguish between antisemitism
and holocaust. So, how many Jews do you think were killed by
"blood-thirsty" Polish barbarians? And how many perished by the hands of
the GERMAN Nazi machine? 
By the way, your story of the Pole who almost gave your grandfather away
and then changed his mind when blackmailed sounds interesting. Why did
they bother to take care of your family in the first place, then? I assume
it was money, what else?

Your hatred should be put in some perspective, though.
Consider these two stories:
- my father was arrested and sent to a concentration camp (5.5 years) by a
  Polish Volksdeutsch (i.e a Pole who decided he was member of the
  superrace)
- most Jews from the Warsaw ghetto were ushered into the cars to Treblinka
  (not Auschwitz, folks!!!) by the Jewish police under Lejkin.

So what? There are amoral individuals in every society and their
visibility usually is proportional to the hardness of the times they live
in.
That most Poles at the time were at least slightly antisemitic did not
help, did it? And most Poles now still are antisemitic, alas.

But from that to claim that Poles participated in the "final solution" is
a long way to go. Even if Poles murdered+denounced 30,000 Jews (so far I
have not read of a higher estimate), this still is only 1% of the Jews
living in Poland. The remainder, minus survivors, was helped to death by
some other nation.
Why not blast your loudspeakers that way, then?

W. Dobosiewicz
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
From: bai@msiadmin.cit.cornell.edu (Dov Bai-MSI Visitor)
Subject: Re: sexism
Organization: /usr/local/lib/news/organization
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 1992 15:50:29 GMT

In article <2677@israel.nysernet.org> warren@nysernet.org writes:

>Anway, out of 1049 articles on my system, 50 belong to this thread.
>There are less than 50 names below as some people have posted more
>than once.
>
>People who criticize Judaism as sexist or agree that it needs to
>change or say that non-O solves the problems
>M/F = 5/4
[List of people who critisize Judaism as sexist deleted]

>People who defend O
>M/F = 9/0
>    Dov Bai
[rest of list deleted]

I can see how easily one could conclude that I am defending Judaism,
if my posts are not read carefully. However, for the record,  I dont 
believe in the Tora and therefore in no way defend sexism in Judaism.

Having said that, I would like to add that I was not very impressed
with Melanie's arguments either, and there were many errors in
her description and iterpretaion of the Jewish Law. I thought at 
first that she made a much more deliberate decision to abandon
Judaism ( look sometime at the atheist group for examples to this ),
but found later that that was not the case.

>-- 
>/|/-\/-\       New signature will appear "acharai hachagim"
> |__/__/_/    
> |warren@     
>/ nysernet.org 			Jerusalem

Dov
From: de@moscom.com (David Esan)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: sexism
Date: 15 Oct 92 13:42:54 GMT
Organization: Moscom Corp., Pittsford NY

In article <1992Oct13.002501.11405@ils.nwu.edu> allender@ils.nwu.edu (Laura Allender) writes:
>I agree, Orthodox Jewish Law, when interpreted by men for men is
>degrading to women.  (How else could men arrange to study all
>day while women scrub floors, bathe children, and prepare food.)

Funny thing.  After a full day of working at this computer terminal, I go
home, help feed the kids, and myself, as often as not put the kids to bed
because my wife has a meeting or a class.  Then about half the time I do
laundry or wash dishes, and collapse into bed exhausted.  I know many modern
Orthodox men who follow similar routines.

The only studying that I get in is on Shabbes afternoon, and an occaisional
class at shul.

My wife stays home with the kids because TOGETHER we made the decision that
we wanted one parent to be home with our children.  TOGETHER we decided that
my job had a greater earning potential than hers, so that she would be the
choice to stay home.  We view our lives as two jobs, mine to find cash to 
pay for the house, hers to raise the children.  At 5pm, neither of us is on
a clock, and we must work together.

Orthodox Jewish Law, when interpeted by sexist men, is degrading to women.
-- 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 -->     David Esan      de@moscom.com  
 
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organization: Senior, Physics, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Date: Fri,  9 Oct 1992 16:59:25 -0400 
From: Jason Ari Goldstein <jg3o+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Heleocentric Cosmosology

Hey now,

I have been taking a History of Modern Science (Aristotle - 1900) this
semester and we are discussing the changes in science between Aristotle
and Kepler.  An important discussion has been the Church's response to
the Heleocentric model of the universe as proposed by Copernicus and
later Galileo and Kepler.  We all know the Church's response - they
excommunicated Galileo.  My question is this, how did Judaism deal with
this then and what is the common viewpoint now?  (ie. How do Jews
reconcile the fact the world does not revolve about man)

What I am really looking for is twofold,
    1 - Official Jew Viewpoint
    2 - Your Personal Viewpoint

In addition, if you good give specific references to book or even better
references to books written in the Renaissance (I like to see for myself
rather than read what some thinks they were thinking, you know what I
mean).

I just want to state that I am not asking you to do my homework for me
because though I do need to do a paper I think the subject is going to
be on how come people thought the world was flat when Aristotle pointed
out it was a sphere 2000 years earlier.  Anyway, I consider myself to be
a Jew, but unfortunatly I feel to uneducated about Judiasm and thus I am
now in a point in my life where I want to reconcile my viewpoints with
that of the religion in which I was raised.

Thanks in advance.

Later...

Jason A. Goldstein
___________________________________________
I'm a peripheral visionary...
I can see the future but only off to the sides.

Over, Finished, Gone, Done, Out.  (Finally)
From: hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: democracy in religion? (was Re: Intermarriage)
Summary: How restrictuve should a religion be?
Date: 9 Oct 92 19:48:53 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Statistics Department

In article <1992Oct8.142828.18769@cbnewsl.cb.att.com> saal@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (samuel.saal) writes:
>In article <2AD3FFFF.13320@ics.uci.edu> mkrawitz@ics.uci.edu (Marc
>Krawitz) writes:

>>like myself) have a right to marry anyone they wish.  Is that not a
>>fundamental right in any democracy?  If the idea of intermarriage
>>represents some kind of irrelevant, extremist philosophy, than why
>>is the intermarriage rate among Jews so high?

>Marrying anyone you want seems like something reasonable in a democracy,
>but I don't see what Judaism has to do with democracy.  After all, Judaism
>has survived democracies, monarchies, oligarchies, dictatorships, and any
>other form of (mis)government.

I believe that democracy is far too restrictive, both in government and
in religion.  This may be one of the problems with the Orthodox here; the
feeling that the religion MUST be a full government.

There is no good reason why religion, or in my opinion government, has to
overdo restrictions on individual behavior.

>As for why intermarriage rates are so high, I think the answer is
>closer to one of not accepting Jewish values and the weakness of Jewish
>education than it is one of assuming that because so many are doing it,
>it is a part of Judaism.

I wonder what the intermarriage rate was in the last situation in which
there was a substantial non-ghetto population with a fair amount of freedom
in the Diaspora?  Say the part of the Roman Empire west of Palestine in the
3rd century, and the Persian dominions during the 3rd through 5th centuries
of the common era.

Also, what were the conversion rates to Judaism?  I have heard that it was 
substantial in the Roman Empire.
-- 
Herman Rubin, Dept. of Statistics, Purdue Univ., West Lafayette IN47907-1399
Phone: (317)494-6054
hrubin@pop.stat.purdue.edu (Internet, bitnet)  
{purdue,pur-ee}!pop.stat!hrubin(UUCP)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish