HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: C106LR4H@ubvm.cc.buffalo.edu
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: testing
Date: 28 Jan 93 22:06:23 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo


    Well, I was sitting around wondering, like people often will. Does anyone
know of any instances where people have willed their land to a (specified or
not) God? I know it has happened, read about it once, but didn't get any
details and legal implications. I believe one occurence of this was that the
land became permanently untouchable, and never to be the property of anyone.
Needless to say, that this could be a very interesting loophole in America
for anyone who believes in the retrogression to nature but just doesn't really
wanna give up something they might have a use for while alive.
   I know that, at least in New York state, a property tax for land is foregone
if owned by a non-profit (and/or environmental?) organization, or by just
someone who owns it but commits it to remain in natural state. Perhaps this
could be a way to shield any land from government intrusion until the point
that that government ceases to exist and new laws are placed? I'm curious.
   Sorry, if this isn't appropiate to alt.atheism, but I think it could be
for any atheist with a mind for the environment. I see that atheists are
less likely to "rape the land" because they/we don't believe that jesus is
gonna make things right in the End, so we can do whatever we want now,
espically since the bible told us we can.
 
                                               Any thoughts?
                                                      -Eric   (Yrich)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: pierce@lanai.cs.ucla.edu (Brad Pierce)
Subject: Atheism in pop culture
Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 18:46:22 GMT

Somebody sent me the words for John Lennon's hit song "Imagine". Lennon
and his song are before "my time", but they seem to hint at atheism.
Was he an atheist?

Can you think of any examples of explicit atheism expressed in pop
songs or other pop culture works?

-- Brad Pierce 

p.s.
                    Imagine there's no heaven
                    it's easy if you try,
                    no hell below us
                    above us only sky.

                    Imagine all the people living for today.

                    Imagine there's no countries
                    it isn't hard to do,
                    nothing to kill or die for
                    and no religion too.

                    Imagine all the people living life in peace.

                    You may say I'm a dreamer,
                    but I'm not the only one.
                    I hope some day you'll join us,
                    and the world will be as one.

                    Imagine no possessions,
                    I wonder if you can,
                    no need for greed or hunger,
                    a brotherhood of man,

                    Imagine all the people sharing all the world.

                    You may say I'm a dreamer,
                    but I'm not the only one.
                    I hope some day you'll join us,
                    and the world will live as one.
From: dgraham@bmers30.bnr.ca (Douglas Graham)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: I'd Rather be an Atheist! Was: CHRISTIANS ARE BEING DUPED!
Date: 27 Jan 93 04:27:58 GMT
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada

In article <1993Jan26.183148.609@doc.bmd.trw.com> jbrown@doc.bmd.trw.com writes:
>>			 CHRISTIANS ARE BEING DUPED!

[Jim Brown's scathing rebuttal of yet another mindless rant
 courtesy of mcelewre@cnsvax.uwec.edu deleted]

>Frankly, if I didn't believe in God, I'd be an atheist --
>I certainly wouldn't be a New Age Wacko!
>
>It's simply amazing what some people will swallow!

Ain't it though!  It's a good thing that none of us sane people
would ever be guilty of swallowing such drivel, right Jim?
--
Doug Graham         dgraham@bnr.ca         My opinions are my own.
From: cai@cis.ohio-state.edu (shuofeng cai)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: To all Atheists
Date: 23 Jan 1993 11:56:05 -0500
Organization: The Ohio State University Dept. of Computer and Info. Science
NNTP-Posting-Host: tortoise.cis.ohio-state.edu

In article <C15yM8.KGp@news.cso.uiuc.edu> pjnelson@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (nelson peter j) writes:
>>	If you want the 'reason' why we should believe in God, I can not give
>> it.  If you want the empiricial justification for the supernatural, the 
>> nature of the word empirical forbids such justification.  If your heart is
>> open however, to the love that christ died for;  the extreme joy and
>> benevolence that can be yours; then please respond to me with your questions>> I will not attempt to prove the existence of God.

	Well, the world is already like a hell, while God has another one
waiting for us if we don't act the way God likes. Then why should we
believe in God, if God really exists, just to avoid another hell?

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: geoff@poori.East.Sun.COM (Geoff Arnold @ Sun BOS - R.H. coast near the top)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Atheism in pop culture
Date: 25 Jan 1993 04:41:12 GMT
Organization: SunSelect
NNTP-Posting-Host: poori.east.sun.com

Try almost anything by Crass (the best punk band that ever was).  Check
out the  songs "Big A, Little a", or the long poem-to-music "Reality
Asylum", which ends with the observation that "Jesus died for his own
sins - not for mine."

Actually, a fair amount of the material that's been mentioned in this
thread is antitheist rather than atheist. It doesn't make much sense
blaming Jesus for being a "petulant child... wrapped in the bloody
shroud of churlish suicide" who "scooped the pits of Auschwitz" if you
don't believe that he was connected in some way to a deity.  The
assertion "god is evil" is not consistent with atheism.

Nonetheless, most of it's really good stuff :-) I gues I'm going
to have to pick up a copy of "Skylarking" (the XTC album which
contains "Dear God").
-- 
Geoff Arnold, PC-NFS architect, Sun Select. (geoff.arnold@East.Sun.COM)
From: livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Let's try these proofs
Date: 22 Jan 93 23:38:40 GMT
Organization: sgi
NNTP-Posting-Host: solntze.wpd.sgi.com

In article <1993Jan21.222614.119787@marshall.wvnet.edu>, yea027@marshall.wvnet.edu writes:
|> Printed by 
|> Islamic Teaching Center, P.O. box 38
|> Plainfield, Indiana 46168
|> Tel. (317) 839-8157
|> 
|> How did it happen?
|> 
|> 	Would you believe a man if he tells you that there is a
|>  store which is running smoothly but has no salesman, 
|> storekeeper or someone to look after it?  Or would you 
|> believe him if he told you that the chair in front of you 
|> assumed its present form all by itself?

Followed by hundreds of line of argument from design, and minor
variations.

I have a serious question.   Is this really current stuff in
Islamic teaching?

jon.
From: mathew <mathew@mantis.co.uk>
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: VALIS: insanity and religion
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 12:52:23 GMT
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.
X-Newsreader: rusnews v0.98

gj156879@alfred.carleton.ca ( gj student 156879) writes:
> Valis was a great novel, and the main characters religious experiences
> were very similar to symptoms of schizophrenia.

There are also marked similarities to the symptoms of temporal lobe epilepsy
which John A. Johnson has posted about.

> Check out "A SCANNER DARKLY", which is a damned fine read, also by
> Philip K Dick.  Sort of a 60s paranoid fantasy that blew me away when
> I read it.  Also, not there are some bigtime similarities between
> VALIS and RADIOFREE ALBERMUTH, another amazing book.  (The pink laser
> occurs in both, if I recall correctly...)

Yes.  Also in Radio Free Albemuth a transistor radio whispers secret threats
and messages to people while they're half asleep.  Meanwhile, Ferris F.
Fremont is being elected president, and of course FFF = 666...


mathew
From: bernt.budde@udac.uu.se (Bernt Budde)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Deliberate Ignorance
Date: 26 Jan 93 21:00:06 GMT
Followup-To: alt.atheism
Organization: UDAC (Uppsala Univ. Comp. Centre)
NNTP-Posting-Host: macbug.udac.uu.se

In article <C1G7CF.HGC@darkside.osrhe.uoknor.edu>,
bil@okcforum.osrhe.uoknor.edu (Bill Conner) wrote:
> 
>     The tactic of quoting the Bible out of context is a favorite
> fallacy of both the atheist and the believer, and serves only to make
> the whole debate ridiculous. The atheist invents all manner of wildly
> inaccurate appeals to history to "prove" that the God of the
> Christians cannot possibly exist, or if He does, He's nothing like the
> God the Christians worship. This is pure hyperbole and contributes
> nothing. The Christian for his part, makes appeals to all manner of
> supernatural enities whose existence cannot be proved by any means an
> atheist can accept.

I have to take exception at your way of describing the atheist handling
of biblical material. Lots of great minds wasted much time with that dull
book so I can hit Xians over the head with it!

E g, a combination of these doesn't make an atheist case?

* Early Xian tradition (<150 AD, as evidenced in non-biblical writings)
* Biblical support
* Long tradition in all Xian subcults
* Xian denying its place in the dogma

E g, lot's of Xians locally in Sweden speek very quitly about hell.
That pisses me off, since I have to first show them lots of references
of early writings that really gloats in the punishment for us, the
unbelievers (and others) before I can give moral arguments for what an
inhuman religion they are members of! (No smiley. I have done this!)

Then there are, to me, at least one known case of pure history lie in
the bible (see Russel: A history of western philosophy (or what it's
original title is).

I'd say your post was a half-OK try at an excuse for religious people.
Soon you'll say that they should be left alone, since they seem happier
with their religion, and happiness can't be bought for money. My answer
is that the total happiness in society goes downward with more religion
(sociological effects of intolerance, if nothing else). Besides, I can't 
stand when people live happily on lies I can't make myself believe. .)

I'm looking forward to reading the massacre of your posting.


Bernt 'Bug' Budde, UDAC      |    :  #'''    | UDAC is quite a fun place,
(Uppsala Univ. Comp. Centre) |    :  #       | but they don't necessarily
Bernt.Budde@udac.uu.se       |    :#####:    | agree with my opinions. And
                             |       #  :    | they don't care about
Impeach god                  |       #  :    | religion!
 /Richard M Stallman         |    ...#  :    |
From: bil@okcforum.osrhe.uoknor.edu (Bill Conner)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: A point well missed ...
Date: 27 Jan 93 06:38:38 GMT
Organization: Okcforum Unix Users Group
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]


   I've had the experience of discussing atheism with atheists before
and in every case the atheists avoids the questions, "Why are you an
atheist?" ...
   I think there are really only two possibilities here: one is that
the atheist can't explain his position, the other is, if he did he'd
look like a fool. 
   Other than sarcasm, ridicule and hyperbole, I've yet to hear an
atheist's defense of atheism; are you up to it?

Bill
From: delancey@darkwing.uoregon.edu (Scott C DeLancey)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,sci.skeptic
Subject: Re: Will the -REAL- Christians please stand up? Was: What did Judas be
Date: 22 Jan 93 06:40:59 GMT
Organization: University of Oregon Network Services
NNTP-Posting-Host: darkwing.uoregon.edu

In article <1993Jan20.213756.8012@hfsi.uucp> ata@hfsi.UUCP (John Ata - FSO) writes:
>
>I would be most greatful if you could point out to me the passages in
>Scripture that support "treating gays badly".

Well, one that leaps to mind is Leviticus 18, where among the many
offences for which the offender is to be "cut off from his people" is
for a man to lie with a man as with a woman.

Scott DeLancey
From: tombiv@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Andrew Spencer Tomb)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: All Atheists hear this!!!
Date: 28 Jan 93 01:01:46 GMT
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

In Job 38:2-11 The God of the Universe writes:
"Who is this that darkens my council with words without knowledge?
	Brace yourself like a man; I will question you,
	and you shall answer me."
"Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?
	Tell me, if you understand."
"Who marked out it's dimensions?
	Surely you know!"
"Who streched a measuring line across it?
On what were it's footings set, or who laid it's foundations?
	while all the angels shouted for joy?
"Who shut up the sea behind doors when it burst forth from the womb,
when I made the clouds its garment and wrapped it in thick darkness,
when I fixed limits for it and set it's doors and bars in place,
when I said, 'This is how far you may come, and no further;
	here is where your proud waves halt'?"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Mail: tombiv@matt.ksu.ksu.edu
"Only a fool professes to be wise"
From: mikel@Apple.COM (Mikel Evins)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Strong atheism ought to explain theism (Was: Re: Atheism is dogmatic.
Date: 25 Jan 93 07:35:51 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc, Cupertino, CA

In article <11194@vice.ICO.TEK.COM> bobbe@vice.ICO.TEK.COM (Robert Beauchaine) writes:
>  I personally know of no one who makes the claim that their
>  experience of god is on the same sensual level as their day to day
>  perception of the world around them (well, maybe one, Jarek
>  Dabrowski, but that's another topic).  Most claims of believer-god
>  interaction are extraordinarily vague or mystical, with phrases
>  like "felt lead to", "had a vision", "had a feeling", etc.

I have memories of experiences of beings that I think deserve to be
called gods. Of course, maybe I don't count as I am (apparently) an
atheist. I suppose it's because I can tell the difference between
experiences that (for example) people on the net are going to consider
real and ones they aren't, and because I am skeptical by temperament.

>  If any of the theists in this group have had encounters of this
>  kind with their god, please post them.  I for one have never heard
>  of such a thing.

Hmm. What about atheists who have had (mutually contradictory or ambiguous)
experiences with other people's gods? Never mind; I don't think they
prove anything except the malleability of human experience.
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: darice@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Fred Rice)
Subject: Re: religion in general
Organization: Monash University, Melb., Australia.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 08:34:31 GMT

In <16B60D47C.I3150101@dbstu1.rz.tu-bs.de> I3150101@dbstu1.rz.tu-bs.de (Benedikt Rosenau) writes:

>In article <sumner.727643696@milo.math.scarolina.edu>
>sumner@math.scarolina.edu (David Sumner) writes:
>>
>>Fred Rice writes:
>>
>>>Several people, throughout history in fact, have the
>>>viewpoint that the essential truths within various
>>>"authentic" religions are one.
>>
[...stuff deleted...]
>>But more to the point, this statement lacks substance. What
>>exactly are a few of the 'essential truths' you refer to
>>here.

I will talk about Islam/Sufism, because it is the religious system I
happen to know the most about.

>The suppression of women, a common trait of religions?

Islam helped to give women rights when it was originally preached by
Muhammad in 7th century Arabia, compared to the pre-Islamic Arabian
culture.  Today, although there are several secular-style feminists in
the Islamic world, several are trying to give women back their rights
which they perceive Islam gave them originally, but which then male-dominated
culture took away.  For example, one prominent feminist who seems to
have this viewpoint is Azizah Al-Hibri.  See, for example, Azizah
Al-Hibri's article in "Women and Islam" (1982), edited by her.  Azizah
Al-Hibri is also the founder of the journal "Hypatia: a journal of
feminist philosophy."

>The lack of a declaration of human rights?

There are several human rights declared in Islam.  The fact that Islam
says so much on this issue has sometimes caused Westerners to remark on
how legalistic the Qur'an seems to be, for example.  I can go into
further details on this if you wish, but this being alt.atheism, this is
probably better done via email or via soc.religion.islam.

>The knowledge that one can fool people into believing that
>belief is not to be justified?

Well, religions do teach that some beliefs are incorrect, but
this is a trait of practically all coherent systems of thought.

>That people who believe in another religion do not know the full truth?

Now this just shows that you weren't reading what I wrote before
regarding the "Perennial Philosophy", or "Primordial Tradition", which
was the original posting the above poster was responding to. 

As I pointed out previously, the viewpoint that all traditional religions
are legitimate is expressed in several Sufi writings, and probably in
the writings of many other mysticisms.

>Actually, I wonder what Fred Rice means, too.
>   Benedikt

 Fred Rice
 darice@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au   
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: chrisb@seachg.uucp (Chris Blask)
Subject: Re: Why must you act this way?
Reply-To: chrisb@seachg.UUCP (Chris Blask)
Organization: Sea Change Corporation, Mississauga, Ontario, Canada
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 16:23:54 GMT

In article <1993Jan18.170322.29686@ra.royalroads.ca> mlee@post.RoyalRoads.ca (Malcolm Lee) writes:
>How does one cope with the prospect of death?  When death hits you, it may
>come suddenly or you may see it coming from a long way off (as in a terminal
>disease).  Everyone knows that we will eventually die and leave this earth.
>Most people do not want to think about it and would rather bury themselves
>in the rituals of everyday life.  The Christian knows that there is a life
						 ^^^^^
				Wrong!  "convinces him/herself"  There's a
				world of difference between "knowing" and
				"believing, though you'll never admit it.

>beyond the physical death.  Every person is more than just the elements of
>his physical body.  There is in each and every one of us a living spirit
>that does not pass away when the body ceases to be.  From the Christian
>vantage point, death holds no fear.

Death scares the shit out of me, and given any opportunity I plan to avoid it
indefinately.   Does this mean that I should lie to myself to make myself
feel better?  I think not.  Self deception never leads to anything other
than dysfunction.  I suppose if I'm afraid of heights I should believe in
an invisible net that is always just below my feet?

-chris blask
Newsgroups: alt.atheism,talk.religion.misc
From: pierce@lanai.cs.ucla.edu (Brad Pierce)
Subject: Re: "The White Lie"
Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 22:36:37 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.204128.23632@cbnewsh.cb.att.com> young@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (young.u.huh) writes:

>I am looking for a book entitled "The White Lie" in which the 
>author presents his findings on textual-copying in the writings 
>of Ellen G. White of the Seventh-day Adventist church.  
>If you know of this book, please post the name of the author and 
>the publisher.  Thanks in advance.

Author:        Rea, Walter T.
Title:         The white lie / by Walter T. Rea. Turlock, CA : M & R
                 Publications, c1982.
Description:   409 p. : ill. ; 24 cm.

Notes:         Includes bibliographical references.

Subjects:      White, Ellen Gould Harmon, 1827-1915.
               Seventh-Day Adventists -- Doctrines.

Newsgroups: alt.atheism
From: L.Newnham@bradford.ac.uk (Leonard Newnham)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Why God is Hiding
Date: 26 Jan 93 13:41:22 GMT
Organization: University of Bradford, UK
Originator: 90908502@muser
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

Seth James Killian (skillian@ux4.cso.uiuc.edu) writes:
>
> With the assignment of free will, the God has also
> assigned humankind the capacity for reason.  Time passes, and the 
> creator ceases frequent and obvious interaction with his creations.
> Those who had direct interaction with the creator die, and can leave 
> only a book as a legacy to future generations.  The descendants of
> the book writers begin to doubt the veracity of their forefathers 
> claims, and begin to search for verification of the creator under an
> empirical system of rational enquiry.  Finding none (or at least
> insufficiently convincing quantities), the descendants cease to
> believe in any creator, thinking the very idea just another foolish
> belief of ignorant ancients.  

If God gives the capacity for reason then he should expect this.  He 
would probably think it very odd if it didn't happen!  He gives people
the ability to question and then expects them not to use it - is that 
likely??

> So there exists no wholly reasonable proof of God's existence.  Are 
> the descendants then right in assuming 
> there to be no God?  Not necessarily so.  

Of course they are!  According the events you have outlined belief can
only be based on rumour.  That is likely to attract the weak and the
foolish only.  The reasoning capacity God has given, will inevitably 
mean many will question his existence.  If they didn't they would not 
be using their god-given reasoning ability to its full.  Does God only 
want the weak and foolish to believe and to discriminate against those
who use their rationality??

> To accord with the 
> preservation of free will, any God could not allow his own existence
> to be provable with formal logic.  If he were so provable, humankind
> would not have any choice (the critical reason for our creation) but
> to believe in God, thus undermining the nature of our freedom to choose.	
> Of course this does not lead to the necessary assertion that any God 
> _does_ exist, it only shows that if he were to exist, we, as free 
> humans, have no recourse but faith alone for any belief we might have.

As far as I can see it would be a pretty unreasonable god who refused to
demonstrate his existence but still continued to expect his subjects
to believe in him on the basis of hearsay and the content of an old
book.  

In fact I would go further, assuming any god is rational, then
it could be argued that the last people God would want to share
eternity with are the ones who believe, what is, when compared to the
evidence, incredible supersticion.

Of course, if God is a bastard then it will be another story!

--

Leonard               e-mail:  L.Newnham@bradford.ac.uk
-- 

Leonard               e-mail:  L.Newnham@bradford.ac.uk
From: I3150101@dbstu1.rz.tu-bs.de (Benedikt Rosenau)
Subject: Re: A different view of God
Organization: Technical University Braunschweig, Germany
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 20:57:30 GMT

In article <1jisvdINNfkv@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>
bb099@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Adam Trent Phillips) writes:
 
>
>
>In a previous article, rabjab@golem.ucsd.edu (rabjab) says:
>
>>In article <1993Jan20.031133.27550@rp.CSIRO.AU> ahaig@rp.CSIRO.AU (Albert Haig) writes:
>>
>>>        I do not believe that God
>>>        has revealed himself except in nature and the order and design
>>                              ^^^^^^
>>
>>If God exists, why would He limit his interaction, a priori, to the moment
> ^^
>>of creation?  Is that view simply an expression of your preference?
>>
>>-rabjab
>>
>
>        BIG `IF' isn't it ?.....can you back it up with any proof ?
>
>
 
Why should he? Assuming that god exists does not imply the rest.
To assume that a god does not interfere is so far unfounded.
Even when assuming that there is one.
 
To be honest, I don't think he meant it this way. As one of his previous
posts have shown that he was probably no atheist AND that he hasn't read
the FAQ.
   Benedikt