HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: random@presto.UUCP (Jeff W. Hyche)
Newsgroups: hsv.religion
Subject: Atheist (Was Re: Christian Bashing)
Reply-To: presto!random@uunet.uu.net
X-Newsreader: Arn V1.00 alpha rel3
Date: 7 Apr 92 21:42:33 CST
Organization: I'm Just Me.

In article <4373.29E152E1@umagic.FIDONET.ORG>, Christian Walters writes:

>  
> >> So, if you're willing to play the atheist, Jeff, go for it. It may be
> >> refreshing for some of the readers to get the real McCoy, instead of
> >> the the people like me who just SOUND atheist :)

Well I'll just start the ball rolling with an old argument.


{Humf, scruff scruff scruff plop}

<<On Soap Box>>

Basicly the heart of the debate is does god exist or not.  I say
he doesn't, simply because there is now sientific evidence to
support him.  I see no reason to be superstitious about anything.
If you can't prove it, then is doens't exist.  You can't prove
god so he doesn't exist.

As far as the bible goes.  Its a great story book and one of the
bests books you can get on morial value.  That I will admit, but
its about as factial as the comic books I used to read.  It
contradices its self too much and as has been stated before its
just plain bad writing.  The King James edition is the worst.
Its ashame that its what most of the modern church teachings are
founded on.  The James edition was translated in a time when man
still feared the dark.  Satan was in the darkness.  Pure science
was feared by the church because it would take away the power and
faith in the church by the common people.  


>  
> It's shocking, the number of people who don't know the difference
> between atheism and agnosticism. I guess that since much of the time I'm
> arguing with believers, I seem atheist by comparison. I've only gone toe
> to toe with atheists a couple of times, and it was really odd to find
> myself arguing for God :)
>  
 
Not many people know the real difference.  Agnostics done care if
there is a god or not.  Atheist just say there is not and be done
with it.

--
"If winning is not              // Jeff Hyche           
 important, then            \\ //  UUCP: ...!uunet!sci34hub!presto!random
 why keep score?" Lt. Worf   \X/   GEnie: J.HYCHE
Newsgroups: hsv.religion
From: lester@naomi.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Les Bartel)
Subject: Re: Christian Bashing
Reply-To: lester@naomi.b23b.ingr.com
Organization: Dazix, An Intergraph Company
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 14:42:03 GMT

In article <4373.29E152E1@umagic.FIDONET.ORG>, Christian.Walters@p0.f14.n373.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Christian Walters) writes:
|>  
|> Which blatant miracles are we talking about? I don't count the Bible,
|> because I hardly view it as an objective source for facts :) Sort of
|> like reading Pravda in the Good Ol' Days about the Cold War.
|>  

Many scholars accept the Bible as an accurate and trustworthy source of
history.  The Bible has never been proven wrong when it comes to
archeological findings (though not every archeological fact in the Bible
has been proven true, the evidence strongly indicates that it is reliable).
The book _Evidence that Demands a Verdict_ by Josh McDowell is an excellent
source for this kind of information.  Mr. (Dr.?) McDowell is a scientist who
began his work in an attempt to discredit the Bible.  After his research,
he became convinced that the Bible is in fact the Word of God (note his
bias) and is completely accurate and reliable.  There are a number of
other cases where an individual searching for the truth (with a bias)
had to change his/her premise because of the overwhelming evidence.

Another fact that McDowell brings up is that the Bible was written within
a couple hundred years of when the events occurred, and often sooner.
Other major non-biblical writings which many of us accept as reliable were
written many hundreds of years after the fact.

McDowell has numerous references to other works which support his findings.
The book that I mentioned is written in outline form, making it more
suitable for research.

 - Les

-- 
Les Bartel			lester@naomi.b23b.ingr.com
Dazix, An Intergraph Company	uunet!ingr!b23b!naomi!lester
Newsgroups: hsv.religion
From: deaverpf@infonode.ingr.com (Paul F. Deaver)
Subject: Re: feeling threatened?
Keywords: Oops!
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 13:08:14 GMT


Christian Walters writes: 
@
@ Paul Deaver says:
@ 
@ > In the long run, the quality of a person far outweighs a particular
@ > group that person chooses to be associated with.  Those I would
@ > consider radical (homosexual, "fundie", etc.) seem to get thier
@ > identity from the group they choose to associate with.
@ 
@ Point taken, although I don't believe that homosexuals are radicals by
@ definition. Fundies probably aren't, either. It's just that the people
@ that are identifiable as either fundies or gays have taken a vocal tack.

Oops... I should proof my postings more closely.  What I meant to say
is that I typically see radicals as getting their identity from the groups
they associate with rather than simply choosing to associate with a group
because it's how they believe.  

Thanks for pointing out my mistake.

@ * Christian.Walters@p0.f14.n373.z1.FIDONET.ORG via Micro Magic
@

--
Paul Deaver          deaverpf@infonode.ingr.com

Newsgroups: hsv.religion
From: jimc@cobabe.b11.ingr.com (Jim Cobabe)
Subject: re: kids and morals
Reply-To: jimc@cobabe.b11.ingr.com
Organization: Intergraph 
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 18:22:07 GMT

|> Okay. A case of different definitions :) But those types of groups
|> weren't the types I was referring to when I mentioned the word "gangs."
|> In fact, I don't think I've ever heard a boy scout troop or a sunday
|> school class referred to with the same adjectives used to describe the
|> Crips and the Bloods.

Hmm...

Check out some of the discussions going on in rec.scouting some time.

*****************************************************************
| Jim Cobabe                   |  uunet!ingr!b11!cobabe!jimc    |
| Software Consultant          |  jimc@cobabe.b11.ingr.com      |
| System Utilities Group       | Just My Own Bigoted Opinions  |
| Mail Stop: CR1104            |  phone: (205) 730-5625         |
| Intergraph Corporation       |    fax: (205) 730-6011         |
| Huntsville, AL  35894-0001   |                                |
*****************************************************************
Newsgroups: hsv.religion
From: jimc@cobabe.b11.ingr.com (Jim Cobabe)
Subject: Re: Christian Bashing
Reply-To: jimc@cobabe.b11.ingr.com
Organization: Intergraph 
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 13:40:28 GMT

In article <4373.29E152E1@umagic.FIDONET.ORG>, Christian.Walters@p0.f14.n373.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Christian Walters) writes:
|> >There are some people who would not even be convinced by a "blatant"
|> >miracle.
|>  
|> Yeah, probably, but there are some who view things like rainbows
|> miraculous. I think we should probably take steps to define a miracle
|> sometime.

What is the problem with those "who view things like rainbows miraculous"?
I like to view some complex natural phenomena as evidence of divine work.
This thinking comes so natural to me, it is difficult for me to imagine how others
view such things.

My own religious views include a belief that there is a divine creator, who is
responsible for establishing the laws and principles which govern operation
of the physical world.  When I see these laws manifest in nature, I recall this
belief.  I tend to view the more noticable, spectacular, or beautiful manifestations
as "miraculous".

I believe there is no such thing as a miracle in the sense of something mysterious or
magical.  This kind of thing is a good theme for fantasy stories, but never happens
in the real world.  I believe that the universe operates in accordance with immutable
physical laws.

This view does not detract from my sense of wonder and reverence for the
spectacular or beautiful.  I view many things of this nature as miraculous.
And I give credit to the creator who caused them to be.

*****************************************************************
| Jim Cobabe                   |  uunet!ingr!b11!cobabe!jimc    |
| Software Consultant          |  jimc@cobabe.b11.ingr.com      |
| System Utilities Group       | Just My Own Bigoted Opinions  |
| Mail Stop: CR1104            |  phone: (205) 730-5625         |
| Intergraph Corporation       |    fax: (205) 730-6011         |
| Huntsville, AL  35894-0001   |                                |
*****************************************************************
Newsgroups: hsv.religion
From: jimc@cobabe.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Jim Cobabe)
Subject: Re: kids and morals
Reply-To: jimc@cobabe.b11.ingr.com
Organization: Intergraph 
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 19:58:08 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.181820.21199@infonode.ingr.com>, wilsonk@infonode.ingr.com (Keith Wilson) writes:
(stuff deleted)
|> > |> Do we agree on the problem here? To me, it seems like all the problems
|> > |> associated with children and teenagers (and therefore eventually adults)
|> > |> are getting worse. When I left Huntsville for school 5 1/2 years ago,
|> > |> there weren't any street gangs - at least none worthy of getting news
|> > |>  
|> > Perhaps we will just have to learn to be more tolerant. :-)
|> > 
|> > | Jim Cobabe                   |  uunet!ingr!b11!cobabe!jimc    |
|> 
|> 
|> I used to live in a "gang free" neighborhood.  The high-school gangs didn't
|> have names in the 70s either.  Both events have changed.  Being "more tolerant"
|> only encourages more of the same.  

I was offering this as a humorous suggestion.  Advocating tolerance for
"alternative lifestyles" is very popular with some people these days.  But
it's okay with me if you don't hold this view.

|> The problem is that problem children usually come from neglectful/abusive 
|> parents and/or broken families.  The question is: is it cheaper to let the
|> government raise these children OR let the government house these children
|> in prisons when they become adults.  Either way: the taxpayers lose because
|> the parents shunned THEIR responsiblities.  No, you cannot blame the schools 
|> because the teacher is not responsible for developing the CHARACTER and
|> DISCIPLINE outside the classroom...

Great.  Now, which ones should we turn over to the government camps?
Which parents are the neglectful ones?  Who gets the responsibility to
decide?  Perhaps a committee of Christian fundamentalists?  :-)

What will the government provide for these "neglected" children that the
parents were so lacking?  Perhaps the government can provide love and
nurturing better than the natural parents.  I don't think so.

*****************************************************************
| Jim Cobabe                   |  uunet!ingr!b11!cobabe!jimc    |
| Software Consultant          |  jimc@cobabe.b11.ingr.com      |
| System Utilities Group       |                                |
| Mail Stop: CR1104            |  phone: (205) 730-5625         |
| Intergraph Corporation       |    fax: (205) 730-6011         |
| Huntsville, AL  35894-0001   |                                |
*****************************************************************
From: Christian.Walters@umagic.FIDONET.ORG (Christian Walters)
Newsgroups: hsv.religion
Subject: Re: feeling threatened?
Date: Wed,  8 Apr 92 02:32:03 CDT
Organization: Micro Magic

Paul Deaver says:
>I think your brother and my older sister have a lot in common.  She
>found her version of religion via guilt.  She was *very* wild in her
>highschool years.  Now she's the one who considers it her privilage to
>get arrested at the abortion clinics (for harrasment, NOT for
>protesting).
 
Yeah, that's sad. If it makes her happy, then I'm glad she found
religion. Even if I don't believe its precepts, I can't deny it's
psychological value to some people. However, I am not glad she found
religion to the degree that she feels she needs to bother people at
abortion clinics. How long ago did she become religious? I've noticed
that in many cases, the zeal wears off after a while.
 
Not in my brothers case, though. Y'see, he's a chaplain's assistant in
the Navy, and as such he is exposed to a great number of religions,
which are offered so that the chapel can appeal to everyone on board.
While this may give him a sense of worldliness, hearing all of it, he
has an unfortunate tendency to believe whatever he hears from the
pulpit. His beliefs seem to stem from whatever platitudes and aphorisms
have come into his transom that way.
 
(This makes him stunningly easy prey during our many religious
arguments, by the way :) )
 
>I feel really bad for her sometimes.  I'd have a lot more respect for
>her views if I had any doubt that they were driven by moral conviction,
>not by guilt.
 
Exactly! Some people seem as though they sought religion to ease
something or to belong to something, but somewhere along the line they
got so caught up in it, that they are no longer aware of the outside
world. Pity.
 
>> Oops! I grow silly. :) Take care.
 
>Humor is a good way to cope extreme situations (i.e. Christmas with the
>*entire* family (:-0).  The best way is to avoid the situations
>altogether.
 
Interesting. There are only a couple of strong beliefs I have when
dealing with life, and you've stumbled on one of them. An intact sense
of humor is vital if you're going to get anywhere. If I teach my
eventual kids (maybe) anything, I want them to learn that there is
nothing so awful that humor cannot be found in SOME aspect. True, it
might be very black humor, and probably not best to utter out loud in
many cases, but it's there. If you find it and it makes you smile a
little in the rough times, you'll be okay.
 
My other strong belief is that you should never steal home when there is
two outs. :)



--  
 * Christian.Walters@umagic.FIDONET.ORG via Micro Magic
Newsgroups: hsv.religion
From: wilsonk@infonode.ingr.com (Keith Wilson)
Subject: Re: kids and morals
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 18:18:20 GMT

In article <1992Apr8.163746.15485@infonode.ingr.com>, jimc@cobabe.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Jim Cobabe) writes:
> In article <4386.29E26797@umagic.FIDONET.ORG>, Christian.Walters@umagic.FIDONET.ORG (Christian Walters) writes:
> (stuff deleted)
> |> What I'm seeking is ANYTHING that will help out when parents screw up.
> 
> For instance, a mother I know had her children taken away from her because
> she "neglected" them.  She customarily left the childen without supervision
				:
				:
				:
> I didn't mean to make a long sermon out of this, but ...
> 
> |> Maybe I'm just an idealist, but
> |> I can picture a world without date rape and street gangs. :)
> 
> Yes.  How about using the government to promote parental responsibilities.
> 
> |> Do we agree on the problem here? To me, it seems like all the problems
> |> associated with children and teenagers (and therefore eventually adults)
> |> are getting worse. When I left Huntsville for school 5 1/2 years ago,
> |> there weren't any street gangs - at least none worthy of getting news
> |>  
> Perhaps we will just have to learn to be more tolerant. :-)
> 
> | Jim Cobabe                   |  uunet!ingr!b11!cobabe!jimc    |


I used to live in a "gang free" neighborhood.  The high-school gangs didn't
have names in the 70s either.  Both events have changed.  Being "more tolerant"
only encourages more of the same.  

The problem is that problem children usually come from neglectful/abusive 
parents and/or broken families.  The question is: is it cheaper to let the
government raise these children OR let the government house these children
in prisons when they become adults.  Either way: the taxpayers lose because
the parents shunned THEIR responsiblities.  No, you cannot blame the schools 
because the teacher is not responsible for developing the CHARACTER and
DISCIPLINE outside the classroom...

End of short sermon

Keith (when the neighborhood has problems, do the American thing: move) Wilson
From: Christian.Walters@umagic.FIDONET.ORG (Christian Walters)
Newsgroups: hsv.religion
Subject: Re: Christian Bashing
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 22:49:33 CDT
Organization: Micro Magic

Les Bartel says:
>> Nothing I ever heard at a church was presented as opinion, and they
>> never pointed out sources that disagree with the conclusions.
 
>Then it might be time to find a different church.
 
Is there really a church out there that gives time to dissenting
opinions? I'd like to see that. I don't mean a church that says
something, and then says something like "of course, those heathens which
are simply Satan's handmaidens would have you believe differently."
 
>I'm not saying to look for a church until you find one that believes
>what you want it to, but look for a church that is able to rationally
>discuss _any_ question you ask of it.
 
Aw, I get that on this newsgroup :) Plus, I can do it in my underwear
with my stereo on.
 
>It would also render all inhabitants within hundreds of miles deaf from
>the noise (I assume that you are saying the noise of the trumpets etc.
>had enough energy to break down the walls).
 
Well, if the trumpets they mention at Jericho are of a similar style to
the modern trumpet, then they are directional instruments, so the
intensity would drop as you move away from in front of it. Anyone inside
of Jericho proper would probably have experienced some ear trouble - not
to mention what the doggies would have gone through - but if you were
standing off to the side or the rear it wouldn't be as bad.
 
>This (at least at that time) is one of those (can I say it?) miracles.
 
Or maybe this is one of those (can I say it?) errors :) Who knows? I'd
be more tempted to believe the physical evidence than I would a story
about trumpets, and then making that story conform to the evidence under
the miracle heading. Jericho is just as destroyed either way you look at
it :)



--  
 * Christian.Walters@umagic.FIDONET.ORG via Micro Magic
Newsgroups: hsv.religion
From: deaverpf@infonode.ingr.com (Paul F. Deaver)
Subject: Re: kids and morals
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 18:03:57 GMT

Chris Spray writes:
>
>KW> PSS: How did a stupid bunny ever get associated with the RESURRECTION
>KW> (sp)?
>
>I know I said I was leaving, but since this one isn't controversial, I'll 
>answer.  It is because of the Pagans.

Can we find some way even more inflamitory to blame the evils of pagan 
(notice the lowercase "p" in contrast to Mr. Spray's uppercase "p"... 
no, I don't worship pagans ;-) rabbits?  Personally, I think Mr. Hallmark 
had something to do with this.  

Keith, I always figured you had it in you *(:-).  Good job. 

--
Paul Deaver
Newsgroups: hsv.religion
From: nik@nik.b23a.ingr.com (Nik Simpson)
Subject: Re: Christian Bashing
Organization: Intergraph Systems Product Marketing
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 20:41:54 GMT

In article <1992Apr9.174950.11730@b11.ingr.com> lhughes@b11.ingr.com (Lawrence Hughes) writes:
>In article <1992Apr9.134015.25029@b11.ingr.com>, lester@naomi.NoSubdomain.NoDomain (Les Bartel) writes:
>> Nik Simpson writes
>> |> 
>> |> 	It is common practice to cite other works which agree with a point you
>> |> are trying to make,  Von Daniken was one of the finest practitioners of 
>> |> picking on and citing those facts which agreed with his premise while ignoring
>> |> less convenient ones.
>> 
>> Agreed.  But see my comments above.  Don't you think that someone who
>> sets out to disprove something might try to select work to back him/her
>> up? 
>
>A good researcher will try to find ALL of the facts, and an honest one will
>present even citations that DO NOT substantiate his claim, if perhaps with a
>note of disagreement. A really honest researcher will not have formed a
>conclusion before trying to do the research, and will base his conclusion
>on the facts found. So much "biblical research" starts out with the
>assumption that the bible is correct, and tries to find "facts" to back up
>that conclusion. Very similar tactics to the more recent "green science" types.

	I think I shall have to rethink my position here, I don't know if
I can live with being on the same side of an argument as Larry :-)
-- 
|--------------------------------------------------|
|  Nik Simpson	Mail : nik@ingr.com                |
|  Intergraph Corp.  System Product Marketing	   |
|--------------------------------------------------|
Newsgroups: hsv.religion
From: jim@doink.b23b.ingr.com (James B. Reed)
Subject: Miracle Bashing
Reply-To: jimreed@b23b.ingr.com
Organization: Intergraph Corporation, Huntsville, AL.
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 13:57:27 GMT

Sorry to intrude on your reply to Jim, but...

In article <4400.29E334B3@umagic.FIDONET.ORG>, Christian.Walters@umagic.FIDONET.ORG (Christian Walters) writes:
|>
|> I don't believe in divergences from natural law either, and i think all
|> the people swallowed alive by great fish and all the seas parted and the
|> sun stopping and all the other stuff are probably just
|> "misrepresentations."

Are you saying that everything can be explained by natural law?  I thought
you also said that if something could be explained by a (known or as yet
undiscovered) natural law then it didn't qualify for miracle status.

I looks to me like you're taking a position that makes it impossible to
define miracle in any meaningful way (whether you believe miracles happen
or not).

-- 
James B. Reed                | If at first you don't succeed,
DAZIX, An Intergraph Company | Find out why,
jimreed@b23b.ingr.com        | **THEN** try again.
(205) 730-8874               |
Newsgroups: hsv.religion
From: Christian.Walters@p0.f14.n373.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Christian Walters)
Newsgroups: hsv.religion
Subject: Re: a miraculous definition
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 09:56:33 CDT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:373/14.0 - The Aviation BBS, Meridianville AL

Jim Cobabe says:
>A personal experience is always subjective.  _You_ might want to say
>that everything in life is quantifiable and logical, but I have not
>found this to be true.
 
Hmmm... okay, I'll bite. Give me some examples of some things that have
happened that could not be explained rationally.
 
>> Or if he says "That's amazing!" and you look and say "What's so
>> amazing about a hummingbird feeding out of a sunflower?" Who's the
>> cynical dunderhead now?
 
>Cynicism is subjective too.
 
Well, I think it's more comparative. I may be cynical, but I've known
people and have seen comedians that make me look like Maria from "The
Sound of Music."
 
>I see from your responses above that you understand what I am saying
>about miracles, but cannot seem to believe that I am serious.
 
I believe you're serious - I just can't believe you're right :)
 
>Perhaps the problem is that my understanding is different from that of
>other Christians.  Not too suprising to me though, as I have often
>found that my views differ significantly from others.
 
Great. A renegade fundie. God help us :)


--  
 * Christian.Walters@p0.f14.n373.z1.FIDONET.ORG via Micro Magic
Newsgroups: hsv.religion