HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: goff@intruder.navo.navy.mil (Victoria Goff)
Subject: Re: Christianity and Logic
Nntp-Posting-Host-[nntpd-12886]: intruder.navo.navy.mil
Reply-To: goff@pops.navo.navy.mil
Organization: POPS Facility Managment
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 17:48:48 GMT

In article <1993Jan07.061849.9159@microsoft.com>, jenk@microsoft.com (Jen Kilmer) writes:
|> Christianity purports to explain how the universe and world
|> that we know came into being and how it works and what will
|> happen next. 
|> 
|> It doesn't claim to be logical.
|> 
|> I would think that if the universe and world that we know appear
|> logical to us, then a true religion (ie the religion which explains
|> how things actually are, as opposed to the wrong religions which
|> don't get the sum exactly right) would appear logical to us as
|> well.
|> 

The word "religion" only appears seven times in the bible and only
once is it in a good context. James 1:27 Pure religion and undefiled
before God the Father is this: To visit the widows and fatherless in
their afflictions and to keep oneself unspotted from the world.

In order to know God, you just ask Jesus to save you. It is as simple
as that. I have lead many to the Lord and it is amazing how similar
they react as soon as they finish praying - first, they know beyond
a shadow of a doubt that they are going to heaven and secondly, they
have a knowledge that the Second Coming is emminant.

As far as I can tell from my walk with God, there is only one will
of God and that is that none should perish. God does not want to
be separated from us but He cannot allow sin in His presence because
He is holy. We need someone to clean us up. That person is Jesus
Christ and yes, He did rise from the dead and yes, He is still
ministering to the poor, lost and suffering; He is doing this
through the body of Christ which is the church (believers).

Look, it's like this. Do you want to sign up in God's army? There
are broken people out there that need God and no one wants to get
out there and help them. Miracles happen. I see them all the time
but God won't let you see them if you are so arrogant and to reject
His Son who, by the way, died for you. Why? BECAUSE GOD IS LOVE and
He loves you. Humble yourself, repent and seek righteousness and then
you will know God and start doing something good with your life
instead of just living for yourself. 

Do it today. You do not know what tomorrow may hold for you.

In His Name,

v.goff



 
Xref: sparky talk.religion.misc:25826 alt.pagan:15242
From: cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese)
Subject: the PENTACLES, people!!!!
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.pagan
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 11 Jan 93 18:41:12 GMT

I am not up for a discussion about ritual abuse, since it is too hazy
and not my specialty.

What I disliked whas the use on the front cover illustration of six
pentacles in a painting where a little child is menaced by abstract
demons.  The last thing we need is for Ms. Magazine to further convince
people that what I'm wearing about my neck right now is a demon sign and
that I worship the devil and abuse kids and animals.  THIS IS WHAT I WAS
WRITING ABOUT.  A MAGAZINE THAT HAS IN THE PAST PRESENTED ITSELF AS THE
PICTURE OF LIBERAL TOLERANCE HAS DEMEANED A VERY WONDERFUL SYMBOL
THROUGH IGNORANCE OF SOMETHING THAT MEANS A GREAT DEAL TO MANY FEMINIST
WOMEN AND MEN.  THIS was my point in posting, not to start a discussion
on the dubious nature of ritual abuse.

Blessings,
Janis  

Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: zmbenhal@netcom.com (Zeyd M. Ben-Halim)
Subject: Re: Jihad in Islam (was Re:Islam Revealed #1
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:20:24 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.153815.17814@kth.se> d89-gsk@nada.kth.se (Gani Skepi) writes:
>|> Ok, do you agree then that Salmon Rushdie deserves the death sentence ?
>
>My personal opinion is yes. But there are a lot of other Muslims who wouldn't
>agree with me on this point.....

I happen to be one of them! I believe in the absolute freedom of thought,
beliefs,  and expression thereof.

>|> Who decides on what is evil and what is good ?  
>
>There can only be one answer from a religious perspective and that is God
>*alone*.

We can't get God to give us an opinion on each little incident. It is 
enevitable that men and women will have to make some decisions by themsleves.
Those decisions will be based on their beliefs.

>|> 
>|> >In an Islamic state, it is the Caliph who orders jihad when certain
>|> >circumstances prevail.
>|> 
>|> How do you distinguish the political motives of this person ?  
>
>You can never know that to 100%.
>
>God has given us a brain to think with so it is ultimately up to each one of
>us to try and figure out if the Caliphs orders are in accordance with the 
>teachings of God. If the Caliph suddenly orders something which is not in 
>accordance with this then we shouldn't obey him.

That is inadequate. Not all people are willing or able to stand up to people
with authority. The system of caliphate has nothing to do with Islam. It was
invented by muslims of the time to solve a particular problem. This does not
stop muslims today from inventing their own system.

>There can only be *ONE* God and it is to Him  *only* we submit ourselves 
>too....
>
>|>Do religion and politics mix freely in Islam ?
>
>Every society has a constituion and in a *true* Islamic society this constitution
>is the Laws in the Quran and the Sunnah. Whatever is decide in the frame of this
>is up to the people and the state. 

The quran and sunna are inadequate as a constitution. They do not address many
of the issues in a constitution, including the structure of government, the
powers of the state, nor does it address the issues dealing with the due process
of law, rules of arrest and trials, rules of evidence, treatment of prisonors.
They can serve as basis of a constitution but alone they can't form one.

>
>Peace
>Gani
>
>********************************************************************
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>(SAHIH MUSLIMIN)" ... I heard the Messenger of Allah (pbuh) saying: 
>He who amongst you should see something abominable should modify it
>with the help of his hand; and if he has not strength enough to do 
>it, then he should do it with his tongue, and if he has not strength 
>enough to do it, (even) then he should (abhort it) from his heart, 
>and that is the least of faith."
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>********************************************************************


Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: aaron@binah.cc.brandeis.edu (Scott Aaron)
Subject: Re: ISLAM REVEALED #2 - The Origin of Allah
Reply-To: aaron@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Organization: Brandeis University
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 18:26:24 GMT

A question for af664@yfn.ysu.edu (Frank DeCenso, Jr.) from a fellow Christian:
what are you trying to reveal Islam as?  So far, you've shown Islam as a
religion whose adherents refer to their god as "God" and whose predecessors
had a history of following false gods and who needed prophets to straighten
them out.  Surely you see that the exact same thing can be said for
Christianity:  we refer to our god as God and our predecessors (the Jews of
the OT) were constantly going over to false gods resulting in God (see
what I mean) sending prophets like Elijiah to set them straight.  So, once
again, as what do you think you are revealing Islam?

BTW, Gani has repeatedly suggested Ali's translation of the Qur'an.  I would
suggest Assad's because his English is easier to read (IMHO).  The commentary
is also more useful than Ali's.  Both still use King James type language but
Assad's isn't as archaic in style.

  -- Scott
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey)
Subject: Re: And over to you, Sean... (anyone else can play - just jump in!)
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: +1 408 249 9630, log in as 'guest'.
Date: 5 Jan 1993 05:30:23 UTC

In article <root.726185836@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>hartigan@ac.dal.ca writes:
>>I'm thinking
>>this is a matter of motivation, i.e. that if your motivation to suppress
>>your intellectual sense of "rightness" is stronger than your motivation
>>to recognize it, than you can maintain belief in spite of contrary
>>evidence. In other words, you are a practitioner of "doublethink." 
>I'd have to say yes, that's true.  And, as we've said before, the source of
>the motivation would appear to be fear.  I'd have to say that it was fear
>of 'the end' actually being the end, if you know what I mean.  Some
>self-examination has shown me that I truly do fear death being the end of
>everything...

Fear of death? Well, that seems better than most who are content with
denial. Just remember, into the light. The journey of death is the
hero's journey, one we all make, alone. Life is to some people heaven on
earth, if you'd been living my life you'd know what it's worth, life is
- Too $hort. If a dream is all you've got homeboy, you better live that
dream like the real McCoy, you ask a simple question boy don't say what,
it's your life but don't waste it though or you'll know, Life Is. A'ight,
thas it, we out. [Comin' straight from Oakland, home of the rock ...]

>>It's dull as ditchwater,
>>because it's so phony and artificial, and it has virtually no 
>>predictive power. It's cheating, I think. Dixi! 
>Ah, but what if Genesis is poetry...as we've said?  Remember Paul Harvey's
>and my theoretical discussion about the Fall?

Poetry? It's myth! And what's this theoretical discussion? I fancied we
were having an argument or at the minimum pining for the fjords. And my
name is Blanche Dubois which means white woods. Now if you'll excuse me,
I must secure some shrubbery for my collection. It's a secular/sacred
thang - r&b sound with pop appeal smoothed out on the hip-hop tip.
From: jimgar@scorch.apana.org.au (Jim Garner)
Subject: Re: Torture and the mind: _Star Trek_ vs. _1984_. 
Organization: Craggenmoore public Unix system , Newcastle , Oz
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 19:47:10 GMT

drake+@cs.cmu.edu (Drake) writes:

|The pertinent question, though, is what happens if you are tortured and/or
|brainwashed to the point that you really DO mean those "few words?"

I think if the torture or brainwashing had interfered with an
individual's thoughts and identity to the extent of rewriting their
beliefs, that person has in effect been driven insane. The mind has
been detatched from the soul, and the person is not responsible for
their thoughts. There is still no culpability, and the torturers have
acheived nothing as far as the victim's spiritual state is concerned. 
The person's true spirit cannot be expressed through
the brain - it would probably be in abbeyance until they die, in the 
same way as the spirit of a person in a coma.
-- 
Jim Garner B.Math (Newcastle NSW Australia) - jimgar@scorch.apana.org.au
From: iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Ivan A Derzhanski)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Polythe'isme?  (Re: And over to you Sean... (a mixed bag of subjects))
Date: 10 Jan 93 21:41:18 GMT
Organization: Centre for Cognitive Science, Edinburgh, UK

In article <root.726508832@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>Mon Dieux!

C'est "Mes Dieux".  Combien en avez-vous?

-- 
 `D'ye mind tellin me whit the two o ye are gaun oan aboot?' (The Glasgow
Ivan A Derzhanski  (iad@cogsci.ed.ac.uk; iad@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu)    Gospel)
* Centre for Cognitive Science,  2 Buccleuch Place,  Edinburgh EH8 9LW,  UK
* Cowan House, Pollock Halls, 18 Holyrood Park Road, Edinburgh EH16 5BD, UK
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.pagan
From: swaim@owlnet.rice.edu (Michael Parks Swaim)
Subject: Re: The meaning of "pagan"
Organization: Rice University
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 07:21:15 GMT

In article <29DEC199200093236@jane.uh.edu> lib1p@jane.uh.edu (Tammy Stark Blandino) writes:
>Just as "pagan"
>means that they don't believe Jesus is the Messiah.  It also means that
>they don't derive their religion from the Judeo-Christian-Moslem base.
>Remember that neither Hindu nor Buddism are derived from the 
>Judeo-Christian-Moslem base.  Technically they are pagan also.
  I associate pagan with being polythiestic, so I'm not sure Buddhism
qualifies. You could probably argue both ways. For that matter, I was
talking with a friend of mine over break, and she said that the Buddhists
she had known in Operation Rescue considered it a philosophy, not a religion.
(They were from a country near India, but I've forgotten which one.)
  I think that it's probably about as hard to get a good working definition
of pagan as religion.
-- 
Mike Swaim            | "101 Dalmations? Yeah I saw that."
swaim@owlnet.rice.edu | "You Did! REALLY? The same film?
Disclamer: I lie      | Let's stop driving! We must get out and jump
up and down and up and down and dance around and around!" Matt and Delerium
Xref: sparky talk.religion.misc:25750 alt.atheism:25577 soc.culture.jewish:24911
From: jbaltz@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Jerry B Altzman)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism,soc.culture.jewish
Subject: Re: Child abuse ordered by G-d - NOT!
Date: 10 Jan 93 17:10:09 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.1993Jan10.171009.23877
Reply-To: jbaltz@watsun.cc.columbia.edu (Jerry B Altzman)
Organization: mailer daemons association

In article <9301100108.AA21433@aplpy.jhuapl.edu> levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu (Robert A. Levene) writes:
>Among the conditions this "rebellious son" must satisfy
>* Male
>* Age > 13
    and < 13.25


* Both parents must STATE PUBLICLY that their son is a thief, &c. There are
many many additional conditions, as Rob notes.
>* etc...

I once questioned my rabbi about this. Several times (at different points
in my life, to several DIFFERENT [o,c,r]) Rabbis. They all reported that it
is meant primarily as a scare tactic, and that the punishment itself had
never been enforced.

>Robert A. Levene     Internet: levene@aplpy.jhuapl.edu

//jbaltz
--

jerry b. altzman                                              +1 212 650 5617
jbaltz@columbia.edu                                      jauus@cuvmb (bitnet)
NEVIS::jbaltz (HEPNET)                    ...!rutgers!columbia!jbaltz (bang!)
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.atheism
From: bskendig@netcom.com (Brian Kendig)
Subject: I feel threatened by Christianity...
Organization: Starfleet Headquarters: San Francisco
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 21:41:49 GMT

I just saw part of Pat Robertson's TV show "The 700 Club" for the
first time today while I was home on my lunch break, and I'll admit,
it frightened me.  I was never really aware of what large Christian
organizations are doing these days.

Robertson kept talking about how society is moving farther and farther
away from God, and how this nation is falling into such sinful
activities as drug use, murder, abortion, homosexuality and sodomy,
and materialism as a result.  He urged his audience to rally together
and fight the anti-Christian oppression.  He spoke highly of the fight
to put official prayer back into schools, and he encouraged the
pro-life crowd to keep striving for their goal, and he even did an
interview with one of the lawyers from a Christian legal firm which is
working to defend the ability of students to distribute pro-life
pamphlets in schools.  Throughout the whole time I watched him,
Robertson kept talking about his desire to return America to
traditional family values, despite his opposition (which, it could be
inferred from his words, is quite morally depraved).

I'm worried.  What am I to do if much of this comes to pass?  I don't
want my children to be singled out by sitting quietly during a school
prayer, I don't want my tax money to be spent on a public nativity
scene, I don't want Jehovah's Witnesses to come by my door (as they
did twice right after Christmas).  I just want to be left alone, and
not have well-meaning people try to bring the word of Jesus to me, and
not have a well-meaning government decide what's morally best for me.
I have my own moral values which I'm perfectly happy to keep to
myself.  Heck, I won't even complain about the "In God We Trust" on
all my money, if it would just convince the Christians to keep their
religion out of my life.

I'm overreacting, I know, but just seeing Pat Robertson voicing a lot
of arguments so one-sided I'm surprised they don't fall over is bad
enough -- seeing him on TV, with the phones around him ringing off the
hook with people pledging money to support him, really got to me.  How
_dare_ he try to pass _himself_ off as the oppressed one!

-- 
_/_/_/  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
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey)
Subject: Re: Freewil was The delusional nature of sincere belief.
Organization: The Duck Pond public unix: +1 408 249 9630, log in as 'guest'.
	<1993Jan8.162934.10005@ac.dal.ca>
Date: 9 Jan 1993 06:45:31 UTC

In article <1993Jan8.162934.10005@ac.dal.ca> 
hartigan@ac.dal.ca writes:
>In article <fXFLZCy@quack.sac.ca.us>, 
pharvey@quack.sac.ca.us (Paul Harvey) writes:
>> In article <1993Jan7.135300.9967@ac.dal.ca> hartigan@ac.dal.ca writes:
>>>If you guys are so free, then explain this: how do you decide to make
>>>a decision? Or do decisions _just happen_? Heh heh... *evil laugh*
>> Let me share with you a little technique I learned in one of the many 12
>> step programs I belong to, or did I discover this while contemplating
>> the meaning of a rock, well whatever, here it is: I have digitized time
>> into convenient discreet (prudent at this juncture) increments.
>Heh heh...:) I hope all the free will advocates out there practice this
>same procedure, otherwise, heck, they are abdicating their much
>prized free will 99% of the time! 

Exactly. Use it or lose it. You axe a simple question boy don't say
what, there's one simple rule and that's you must stay up!

>But wait!

Oh, ye of such little faith! Really, Jesus does love you. And Tonto
too! Oye como va? Qui mo sabe?

>If you have to freely
>choose to exercise your free will, how do you make _that_choice?

That's easy! Just *do it*. That's the way this freewill racket works.
Exercise it and you got it, slip up or get caught in idle thought and
it's gone, just like that! Puff! But, you got a shot at the next time
slot if you're quick. Remember, you must stay up! It's a mind game and
you got to deal with that, it's your life, but don't waste it though, or
you'll know, Life IS ... [Too $hort]

>Oh, I hate it when I get all confused.

Why? If you ask me it's the only way to fly!
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
From: zmbenhal@netcom.com (Zeyd M. Ben-Halim)
Subject: Re: Islam at a Glance
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 02:22:36 GMT

In article <1818@rwja.umdnj.edu> gopal@rwja.umdnj.edu (Srihari Gopal) writes:
>Gani:
>
>You sidetracked my original question by quoting a long and boring article
>which I didnt have quite the attention span to read thoroughly. I'll
>restate it again.
>
>>In other words, why should I limit myself to praying ONLY to Allah?
>>What if I want to pray to Jesus, Yahweh, Krishna or Buddha? Why are these
>>manifestations of God wrong? And why is the worship ONLY to Allah the only
>>correct path to salvation?

Because that is thae basis of Islam. If you accept it then you are on the
first step in becoming a muslim, if you don't then you are not.
The basis of christainty is that Jesus is the son of God who died on the
cross to save us from our original sin. If you accept that then you are a
christian.

You don't have to worship if you don't want to. But if you want to become a
muslim then only God is worthy of worship. If you don't that is fine with us.
If you want to worship God and other deities you are free to do so, but you
are not a muslim.

Capice?

>Can you answer the above question (in one paragraph or less)? Please be
>specific and please avoid giving quotes and references to texts. I'd
>appreciate a summary of your knowledge.
>
>Srihari Gopal
>gopal@rwja.umdnj.edu

Zeyd
From: ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik )
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc
Subject: Re: Criticism:  "There's no logic in Christianity"
Date: 5 Jan 93 00:49:43 GMT
Followup-To: talk.religion.misc
Organization: (Evil Eye Creature from Mars, Inc.)

In article <TORKEL.92Dec31134929@bast.sics.se>, torkel@sics.se (Torkel
Franzen) wrote:
> 
> In article <C04CrJ.Mv0.1@cs.cmu.edu> drake+@cs.cmu.edu (Drake) writes:
> 
>    >I'm surprised that nobody has pointed this out yet, but nowhere is it
>    >claimed by any competent geometrist that the premisses (we mathemeticians
>    >like to call them 'axioms' or 'postulates') of Euclidean geometry are 
>    >in fact 'true.'
> 
>   I thought it was best not to risk overloading Kent's circuits. But you
> are right of course, and in the case of axiomatic set theory, many of the
> people who actually prove things in the subject would say that the axioms
> are strictly speaking meaningless. They're wrong, of course, but their
> opinion is perfectly compatible with axiomatic set theory being a subject
> abounding in logically valid arguments.

I think Euclid is a splendid example of where the mass agreement 
causes the premise to be accepted as a valid one, formal logic
and mathematics is also good examples of a priori agreements. As 
long as we can't agree on metaphysical religious premises, such
as in the case of Christianity, I don't see any possibilities to
boldly state that Christianity is founded upon logic.

Note the difference, Hindus and Christians accept straight lines,
but they don't accept each others' concepts of good and evil.

Kent
-------------------
Kent Sandvik (UUCP: ....!apple!ksand; INTERNET: ksand@apple.com)
DISCLAIMER: Private activities on the Net.		
"Don't just do something!  Stand there!"  -- Mystery Science Theater 3000
Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc