Re: The BIG Lie (Jesus Confesses)

At 06:16 PM 8/10/97 +1000, you wrote:
>Is it worth noting at this point that an evangilical Christian and the 
>religious right have little in common. Evangelicals (I'm one) belive the 
>Bible to be the word of God etc.. but don't add anythign else to it and 
>certianly wouldn't force thier beliefs down your throat. They would 

Well, most evangelists don't force things down your throat.  They try to convince you to send them money to "Help" The Almighty (TM)'s cause.  Usually, that money is spent on porno mags, hookers, and booze.

>I would also have a problem with Christians controlling and censoring the 
>net. I would welcome (and do welcome) sites that which to argue against 
>Christianity. What wrong with that ?? It simply provides a forum for 
>Christians to defend thier beliefs. Besides if I censor you now because i 
>find your content un acceptable whats to stop you censoring me later when 
>your in the majority ! What utter stupidity to load the gun for others. 
>Particularly as i am a Christian I WOULD be critical of some of the 
>religious rights ideas and agendas and would happily argue from the Bible 
>that they are not a good thing.
>

Too many Christians try to censor atheist site because it defies their Almighty God (TM), and somehow clouds others views.

>I thought school pray was outlawed in the states ?? 

mandatory prayer was.

>> I have known far too many Christians who never read anything that
>> challenges their basic belief structure.  Nothing that could dare shake
>> their faith in God and the Bible.  In their isolation, they are taught to
>> believe ideas that have no rational defense.  (Like Biblical inerrancy and
>> Creationism.)  When challenged, these outcasts from reason have to rely on
>> the "moral authority" of their unseen God or other appeals to authority to
>> try and defend their irrational beliefs.
>
>Christians whould read challenging stuff. IT expands thier mind and 
>strengthens thier beliefs (Well i find it does), and in my expirence a 
>Christian who cant defend thier faith needs to learn more. Although i 
>would disagree with dismissing creationism and Biblical inerrancey. (not 
>that is is an appropriate forum for such a discussion)

Bullshit.  Most Christians I see IRL and on TV cringe at books other than The Good Book(TM).  Creationism is bullshit, God didn't make everything in 7 days, we evolved from monkeys and various others (Although many half-evolved monkeys can be seen on TV Evangelism shows and in Congress).

In order to believe in something, I need some hard facts.  I need to actually see a god (while I'm sober) talk to me and I talk back and see him actually makes things.  Unlike some of the weaker people, I can't just believe it because "anything's possible".  I can't believe it because a minister or a book tells me.  When I was around 8 years, I read this section of the bible asking questions like (it was in the back) "How do we know the bible is true?"  I was intersted, reading further, I noticed some page numbers, so I went there, finding not words of a scientist, but supposed words of god.  If god supposedly asked people to write this, and he says it's true, then that's called bullshit, because that's like someone writing a crypto algorithm, and stating it's secure even though no one else has seen it.

In short, unless I see it for myself, I won't believe it fully.  In religions case, at all.

> Too many Christians try to censor atheist site because it defies their Almighty God (TM), and somehow clouds others views.

I notice to many and all for you have a way of being the same. Typical 
narrow minded sterotyping. 

> 
> Bullshit.  Most Christians I see IRL and on TV cringe at books other than The Good Book(TM).  Creationism is bullshit, God didn't make everything in 7 days, we evolved from monkeys and various others (Although many half-evolved monkeys can be seen on TV Evangelism shows and in Congress).

SO get out more and meet more Christians. Dont generalise to some tiny 
subset you know.  
> In order to believe in something, I need some hard facts.  I need to actually see a god (while I'm sober) talk to me and I talk back and see him actually makes things.  Unlike some of the weaker people, I can't just believe it because "anything's possible".  I can't believe it because a minister or a book tells me.  When I was around 8 years, I read this section of the bible asking questions like (it was in the back) "How do we know the bible is true?"  I was intersted, reading further, I noticed some page numbers, so I went there, finding not words of a scientist, but supposed words of god.  If god supposedly asked people to write this, and he says it's true, then that's called bullshit, because that's like someone writing a crypto algorithm, and stating it's secure even though no one else has seen it.
                                                ^^^^^^^^^^

Next you'll claim to belive in evoloution because it has hard facts. 
Sorry to burst your bubble but evolotuion is at least as faulty as 
creationsim. And before you shoot your mouth off and look stupid, i have 
studied a lot of biological scinces at a teritiry level, and was majoring 
in it till i swithced to computer science. I also know heaps of biology 
students who share a similar opinionof evolotuion. No not all of these 
are Christians they just know what there talking about.


> In short, unless I see it for myself, I won't believe it fully.  In religions case, at all.

Again, your probably an evolotuoinist. You belive in quarks don't you ?? 
But wait you cant see them and all information realted to them is 
theoretical. Still what can i expect from the sheltered ignorant. 

Get out more and meet more poeple and dont generalise to all from small 
subsets you ignorant individual.

Jason

> 
> 
> 
> > Too many Christians try to censor atheist site because it defies their Almighty God (TM), and somehow clouds others views.
> 
> I notice to many and all for you have a way of being the same. Typical 
> narrow minded sterotyping. 
> 
> > 
> > Bullshit.  Most Christians I see IRL and on TV cringe at books other than The Good Book(TM).  Creationism is bullshit, God didn't make everything in 7 days, we evolved from monkeys and various others (Although many half-evolved monkeys can be seen on TV Evangelism shows and in Congress).

Is this what the cypherpunks list has become ? Discussions about religion ?

If so, I am out of here...

-- 
| Patrick Oonk -    http://patrick.mypage.org/  - patrick@pine.nl |
| PGP Key ID 0xDA2E93FA   -   Internic PO59   -   <clicketyclick> |
| Pine Internet B.V.           Consultancy, installatie en beheer |
| Tel: +31-70-3111010 - Fax: +31-70-3111011 - http://www.pine.nl/ |

On Tue, 12 Aug 1997, Patrick Oonk wrote:

> > > Bullshit.  Most Christians I see IRL and on TV cringe at books other 
> > > than The Good Book(TM).  Creationism is bullshit, God didn't make
> > > everything in 7 days, we evolved from monkeys and various others
> > > (Although many half-evolved monkeys can be seen on TV Evangelism
> > > shows and in Congress).
> 
> Is this what the cypherpunks list has become ? Discussions about religion ?
> 
> If so, I am out of here...

It has just devolved from crypto-religious discussion to
christ-o-religious discussion.

Don't worry.  It will be back to normal soon.

Whatever that is...

alan@ctrl-alt-del.com | Note to AOL users: for a quick shortcut to reply
Alan Olsen            | to my mail, just hit the ctrl, alt and del keys.

Actually i've tried to killthis thread by suggesting this in as in 
appropiruate forum for this but they insist on posting back

Jason

At 09:31 AM 8/12/97 -0700, Tim May wrote:
>At 4:10 AM -0700 8/12/97, Patrick Oonk wrote:
>>Is this what the cypherpunks list has become ? Discussions about religion ?
>>If so, I am out of here...
>
>The list is about what people discuss. It is up to all readers to write
>articles that are interesting.
>
>Merely sitting back and waiting for good articles is seldom fruitful.

Or at least _forge_ some good articles you wish somebody else had written....
:-)

				Klaus! von Future Composite

At 4:10 AM -0700 8/12/97, Patrick Oonk wrote:

>Is this what the cypherpunks list has become ? Discussions about religion ?
>
>If so, I am out of here...

The list is about what people discuss. It is up to all readers to write
articles that are interesting.

Merely sitting back and waiting for good articles is seldom fruitful.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

At 10:33 AM -0700 8/12/97, Patrick Oonk wrote:
>>
>> At 4:10 AM -0700 8/12/97, Patrick Oonk wrote:
>>
>> >Is this what the cypherpunks list has become ? Discussions about religion ?
>> >
>> >If so, I am out of here...
>>
>> The list is about what people discuss. It is up to all readers to write
>> articles that are interesting.
>>
>> Merely sitting back and waiting for good articles is seldom fruitful.
>
>Yeah right,
>
>I subscribed to this list again after I met some cypherpunks
>at HIP'97, as they told me it's still interesting.
>AFAIK this list is about cryptography, privacy and security.
>
>But hey, I just killfile everyone that discusses religion :)


I just sorted my mailbox based on name, to see what you've contributed. Of
the articles I've kept (about half of all articles, roughly), the only two
I have from you are on this topic. (It may be that you have written other
articles which I don't have, but your name does not spring to mind as being
a contributor.)

Again, if you want discussion, discuss already.

Complaining that others are not writing the articles you want to read is
never fruitful.

Probably you'll be happier doing what you said you were going to do, leaving.

--Tim May

There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

Even I am sick of this thread. I made an error in judgement in replying to a
 letter. 
I have apologized publicly to all invloved and yet this thread *still* continues
. How about we 
get back to the subject this list was designed for? Here, I'll even start.


     Under PGP 2.63, you are able to generate 2048 bit keys. Now, from everythin
g that I have read, 
it should be impossible to break these keys even use of a Cray computer. (Estima
tes os to cost were 
roughly in the neighborhood of .30 cents a minute, and approximately 1.8 years p
rocessing
 time if done with a Cray. My question is this. Are there any known attacks that
 have 
yielded success against that level of encryption without the plaintext being kno
wn under PGP?
     Also, does anyone know if the 4098 bit keys under PGP 5.0 are stronger or w
eaker? I noticed 
that the alogrythm has been changed as well as the LIB used. (THe MIT version us
es the RSALIB and the 
international version uses the MPLIB). It is the number of bits used that throws
 me. 
If the 2048 bit keys are unbreakable from 63, then why the need for 4098 bits no
w, unless there is a good 
chance that the bit level is close to being broken if not broken already. That w
ould jump the 
computing time and cost out of this world, considering that the cost jumps expon
entially per *bit*!
    Anyone have an answer? Are the 2048 bit keys under 2.63 breakable at  by the
 US Government or other 
such entities? Are my technical ideas behind my question correct, or do I have t
hem all wrong?
 Any point in the right direction will be welcome. Thanks.
>Again, if you want discussion, discuss already.
>
>Complaining that others are not writing the articles you want to read is
>never fruitful.
>
>Probably you'll be happier doing what you said you were going to do, leaving.
>
>--Tim May
>
>There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws.
>Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!"
>---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:----
>Timothy C. May              | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
>tcmay@got.net  408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
>W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA  | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
>Higher Power: 2^1398269     | black markets, collapse of governments.
>"National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

----------------------------------
E-Mail: David D. W. Downey <admin@cyberspacetechnologies.com>
Date: 08/13/97
Time: 05:19:41

This message was sent by XF-Mail
----------------------------------

> 
> At 4:10 AM -0700 8/12/97, Patrick Oonk wrote:
> 
> >Is this what the cypherpunks list has become ? Discussions about religion ?
> >
> >If so, I am out of here...
> 
> The list is about what people discuss. It is up to all readers to write
> articles that are interesting.
> 
> Merely sitting back and waiting for good articles is seldom fruitful.

Yeah right,

I subscribed to this list again after I met some cypherpunks
at HIP'97, as they told me it's still interesting.
AFAIK this list is about cryptography, privacy and security.

But hey, I just killfile everyone that discusses religion :)

-- 
| Patrick Oonk -    http://patrick.mypage.org/  - patrick@pine.nl |
| PGP Key ID 0xDA2E93FA   -   Internic PO59   -   <clicketyclick> |
| Pine Internet B.V.           Consultancy, installatie en beheer |
| Tel: +31-70-3111010 - Fax: +31-70-3111011 - http://www.pine.nl/ |

At 01:10 PM 8/12/97 +0200, Patrick Oonk wrote:
>Is this what the cypherpunks list has become ? Discussions about religion ?
>
>If so, I am out of here...

Cypherpunks, like many other large groups, have a lot of opinionated people
who can be counted on to respond to a troll.  This one was, ummm,
created a few days ago, but it'll go away or evolve into other species of
flamewar, given enough time and chance :-)

#			Thanks;  Bill
# Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts@ix.netcom.com
# You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp
#   (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies.  Thanks.)