HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 8 Apr 1992 10:17:06 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Prayer Request

Michelle:

I am praying for your parents (and for your baby--Congratulations!).
May God's peace and His blessings keep you all safe and warm.  In His
name.
     Love INC,
              ---Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 9 Apr 1992 21:04:04 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: ACLJ & CASE
              9 Apr 1992 19:29:54 EDT from <MKLINE%VDH.bitnet@VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU>

Michael:

Thank you for the information about the ACLJ.  You might be interested to
know that Jay Sekulow is also the Chief Counsel for Operation Rescue in
the current case of Alexandria v. Bray, and he won the Mergens case which
entitles students to distribute Christian literature on campuses.  Jay
Sekulow has argued more cases before the Supreme Court than any other
attorney in the United States, according to my information.  One of the
Christian magazines did a profile on him sometime around last February or
so.  He is a fascinating person.  He has also written a book about the legal
rights of Christians in America which includes a good deal of autobiographical
information.  It is called "From Intimidation to Victory:  Regaining the
Christian Right to Speak," published by Creation House of Lake Mary, Florida.
                                          Love INC,
                                                   ---Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 10 Apr 1992 17:12:00 EST
From:         MCDURFEE@MIDD.BITNET
Subject:      Re: help with prayer

Hi!  I'm new to the list today.  I am really excited about all
I have read so far in just the few hours I have been receiving
messages.
Anyway, I reason I am writing is to say that the "A" in the ACTS
is for "Adoration", like the kind we should give to God every day
and especially each time we pray.  We should begin with Adoration
for His qualities and who he is.
I'll be praying for you JoEllen, in your desire to search Him through
your prayers.  I have found that if you desire it and it is God's
will, he will change your heart to be able to follow him in
this area.
God bless,
Donna
McDurfee@Midd.Bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: christia@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: CHRISTIA
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 20:20:00 EDT
From:         The List Minor <VCHAI@SMITH.BITNET>
Subject: Songrette - Hope

   MY HOPE IS BUILT ON NOTHING LESS  (Edward Mote and others)

   My hope is built on nothing less
   Than Jesus' blood and righteousness;
   No merit of my own I claim,
   But wholly lean on Jesus' name.

   When darkness seems to veil His face,
   I rest on His unchanging grace;
   In ev'ry high and stormy gale
   My anchor holds within the veil.

   His oath, His covenant, and blood,
   Support me in the whelming flood;
   When all around my soul gives way,
   He then is all my hope and stay.

   When the last trumpet's voice shall sound,
   O may I then in Him be found,
   Clothed in His righteousness alone,
   Faultless to stand before His throne.

   On Christ, the solid Rock, I stand;
   All other ground is sinking sand.


   "He drew me up...out of the miry bog, and set my feet upon
    a rock."  Ps 40:2
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL0]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 10 Apr 1992 13:03:42 EST
From:         Ian Williams <iwilliam@AU.ORACLE.COM>
Subject:      Apostolic Teams

Hi!

I received a letter regarding the 'Biblical Leadership' posts I sent..

Obviously because they are notes, they are a little hard to understand..
Sometimes when you're so used to a term, you forget that other people might
not have heard of it before..

I was asked what an 'Apostolic Team' was...

Well an apostolic team is a team lead funilly enough by an apostle that is
responsible for many existing churches, and also for planting new churches..
A well founded team should ideally contain at LEAST one of each member of the
Eph 4 Ascenscion gift ministries..


The apostolic team that our church relates to is actually based in our church.
The Lead Elder (pastor) of our church is the apostle on the team.. (he hates
to call himself an apostle because of the misunderstaning of the term, but
oh well)..
The team at the moment is three strong. We have 6 pastors in our church, but
only three of them make up the team.. This team is responsible for over
a hundred churches throughout South Africa, Australia, Asia and Europe.
We do not try to convert churches to relate to us, but rather they come
and see that something is happening with our church and decide they want to
be a part of it..

There is no rank and priviledge associated with being a member of this team.
They are not earned ranks, but a gifting from God, and hence whilst having
governing authority over us, are not _higher_ than us in a hierachial sense..
This is where most of the heresy in church leadership comes about, and why
I say that the chuch structure is _NOT_ hierachial, because our  leaders
are not _higher_ than us, they just have different functions in God..

Anyway I hope that clears some things up!.


*****************************************************************************
Ian Williams          			Internet: iwilliam@au.oracle.com
Oracle Systems         			Phone   : +61 8 239 3900
Adelaide, Australia
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Acknowledge-To: <S096556@UMRVMA>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 6 Apr 1992 08:04:58 CDT
From:         Lonnie Schubert <S096556@UMRVMA.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: ABORTION:Spec. legal

In Kansas, an abortion can be legally terminated until labor begins
naturally, even if the pregnancy is 2 or 3 weeks (or more) after the
"due date".  This is one of the few facts about my home state that
disgusts me.
    Lonnie Schubert
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 9 Apr 1992 08:43:34 EST
From:         carol nemec <YA67@FERRIS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: garbage music

I can't sing.  I can almost carry a tune.  I ruined my throat on cigarettes
so it is weaker than when I was young.  I hope when I get to heaven that God
will call upon me to sing with my perfect voice, because it would give me
great pleasure to sing for God without other people making faces.


Your friend in Christ, Bernice.
*********************

Bernice,
I always figure I'm gonna be in the angel choir...so what I think
in my head will come out of my mouth!  I love making a joyful
noise :-)    I can't wait to meet you there, Bernice!  (If not before)
With love, in Christ, Carol
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 6 Apr 1992 19:37:00 EDT
From:         The List Minor <VCHAI@SMITH.BITNET>
Subject:      Roberta, RE: prayer request

 Hi Roberta!  Welcome to Christia!

>This is a challenging time for me right now and
>I ask for your prayers with regard to prosperity and a strengthening
>of my faith.  I pray to walk with Christ and fear not.

   I hope you don't mind me asking this, but is there a fear you are
   specifically dealing with?

   In Christ,
   Vicky
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 16:45:00 EDT
From:         The List Minor <VCHAI@SMITH.BITNET>
Subject:      Chinese terminologies

Allen Chen writes:
>There a lot of differences in cultural as well as in the intrepretations
>of some terminalogies between the western and the eastern world.
> Most Christians thought that
>Buddism, Tsan, Taosm and Yoga are religions and people should give up
>those in order to accept Jesus Christ.  It is very hard for the people
>in East as they have lived on it for thousands of years.

   I guess it _is_ hard in cases like these, to separate religion
   from culture.

>The buddist book told the Chinese to forgive
>others even your enemy, to love others as you love yourself in order to
>be trully happy in the spirit.

    But that is where it stops.  Whereas in Christianity, we have the
    chance to have a *personal* relationship with the One who created
    us.
    Not all religions are bad (not all are good either).  I think some
    are man-thought-out, and some are not, but whether they are good or
    bad, they are *not enough* for our salvation.  Cultural differences
    present a great difficulty, especially if a certain religion is part
    of one's heritage and family background, but I personally think that
    we need to think of it as a spiritual battle, and not just simply as
    rejecting a practical practice of something that is part of our lifestyle
    or culture, know what I mean?

> The Tasan is only a practice for one
>to calm down, not letting the physical desires or thought to control
>yourself, but let the spirit in your body to control it.

    This is self-centred, and therefore, not in keeping with God's
    will for us.

> The taosum is
>a philosopy devoting oneself to the 'TEN' (heaven, in Chinese) that
>controls the stars, the living beings.

    Not Christ-centred.

>I was baptized into a Christian about half a year ago.  Christians are
>a very minority in China, Japan, and Taiwan.  I would not like to see
>people reject the gospel simply because you do not respect our
>inheritage from the history.

    Hmmm...do not respect our (I'm Chinese too, Allen) heritage...
    Personally, I think that when we're in Christ, cultural heritage
    doesn't matter that much anymore.  I'm not saying that we should
    forget it, it's just that somehow our *heritage* in Christ over-
    shadows our cultural heritage, know what I mean?  To accept the
    gospel is not to reject the morals we've been taught, nor to
    reject the "good things" in our culture, it is to accept what
    God wants for us, for our salvation, and for our souls, and to
    deny whatever is not of Him.

    In Christ,
    Vicky
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: QuickMail/SMTP interface.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 13:21:33 EDT
From:         Leo W <Leo_W@QM.CIRCA.UFL.EDU>
Subject:      Scripturette 4/7
X-To:         Christia <christia@asuvm.inre.asu.edu>

"Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are *perfect* ... I could not speak
unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
I have fed you with milk and not with meat" (1 Corinthians 2:6; 3:1,2).

"For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you
again which be the first principles of the oracles of God, and are become such
as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.  For every one that useth milk is
unskilful in the word of righteousness; for he is a babe.  But strong meat
belongeth to them that are *perfect* (of full age), even those who by reason of
use have ther senses exercised to discern both good and evil.  Therefore
leaving the word of the beginning of Christ, let us go on unto perfection"
(Hebrews 5:12 - 6:1).

"Till we all come ... to the *perfect man* ... that we henceforth be no longer
*children*" (Ephesians 4:13,14).

Yours in Christ Jesus,
Leo
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re: Should women cover their heads?
From: comjohn@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Mr. John T Jensen)
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 19:57:41 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland, New Zealand.

I wonder if this passage does not also have something to say about hair
length.  I am uncertain whether the passage is prescriptive --- is it a sin
for a woman to come to church with her head uncovered?  I don't know.  But
at minimum I think the Bible is telling us here that God's creation has some
aesthetic norms in it.  Are all the wild things going on today (shaved
heads, boys' haircuts for women, pony tails for men, spiked hair, etc)
simply neutral 'styles'?  I doubt it!

jj

John Thayer Jensen                      64 9 373 7599 ext. 7543
Commerce Computer Services              64 9 373 7437 (FAX)
Auckland University                     jt.jensen@aukuni.ac.nz
Private Bag 92019
AUCKLAND
New Zealand
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 11:49:00 EDT
From:         Jeff Shirton <SHIRTON@MCMASTER.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Abortion & Don't

Darryl,

> Ok, I understand now.  Let's relate this back to abortion.
>
> Abortion is now legal.  Americans are discussing whether we should
> make it illegal, but we are unsure (have doubts).
> Therefore, it MUST remain legal.
>
> You're right.  "When in doubt, don't" is an emminently sensible
> aphorism after all!

No, Darryl, you misused it again.  For the abortion issue, you use it
like this:

Do I want to have any kids?
When in doubt, _Don't_ have sex!

If you do get pregnant, do you want to commit murder?
When in doubt, _Don't_ have an abortion!

In Christ,

Jeff Shirton
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 13 Apr 1992 10:26:59 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Contraception == abortion? (was Re: re:pro-choice)

Darryl:

Apparently you have misunderstood me, or I have overestimated your ability
to find options.  There is no case in which you have the choice of either
torturing someone or denying God.  No one can be forced to do either.  If
pressure is put on you to do either, you must refuse, and if that refusal
means death, you must die.

I am confused by your distinction between "your Truth" and "another's Truth."
God's Truth is the only truth there is, and the trueness of Truth is unaffected
by your (or anyone's) acceptance of or belief in it.  Let me put it this way:
apples fell off trees long before people knew about gravity.  People will be
damned by their refusal to accept Christ whether they accept that possibility
or not.  As someone once explained to a friend of mine (who fancied himself
a solopsist--i.e., nothing exists unless he thinks it does), if someone hits
you with a brick, you will bleed, whether you accept the existence of the
brick or not.  Truth is not relative; it is absolute, and it exists
independently of your ability to perceive it.

The argument that you should deny God before torturing someone to accept
"your God" is a straw man.  God does not ask you to make such choices.
Furthermore, there is no such threat implied by any of the topics we
have discussed here, as far as I can tell.

By the way, please do not bring up the Crusades, the Inquisition, and
so on as a response.  These activities were pursued by the Catholic church
(sorry, Catholics, but bear with me here) in a time when the church and the
state were one entity.  They were done for _political_ reasons, using a
_religious_ excuse.  As an Anabaptist, I have no relationship to either the
institutionalized Catholic church nor the institutionalized Protestant church.
The people of my faith tradition have been murdered by both sides during
their history (see "Martyr's Mirror").  I have no hard feelings about this,
of course; I simply wish to make it clear that the tradition of which I am a
part has no part in these crimes and its members were persecuted for refusing
to side with the Big Guys.

Anyway, the point is that one is never "forced" to torture someone _or_
to deny God.  Either is an act of will; both can be refused.

Hope that clears things up.
                           Love INC,
                                    ---Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 10 Apr 1992 06:27:01 EDT
From:         MKLINE%VDH.bitnet@VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU
Subject:      Slow Turn Around

Subject: Slow Turn Around


Well, I've got so far behind I had to upload over 10,000 lines of CHRISTIA
posts to my PC at home. Can't keep up with this with just a couple of
breaks, etc.

So, my replies might be a bit slow, and I pray I don't answer something
already answered, but bear with me and I should be able to get caught up.

No, I haven't forgot the Rock postings and hope to get 1-2 "testimonies"
out this weekend. Like I said, I just want any replies to be on the nature
of "If my sister/brother had said this, I couldn't agree with it because..."
There are some that I thought was "stretching things", *BUT*, it could
very well be that some one on this list would say, "That's exactly how
it was with me!" We'll see.

Thank you, family.

Maks
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sat, 11 Apr 1992 18:14:08 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Contraception == abortion? (was Re: re:pro-choice)
              11 Apr 1992 19:36:55 GMT from <creps@SILVER.UCS.INDIANA.EDU>

Steve:

Thanks for the input, but my point was somewhat different.  Someone (I
forget who now) had predicated their support for abortion rights on the
fear that if we "take away" the right to abortion, contraceptive rights
would be the next to go.  My point was simply that, if one sees the
two as morally equivalent, how can one be personally opposed to abortion
(as the writer said he/she was--forgive me, I really got lost as to
who said what during all this, and my files got permanently zapped during
last night's thunderstorm), but at the same time personally in favor of
contraception.  If they are equal, one should be personally opposed to
both.  Furthermore, in all cases, I reject the "you may have a different
set of ethics" argument when it is offerred by Christians.  If we, as
Christians, accept Jesus for who He says He is--Lord--and the Bible for
what it says it is--Truth, then we can not accept someone else's "alternative"
truth as being just as valid for them as ours is for us.  Truth is truth.
We don't have the option of picking it ourselves; God has taken care of that,
not just for Christians, but for everyone.
  Hope that clears things up (but somehow I doubt it!)
                                                      Love INC,
                                                               ---Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 14 Apr 1992 03:38:50 EDT
From:         JEK@NIHCU.BITNET
Subject: re: Evolution

Andrew Brennan writes:

 > I am under the impression that the evolutionists are primarily
 > focusing on mankind's own evolution. While that is to be
 > expected, have they attempted to find evidence of other
 > creatures' evolving? If not....

Yes indeed, they have written and researched extensively about the
development and origins of other species. Darwin's ORIGIN OF SPECIES
devotes only one sentence to the question of human evolution. The
public pays attention chiefly to the question specifically of human
evolution, partly because one is naturally more curious about one's
own ancestors than about someone else's, and partly because that is
where the religious questions arise. (If evolutionists asserted only
that lions and tigers have a common ancestor, only a handful of
specialists would b interested.)

You might find it interesting and worthwhile to read the ORIGIN OF
SPECIES from cover to cover. In the first place, it is part of a
good education to acquaint yourself with a theory, and with a book,
regardless of whether you agree with them or not, that have had so
great an influence on the culture in which you live.  In the second
place, if you are going to argue with evolutionists, it pays to know
something of their position. And you can score points by being able
to say truthfully that you have read the ORIGIN. Most of them
haven't.

If you want something a little lighter than the ORIGIN, you might
pick up at your paperback bookstore or library any of several books
of essays on evolution by Stephen Jay Gould.

 Yours,
 James Kiefer
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:      UK.AC.AFRC.JII;  9 APR 92 10:53:51 BST
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 9 Apr 1992 10:53:00 GMT
From:         HANNANT@JII.AFRC.AC.UK
Subject:      Gifts of the Spirit

All,
    Yesterday at our Christian Fellowship group the topic of concersation
was on the gifts of the spirit.  A visitor joined us yesterday who used to
work here some 5 years ago.  When she left she went on to be trained at
Ruffe Place a Christian teaching centre.  She has been praying for this site
for many years and was delighted that this group exists.
    Back to the discusion.  Before the meeting the Lord showed her a passage
Acts 5:12-17, and she felt this was relevant to us.  It is bit long to type
out so I shall trust any interested to read it themselves.
    Her view was that we should be performing healing and miracles.  The
Holy Spirit within us can do anything as long as we beleive.  She felt
that it was up to us to strive for the Gifts of the Spirit and use them as
the Lord did.
    Her main point of view was that if Jesus performed miracles that helped
people to beleive then why don't we use them.  Instead of shying away from
them actively seak them and use them.
    I fully beleive that anything Jesus did we can also do if we just have
enough faith but, should miracles just be performed as an added reason to
beleive in God ?  Doesn't it say somewhere in the Bible that man will not
beleive on miracles alone ?
    What I would like is any scriptures that back up her reasoning and some
that don't.  God bless you, Nigel.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 16 Apr 1992 12:43:49 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Heterosexual risk
              16 Apr 1992 08:31:19 EDT from <BSCURR01@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU>

Brenda:

Thanks for the 60 minutes information.  By the way, another source of
infection which is extremely common in third-world nations, particularly
in the African nations, is the common practice of re-using needles when
performing innoculations.  This practice has been linked to many of the
cases in the African nations, and has been explicitly blamed for the
abysmally high incidences of AIDS-infected infants in Romania under the
Ceaucescu (sp?) regime.
                       Love INC,
                                ---Kerry
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia