HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 31 Jul 1992 09:31:56 -0400
From:         "Toni J. Benner" <tjbenner@COLBY.EDU>
Subject: Re: Divorce and Remarriage
X-To:         CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU

Jeff, I agree with you that if you are in a backslidden condition, that
if you sin and repent later that you are forgiven. I was talking mainly
of those who are trying to please the Lord every day. How can one
knowingly sin when you have a daily walk. I too have backslidden and
been forgiven. This whole thing seems to be a little too legalistic,
when we say that one can never divorce. I think many things are between
a person and the Lord. I don't attend church every Sunday because my
husband thinks I am being selfish if I go to church and he wants to
do something that day. I am trying to win him to the Lord, and I don't
think by insisting that I go to church, I am going to get very far.
Many might disagree with me, but I have to do what I feel is right.
Toni
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Organization: University of Prince Edward Island
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 20:49:00 -0400
From:         Lora Harris <LHARRIS@UPEI.CA>
Subject:      Amy Grant, music, morals

My very minor addition to the discussion of Amy Grant -

        I do go to taverns.  Canada is more like Britain in some ways - taverns
are places to eat and socialize.  True enough, on Friday and Saturday nights
they turn into very different places, but during the day and the weeknights,
they are NOT places to get drunk and pick up people, they are places for
friends to go and eat and talk.

Anyhow, that said, so you have any idea how refreshing it is to be in a pub,
eating lunch, and look up and see on the video screen - a married couple.  A
faithful married couple.  A not-teenage couple, married, in love, being a bit
silly, committed to each other, celebrating their love and marriage and
committment to each other.  I give Amy all the credit in the world for bringing
into these places not a "sneaky" undercover gospel, but a breathe of fresh
innocent air. A hint that there is more to life than what you find in bars.  A
reminder of faithfulness in marriage. A living example of family.  A
celebration of what sex is really for.

        I've heard many people complain about Amy 'selling out' any time a
song doesn't explicity say "He died for our sins and rose again". But in this
society, most people have heard that.  They don't believe it - they haven't
seen reason to - but they've heard it.  And since Christ Jesus is all in all,
shouldn't her music be all about life with Him?  That includes married love, a
symbol of Christ and His church.  It includes dealing honestly with temptation
and our own sin.  So I have no problem with her singing about any of these
things.  And the fact that she is Christian shines through her 'secular' songs
so strongly!

        Just my perspective,
                                        -Lora
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 21 Jul 1992 12:19:00 EDT
From:         "DRCV06::GRAHAM" <graham%drcv06.decnet@DRCVAX.AF.MIL>
Subject:      What to do with Paul.
X-To:         christia <christia@asuvm.inre.asu.edu>

Paul himself makes this issue very easy, and very difficult at the same
time.  In Galatians, he declares that anything other than the gospel that
he teaches is cursed, damned is a better translation.  He says even an
angel from heaven cannot gainsay his gospel.  In many references, he calls
the gospel "My gospel."  So, we are left in a rather tight situation --
either all of Paul is correct, or nothing of it is.

Paul is careful to delineate when he is speaking on his own rather than
what has been revealed to him.  It seems we have no choice but to accept
him, or reject him out of hand.  Now, if we accept him, what is he really
saying about women?

First of all, he is no chauvanist or hater of the female sex, this is a
ridiculous charge made by those who wrest Paul to their own destruction.
Second, his writings are no excuse for abusive and dictatorial husbands.
That being said, we are obliged to follow his teachings, whether we like
them or not.

If Paul says that wives should submit to their husbands, he means that and
fighting against it won't change it, but remember that he says also "submit
yourselves one to another."  So, taking both into account gives a
non-hostile picture.

The context demonstrates that his words about women covering their heads is
strictly when they are praying or phophsying aloud in a public gathering.
This shouldn't be a problem, just do it.

I freely admit that Paul's instructions to Timothy about women teaching
make me uncomfortable.  My comfort, however, is no criterion for my
obedience to the Scripture, which Peter says Paul's writings are.

Instead of trying to get around what the apostle said, we should rather try
to completely understand it so we do not err on the side of whatever side
we are on.

Dan Graham
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 18:05:40 EDT
From:         Bernice Tennant <U1A9A@WVNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: systematic theology

I always wondered..why?
I have nothing to offer,
I have no part of beauty
I make so many mistakes,
I seldom do my duty..why?

There are all the others..*sigh*
They seem to know the way
So much more than I do.
They always seem so perfect
How can it really be true? *sigh*

He died for me..why?
I heard him call my name!
He has showed me his great call!
He should have only died for them,
But for me too, he gave his all,..why?

What did I do?..*sigh*
Without him, I am nothing!
Even less, for I am weak.
If he hadn't called to me,
His name, I wouldn't seek..*sigh*

He died for me..why?
Because he loves us all,
and if we need him more,
More, he will hear our call.
He is truely our savior..thats why!
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 28 Jul 1992 08:08:39 EDT
From:         lin <BI599128@BROWNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Amy Grant and her 'Crossover' Music

I have difficulty with the notion that only music that directly mentions God
is wholly religious in scope &  acceptable.  I did not find Amy Grant's "Baby,
Baby" to be unspiritual because I belive in celebrating the life that God gave
me, and I don't think that her celebration of her child's birth (which is what
the song is about, according to her) is unseemingly. Have we forgotten what
life is about?  It's about celebrating all the wonders around us, of love and
peace--which is God-given.  Why shouldn't music celebrate that, whether it
mentions God or not.  I have no difficulty with Christian artists going cross-
over; how else are you going to reach the masses?  From my experience in poli-
tical movements, one thing I have learned:  it's often useless to preach to the
 converted if you want your message to go out to those who haven't heard it.
From: spk@uk.ac.aber (Stephen Kingston)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re: Practical witchcraft
Date: 27 Jul 92 09:31:36 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept., University of Wales at Aberystwyth.

NOTTMB@LSUVM.BITNET (Tom Brewer) wrote:
>
> ... Sin in the
> camp caused the Israelites to lose a battle when led by Joshua.

Yes, sin in the * camp * caused the Israelites to lose a battle, not 
sin outside of the camp.

Dan makes no claim to be a Christian so his sin is not in the camp.

It stands to reason that outside the camp we will find every form of 
sin, including witchcraft. Our response should be appropriate to the 
fact that these people are without the saving knowledge of Christ.

Did Christ condemn the woman caught in adultery? He certainly made 
it clear that he did not condone the sin (and for the record, I 
believe Wicca to be in opposition to the message of the gospel). 

Likewise Christ did not condemn the samaritan woman at the well. I 
am sure that the woman was in fact aware of her sin, and Christ knew
that the better response to her was to make * himself * vulnerable 
by talking to her, asking her to serve him and the like, even though 
she was a samaritan, a woman and an adulterer herself. 

Now when there was sin "in the camp", for instance the hypocrisy of
the Pharisees, or their trade in the temple, then Christ's response
was very different. If I may be so bold as to say so, I think God 
has less problem with sin in the world then with sin in the church.

> 
> Tom Brewer

Stephen.
-- 
Gweleis i rac neb nym gweles pop annwyl. ef diwyl yneges. Gweleis i pasc.
(I saw the one above all men,  he saw me;  he, the beloved of his people,
who fulfills his mission. I saw Easter.) "Yspeil Taliesin" ---Taliesin---
spk@uk.ac.aber --- spk%uk.ac.aber@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk --- Stephen Kingston
From: FACN34B@SAUPM00.BITNET (Zane of Dhahran)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Christian literature
Date: 25 Jul 92 08:33:06 GMT
Organization: King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, S.A.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Acknowledge-To: <FACN34B@SAUPM00.BITNET>

Michael, (and anyone else interested)

     I read a few of Charles Williams' novels while I was working in Japan
and really enjoyed them.  His conception of everything working out for Good
came through really well, even when things got so dark...and they do often
get dark.  In the U.S. Eerdmans publishes all his novels, but I don't know
about England.
     If you haven't read anything by MacDonald yet, get busy!  I read one of
his "romance novels" and even enjoyed it, but I really liked The Princes and
the Goblin and its sequal.  I also enjoyed Phantastie(?) and, ??? I can't re-
member the titles!?!  The Back of the North Wind was a little slow, but had
interesting parts.  The sermons of MacDonald are also great.  I would particul-
arly recommend them to brothers and sisters of a Calvinist bent.
     My family has also enjoyed reading the Tower of Gebura series by John
White (who also wrote "The Golden Cow" anybody read that besides me?).  It
is probably classified as childrens fantasy, but both my wife and I really
enjoy the stories too.  We liked them better than the Narnia series.

                                           Peace, Zane.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 23 Jul 1992 13:41:24 EDT
From:         Lon Mendelsohn <LMENDELS@WAYNEST1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Already read Prophet

Regarding the originality of Peretti's novelization of spiritual warfare --

While he does a very good job at it, the idea of depicting the events of
this world as a manifestation of spiritual warfare is not new.  C.S.
Lewis did it in _That Hideous Strength_, the third book of his space
trilogy.  While I have never read any of Charles Williams' novels, I
understand that he did much the same thing.

Shalom,

Lon Mendelsohn
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 31 Jul 1992 14:45:31 -0500
From:         David Richmond <RICHMOND@UTDALLAS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Warnke

S: Steve
M: Mark

S>But - my main question is this - has anyone out there contacted Mike or his
 >ministry and asked them about this stuff?  Has anyone tried to get their side
 >of the story?  If not, why not?  Are we interested in the "truth" or just in
 >what someone else reports that someone told them was the "truth"?

M>             Cornerstone did.  He refused to talk to them.  When they
 >       tried again, he said he would only talk to them through his
 >       attorney.

I'm not really interested in involving myself in this thread, but I do
want to point out that there can be more than one reason for not wanting
to talk to a group taking it upon themselves to investigate a ministry.
If I were in such a situation, I'm not sure I would talk to Cornerstone
Magazine either, even if the charges were false.

In Jesus,
	David Richmond

BTW: I'm not necessarily saying that Cornerstone should _not_ investigate,
     but I'd like to know their motives.  They do _sell_ their magazine,
     don't they?
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Organization: Samford University
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 29 Jul 1992 09:03:11 CDT
From:         Renee Autry <SRAUTRY@SAMFORD.BITNET>

On Tue, 28 Jul 1992 19:12:09 EST Kerry Stephenson said:
>     Renee:
>
>
>"Wife abuse doesn't occur in families in which husbands are unsaved or
>alcoholics, where mothers work outside the home or couples are only nominally
>Christian.
>
>     Um, unless you are missing a "just" between "doesn't" and "occur,"
>     I would have to say that this statement is demonstrably false.
>     If there is supposed to be a "just" in there, I would have to
>     agree.  However, I think we should remember that a Christian
>     husband exercising his rightful authority is "authoritative,"
>     not "authoritarian."  If there is no qualifier in the actual
>     text, I would have to question other conclusions that might be
>     found in the book.  I don't mean to flame you, but this
>     statement, as is, concerns me, if scholars are in support of
>     it.  Would you mind clearing this up?   Thanks.
>
>                                            Love INC,
>                                                     ---Kerry


I e-mailed Kerry a little bit more information, but for the general list:

The statement in question should read "Wife abuse doesn't just occur in . . . "
- my mistake, not the writers.


I think the writers are attempting to bring to light a problem that exists in
some Christian marriages and that (according to their studies) the church has
been relatively unsuccessful in dealing with.  The problem seems to be that
a number of men have difficulty distinguishing between "authoritative" and
"authoritarian."
They cite several different studies and at no time (that I have read) imply
that this affects a MAJORITY of Christian marriages that have a heirarchially
oriented model - I think there conclusions are scholarly (and in line with
several other studies Mica mentioned), but certainly deal with a percentage
of a population and the conclusions are not meant to be taken to refer to
all Christian marriages of this nature.


If anyone has any additional questions about this particular book, I would
be glad to recieve private e-mail.


 Renee Autry (SRAutry@Samford)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 30 Jul 1992 15:17:53 EDT
From:         carol nemec <YA67@FERRIS.BITNET>
Subject:      Multiple Personalities

Okay...yes I do.

Carol
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 30 Jul 1992 09:31:16 -0500
From:         MARCI HENDRIX <HENDRIX@RHODES.BITNET>
Subject:      prayer request

Dear Listfolk:  Please pray for Courtlann & Robert Dixon as they move to
Buffalo, NY.  They left Memphis this morning and are traveling in a U-haul
with their 4-month old daughter, Brooke and the cat -- it's going to be
tough.  Courtlann is a Christia member but she didn't get a chance to
write and ask for prayer before leaving -- she was trying to get things
wrapped up at her job.  In Buffalo (actually it's Grand Island and the
surrounding area), Robert will be starting a new church under the auspices
of the Southern Baptist Convention.

Please pray for me also.  Courtlann has been my best friend here in Memphis
since we both moved here in 1988 and I'm going to miss her terribly.  In
that respect, please pray that they purchase a modem and get e-mail set
up as quickly as possible to save money on those long-distance calls we two
are bound to be making.

I truly appreciate your prayers in this matter.  Marci Hendrix

P.S.:  Courtlann will be rejoining Christia when they get their system
       set up -- maybe Robert, too.  Brooke might want to wait awhile
       before chatting with us, although I'm sure she has lots to say.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 29 Jul 1992 10:32:00 EDT
From:         AISARMSTRONG%IST%VMI@IST.VMI.EDU
Subject:      Graphics
X-To:         CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU

I am the church secretary of my local Presbyterian Church.  I would like to
know if anyone could tell me if there is is a ftp site that I could get some
christian graphics or anything else that will be good for a newsletter?

Eddie Armstrong(aisarmstrong%ist%vmi@ist.vmi.edu)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 09:05:35 CDT
From:         Yvette Traylor <YST1@DCCCDBIT.BITNET>
Subject:      Practical witchcraft

Tom,
Thank you for telling the truth.
                            Yvette
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Via:        UK.AC.BHAM.IBM3090; 29 JUL 92  3:07:19 BST
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 29 Jul 1992 03:07:25 BST
Comments:     Warning -- original Sender: tag was
              SPCP@IBM3090.COMPUTER-CENTRE.BIRMINGHAM.AC.UK
From:         MAILER@IBM3090.COMPUTER-CENTRE.BIRMINGHAM.AC.UK

Network Activity Report received at UK.AC.BIRMINGHAM.COMPUTER-CENTRE.IBM3090
 on Wed, 29 Jul 92 at 03:07:25 BST

Network Reference : 290792030711A
Your Reference : Mail to-Z_STAFF_CL at UK.AC.SOLENT
 - Message-id=<sent_Wed,_29_Jul_1992_01:51:15_GMT_via_EARN.ASUACAD>
Report generated by : UK.AC.BIRMINGHAM.COMPUTER-CENTRE.IBM3090

Activity completed
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Original_cc:  MARCHIBOLD
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 09:09:00 MDT
From:         MARCHIBOLD@MSCD.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Christian television

Steven

Promise Keepers has a 3 day leadership conference in the fieldhouse prior to
the weekend meetings.  On Tuesday night I did the character generator and
audio in the van which we hope to purchase.  On Thursday night I ran camera
2.  On Saturday during the day I was the floor manager sitting audience right
wearing a headset next to the light board.  We rented the channel 2 production
truck for the Fri. and Sat. meetings, they gave us an unbeatable price.  All
of the production people on the field were volunteers. KWBI has an internship
program to train volunteers.  That needs prayer as well that we would
continue to recruit serious, capable volunteers and be able to maintain
quality.

It was powereful, wasn't it - praise God.

Molly Archibold
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 27 Jul 1992 09:54:58 CDT
From:         Tom Brewer <NOTTMB@LSUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Practical witchcraft?

Another member writes about witchcraft:

>     I don't know whether you intend "the sin of rebellion" to be a
>definition of Witchcraft or an evaluation of it, but I don't see a basis
>for describing Wicca in this way.

Perhaps "the sin of rebellion" is not 100% accurate; however, Samuel did
tell Saul that "rebellion" is as the sin of witchcraft. Maybe I was too
quick to say A=B and B=A. But I don't retract the intent to say that
witchcraft is sin. It really doesn't matter how sin is classified because
all sin is just that: sin. There might be degrees of sin, but again I'm
not addressing that issue.

>Wicca (or Witchcraft), as practiced
>in modern times, is a nature religion that is pantheistic or polytheistic
>or both -- the "sacred" is seen in nature, rather than in a transcendent
>Deity as in Christianity (hence "pantheistic"), and this "presence" in nature
>is personified as a Goddess and sometimes also a God (hence "polytheistic").
>Witches use mythology and ritual to connect to this "presence" in nature
>and in human consciousness.

"Modern times" or ancient times, witchcraft is witchcraft. Paul says very
clearly that "they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God."
As for seeing the "sacred" in nature, isn't that what Paul describes in
Romans chp. 1? Is not this an example of how men change the truth of God
into a lie or how men "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools"?
Just incase you might feel I'm going too far with this idea, let me quote
the description sent to me from Dan himself:

>We personify the Divine in order to interact with it directly.  The most basic
>personifaction we use is God and Goddess.  We personify God as the Sun
>Child, the Green Man, and the Horned Lord; and Goddess as the Maiden,
>Mother, and Crone.  Each of these six basic aspects of God and Goddess interact
>in a pattern of life, death, and rebirth.

It should surprise no one that the witches steal from God's truth concerning
life, death, and "rebirth". The Scriptures tell us the Devil is the father
of lies, and he is a robber and a thief.

Finally, about my using the phrase "sin in the camp":  I agree with everyone
that has called me on using that phrase. I was again probably too quick to
hit the keyboard, and in my haste vainly implied the CHRISTIA list was a
type of fellowship or gathering of believers. I stand corrected on that one.
I hope that everyone can bear with me on that one. Sorry.

      Tom Brewer
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU