HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail v2.2 (R4b).
X-Acknowledge-To: <S096556@UMRVMA>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sat, 11 Apr 1992 00:12:18 CDT
Reply-To:     ddavidson@cbacc.cba.uga.edu
Comments:     Resent-From: Lonnie Schubert <S096556@UMRVMA>
Comments:     Originally-From: "Dennis Davidson"  <DDAVIDSON@cbacc.cba.uga.edu>
From:         Lonnie Schubert <S096556@UMRVMA.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: evil

Sorry about the long header.  I figured it was unwise to alter it.

The following "Original message" was a reply to Dennis Davidson when he
asked if he should tear all the pages from his bible that refered to evil,
assuming evil is a mere illusion.  (or words to that effect)
Apparently it did not make it to the list, but instead, it went to Dennis
privately.  When I discovered this mishap, I asked Dennis to forward a
copy, and he graciously responded.  So, I'm resending it.

I am resending it in hopes that it will clearify my position on evil.
I think "kilroy's" (Darren's) post would have been quite different if
he had read this first (i.e., I think he at least would not have been
confused as to my meaning.)
I am saying that [as a statement of personal faith] I believe evil to be
self-existant.  It is an unaware, non-motivated force, not at all a
physical or tangible thing, but nonetheless, a real entity.
(Also, the archives will have 2 posts by me subject, "origin of evil".
Taken together, I think they say what I mean (and believe).) :-)
   les
----------------------------Original message----------------------------
 Rest assured Dennis, evil is real, and God was not crazy to speak of it
 as being real.

 I define evil as a self-existant force that sets itself (I don't know
 how to say this without implying "motive" to the "thing" evil, but it
 most definately is NOT a thinking or self-aware force.  It is a
 non-tangible "thing".) opposed to good, and thereby, it is opposed to
 God.  (It is not the equivalent opposite of good.  It simply would
 destroy good if it could.  It can not.)
 Roy has expressed a different definition which leaves evil real, but not
 quite "existant".  He defines it as "good" bent to non-goodness.  (Sort'a)

 As long as one does not call evil a mere illusion, I see little need for a
 specific definition in regards to life and salvation.  I see some real
 problems with calling evil an illusion.  This can lead to all sorts of
 "logical" extremes and excesses.  The main thing is (IMHO) to acknowledge
 that evil has seperated the individual from God until that person accepts
 the redemption Jesus, the Christ, offers.

 As I said, it is not needful to accept my definition of evil in regards
 to life and salvation.  However, for me, the definition I hold is essential
 for a consistant philosophy of God.  It is consistant with the God I know
 and the universe He created.  (IMHO)
     Lonnie Schubert
 PS  My definition denies God the ability to "do" evil.  I am addiment that
 God is NOT omnipotent IN THIS SENSE. (caps for stress only, no shouts)
 We know that God cannot lie.  God has no part in evil at all.
 Another thing God cannot do is fail.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Organization: University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, North Dartmouth, MA, USA
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Importance: SEMASSU.EDU was changed to UMASSD.EDU on Aug 10, 1991
Priority: SEMASSU.BITNET was changed to UMASSD.BITNET on Oct 10, 1991
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 6 Apr 1992 11:33:00 EST
Comments:     A VAX cluster with VMS V5.3-1, PMDF V3.2-19,
              JNET V3.5 & UCX V1.3A
From:         LIZ MOREAU <EMOREAU@UMASSD.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Question Re:abortion

>I would like to hear from the women on the list who have born children.
>Did the baby ever restrict your freedom?  Did pregrenancy every interfere
>with any of your rights?

Lonnie:

I've had three pregnancies, one ended in a miscarriage.  The
pregnancies did restrict my activities, but not my freedoms.  It
interfered with no rights that I can think of.

Certainly there were discomforts but nine months isn't a lifetime.
What could be more important than being blessed by God to be entrusted
with HIS children.  IMO, I was honored to be chosen to be given these
gifts by God.

                                        Liz
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL0]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sun, 12 Apr 1992 13:41:14 EST
From:         Ian Williams <iwilliam@AU.ORACLE.COM>
Subject:      Re: Spiritual and physical death
X-To:         CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU
              at Apr 10, 92 11:47 pm

Jeff,

I am only going from memory here, but wasnt the jailer that was converted
when the apostles 'escaped' baptised immediately..

I actually wish that I was baptised a lot closer to the time I was saved,
however with the church that I was saved into, baptism wasn't a very
important thing..

Baptism is not a cerebal thing that requires head knowledge understanding
in my opinion..It's an act of obedience to the commands of our Lord
to believe and be baptised! Its a public confession of a private decision,
and hence should be done fairly well straight away.. ("If we believe in
our hearts and confess with our mouths etc)..


*****************************************************************************
Ian Williams          			Internet: iwilliam@au.oracle.com
Oracle Systems         			Phone   : +61 8 239 3900
Adelaide, Australia
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 9 Apr 1992 15:52:07 EST
From:         John Ross <ROSSJB@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: radio preacher/music

Andrew B. wrote:
>     I suppose that the electric organ is in the Bible somewhere.
>     It's amazing what a little translation can do, isn't it?
                          ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

A little???

John
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 8 Apr 1992 09:18:57 PDT
From:         Doug Gould <5315P@NAVPGS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Canadian national identity

I couldn't resist this one, Jeff.  It's my favorite explanation for the
name of your country.  You said:

>Speaking of Canada, somebody once told me how our country was named. . .

Ancient Spanish explorers' maps, probably used for trying to locate
the fabled northwest passage, showed America in the usual place.  Where
Canada now appears they simply wrote:

     Aca Nada - meaning "here, nothing."

That later was truncated to read (you guessed it):

     'Ca-nada.      :-)

>(Despite the fact that I hate the stereotype, I still find it funny  :-)

Glad your sense of humor won't allow you to take offense, good friend.
Since those olden day, of course, lots of good things and people have
been discovered in Canada.

In Christ Jesus,

.+++++++++++++++++++++.+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++.
| Doug Gould          | Jesus: "Come unto me...my yoke is easy, |
| 5315P@NAVPGS.Bitnet | and my burden is light." Matt. 11:28-30 |
`+++++++++++++++++++++^+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 23:52:19 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: Pro Choice Rally in DC.

Dan:

Thank you for the information.  I was a Wiccan until approximately two and
one half years ago, when I was approached to become a Satanist.  I did not
complete the process.  I met Jesus Christ and became a new creature, able
to recognize my sin and repent of it.  I am well acquainted with your
religion and with the gods you serve.  Please bear in mind that when I
debate issues such as abortion on this list I am speaking from a Christian
perspective informed by long knowledge of an unChristian perspective.  I
try not to attempt to engage in such discussion publicly on any other basis
than Biblical Christianity because I do not consider it appropriate to this
forum.  If you would like to debate the issue on a non-Christian basis, feel
free to mail me privately (KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET).
                                                   Love and Peace,
                                                                  ---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:         Thu, 16 Apr 1992 23:36:00 CST
From:         "Darryl (The Other Brother) Johnson" <DJOHNSON@TCUCVMS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: "Safe Sex"

From: Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
2 things involving this posting.  First, the pregnancy information is simply
wrong.  It is not possible for a pregnancy to occur unless there is a
fertilizable egg present, which does not, contrary to the article, occur
50 percent of the time.
    First of all, a question: what is the life span of sperm in
    side the female body?
    Second, his information came from p. 105 of The Sex Atlas by
    Edwin J. Haeberle, (New York: Continuum, 1983).  I suggest
    you argue with them.

Secondly, the distinction between bad equipment and bad users is irrelevant
if we are discussing (as much of the Ankerberg material is) young people,
people who may not be as careful as they need to be, or people who are not
tremendously skilled at using a condom.  Come on, how often are condoms
     And this can be corrected by telling teenagers that condoms
     are unreliable in and of themselves, and that abstinence is
     the ONLY form of birth control?  So because teenagers are
     ignorant as to the proper way to use a condom, we should
     KEEP them ignorant, to limit their choices, and force them
     to make the one choice we offer them?
     MOST car accidents are caused by impaired drivers or just
     plain ignorant drivers, but you don't hear anyone talking
     about this being an automotive "failure rate".

     Darryl at TCU
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"christia%asuacad.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 9 Apr 1992 20:04:14 -0500
From:         F_GRIFFITH@CCSVAX.SFASU.EDU
Subject:      Goodbye
X-To:         christia%asuacad.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu

  I have reluctantly concluded that I must sign off CHRISTIA.  The time
I'm spending on it is keeping me from other things that I should be
doing, even deleting messages on a number of threads and resisting the
temptation to reply fairly often.

  I have enjoyed the discussions and appreciated the opportunity of
praying for people.

  A couple of prayer requests:  My fatigue has returned particularly
this week and I would ask your prayers again for it.  I have joined
a scripture study group in my parish.  The week after Easter we will
begin a study of Acts.  Please pray that the Lord will use this as a
beginning to pour out the Holy Spirit on the whole parish.

  I will miss you-all.
           God bless you,
                         Reynolds
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 15 Apr 1992 09:44:48 EDT
From:         Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: C.S. Lewis and Universalism-I'm confused!
              14 Apr 1992 23:09:00 GMT from <jmb5b@FARADAY.CLAS.VIRGINIA.EDU>

Michelle,

No, C. S. Lewis was not a universalist.  A universalist, as I under-
stand the term, is someone who believes that everyone will be saved.
Lewis did not believe that.  _The Screwtape Letters_, which is an
explicitly theological book, refers to large numbers of people being
lost. (Most of the Calormenes were lost, too.)  However, there is a
Christian belief, going back to some of the earliest Church Fathers,
that some pagans can be saved by Christ without having explicitly
professed a belief in Him.  Many theologians say that at the moment
of death such a person is given a revelation of Jesus so that He can
make an explicit act of faith in Him before true death occurs. (This
is similar to what happened with Emeth.)  Such a person's salvation
depends on the grace of God and the merits of Christ's sacrifice.  It
does not result from "being a good person". It results from trying to
serve God to the best of his ability even though he has been misin-
formed about the nature of God.  In other words, if the person knew
that God wanted him to believe in Jesus he would believe in Jesus.
It is not his fault that he didn't know that God wanted him to be-
lieve in Jesus.

This does not mean that we don't have to worry about evangelizing.
God commanded us to evangelize, so obedience would be enough of a
reason, but there's more to it than that. A Christian has the Holy
Spirit dwelling inside him.  It is far easier for him to avoid sin,
and to repent of sin when he does commit it, than it is for a non-
Christian.  Saying that it is theoretically possible for someone to
avoid starving to death in a land afflicted with drought and famine
by finding a few edible roots does not mean we don't have to worry
about providing people in that country with nourishing food.  Fur-
thermore, although getting to Heaven is essential, there is more to
the Christian life than that.  We must live in such a way as to draw
closer to God, to open ourselves more fully to Him so that He will
live more fully in us.  Even if someone can reach Heaven without
having been evangelized by Christians, if he becomes a Christian and
dedicates his life to Christ he can attain a higher reward.

Marty Helgesen
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 9 Apr 1992 08:58:21 EDT
Comments:     Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2X
From:         Brenda Curry-White <BSCURR01@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU>
Subject:      No Subject

Urban Research Institute
Phone: 502-588-6626
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 8 Apr 1992 06:22:45 -0500
From:         F_GRIFFITH@CCSVAX.SFASU.EDU
Subject:      RE: on being filled with the spirit
X-To:         CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU

  D.L.Moody, when questioned about why he spoke of being filled with the
Holy Spirit on occasions subsequent to his initial receipt, replied "Well,
I leak."

                         Reynolds
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sat, 11 Apr 1992 23:09:00 EST
From:         "Jeff Sinatra" <BSC92SPA18@RCNVMS.RCN.MASS.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Perfection (was: Re: Planets and matter)
X-To:         CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU

Roy,
#1 is correct: We are perfect; God made us perfect.
However, in number 2, you mixed imperfection with perfection, which is not
possible.  The man of God creating could never think itself to be imperfect.
imperfection is a mortal invention, not a divine creation.  Imperfection is
derived from mortality--or human, erring consciousness, not God's man.  I would
change #2 to: mortals think they are imperfect because they have no cognisance
of perfection, and this mortal dissapears to the degree in which immortality
becomes apparent.  Jesus ascended (disappeared to human consciousness) when
his mortal thought fully yielded to immortality--the law of God. "For the law
of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and
death."(Rom. 8:2)

				love,
				  Jeff Sinatra
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 14 Apr 1992 10:31:38 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Who's doing what (Was: Abortion)
              14 Apr 1992 08:48:40 EDT from <KEL111@PSUVM.PSU.EDU>

ATTENTION:  THE FOLLOWING POSTING IS ABOUT ABORTION LEGALITY.
Kurt:
I would like to know where you got your information regarding the historical
legality of abortion.  Post-quickening abortion was a crime under common
law from the beginning of the Republic to the late 1800s, when pre-quickening
abortion was also criminalized in some states, as part of the physicians
drive to create a respectable profession.  Abortion was not decriminalized
across the board until 1973, when the Supreme Court declared it legal to
abort a child at any time throughout the nine months of pregnancy.  In
1973, a majority of the states had some form of law restricting the practice
of abortion.  This is precisely the truth that proponents of _Roe_ are afraid
of--that states will revert to the laws previously in place if the issue is
turned back to the states (where, as a political question, it constitutionally
belonged in the first place.)
  You state that _Roe_ is an "interpretation" of the constitution.  Agreed.
However, it is an interpretation without legal foundation, and is destined
to fall under its own weight as a 4-1-4 decision that was bad law in the first
place.  The charge of the Court to "interpret" the laws does not go so far,
constitutionally, as to require it to make up new laws; it is supposed to read
law in light of precedent and the intent of the lawmaking body.  The term
"abortion" does not appear in the Constitution; Justice Blackmun and his
cohorts inserted it.  The Chief Justice and the current Court, being
advocates of limited lawmaking by the Judiciary, will simply remove it.
  For advocates of a fundamental right to abortion to hide behind the Con-
stitution, which was written by advocates of the rights of "life, liberty,
and the pursuit of happiness" and which takes great pains to separate the
judicial from the political, is the height of hypocrisy.  The Founders were
prolife.
  To bring the discussion back to the point of the listserver, the reason the
founders (and most citizens until the late 1950s) were prolife is that they
were Christians, with a Christian understanding of the meanings of law, liberty
and justice, and a profound belief in the United States as a nation chosen
by God to serve and glorify Him.  If you don't belive me, read any history
text written between 1776 and 1910.  It's all still there, despite our modern
desire to deny the Christian foundations of the United States.
  Anyway, if you want to debate the historical legalities any further, please
mail me privately, as I prefer to keep to the moral and religious issues on the
public list.
                             Love INC,
                                      ---Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 8 Apr 1992 15:29:40 EST
From:         John Ross <ROSSJB@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      garbage music

To all who misunderstood (Ian incorporated) my message on Amazing Grace
(someone vs. a wretch), no problem, don't worry about it, blah blah blah.
(Stereotypical kiss-and-make-up-message-inserted-here).
               ^^^^
                Actually, I'll settle for a hand-shake.

I'm starting to feel like Ruch Limbaugh.  Everyone misunderstands me!
<WIDE grin and "giga"dittos for those of you who care>
Anyway, Ian, don't worry about it.. .you were not the only person
who misunderstood.  It's been cleared up, so I won't waste CPU time.
----------------------------------------------------
The list minor wrote:

>   John, what are you trying to say?

Simply that people who consider "heavenly metal" (gag, what a term)
to be spit up from the abyss of Hell had better think more than
twice when judging.  Their own _trusted_ music may be more demonic
(ok, may twist scripture worse) than the lyrics in heavenly metal.

Officially "sanctified" (pardon the pun) soft music can sneak in
lyrics that are not scriptual just as easily as those in heavenly
metal.  If I am given the choice between _True_ Scriptual lyrics
in a heavy metal song and _False_ Doctrine from a sweet sounding
hymn, I would choose the metal over the mush.  Thus, I'd rather
hear "JESUS IS LORD" screamed over and over in a thrash song
than some "artists" version of a screwed up Amazing Grace.
----------------------------------------------------
Kerry wrote:
>Nice point (rock & gospel).  But I'm not sure we should lay all the pap
>on the doorstep of Southern gospel.

You're right.  I wanted to point out that Southern Gospel isn't
always _Safe_.  Just because the tape is in a Christian store
doesn't mean it embraces Scriptual lyrics.  Your own self-help books
show good example.

>Wait!  Let me defend John.  He _likes_ songs like "Amazing Grace" (MY
>personal favorite, by the way), but he is recognizing that modern
>Southern gospel singers have changed the way they sing the song so that
>the hymn words are entirely lost.

Bingo.

>Am I talking out
>of turn here, John?

Right on!
----------------------------------------------------
Steven Klepzig:
>Sorry there people.  I like it.  I'll take these old meaningful hymns any day
>to some almost mindless repetition of a two or three word chorus, especially
>when the chorus is undecipherable above the noise of guitar banging.

How about joyful noise?  :)
----------------------------------------------------


John
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 16 Apr 1992 20:20:17 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Lifechain (WARNING: PROLIFE)

To all interested parties:

As I mentioned before, LifeChain this past weekend turned out massive
numbers and was covered by the local TV news and the Indianapolis TV
news.  However, you might be interested to know that despite the fact
that 2200 people lined the two major streets of this town with signs
saying "Abortion Kills Children" and "Jesus Heals and Forgives" (the
pastors held those), the local paper said not one word about it.  The
front page story was about the Blessing of the Palms that involved
four downtown churches and about 100 people.  Sigh.
                                                   Love INC,
                                                            ---Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL0]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 17 Apr 1992 10:17:13 EST
From:         Ian Williams <iwilliam@AU.ORACLE.COM>
Subject:      Re: Prayer request for the Church
X-To:         CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU
              Stephenson" at Apr 16, 92 12:52 pm

>  "Do you ask, 'Well, now, where do we go from here?'  The answer is, 'Where
>sinful individuals or sinful nations can only go--back to a merciful God.'
>Hear me!  Every church without a prayer meeting condemns us; every Bible
>daily unopened condemns us; every promise of God unused condemns us; every
>lost neighbor condemns us; every lost heathen condemns us; every dry eye
>among us condemns us; every wasted minute of our time condemns us; every
>unclaimed opportunity for God condemns us.  Next year is not ours.  Tomorrow
>may be too late.  Unless we repent _now_, unless we return and fire the
>prayer altars _now_, unless we fast and weep _now_, woe unto us at the
>judgment!"
>
>                                          Love INC,
>                                                   ---Kerry
>

Kerry, that must be the most legalistic judgemental condemming thing I
have read in quite a while....

"FOR IN CHRIST, THERE IS NO CONDEMNATION"....

Yes, I agree in the power of prayer, but take a look back and see the
spirit in which that was read.. NO GRACE, NO LIBERATION, just legalism..

I throw it out.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU