HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 22:58:36 EDT
From:         Bernice Tennant <U1A9A@WVNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: One little comment and question

Jason,

      Paul said there is no other sin that affects the body as much as sexual
  sin.  When a couple enter a marriage,  they are entering a union   with
 God.  Just as you should  not bring a prostitute  to the union between your
 wife and you and God, you should not bring in a homosexual  relationship  with
 God.  Sex is not just a body function.  It is blessed and sanctified by God
 between a man and a woman and he is at the head (figuratively) of that
 union.   I hope you understand.  Maybe someone can explain what Paul was
 trying to tell us better than I.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  CHRISTIA
Original_cc:  HUTTER
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 10:33:00 N
From:         Wolfgang Hutter <HUTTER@DULRUU51.BITNET>
Subject:      Contraception

In a message of Tue, 25 Aug 1992 08:01:13 EDT
Received on Tue, 25 Aug 92 14:02 N
Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET> wrote:

>In contraception the husband and wife use, or misuse, their sexual
>capabilities in such a way as to prevent conception. In NFP they
>refrain from using their sexual capabilities during the relatively
>few days a month the wife is fertile.

But Marty, if someone uses contraceptiva in any form they do nothing
else, but to put their wish into practice that they want to have
intercourse, but don't want a pregnancy. It's no different from what a
couple does that practices NFP. They want to have intercourse, but no
child. In both cases the intention is perfectly the same. Only in one
case the couple can (depending on the method chosen) come together any
time they want, in the other they have to exclude certain days. So the
only difference (besides physical effects) is that in the case of
contraception the couple is not as restricted in relation to time as in
the case of NFP. And since having intercourse without procreation taking
place is not sinful I see no (ethical) problem in contraception.

Wolfgang <><
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 08:08:29 EDT
From:         Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Forgiveness of Sins, by Priests?

On Thu, 27 Aug 1992 10:18:58 EST Kerry Stephenson said:
>Marty:
>
>You say, if I got it right, that absolution is an essential part of
>bringing about forgiveness.
>
>How can this be?  Jesus has *already* forgiven us.  His blood is
>all that is required for the remission of sins, not explicit
>forgiveness from any human being, nor any type of ritual.  If
>we add another to the work of the cross, we say that the cross is
>not sufficient or complete to take care of all our sins, which
>the Bible explicitly says it is.
>
>Perhaps I am misunderstanding what you said.
>
>Thanks.
>
>Love INC,
>         --Kerry

Kerry,

Yes, I think you misunderstood what I said.  Consider someone born of
atheist parents who is himself an atheist.  Have his sins been for-
given?  Jesus died for Him, as He died for all men, but the forgive-
ness Christ won on the Cross must be applied to the individual.
First this atheist must believe and be baptized.  Saying this does
not mean saying that the cross is not sufficient or complete to take
care of all our sins.

As we all know from personal experience, Christians sin.  What are we
to do about those sins?  We confess them to God and ask Him to for-
give us.  The fact that we must do so does not mean that the cross is
not sufficient or complete to take care of our sins.  The Catholic
and Orthodox belief is that Christ has chosen to make His forgiveness
available through the ministry of His priests.  This does not mean
that the cross is not sufficient or complete to take care of our
sins.

Marty Helgesen
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-mailer: Pegasus Mail v2.2 (R4).
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 12:12:35 PST
From:         FRANK@LAW.UCLA.EDU
Subject:      Re: Their Lady of Cold Springs

> What hurts you about Tom Brewer's statements???
> The Scriptures do not support any post-Canonrevelations, nor gives them
> any AUTHORITY ... so what's the problem?
>
> Jesse Carnes


     Jesse --

     For one second remove yourself from the Bible please.  You can't
be so blind that you can't see how his statements can be hurtful to
people can you?  Tom's two postings regarding this subject have
been less than, how should I say this, kosher.  He chooses to
belittle people with witty little statements like "their Lady..."
"Guacamole", the "Catholic Church (sic)"  "piped their 'prayer'",
people, who I must say, rightly or wrongly, believe to the very depths
of their hearts that God chooses to speak to them through these
methods.  This, too use the vernacular, is uncool.  People are
people.  Flawed and stumbling, they deserve respect and dignity
regardless of their beliefs and modes of worship.  You may not
believe in their ways and that is fine but DO NOT RIDICULE THEM.  If
you are trying to show them that your way is true do so thru love and
respect for who they are.

Frank
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 22:29:14 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Their Lady of Cold Springs

Um, I'm having this problem:

1 Thess. 4 talks about the dead in Christ and refers to them as being
asleep.  It appears that they do not stop being asleep until Christ
returns.

If they are asleep, how can we communicate with them, and why should
we expect them to communicate with us?

Love INC,
         --Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sun, 23 Aug 1992 22:24:05 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Established Authorities
              24 Aug 1992 02:53:54 GMT from <kilroy@GBORO.GLASSBORO.EDU>

Darren:

Maybe nobody asked you, but--miracle of miracles--I agree with you
anyway.  :-)

Love INC,
         --Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
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:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 12:57:12 -0700
From:         MARK DRAKE <DRAKE@ASUCHM.LA.ASU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: post cannon revelation
X-To:         CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU

>Like, man, you got me ... I am not sure what the connection between my
>series on Matt 24 (eschatology) and my view on no post-canon revelation is,
>as far as YOU are concerned.

>Did you see a connection between the two points of belief?

>Jesse Carnes

	No.  You've mentioned several times your belief about post canon
revelation and I've always wondered what you base it on (not being able to
figure that out myself).
	I didn't say there was a connection.  I was just willing to wait till
you finished what you were doing for an answer.

mark
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 25 Aug 1992 21:49:06 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Political speeches

Hi Bernice:

Yes, I've often noticed that several different versions of a story
get told.

Here's a small example.  I don't know if it's anything more than
an indicator of a general disdain for precision, but I find it
disturbing.

The Simpsons are going to have an episode in which they respond to
George Bush's comment that America needs more families like the
Waltons and less like the Simpsons.  The exact details don't matter.
The point is this:  I saw the clip on CNN, taken directly from the
show.  The next day I read two separate newspaper accounts about the
quote.  Each paper had a slightly different sentence, and both
differed from what I had heard the night before.  The meaning was
the same, but the point is that the papers represented these as
direct quotes, using quotation marks, and the actual wording would
not have been difficult to check.

If they can't get a simple sentence right, how can we trust them
to tell us more complex things?

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:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 16:44:54 EST
From:         Ian Williams <iwilliam@AU.ORACLE.COM>
Subject:      Re: Stray thoughts on Sodom.
X-To:         CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU
              at Aug 31, 92 12:41 pm

I believe that like the city of Nivennah with Jonah the people had
a chance to repent, and if not taken destruction would follow..

It is uncharacteristic of God not to give a chance to repent, so even if the
mention of a 'message to repent' was left out, we need not assume non was
ever given..

Another possibility is through Gods foreknowledge he knew non would repent,
so he saved their time and his..
]

---------------------+-------------+-----------------------------------------
Ian Williams         |    _--_|\   |      Internet: iwilliam@au.oracle.com
Oracle Systems       |   /      \  |	  Phone	  : +61 8 239 3900
Adelaide, Australia  |   \_.--*_/  |
                     |         v   |
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 13:34:06 EDT
From:         Lon Mendelsohn <LMENDELS@CMS.CC.WAYNE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: 2 Peter 3
X-To:         Practical Christian Life <CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU>

Jesse,

Memo didn't ask you the question, I (Lon Mendelsohn) did.

What specifics, you ask?  How about 2 Peter 3:10?  When did each of the
events described happen?  Feel free to take into account the alleged
hyperbole of apocalyptic language.

Shalom,

Lon Mendelsohn
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 08:20:43 CDT
From:         Jesse Carnes <NOTJIC@LSUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: 2 Peter 3
              2 Sep 1992 19:36:17 EDT from <LMENDELS@CMS.CC.WAYNE.EDU>

Dear Lon ;

Could you do me a favour?
Could you explain, just a bit, what you mean by "problematic hermeneutic"?
There really are just two viable forms of hermeneutics :

1) "Classic" hermeneutics.  These are the principles which we use to interpret
any form of literature in context.  The added variable is the "Analogy of
Scripture" (Sacra Scriptura sui Scriptura Interpres ... I believe is the
expression?) andthis is where Scripture interprets itself ... which is really
true in other forms of literature in that the macro-context definesthe micro.

2) "Corporate" hermeneutics.  Here, diologue within an ekklesia is employed to
hammer out an exegetical scenario.  Obviously, classical hermeneutics is the
underpinnings in order for valid exegetical diologue to occur.
(BTW, Jon Zens, editor of "Searching Together" of St. Croix Falls, WI is the
best authority I personally know on this area).



Jesse Carnes
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 13:50:37 CDT
From:         Yvette Traylor <YST1@DCCCDBIT.BITNET>
Subject:      Sukkot

Thanks Lon that helps alot.

   Yvette Traylor     "We are His people and the sheep of his pasture."
   Dallas County Community College District             Psalm 100:3
   Computer Programmer/Analyst  in  Dallas - Texas
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Orig-To: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 08:50:45 CDT
Comments:     Answering received message
From:         THERESA BLACKWELL <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Subject:      WAY TO HANG IN THERE!!!

 Kerry!!
 I'm proud of you, girl!!!
 (Carol, maybe you were right... that called strike was really
 Ball one!)
 I think that David really understood what he was speakin' of.
 Even if he was speakin' about Jerusalem at the time of the
 writing of Ps. 33:12...
 Hey, the "BOOK" also states that "I will turn all nations
 into hell that forget me"... (I think this is from PS, too...)
 God's serious about the US getting back to his ways.
 I wanna be blessed myself!!! It's the blessings that make
 this life such an easier (I didn't say "EASY"...) road to
 travel...
 In His Love,
 Theresa
 "the G"....


 * <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 10:40:00 GMT
From:         Z_STAFF_CL@SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE.AC.UK
Subject:      Homosexuality

>From: <HOLZMAN%BITNET.FNAL@EDU.VT.CC.VTVM2>>
>
><  Leo, having love for one's father is not homosexual.  Homosexuality is when
><  one lusts after someone of the same sex and engages in sexual acts.  I am
><  sure that your son does not lust after your body.
>
>Carl, you don't now what you're talking about.  Homosexuality is about like,
>love, lust, and every other emotion a human is capable of feeling.
>
>Dan

Now both chaps have a valid point.

The love between father and son is of the same form regardless of sexual
orientation.  The love between friends is of the same form regardless ...
(This one is true as well ...) The love between lovers is the same the
world over regardless of sexual orientation.  Take two loving couples of
long standing you'll find differences but they are lovers.

Being homosexual is about "being".  It is not just about lust or sexual
acts.  "gay" means that society's general sexual assumtions (and a lot
of what happens in society is affected by these) don't fit you but
it doesn't mean you are incapable of feeling just as every other human
being does.  It does not mean that a 'gay' chap will lust after everything
male or be a sexual preditor for every male family member or friend
or hate every female.  These common assumptions are pure prejudice.

Moreover, change the gender of everything above and it still applies.
In our culture, many people deny that lesbians exist.  Not the case.
I don't intend to exclude those either ... I just started with 'he'
as a responce.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Carol A Long,  					DISCLAIMER - unless otherwise
IT Service,					stated this message contains
Southampton Institute of Higher Education	my opinion...probably only mine
East Park Terrace,
Southampton	SO9 4WW,   England		RELEASE - Repost at will, with
						acknowlegements to author.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Z_STAFF_CL@UK.AC.SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE
===============================================================================
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 18:46:11 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Appropriate Entertainers (was Political speeches)
              26 Aug 1992 16:58:00 GMT from <kilroy@GBORO.GLASSBORO.EDU>

Darren:

Wynona Judd's reason for being at the convention was not to serve as
a role model for moral life; it was to sing.  She did not refer to
her life, did not encourage others to imitate it, and the Republicans
did not endorse her personal characteristics.  She was there
to sing, and she sang.

Murphy Brown's situation was created.  She was written to have a child
out of wedlock, and the decision was strongly endorsed by the
other characters in the show.  She is a role model; Diane English
deliberately wrote her to show that marriage and parenthood can be
separated.  Linda Bloodworth-Thomas wrote MaryJo to show that
parenthood can be chosen by women, even without an intimate
relationship of any kind.  She, too, is a role model.

Do you really see *no* difference?

Love INC,
         --Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 13:20:00 EST
From:         "DRCV06::GRAHAM" <GRAHAM%DRCV06.decnet@DRCVAX.AF.MIL>
Subject:      Pledging allegiance

U.S. related stuff in case you're not interested.

I, also, do not believe in the so-called pledge of allegiance.  First of
all, I owe no allegiance to a piece of cloth, but to the constitution, if
anything other than God, and I'm doubtful about that.

More importantly, we, as a nation, are not a "nation under God."
The words on our money, "In God we trust" are a baldfaced lie.  This nation
was not founded on God at all.  Even the words in the Declaration of
independance saying that we are endowed by our Creator with the inalienable
rights of life, liberty and the persuit of happiness, are a lie.

I'm not unhappy to be an American.  I am unhappy when this ungodly country
claims to have the Blessing of the Diety.

Back to the pledge of allegiance.  Indivisible?  Well, maybe ... but
liberty and justice for all?  Don't make me vomit.

Sorry, I'm a rabid separationist.  I'm happy to keep the government out of
my church, and I want God kept out of the government, from the human point
of view, that is.  From God's point of view, He sets 'em up, and takes 'em
down.

Dan Graham
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 09:59:20 EDT
From:         Lon Mendelsohn <LMENDELS@CMS.CC.WAYNE.EDU>
Subject:      Matthew 24
X-To:         Practical Christian Life <CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU>

Jesse,

Brian has already addressed some of these questions, but I thought
that I would add a few details.

While it is possible that the desolating sacrilige spoken of by
Jesus was the destruction of the Temple in 70 A.D. (indeed, many
interpreters have taken this view), I think that you need to look
at it as the hearers would.  The passage in Daniel which Jesus is
quoting would have been understood by by His disciples to refer to
the desecration of the Temple by Antiochus Epiphanes in 165 B.C.,
as described in 1 Maccabees 1 (yes, I know, it's not scripture to
many of us, but it is considered to be an historically accurate
account by most scholars). Verses 54-61 are especially relevant.
It is thought by most scholars that Antiochus Epiphanes set up an
altar to Zeus in the Temple and sacrificed pigs on it.  Since the
events described in 1 Maccabees are the basis of the Jewish
holiday Chanukkah (the Feast of Dedication; mentioned in John
10:22), I am certain that the disciples would have been aware of
them.  While the Temple was indeed destroyed by the Gentiles, I know
of no document which indicates that it was desecrated first.
Jesus' words lead me to believe that the desolating sacrilige must
occur while the Temple is still standing.  Nothing on that level
occurred in 70 A.D., and I really think that something on that
order is what the four disciples would have expected.  For this
reason, I would tend to support the teaching that the Temple will
be rebuilt at some later date in order to enable this prophecy to
be fulfilled.

Regarding the use of cataclysmic language to describe the events
surrounding the end of the age, I would say that such prophecies
are often fulfilled in unexpected ways, but there is usually a
pretty clear correspondence between the event as prophesied and
the event as it eventually occurred.  If you could elaborate on
the fulfillment of the events described in Mt. 24:14 and 24:27-31,
it help me to understand how you arrived at your viewpoint.

BTW, while preparing this reply, Dan Graham's posting on this topic
came through.  Dan raises many similar questions which I think
you need to address directly rather than by saying that those who
disagree are using faulty hermenuetics.  Even if (in your view)
my hermenuetics are faulty, I still want to know in a specific
sense how you believe the prophecies of Jesus in Mt. 24 to have been
fulfilled.

Shalom,

Lon Mendelsohn
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 11:56:32 CDT
From:         Yvette Traylor <YST1@DCCCDBIT.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Christian Youth

Kerry,
The girls ages are 15-17.
>
> What about concerts?  Are there any amateur Christian bands in your
> community?  Are there any kids in your class who would like the
> opportunity to display their talents?  You could have a small
> admission fee and sell food or whatever at the concert.
>
> And kids just *love* concerts.  (You might even be able to get the
> local "evil media" to cover it! :-) ).
I personally don't know of any Christian Bands in the area. And from
listening to them talk about, Youth role models Sunday, I don't think
they know of any either. :-)

Thanks


   Yvette Traylor     "We are His people and the sheep of his pasture."
   Dallas County Community College District             Psalm 100:3
   Computer Programmer/Analyst  in  Dallas - Texas
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sat, 29 Aug 1992 22:02:59 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      new releases in Christian music

Hi all:

For all who might be interested and have not yet heard, the new
Michael W. Smith tape came out this week.  It's pretty good (especially
if you turn up the bass :-) ).

Also, (and, IMHO, better news) Michael Card has just released his
newest tape.  It is the final part of the Old Testament trilogy,
and it's called "The Word."  It is every bit as fine a word as we
have come to expect from Michael.  Very stirring, very strong and
committed.

I understand that the new releases from Carman and the Accappella
(sp?) Vocal Band are releasing now and should be in stores next
week.

And for those who haven't heard it yet, I strongly recommend Steven
Curtis Chapman's newest, "The Great Adventure."  The title song is
worth the price of the whole, in terms of pop, and there's a fun
song (Got 2 B Tru) that he does with DC Talk, which is essentially
his proof that he isn't a great rap singer.

Related note:  I have a friend who insists that she heard on MTV that
Nirvana is a Christian band.  Every Christian bookstore person I have
consulted on this says Nirvana is a secular ("very secular") band.
I have not heard them, nor am I certain that MTV said this of them.
Apparently they are very big on MTV, nominated for awards and such.
Does anyone know if they are representing *themselves* as a Christian
band?  Thanks for any information.

Well, that's all on the retail front for the moment.

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:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 16:15:46 EST
From:         Ian Williams <iwilliam@AU.ORACLE.COM>
Subject:      Re: The "Mary" flame-war
X-To:         CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU
              Zeigler" at Aug 27, 92 3:16 pm

>close to the line separating "veneration" from "worship" and "intercession"
>from "mediation."  At worst, they fear you have devalued the Bible and have
>elevated Mary to the 4th person of the Godhead.
>
Actually I would say the 2nd person in the Godhead..

John 1: "And the Logos became flesh and dwelt among us"..




---------------------+-------------+-----------------------------------------
Ian Williams         |    _--_|\   |      Internet: iwilliam@au.oracle.com
Oracle Systems       |   /      \  |	  Phone	  : +61 8 239 3900
Adelaide, Australia  |   \_.--*_/  |
                     |         v   |
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia