HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Steve.Hayes@p5.f22.n7101.z5.fidonet.org (Steve Hayes)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: 'my personal savior'
Date: 2 Oct 92 04:46:25 GMT

On <27 Sep 1992 09:09> Eric James Ewanco said to All :

 EJE>I think that there is an important point here about the 
 EJE>involvement of
 EJE>community.  Christianity is a community faith, and our faith in 
 EJE>Christ is both
 EJE>personal and communal.  We are the Body of Christ.  "Personal 
 EJE>Savior" tends to
 EJE>sound like it rejects the community aspect of the Christian faith.

It is not the "personal" that rejects the sense of community in the Christian
faith but the individual. 

In God as trinity there is a community of persons (not individuals) and God 
relates to us as persons too. The ten commandments, for example, are not 
couched in impersonal passives, like our constitutions and statutes. They 
do not say that murder is not to be condoned, and adultery is not to be 
permitted. They are not man's idea of what God wants, they are God's own 
word, addressed to man, second person singular. 

A far bigger linguistic danger than "personal" saviour is the femspeak 
insistence that "man" can only refer to a male, and can no longer be 
inclusive and generic. If you see it as a generic term, you can say, for 
example, that Christ bring about reconciliation between God and man and man 
and man, and you can affirm the truth of God's relationship to persons in 
community. "Man" means the human person in community. If you substitute any 
other word, you drift off into either individualism or collectivism. 
"Humankind" speaks of human beings in the mass, and "humanity" speaks of an 
abstract essence. "Man" is the only way of speaking (in English) of a human 
person not just as an individual, but as part of a community and 
representative of the community. Perhaps we should coin another acronym as a 
substitute for "man" - thpic - which can stand for "the human person in 
community".




addressed
--  
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!5!7101!22.5!Steve.Hayes
Internet: Steve.Hayes@p5.f22.n7101.z5.fidonet.org
From: rgoers@gumdrop.Xerox.COM (Ron Goers)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Non-Religious Practice
Date: 1 Oct 92 03:38:34 GMT
Organization: Imaging Science Engineering & Technology, Xerox Corporation

In article <Sep.30.01.27.51.1992.7171@geneva.rutgers.edu> jwong@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Jack Wong) writes:

>    In the end, my point is that there must be something besides the
>    Bible that can I refer to in finding the truth.  For example,
>    if the Ark of Noah or whatever you called it could be found.  
>    To all those who read this, I meant no insult.  I'm just trying to
>    learn.  Please don't get nasty.  I'm still gonna block my mail, so
>    if you try sending me mail, it will bounce!
>
>    Jack.

Not to be nasty Jack, but just go outside and look around.  I mean REALLY look around!  Is any man capable of creating such wonder?  Can you honestly believe
that it just 'happened'?  I don't know the exact reference, (it is somewhere 
in the New Testament) but it says something to the effect that NO man has an
excuse for not believing in God because the surrounding beauty in nature is a
living testamony to the One who created it.  ... not word-for-word, but it will
do in a pinch...  

rlg
-- 
Ron Goers @ Xerox Corporation     Email: rgoers@iset.scan.mc.xerox.com

"Time flies like an arrow ...
 fruit flies like a banana"
From: crs@stein.u.washington.edu (Cliff Slaughterbeck)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: World Communion Sunday
Date: 6 Oct 92 03:36:44 GMT
Organization: University of Washington, Seattle

Today, October 4, is World Communion Sunday.  We had a particularly
inspiring worship service at church today, and I thought I might share
some of it with you.

My wife and I attend Terrace View Presbyterian Church in Mountlake Terrace
Washington.  It is a small PCUSA church of about 65 members.  For the
last few years, we have rented our building to the Elim Presbyterian
Church, a Korean church which meets late on Sunday afternoons while we
worship Sunday mornings.  This has been a blessing to both congregations
although most of the parrishoners did not know one another, as we needed
their rent money for our budget, and they needed a place to worship the
Lord as a community of faith.  For the most part, however, the congregations
did not interact with each other.

This Sunday, in honor of World Communion Sunday, we met jointly as a
larger community of faith for the first time.  The worship service was
moved to start at 11:30--halfway between our 10:00 and their 1:00
normal starting periods.  Both pastors officiated together.  There were
two bulletins, one in English and one in Korean.  Some items on the
worship service were done first in one language and then the other, such
as the Call to Worship.  Other items, such as the Prayer of Confession
were said in unity by both congregations in their respective languages.
The anthems were sung by choirs from both churches.  The hymns that
were chosen had both English and Korean words and they were sung together.
Our pastor gave the sermon, which was translated after every paragraph
by the pastor from Elim Church.  Communion was served by elders from
both chuches together to the crowd of mixed cultures.  Naturally, the
bilingual service took longer than the standard "one hour" service
that Presbyterians normally expect, but nobdy seemed to mind as we
all were thouroughly enjoying worshiping and praying with people
of the same faith who lived next door to us, but we did not really
know.

The service was such a rousing success that I am sure that we will do it
again sometime.  Perhaps we won't wait until the First Sunday in 
October to try it again.  I am sure that some of you out there must
belong to churches in similar situations.  I strongly encourage you
to think about trying to hold a combined worship service.

****************************************************************************
Cliff Slaughterbeck           * 
Dept. of Physics, FM-15       *   Hey Matt!  The diffusion pump is full of
University of Washington      *   water again!
Seattle, WA 98195             *
****************************************************************************
From: Steve.Hayes@p5.f22.n7101.z5.fidonet.org (Steve Hayes)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Orthodox Saints?
Date: 3 Oct 92 06:18:46 GMT

On <28 Sep 1992 21:42> mhill (5:7104/2) said to All :

[A previous posting asked about Orthodox saints --clh]

 m>How about Sergius of Moscow, whose feast is celebrated today in the 
 m>Anglican calendar.  He and his brother founded a monastery just outside of 
 m>Moscow.  I think he was post-schism.  I don't know the procedure for 
 m>canonization.

I missed the original posting, but several Orthodox saints have been canonized 
recently, notably St Tikhon of Moscow (died 1924). Others canonized within the 
last 20 years include St Herman of Alaska (Enlightener of the Aleuts), St 
Nicholas of Japan (Equal to the Apostles), St Innocent of Alaska (Enlightener 
of America), St Peter the Aleut (Martyr) and several others. 

--  
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!5!7101!22.5!Steve.Hayes
Internet: Steve.Hayes@p5.f22.n7101.z5.fidonet.org
From: dubin@cs.arizona.edu (Michael David Dubin)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Corporate Confession
Date: 2 Oct 92 05:04:49 GMT
Organization: U of Arizona CS Dept, Tucson

The fellowship I am involved with on campus (Chi Alpha Christian Fellowship)
encourages and practices confessing sins to one another for two reasons:
	1) The NT tells us to (in James I think)
	2) For reasons of accountability.  If your brothers and sisters know
	a sin that you have been struggling with, they can ask how you are 
	doing, pray for you, encourage you, and generally help you "work out
	your salvation with fear and trembling."  The Bible does mention a tie
	between community and holiness... (Colossians, I think)
I personally have benefitted from this, and have thus gained some of Christ's
victory into my life.

''''''''''''''''''''''''
Michael Dubin
dubin@cs.arizona.edu
..gotta getta sig..

````````````````````````
From: boswell@fnale.fnal.gov (Chris Boswell JHU CDF (708)840-3638)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Christians and economics (was: no title given)
Date: 30 Sep 92 05:43:56 GMT
Reply-To: boswell@fnale.fnal.gov
Organization: Fermilab

>>In article <Sep.24.23.52.28.1992.4300@athos.rutgers.edu> dmccrea6@mach1.wlu.ca (doug mccready F) writes:
>>Is there anybody relating their Christianity to the profession of Economics?
>>I find that there are some people who refuse to accept the idea that I can
>>be an economist and a Christian at the same time. I would like to see
>>writings on this topic.

	I know the problem (in the field of physics).  Check out writings by
Franky Scheaffer ( in some book like "Is Capitalism Christian?"),
R.J.Rushdoony( a copy of the Chalcedon Report is available
from Chalcedon, P.O. Box 158, Vallecito CA 95251),
Herbert Schlossberg, Marvin Olasky
David Chilton( "Productive Christians in an age of guilt manipulators"),
Gary North ( Institute for Christian Economics, P.O. Box 8000,
Tyler, TX 75711, for several newsletters on the question).
That should be a good start.

In article <Sep.27.21.32.17.1992.929@athos.rutgers.edu>, pstephan@condor.mcs.ke
>Have you ever heard of Larry Burkett?  He runs an organization called

	IMHO, Larry Burkett is involved in inferior
family economic planning, and is not looking at the
things most economists are doing in graduate school, so
might not be the place to start.

	Chris
From: wiggins@marigold.cs.odu.edu (Samuel E Wiggins)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Questions about the Bible
Date: 30 Sep 92 05:37:09 GMT
Organization: Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA

One thing that nobody has said expressly, is that God gives us the freedom to
choose to do right and wrong, and to think however we want.  He allows us to
make up our own mind about things.  And, generally when we don't listen to Him,
we mess things up.  Adam and Eve in the garden is a good example.  They were 
totally free to do what God said or what they wanted to do, which was contrary
to what He had said.  He could have made the Tree inaccessible from the
beginning, but He didn't.  For some reason, to me, it seems evident that He
didn't want to have to *make* everything be good.  I think He liked/likes the
idea of our wanting to do good/be good on our own, just like He is good and
does good on His own.  Anything less than letting us have total freedom to
think/do as we please would spoil this, wouldn't it?  So, we can blame the
creations for their own imperfections.  And, for this same reason I believe,
He can judge us as good or bad, right or wrong, honor us or punish us, because
we constantly, consistently mess up His perfect order and best system with our
own limited, usually selfish, and never-the-best ideas.  Hence the need for
His salvation which He promised through a Messiah who we Christians know 
Jesus is.  Keep in mind, that God says what's good or not.

This salvation doesn't/can't come from within, because there's very little
good in there.  Paul in Romans talks alot about his spirit (mind) being willing
to do good, but his flesh (his normal, selfish desires coming from living in
this world and considering how it operates) not letting him do it.  To get out
of the rut, one really needs external help.  And, throughout the Bible, from
the Old Testament to the New, God only gave One Example to follow and One Way
to get out of the rut.  Jesus Himself claimed to be the ONLY way to overcome
all this selfishness, this sin.  And, the whole Bible claims there're no 
other gods, no other routes to goodness, no other ways to enlightenment, other
than This One.  This is the one true religion, specifically, the religion of
Jesus Christ: the same as what the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John
relay; what the prophets of the Old Testament spoke of without yet
understanding it; what the apostles and other disciples lived by.  Hence, the
reason why we Christians bug you so much to believe like we do!
From: Amy.M.Marshall.1@nd.edu
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Christianity and economics
Date: 2 Oct 92 04:50:51 GMT
Organization: University of Notre Dame

As a Christian studying to be an economist, I have spent a lot of time
presenting my views to my colleagues regarding my beliefs and where econ
fits in.  I have fought hard to emphasize that I am NOT an economist, nor a
consevative, nor a Republican, etc, but that I am a Christian who studies
economics, has conservative leanings, and sometimes votes Republican. 
Labels are not only misleading, but they also turn our eyes from God and
his purpose.

Specifically regarding econ, I have tried to explain the role of individual
free will and justice in the marketplace.  I wrote my master's thesis on
social welfare administration and alternatives to such in light of
individual responsibility and the failure of the collective to "solve"
society's problems.

In preparing to face my careeer in such a manner, I found the work of
Francis, Franky and Edith Schaeffer to be invaluable.

As for Chris Boswell's comments on Larry Burkett, I agree. I have
persoannly spoken with people who were crushed by the declarations in The
Coming Economic Earthquake.  When a Christian who is an economist writes
for the general public, he should temper his decalarations with love and
encourage others to seek God's will for themselves and their communities. 
This IS a fallen world, and terrible things continue to happen, but God is
omnipotent and omnipresent and will guide those who seek Him.  Larry
Burkett's advice cannot transcend this Truth.

Amy Marshall



__________________________o_______________________
Univ of Notre Dame
Dept of Econ and Ofc of Univ Computing
marshall.1@nd.edu          marshal@irishmvs.bitnet
From: wity@iastate.edu (Wity Ganda)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: God does exist! (Was Re: Non-Religious Practice)
Date: 2 Oct 92 04:11:05 GMT
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, IA

In article <Sep.23.23.58.05.1992.3331@athos.rutgers.edu> jwong@copper.denver.colorado.edu (Jack Wong) writes:
>
>     I'm a non-religious person.  What I don't like about
>     religion is that I think it tends to split people apart
>     more than uniting them.  One group say their god is real and
>     another say their god is the only god.  Since all you religious
>     believer claim there is a god, why can't you prove that there is
>     one.  Oh, I know what you all will say, the Bible says there is.
>     I've heard that line over a million times.  Sorry, but I'm not
>     used to believing what I don't see or experience.  


Some people keep saying, "Prove to me that God exists!"
To those people, we can just say, "PROVE TO ME THAT GOD DOES NOT EXIST!"
It is impossible to prove that God does not exist.

These are things that I've just got a couple days ago:
- God does not exist simply because man believe in His existence,
  and He will never become non-existence simply because we do not 
  believe in His existence.
- The existence of God is not a result of human's discussion,
  but the existence of God is the cause, is the reason that human
  discuss about His existence.

- If God can be seen, God is even smaller than our eyesight.
- If God can be proven, that kind of God is even smaller than our 
  argumentation.
- If God can be experienced, God is even smaller than our sensation.


8-), God loves you
     -wity-
-- 
+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+
|  Wity Ganda                    |  wity@iastate.edu                    |
|  Iowa State University         |  as101@cleveland.freenet.edu         |
+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+=-+
From: mayne@ds1.scri.fsu.edu (Bill Mayne)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: opinions on the big bang needing a external cause
Date: 6 Oct 92 04:06:16 GMT
Reply-To: mayne@ds1.scri.fsu.edu (Bill Mayne)
Organization: SCRI, Florida State University

In article <Oct.4.22.02.29.1992.5938@geneva.rutgers.edu> schlegel@cwis.unomaha.edu (Mark Schlegel) writes:
>Could people on this channel post some opinions on whether they think the
>universe can be self sufficient (i.e. does it have to have a specific cause)
>or did it have to be externally created (by God).

The argument that God must exist because the universe could not exist
without a creator is one of the weakest ever presented. If God can be
self sufficient and capable of producing the universe why can't the
universe be self sufficient? This is so simple even a child can
understand it. Who has not asked "Who made God?" So the bottom line
is that there is not reason to suppose that the universe must have
been externally created. Postulating a creator only moves the question
of ultimate origins back one level. 

Bill Mayne
From: mpaul@unlinfo.unl.edu (marxhausen paul)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Kingdoms in Conflict, recommended
Date: 29 Sep 92 06:42:15 GMT
Organization: University of Nebraska - Lincoln

A reading recommendation for those of us kicking around Christianity/Gov
ernment threads -  Kingdoms in Conflict, by Charles Colson (Morrow/Zondervan
1987) .  A good, in depth discussion of the relationship of God's Kingdom
and earthly ones.  What makes it good reading IMHO is the many in-depth,
concrete historical examples used to illuminate different aspects of the topic,
from the Confessing Church in Hitler's Germany to the overthrow of Marcos
in the Phillipines, also the Irish Troubles, the Nicaraguan Sandinistas,
and Colson's personal insight on the wheels of power inside the Nixon
White House, as well as others.  Also many examples of how American society
has become antagonistic towards Christianity.  I didn't perceive that Colson
can be stuck in anybody's particular ideological camp, as he points out
the errors on all points of the political and religious spectrum.  
 
--
===============================================================================
paul marxhausen                              \/               grace 
university of nebraska - lincoln             /\              happens           
===============================================================================
From: mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Greek Bible
Date: 1 Oct 92 03:41:13 GMT
Organization: Free Software Foundation, Cambridge, MA

In article <Sep.30.01.26.05.1992.7141@geneva.rutgers.edu> dabbott@augean.eleceng.adelaide.edu.au (Derek Abbott) writes:

   Does anyone know of a *modern* Greek translation of the Bible?

   I've seen New Testaments about, but not the whole thing.

   A lot of "modern" Greek Bibles are not in today's spoken Greek but in
   Katharevousa    ie. "intellectual" Greek.

I assume you mean a translation to Demotic Greek.  I don't know if
there is one or not.  It is my understanding that Katharevousa Greek is
in common use in Greece in law courts, the liturgy of the Greek
Orthodox Church, and so forth, so it's quite possible there is no
Demotic Greek translation.

   PS. BTW, is there a Koine Greek version of the *whole* Bible? If not,
   what did the early Greek Christians use to get Old Testament knowledge?

The Septuagint (often abbreviated LXX) is somewhat pre-koine and
post-Hellenistic Greek, being somewhere in the middle.  It's more
precise about grammar than Koine, and uses some forms that dropped out
of use by the time the New Testament was penned.  It is the Septuagint
that was used by the authors of the NT; most of the OT quotes in the
NT are taken verbatim from the Septuagint.

	-mib
--
Michael I. Bushnell            Gaude, virgo, salutata Gabriele nuntio.
+1 617 625 4518 (H)      |     Gaude, mater jucundata Jesu puerperio.
+1 617 253 8568 (W)     -+-    Gaude, conresuscitata resurgente filio.
mib@gnu.ai.mit.edu       |     Gaude, tua sublimata prole plena gaudio.
25 Belknap St Apt 1      |     Gaude, sumpta et locata cum Jesu in solio.
Somerville MA 02144            Esto nobis advocata in magno judico, O Maria.
From: pasward@maytag.uwaterloo.ca (Paul A.S. Ward)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Responsibility of Leaders
Date: 29 Sep 92 06:46:10 GMT
Organization: University of Waterloo

OFM commented on my article:

>[Do we really buy music based on judgements of the personal character
>of the author?  I can understand that there are people who personal
>character makes one recoil from their works.  This happens to me in
>some cases.  But when there's doubt, it would seem to me that we could
>make our decision based on the quality and message of their works
>itself, without feeling forced to judge them personally.  --clh]

It depends on what we are buying.  In the case of Christian music, I
believe that we are buying two things; first we are saying that the
music is acceptable, and second we are saying that the ministry is
acceptable.  To buy a Sandi Patti tape is to say that you believe that
it is acceptable for a visible leader of a Christian ministry to be
divorced/ in the process of divorce.  To not buy (when one would otherwise)
is to say that it is unacceptable.

The quality and message of the works may be saintly; however it really
doesn't mean much if the one preaching cannot follow his/her own words.
From: ricko@ee.uts.edu.au (Rick Jelliffe)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Name It & Claim It
Date: 2 Oct 92 04:12:58 GMT
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney

stovall@ficus.cs.ucla.edu (Steven Stovall) writes:

>cmgrawbu@eos.ncsu.edu (CHRISTOPHER M GRAWBURG) writes:

>>Can someone please explain to me the concept of Name it and claim it taught
>>by Copeland and Fred Price??

>At any rate, a seminal scripture for the power of speech in the life of
>the believer would be Mark 11:23. "Verily I say unto you, Whoever shall
>say unto this mountain, Be thou removed and cast into the sea, and shall
>not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that what he speaketh shall come
>to pass, it shall be his."

>On the other hand, this sort of emphasis tends to promote materialism in
>the life of the believer, which is the exact antithesis of the Gospel,
>and is something we are warned against, e.g. 1 Tim 6:6-11.

I've had friends very keen on it, and they've all ended up hurt. The 
prosperity doctrine is that God wants us all rich and happy. This is
our birthright, and we are suckers for not taking Him at his word.

It bypasses the kind of teaching of Paul, who praised God for counting him
worthy to share in Christ's sufferings. Almost all the Apostles were
martyrs, as have been many Christians. I have heard one properity preacher
claim that matyrs never feel any pain, so they were really prospering
even as they roasted or hanged or stuck! It generally appeals to 
people who must buy lottery tickets. 

-ricko
From: andyrose@netcom.com (Andy "San Francisco Fractal Factory" Rose)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: CFV: soc.religion.quaker
Date: 1 Oct 92 03:37:09 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

Request votes regarding soc.religion.quaker
as an avenue for communication of some literature regarding the life
of members of Religious Society of Friends (Quakers).  This
would mainly include publication of American Friends Service Committee
media spec. Quaker Service Bulletin, AFSC Resources, regional office notes,
Annual Report, electronic and standard contacts, local meeting 
minutes, Right Sharing of World Resources, Criminal Justice and Prison 
Reform, and guides to travelling friends.

UNMODERATED

Voting period begins Wednesday Sept 30 and runs through Wednesday Oct 21.

please mail a one-liner with yes, no, or abstain to:
andyrose@netcom.com

-thanks, anr
-- 
Andrew Rose andyrose@netcom.com FAX 4155537756 When peace rules the planet