HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: CHRISTIA
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 22 Jul 1992 15:54:00 EST
From:         "Lauren H. Arango" <LHARANGO@OWUCOMCN.BITNET>
Subject:      The author of "Footprints"

Angela asks,

>I just read a note by Lauren Arango saying that there was an article in
>a magazine about the woman who wrote Footprints.  On everything I've ever
>seen with Footprints on it, the author is either listed as unknown or
>anonymous (can't remember which).  Are you sure she was the author of the
>poem?  Did I completely miss something somewhere?  Thanks.

The article addresses this fact, and tells how the author finally was able
to gain credit for what she had written many years ago.

Check out the July 1992 issue of "Guideposts".  I'm sure it's available at
just about any Christian bookstore.  The other articles are interesting
as well! :)

                                        Lauren
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: University of Missouri-Columbia Campus Computing, 314-882-2000
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 21 Jul 1992 14:41:34 CDT
From:         Elizabeth Stevens <CCCAMPER@MIZZOU1.BITNET>
Subject:      Footprints, customized

When learning to deal with a very devastating marriage and divorce a
Christian counselor asked me to memorize "Footprints". It was a little
too "wordy" and masculine for me, so I altered it a bit. Of course
the original is wonderful, just thought someone may enjoy this version.

footprints       (CFV)

one night i had a dream
i was walking with Jesus along a beach at sunset
as we walked the scenes from my life were
playing across the sky
in most of the scenes there were
two sets of footprints, Jesus and me
but when the scenes flashed by
from the most difficult times in my life
i looked back and there was but
one set of footprints across the sand....
i looked up at Jesus and asked
why weren't you there, holding my hand
when i needed you most?
Jesus stopped and turned to look at me
and gently touched my cheek
to wipe away a tear
Elizabeth, there is only
one set of footprints
because that is when
i was carrying you



(CFV....eas)
customized feminine version


Isn't Jesus awesome?

In His most tender care and Love,
Elizabeth
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 29 Jul 1992 08:29:55 -0500
From:         MARCI HENDRIX <HENDRIX@RHODES.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Divorce and Remarriage

Marty, I've always been curious about annulments.  Growing up in the northeast,
most of my friends were Catholic and practically everyone I can think of that
has been divorced has gone through the annulman proceedings so they can
be remarried by the Church.  In your post you alluded to marriages that
were never true marriages (by law).  Can you tell me what in the law someone
could use to prove they were never married?  I've been witness to marriages
that have ended up as "annulled."  Personnally, I've always just felt that
annullments are just denial of a divorce.  Marci Hendrix
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 28 Jul 1992 18:55:09 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Changing Opinions (Edify)
              29 Jul 1992 09:03:44 EST from <iwilliam@AU.ORACLE.COM>

Ian:

I'm not sure that the Republican party has a position on the legality of
divorce.  However, in answer to the other part of your question, I think
you have a misunderstanding of the way our government works.  In the
US, the "party in power" does *not* have free reign to do anything it
likes.  There are certain things the President can do to bypass Congress
(such as issue Presidential Directives and Executive Orders, but the
applicability of those are limited.)  In addition, the Republicans
have not been "in power."  The legislative power is vested in the Congress,
which has been in the control of the Democratic Party.  The President can
propose legislation, but the Congress can refuse to pass it.  The President
can veto a Congressional Act (which Bush has done 27 times as of this
writing), but the Congress can override the veto (which they have not during
Bush's tenure).  In short, the President's legislative capacity is severely
limited by the terms of the Constitution.
  To complicate things even more, an Act of Congress (or an Executive
Order or Presidential Directive) can be nullified by a decision of
the Supreme Court (though the Court is generally reluctant to do so,
since the President has the power to appoint Justices, and the Congress
has the power to limit the Court's jurisdiction, if it chooses to do
so.)  And, finally, neither the Congress nor the President has a power
of enforcement, unless the Congress takes extreme action or the President
sends in troops.
  Perhaps now you may understand why very little of any value ever gets
done by the government itself.  Add to this that there are *2* houses
of Congress, who have conflicting interests, and that it is factually
the bureaucrats who really run the whole show, mix the whole mess together,
and you have some picture of why we continue to have governmental
gridlock.  About the only thing we ever get agreement on is going to
war (because everybody but the bureaucrats are afraid of public opinion.)
It's not pretty, but it's *our* democratic republic.  For what it's worth.
                                        Love INC,
                                                 ---Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 29 Jul 1992 12:37:02 CDT
From:         Yvette Traylor <YST1@DCCCDBIT.BITNET>
Subject:      Graphics

Eddie: Communication Resources 1425 West Maple Street North Canton, Ohio
44720 (216)499-1950
They have all types of church art, even stuff on disk.  Yvette

************************************************************************
*  Yvette Traylor     "We are His people and the sheep of his pasture."*
*  Dallas, Texas                                        Psalm 100:3    *
*  Computer Programmer/Analyst                                         *
************************************************************************
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
From: mueller@owlnet.rice.edu (Ernest Conrad Mueller)
Subject: Re: Book recommendation
Keywords: Saint Camber, Deryni, Katherine Kurtz
Organization: Rice University
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 18:31:32 GMT

"Hawk's Flight" sounds good.  I love sf-fantasy type stuff.

Along this line, Katherine Kurtz writes a multi-trilogy series with
"Deryni" or "Camber" in the name that is set in a medieval world
much like our own with one exception: there are people of a race called
Deryni which appear normal but have innate psychic powers.  The Church
plays a large part in the book, as being Deryni goes from considered
really cool to being considered evil and heretical.  A Deryni saint
(Camber) and a Deryni priest figure heavily in the plots.  These
books are not explicitly Christian but take place in a setting where
God, etc. exists and is active in things (with help from the saints,
warning to fundamentalists).  They are very good fantasy literature
and raise thought-provoking points about discrimination & serving God. 

Ernest Mueller
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
From: nlt@gboro.glassboro.edu (N. L. Tinkham)
Subject: Different names
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Glassboro State College
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 05:25:36 GMT

Wolfgang Hutter asked:

> P.S.: Risking to be viewed as foolish, but why are your last names
> different? - JFMI... you may answer this privately, since it has nothing
> to do with the subject.

     For those who came in late, I am Nancy Tinkham, and my husband is
Darren Provine.

     Basically, the answer is that I liked my name and wanted to keep it.
I was 28 when Darren and I were married, and by that time I was used to
"Nancy Tinkham" being "me".  The beginnings of my academic career (my
degrees and a couple of publications) were in that name.  It's got a neat
genealogical history -- my father has found the river valley in Devon that
the family is named for -- and that gives me a "rootedness" in a way that's
hard to explain.  And so on.

     Modern U.S. laws are pretty flexible about couples' names.  I've
seen couples with the same family name, with the two birth names, with
the wife's or both names hyphenated, and with a newly invented family name.
And we've got immigrants from countries with entirely different schemes
for passing on family names.  Most government forms and many computer
databases are now robust enough to handle the variety of combinations
that are in use.


                                              Nancy Tinkham
                                              nlt@gboro.glassboro.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 29 Jul 1992 13:21:00 CDT
From:         "Love does not subtract, it multiplies." <HOLZMAN@FNAL.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: US Politicians Twisting Scripture

<While he may have legitimately earned the title of "reverend," I do
<know that Jesse Jackson has never led a congregation, nor has he ever
<given a sermon. If he indeed rightfully earned the title, I would
<suspect it would have only been done for political gain.
<
<-ACF

In the time and culture that Jesse Jackson grew up and went to college in, just
about the only advanced academic study open to Blacks (then called Negroes, at
best) was the ministry.  There were few notable exceptions.

Dan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 14:08:13 EDT
Comments:     Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2X
From:         Brenda Curry-White <BSCURR01@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Spiritual leadership in the home

Urban Research Institute
Phone: 502-588-6626

Roger Phyall gives advice to Christian wives with husbands who are
unwilling to take on leadership roles within the family.  These two
pieces of advice are to 1) attend a seminar in Philadelphia, or 2) to
perfect the art of what Mr. Phyall calls, "non-persuasion."  Since
most listmembers do not have easy access to Philadelphia, Mr. Phyall
expounds on the second piece of advice.

In his first step of non-persuasion, Mr. Phyall advocates something that
sounds like deception to get the husband to attend counseling.  He says
to "come up with a decisions you feel YOU need spiritual counseling on
with his help.  Maybe changing churches, or having another child, or
maybe kids to what kind of school..."  He goes on to say, "Having
explained ahead of time what you are really getting counseling for &
your cover topic to your counselor.  You and your counselor proceed to
*gang up* on 'hubby' and educate scripturally what his *job/role* is."

I can think of nothing that will put 'hubby' on the defensive faster
than this kind of deception.  Perhaps in some cases such "counseling"
would work, but there is a great chance that it could do more harm
than good.  I believe in honesty.  Making up an excuse to get your
husband to go to counseling is nothing less than lying (in my opinion
at least).  There is a good chance that once such a husband is
"ganged up" on, he will feel betrayed and defensive.  Better to be
honest in the first place if what you really want is for your husband
to take on leadership.  Ask him why he won't.  Tell him it's important
to you.  Ask him if he will discuss it with you and a third party
counselor.  But don't lie.  And don't use some other issue on which
the two of you may disagree (which may even be a bigger issue in the
long run--like the suggestion about having another child) to trick
him into discussion on leadership.

Just my opinion.

Brenda Curry-White
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Subject: (no subject given)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 21 Jul 1992 11:46:54 EDT
From:         "Patrick Scott" <PSCOTT@SUVM.BITNET>

Subject:   Personal Ideologies

Hi.  I'm a new subscriber to Christia.  I'd like to know if anyone
out there is (or in the past, has) subscribed to the "Belief-L"
discussion group.  I'd also like to know if you have any thoughts
or opinions you'd like to share regarding your experiences in
communicating your faith to that group.

Thanks!
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 10:07:27 CDT
From:         CCCHRIS@MIZZOU1.BITNET
Subject:      Spiritually dead

I've already deleted the mail I read this morning, but something I saw in one
note didn't set too well with me.  Sorry, it's gone, so I can't quote it
verbatim, but it was about how if a person is not reading their Bible daily
they're spiritually dead.  While I agree that a Christian should read the
Bible daily, I strongly disagree with the implication that _not_ doing so
means the person is spiritually dead.  Many of us experience a lag at times,
or we may backslide, or we could be struggling with any number of spiritual
problems.  How refreshing to see another recent post dealing with how many
respected theologians struggle with their faith, even to the point of
questioning the very existance of God.  We can relate to that, and we feel
edified in knowing we're not alone when we have our doubts, and still work
through them and become stronger in our faith as a result of it.

Please understand that I don't mean to be critical.  Perhaps I should ask
for a definition of what is meant by "spiritually dead," as it seems to me
such judgements can only be made by Jesus.  And He is a good shepherd,
righteous to forgive, always seeking His lost sheep.

In His name,

Chris Reed
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 24 Jul 1992 13:59:00 CDT
From:         "Love does not subtract, it multiplies." <HOLZMAN@FNAL.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: Practical witchcraft?

<I might not have read everything that goes with/before this post. In fact,
<the following excerpt might even be a joke. Maybe I'm being too quick to
<react. But I was wondering since we can no longer discuss the "P" word in
<posts here, does that mean rebellion and witchcraft are more "practical"
<than the "P" word? By that I refer to the words "covenmate" and "Witchcraft"
<in the material below.

Someone refresh my memory -- what's the "P" word?

[quote of my posting deleted for brevity]

<Maybe this doesn't bother anyone else. And if it's only a joke, well....
<But if it's real, then it seems like the family values being endorsed are
<the values of the sin of rebellion (is that not how witchcraft is described?).

I was not joking, I am in fact a Wiccan High Priest, aka a Witch.  I will send
you a brief statement of what this is privately, as most people on the list
have either heard it before or are not terribly interested.

Dan
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
From: kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu (Dr Nancy's Sweetie)
Subject: Voting about Issues (US-specific, but generalisable)
Organization: Glassboro State College (The Hour Is Growing Late)
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 18:09:02 GMT


On the specific topic of President Bush losing pro-life voters, it's that
those people won't vote at all.  It's true that pro-life voters would like
to see more from Mr Bush, the supposed pro-life president -- but he's also
supposedly the Education President, the Environment President, and he used to
be in charge of the War on Drugs.  LOTS of people would like to see more from
him . . .


Robert Weiss writes that pro-lifers have several voting choices:

>	Don't vote.
>	Write-in someone who will lose.
>	Vote for a solid pro-choice ticket.
>	Vote for a weak pro-life ticket.

There are several other things to do:

1) Accept that there are no pro-life candidates, and select a candidate on
   more than one issue.  (I recommend this latter idea in any case.)

2) Try to measure who will reduce abortion the most without legislation.

In particular, suppose one candidate has extensive social and educational
programs that:

 a) advocate and teach abstinence/chastity
 b) provide free counseling and medical help during a pregnancy
 c) provide free contraception and training to those who cannot afford it

[ I do not claim that there are any candidates who meet this description. ]

Such programs and ideas, presuming they can be instituted and paid for, may
well prevent many abortions.  (Paying for them is a big problem given the
current US deficit; ironically, Ronald Reagan may have done more to keep the
government from stopping abortions than any pro-choice president would have
done.  Now that we're in the results of Mr Reagan's fiscal irresponsibility,
I suspect government intervention to reduce problems like abortion will be
much more difficult to arrange.)

I know some people don't think much of providing contraception, but people
are sinners and they are GOING to sin.  I see contraception as much less awful
than abortion.  If the object is to reduce the damage done by people who don't
act like you want, free contraception looks like the lesser of two evils.

There are ways of reducing abortion besides just using legislation; if you
can't find a candidate who'll stop abortion with legislation, look for one who
will try something else.

(Of course, it is worth considering whether a candidate can do what he
 promises.  Sometimes I think of voters who consider only a pro-life platform
 to be as someone who only votes for candidates who promise to make the sun
 rise in the west.)


Darren F Provine / kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu
"It is now quite lawful for a Catholic woman to avoid pregnancy by a resort
 to mathematics, though she is still forbidden to resort to physics and
 chemistry."  -- H L Mencken
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re: Amy Grant and her "Crossover" Music
From: superc@chester.ksu.ksu.edu (Shawn E Chase)
Date: 27 Jul 1992 18:49:37 -0500
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: chester.ksu.ksu.edu

<LSMITH@auvm.american.edu> writes:

>Sure, writing a song about your baby is edifying in the terms of a person excer
>sising the gift of Love that God has given us, but as I said - I have a problem
> with songs that straddle the fence.  It should not be that a person has to rea
>d an article in a magazine to find out EXACTLY what a person is singing about.
> Gospel music should proclaim the Good News of the Lord

 Oh, pardon my ignorance, but I wasn't aware that 'Heart in Motion' is promoted as Gospel music. The last time I checked, it was termed as 'contemporary pop'. 
 - not hide behind the c
>loak of ambiguity in order to make a profit
 Pardon me, again, but what, may I ask, is wrong with making a profit? Amy Grant makes good music. She has been given a gift from God and she is using it to the best of her ability, as I see it. As far as crossing over, I bet she reaches many more non-Christians than she did previously. Which brings up the point that that's what we're here for. If you don't believe me, read Mark 16:15...
  As far as proclaiming the Good News, I think When It All Comes Down does a pretty good job. As far as the album in entirety, it is fun and entertaining. Of course, the album isn't something like Michael Card, et al, in that it doesn't offer deep insight into the Christian faith or offer any challenges specifically. But still, the album has great production. As far as I'm concerned, I don't see anything wrong with her "crossing over." The same goes for Michael W. Smith. 
If people are looking for 100% challenging Christian music, there are plenty of bands to choose from. But, I think it's about time that Christian artists start invading the secular airwaves and showing people that Christians make GREAT , entertaining music as well. Good for Amy and Michael that they've made the start. BTW BeBe and CeCe and Take 6 - kudos to them as well.       
          my  $.02 
-- 
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+Shawn E. Chase          +SUPERC@MATT.KSU.EDU + Offending, to some I am, 'cause+
+Dept Of Industrial Engg +SUPERC@KSUVM.KSU.EDU+ I tell the truth, my man       +
+Kansas State University +aka The Hood Of Good+ S.F.C.- "The Bomb"             +
From: mktjadx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu (Jeff A. Dilcher)
Subject: Masturbation:  Gift of God or Sin from the Devil?
Organization: Georgia State University
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 18:54:44 GMT

Hello! 
Someone else brought this up in another post, so I thought I would throw
it out as a topic for discussion.  This is probably a taboo subject fro
many, but it might be of value to talk about it openly and honestly, as
it seems to be a stumbling block to many.  I have found no places in the
bible that actually forbid the practice, yet some people say that teachings
on lust apply here.  Perhaps it is up to the individual to decide.  Some
may also view masturbation as a gift from God, and an alternative to
committing fornication or adultery.  Also, on a related note.... Is it
possible to exist without any sexual release whatsoever?  Celibacy in its
truest sense?  I would like to hear from any who have managed to live this
lifestyle.
 
This aught to get the ball rolling!
Jeff


-- 
 
  Jeffrey A. Dilcher                                   Atlanta, GA, USA
mktjadx@gsusgi2.gsu.edu                             Telephone 404-266-1585
      NSS #25914                                       II Peter 1:10,11
 



Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
From: kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu (Dr Nancy's Sweetie)
Subject: Ensuring Fairness
Organization: Glassboro State College
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 04:56:33 GMT


Kerry Stephenson relates a story:

> FYI, when my friend Mark was teaching middle school, he assigned his
> students to deliver a persuasive speech to the class.  He called the NEA and
> asked them, "What if one of my students decides to write a speech exhorting
> the members of the class to accept Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior?"
> Their reply?  (After a long pause.)  "We would advise you to structure the
> assignment so that such an outcome would be impossible."

From a strictly pragmatic perspective, I'd say this was really good advice.
The potential for trouble is rather large, and I don't think a controversy
would benefit anybody.

But thinking on it further, I start to wonder about my own motivations.  Let's
suppose A tries to persuade the class to become Christians, and B attempts to
persuade them to join American Atheists.  As a teacher, I should evaluate
these on purely subjective grounds and grade them based on how well they made
their cases, how well they delivered the speech, and so on.  But some of that
involves subjective evaluations; might I unfairly credit the Christian more
than the Atheist, simply because I believe the Christian is correct?  Giving a
higher grade for reasons unrelated to the quality of the work is inexcusable;
but how can I be sure I wouldn't do it?

Going the other way, suppose I see the potential for unfairness (or even some
unpleasant accusations later) and overcompensate?  Might I overlook errors in
the Atheist's speech because I don't want to be seen as unfairly biased?


I do not think I trust myself enough to be impartial in this situation, and
as a result I would try to stick by the NEA's advice.  Not just to avoid a
controversy, but to ensure that I don't violate standards of fairness.

What do others think?  How certain are people that they could, as a teacher,
grade such speeches fairly?


Darren F Provine / kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu
"Power is an amazing thing." -- Robert Fulghum
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU