HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: afsar@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com ( )
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: Help
Date: 12 Dec 1992 13:23:51 GMT
Organization: Lockheed Missiles and Space Co.
Reply-To: afsar@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com ( )
NNTP-Posting-Host: wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu
Originator: gwydion@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu


I have a very good friend who got asthma about 4 years ago and since that time
his life style has not been the same. He has not been able to fast or pray 
properly because of the shortness of breath in the past 4 years.
He use to be able to pray and fast properly but now he struggles even praying.

He feels guilty because he has not been able to do his daily prays and he has 
not been able to fast in the month of Ramadon.

I like to help him but I do not know much about Islam and the laws.
Do you know what Quran the holy book says about people like him and how can he 
continue fasting and praying properly with his conditions?.

	Thank you 
                                afsar 
	                        afsar@iscnvx.lmsc.lockheed.com

P.S. He has seen many doctors and his medications do not help him very much.
From: Steve.Hayes@f22.n7101.z5.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Christmas...What does it really mean ?
Date: 20 Dec 92 22:14:29 GMT

On <14 Dec 1992 22:32> OEI ENG HAUW (5:7104/2) said to All :

 OEH>        Just wondering what does Christmas means to Christians 
 OEH>... (I
 OEH>just want to know how you all out there celebrate Christmas or 
 OEH>is it a
 OEH>day of celebration).

This is what we sing at Christmas, and this is what it means to me:

Thy Nativity, O Christ our God
has shown to the world the light of wisdom!
For by it those who worshipped the stars
were taught by a star to worship thee
the Sun of Righteousness
and to know thee, the Orient from on high
O Lord, glory to thee. 

(Troparion for the Feast of the Nativity)

Today the Virgin gives birth to the Transcendent One
and the earth offers a cave to the Unapproachable One!
Angels, with shepherds, glorify him!
The wise men journey with the star!
Since for our sake the eternal God was born as a little child!

(Kontakion for the feast of the Nativity)

I behold a strange, most glorious mystery!
Heaven - the cave!
The cherubic throne - the Virgin!
The manger - the place where Christ lay
the uncontainable God whom we magnify in song.
From: swf@elsegundoca.ncr.com (Stan Friesen)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Is Christianity really the ONLY way?
Date: 20 Dec 92 22:17:25 GMT

In article <Dec.14.00.09.12.1992.2971@geneva.rutgers.edu>, you write:
|> I've been having difficulty trying to understand something. Doesn't Jesus
|> say that belief in Him is the only way for salvation, and that we cannot
|> be
|> saved through our own efforts? However, this would seem to cut off
|> millions
|> of people who have never heard of Jesus, and millions more who died before
|> Jesus even walked the face of the earth. ...
|> 
|> There seems to be four ways out of this logical trap.

I see several others:

5) Those who have not had a fair chance to choose are reincarnated, given
   another chance.

6) Those who have not had a fair chance to chose before death are given a chance
   in the afterlife, in what might be called Limbo. (A la "The Great Divorce"
   by C.S. Lewis, thought he did not intend the book to seriously suggest such
   a possibility).

Currently, based on my persepctive on the nature of the world, I tend to favor
this last alternative (since I cannot make any real sense out of a reincarnation
without memories intact).

-- 
sarima@teradata.com			(formerly tdatirv!sarima)
  or
Stanley.Friesen@ElSegundoCA.ncr.com
From: u94_dlavdas@vaxc.stevens-tech.edu
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: <None>
Date: 17 Dec 92 04:27:43 GMT
Organization: Stevens Institute Of Technology

> 
> My understanding was that people who object to cremation on religious
> grounds do so because they feel there won't be anything to resurrect.

	I am waiting to get all the information I can before posting.
	For now let me just say it has nothing to do with the resurrection.
	God would have no problem resurrecting ashes, just as He has no problem
	resurrecting people burned in fires, or who lost limbs, etc.

	MORE TO COME.
                

> 
> I grew up in Japan, where cremation is required by law; there just isn't
> enough land for living people, much less dead bodies.  Christians there are
> cremated and have no qualms about it.
> -- 

	That is not true: My friend is an Orthodox priest in Japan and most
	of the Orthodox he knows (the non-Japanese) are flown to either their
	homeland or another country for burial.
                                               

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Dean Lavdas	 	IC | XP
	                -------        		MERRY CHRISTMAS !
    STEVENS TECH        NI | KA                       ^^^^^^
						Don't take the CHRIST out of
							CHRISTMAS !!!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: ummak027@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Anson Sen Sau Mak)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: God answer my prayer, again!
Date: 17 Dec 92 05:12:34 GMT
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

Hi Everyone,

	Just want to share what God did to me last few week. I was praying
for all my term paper, readings, tests, exams which all needed to be done
in 1 week time. it's a very heavy workload for me since I need to complete
one book before I can start writing my paper. (also, English is my second
language) I pray for His arrangment on my timetable, and He answered my
prayer again! I done everything and still had time left! I know if He is
not with me, I can't finish even 1 of the 4 assignments! praise to the Lord

Best Wishes

In Him,

Anson
From: ummak027@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Anson Sen Sau Mak)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: A Story on "Streams in the Desert"
Date: 17 Dec 92 05:20:08 GMT
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

I read a story in the book, "Streams in the Desert" few days ago, And want
to share it, here's the story (forgive me if there is any grammer
mistakes, because I translated from Chinese):

	"There was a widow who only had 3 daughters. However, they were
all dead during their missionary work at Africa. One day, a missionary at
her church asked her whether she felt sad or not. She said: ' Yes! Of
course I feel sad! I feel sad because I don't have the Fourth daughter to
serve God."

What do you think after reading the story? When I first read the story, I
felt surpise of the widow's faith on God, and I kept asking myself if
I have the same faith on God like that widow. Sometime I just feel that I
don't have much faith on God during sufferings. Please pray for me.

In Him
Anson
From: hedrick@cs.rutgers.edu
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: thought for the day (12-20)
Date: 20 Dec 92 23:40:35 GMT

Sunday, December 20:

     In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of
our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace that he lavished
on us.  <Ephesians 1: 7>
From: jhpb@sarto.budd-lake.nj.us (Joseph H. Buehler)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Mary and the Moderns
Date: 20 Dec 92 22:13:08 GMT
Organization: none

In article <Dec.16.02.09.58.1992.8569@farside.rutgers.edu> rjb@akgua.att.com (Robert J Brown) writes:

   His point (along with many other sources including scholars of
   Protestant, Jewish, and RC background) is that Matt gospel account
   is based on the Septuagint translation of the Is 7:14 word in
   Hebrew ALMAH into the Greek word PARTHENOS.  In the Hebrew ALMAH
   has no direct indication of virginity, but is rendered in the
   sense of young woman.  PARTHENOS on the other hand is translated
   as virgin in the technical sense.  Jews often point out that if
   Isaiah meant virgin, he would have used the term B'TULLAH in Hebrew
   which is, indeed, the technical term virgin.  

This argument was known to the Fathers of the Church; the Jews used it
back then too, of course.  St. Jerome demonstrates that there is a
connotation of "virgin" in his work on the perpetual virginity of our
Lady, I think.  I can't locate my copy at the moment, so can't quote
it for you.  Here is what Dr. Ludwig Ott says in "Fundamentals of
Catholic Dogma":

    ...The Jewish objection that the Septuagint wrongly rendered the
    Hebrew word ha 'alma by (Greek word for virgin here) instead of by
    (Greek word for young woman here) ... is unfounded, as the word ha
    'alma in biblical language means an untouched marriageable maiden.
    Compare Genesis 24:43 with Genesis 24:16; Exodus 2:8. Psalm 67:26;
    Hl. 1,2 (M 1,3); 6,7 (M 6,8).

I have no idea what those last few references are.  Perhaps Talmud?

[I'm prepared to believe that alma implied that the woman was virgin.
Presumably unmarried females were expected to be.  But there's still a
shift in emphasis when you use virgin as the translation.  Virgin is
not the only property that was expected to apply to alma's.  Further,
it seems highly unlikely that the original intent of Is 7:14 was to
describe a virgin birth.  Note that 7:14 talks about conception in the
future.  So even if the woman was a virgin at the time Isaiah made his
prophesy, she presumably was not after the child was conceived.  Note
my comment a few days ago -- I'm not criticizing Mat's use of the
passage, but looking at the meaning in the original OT context.
--clh]
From: pkk36438@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Polygon)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Why do you thank God?
Date: 17 Dec 92 05:11:57 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana


	I made an observation that people simply thank God for 
everything before meals.  "Thank God for bringing our friend Peter
to our house today."   "Thank God for giving us meal today."
"Thank God for this and that."

	My question is "How do Christian determine what is God's
wish and what is human's wish?"   Why do you thank God?

	It does seem to me that people are trying to decide what
should be God's wish and what shouldn't be; otherwise it is 
meaningless to thank God for everything-- whether He did it for
you or not.   If I elected not to go the house party, would the
host still thank God for "not bringing our friend Peter to our
house today?"

	Surely I enjoyed the party.  I was just puzzled by this
strange thought.

					Polygon
From: conan@durban.berkeley.edu (David Cruz-Uribe)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Cremation
Date: 20 Dec 92 22:32:26 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Math. Department.

Since I still have a copy of canon law on my desk, I thought
I would add its two cents worth:

Canon 1176.3:  The Church earnestly recommends that the pious
custom of burying the bodies of the dead be observed; it does
not, however, forbid cremation unless it has been chosen for
reasons which are contrary to Christian teaching.

Canon 1184.1.2:  Unless they have given some signs of repentence
before their death, the following are to be deprived of 
ecclesiastical funeral rites: persons who had chosen cremation
of their own bodies opposed to the Christian faith.

Yours in Christ,

David Cruz-Uribe, SFO
From: b645zaw@utarlg.uta.edu (Stephen Tice)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Is Christianity really the ONLY way?
Date: 15 Dec 92 09:11:38 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Arlington

In article <Dec.14.00.09.12.1992.2971@geneva.rutgers.edu>, 
st14@cornell.edu (Stephen Tseng) writes...

>I've been having difficulty trying to understand something. Doesn't Jesus
>say that belief in Him is the only way for salvation, and that we cannot be
          ^^^^^^
>saved through our own efforts? 

In John 6:38-40, Jesus Said...

	For I came down from heaven, not to do my own will,
	but the will of him that sent me. And this is the
	Father's will ... that of all He has given me I
	should lose nothing, but should raise it up again
	at the last day. And this is the will of Him that
	sent me, that every one which sees the Son, and
	believes on him, may have everlasting life: and 
	I will raise him up at the last day.

And in 6:44-45,47...

	No man can come to me, except that the Father
	which has sent me draw him: and I will raise
	him up at the last day. It is written in the
	prophets, And they shall be all taught of God.
	Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath
	learned of the Father, comes unto me...
	Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believes
	on me has everlasting life.

Human logic is a poor substitute for faith, and prone to self-conceit.
If you will be taught of God, whatever understanding He deems best,
then certainly your hunger will be filled.

Before the written Word was, Paul encountered the Messiah, who I believe
is Christ Jesus. I do not know how all come to encounter Him, but I
trust that all do indeed. 

It might help to recognize that we live 5000 to 6000 years since the
start of recorded history; perhaps then, in about the 300th generation
of modern man. We look out on an incredibly vast universe in space and
time, from the stance of one small planet, and from an understanding we
grasp during a very brief lifespan. Hardly much to go on.

So who will you put your faith in, Stephen -- your own understanding
or God? Why fight as God draws you near unto Him? 

In John 6:63-65-67, Jesus says...

	It is the spirit that quickens; the flesh profits nothing:
	the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they
	are life.

	Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me,
	except it were given unto him of my Father.

	Will ye also go away?


Your choice.
From: dan@ektools.kodak.com (Daniel P. Schaertel)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Christmas on the 25th.  Why? (was Re: Messianic Jews and Christmas)
Date: 15 Dec 92 08:58:24 GMT
Organization: Eastman Kodak

In article <Dec.12.23.51.43.1992.614@geneva.rutgers.edu> allegra!lieuwen@allegra.att.com (Dan Lieuwen) writes:
>December 25th as Christmas:
>
>
>According to Conarias' Introduction to the Orthodox Church, the dating
>for Christmas and the dating for the feast day of John the Baptist are
>related.
>
>John the Baptist's saying "He must increase and I must decrease" is symbolically
>represented in the liturgical year
>by having John  the Baptist's feast day on the longest day of the
>year, and Christmas on the shortest.  So after Christmas , the
>amount of light is increasing.  After John's feast day, it is decreasing.
>
>It is also symbolic that Jesus came into a world of darkness.  His coming
>brings the light.
>

This sounds very interesting, but I believe the reason Christmas is when
it is, is because to avoid persecution, the early christians celebrated
the birth of Christ during the winter Solstace(spelling?).  This was a
pagen celebration that celebrated the days starting to get longer.  It
wasn't really symbolic, but it allowed christians to celebrate without
drawing attention.

[The first mention of 25 Dec is in 336, which is after Christianity
was legal, so there's no evidence that it was done to avoid
persecution.  The best guess is that it was chosen to give Christians
something to celebrate during a major pagan celebration (sort of the
way Chanukka has been given some of the attributes of Christmas).  But
it's only a guess.  --clh]
From: jhpb@sarto.budd-lake.nj.us (Joseph H. Buehler)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Ut Re Mi Fa So La
Date: 17 Dec 92 05:24:00 GMT
Organization: none

Here's some more info on the "do re mi," so you can astonish your
friends and relatives at Christmas.

According to "The Hymns of the Breviary and Missal," by Britt, OSB,
the naming was picked by Guido of Arezzo (990-1050) from the vesper
hymn for the feast of St. John the Baptist.  The first stanza is as
follows:

	UT queant laxis
		REsonare fibris
	MIra gestorum
		FAmuli tuorum
	SOlve polluti
		LAbii reatum
	Sancte Joannes.

literal translation:

	That thy servants, St. John, might be able to sing the wondrous
	nature of thy deeds with vocal cords well strung, cleanse thou the
	guilt of our polluted lips.

The hymn is ascribed to Paul the Deacon, 730-799.

I remembered the "do re mi" as the first line of successive stanzas,
but that is not correct.  What it actually is is the first note of
successive phrases in the first stanza.  I capitalized them in the
Latin above so you can see them.  The "Ut" somehow got changed to "Do"
over the centuries, at least in English, and "Ti" got added also.  The
hymn is such that the first note of successive phrases makes an
ascending scale.

The hymn itself can be found in the liturgical book called the Liber
Usualis, which you can probably find in Catholic University libraries.
Be warned that the musical notation is not the modern one, though,
it's medieval, and I don't know which scales correspond to the
different modes in the medieval notation.

The "liber," as it is called in short, used to be used by religious
congregations in chanting the liturgy of the day.  They probably still
have such a thing in the post-Vatican II era, but they may have
changed the hymns.  So look for an older one, if you can't find it in
a newer one.
From: howard@cs.uiuc.edu
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Christian Singles Group?????
Date: 20 Dec 92 22:33:26 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Computer Sci - University of Illinois


 I agree about the RACY part - I inquired about a singles dating group
on the net - boy did I get a shocker!!! 8{  I expected to get a group
that would be interested in the same things I was interested in. In-
stead it was in inquiry into my physical side and just about everything
else that I felt was very personal.  Needless to say, I didn't continue
to respond to my mail.  

I too, would like to correspond with people with same beliefs and ideals
as I have.

I have been a widow for 11 years.  I lead a singles group at our church
and I know that several of those people would like contact with others
that are in the same situation.

Please let me know if anyone is interested???  Most all of the stuff
on the net is far to racy for me - and I am pretty open-minded.

thanks,
bonnie
From: dan@ingres.com (Heaven is not for the careless or cowardly)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: CONTRADICTIONS ABOUT GOD
Date: 17 Dec 92 05:11:45 GMT
Organization: Ingres, an ASK Company, Alameda CA 94501

Please forgive me if I'm responding to the wrong newsgroup--I noticed that
the heading had rec.music.christian when I started to respond, so I added
soc.religion.christian afterwards.  So, I might be continuing a discussion
that is happening on the wrong group while giving an answer to a question
that noone on the other newsgroup knows about :-)

I generally see apparent "Biblical contradictions" as

	1--a tool that helps protect the true meaning of God's Word, and
	2--a tool to give the non-believer freedom and a cheap excuse to
		flee from God should he or she wish to do so.

Romans 8:28 says that all things work for good to those who love God and
are called according to His purpose.  The person who fears God reads the
Bible, sees an apparent contradiction only to learn later on, comparing
scripture with scripture, that the scripture was not in error but rather that
his or her understanding needed corrected.  This apparent contradiction helps
us who do not know Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic know and feel the difference
between a poor translation of scripture and a good one and really get into
what God meant.  In this way, God comes across as the greatest communicator
and his scripture works to good for those who love Him and are called according
to His purpose.

As for the mocker, these apparent contradictions give him every opportunity
to grab at cheap shots left and right.  Watch the mocker exhault his own
intelligence and lift himself above all christians in his own eyes prancing
around like the king of all intelligence only to be cast down as a supreme
fool!  The christian sits at the feet of the Lord hungering for and living
off of every word that comes from His mouth while the mocker sneers, starves
himself and closes his eyes in supreme arrogance and foolishness as he walks
straight into the pit of hell while the christian is given the welcome of
Christ into His Father's house with many mansions!

As for my own preferences for versions of the Bible, I'm no expert over which
is the "most accurate".  I know that I feel funny when I see some things that
seem like poor paraphrases or poor translations in, for instance, the Living
Bible, but I'm pretty happy over all with the KJV, NASB, NIV, and RSV.  But,
even when using the New English Bible or Good News or Living Bible and some
others, I feel that comparing scripture with scripture that I'm still much
better off than I would be having nothing at all.

--
---------------------------------------------------------------
-----------/\---------- Daniel J. Dick
----------/ /\--------- ASK/INGRES Internal Support Team
---------/ /| \-------- 1201 Marina Village Parkway - 3rd Floor
--------/ / /\_\------- Alameda, Ca - 94501
-------/ / / / /\------ (510) 748-2538 (dan@ingres.com)
---------------------------------------------------------------
From: ricko@ee.uts.edu.au (Rick Jelliffe)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Mary and the Moderns
Date: 20 Dec 92 22:17:57 GMT
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney

>Michael Seimon writes:

>>But you see, that is precisely what calling Mary a Virgin seems to
>>me to imply -- a concern for low-grade speculation that has nothing
>>to do with the case.  It is like requiring transubstantiation for
>>the Real Presence of Christ in the eucharist.  What has "virginity"
>>got to do with Incarnation, any more than "essence & accident" have
>>to do with eucharistic bread and wine?

With the Incarnation, we are not told how it happened, but we
are told what happened. Similarly with the real presence, we do
not know how it happens (in particular, at what point the miraculous
change takes place), but we are told what happens. 

The metaphysical theology of the Real Presence is transsubstantion.
The metaphysical theology of the incarnation is the homostatic union,
presumably. Neither are low-grade speculations, but serious attempts to
understand what does on, within the limits of mystery.

So I don't think its correct to compare the B.V. Mary's conception of Jesus 
as a virgin with transsubstantiation. The virginity of Mary is in the realm of
the physical and the historical, while transubstantion is in the realm 
of ontology. Now the area of the perpetual virginity of the B.V. Mary
is a different matter: as I understand it, it is history gleaned from
theology & living tradition rather than the other way around. 

-ricko
From: stovall@ficus.cs.ucla.edu (Steven Stovall)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Christmas on the 25th. Why? (was Re: Messianic Jews and Christmas)
Date: 17 Dec 92 05:09:35 GMT
Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department

Our humble moderator (Charles Hedrick) writes:

>stovall@ficus.cs.ucla.edu (Steven Stovall) writes:
>
>>I dont know the proofs, but it has been proposed that Dec 25 was
>>the birthday of Tammuz, the son of Semiramis, the wife of Nimrod.
>>Since Nimrod was said to have gone to possess the sun at his death,
...

>[This sounds to me like what I'd classify as "lunatic fringe".  The
>Christian term for Sunday is "the Lord's Day"

I have no strong conviction about the material I presented. I suppose
the name "lunatic fringe" *does* mean something to me here :-)

But having listened to this minister a number of times, I am convinced
of his sincerity, and he seems to do his homework. And many things he
says have the ring of truth to them. Still, he *also* promotes a flavor
of British Israelite doctrine, so buyer beware :-)

_______________________________________________________________________________

steven stovall
stovall@exeter.cs.ucla.edu
(310) 825-7307