HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ceb@dbrus.unify.com (Caroline E. Bryan)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: suicide- is it a sin in God's eyes.
Date: 22 Nov 92 23:05:57 GMT
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organization

In article <Nov.17.03.27.38.1992.26376@geneva.rutgers.edu> ptfarre@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Peter Farrell) writes:
>In article <Nov.15.21.53.33.1992.23792@geneva.rutgers.edu> moy@acf3.nyu.edu (Gloria J. Moy,N.DORM C3,(212)9983456,) writes:
>>
>>	Is suicide a sin in the eyes of God?

I'd always assumed that "Thou shalt not kill" included killing oneself.

>I'd like to toss one of the first easily debateable ideas out that if a
>person is giving their life for a friend, family or God, perhaps not.

If someone gets a life insurance policy without a suicide clause, makes a
friend or family member the beneficiary, and then kills him/herself, s/he
violates the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" even if the insurance money
would mean a life-saving operation for the beneficiary.  I can't imagine how
killing oneself would benefit God any, considering that God already has all
He needs by definition.

If someone risks his/her life attempting to save someone else's life, and
loses his/her life in the attempt, that is not suicide.  If, for instance,
s/he offers him/herself in a hostage swap, and the hostage taker subsequently
kills him/her, the hostage taker has committed murder but the hostage has not
committed suicide.  Obviously it makes no difference whether the person saved
was a friend, relative, or complete stranger.


Carrie		ceb@rechenau.unify.com	x6244
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|    For every vision there is an equal and opposite revision.   -- Anon.     |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: jmrg9881@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Jon Reid)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: exorcism
Date: 17 Nov 92 08:33:20 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

In article <Nov.13.02.17.48.1992.19278@geneva.rutgers.edu>, g91a2724@giraffe.ru.ac.za (MR GJ ANDREWS) writes:
> Need info on exorcism - would appreciate anything. E-mail or posted here.

Greg, "exorcism" is, I believe, a strictly Catholic term.  You may find
more information under the broader term "deliverance".  (There is a
slightly different understanding of the two, I believe).

Books on healing usually include sections on deliverance.  I would
recommend _Power Healing_ by John Wimber.  If you want a more Catholic
perspective, try _Healing_ by Francis McNutt.

I've had a little experience with deliverance myself.  Are there any
particular questions you have?
-- 
Jon Reid    j-reid@uiuc.edu    GEnie: THE.REIDS
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose."
From: aaron@binah.cc.brandeis.edu (Scott Aaron)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Spousal Abuse
Date: 22 Nov 92 22:50:49 GMT
Reply-To: aaron@binah.cc.brandeis.edu
Organization: Brandeis University

In article <Nov.20.02.05.01.1992.27799@athos.rutgers.edu>, phoenix@cwis.unomaha.edu (Shannon Chris Saltzman) writes:
>Biblical scripture aside Jesus wants us to grow in him and produce the
>fruits of salvation. I do not believe this is likely when someone gets
>beaten regularly.

I had a discussion on the net over the summer over the subject of spousal abuse
and the Biblically allowed responses.  I am convinced that the Bible DOES allow
divorce (we can discuss it privately if you want since it was discussed so
recently on the net).

I would like to comment on this.  Unlike many on the net (at least I hope it's
not common), I have somewhat extensive personal experience with domestic 
violence.  A friend of mine has been beaten about 20 times (her estimate) by
her husband, a few times (including a few weeks ago) very badly.  Theology and 
doctine aside, what you say above is sadly true.  The damage caused by her 
husband goes far beyond the physical injuries and constantly affects her walk 
with God.  She will never have a full and healthy walk with our Lord or with 
any other person.  I have constantly been impressed with her vitality and 
resilience in the face of such treatment but the emotional and psychological 
damage is always apparant.

The Bible calls us to love one another and to spur one another on to love and
good deeds (Hebrews 10, I think).  We must decide what response would do this
both for the victim and the abuser.  Keeping them together does nothing to
help the abuser clean up his life nor does it help the victim grow in love
for others or for God.

  -- Scott @Brandeis

	"But God demonstrates His	"I tell you that in the same way,
	 own love for us, in that	 there will be more joy in heaven
	 while we were yet sinners,	 over one sinner who repents, than
	 Christ died for us."		 over ninety-nine righteous persons
					 who need no repentance." 
		-- Romans 5:8 [NASB]		-- Luke 15:7 [NASB]
From: riipinen@dxcern.cern.ch (Petri Juhani Riipinen)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Bored in Eternity...
Date: 17 Nov 92 08:20:01 GMT
Organization: CERN European Laboratory for Particle Physics

In article <Nov.15.22.26.29.1992.24029@geneva.rutgers.edu> 5gz8wakefiel@vmsf.csd.mu.edu writes:
>In article <Nov.13.02.17.43.1992.19268@geneva.rutgers.edu>, dwjurkat@mailbox.syr.edu (Jurkat) writes:
>>Just exactly what do you do when you're in heaven?  Eternity is rather long. 
>
>One of the only hints in the Bible is found in Revelation 22:3: "and the saints
>of God shall serve him."  Add this to I Corinthians 6:3, and use your imagina-

In Finland, there is one prophet of God, who really has been given prophesies
from God, and they have come through. He saw the division of Finland after
the WWII, before it was divided. Well, anyway, he had this vision from
God, that he saw the ending of the world and the rapture. He saw the nuclear
war and that the war was going on, and just at the beginning of the war
(some missiles were already exploded, I understand), the believers were
raptured and he also instantly was lifted up from the ground. Well, he
described in his book, what he saw in the heaven. It was quite similar,
like this world, EXCEPT: No beggers, no hunger, no deceases, no pollution,
there were aeroplanes and vehicles, except, they produced NO pollution.
Everything was working on somekind of SILENT power system. Everybody
had apartments and world seemed to be quite a nice place to live.

This was shown to him in a three night period. The dream was like a three-
part series and continued every night, were it was left.

So, this seems to describe quite nicely the atmosphere of the millenial
kingdom, and I certainly won't be the one to miss it!

If you are interested to know more about this, I will be happy to discuss
about this with EMail. I know, that many people find this kind of visions
ridiculous and I will not start a war over these things. I have concrete
evidence, that this man has had REAL visions and I have met him personally,
and I believe, that he has been really shown the future world by God.

I suppose, that this book of his has not been translated to english, so
probably nobody non-finnish has read it. The book is in Finland right now,
so I can not quote anything directly from it, I can only try to remember
it, but if you are REALLY interested, I can take it with me from Finland,
when I go to home at christmas and I can then quote something out of it.

Marana tha!,
	     - Petri J. Riipinen -

PS. This person was speaking in a conference, where I got converted. He is
    a pentecostal priecher in Finland.
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Petri J. Riipinen                (riipinen@dxcern.cern.ch)
Les terrases de Thoiry n.15      (riipin@vxldb1.cern.ch)
01710 Thoiry,  France            (riipin_dev@vxldb2.cern.ch)
From: xxbrent@convx1.lerc.nasa.gov (Brent Anderson)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Messiah Soon?
Date: 22 Nov 92 23:11:46 GMT

Rex,

Thank you for your followup to my questions.  You wrote:

>> 1) When might we look for the Messiah to appear
>
>"Now as to the times and the epochs, brethren, you have no need of anything to
>be written to you. For you yourselves know full well that the day of the Lord
>will come just like a thief in the night."(1 Thess. 5:1,2)
>It's imminent.  Its a surprise.  There is nothing that has to take place before
>the Lord's returns for the Church.  (This discounts mid and post
>tribulationalism) 

I am not a Christian, and am not familiar with such concepts as mid/post
tribulationalism.  When I was a teen, my step-father used to preach at
us kids about the "Rapture", but it never really did make sense to me,
but I really haven't taken the time since then to find out whether
many other people shared his views.  I sort of feel that thieves in
the night usually don't go around blaring trumpets to announce their
arrival.  He talked about things like floating through the car roof,
but being given enough time to pull over so as not to hurt others.
He also said that God would see to it that everyone would see Christ
on a cloud all around the world, simultaneously.  Is this commonly
understood among (Fundamentalist?) Christians? 

There seems to be a lot of disagreement among Christians regarding
the interpretation of the Bible.  Aren't there some people out 
there that feel that God's way doesn't necessarily conform to the
preconceived ideas of our fallible minds.  After all, Christ didn't
conform to the notions of the clerics of His day.  

Warm regards,

Brent Anderson
xxbrent@convx1.lerc.nasa.gov
From: abigail@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca (Shawn Abigail)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Anglicans/Catholics
Date: 19 Nov 92 07:37:52 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Laurentian University, Sudbury, ON

It is possible that I might get some of the finer points incorrect,
but I believe that there was a married Anglican minister in Ontario,
who converted to Roman Catholicism, and was then accepted (re-ordained?)
as a Roman Catholic priest.  I remember a reporter trying to generate
a little news by asking him if he thought that he could minister more
effectively to married people since he himself is married.  Talk about
a loaded question!  His reply was something like "I think I can minister
in a different way, but not necessarily a better way".

My understanding is this:

A Roman Catholic man who is single or widowed can be ordained.  A man
who is already an ordained Anglican minister, who converts to Roman
Catholicism, falls into some special category.  Perhaps this was a
one-time trial event, or perhaps there were further extenuating
circumstances in this case.

Shawn Abigail (not exactly your best source for Catholic theology)
abigail@ramsey.cs.laurentian.ca
From: tony@nexus.yorku.ca (Anthony Wallis)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Anglican and Roman Catholic
Date: 23 Nov 92 02:02:26 GMT
Organization: York University

DEAN LAVDAS wrote about:
> .. a Roman Catholic priest who was an Anglican priest and upon
> converting to Catholicism he automatically became a RC priest.
> I find that hard to believe ..
> [ .. it's pretty clear that this is false.  The Roman Catholic Church
>   does not accept Anglican orders as valid. .. --clh]

I'm not sure of the theological fine-tuning, but according to my
Anglican priestly friends, there is very little in the way of
hurdles (except gender in the case of female priests, of course)
should an Anglican priest want to convert to RC and be a RC priest.
It is one of the paths for a RC priest to be married, of which we
have a number of examples in Canada.

--
tony@nexus.yorku.ca = Tony Wallis, York University, Toronto, Canada

[All of the responses from knowledgeable Catholics, and my reading
of the Catholic Encyclopedia, agree that the Catholic Church
would have to reordain a priest who converted, since they do not
recognize Anglican orders.  --clh]
From: hedrick@geneva.rutgers.edu
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: thought for the day (11-22)
Date: 23 Nov 92 02:26:43 GMT

Sunday, November 22:

     sound teaching ... conforms to the glorious gospel of the
blessed God, which he entrusted to me [Paul].  <1 Timothy 1: 11>

[This is Ralph Reid's choice of passage, but from the NRSV.  The NWT
renders /makarios/ as "happy" here.  The traditional rendering is
"blessed".  According to TDNT, in the LXX, it is used to translate a
Heb. word implying a fullness of life, relating to such things as a
wife, beauty, honor, wisdom, and piety.  In the NT it is used for the
distinctive joy which comes through participating in the divine
kingdom.  Modern translations tend to use "happy" in passages such as
the beatitudes, rather than "blessed".  I think this is because in
modern English "blessed" suggests a more narrowly religious meaning
than the Greek word.  However "the glorious good news of the happy
God" just doesn't quite have the right associations for me.  TDNT
comments on this passage: "/makarios/ describes the blessed
transcendence of God."  --clh]
From: spok+@cs.cmu.edu (John Ockerbloom)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: US presidential curse
Date: 17 Nov 92 07:59:47 GMT
Organization: School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon

Peter Farrell writes (after describing the 'zero-year' presidential deaths):
>There are no other cases that I have ever heard of or read of where a
>sitting U.S. President has failed to live out the term. NONE.

Try Zachary Taylor, who was elected in 1848, and who died in office
(of cholera) in his first term.

The Tecumseh story is an interesting legend, but I haven't seen anything
yet which makes me put its credibility higher than the sorts of legends
commonly seen in alt.folklore.urban.  "Proving coincidence" is beside the
point; coincidence generally can't be proved, but can often be the most
plausible explanation available.

In particular, the whole 'zero-year' nature of the curse seems
contrived, as if it were a post-facto attempt to fit an
already-noticed pattern into a story.  (Why would Tecumseh have an
interest in doing repeated curses on every zero-year president,
instead of just on Harrison or other anti-Indian presidents?)

One bit of evidence which would make the 'periodic curse' idea more
plausible would be some documentation from something written BEFORE
1880 about a zero-year curse laid on Presidents.  Presumably, if the
curse is known to be real nowadays, it would have also been known of
sometime in the first 40 years as well.  And before 1880 there
wouldn't have been a noticeably regular pattern of presidential
deaths.

John Ockerbloom
-- 
==========================================================================
ockerbloom@cs.cmu.edu                4209 Murray Ave., Pittsburgh PA 15217
From: nelson@pdn.paradyne.com (Bill Nelson)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Bible References
Date: 20 Nov 92 05:42:16 GMT
Reply-To: nelson@pdn.paradyne.com (Bill Nelson)
Organization: AT&T Paradyne, Largo, FL

I am looking for a really, really, really, (you get the point) good book that 
explains how the Bible was created and why were particular books chosen
and others
left out (i.e. the books of the Apocrophya, etal).

I have been to my local Christian book store and have found several books but 
would like the "wisdom of the net".

I have also found reference to some historical writings and "Lost Books of the 
Bible" such as: "The Books of Eden", "The Apocrophya", "The Writings of
Josephus"
and an obscure reference to "The Book of Jashar" (which is referred to in the
Bible as "is it not written in...").  I know that some of these may be really
"neat" references to read (without putting my faith in them like the
Bible), but
how can one be sure of their authenticity?


My love to all of you in Christ Jesus, Amen.


+----------------+----------------------+-------------------------------
---------+
| Bill Nelson    | This space intended  | Opinions expressed do not
necessarily |
| AT&T Paradyne  | blank!               | reflect those of my employer;
in fact,|
| (813) 530-8696 |                      | they may not represent mine
either.   |
+----------------+----------------------+-------------------------------
---------+
From: rreid@ecst.csuchico.edu (Ralph W. Reid III)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: thought for the day (11-17)
Date: 18 Nov 92 09:13:43 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico

Tuesday, November 17:

     God is love.  <1 John 4: 8>

-- 
Ralph.  N6BNO.  NOW LOOKING FOR A JOB!
Phone 1-916-345-9155.
lectromail- rreid@ecst.csuchico.edu.
I do not waste time expressing others' opinions!
From: wagner@grace.math.uh.edu (David Wagner)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Calvin's eucharistic theology
Date: 15 Nov 92 23:39:45 GMT
Organization: UH Dept of Math

I mentioned this subject to my pastor, and he made an interesting
comment, which I thought I's pass along.  He said, that when you read
Calvin's commentaries, where he was constantly dealing with the text
of the Word, he was right on the money, because he was a very sharp
exegete.  But when you read his Institutes, you can hardly believe it
was written by the same man.

Of course this is said from a very Lutheran viewpoint.  And I think
the comment was made with particular reference to the sacraments.

David H. Wagner
a confessional Lutheran
From: hovingh@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (William Hovingh)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Decisions on homosexuality by the Presbyterian judicial commission
Date: 17 Nov 92 08:13:15 GMT
Organization: Student, Louisville Presbyterian Seminary

In fact, one of the several overtures which have been put forward with respect
to the question of the ordination of homosexuals in the PC(USA) is a proposal
to put the decision back onto individual presbyteries.  The overture originated
with the person who was Moderator of the 1978 General Assembly, who (reportedly
has had a change of heart since then.  The point of the overture is that the
question of whether or not to ordain someone is, in the Presbyterian system, a
question that is entirely up to the Presbytery that is doing the ordaining. The
only requirements currently imposed by the national church are the guidelines
for what kind of education a candidate should have (including a nationally 
standardized set of examinations) *and* the ban on "practicing homosexuals".
The effect of the overture would be to legitimize the existing "More Light"
presbyteries.  These would be in a slightly better position than those
presbyteries which *in practice* barely recognize the ordination of women.

This whole question is generating a lot of discussion here at the Louisville
Presbyterian Seminary and at PC(USA) headquarters in downtown Louisville.
I have to say that, no matter what any of us thinks about the ordination of
gays and lesbians, no one I've talked to is really pleased about the prospect
of being questioned by Presbytery about details of our sexual lives.  I'd have
to say that the one thing almost everyone agrees about is that we have not
reached the final resolution of the issue.

[Possibly this is the same thing, but there's an overture with similar
provisions being prepared by the Nassau church in Princeton.  I've
heard claims that one of the reasons for using "definitive guidance"
in the first place was to leave the issue at a pastoral level, and
avoid turning it into a matter of law.  But even if the current
outcome is not what anyone wants, tempers are hot enough over this
issue that I don't see the General Assembly being willing to take any
action that is going to be seen as allowing homosexuals to be
ordained.  There's just too much strong opposition in the church.  For
better or worse, the folks in the pew have a rather different view
than those at headquarters and in the seminaries.  --clh]
From: phys224@cantva.canterbury.ac.nz
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: hell and heaven
Date: 20 Nov 92 05:47:56 GMT
Organization: University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

just one question about hell,etc...
what happens if a christian marries an atheist (say) (as has happened with
my parents) and they both die...how is it possible for the christian partner
to be happy in heaven in the knowledge that their partner is suffering
eternally?( a question for you fundementalists out there.)                     
If it is possible,i don't think much of christians... if not,then what is the 
use of heaven?

stephen botha,new zealand.
From: dxf12@po.cwru.edu (Douglas Fowler)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Bored in Eternity...
Date: 15 Nov 92 23:09:45 GMT
Reply-To: dxf12@po.cwru.edu (Douglas Fowler)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)

In a previous article, dwjurkat@mailbox.syr.edu (Jurkat) says:

>Just exactly what do you do when you're in heaven?  Eternity is rather long. 
>
     Understatement of the year.  Well, there are 2 possibilities, as I
see them.  I could be way off in both, given my mortal understanding, but
here goes:
     1.  We get to explore all the Heavenly realm.  Since we'll simply
be spirits, it's quite possible that we will have the ability to go to
places like quasars, comets, and even black holes to explore God's Heavenly
creation.  There will also be all sorts of creatures there - every kind
of animal God ever created.  We will be able to pick our activities, and
not be limited by anything; I could play baseball at any time, go swimming
any time, or anything.  It'll be like the playground when we were kids,
but zillions of times better.  You remember what it was like - how you
never wanted to leave because you had so much fun.

     2.  There is no actual length in Heaven.  Since God "is, was, and is
to be," then there is no time up in Heaven, but it is instead an eternal
"now," for lack of a better word.  Hence, we don't really notice the length.
-- 
Doug Fowler: dxf12@po.CWRU.edu  : Me, age 4 & now: "Mommys and Daddys & other
   "Thou shalt love God with all: relatives have to give lots of hugs & love
thy heart...*and thy neighbor as: & support, 'cause Heaven is just a great
thyself*." Luke 10:27           : big hug that lasts forever and ever!!!"