HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 08:17:58 EDT
From:         Bernice Tennant <U1A9A@WVNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: Mary's other children.

On 08/25/92 at 09:36:01 A16905@ITESO.BITNET said:
>And, why did Mary go with Jesus in His preaching ? If she had other sons,
>she would have stayed with them in Nazareth.

I didn't see anyone answer this, but wasn't Jesus thirty when he started
to minister?  If he had brothers, they could have still been grown men.

>Shalom,
>Memo.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 12:42:00 GMT
From:         Z_STAFF_CL@SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE.AC.UK
Subject:      Re: homosexuality

31 AUG 92  U1A9A@EDU.VT.CC.VTVM2
> The bottom line is : you cannot continue with your boyfriend..... God
> hates homosexual sin............

[flame mode on]

I have heard a lot of this out right conmdemnation on this list.
I grow tired of ivory towers and those who cast stones from the top of them.

[flame mode off]

God hates sin ... agreed regardless of sexual orientation.
The rest of the comment appears as a tirade of prejudice.
Perhaps those who condemn so strongly should walk the way of
those they condemn - the way of being subjected to such tirades
for being as you believe God has made you.


>Let Jesus help you to know the way.....

I know may people who are close to God and gay.  I know may who
conform to the given veiw who show no signs of the Spirit in their
life.

Being gay **does not** equate to not knowing God.


> ..repent ....

Repent for being the way you feel God made you and God intended
for you to be is a strange thing to be asked to do.

Please can we get away from the dogma and condemnations (especially
those in the name of love) and, CASTING NO STONES, discuss this subject
that is obviously so important to some of us.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Carol A Long,  					DISCLAIMER - unless otherwise
IT Service,					stated this message contains
Southampton Institute of Higher Education	my opinion...probably only mine
East Park Terrace,
Southampton	SO9 4WW,   England		RELEASE - Repost at will, with
						acknowlegements to author.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Z_STAFF_CL@UK.AC.SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE
===============================================================================
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Orig-To: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 15:30:40 CDT
Comments:     Answering received message
From:         THERESA BLACKWELL <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Subject:      To Lie or Not to Lie???

 Yvette...
 I'm a 21 year old college senior...
 My folks taught me by what God's word says:
 Lyin' ain't cool.
 So, when me and my ex-boyfriend decided to split up,
 they decided that he had told me lies the whole time
 we dated... but, ya see, HE was also brought up by
 the BOOK....
 He TOLD ME he'd not lie to me.
 He never did.
 So.... which is worse, him telling me the truth and sayin'
 that his feelings weren't as strong for me as mine are for him,
 or him Lyin' to me and tellin' me that he did love me?
 I'd have rather known his true feelings!
 (sorry, that reads "I'd"...)
 At least my ex cared enough to tell me the truth ...even if
 it did hurt both of us, and our families.
 oh well...
 The Truth still remains:
 Lyin' ain't cool to the Lord, so I won't do it...
 Or at least I'll TRY not to.
 God Bless Ya,
 Theresa / "G" / "G FORCE"

 * <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 10:39:18 EDT
From:         carol nemec <YA67@FERRIS.BITNET>
Subject:      revival

Another thought on this revival...we don't really want a
revival.  There would be too many drastic changes.  We
don't want that much change.  Be careful for what we pray,
we may have to live with the results.

Carol
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 12:23:51 CDT
From:         Jesse Carnes <NOTJIC@LSUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: 2 Peter 3
              2 Sep 1992 11:51:19 EDT from <LMENDELS@CMS.CC.WAYNE.EDU>

Dear Memo ;

What sort of specifics?



Jesse
From: psyrobtw@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Robert Weiss)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re: My Brother Was An Only Child
Date: 29 Aug 92 01:47:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <CHRISTIA%92082805104701@ASUACAD.BITNET>, MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET (Marty Helgesen) writes...

[...]

>The less common one is Psalm 69, which is referred to in John 2:17.
>Bob Weiss wrote, "I want to quote this psalm, starting from verse 7:
>'For your sake I have suffered reproach; I dare not show my face for
>shame. I have become a stranger to my brothers, and alien to my moth-
>er's sons. Zeal for your house has consumed me; the insults aimed at
>you have landed on me.' (Psalm 69:7-9 REB)."  He concluded that as
>the "Zeal" clause was applied to Jesus in John 2:17 the reference to
>"my mother's sons" must also apply.  James Kiefer has already called
>attention to v. 5 of the same Psalm "O God, thou knowest my foolish-
>ness; and my sins are not hid from thee" and pointed out another
>example of the Gospels taking an apt phrase from the Old Testament
>even though in its original context it says things that cannot apply
>to Jesus.  

	Last point first. I mentioned to James privately that an 
example from a different gospel is not really pertinent to 
illustration to the gospel in question. 

	I have a hard time with the quotes that Matthew gives in 
his gospel. For example, when he writes that the slaughter of the 
innocents is a fulfillment of Rachel weeping in Ramah, I say, "huh?"
But the fact that Matthew's quotes are hard to follow is not 
indicative of how John writes. If we look at an example from Matthew 
to show how John wrote we end up with gibberish. I think that it would 
be more pragmatic to discover how John uses quotes by looking at the 
gospel of John.

	First point. Up until the time I was 22 (I'm 35 now), the only 
Bible version that I read was the NAB. If it didn't have a Nihil 
Obstat and Imprimatur, I didn't read it. My NAB (P.J. Kenedy & Sons)
has in a footnote for Psalm 69 that, "Since several passages are 
quoted in the New Testament in reference to Christ, Catholic tradition 
has always considered this psalm at least indirectly messianic."

	As to the reference to verse 5 (verse 6 in the NAB), my copy 
has, "69, 6: My folly, and my faults: ...This verse cannot be 
interpreted in a messianic sense except so far as Christ took upon 
himself the sins of the world."

	So verse 6 (5 in a non-Catholic Bible) can be looked at in a 
messianic sense. In the NAB the verse concerning zeal is the second 
clause of a sentence that mentions strangers to my mothers sons: "I 
have become an outcast to my brothers, a stranger to my mother's sons, 
Because zeal for your house consumes me, and the insults of those who 
blaspheme you fall upon me" (Psalm 69:9-10 NAB). The NAB therefore 
makes the cause of zeal as the reason that the speaker is a stranger 
to His mother's sons.



 en agape,
 Bob 
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 19:51:21 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Mary and sinlessness
              26 Aug 1992 12:36:16 PST from <FRANK@LAW.UCLA.EDU>

Frank:

If the vision was real, why should the tree have to be there?

Love INC,
         --Kerry (a bit puzzled)
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:         Fri, 21 Aug 1992 14:32:30 -0500
From:         DCC@VASSAR.BITNET
Subject:      Political Platforms

Can anyone tell me where I can get a copy of both the Democratic and
Republican platforms?  By get, I mean access via the Internet.  I suppose
there MUST be a copy floating around somewhere out there. Since this is not
exactly CHRISTIA type discussion, you can reply privately.

Thanks!

      .
       .
      .
Scott <><
DCC@VASSAR.BITNET
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 18:36:00 CDT
From:         BKCOBB@LIFE.UAMS.EDU
Subject:      Re: Matthew 24

The word tranlated generation need NOT be translated that way.  It can also be
translated "race" (see the NIV) or "nation".  It need not refer to the
generation the disciples lived in, and give the specific events Jesus
predicted that were not fulfilled at the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D.
it cannot mean that.

Brian
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 12:10:58 CST
From:         A16905@ITESO.BITNET
Subject: Re: SEx

How about  Mt 5:27-28.

Shalom,
Memo,
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Orig-To: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 09:11:54 CDT
Comments:     Answering received message
From:         THERESA BLACKWELL <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Subject:      JASON....

 LIKE I STATED day-before-yesterday...
 It's time the folks on this list *GREW UP* and atarted sharing
 God's love, rather than casting judgements on others for their
 beliefs, habits...etc.
 If a person is Homosexual, heterosexual, or of any other
 orientation, let's just let God handle that situation with
 that individual... and let's just PRAY for that person.
 After all, didn't the "BOOK" say "...Ye that are Spiritual
 restore such a one, and consider yourselves, lest ye also
 be tempted"....
 Just like my post about Sex and Marriage...
 I was a victim of temptation as far as pre-marital sex went...
 Not only because of my love for the man I was with, but also,
 because I let the physical needs I had overshadow what GOD
 would have wanted for me.
 Because of this fact, I can't condemn someone for having
 the same happen to them... all I can do, is pray for them,
 and hope God will help them avoid such a situation... Believe me,
 IT AIN'T A PICNIC TO SEE YOUR PARENTS HURTING BECAUSE you
 made a decision that goes against God's word.... and it
 Definately AIN'T A PICNIC to watch your boyfriend/girlfriend
 hurting because you both decide to call off the relationship
 because of the intense feelings that you both shared.
 And because you both know that GOD would have had things
 turn out differently between the two of you.
 NOTE: *I'm not flaming anyone... I don't intend this
        in that way... it's taken my situation to make me
        "grow up" and pay attention to what God says do...
        I used to make snap judgements about persons involved
        in the situation I was in... Ya don't know how
        THEY feel until you can honestly and truthfully say,
        "I KNOW... I'VE BEEN THERE!"
 Live in His Light....
 Theresa
 "G"

 * <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 15:28:00 EST
From:         "DRCV06::GRAHAM" <GRAHAM%DRCV06.decnet@DRCVAX.AF.MIL>
Subject:      2nd coming and Daniel.
X-To:         christia <christia@asuvm.inre.asu.edu>

Jesse,

Jesus refers to the abomination that makes desolate from Daniel.  Now, that
phrase is used a couple of times, but neither of them can be refering to
the 70 A.D. destruction of the temple.  How does this fit?

Second question:  Jesus told them a few days before His death that their
temple was left desolate, if that is true, why does the destruction in 70
mean much of anything?

Jesus said in Mark 1 or so that He had come to fulfill the "time."  Now,
this, I believe, refers to the 70 weeks of Daniel nine.  That time ended in
about 34 A.D., with Jesus being crucified in the middle of the last week,
or about 31 A.D.  If that marked the cutoff point for Jewish probation,
why any significance for 70 A.D.?

Another thing, this is not from the Bible, but there is a fair body of
evidence that suggests that John wrote Revelation late in the first
century, probably after 70.  What is the point of the book if it all is
pointing backwards when it claims to point forwards?

Just some thoughts...


Dan Graham
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 09:29:52 EDT
From:         Bernice Tennant <U1A9A@WVNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Mary and sinlessness

Concerning the tree that was cut down at the site of the vision:

It might have been that the people were afraid the tree was becoming an idol.
I have a friend that won't use a Christmas tree because a false God was
worshipped with a tree/trees.  Nimrod, I believe.


                                  Bernice
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 07:23:02 MST
From:         Madge McBurney <ISPMOM@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Their Lady of Guacamole

On Tue, 25 Aug 1992 22:17:55 EST Kerry Stephenson said:
>Excuse me:
>
>While I in no way believe in any of these apparitions of Mary, nor in
>the traditions of the Catholic church, I think that deliberately
>referring to "Their Lady of Guacamole" is flippant, rude, and
>uncalled for. We may not agree with the RCC attitude toward Mary,
>but I think it is incumbent upon us to recognize the reverence in
>which she is held by those who do.  I tried very hard not to
>insult those who disagree with me on this issue, and to speak the
>truth as I know it in love.
>
>To deliberately denigrate someone dear to another is unChristian.
>I would not treat someone's friend or mother in this fashion, and I
>do not think that ridiculing a deeply held belief has any chance of
>changing that belief.
>
>I expect to see things like this on the Politics list, but not here.
>
>Please, let us strive to keep the level of dialogue here a bit
>higher than the mud-pits over on the Politics list.

Thank you Kerry!   I've been very disappointed with some of the
comments made on this topic.  Sarcasm and ridicule will never be
welcome on this list!

Please everyone, let's be careful with the way we express our opinions.

Christia co-owner   Bitnet:   ispmom@asuacad
Madge McBurney      Internet: ispmom@asuvm.inre.asu.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 00:59:49 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Catholicism

Molly:

Good question.  I don't believe that, when we pray for each other,
we act as "intermediaries."  By praying for others, we join *with*
them in submitting our will to Christ, and telling Him explicitly
that we are certain of His providence.  The Holy Spirit indwelling
in us gives us direct access to God, and in seeking Him at the
same time or for the same purpose, we join to *each other* in
Christ.

Essentially, we are in unity, which is Christ's desire for His
church.  God's response is *not* dependent on the number of
people who pray, or on the eloquence of their prayers.  But
when we pray together in person, we are strengthened in our
witness, and God uses some to strengthen others.  When we pray
at a distance, we are still joined in the Spirit, and God
gives us the knowledge (in our spirits) that we are joining
with others in *Him*.

I hope that clears things up a bit.

Love INC,
         --Kerry
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
From: creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Steve Creps)
Subject: Re:      Origins of church names.
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1992 18:12:14 GMT

In article <CHRISTIA%92090107214882@ASUACAD.BITNET> "DRCV06::GRAHAM" <GRAHAM%DRCV06.decnet@DRCVAX.AF.MIL> writes:
>Until the Protestant Reformation, there was no church formally named the
>Roman Catholic church, there didn't have to be.  The terms "the church,"
>and the "Roman Church," and the "Roman Catholic Church," were
>interchangeable.

   The first sentence is actually true.  Until the Protestant
Reformation, there was indeed no church formally named the Roman
Catholic Church or the Roman Church.  However, as everyone who's been
reading the discussion on "brethren" should know that the word "until"
does not imply a later change of state, it is true in spite of the
fact that there is _still_ no church going by either of these names.

   The Catholic Church has never been officially called the "Roman
Catholic Church" or the "Roman Church".  The origin of these terms as
proper names comes from English Protestants, who used them as
derogatory terms, in the manner of "papists."  The Catholic Church
does refer to herself as the Church, but it is not used as a proper
name, at least in the sense you're talking about.  The second sentence
is true in the sense that it seems to have been used interchangeably
by the above-mentioned Protestants.

   The name "Catholic Church" has, however, been in use since the
early times of the Church (pre A.D. 400).  The use was to distinguish
orthodox Christians from the heretics who also called themselves
Christians, such as the Gnostics.  Many of the heretical sects who
called themselves Christians gave a bad name to the real Christians by
causing charges of immorality, infanticide, etc., to be made against
all who called themselves Christians.  For a description of this, see
the scholarly work _Pagan Rome and the Early Christians_, by Stephen
Benko.

-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Steve Creps, Indiana University
creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 23:08:46 EDT
From:         JEK@NIHCU.BITNET
Subject:      lex talionis

Mike,

This should probably go off-line, but I have yet to solve the
problem of getting mail to you directly.

In your posting on Francis Schaeffer, Part 3, line 52 (including the
subject line as line 1), you refer to LEX TALIOTUS (?). What
Schaeffer was talking about was LEX TALIONIS. This is Latin for "law
of so much".  However much Smith has injured Jones, Smith in turn is
to be injured so much (either by Jones or by an officer of the
court). Example: "an eye for an eye."

 Yours,
 James Kiefer
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: QuickMail/SMTP interface.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 12:41:17 EDT
From:         Leo W <Leo_W@QM.CIRCA.UFL.EDU>
Subject:      Scripturette 9/1
X-To:         Christia <christia@asuvm.inre.asu.edu>

"I also want women to wear clothes that are right for them.  They should dress
with respect and right thinking.  They should not use fancy braided hair or
gold or pearls or expensive clothes to make themselves beautiful.  But they
should make themselves beautiful by doing good deeds.  Women who say they
worship God should make themselves beautiful in that way" (1 Timothy 2:9,10).

"Also, teach older women to be holy in the way they live.  Teach them not to
speak against others or have the habit of drinking too much wine.  They should
teach what is good.  In that way they can teach younger women to love their
husbands and children.  They can teach younger women to love their husbands and
children.  They can teach younger women to be wise and pure, to take care of
their homes, to be kind, and to obey their husbands.  Then no one will be able
to criticize the teaching God gave us" (Titus 2:3-5).

Yours in Christ Jesus,
Leo

Scriptures quoted from the International Children's Bible (ICB), New Century
Version, copyright 1986, 1988 by Word Publishing, Dallas, Texas 75039.  Used by
permission.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 10:41:39 CDT
From:         NOTJIC@LSUVM.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Second parousia in the past?
              2 Sep 1992 09:50:00 EST from <GRAHAM%DRCV06.decnet@DRCVAX.AF.MIL>

Dear Dan "the man" Graham;

I can best serve you by calling you.
I do not hold to dominion theology, if you are referring to something akin to a
"Theonomist"?

Also, I have been going through Revelation, the book, with a long prolegominon
for about the last one and one half years ... in my church.
We will be involved in exegetical studies for about the next year, infact we
have our Apocalypse study tonight (Wednesday).

Generally, I believe we must hold to a theory which answers more questions than
it asks.  The Preterist / Amillennial view of Eschatology seems to answer more
queries and gives more logical cohesiveness to apocalptical sections within
perameters of the Scriptures.



Jesse Carnes
From: A16905@ITESO.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re: Mary's other children
Date: 28 Aug 92 17:22:40 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

Support from His mother ?  A 30 yr old mature, popular and wise man ?

Hmmmmmm...

Shalom,
Memo.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 10:03:00 EST
From:         "DRCV06::GRAHAM" <GRAHAM%DRCV06.decnet@DRCVAX.AF.MIL>
Subject:      The DPT vaccine questions.
X-To:         christia <christia@asuvm.inre.asu.edu>

Not to discourage discussion, rather to facilitate it, there is a list
dedicated to holistic health and questions about allopathic (regular
medicine) treatments.  There are, indeed, serious problems with the DPT and
other vaccinations.  Perhaps some questions to the holistic net would
ferret out some good answers.  The list is at holistic@siucvmb.bitnet.  If
you are interested, subscribe in the normal manner to the listserv  at that
address NOT the list itself.

Christians need to know about these things.  The AMA was formed for one
reason only, to stop the spreading influence of Homeopathic medicine back
in 1846 or so.  Today, it perpetuates bad medicine, high fees, ignorance of
holistic methods by the medical profession and many other evils.  I would
urge any Christian physicians on the list to drop their AMA membership.

Dan Graham
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 12:43:13 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: State Fair
              31 Aug 1992 00:52:56 EDT from <AMZIMM01@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU>

Angela:

Having been one, I would be interested to see the list of Secular
Humanist beliefs you mention.

Love INC,
         --Kerry

PS:  Regarding the 3 things God cannot do.  He cannot lie, because He is
perfect.  He cannot change, because perfection has no need of change.
He cannot accept anyone that does not come to Him through Christ,
because it is impossible (not in the sense that *we* cannot do it,
but in the sense that it *cannot* be done.)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU