HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: whheydt@pbhya.pacbell.com (Wilson Heydt)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: End of the World Predictions: General Theory
Date: 23 Jul 92 07:37:41 GMT
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA

Inquiring minds want to know . . .

>From time to time, I see various prediction predicated on Biblical
verses forecasting the imminent End of the World.  I don't want to
start a thread on what the current signs are, which verses are used,
how to interpret them, and all that.  My question is rather simpler.

Given that there is a verse (variously interpreted) about "no one
knows the day or the hour", and

Given that this precludes a *specific* (date and time) prediction,

This does not preclude that a given prediction will have a time and
date beyond which the specific prediction can be said to have been in
error or to have 'failed'.

For example . . .

If one were to predict, say, that the references to the world ending
"before this gneeration passes away" were said to apply to the cohort
of 1914, and (as some do) there is a claim of an upper bound on human
lifespan of 120 years, then one can say that such a prediction fails
if the world is still here in pretty much it's present form after
2034.

Of the various outstanding End-of-the-World predictions floating about
various Christian denominations,

1.  What is a plausible date past which a given prediction can be said
to have failed?  

2.  If you beleive in such a prediction, what effect would such a
failure have on your beliefs?

	--Hal
-- 
Hal Heydt                    |    "Boycott Time-Warner"
Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |         --J. Danforth Quayle
510-823-5447                 |    "... kill all the lawyers."
whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM    |         --William Shakespeare
From: jhb@maths.su.oz.au (John Brownie)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Into the highways and hedges: A theologian's trek
Date: 23 Jul 92 07:08:08 GMT
Organization: Sydney University Computing Service, Sydney, NSW, Australia

In <Jul.21.03.23.50.1992.6162@dumas.rutgers.edu> conan@durban.berkeley.edu (David Cruz-Uribe) writes:

>In article <Jul.20.01.54.20.1992.4089@dumas.rutgers.edu> <lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu> writes:

>>people.    The question was whether a person  regarded by 
>>tradition as sexually abnormal could be part of the body of 
>>Christ.  It was the highly controversial baptism of the Ethiopian 
>>eunuch by Philip. And while his critics screamed that this 
>>baptism was in clear violation of the holy scriptures,  Philip 
>>set aside even the prejudices of the Bible in favor of the 
>>Gospel.

>I could find nothing in Acts which justifies this interpretation.
>Philip and the Eunuch are discussed in one pericope--Acts 8: 26-40--
>and they are the only two people mentioned (besides the angel of
>the Lord).

My recollection from preparing a sermon some weeks ago on this passage
is that there is a passage in Isaiah (chapter 56?) which offers the
eunuch a share in the blessings of the new covenant.  If my
recollection is right (and I can't check it until I get home), that
would make a big difference, would it not?  There could hardly be a
problem when there was an explicit word about the issue.

Corrections welcome.
--
John Brownie
School of Mathematics and Statistics   |    Wycliffe Bible Translators
University of Sydney NSW 2006          |    Graham Rd
Internet: jhb@maths.su.oz.au           |    Kangaroo Ground Vic 3097 AUSTRALIA
From: agr00@ccc.amdahl.com (Anthony G Rose)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: ARE THERE ANY CHRISTIAN GIFS OUT THERE?
Date: 26 Jul 92 18:42:27 GMT
Article-I.D.: dumas.Jul.26.14.42.26.1992.3290
Reply-To: agr00@juts.ccc.amdahl.com (TONY ROSE)
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

I've been looking for a long time for any Christian computer gifs.
Does anyone have any or know where I can get some?

Thnx,
-tony
From: CASTILLO@nauvax.ucc.nau.edu
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Isaiah 21:7
Date: 30 Jul 92 08:29:37 GMT

In reference to Isaiah 21:7

Can someone tell me if the phrase "riders on donkeys or riders on
camels" can or should be translated as "riders on donkeys AND riders
on camels?"  Any "proof" you can give me that it should be OR not
AND  (or the other way around, whatever), would be greatly 
appreciated.

In Christ,

Ulysses.
_____
Ulysses Castillo (aka Belgarion)   Trr, lbh zhfg or n irel phevbhf crefba!
Castillo@nauvax.ucc.nau.edu
"And be assured, I am with you always, to the end of Time.", Matt. 28:20

[For what it's worth, NRSV and JPS both omit the conjunction
completely: riders on donkeys, riders on camels.  In context I think
one would likely understand that construct as "and".  But I have to
admit some perplexity at the question.  It seems to me that the
emphasis in the image is simply on lots of warlike people riding, not
particularly what they are riding on.  I can't help suspecting that if
this has become a serious issue, somebody is getting side-tracked from
the point of the passage.  --clh]
From: DSIMON@atlas.nafb.trw.com (D_SIMON)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Eternal Security?
Date: 30 Jul 92 08:00:50 GMT
From: dsimon@atlas.nafb.trw.com
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Eternal Security?
Date: 29 Jul 92 12:45:48 PST
News-Moderator: Approval required for posting to soc.religion.christian

> The inevitable conclusion must be that the subjects of Heb 6:4-6 were
> never regenerate.  

If the subjects of Heb. 6 were not Xians, then who WERE these people
of whom it is said, "it is impossible to renew them to repentance."

> The point of course is whether, as Rex says, this passage actually 
> teaches that a regenerated individual can fall into apostasy.
> I think not for two reasons :
> 
> 1.  this is contrary to the many clear texts which teach otherwise 
> John 10:27-29 being a case in point.

Apparently a contradiction exists in the Bible.  This would not be the
first time.  E.g., "Do not answer a fool according to his folly" (Prov. 26:4)
and "Answer a fool according to his folly" (Prov. 26:5).  This just means
that there are two sides to the coin, not that we should ignore or deny
the existence of one of the sides.
----------
Dan Simon
From: cctr114@csc.canterbury.ac.nz
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Dry Bones
Date: 30 Jul 92 08:04:13 GMT
Organization: University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand

In article <Jul.29.03.46.08.1992.25311@dartagnan.rutgers.edu>, crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford) writes:
> Someone posted a while back about where the "dry bones" image
> comes from.  Someone else guessed Isaiah.  
> 
> It's in Ezekiel, and refers (I think) to how God views Israel's
                                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> spirituality:  dried up and dead.  I don't know all the ins and
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> outs of this, but there's a book out called "Dry Bones" that is
> a study of the book of Ezekiel, and I've heard it's good.  I think
> God also mentions that he will bring life to those dry bones again.


It was my impression that the vision of the dry bones was a picture of
how Israel viewed its own spiritual condition. The God was able to
bring them back to life even they appeared to be the deadest of the
dead.
> 
> -- 
> Lauren Crawford  //  crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu
-- 
                                                                      ___
Bill Rea                                                             (o o)
--------------------------------------------------------------------w--U--w---
| Bill Rea, Computer Services Centre | E-Mail     b.rea@csc.canterbury.ac.nz |
| University of Canterbury           | or       cctr114@csc.canterbury.ac.nz |
| Christchurch, New Zealand          | Phone +64 3 642-331 Fax +64 3 642-332 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: mib@geech.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Michael I Bushnell)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Bisexuals
Date: 22 Jul 92 06:08:04 GMT
Organization: Free Software Foundation, Cambridge, MA

Stan's questions deserve a thoughtful reply.  The problem here is that
he does not seem to understand what bisexuality is.  As in all things,
I will proceed by giving a rough analogy.

Among straight male friends of mine, I have some who are only usually
attracted to women with dark hair.  I also have some who are only
usually attracted to women with light hair.  And, there are some who
are attracted to women of any hair color.  

The guys who are attracted to women of any hair color can form
monogamous, long lasting relationships, with a single woman.  In fact,
it might turn out that for some of them, they have only dated women of
dark hair color.  But, ever so, they are "omni-coloro-sexual": they
are attracted to women of either hair color.

The analogy should be obvious.  The fact that a person is a bisexual
does not mean that they sleep with people of both genders...it merely
means that they are attracted to people of both genders.  

Stan's comment that:

   To consummate bisexual desires
   would seem to require at least two partners, one male and one female.

is thus off the mark.  People don't have "bisexual desires" (well,
maybe some people do, but that's not what bisexuality is about),
rather, they have sexual desires, which unlike purely straight people
or purely gay people, are directed at people of both genders.  Nothing
about this implies that they have relationships, simultaneously or
serially, with people of both genders, any more than the condition of
being attracted to people of different hair colors implies wanting to
"consummate" such a desire by sleeping with as many different hair
colors as possible.

--
Michael I. Bushnell             |		Benedictus qui venit
+1 617 625 4518 (H)            -+-                       in
+1 617 253 8568 (W)             |                      Nomine
mib@gnu.ai.mit.edu              |                      Domini
From: norris@athena.mit.edu (Richard A Chonak)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: angels (Opus Angelorum)
Date: 21 Jul 92 07:46:46 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

The July/August issue of the Catholic magazine "Fidelity" reports
that the Vatican has condemned an organization which promoted 
erroneous devotions to angels.  

The "Opus Angelorum Sanctorum" ("Work of the Holy Angels") was 
founded in Austria and based on the writings of alleged mystic 
Gabriela Bitterlich.  In recent years it spread to other countries,
including America, where it was supported by a number of clergy known for 
their orthodoxy (e.g., Fr. Robert Fox, Fr. John Hardon, SJ).

Catholics who joined the group at first studied standard Catholic
teaching on the angels, but as they progressed through the initiations
of the group, they were exposed more and more to Mrs. Bitterlich's exotic 
ideas.  Some of her writings were kept secret from the public and only 
revealed to "insiders" of the OA.  

One of her books described in detail hundreds of individual
angels, even giving their supposed "names".  Furthermore, she presented 
fanciful ideas about supposed means of demonic influences.  For example, 
Mrs. Bitterlich's writings claimed that demons live in dust; thus it was 
important to keep a very clean house.  :-)  Also, certain species of 
animals and certain occupations (e.g., midwives) were bearers of demonic 
influences.

In several years of dialogue with OA, the Austrian bishops and Vatican
authorities (Cardinal Ratzinger) directed the organization to give up 
its use of Bitterlich's teachings, but without result.  In 1990, the 
Austrian bishops restricted the group, and in the past few weeks, 
the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued directives
approved by the Pope, forbidding Catholics to promote or disseminate the
writings of Mrs. Bitterlich, and forbidding the prayers of "consecration 
to one's guardian angel" practiced by adherents of the OA.

"Fidelity" promises a more detailed account in its September issue.
-_RC
---
Richard Chonak, sysmgr                                    office: newz@wit.edu
Wentworth Institute of Technology             sometimes: norris@athena.mit.edu
The software is willing, but the hardware is weak. - me, apol to Gloria Maxson
From: studman@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Daniel Tseng)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Please Prove it to me!
Date: 29 Jul 92 08:53:18 GMT
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA

Hello out there,
	Currently I am as you might say a "non-believer", and I've been trying
to accept the basic premise of Christianity, the belief that Jesus was our
Savior and gave his life for our sins.  Now that's great and everything, but
it's very difficult for me to accept something without some sort of proof of
this.  Don't bring the bible into it, that's not a valid argument for me
either, I've read alot of the bible, Matthew, etc... and know about Jesus's
birth and his travels and the stories in Israel.  How do I and you know that
it's not all made up by some lunatic way back when.  Is there any evidence
that can show me that Jesus did give his life for us?  Besides that, can you
prove that the bible is a valid document.  Does it all come down to faith?  If
it does, how did you all gain this faith which I seem to lack.  It's not that
I'm not open-minded about the issue, it's just that it's hard to accept,
because I'm the type that needs to be proven or shown something before I can
believe it, as many people are.  
	If you feel that the answer to my questions should be publicly known,
I'm sure alot of non-Christian subscribers would be interested, otherwise if
it's personal, send me E-mail to my address.  Thank you for your advice and
time.
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
From: farris@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Lorenzo Farris)
Subject: Re: Becoming conscious of energy movement.
Keywords: Kundalini
Organization: ----
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 17:54:01 GMT


In article <1992Jul27.201631.11274@cco.caltech.edu>, tt@wag.caltech.edu writes:
> [various interesting things about movement of energy
> 
> Toshi
> tt@wag.caltech.edu
Just would like to add my two pennies worth on feeling energy
movement.
Like Toshi, when I let go, and remember my happiness, the feeling of
happiness, and the huge grin that plasters itself on my face, are
usually accompanied by a tingling that runs up and down my body from
the base of my spine to the back of my skull.  I can't say I recall
ever feeling such sensations outside of my body.

Since beginning my current style of meditation, a variant of Tantric
Buddhist cakra meditation, I have also noted more of these sensations,
and especially I often feel a tingling in the gonads (maybe my
Kundalini has moved up there?, or maybe I need to get out more).

While I meditate, the best way I can describe it is that the point on
my body corresponding to a cakra feels like a fizzy tablet in water.
Pretty neat!

I find I get the biggest surges of happiness and tingling, often to
the point of tears of joy, when I read or hear something deep that I know
inside to be true.

Toshi also makes some comments about feeling the emotions and
manipulations of others, if you start engaging in these practises.  In
my own experience, I felt this stuff going on already, only the habits
of childhood ran along the lines of denying this experience.  I agree
with my teacher that if you are drawn to meditation, you are probably
already pretty sensitive to begin with.  I found that when I simply
started to pay conscious attentions to my feelings, and my physical
and emotional reactions to what goes on around me, I could take a 
conscious hand in my reactions to the psychic environment around me, 
and not just salivate when someone rings my bell.  But after all, 
this is part of what perfect awareness is about.

Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
From: oser@fermi.wustl.edu (Scott Oser)
Subject: Beginnings of sentience
Organization: ----
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 19:33:46 GMT

Perhaps someone can help me with a question that has bothered me for a while...

If the universe began with a big bang (as is currently believed), and if
sentient life comes into existence due to the karmic outflows of previous
life, how did the first sentient beings come into existence?  From where
did the karma which brought the first sentience come?  In short, is it
necessary to state that the universe's first life forms had no karmic
predecessors?  Or do I have a misunderstanding about something?

-Scott Oser
oser@fermi.wustl.edu


Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
From: jil@linus.mitre.org (Jon Leivent)
Subject: Jiddu Krishnamurti
Organization: ----
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 22:51:15 GMT


I am new to this newsgroup.  I was wondering if any one would like to
engage in direct email discussions about Jiddu Krishnamurti's
teachings.


-- Jon Leivent
From: raj@globe1.att.com (Rajendra P Sharma)
Subject: Re: Questions sparked by Portal
Organization: ----
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 17:55:07 GMT

James writes:

> If Buddha had written it down...

Buddha does nothing,
as Buddha reminds us always.
but we don't listen,
and blame Buddha.
 
Buddha
did nothing,
will do nothing.
or does everything.

[but this is going on tangents. isn't it?]
[why talk about buddha?]
[didn't we become interested in Buddha,
 because what he said about suffering,
 its causes, and
 how to step out of this suffering!]
[so why not stay on the course]


---raj
From: mw@ki.fht-mannheim.de (Marc Wachowitz)
Subject: Re: quotes from talk.religion.newage
Organization: Fachhochschule fuer Technik Mannheim
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 17:46:19 GMT

Greg Sanders <sanders@iitmax.iit.edu> wrote:
:>Just then, he saw a beautiful strawberry within arm's reach. He picked it and
:>enjoyed the best tasting strawberry in his whole life!
:
: A beautiful strawberry obscures the story.  Say just "a strawberry."  That's
: the flavor of Zen.

Each moment's death
now IS beauty -
not even a strawberry


[don't think there's disagreement between the statements]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Wachowitz, mw@gandalf.ki.fht-mannheim.de, 75742@novell1.rz.fht-mannheim.de
  *  wonder everyday    *    nothing in particular    *    all is special  *

Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
From: jdavis@netlink.cts.com (James Davis)
Subject: 10 Questions on Spiritual Guidance
Organization: NetLink Online Communications, San Diego CA
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 23:53:45 GMT

Here are ten multiple choice and true/false questions which may
be worthy of consideration.  We can, of course, add additional
options like "All of the above," "None of the above," and
"Other...".


1.    Widespread guru gullibillity means

      a.  The desire for a teachers is stronger than the desire
          for enlightenment.
      b.  People are are superficial. 
      c.  We are reacting to powerful thought-formations.


2.    My values are

      a.  born from the soul.
      b.  laid upon me by my group karma.
      c.  the standardized formula of the herd.


3.    Repeating a good mantra will lift your consciousness. 
      True/False


4.    Most meditation is selfish and therefore not meditation at
      all.   True/False


5.    Masters issue orders to their followers (or devotees) to do
      thus and so, to form this or that organization.  True/False


6.    Disciples of the Masters deal in claim making and the art
      of attracting attention.   True/False


7.    A disciple may find it necessary to say, "The Master has
      chosen me," or "The Master stands behind my effort," or "I
      am the representative of Hierarchy."   True/False


8.    When most people shut out the physical world and stop
      thinking, what they have left is 

      a.  the spiritual world of reality
      b.  the emotional-mental world illusions


9.    Most spiritual guidance is

      a.  subconscious "wish life."
      b.  old aspirations from previous lives.
      c.  communication (good, bad, or indifferent) from ordinary
          discarnate people.
      d.  unconscious telepathic "eavesdropping"
      e.  contact with thought-formulations
      f.  invasion by emotion-formulations
      g.  from one's own mind
      h.  from one's own soul
      i.  from the Masters


10.   All people who have only two eyes and ears are blind and
      deaf.  True/False



--                    
INTERNET:  jdavis@netlink.cts.com (James Davis)
UUCP:   ...!ryptyde!netlink!jdavis
NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 453-1115
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
From: wabrams@jug.iaims.bcm.tmc.edu (Josh Abrams)
Subject: Zen masters and communities
Organization: ----
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 18:07:22 GMT

I haven't been reading this group for very long, so forgive me if this
question has been asked before...

One of the hardest parts of developing a serious Zen practice is finding a
spiritual teacher. I'm looking for that teacher, but I don't really know
how to go about it.  I've read several introductory books on Zen which
contain very few specifics on teachers in the U.S., Japan, Korea, Burma,
and Europe.  I'm interested in either Rinzai or a combination of
Rinzai/Soto. I'm also open to practicing other traditions.

Can anyone recommend any Zen masters that I might contact/visit? These
people don't necessarily have to have the title of Sensei or Roshi, and 
they don't necessarily have to be based in the United States. I have 
heard several names, such as Philip Kapleau, Robert Aitken, Myo Bong S'nim,
Yamada, and Sasaki, but I know very little about these people except for 
the teaching traditions of some of them. Any books or references would be
helpful as well, along with addresses.

I'm also interested in hearing about experiences with Zen centers/retreats
/communities as well. I'd like to visit several of these places at some point
in the near future. Information and/or addresses would be greatly
appreciated also.

Either post or email, as you prefer...

Thanks in advance,

Josh Abrams               Baylor College of Medicine
IAIMS Development     Internet (wabrams@bcm.tmc.edu) 

[reformatted to 80 cols -aaron]
From: jdavis@netlink.cts.com (James Davis)
Subject: Questions sparked by Portal
Organization: ----
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 04:22:41 GMT

portal!cup.portal.com!Tagi@uunet.UU.NET

>While I'm all in favor of breadth of discussion, I don't think
>that I'll follow any posts that have 'New Age' overtones.

>'Theosophy' did much to muddy the waters and stir up the
>imagination-stew.  Valuable activities, yet not very applicable
>to the study of eastern religion per se.


What are New Age overtones?

What are Old Age overtones?

What is Theosophy, and what waters did it muddy?

What is Eastern religion per se?

Since no one wrote down anything Buddha was suppose to have said
until two to four-hundred years after his death, how shall we
remove the dust from any supposed per se?

If Buddha had written it down, would any shreds of the originals
have survived?

Smiles and benign retributions upon all our ignorant heads!



--                    
INTERNET:  jdavis@netlink.cts.com (James Davis)
UUCP:   ...!ryptyde!netlink!jdavis
NetLink Online Communications * Public Access in San Diego, CA (619) 453-1115

Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern