HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 6 Apr 1992 05:34:24 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: CScience and the existence of Error
              5 Apr 1992 17:31:00 EST from <BSC92SPA18@RCNVMS.RCN.MASS.EDU>

Jeff:
My posting on James 3:11 explicitly dealt with the context of the passage.
You may read anything you like into it, I suppose, but the text does not
support your interpretation.  Again, James is cautioning Christians on
the use of the tongue.  He is saying that it is a dishonor to God to
allow ourselves to engage in petty gossip and lowly chatter (no offense
meant to anyone, especially me.)  He even goes on after the verse you
quote to bring the point back to where he began:  "Who is a wise man
and endued with knowledge among you?  let him shew out of a good conver-
sation his works with meekness of wisdom" (3:13, KJV).

I have found that the best way to understand what a Bible verse says is
to first ask God to help you understand it and then to read the entire
passage surrounding it to determine what is actually going on.  No offense
to anyone, but I have seen far too many people build entire theologies on
one mis-read Bible verse.

PS:  Jeff, what about my perception question?  Or have I just not finished
reading my mail yet.  I really am curious about it.
                           Love INC,
                                    ---Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:      UK.AC.AFRC.JII; 14 APR 92  8:26:43 BST
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 14 Apr 1992 08:26:00 GMT
From:         HANNANT@JII.AFRC.AC.UK
Subject:      RE: Effort

Jeff,
     I feel like a great weight was lifted off my shoulders reading the poem
you sent in.  My heart gave a large sigh of releif.  The Lord really does
move in odd ways to bless us doesn't He.
     Thanks Jeff, God bless you, Nigel.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 8 Apr 1992 05:17:47 EDT
From:         Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Modern Revelation and the Pope

Doug,

     I did not say the pope does not receive revelation from God.  I
said he does not receive public revelation.  God may speak to anyone,
and I have no doubt that He speaks to many people.  He may send an
angel (or a saint) to someone  to give a message as He an angel to
Mary and to the father of John the Baptist.  However, such private
revelations are binding only on the individuals who receive them.
Also, they must not contradict anything in public revelations.

     You ask, "if 'public' revelation ended with the death of the
apostles, who told the Catholic Church there would be no more public
revelations?"  The easy answer is that God did before the death of
the last Apostle.  There is no explicit text saying that, but there
are statements that Jesus is the fulfillment of the Old Testament
prophecies.  He is God incarnate who perfected the Law.  St. Paul
writes of remaining faithful to what we received and passing it on to
others.  The Church Fathers also rejected claims by early heretics to
have new revelations from the Holy Spirit.

     God has told us all we need to know.  Doctrinal definitions do
not present new doctrines the way a new revelation would.  They give
new status to doctrines that had been believed before and exclude
erroneous interpretations of God's revelations.  When the Arians, for
example, taught erroneous ideas about God and Jesus the Council of
Nicea defined basic truths about the Trinity and the Incarnation
which excluded the Arian errors.  A doctrinal definition  is the same
whether made by an ecumenical council or by the pope.  In neither
case is there any claim to new revelation.  The bishops at a council
and the pope pray for God's guidance, and we hope those prayers will
be answered, but that guidance will be in the form of help in under-
standing what was already revealed.  It will not be new doctrines,
certainly not reversals of revelation as happened when the LDS
claimed a new revelation that black people, formerly considered
cursed by God and barred from the priesthood, could be given "all of
the privileges and blessings which the gospel affords."

     You say, "Since He's the same God today, why would He _not_
continue to speak to His children, as the need arises?  Surely we are
in need of guidance from Him as much today as His people were an-
ciently."  We do need guidance, and we receive it, but we do not need
any new truths.  God told us all we need to know when He became a
man.  All we need now is help in understanding and following these
truths.

Marty Helgesen
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 23:08:00 EDT
From:         Jeff Shirton <SHIRTON@MCMASTER.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Two different questions

Ian,

> Abortion is the willfull act of taking an unborn life that belongs to the
> species Homo Sapien..
>
> Contraception is not the willfull act of taking a life, because one can not
> be sure whether or not a life is present when one takes the pill.
> Abortion is the deliberate act of terminating an unborn _HUMAN_ ie HOMO SAPIEN
> life..

1)  "Homo Sapien" - the species is not capitalized, and is spelled with a
     terminating "s" - "Homo sapiens"  (Sorry, I'm a Biology teacher)

Anyway, the reason I posted:

The problem with "contraception" is that it is a partial misnomer.  It
implies "preventing conception", yet in practical use, when use the
term to describe:

1)  prevention of fertilization;  and
2)  prevention (or termination) of implantation of the fertilized ovum
    into the uterine wall.

This is an important distinction for some.  For those (such as myself) who
believe that life begins at conception, the first form would be okay
(condoms, spermicidal foam, diaphragm, etc.), while the second form would
not (IUD's, etc.)

I'd also like to comment on your statement that contraception is not the
willful taking of a life, since you're not sure whether life exists.  I
would observe that using a contraceptive is definitely a willful act, and
I have a problem with "not sure if there's a life there".  I would compare
it to spinning around in a circle firing an automatic weapon.  You're not
aiming at anything specific, and you're not sure if you're going to hit
someone, but you certainly are aware of the possbility and the consequences.

(Those who don't believe that a zygote is a human life can disregard the
 above, of course :-)

In Christ,
.------------------------v----------------------------------------------------.
| Jeff Shirton           | "Now it is God that has...given us the Spirit as a |
| shirton@McMaster.CA    |  deposit, guaranteeing what is to come."  2Cor.5:5 |
`------------------------^----------------------------------------------------'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 14 Apr 1992 05:17:12 EDT
From:         Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Hierarchy in the Apostolic Church

The Nuzz,

You are correct.   Error on one or two points is not the same as
apostacy.  I should have worded my point differently.  It is not
merely the Fathers' view of the Church as being, at least in part, a
visible, hierarchical body that would make them apostates if they
weren't correct, although that is a fundamental doctrine.  The point
is that on a large number of doctrines, some of which have been
discussed individually on the list, the teachings of the Fathers is
the same as the teaching of the Catholic and Orthodox churches of
today and not the same as the teachings of most Protestants on those
points.  In other words, Protestants who say that Luther and the
other Protestant Reformers were restoring original Christian teaching
that had been distorted and corrupted by "Romish innovations" are
likely to find that those "innovations" were taught and taken for
granted by the Fathers.

I have quoted various passages from the Fathers supporting various
Catholic teachings, but they were selected to illustrate points.  I
suggest that Christians go to libraries and read some of the writings
of the Fathers themselves, not as scripture, but as Christian histo-
ry.  They can see for themselves what the overall attitudes were, as
distinct from looking for "proof texts" for or against individual
doctrines.  See also C. S. Lewis's essay "On the Reading of Old
Books" in GOD IN THE DOCK, which originally was written as an Intro-
duction to a translation of  THE INCARNATION OF THE WORD OF GOD by
St. Athanasius.  He gives a number of reason why Christians should
read older Christian books.

Marty Helgesen
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Organization: University of Central Queensland
X-Vms-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 10 Apr 1992 09:50:00 +1000
From:         Ken Diefenbach <DIEFENBAK@TOPAZ.UCQ.EDU.AU>
Subject:      Quicksilver
X-To:         CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU

My guess would be Hermes/Mercury - the messenger of the gods (Greek/Roman
respectively again I think)

Ken D.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: christia@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: CHRISTIA
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 16 Apr 1992 14:52:00 EDT
From:         The List Minor <VCHAI@SMITH.BITNET>
Subject:      weather

    I just want to share this experience with you all.

    It's snowing here in Northampton.  In mid April.
    It is snowing.


    "I want Spring!"-Vicky
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 17 Apr 1992 11:24:22 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: JUST A THOUGHT

John:
Regarding "Just a thought".  We would be where we were before we met Him.
A very sobering thought indeed.  Thanks for reminding us.
                                                         Love INC,
                                                                  ---Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Acknowledge-To: <S096556@UMRVMA>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 16:14:11 CDT
From:         Lonnie Schubert <S096556@UMRVMA.BITNET>
Subject:      Labals
              7 Apr 1992 13:06:04 EDT from <BSCURR01@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU>

I really wish people would quit worrying about lables.  If the term is
intentionally derogatory, it should not be used.  For me, call me whatever
your whim may deign.  I do not define myself by your labels or even liables.
I define my self by Him to whom I belong.
     Lonnie Schubert
(PS Packaging lables are excepted from my comments.) (-: :-)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Acknowledge-To: <S096556@UMRVMA>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 9 Apr 1992 12:46:39 CDT
From:         Lonnie Schubert <S096556@UMRVMA.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Poverty
              9 Apr 1992 15:49:05 GMT from <kilroy@GBORO.GLASSBORO.EDU>

On Thu, 9 Apr 1992 15:49:05 GMT Dr Nancy's Sweetie said:
>Kerry Stephenson asks about Isaiah 45:6-7, "... I form the light, and create
>darkness:  I make peace, and create evil."
>
>> If God created evil, how can it not exist?
>
>Because `evil' is not a kind of material or energy; `creating evil' is a
>figure of speech.  Consider that `darkness' is not a material either; darkness
>is merely a condition wherein there is an absence of visible light.  One does
>not actually `create darkness', one just removes all the light.
>
>{..................}, and I think it is a
>mistake to use a literal reading of this verse to claim that evil exists.
>
>kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu      Darren F. Provine      ...njin!gboro!kilroy

I posted a couple of articles subject headed "origin of evil" that you
can refer back to if you would like to "see" where I'm comming from on the
topic of evil's existance.  I hold that it does, but not because God created
it, but because it and other such "things" are self-existant (e.g., Love).

But, that aside, it seems reasonable to me to define evil as the absence of
good, by your statements above.  Thus, in realizing that "creating evil"
as used by Isaiah was in fact a figure of speach, then God is saying that
He "creates" evil by shutting off the sinner from his holiness and goodness.
Of course, being omnipotent, God only shuts off enough "good" to not destroy
the wicked with their wickedness (as light destroys dark).  God allows many
of His blessings to come the way of sinners.  All good gifts come from God.
If sinners have anything good, it is from Jesus.  Thus it is obvious that
while rejecting the sin, God still accepts the sinner.

I seem to have lost sight of my point there.  My point:
I believe God was acknowledging the existance of evil by saying that He
allowed its existance, and thus by default only (being the only possible
responsible party) "created" it, and the only reason He has held back His
absolute holiness and goodness from destroying evil, is because that would
have destroyed so many of his beloved human creations who were (and are)
clinging to that evil and rejecting God.
     Lonnie Schubert
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 9 Apr 1992 09:18:00 EDT
From:         Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Prayer Suggestion

Today is the General Election in the United Kingdom.  I suggest that
everyone offer a prayer that God will enlighten British voters to
chose the best possible candidates.  (Great Britain is several times zones
ahead of the United States, but I think most of you will see this before the
polls close.)
Marty Helgesen
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 10 Apr 1992 11:29:54 CST
From:         CXKJP%UTXDP.bitnet@UTXVM.CC.UTEXAS.EDU
Subject:      RE:abortion
X-To:         CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.

John--

   Planned  Parenthood gives prenatal care for people who cant
afford to go anywhere else. For some people, its the only time
they go to the doctor at all. Once a midwife told me of a 17
year old pregnat woman whom she examined and found a rock in
her ear that had been there for over 12 years. The prevailing
attitude at the clinics I have been in is "We give you this
birth control so you wont have to make a decision about
abortion."
 I once went to a pro-life clinic for a pregnancy test. I
was not asked any questions about my situation, even whether
or not I was married, and they showed me a sickening video
about abortion. Then I was lectured in person. No one offered
any kind of alternative counseling or even warmth, they just
moralized. If I had been in trouble, I guarantee you this place
would have been the last p lace I would have gone for help.

   Kim
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL0]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 9 Apr 1992 18:04:07 EST
From:         Ian Williams <iwilliam@AU.ORACLE.COM>
Subject:      Re: Hierarchy in the Apostolic Church
X-To:         CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU
              at Apr 9, 92 1:52 am

Marty,

I will reply to your message regarding the 'hierachy' of the church with
notes from a bible college lecture on Tuesday night.. I hope to be able
to post these tonight, we shall see..



*****************************************************************************
Ian Williams          			Internet: iwilliam@au.oracle.com
Oracle Systems         			Phone   : +61 8 239 3900
Adelaide, Australia
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  CHRISTIA
Original_cc:  HUTTER
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 15 Apr 1992 09:51:00 N
From:         Wolfgang Hutter <HUTTER@DULRUU51.BITNET>
Subject:      Is a baptozed unbeliever saved (was Catholics and Protestants)

On Mon, 13 Apr 1992 06:01:00 EST
Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET> wrote:

>        Someone who  has
>        never made a decision for Christ will go to Hell as soon as he
>        dies.  Someone who has made a decision for Christ but who needs
>        final purification before entering Heaven will pass through
>        Purgatory on the way to Heaven.  I will be away over the Easter
>        weekend but I hope to have time to write my promised essay on
>        Purgatory shortly after I get back.  Also, the question of infant
>        baptism is not a Catholic/Protestant issue because many Protes-
>        tants practice infant baptism, just as Catholics and Eastern
>        Orthodox do.


Marty,

(or someone else)

could you please expound on what the RCC teaches about baptism and
salvation. I.e. are we saved through baptism? Is someone saved that was
baptized but never made a decision to follow Jesus?

In an attempt to get first-hand information

Wolfgang
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 6 Apr 1992 18:51:00 EST
From:         "Jeff Sinatra" <BSC92SPA18@RCNVMS.RCN.MASS.EDU>
Subject:      Re: CScience and the existence of Error
X-To:         CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU

Kerry,
>Where does the Bible say that God is freedom?
It doesn't, and neither did I.  I stated that the very essence of God is
freedom--that one of God's atributes is freedom. For example, "...where the
Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty."(2Cor. 3:17)

>IMHO, freedom is an idolatrous god of man's own invention.

On the contrary, freedom is one of the "good gifts" of God, and bondage (sin,
sickness, death, etc.) is the "...idolatrous god of man's own invention."
How can you honestly say that "freedom" is man created (a lie), and then at
the same time say that evil, sickness, etc. is real and God-created. IMHO, this
is completely backwards, and I wish you would explain your reasoning behind the
statement that freedom is idolatrous--Biblical references would be even better.

Just trying to understand???

				love,
				  Jeff Sinatra
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re: Should women cover their heads?
From: comjohn@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Mr. John T Jensen)
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 23:25:41 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland, New Zealand.

Brenda Curry-White <BSCURR01@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU> writes:

>...And BTW,
>long hair is not necessarily a glory for a woman.  My face with short hair
>is much more aesthetically pleasing to look at--even my husband agrees. :-)

The question is, does God agree?  I'm not saying He doesn't, mind --- though
I am inclined to think, as I said, that we are given absolute (and not just
culturally relative) advice here.  As to whether it's a matter of SIN --- I
am inclined to doubt it.

jj

John Thayer Jensen                      64 9 373 7599 ext. 7543
Commerce Computer Services              64 9 373 7437 (FAX)
Auckland University                     jt.jensen@aukuni.ac.nz
Private Bag 92019
AUCKLAND
New Zealand
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 09:48:23 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Two different questions

Darryl:

Your observation on the taking of life defined as "homo sapiens" is
correct.  Now do you understand why I, in fact, _do_ oppose not only
abortion, but capital punishment, war, and abortifacient forms of
contraception (such as the IUD and the morning after pill)?  You are
making my argument for me, but I guess that saves me the work.  Thanks.
                                                 Love INC,
                                                          ---Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 12:23:00 EDT
From:         Jeff Shirton <SHIRTON@MCMASTER.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: EITHER AND/OR: A BAPTISIMAL INQUIRY

> Baptismal in the name of Jesus Christ Acts 2:38.
>
> Read the book of Acts and in that *** name *** they were baptize.
>
> Not in the Name of The Father,the Son,and Holy Espirit.

        "Then Jesus came to them and said, 'All authority in
         heaven and on earth has been given to me.  Therefore
         go and make disciples of all nations,

         - baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the
           Son and of the Holy Spirit -

         and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded
         you.  And surely I am with you always, to the very end
         of the age."    -- Matt. 28:18-20 (NIV)

In Christ,
.------------------------v----------------------------------------------------.
| Jeff Shirton           | "Now it is God that has...given us the Spirit as a |
| shirton@McMaster.CA    |  deposit, guaranteeing what is to come."  2Cor.5:5 |
`------------------------^----------------------------------------------------'
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 10 Apr 1992 23:31:00 EDT
From:         Jeff Shirton <SHIRTON@MCMASTER.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: help with prayer

JoEllen, hi!

>    I used to wonder (and not so long ago, either) how people managed
> to spend so much time in prayer.

Well, I may be the wrong person to ask, since I don't pray as often as
I'd like to.  I also don't always remember to commit as many things to
prayer as I'd like to.

>  Now that I've grown a bit spiritually
> however, I find myself wondering how to find time to pray for the
> seemingly endless number of people the Holy Spirit brings to my mind.

Due to our busy society, you will _never_ "find" time for anything.  If
you want to do something, you have to _make_ the time.  Yes, even schedule
time for prayer.  Write it down in your day-timer, maybe, to make it a
commitment to yourself to do.

>    I have a long commute to and from work every day.  It's not a hectic
> drive so I use that time for quick prayers.  I can also find time for
> brief prayers during the day.

That was going to be my first suggestion!  :-)

>     I do feel that I am surely not getting all of the benefits and
> power of prayer available to me because I don't pray enough--that is,

Although persistence in prayer is important, IMO it isn't as important
as sincerity and _faith_ (James 1:6)

> in addition to all the quick prayers I should have a longer prayer
> time.

Definitely!  With all the things we have to pray for, we definitely need
to take the time for it.  We have so many things to pray about that (IMO)
it isn't feasible to pray about everything we need to at every prayer session.
We need to pray for:

family;
friends;
the unsaved;
missionaries;
our clergy;
our city/country's leaders;
other world events;
specific prayer requests

thanksgiving for all the things He has done for us (specific and general)

don't forget to confess the bad stuff

etc. etc.

>  But there is so much and so many people to pray for--how do I
> keep track of it all?  Would lists help?  What about a notebook?

Yes!  Not only is it a great way to remember what to pray for, but IMO it's
also a good idea to keep a record of prayers that have been answered.  It's
a great testimonial reminder when your faith starts to weaken, or to help
you praise God, be reflecting on how He's blessed us with answered prayer!

God bless,

Jeff Shirton                  "My Boss is a Jewish Carpenter!"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia