HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 10:33:00 GMT
From:         Z_STAFF_CL@SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE.AC.UK
Subject:      Bishops' examples

From:        Lon Mendelsohn <LMENDELS@EDU.WAYNE.CC.CMS>
Subject:     Re: Bishop Spong
>My choice of words was, perhaps, poor.  The use of the word "doubt" implies
>that a person can doubt a particular doctrine without disbelieving in it
>altogether.  If, however, a person completely disbelieves in one more of
>the major points of doctrine, then that is the point at which I think
>that they should disqualify themselves from being in a position of authority
>within their particular church.  To say (as you seem to have been saying):
>"I have personal doubts about the resurrection but I am working through
>those doubts toward faith" is quite different from saying "The resurrection
>never happened, and I will preach and teach accordingly."

I must say I would have difficulty in accepting a religious leader who point
blank said "The resurrection never happened, and I will preach and teach
accordingly" and meant that.

I have, however, come across some who have said  that and meant something
totally different - more "I'm frustrated, I can't get my brain round this
and I don't care to hide how silly it all seems any  more".  These people
need care and not "you're unfit to ...".

Another case is the minister who has "sold his soul" - hopefully never to
happen.  He won't give up of his own accord - it's in the otherside's
intrests not to.  Some how the church has to find a way of seeing who
these are.

How do you decide which is which ?  It is a problem I have had often in the
past - I have a number of clergy friends. If it is a bishop, the influence
they have is greater, the people "under" them have less personal knowledge.
How do you decide if your bishop is a fit leader in this case ?

I don't think it is a simple as it seems at first sight.  Christianity
is complex.  Blind faith doesn't appear to be a helpful trait in a minister.
Doubts, difficulties and logical disbelief will no doubt hit most of
us at some time.  (What was it Paul said about preaching folly ?)

I have no answers.  I am unready to remove any church leader because they
do not agree totally with the doctrine.  Why ? Because the doctrine has
changed and developed over the years and will probably continue to.  (Paul
accepted slavery as O.K. The church today doesn't.)  I have no wish to
stiffle the church's growth.

If anyone has a fool-proof formula to solve this one, let me know.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
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
	UK Fax No : (0703) 222259		acknowlegements to author.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Z_STAFF_CL@UK.AC.SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE
===============================================================================
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:      UK.AC.SOLENT; 15 SEP 92 17:07:23 BST
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 15 Sep 1992 17:07:00 GMT
From:         Z_STAFF_CL@SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE.AC.UK
Subject:      Re: Gays want to be left alone???

Barry,

It has just occured to me that there is another Barry on another list
GLOBLX-L carrying a very similar thread.

Perhaps, as our list owner has expressed the idea that we've already discussed
this fairly well (for references I am sure the LISTSERV can help) we should
not be duplicating the arguements on both list and continue here with another
thread.

Carol L
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Orig-To: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sat, 12 Sep 1992 13:34:42 CDT
Comments:     Answering received message
From:         THERESA BLACKWELL <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Subject:      UNDERGROUND CHURCH...

 Don't exactly know who posted this, but I will continue to pray
 for those Christians in other parts of the world who do continue
 to worship Jesus at all costs.
 Sometimes American Christians take for granted that we can worship
 without the machine guns in our faces, or the knives at our backs.
 (Figuratively and literally speaking...)
 I think sometimes we forget that if there weren't sacrifices made
 by others, that we'd not have the right to worship in the ways
 we do.

 Dear Jesus:
 I'm not sure how to say this, but Thank you!  Due to my being
 an American citizen by birth, I have the freedom to worship and
 praise Your name without undue stress from whatever forces that
 would have that happen otherwise.
 Bless those of your Children that are in other lands, who have
 to worship you in Secret, to avoid torture, etc.
 May they one day soon be able to spread your Gospel without
 fear in the lands where they are.
 Please, God... don't ever let us take for granted our heritage
 here in the US.... we have too much to be thankful for.
 Never let us forget those who gave their lives for our freedom.
 And dear Jesus?? Please don't ever stop reminding ME that you're
 YOU... perfect in all ways.
 How Majestic is YOUR NAME!
 "G"


 * <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 08:42:07 CDT
From:         Jesse Carnes <NOTJIC@LSUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: ????? on the Second Coming
              10 Sep 1992 16:19:16 CST from <iwilliam@AU.ORACLE.COM>

Dear Ian ;

Try Colos. 1:23.

For some lagnappe, try the KJV edition of Heb. 9:26.
End of WHAT world??


Jesse
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sat, 12 Sep 1992 19:35:36 PDT
From:         Barry Wadsworth <BARRYW@UCSFVM.BITNET>
Subject:      NEWSWEEK: GAYS UNDER FIRE

So, God let them go ahead into every
sort of sex sin, and do whatever they
wanted to--yes, vile and sinful things
with each other's bodies. Instead of be-
lieving what they knew was the truth
about God, they deliberately chose to be-
lieve lies. So they prayed to the things
God made, but wouldn't obey the blessed
God who made these things.
That is why God let go of them and
let them do all these evil things, so that
even their women turned against God's
natural plan for them and indulged in sex
sin with each other. And, the men, in-
stead of having normal sex relationship
with women, burned with lust for each
other, men doing shameful things with
other men and , as a result, getting paid
within their own souls with the penalty
they so richly deserved.
So it was that when they gave God
up and would not even acknowledge him,
God gave them up to doing everything
their evil minds could think of. . . .
Romans 2:24 - 2:28

This is offered as a personal response to Newsweek's extremely slanted
journalism.
Once again, Christians are made to look like the force of evil and
homosexuals are raised to saintly martyrdom.
We must have great compassion for our fellow human beings, gay or
otherwise.  We should love them.  But that does not mean that we
must accept their ways.  It does not mean that we should encourage
their values. And it doesn't mean that we should expose our children
to their influences. How is it that we have come to even considering
such things that the authors of that article take as a given that we
should compassionately embrace.  Homosexual acts are in direct opposition
to the Christian faith. How is it that our country is plagued with this
problem?

BarryW
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
From: nabil@cae.wisc.edu (Nabil Ayoub)
Subject: Tradition (was Re: Second parousia in the past?)
Organization: U of Wisconsin-Madison College of Engineering
Date: 8 Sep 92 17:49:49 CDT

In article <CHRISTIA%92090406190068@ASUACAD.BITNET> Jesse Carnes <NOTJIC@LSUVM.BITNET> writes:

>Despite what it has believed, the RC organization, nor any other group
>has any REAL authority in these matters.
>The Written Word of God is our Authority ... sola scriptura.

Let us see what Scripture tells us *first* :

   John 21:25   And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if
   they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could
   not contain the books that would be written. Amen.

So John The Evangelist, the author of this Gospel *clearly* states that
there is *more* than what he has written in this gospel. So your "sola
scriptura" is *in* contradiction with the Scripture itself! Our Orthodox
Tradition is based on what the Apostles have learned directly from Christ.
That is why we call it the Apostolic Tradition. As the Secretary of MECC
(forgot his name) once said "Christianity is more than a book! It is a way 
of life." Obviously, he implies that Christianity is *not* just what in 
the physical book (The Bible), in direct referece to the authenticity of
The Tradition. 

Irene pasi,

Nabil

PS. MECC = Middle East Council of Churches
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:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 12:15:21 EDT
From:         Leo W <Leo_W@QM.CIRCA.UFL.EDU>
Subject:      Scripturette 9/11

"Give to Caesar the things that are Caesar's.  And give to God the things that
are God's" (Matthew 22:21).

"Remind the believers to do these things: to be under the authority of rulers
and government leaders, to obey them and be ready to do good, to speak no evil
about anyone, to live in peace with all, to be gentle and polite to all people"
(Titus 3:1,2).

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
Original_To:  BITNET%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 14 Sep 1992 16:42:00 CDT
From:         "Love does not subtract, it multiplies." <HOLZMAN@FNAL.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: OK, YOU GUYS ASKED FOR THIS....

< I am gettin' annoyed at everyone goin' off on each other
< because we have different DENOMINATIONAL beliefs...
< Let's get back to the CARDINAL DOCTRINES OF THE *CHRISTIAN*
< FAITH:
< 1. JESUS WAS GOD'S SON.
< 2. BORN OF A VIRGIN
< 3. LED A SINLESS LIFE HERE ON EARTH
< 4. DIED TO SAVE ALL MANKIND FROM SIN/DEATH/HELL
< 5. ROSE ON THE THIRD DAY (ACTUALLY SUNDAY NOW...)
< 6. SENT US THE HOLY SPIRIT AS COMFORTOR/COUNCELLOR
< 7. HE'S COMING BACK HERE TO RAPTURE HIS CHURCH AND
<    TAKE US TO HEAVEN WITH HIM... AND THERE WE WILL
<    STAY *FOREVER* ... IF we have a one-on-one with him.

Wasn't the "common ground" stuff supposed to deal with all this?

Dan
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:         Mon, 14 Sep 1992 17:40:06 EDT
From:         Leo W <Leo_W@QM.CIRCA.UFL.EDU>
Subject:      Re>Catholicism ?s

Tom Brewer wrote: "Let me ask for example, why was Mary exalted and not Jesus?
Why was the wedding song praising Mary and not Jesus? Why did the couple stand
before a statue of "Mary" and pray to the statue?"

I am currently re-reading the writings of the very early church fathers (1 and
2 century) and it is incomprehensible that anything like this would have been
allowed in the church back then (several of them even forbid eating food which
was offered to an idol).  However, Right Rev. Sullivan in "The Externals of the
Catholic Church" offers some interesting statements regarding various RC
religious rites.  Here is one of many:

"Instead of attempting to repress totally a practice which was misguided
indeed, but which showed an instinctive reliance on higher powers, the Church
in many instances took the religious customs with which the people were
familiar, and made these customs Christian."

While not addressing your question specifically, evidently the RCC does not
discourage the acquisition, development, and distribution of any religious
behaviors which do not oppose divine revelation (as understood by the RCC).
It is possible that such a tradition would result in behaviors similar to what
you witnessed during the wedding ceremony.

Yours in Christ Jesus,
Leo
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 14 Sep 1992 23:14:01 EDT
From:         Lon Mendelsohn <LMENDELS@CMS.CC.WAYNE.EDU>
Subject:      Favorite Scripture (NT)

As promised, one of my favorites from the NT:



1Cor. 1:18-29:

For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but
to us who are being saved it is the power of God.  For it is
written, "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the
cleverness of the clever I will thwart."  Where is the wise man?
Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God
made foolish the wisdom of the world?  For since, in the wisdom of
God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God
through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe.
For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ
crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to
those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of
God and the wisdom of God.  For the foolishness of God is wiser
than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.  For
consider your call, brethren; not many of you were wise according
to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of
noble birth; but God chose what is foolish in the world to shame
the wise, God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong,
God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that
are not, to bring to nothing things that are,  so that no human
being might boast in the presence of God.


Shalom,

Lon Mendelsohn
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sat, 12 Sep 1992 00:42:32 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Dark Dreams

Chris:

I'm not presumptious enough to speak for God, but perhaps you should
prayerfully ask God what He meant by that dream.  Perhaps He has
a work for you to do with those who have AIDS, now that He has
broken your heart for them.

Be at peace, but don't get complacent.

Love INC,
         --Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Orig-To: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 14 Sep 1992 20:23:20 CDT
Comments:     Answering received message
From:         THERESA BLACKWELL <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Subject:      C.G.D!!! C.G.D!!!! (ETC....)

 Steven, Madge....
 Would either of you mind posting the Common
Ground Document again????
 I think it's appearance on this list, would save
loads of folks from bein' hurt at what their
brother/sister tries to tell them concerning our
diffs.
 It's just a thought... Thanks to Lon's reminder,
 I even remembered it!!!
 (Major accomplishment for "G" on a Monday
night!!!)
 God Bless You!

 * <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Orig-To: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 21:09:24 CDT
Comments:     Answering received message
From:         THERESA BLACKWELL <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Subject:      OK, YOU GUYS ASKED FOR THIS....

 Let's get one thing crystal right now.
 I am gettin' annoyed at everyone goin' off on each other
 because we have different DENOMINATIONAL beliefs...
 Let's get back to the CARDINAL DOCTRINES OF THE *CHRISTIAN*
 FAITH:
 1. JESUS WAS GOD'S SON.
 2. BORN OF A VIRGIN
 3. LED A SINLESS LIFE HERE ON EARTH
 4. DIED TO SAVE ALL MANKIND FROM SIN/DEATH/HELL
 5. ROSE ON THE THIRD DAY (ACTUALLY SUNDAY NOW...)
 6. SENT US THE HOLY SPIRIT AS COMFORTOR/COUNCELLOR
 7. HE'S COMING BACK HERE TO RAPTURE HIS CHURCH AND
    TAKE US TO HEAVEN WITH HIM... AND THERE WE WILL
    STAY *FOREVER* ... IF we have a one-on-one with him.

 ------
 If some want to flame me for the tone in this post, go ahead.
 I'm just a bit irate that some of the folks here can't see
 BEYOND *DENOMINATIONAL* BARRIERS.
 ------
 It hurts "THE G" to see her Catholic friends flame her Protestant
 buddies, and the same is true in reverse.... I am serious guys,
 this is beginning to bug me.
 ------
 If we can't be of encouragement to each other, then why did
 Madge and Stephen even bother to create this list???
 I think they had a fellowship in mind... not of Catholic/Protestant,
 but of CHRISTIANS....
 (Madge, Stephen.... how'm I doin' so far????)
 Geez, folks.
 Let's just get back to the basics... like the kids sing...
 "Jesus loves me this I know...
  For the Bible tells me so...
  Little ones to HIM belong, they are weak, but he is strong.
  Yes, Jesus loves me
  ....
  The Bible tells me so"....
 ---------
 and this one also could be applied to each of our lives:
 "Jesus loves the little Children
  all the Children of the world
  Red and yellow, black and white
  They are PRECIOUS IN *HIS* SIGHT
  JESUS LOVES THE LITTLE CHILDREN OF THE WORLD"
  -------
  FOR ALL intents and purposes, let's re-write the song, since
 it's in public domain anyway, why can't we write it this way?
  "Jesus loves the Faithful Christian
   All HIS children of the world
   (Catholic, Baptist, Lutheran and Methodist... (all)
   We are precious in HIS sight...
   Jesus loves the FAITHFUL CHRISTIANS
   of the world..."
   ------
 ok.. so for the sake of driving a point home, the lyrics suffer,
 but I think you get my point????
  --------
  Again, Madge????? Whatcha think?
  God Bless you all... I don't care what DENOMINATION you
  affiliate with!!! :)
  "G"

 * <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 8 Sep 1992 10:42:20 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: very weird rumor
              8 Sep 1992 13:17:57 GMT from <78witherspoo@CUA.EDU>

Tom:

Thanks for the information, but the lyrics you provide don't strike me
as particularly "Christian," and I have seen Ozzy Osborne interviewed.
He *did* bite the head off the (not bat, I forget what it was), though--
he thought it was fake.  Oops.

Love INC,
         --Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:      UK.AC.SOLENT; 11 SEP 92 15:46:41 BST
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 15:46:00 GMT
From:         Z_STAFF_CL@SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE.AC.UK
Subject:      RE: roommate prayer update

Carol,

Sarah is obviously "being looked after"
Don't worry quite so much.... I know your her mother but ...
I am sure she'll find her own level - stop worrying about having
to force her into meeting people, God will provide.
You're both in my prayers
Carol L
From: YA67@FERRIS.BITNET (carol nemec)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re: Spiritual Gifts
Date: 11 Sep 92 14:28:27 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU

Hi Tim,

Thanks for the encouraging thoughts.

My church, over the years, has responded to guitar music
somewhat similarly.  What it took was a supporting pastor.
We now have 2 pastors who both play the guitar.  The compromise
has been an early traditional service and a later (both on
Sunday) service that uses newer hymns, some with guitar
accompaniment.

Wasn't Silent Night written for the guitar?

Well, the change was slow.  But, IMO, the church must  allow
members to use their talents for the Lord.  And yes, there
will always be members that object to any change.  Perhaps
using the guitar with the youth to begin.  And perhaps someone
who supports it will take notice and take it further.

Or offering services to a different church at a time when it
would not interfere with your own worship.

Perhaps offering guitar lessons through the church...get
enough people interested in it and enjoying it.

Guitar music can be very beautiful.  I will pray the love of
the members to accept the talents of all.  And for patience
to wait on the Lord to put all the talents to use.  Church is
an appropriate place, but witnessing can be done using our
talents outside of our church family.

The Lord be with you.

Carol Nemec
ya67@ferris
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 08:10:36 CDT
From:         Tom Brewer <NOTTMB@LSUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Catholicism ?s

      Many seem to be convinced that Catholicism is just another
denomination that falls under the umbrella of "Christian" faith. Many have
also interpreted my posts in the past to be targeted at individuals. My
purpose is to discuss Catholicism in the light of Scripture just as others
are discussing homosexuality, masonry, Jehovah's Witnesses, eschatology,
etc.
      For the sake of personal reference, I have already told others via
private email that the majority of members in my church are ex-catholic,
including the pastor; and my wife is ex-catholic which obviously means my
in-laws are Catholic. My beef, attack, fight or whatever you choose to
call it is not with the people. It's much like the former Soviet Union.
Most of us had sympathy toward the people of the Soviet Union; it was the
Soviet establishment, Communist Party, Marxist government, etc. that we
all hated. Most people hated the oppression and deception that cruelly
kept the people in slavery for years.
      For what it's worth, Saturday I attended a Catholic wedding. The
bride is the daughter of my wife's "God-mother." Her family helped in my
own wedding years ago. While at the wedding, the ceremony once again
raised questions that I hope to toss out for discussion, debate, or
whatever.
      Let me ask for example, why was Mary exalted and not Jesus? Why was
the wedding song praising Mary and not Jesus? Why did the couple stand
before a statue of "Mary" and pray to the statue?
      I hope you can see how an ignorant protestant can come to question
these actions.
      Also, why was an official papal statement called an "Apostolic
Blessing" from the Pope? The groom's family is Italian and arranged for
the Pope's blessing on the marriage. I spoke with the mother of the bride
after the ceremony and saw the Pope's letter. My question of course is how
is it "Apostolic" in nature?
      I sure hope these questions don't ruffle any feathers. Every thing
is true and I'm sure many of you are very familiar with what I've
described. If these actions have basis in Scripture, then I see no reason
for anyone to get angry. But if there is no Scriptural basis, then why
commit such acts?
      Concerning my assertions in earlier posts of a gospel of works, let
me say that Catholic doctrine states "The Sacrament of Matrimony bestows
Sanctifying Grace on the contracting parties." This is another DE FIDE
doctrine from the Council of Trent and Pius XI. Does this not conflict
with the teaching from Scripture that Christ is our sanctification?
      I have many more questions that relate to a gospel of works, but I
will wait to see if these questions are understood and accepted as I am
trying to present them before posting any more questions that relate to
the work of Christ.

Tom Brewer NOTTMB@LSUVM
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:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:25:00 CDT
From:         BKCOBB@LIFE.UAMS.EDU
Subject:      Re: Second Parousia

>Read Milton Terry's "Biblical Hermeneutics."
>He not only addresses hermeneutics, but indicates the modus operandi of
>hermeneutics within the scope of eschatology.
>This will indicate how language is employed in "apocalyptic" sections
>of the Word.  He gives examples.

>Another good work is Stuart Russell's "The Parousia."


Just curious.  Do they hold the preterist viewpoint?

Brian
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU