HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: amanda@visix.com (Amanda Walker)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: The fall of Satan
Date: 13 Apr 92 05:29:17 GMT

> ["The war of the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness" sounds like
> one of the books from Qumran, or something Persian.  --clh]

It may well be from Qumran, now that you mention it.  It's also analogous to
similar themes from Zoroastrianism.  I will try to find a specific reference
and post it for people who want to do further research.

Peace,

Amanda Walker						      amanda@visix.com
Visix Software Inc.				    ...!uupsi!visix.com!amanda
--
"He shall cover you with his pinions, and you shall find refuge under his
 wings; his faithfulness shall be a shield and buckler."  --Psalm 91:4
From: rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard Pitts)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Paul: Did he meet Jesus?
Date: 9 Apr 92 08:05:01 GMT
Organization: CERL-EE, Georgia Institue of Technology

In article <Apr.8.03.59.50.1992.26499@dumas.rutgers.edu> gt5599d@prism.gatech.edu (gt5599d TOLBERT,JASON ALAN) writes:
>Did Paul ever meet Jesus in the flesh?
>
>How did the early churches come to respect a man so much that he influenced
>the New Testament many times as much as any of Jesus's original 12 disciples?

The following is a part of a longer discussion on Paul and the Church.  I
cut part of it down - hopefully, it is helpful.

    Paul was appointed by Jesus to be the one to proclaim the gospel to 
the Gentiles.  (Acts - the Damascus Road event.)  He was singled out.  Other
people (e.g., Annanias) had directions from God, during Saul's (Paul's) 
conversion and were told what to do, independent of what was told to Paul.
(i.e., there was independent conformation of Paul's vision/calling.)

    Also, Paul in Acts 24:14, affirms that he worships the God of his fathers,
believing all that is written in the law and prophets.

    To argue the authority of Paul, I would plead that the disciples which
were with Jesus (mainly Peter) would have corrected Paul, if he was wrong.
What you actually find is Paul correcting Peter.  For Peter lived under grace 
and not the law, when other Jews weren't around, and he lived under the law,
when other Jews were around (Gal 2) - thus being hypocritical.  Peter 
recognized Paul's writings as scripture (2 Peter 3:14-16.)

    WHY did Peter submit, IF Paul did not have this authority?  WHY did Peter
give the status of Scripture to Paul's writings, IF Paul did not have 
this authority?

    The calling of Paul to be the messenger to the Gentiles was in keeping
with Old Testament prophecies.  The OT tells of salavation being extended 
to all the world, not just Jews.  In Luke, Jesus was proclaimed to be a 
light to the Gentiles.

    Here are a few verses that show a continuity between Jesus, Peter and Paul
with respect to who is the foundation of the church, which is Jesus the Christ,
the Chief Corner Stone, the Rock :

    Jesus speaking: Luke 20:17-18.
    Peter speaking to the Rulers and Elders: Acts 4:11  
    Paul speaking: Romans 9:33 1Cor 10:4 Eph. 2:20  
    Peter speaking: 1Peter 2:4-8 
                                                                         
    Saul (Paul) was directly confronted by the Lord on the road
to Damascus (Acts 9) and rebuked for persecuting Himself (and His church.)
Then the Lord direcive to Saul was that he was His choosen vessel to preach the
gospel to the Gentiles.  Paul says the gospel he preached was recieved 
by revelation from Jesus Christ not via men.  Why would Saul, a devout Jew
persecuting the church, all of a sudden be advocating the church and its 
gospel, if he was not call by God? 

Sincerely,
Richard Pitts
-- 
rpitts@cerl.gatech.edu       |    
Atlanta, GA                --|-- 
                        -|-  |  -|-
                         |   |   |
From: ceb@dbrus.unify.com (Caroline E. Bryan)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Better Dead Than Mis-Read?
Date: 7 Apr 92 03:01:38 GMT
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organization

In article <Apr.2.01.06.27.1992.9164@dartagnan.rutgers.edu> HOLFELTZ@LSTC2VM.stortek.com writes:
>>But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you
>>besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema.
>>As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a
>>gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema.
>>                                            Galatians 1:8,9
> 
>What is the Gospel in its entire form?  Nothing more than
>  1.  Faith is Christ
>  2.  Repentance
>  3.  Baptism
>  4.  Gift of Holy Ghost
> 
>Anything else is not, to my understanding, the "technical" gospel
>of Christ.  Now this puts a damper on ALL eucharist (sp), all ceremony
>except baptism (by immersion), eliminates the sacrament etc.  This puts
>all but the barest of Christians in deep yogurt.

Rejecting the eucharist is rejecting something that Jesus specifically told
us to do.  See Matthew 26:26-8 -- " [of broken bread] Take and eat, this
is my body.... [of wine] Drink of it, all of you, for this is my blood of
the covenant, which will be shed on behalf of many for the forgiveness of
sins."

Rejecting the Gospels for '"technical" gospel' and accepting only Paul's let-
ters as '"technical" gospel' would cause you to reject not only the eucharist
but also baptism, the forgiveness of sins, the appointment of pastors, and
matrimony.  If you reject baptism because you reject the Gospels as not being
your '"technical" gospel', by what authority do you require immersion-type
baptism?

> [I think that's an odd reading of what Paul meant.  (1) the passage is nor-
> mally translated as condemning people who preach something that contradicts
> what Paul says, not those who say additional things ... (2) Paul does not
> give a list of what he means by the Gospel.  Your short list is your own,
> not his.  Elsewhere he certainly talks about communion (1 Cor 11), which is
> what the Eucharist is ... most (maybe all ...) of the Catholic sacraments
> are also commanded or endorsed in the NT ... I can at least understand
> their beliefs that their sacraments can be defended Biblically.... --clh]

This list is from the back of my pocket NT (NAB, Revised):
baptism: Matthew 28:18-19
confirmation: Acts 8: 14-18
eucharist: Matthew 26:26-8 and Luke 22:19
penance: John 20:22-3
anointing the sick: James 5:14
holy orders: Luke 22:19 and Acts 14:23
matrimony: 1 Corinthians 7:10-11


Carrie		ceb@dbrus.unify.com	x6244
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|   "Age and treachery will always conquer youth and skill."  - Anon.        |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Billy Graham carrying message from the Pope
Date: 7 Apr 92 02:35:41 GMT
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA

In article <Apr.5.03.26.06.1992.6785@dartagnan.rutgers.edu> dlhanson@nap.amoco.com (David L. Hanson) writes:
>I just received a nasty email message about this posting which I quickly
>erased.  The writer accused me of "hate".  I can assure him and other
>readers this is not hate.  If I do not tell the truth then it would be
>hate....
>Let me state it as carefully, I LOVE and care for Roman Catholic people.
>I want to see them saved very much. I absolutely detest the horrible
>Roman Catholic Church which leads so many to hell. 

You know, I think a number of us have read this guy's comments and have
been shocked, if not ashamed, at the sentiments expressed.  But I got
to thinking about it, and realized that exposure to a little intolerance
probably isn't such a bad thing for many of the readers here, who have
had it all too easy when it comes to modern life and its profession
(if not always its practice) of "tolerance".

All I could think of when reading these articles is how similar they
sound to the perennial gay bashing harangues in talk.religion.misc.
Gay people are on the receiving end of such "LOVE" all too frequently.
It's amusing to see the tables turned, however briefly.

-- 
Steve Dyer
dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
From: rlwinter@taco.ucdavis.edu (Richard Lee Winterstein)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Thorn in the flesh
Date: 14 Apr 92 07:34:23 GMT
Organization: College of Engineering - University of California - Davis


  I would like to hear what people think about the hypothesis that Paul may
have been homosexual.  Please, refrain from responding unless you have an
informed opinion on this as I do not wish to see another round of gay-bashing.

Rick

[I'm only willing to engage in discussion on this subject if someone
is interested in supporting the idea.  I don't see any point in
a zillion messages opposing an idea that no one is proposing.  --clh]
From: rlwinter@taco.ucdavis.edu (Richard Lee Winterstein)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: P.S.: Liturgy changes
Date: 10 Apr 92 03:34:16 GMT
Organization: College of Engineering - University of California - Davis


  A short while back there was significant discussion on the sometimes
lamentable effort to "contemporize" church services. Today I went to
our library's old book sale and found a copy of the Confucian Analects
(trans. into English); as it happened, I turned open to the following
passage which really struck a chord with me:

  "Tzu Kung was for doing away with the customary sacrifice of a sheep
on the first day of the month.  The Master said: 'Ah, Tzu, you grudge
the loss of a sheep, but I grudge the loss of a ceremony.' " 

Rick
From: DGRAHAM@bnr.ca (D.A.)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Dislike of Christianity
Date: 8 Apr 92 08:47:02 GMT
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada

In article <Apr.5.03.39.11.1992.7535@dartagnan.rutgers.edu> jgj@travis.csd.harri
s.com (Jeff Jackson) writes:

>> Why is it wrong for people to have self esteem?
>
>Lets start with an extreme example, should Ted Bundy (the serial
>killer) have self esteem?  Should a drug addict have self esteem?  I
>would suggest no.

The question is not whether they should have self esteem.  The question
is whether or not they *do* have self esteem.  I would suggest that
many people who treat themselves and others with disdain, do so
because they lack self esteem.

>But the guilt
>trip is only half of it.  Guilt without forgiveness is useless.
>Forgiveness is the other half of the Christian equation that all too
>often gets forgotten (even by Christians).  The whole spiel about
>repentance is not to experience a guilt trip, but to *end* the guilt
>trap, receive forgiveness, and transform our lives.

So the Christian equation is to first lay a guilt trip on somebody,
and then offer him forgiveness for that guilt which needn't have
existed in the first place.  That sounds about right, but it sure
seems like bad psychology to me.  Firstly, I doubt if the quilt feelings
are ever completely dissipated.  Secondly, it would create a person
who is dependent on others for forgiveness.

>I think the aversion to the
>"save the world" ideas that seems exist within Christianity has
>several causes.  One is it somehow got associated with the New Age
>movement, with their Gaia and earth goddesses theology.

This is something that I hadn't realized before.  I was unaware of
any connection between the environmental movement, and any new
theology.  Anyway, even if that is so, now does not seem like
a good time to be fighting over who is worshipping the right God.
(I know that'll fall on deaf ears)

>Another is a
>general misstrust of the scientific and political establishment.  As
>one writer puts it (I don't recall who), the one field of science that
>the environmentalists have chosen to trust implicity is our ablility
>to predict the weather -- for the next one hundred years.

I don't think that anybody really knows what is going to happen over
even the next 10 years.  The biosphere is just too complicated to
come up with a reliable model for it.  But that is why it's so
scary.  We're greatly perturbing a system that we know very little
about.  We cannot afford to adopt a wait-and-see attitude.  At the
rate things are going, NYC will be underwater before everybody agrees
that there might be a problem with global warming.  But this has
little to do with Christianity directly, so I'll shut up.
--
Doug Graham         dgraham@bnr.ca         My opinions are my own.
From: JACK@LSTC2VM.stortek.com (Jack L. Blassingame)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: e: Father-Mother God reference
Date: 11 Apr 92 06:47:37 GMT
Organization: StorageTek SW Engineering

I woulld like to propose one more thought into this discussion: John 17:5
when Jesus is talking to the Father says "And now, Father, glorify me in
your presence with the glory I had with you befor the world began."  This
would be another explantion of the plural term you all are discussing.
 
 
 
Jack L. Blassingame JESUS is LORD!
Software Engineer
StorageTek
 
 
Disclaimer:  All opinons Expressed by Me in any fashion are my alone and
not those of my employer.
From: tjp@athena.mit.edu (Thomas J Piccone)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Fallen angels
Date: 9 Apr 92 08:29:44 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

I thought I might add that the phrase "the devil and his angels" occurs
explicitly in Matthew 25, in the passage about the sheep and goats at
the return of the Son of man and the judgment at that time.

In addition, the passage in Revelation in which the great dragon sweeps
a third of the stars from the heavens with his tail is also interpreted
by some to refer to Satan and the fallen angels.

- tjp

--
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas J. Piccone                                     tjp@eagle.mit.edu
Massachusetts Institute of Technology                 tjp@athena.mit.edu
From: allenmk@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Allen Melinda Kay)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Urbana
Date: 13 Apr 92 06:01:06 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder

I'm curious.  Who on this newsboard was able to attend the Urbana '90
conference?  Some friends and I just had an Urbana followup meeting where we
discussed what we learned there, and enjoyed some good memories of the event.
If any of you went, what, if anything, about the conference continues to be
important to you over a year later?

For those who don't know what I'm talking about, Urbana is a missions
conference which takes place just after Christmas every three years, and is
sponsored primarily by InterVarsity Christian Fellowship.  At Urbana '90, there
were about 20,000, most of them college students, in attendance.  

I know that I had a good time at Urbana, but I don't actually remember much of
it--I was under a great deal of emotional stress on the way home, and the
memory of being miserable on that trip overwhelms most of my memories of the
rest of the week.  But God did teach me a lot just on that miserable bus-trip
home.  

Anyway, if anyone else has some experiences to share, I'd love to hear about
them.

Thanks.

Melinda
-- 
Melinda K. Allen                  The LORD is close to the brokenhearted 
allenmk@ucsu.colorado.edu       and saves those who are crushed in spirit.   
allenmk@tramp.colorado.edu			               Psalm 34:18
From: jhpb@sarto.budd-lake.nj.us (Joseph H. Buehler)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: All the canonized Saints?
Date: 17 Apr 92 02:43:50 GMT
Organization: none

In article <Apr.15.03.44.32.1992.4050@dumas.rutgers.edu> glennd@starconn.com (Glenn Davis) writes:

   I am looking for a list of ALL Saints (about 400 of them) canonized by the
   Roman Catholic Church, including the date of canonization.
   I need a recent list that includes St. Agnes of Bohemia (November 12, 1989). 

The formal canonization process is fairly modern, dating from the late
middle ages or so; in its present form, even later.  Most of the
Saints regarded as such never went through this process; you will look
in vain for formal canonization dates.

There are actually *thousands* of canonized saints.  There are at
least 2000 to 3000 buried in Rome itself, according to a Church
history professor I met there once.  From all the altars I saw, I can
well believe it.

To answer the question, though, it's not clear to me where you can
easily obtain an exhaustive list of all the Saints that have gone
through the formal canonization process.  The Vatican Congregation in
charge of the causes of saints would undoubtedly have the information,
but I doubt they will just put it in the mail to you, just like that.

You're probably going to have to do some research to try and find a
scholarly work on the subject.  If you go this route, you might start
with the Roman martyrology.  It's a liturgical book with all the
saints commemorated on each day.  Works on this book might be a good
place to start.
From: mcr@meaddata.com (Mary Ries)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: the church established by Jesus Christ
Date: 15 Apr 92 08:05:39 GMT
Organization: Mead Data Central, Dayton OH

I am catching up on old articles... I really appreciated this post.
I'm very interested in the salvation question, both in Protestant and
Catholic beliefs.  So many great answers come up in this news group,
its great! I just have one question on this post, towards the end....

[The article he's concerned about is from Bob von Buelow, on the
question of salvation outside the Catholic Church.  Bob had quoted
from comments by G. Baum on De Ecclesia, one of the Vatican II
documents.  
> Further, regarding non-christians, Baum goes on to comment:
> 
> "Among the people who do not acknowledge the Gospel, the grace of God is
> present and touches the hearts of men;  if they strive, under the influence
> of this grace, to be faithful to the truth they see and to live according
> to their moral conscience, then they are indeed on the way to salvation."
--clh]

Please forgive any misunderstandings, but from what I understand (from
other postings), Catholics believe that you can only be saved through
Christ, and if you know of Christ but reject him as your savior, you
cannot be saved.  However, if you've never heard of Christ, you are
judged by your deeds (Rom 2:12-16).

It seems that the people Baum is referring to in that last paragraph
have rejected Christ. What do you think Baum meant by "on the way to
salvation"... do you think he meant they would finally recognize
Christ as their savior, or that they would be come "good enough" to
obtain salvation through their own deeds? (That doesn't seem right to
me if they continue to reject Christ.) Or is there another meaning?
From: hudson@athena.cs.uga.edu (Paul Hudson Jr)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Hypnosis -- summary of information received
Date: 9 Apr 92 08:11:03 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

>  It is primarily a state of opening your mind to the
>hypnotist.  As such it depends critically upon the hypnotist's intent.
>It may still be that no one should have that level of control over
>someone else, but the concept that it is always demonic seems
>far-fetched.  --clh]

If hypnotism opens up the mind to the suggestion of the hypnotist, doesn't
it make sense that the mind would be open to other beings also?  Demons
are more powerful than humans, and probably much more intelligent.  If
one hypnotized is controlled by a human during hypnotism, how much more 
control could a spiritual being exert over him?

Link Hudson.
From: ceb@dbrus.unify.com (Caroline E. Bryan)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Dislike of Christianity
Date: 17 Apr 92 02:14:21 GMT
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organization

In article <Apr.15.04.00.05.1992.4140@dumas.rutgers.edu> MVS104@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>In article <Apr.14.03.18.23.1992.14067@dumas.rutgers.edu>,
>skinner@sp60.csrd.uiuc.edu (Gregg Skinner) says:
>>
>>...  Also, I find their potential to be
>>turned to tools of evil to be great, at least as great as that of
>>historical Christianity (which I will continue to distinguish from
>>true Christianity).
>
>This can pose a problem. Since the religion was started by god himself
>(or so we're told), god wanted it to happen. Since he is omniscient
>(or so we're told), god knew what would become of it--all of the atrocities
>that would be done in the name of god. God allowed it to happen, given
>that he knew the consequences; therefore, he wanted all of the evil
>perpetrated by christians to happen. 

A parent may not want his adult child to make an ass of him/herself, but
aside from remonstrations and examples (which God gives us), the parent
does not have the right to stop his/her adult child from going ahead and
making an ass of him/herself so long as a law of society isn't broken in
the process.  Allowing an adult child to take responsibility for him/herself
is NOT equivalent to wanting that adult child to become a failure, but is
rather allowing that adult child the freedom to be an adult.  A parent who
loves his/her adult child will comfort him/her in times of distress and
failure and rejoice with him/her in times of joy and success.  So, too, does
God offer to comfort us when our plans go awry and rejoice when we succeed
in what we were born to do.  It's a great pity that people whose own parents
were either dictatorial monsters or totally indifferent (and in neither case
loved their children) take that horrible example and apply it to God.


Carrie		ceb@dbrus.unify.com	x6244   ------------------------------+
|   "When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then there will be   |
|   peace."					-- Anon.		      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: ceb@dbrus.unify.com (Caroline E. Bryan)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Sin
Date: 7 Apr 92 03:31:22 GMT
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organization

In article <Apr.3.02.36.15.1992.6128@dartagnan.rutgers.edu> gotzel@triton.unm.edu (Paul Gotzel) writes:
>Could someone please give me a definition of sin?

To refuse to do God's will (sin of omission);
to insist on doing something that is against God's will (sin of commission).


Carrie		ceb@dbrus.unify.com	x6244
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|   "Age and treachery will always conquer youth and skill."  - Anon.        |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+