HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nathans@coos.dartmouth.edu (Nathan Shafer)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: End times near?
Date: 8 Apr 92 08:32:24 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

In article <Apr.6.22.46.52.1992.12941@dartagnan.rutgers.edu> robp@landru.network.com writes:
>In article 6069@dartagnan.rutgers.edu, bresson@cbnewse.att.com () writes:
>>
>- The Bible references occur in the last chapters of Daniel, where Daniel 
>
>(deleted)
>
>Daniel lived around
>(going from memory now, could be off) 700-600 B.C., and the prophecy
>about the four "beasts" (kingdoms) was about the period around 350 B.C., not
>today.  In other words, that prophecy already came about.  I don't have
>my NRSV in front of me, so I won't quote you verse, but do please read
>the aforementioned NRSV annotations.

    Actually, while there was somebody named Daniel who lived around
700-600 BC, the author of the book of Daniel probably lived around the
time of Antiochus IV of the Seleucid Empire. It was common practice in
the literature of antiquity to assume as a pseudonym the name of a famous
statesman, prophet, whatever, who had lived long ago. This was especially
true of politically sensitive material, since the author would hardly
wish be known and thus be open to arrest and persecution.

   Why do scholars believe this? Well, the prophetic events in the last
chapters of Daniel seem to focus especially on rise of the Ptolemies and
the Seleucids out of Alexander's Empire, and culminate in the atrocities
of the reign of Atiochus IV, Antiochus Epiphanes. The events do in fact
match up quite accurately to what is known historically about this period;
for more detail I refer you to H. Jagersma's book _A History of Israel
from Alexander the Great to Bar Kochba_. The events match quite well - but
only to a point. Up until 11:40 events and dates match up quite well;
however, as of verse 40, the author seems to be talking about the king
of Egypt coming against Antiochus, and failing. This is not reconsilable
with any known events. Thus, the author of Daniel can be dated to have
lived during the reign of Antiochus, shortly before the revolt of the
Maccabees.

Nathan Shafer
Dartmouth College, NH
From: vxv4@po.cwru.edu (Virgilio Velasco)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: End times near?
Date: 11 Apr 92 03:21:13 GMT
Reply-To: vxv4@po.cwru.edu (Virgilio Velasco)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)

In a previous article, bresson@cbnewse.att.com () says:

>The argument that others have been wrong before doesn't mean that we can't heed
>the signs of our times. I am not advocating that we all go off and sit on
>the top of Mount Olives in anticipation of His return - what I am drawing 
>people's attention to is some of the things that are refered to in
>Scripture and encouraging people to WATCH and pray. 

	Excellent!  I agree.  On one hand, we should avoid assuming that
Christ will come very, very soon (for instance, within the next couple
of years).  Some carry this principle too far, though.  They say that we
can always be wrong about when He'll come, so it is best not to think
about it at all.  This is in flagrant disobedience to Jesus' injunction
to watch for the signs of His return.

	We can not be certain when He'll come, but we can get a pretty
good idea by watching the signs.  In doing so, let us hope that these
signs inspire us to greater heights of holiness and obedience.
 

-- 
Virgilio "Dean" Velasco Jr., grad student & roboticist-in-training, CWRU

  THOUGHT FOR THE DAY: A closed  | "Only Nixon could visit      | Hi, Mom!
       mouth gathers no foot.    | China." - old Vulcan proverb |
From: ee01th@ee.surrey.ac.uk (Piglet)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: 2 Cor 6
Date: 14 Apr 92 07:01:36 GMT
Reply-To: Piglet <ee01th@ee.surrey.ac.uk>
Organization: University of Surrey, Guildford, England

My feeling on the issue that Paul raises in 2Cor6 is that not only should we not
_marry_ non-christians, but we should not go out with (date) them either.
My reason for saying this is that I believe that if you are going out with 
someone, then the _natural_ course for that relationship should be marriage.  
Don't get me wrong... I'm not saying that we have to marry the first person we
go out with, nor am I saying that any relationship that does not end in 
marriage is wrong.  On the contrary, much can be learned from past 
relationships.  However, if we truly believe that a particular relationship 
could not end in marriage because they are not a Christian, then we should
seriously examine our motives for continuing (or starting) that relationship.

Also, because Christ should be the head of such a special relationship, that 
gives no problem between two Christians.  But with a Christian and a 
non-Christian, there is almost constant vying for headship.  I know, I've been
there.....
--
email: ee01th@ee.surrey.ac.uk
From: SEANNA@bnr.ca (S.M.)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: re: Jesus returns in 1996?
Date: 17 Apr 92 02:48:44 GMT

jkohnen@comix.cs.uoregon.edu (John Hamilton Kohnen) writes:
>1. The World was created in a seven day period comprised of six
>days in which God worked and one (the Lord's day) on which he
>rested.
>
>2. A cycle of seven (the creation week) signifies a cycle taken
>to completion.
>
>3. Adam was created in 4004 B.C.
>
>4. A day is as a thousand years and a thousand years is as a day.
>
>5. The 2nd coming of Jesus begins a 1000 year (the millennium)
>reign of God's way on Earth before the final end of the World.
>
>
>BC 4004         Adam's creation; begin symbolic day 1
>
>  +6000         Days 1-6; 6000 years of human toil on Earth
>   ----
>AD 1996         THE 2nd COMING; begin day 7 or Lord's day,
>
>  +1000         The Millennium or 1000 years of God's
>                rule until completion of seven stage cycle.
>   ____
>   2996         7000 years; End of the World.
>
>Jesus returns in 1996. Incidentally, some believe that Jesus was
>born in 4 B.C., that early date, instead of the obvious 0, being
>attributed to later calendar error. That would put him exactly 4000

Gee, this sounds like fun, can I play too?  There was no year 0,
so 6000 years from 4004 BC is 1997, not 1996.  But the modern state
of Israel was created in 1948, and 1997 is 49 years (7 times 7)
after that, and so 1997 makes a much better year than 1996.  And
then, 1998 is 50 years after Israel's creation, so it would be
the Levitical Jubilee year, the Sabbath of Sabbaths...a perfect
way to start the millenium.

Seriously though, even Jesus said he did not know the day or hour
of his return.  I don't recall any suggestion that we were
supposed to try to figure it out, just that we should always watch,
always wait, and always be ready.  I suspect we will notice when
He comes.

Also, I think that if we are preoccupied with the end-times of the
world, we might tend to forget that each one of us is always perilously
close to the end-times of his/her own earthly life.  I might have a
fatal heart attack within the next hour; a meteor might hit my building;
the supplies of IC fabrication chemicals stored near here might explode;
I might get hit by a car on the way to the parking lot. How should I be
getting ready for Jesus' coming any more than I should be ready for my
own death?

Seanna Watson   Bell-Northern Research,
                Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Opinions, what opinions?  Oh *these* opinions. | It's hard to seize the
No, they're not BNR's, they're mine.           | day when you must first
I knew I'd left them somewhere.                | grapple with the morning.
From: rlwinter@taco.ucdavis.edu (Richard Lee Winterstein)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: REQUEST: Greek alphabet font
Date: 17 Apr 92 02:50:30 GMT
Organization: College of Engineering - University of California - Davis

As some may recall, I posted a request for information on Greek fonts available
for the Macintosh.  I have received a number of (e-mail) responses from others
similarly interested so I will now present a summary of what I have learned.

There do not appear to be any shareware Greek fonts at this time, at least
none which are enjoying a healthy circulation.  Purchasing a commercial
package appears to be the way to go, unless someone is willing to convert
a bit-map font (there are some in the archives, sorry I don't remember where).

The commercial options I have learned about are:

1)  Purchase an electronic Greek Bible.  Zondervan Electronic Publishing
offers one (macBible, Greek version, see p.87 of recent MacWherehouse catalog)
and according to one person who responded to me, their font, Alexandria, is
very nice.  However, as he noted, whether or not one can actually use one of
these fonts depends upon whether the font itself is in the public domain.
Note that the "Alexandria" available in some archives is NOT the same thing,
it looks like a PS conversion of the old Athens bit-map font.

2) Linguists Software produces two appropriate products:

  MacGreek (for ImageWriter) $79.95 *
  LaserGreek (Type 1 & 3)    $99.95

You can contact them at:

  Linguist's Software
  P.O. Box 580
  Edmonds, WA  98020-0580

  Phone: (206) 775-1130
    FAX: (206) 771-5911

3) Scholar's Press Software offers something called Greek Keys.  I spoke
with them over the phone and a representative said that the package includes
both TT and PS formats.  She also claimed the package includes a program which
redefines the keyboard into something more "natural" for typing ancient Greek.
She will be sending me some literature on the product which I will summarize
to the net when I receive it.  She quoted the price as $50.00

To contact them:

  Scholar's Press Software
  P.O. Box 15399
  Atlanta, GA  30333-0399

  Phone: (404) 636-4757


Thanks to all who responded.  What I have posted is everything I now know, so
if you have any more questions, please contact the manufacturers, not me.

Rick

* (yes, these are all U.S. prices)

P.S.:  Another poster on this group mentioned Linguist's Software, you can
find his article again by typing  ?greek?r (enter)

P.P.S.: A joyful Easter to you all!
From: judy@locus.com (Judy Leedom Tyrer)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Self-love, self-esteem, and "saving the earth" as heresies
Date: 10 Apr 92 03:38:04 GMT
Organization: Locus Computing Corporation, Los Angeles, California

In article <Apr.9.04.09.42.1992.16946@dartagnan.rutgers.edu> smayo@wang.com (Scott Mayo) writes:
>
>>The heresy hunters didn't like this sort of talk back then either.  If
>>your impulse when you see someone manifesting their privilege as a
>>child of God is "crucify him!", I think you need to take a look at
>>this attitude and ask why. You might find it is just this attitude
>>which is blocking your progress.
>
>For some reason "blocking your progress" rings in my ears as a Newage
>buzzword. I'm not making progress, in that sense, at all. I'm being
>redeemed by my saviour, and doing my best not to make the process more
>difficult than it has to be. 


Interesting.  Do you believe that redemption is black and white?  
Yesterday I was not redeemed, today I am?  

I find that on my spiritual journey there is definitely progress.  I find that 
the closer I come to Jesus, the more he demands of me.  The more I live up to 
his demands, the closer I get the more he demands - loop forever.  What I
do NOT find is that I can say, "Jesus, you're my personal savior" and sit back
and relax.  

Since you are doing your best not to make the process more difficult than it
has to be, I am guessing that you also consider redemption an ongoing
process.  Aren't you progressing through this process?  Or is Jesus doing
ALL the work.  


-- 
"This is just a test.  Had this been a real life, you would have been given
further instructions on where to go and what to do."
							Judy Leedom Tyrer
From: scollins@lookout (Steven Collins)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Christian Poverty
Date: 15 Apr 92 08:22:00 GMT
Organization: U S WEST Advanced Technologies

[Jayne Kulikauskas wrote in a posting something that seemed to imply
an identification of simplicity and poverty.

Paul Hudson argued that they are not necesarily the same -- poverty
can draw attention to oneself, and because a cause of pride.
>I don't think
>all Chritians should always live in poverty, but I do think we need to 
>fast and pray from time to time, when we start to become over-indulgent,
>for example after Christmas if we have stuff ourselves full of chocolate
>and eaten a lot, it may be a good idea to fast and pray to put things into
>perspective.  Paul recommended a fast for married couples not only from
>food when they became to controlled by their fleshly desires.
--clh]

 Your comments are good about whether we have or have not, we are
to be content since are hope is in Christ and not the things of this
world, but the comment you made ->

>fast and pray from time to time, when we start to become over-indulgent,
>for example after Christmas if we have stuff ourselves full of chocolate
>and eaten a lot, 

We all know that no person who's god is there belly will enter in
the kingdom of GOD, per the Scriptures. What is this but giving way
to the flesh.  For those who have their mind set on the flesh
are at emnity with GOD.
  
Do professing christians do this? 

Paul says,  The kingdom of GOD is not food and drink, but love and peace
in the Holy Spirit.  Is not the Holy Spirit grieved when something like
this is done?  I'm afraid the table is a stumbling block and a snare for many
professing christians.

-Steve



-- 
scollins@lookout.uswest.com
From: fuhry@think.com (Debbie Fuhry)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Realignment (was Re: Billy Graham carrying message from the Pope)
Date: 15 Apr 92 07:54:03 GMT
Organization: Thinking Machines Corporation, Cambridge MA, USA

I'd like to respond to the discussion of whether Christians of
conservative/liberal convictions will cross traditional denominational
lines to align with those of similar convictions.  Although I've never
really thought about the idea before, I have actually experienced it's
reality.  As he original poster mentioned, in pro-life and pro-family work,
Catholics and Protestants of all denominations labor side by side, in
remarkable unity and love.

I've been at several Operation Rescue rallies, where the leadership of the
event is both Catholic and Protestant, and as an example, a Protestant
might speak, and express appreciation to Catholics for being such an
inspiration and the backbone of the movement.  The response is always
enthusiastic applause from the Protestants, directed towards their Catholic
brothers and sisters.  Then, one of the Catholic leaders might get up and
say how glad they are to have Protestants working with them, followed by
more applause by Catholics for Protestants.  It's actually a very moving
experience.

Do we agree doctrinally on everything?  No, of course not.  Do we believe
in the Lordship, atoning death and resurrection of Christ, and the rest of
the material in the Nicene creed, for example?  Yes, and in this is the
basis of your unity.

The differences are handled in love.  When there are services before
rescues, the Catholics have mass in one room, and the Protestants have a
prayer time in another room.  In the last day, God will reveal his Truth,
and each of us will have errors to acknowledge.

Let me stress that I don't think the differences in doctrine, either
between Catholics and Protestants, or between differing denominations are
unimportant.  I simply don't think that they are as important as Jesus'
prayer that we "be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you
sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me."

As someone else said on another thread here recently, there are both true
Christians and mere hangers-on in each denomination.  It's up to God to
judge between us, but if we find a sincere brother who loves the Lord and
strives in all integrity to serve and obey Him, we shouldn't turn him away.
We don't have to go to the same church, since we may have differing beliefs
and preferences in things like worship style, however....  No such thing as
cookie-cutter christians, ya know!

Fight the good fight, and stand firm in the faith!

Debbie Fuhry

.sigless... :)
From: tlc20700@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Thomas L. Carney)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Jesus returns in 1996?
Date: 17 Apr 92 02:17:00 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

jkohnen@comix.cs.uoregon.edu (John Hamilton Kohnen) writes:

>   2996		7000 years; End of the World.

>Jesus returns in 1996. Incidentally, some believe that Jesus was
>born in 4 B.C., that early date, instead of the obvious 0, being
>attributed to later calendar error. That would put him exactly 4000

Uh-huh.  Yeah.  Right.  Our LORD said, "As to the exact day or hour, no
one knows it, neither the angels in heaven nor even the Son, but only
the Father.  Stay awake!  Be constantly on the watch!

You do not know when the appointed time will come."
^^^ ^^ ^^^ ^^^^

Mark 14:32-33

It could be TODAY.

Tom
From: mmarkish@feds46.prime.com (Mark Markish x2799)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Orthodox Newsgroup
Date: 15 Apr 92 08:30:46 GMT

Subscribe to the     ORTHODOX   on  LISTSERV@indycms.iupui.edu :

Send a message to LISTSERV@indycms.iupui.edu ,
having as the first line the following:

SUB ORTHODOX <your full name>

Best wishes, -- Mark
From: zaft@caritas.cotdazr.org (Gordon C. Zaft)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Lenten thoughts
Date: 9 Apr 92 08:08:57 GMT
Organization: Argus Consulting, Oxnard, CA


	[These are the lyrics to a song we're singing for Good Friday,
I think.  I thought it might be a good reflection for you all.... hope
you like it.]

			Faithful Cross

Faithful cross, above all other,
One and only noble tree;
None in foliage, none in blossom,
None in fruit thy peer may be;
Sweet the wood, and sweet the iron,
And thy load, most sweet is He.

Bend, O lofty tree, thy branches,
Thy too rigid sinews bend;
And awhile the stubborn hardness,
Which thy birth bestowed, suspend;
And the limbs of Heav'n's high monarch
Gently on thy arms extend.

Thou alone wast counted worthy
This world's ransom to sustain,
That a shipwrecked race forever
Might a port of refuge gain,
With the sacred blood anointed
Of the Lamb for sinners slain.

				-- Venantius Fortunatus (530-609)
				   tr. John Mason Neale (1818-1866)

-- 
* Gordon Zaft     Argus Consulting    727 W. 5th St.  Oxnard, CA  93030-6955
* zaft@caritas.cotdazr.org | zaft@caritas.UUCP | suned1!gcpacix!caritas!zaft
       I'm a .signature virus!  Join the fun and copy me into yours!
                 Semper fidelis Christi et Vicarii sui.
From: MVS104@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: dealin w/atheist
Date: 15 Apr 92 08:34:34 GMT
Organization: HAM - Hackers Against MUDs

In article <Apr.14.03.49.23.1992.14245@dumas.rutgers.edu>, ceb@dbrus.unify.com
(Caroline E. Bryan) says:
>
>I'm one heartbeat, one breath away from death and perfect understanding.  Why
>do you think that the closer I get to God the less I should believe in Him?
>Wouldn't it be more logical to believe in Him *more* as I get closer to Him?

I suppose it would be probable that as someone gets older, and the threat
of death looms ever closer, one would want to believe in god to get eternal
life...Nothing logical about it, but I guess it's likely. As for "getting
closer," I don't see it. You're always close to death, it only becomes more
probable. You're not getting any closer to death until you die.

>
>...you don't al-
>low for the possibility that God, being omnipotent, can allow us mere, imper-
>fect, beloved children of His to perceive Him.  Do you think that He in His
>perfection is unable to do this?

Let's keep this claim in mind for what is said later.
Oh, by the way, personal experience is absolutely useless to someone else.
That's why it's called "personal." So before we have to endure yet another
personal revelation, remember that it's pointless.

>
>Any image of God is by definition inaccurate, because it is an image and not
>Himself.  But that includes your image of Him, not only what you think are
>the images religions promote or the images that religions actually promote.

One would think, from what was said earlier, that it would be possible for
Mr. Omnipotence to make the "image" correct. Well, if you say he can't,
then we might as well reduce his power down some from all-powerful. Also,
anyone who "finds god," so to speak, has only an image--and it is therefore
inaccurate, by your reckoning.

>
>Carrie          ceb@dbrus.unify.com     x6244
>|   "There is no smaller package than a man wrapped up in himself" -- Anon.

Martin Schulte
    "The ultimate test of god's omnipotence would be for him to still affect
     us without having to exist." --maybe it's original, maybe it's not.
From: HSUSA00@ricevm1.rice.edu (Susarla, H. Krishna)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Dislike of Christianity
Date: 13 Apr 92 05:15:00 GMT
Organization: Rice University, Houston, TX


      I have a question for any Christian who thinks he or she can answer it:

What is the Christian/Biblical position on other nonChristian religions?

[I trust it will come as no shock to you to know that there are
several positions.  I think essentially all Christians believe that
salvation comes only through Christ.  However there are a substantial
number of Christians who believe that there are cases in which Christ
can speak in someone's heart without their explicitly knowing that it
is Christ.  The most commonly agreed example is people living in
places where the Gospel has not been presented.  The Catholic term for
such people as "anonymous Christian".  The first few chapters of
Romans talk about Gentiles, for whom the Law is written in their
hearts even though they are outside Israel.  While this does not
explicitly answer the question, because it's dealing with the
distinction of Jew vs. Gentile rather than Christian vs.
non-Christian, it seems to suggest that Paul accepts the idea of God
working in someone's heart.  However there are certainly plenty of
people who believe you can be saved only by explicitly accepting
Christ as Lord and Savior.  I don't have a very good idea how commonly
held the various views are.  I should note that accepting that non-
Christians can be saved does not necessarily mean you think it's very
common.

Despite the fact that this is commonly discussed, I still don't have a
good FAQ to give people who ask this.  I'll try to collect information
this time.

--clh]