HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 13:46:57 EST
From:         Dan Harling <harling@ROADRUNNER.PICTEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Mormon/LDS Discussion

> Date: 26 Jan 1993 10:25:00 -0700
> From: SWILBURN@GONZAGA.EDU
> Subject: Mormon/LDS Discussion
> To: Multiple recipients of list CHRISTIA <CHRISTIA@asuvm.inre.asu.edu>
>
> ...I am a Roman Catholic
> and I do not believe in criticizing other religions.  Jesus said, "Love one
> another as I have loved you", and so whether you are Catholic, Mormon, Hindu,
> Islamic, or Protestant, I don't feel that you are more or less of a human
 being
> than I am.  I may or may not agree with some of the things that the Church of
> Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints believes or practices.  I feel that anyone
> who is faithful to their own beliefs is worthy of respect...

I agree with you completely, as far as respect is concerned.  However,
when questions of God and salvation come up, some beliefs are just not
true, no matter how strongly or sincerely they are held.  Either God
has a physical body or He does not; either Mohammed was a prophet of
God or he was not; either Jesus was lying when He said, "No one comes
to the Father but through me," or He wasn't.

The fact that someone is wrong does not make him less worthy of respect
as a human being, and it does not justify denigrating him for his
"stupidity".  Neither does it require others to condone these beliefs
as right "for them".  I mean no disrespect to Mormons or Muslims when I
say that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are co-equal members
of the Trinity, nor will I deny that it has profound implications for
both religions.
____________________________________________________________________________
Daniel A. Harling                        (harling@pictel.com)
PictureTel Corp.             Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of
Peabody, MA  01960                   PictureTel Corp. (so there!)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Via:        UK.AC.LON.SGHMS; 28 JAN 93 13:28:50 GMT
X-Mailer:   ELM [version 2.3 PL8]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 13:31:19 +0000
From:         AE Panagos <sggp999@SGHMS.LON.AC.UK>
Subject:      RE: Revival Centre International

>Hmmm
>    I'm not overly rapt in them either. They (at least the ones I know of in
>Australia - a whole 1 only) subscribe to British Israelism (ie the theory that
>the British are the long lost 12th tribe of Israel). The local church in
>Rockhampton (I worked in the same room as a member of the church in Canberra
>...
>...
>Ken

I also had a little dealing with the Revival Christian Church. We led someone
to the Lord at Univeristy in Brisbane, Australia. I tried to get him into a
church but he was a little stuborn. He came to me after a while and said that
He was going to a Baptist church. Great ! Next he said he was going to another
church, it sounded okay, so I didn't say anything. One day he started to talk
about how if you are not speaking in tongues you are not saved. WHAT !! Well
after a lengthy discussion I really felt there was something wrong about this
church. Well the next 2 months led to discussions every day. He would
come to me with what the pastor told him, he would go back with scriptures
saying different. I asked for all their litterature so I could see what they
were all about. They believed that the British are a tribe of Israel (of
course the church started in the U.K.!). They belived Adam was not the first
man. Lots of other things as well which I can't remember now. But the
statment that they are the only true church was the one that topped it all
(combined of course with the tongues bit).

Well I didn't continue with him because all he wanted to do was argue. But
about 1 year later we had about 10 new people come to church. They were all
from this church, infact one was the minister of one these churches. His
grandfather was the actual founder of the church in Britain. They had left
after God had showed them the error of their doctrine. They tried to change
things but all they got was trouble.

Now I haven't been back to Australia for a few years so I don't know how this
RCI is progressing, maybe Ken knows. I haven't read too many mail on this
topic so maybe I'm repeating things, but if anyone is part of RCI if they
send me some mail I'll try and get the contact details of these ministers
who left.

Andrew Panagos
sggp999@sun1.sghms.lon.ac.uk

"Pick your own nose before you pick someone else's" Me, in a very silly mood
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 16:15:14 MST
From:         Usenet/Netnews Moderator <FOCMCB@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: THE LIST OWNERS' REQEUST TO STOP DISCUSSION ROBERTSON.

----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
>From: crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu (Lauren L. Crawford)
>Subject: Re: THE LIST OWNERS' REQUEST TO STOP DISCUSSING ROBERTSON.
>Organization: University of Pennsylvania
>Date: 21 Jan 93 19:33:53 GMT

In article <CHRISTIA%93012108123815@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU>
 GRAHAM%DRCV06.decnet@DRCVAX.AF.MIL (DRCV06::GRAHAM) writes:

>That being said, I take exception to the request to stop talking about Pat
>Robertson.  I would like to point out that he has set himself up as a
>public figure, not only in Christian circles, but in political ones and
>journalistic ones as well.  To speak well or ill of him is completely
>appropriate and I see no reason why we should not discuss him and his
>organization here.

>I would be the first to say we have no business attacking anyone.  To
>observe negative things about the public figure of Robertson is not an
>attack, it is as much an observation of facts as the "facts" he,
>(Robertson) is touting.  I would not ever think it correct to drcry a
>member of Christia, we are not public figures, but, Mr. Robertson is.


I agree with Dan.  As long as our criticisms of a public figure are based
on fact and not just a matter of venting our spleen -- in other words, if
our purpose is to build up the church rather than tear it down -- I think
it should be perfectly acceptable to do so.  A number of Christian folks feel
that Robertson has done a great deal of good for the church; a probably equal
number of Christians feel he has either not done it any good or has
actually done it harm.  I'm interested in hearing and knowing more about
this influential man.

He exerts an extremely powerful influence (from what I can see) over the
more conservative wing of evangelical Christianity, and I therefore think
it's important for all of us to know more about him.  I don't want to be
spoon-fed only one side.  I'd like to hear *all* the facts, take them to
God, and make up my own mind.

Just my opinion.



--
The trick of reason is to get the imagination to seize the actual world --
if only from time to time.     -- Annie Dillard, "An American Childhood"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lauren Crawford  //  crawford@ben.dev.upenn.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 09:19:49 CST
From:         A16905@ITESO.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Praying in tongues (was Re: centering prayer...)

Russ,

In our experience in the CRHS, the Roman Catholic Charismatic movement,
there can be the 'tongues phenomenon' from all three sources you mention:
There are some inspired by satan, some inspired by ourselves and some
inspired by God, generally, you can fairly easy say what is happening from
the direct consequencies.

Do we *need* the gift ? I don't know. Do we *need* the 'Our Father'? I
think the only thing we need really is Christ sacrifice in the Cross and
His resurrection from the dead. Certianly Christians have this and much
more.

The gift of tongues is some times used by God to give 'word of knowledge'
also. It is basically a comunications gift, used to worship God, to
receive messages from God and for intersesion before Him.
I rarely use the gift privately, then I rarely use it publically, I mean
I use it in communitarian prayer but in a low volume, I can't recall of
ever using it in loud voice but in massive events (15,000+ people congesses)
and in intesesion prayer, so that the person for who we are praying can
listen.

I find very edificant when someone pray in tongues near me, I just feel
the presence of God near. Sorry that in addition to an old lady, my
girlfriend and I no one else in our goup has the gift.

Shalom,
Memo.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 10:03:10 EST
From:         Dan Harling <harling@ROADRUNNER.PICTEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Three Short Notes

> Date: 26 Jan 1993 00:01:51 +0000
> From: "G.J. McCaughan" <gjm11@CUS.CAM.AC.UK>
> Subject: Re: Three Short Notes
> To: Multiple recipients of list CHRISTIA <CHRISTIA@asuvm.inre.asu.edu>
>
> Dan Harling writes that all the 4th Commandment actually says about the
> Sabbath is to keep it holy. I'm puzzled: this is what my Bible says...
>
>    Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. Six days you shall
>    labour and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath
>    to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither
>    you, nor your son or daughter, nor your manservant or maidservant,
>    nor your animals, nor the alien within your gates. For in six
>    days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all
>    that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the
>    LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.
>
> Sounds like forbidding work to me...

The question becomes, what is "work"?  Washing my car?  Mowing the
lawn?  Lighting a stove?  Turning on a light?  Refraining from "work"
is one part to keeping the Sabbath holy, but there is more to the
Sabbath than the lack of work.  I would contend that the Sabbath as the
Day of Rest is the central concept, and the prohibition against "work"
is just one example of many possible.

This is similar to the way in which the Decalogue (Ten Commandments) is
an illustration of the two greatest commandments, according to Jesus:
to "love the Lord with all your heart and with all your soul and with
all your mind," and to "love your neighbor as yourself."  If you do
these things, obedience to the Commandments will follow implicitly.

[neat way to tie the threads together, no?]
____________________________________________________________________________
Daniel A. Harling                        (harling@pictel.com)
PictureTel Corp.             Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of
Peabody, MA  01960                   PictureTel Corp. (so there!)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Orig-To: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 09:53:49 CST
Comments:     Answering received message
From:         THERESA BLACKWELL <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Subject:      Mormons/LDS

 Michelle,
 I can tell you what I know, due to the fact that my Grandparents are
Mormons.  (To those on CHRISTIA who are LDS, please help me out here....)
I do believe that both of my Grandparents are Saved, and it took my
birth and almost my death to get my Grandpa into Church PERIOD!
They believe in the Holy Bible, but they also hold to the teachings of
Joseph Smith and Brigham Young.  The Book of Mormon, which is their
 "companion to the Bible", is supposed to chronicle Jesus walk in
America after his Ressurection????  They (at least the Church my
grandparents attend) Practice "baptism for the dead".  Which means
that someone "stands proxy" for a dead person - actually is Baptized
in place of that person.  I'm not sure where they get THAT (Can someone
help me out here??? I've ACTUALLY WATCHED THIS TAKE PLACE...because I've
been to their Church one time when this "ordinance" was carried out!)
My Grandpa held the office of "Priesthood" for a time, and was allowed
to lay hands on people and pray ...and annoint the sick.  This
(annointing of the sick, laying on of hands...) is Scriptural, but where
in the HOLY BIBLE did anyone stand in for a dead person so that HE could
be Baptized??? I've yet to find that in any translation.
Anyway, I've had my Grandpa do this- Annoint me, when I was sick.  Felt
better too.
Anyway.  I've been in my Grandad's church on Sunday mornings, and observed
Communion with them.  No alcoholic wine, no welch's Grapejuice either, just
sunbeam bread and plain h2o.  They observe communion every Sunday...which
is a good thing.
Every guy who turns 18, or 21...is commissioned as a missionary, and is
sent for 2 years to another part of the world, or of the US, and doesn't
usually return until that mission is complete.  Someone I know did this,
and while he was gone on the mission, got heavily involved in Drugs.
(Don't ask me why...I can't tell you...)
That's about it as far as I know.  Maybe I can ask my Grandmother for
some insight into what goes on in a Mormon church.  I've been to maybe
2 weddings, 2 funerals (My Grandpa's parents...) and 2 services there.
That's all I can remember about being at their Church.
Theresa

 * <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 08:49:33 -0500
From:         John Violette <violette@APXTG03.APEX.DG.COM>
Subject:      Re: Gays in the Military?

This is similar to way back in the 50's(?) when African-Americans were the
issue regarding entrance to the military.  It seem's that the homosexual
community may be using some of the same arguments as were used then.  I think
the main difference is that the Word of God doesn't condemn a person because of
race, but it does condemn them for their sexual preference (Lev 18:22-24, Lev
20:13, Rom 1:26b, and 1Cor 6:9-11).  This is what we should base our rejection
of this matter on.  Unfortunately, because we do so, our point of view may get
rejected.

John <><
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 14:21:07 -0500
From:         "jones, mark" <JMJONES@UGA.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: March for Life, etc.
              28 Jan 1993 14:05:06 -0500 from <YA67@MUSIC.FERRIS.EDU>

Carol and All,
Carol's post reminded me of the situation out in California, I believe,
where a bunch of aborted fetuses have been placed in barrels and placed
out in a field somewhere. A pro-life group went to court to try and get
permission to go and get the dead babies and give them a decent burial.
But, for the court to allow a decent human burial for these little
ones would necessitate recognizing that these little lumps of flesh and
tissue are *HUMAN BEINGS*. Dangerous precedent in a Roe vs. Wade society!

I recently heard one of my favorite evangelists preaching under a tremendous
anointing. He sort of took a detour which had little to do with what he
was talking about. He began to tell about the California barrel babies.
Then he stopped, and looked at the TV camera. He said: One day God Almighty
is going to look out from His throne and say: "Bring me those barrels....
Im going to set these little ones around the throne to sing praises....!

No heavy theology here; even a bit of dramatics. But for me it was one of
those Holy Ghost moments, when time stands still and you hear that inner
witness... it was chilling! It reminds me that there is already a choir
of some 27 million of those little ones in Heaven. Some thoughts....Mark
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 12:16:41 EST
From:         Dan Harling <harling@ROADRUNNER.PICTEL.COM>
Subject:      Re: Prayer Request - Prayer Group

> Date: 27 Jan 1993 12:20:00 +0000 (GMT)
> From: CAROL L <Z_STAFF_CL@SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE.AC.UK>
> Subject: Prayer Request - Prayer Group
> To: Multiple recipients of list CHRISTIA <CHRISTIA@asuvm.inre.asu.edu>
>
> ...For anything to happen in the church life the idea has to go through
> the hoops of the church council to ensure that it fits in with the
> mission of the parish as it sees it. (The priest is of course their
> main guide in this.)...
>
> ...So when we
> heard half a dozen people repeatedly saying they wanted a prayer
> group we thought they were actually say "we need it but can't find
> someone prepared to convene it."... It was an informal set up
> between friends and seemed quite innocent.  Infact when one of the
> group asked if we should ask permission our reaction was "why ask
> permission to pray?" - we saw no reason to...
>
> All seemed fine until last night.  As a matter of courtesy, we rang
> the priest to tell him it was happening so he wasn't caught unawares
> if someone mentioned it later.  His reaction was unexpected.  He
> obviously felt that this was some subversive movement and he spent
> 15 mins on the phone saying groups can't meet without going through
> the church council and if it was going to meet then he would have
> liked to have been there to ensure that it was O.K.  It seemed
> something of an over reaction.  He has now forbidden the group to
> even think about another date after this meeting...

What happened to freedom in Christ?  This is a better example of
following the "teachings of men."  Having one person at the top
insisting on overseeing every aspect of others' lives does not sound
like a very good situation to me.


> ....  Now group meets without a member of the
> team sitting in on them...the moment the conversation
> gets to the point of talking about anything controversial and a member
> of the team steers it back...

Has anyone asked him to explain his motives in overseeing such
activities so invasively?  I can understand a church wanting to avoid
the spread of heresy, but they should be able to detect trouble without
resorting to crowd control and wiretapping.  More involvement on a
*personal* level with members of the church would accomplish the same
thing without the need to meddle.

I'm sorry if I offend, but this sort of Big Brother approach worries me
greatly.
____________________________________________________________________________
Daniel A. Harling                        (harling@pictel.com)
PictureTel Corp.             Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of
Peabody, MA  01960                   PictureTel Corp. (so there!)
From: FACN34B@SAUPM00.BITNET (zane of dhahran)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: a concept of judgment
Date: 26 Jan 93 14:18:08 GMT
Organization: King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals, S.A.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Acknowledge-To: <FACN34B@SAUPM00.BITNET>

Kerry,

Interesting ideas.  I think we may be anguished a bit by an end-time reflection
(replay?) of our sins, but I hope that this anguish will be more than quenched
by the adoration we have upon seeing how God turns even our sins to God's
advantage.  Peace, zane.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 15:08:20 -0500
From:         "jones, mark" <JMJONES@UGA.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Feeling old (was Re: Segregated churches)

Now thats old, Maks (just kidding!)
I was feeling weird when I realized I was out of college and working
when Challenger blew up, but my goodess, I was just a pup when JFK
was shot. This brings me to a point. Has anyone ever done a survey
of Christia subscibers? I think it would be fascinating to kind of
get a profile on everyone. It seems that the list is probably skewed
heavily towards early twenties. Thats ok, it keeps me feeling young
hanging out with all you young folk! I'm at the point where a real
dilemma occurs for me when I lose a gray hair. Now Maks, you may well
be the grandaddy of us all.....I best hush! Some good fun.....Mark
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 16:25:31 -0500
From:         Claude Garner <TQX@CORNELLC.BITNET>
Subject:      Who's Old?

JoEllen and Mike,
   You two are just barely dry behind the ears. I remember being
practically petrified with fear when my 2nd grade teacher announced
to the class that Japan had declared war on the U.S. ( and me with
a soon-to-be twelve year old daughter). Age is really only a frame
of mind :-). I don't expect to be a grandpa for a few years yet. My
son is only twenty and still in college, but then who knows. I don't
even have gray hair yet. My daughter keeps me so busy I haven't had
time.
                                             In Christ,
                                             Claude Garner
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Organization: Virginia Department of Health
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 21:02:20 -0500
From:         "Michael A. Kline" <MKLINE@VDH.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: CHRISTIA charter <was Re: Just what do we want?>
              25 Jan 1993 13:08:45 -0600 from <rolfe@DSUVAX.DSU.EDU>

On Mon, 25 Jan 1993 13:08:45 -0600 Tim Rolfe said:
>Is the charter of this listserver shifting from practical Christian living
>over to Clinton-administration-bashing?  I will grant that the American
>politics and abortion is fair game here, but American fiscal policy?
>--
I'm sorry, but for those of us who live from paycheck to paycheck, when
someone decides to put their hands into our pockets and take our money,
it causes concern. (Didn't we just talk about self defense?)

As we mature, I'm sure any notice of increasing taxes, corruption, etc,
will be of little concern to us. Reminds me of the "PBPWMGINFWMY" or
"Please be patient with me. God is not finished with me yet."

Your brother,
Maks
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 09:01:00 -0600
From:         jim coen <coen@ACC.WUACC.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Countries Turning to God

Scott Weberg writes
(stuff deleted)
>-------------------------------------------------- What percentage of
>new movies are rated PG??  (IMO any movie that's rated above PG has
>SOMETHING non-Christian in it; violence, sex, foul language, etc.
>I'm not saying here that we should NEVER see a PG-13 or R movie --
>I'm just making a point about the *content* of today's movies.)
>Again, I would say that 10% is a high estimate for PG movies, and I
>think OVER 50% of new movies are rated 'R'.

Here is something that doesn't make sense. Of the very highest grossing films
of all time, none are "R" rated. In a market-driven industry such as the
entertainment industry, this just doesn't make sense. If the money is made
with films like the "Star Wars" trilogy, "ET", the Indiana Jones trilogy,
etc., WHY does Hollywood continue to pump out one "R" rated film after another?
My guess is that there is a *power* behind this industry with an agenda to
"kill, steal and destroy".

Jim Coen
coen@acc.wuacc.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU