HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
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 08:18:00 CDT
From:         BKCOBB@LIFE.UAMS.EDU
Subject:      Re: Second Parousia

Dear Jesse;

>Cataclysmic language in apocalyptic scenarios IS normally used in LITERAL
>terms. The function of it is to describe somethingusing overstatement.

Thats just another way of saying that it is used figuratively, so it
seems to me we're back to square one.  There is no ground for taking it
figuartively except that it argues against the preterist viewpoint
when taken literally.

Brian
From: gjm11@cus.cam.ac.uk (G.J. McCaughan)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re: Tradition (was Re: Second parousia in the past?)
Date: 11 Sep 92 00:14:42 GMT
Organization: U of Cambridge, England

In article <1992Sep10.135830.20076@doug.cae.wisc.edu>, nabil@cae.wisc.edu (Nabil Ayoub) writes:

> Here is another verse that supports the authenticity of Tradition :
> 
>    Acts 20:35    "I have shown you in every way, by laboring like this, that
>    you must support the weak. And remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that
>                               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>    He said, 'It is more blessed to give than to receive.' "
>    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> To put things in context, St. Paul is speaking to the elders of the church
> of Ephesus. The underlined part of the verse is quoted by St. Paul. To the
> amazement of the anti-Tration folks, this proves that it is authentic since
> this quote cannot be found anywhere in any of the four gospels. Morover, St.
> Paul did not hear it firsthand, but it was probably passed to him by another
> disciple. This is Tradition, pure, plain and simple! Scripture is an essential
> part of Tradition, but it is not the whole thing. So in terms of set theory,
> Scripture is a subset of Tradition.

I don't think you chose a very good verse to support your claim. Surely there
is a difference between "Fred told me that Jim told him that he heard Jesus
say such-and-such" and "The Church says that so-and-so is true".

If, when the Church says that (for instance) Mary was a virgin all her life,
and says that this is declared to be true by Tradition, does it mean that there
is reason to believe that Jesus ever said that? Of course not.

In fact I'm not sure I follow your argument at all. It seems to be
  1. Paul, on one occasion, quoted words of Jesus that aren't in the Gospels.
  2. This is an example of "tradition".
  3. Therefore, everything that the Catholic Church calls tradition is
     authentic.

Eh?

Incidentally I am not an advocate of "sola scriptura", at least not in any
strong form. But I'm even less keen on the notion that some arbitrary choice
of "tradition" is infallible...

-- 
Gareth McCaughan     Dept. of Pure Mathematics & Mathematical Statistics,
gjm11@cus.cam.ac.uk  Cambridge University, England.    [Research student]
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 11:49:10 EDT
From:         carol nemec <YA67@FERRIS.BITNET>
Subject:      Spiritual Gifts - part 2

continuing from Enlightened with His Gifts...

Spiritual gifts are divided into 4 areas:
I special
  1.  Apostle
  2.  Prophecy
  3.  Evangelist
  4.  Pastor-teacher
  5.  Teacher

II Speaking
   1.  Exortation
   2.  Wisdom
   3.  Knowledge

III Serving
   1. Serving
   2. Helps
   3.  Leadership
   4.  Administration
   5.  Giving
   6.  Mercy
   7.  Discernment
   8.  Faith
   9.  Hospitality

IV  Sign
   1.  Tongues
   2. Interpret
   3.  Miracles
   4.  Healing


Definitions

I Special
  1.  Apostle - the special attribute given by the Holy Spirit to
certain members of the body of Christ (church) to assume and exercise
general leadership over a number of churches with an extraordinary
desire to proclaim to others the message and meaning of the Gospel
which is spontaneously recognized and appreciated by those churches.

 2.  Prophet, Prophecy - The special attribute given by the Holy Spirit
to certain members of the body of Christ (church) to interpret
scripture (revelation) correctly and to apply its message of Law and
Gospel to the needs of man in a given situation in a public setting.

to be continued...
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 08:14:19 CDT
From:         Tom Brewer <NOTTMB@LSUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Hal Camping prediction of Return of Christ

Hello John:

As one who might be considered a "reformed calvinist" (those two are nearly
synonymous, but anyhow...), I wouldn't put much stock in any one predicting
a date of Christ's return. We've seen this spirit of adultery in the past and
it has always produced a poor testimony to the world. I say adultery because
the most recent example I remember is the group in Tennessee that followed
some deceiver's predicted date and began running up bills on their VISAs,
MASTERCARDs, etc. They thought they wouldn't have to worry about paying off
the bills. They went on a one-last-time vanity-fair spiritual prostitution
of themselves with the world. Yes, I know this sounds argumentum ad hominem,
but I think Christ Himself has already told us we need not bother trying to
predict the date of His final parousia/return.

Tom Brewer
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 23:55:38 EDT
Comments:     Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2X
From:         Angela Zimmerman <AMZIMM01@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU>
Subject:      Drugs

Item Retrieval Assistant, DADS
Phone: 588-6757


> I have never sold drugs, but I don't think it is as easy as you make it
> sound. Is it really easy to buy drugs from someone and not know if they
> are going to kill you or think that you are a narc. Or is it easy to
> sell those drugs to someone and they don't get the right kind of high &
> they come gunning for you. Is it easy money when you get caught and
> have a prison record or shot in the back tring to escape and so on?

This is going to be offensive to any drug dealers, but anyone stupid enough
to sell drugs isn't going to be thinking about things like that.  When people
sell things like that, they're too busy thinking about the fast cash and how
to get more to think about the dangers.  Also, once someone gets a supplier,
chances are they aren't going to get killed, unless they forget to pay for
some of the "goods".  The supplier is making money on this too, remember.
As for the druggie killing because of a bad trip, it's highly unlikely.  The
dealer is almost always the one in control.  Finally, the prison record...
most criminals don't think they'll get caught, so this doesn't even enter
their mind.

> Self-righteousness is right, I think you took a bigger dose than the
> kid. God bless her and every other young person who cares enough to
> question people who are hurting and killing our Children.
> From A Mother of Four,

It always amazes me how quick people on a Christian list are to judge others.
I still don't think it took much courage to ask the girl if she had any
morals.  That sort of question is more often than not motivated by a sense
of self-importance and is often posed in a condescending manner.   There
are exceptions, of course, but I sincerely doubt that this is one of them.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Orig-To: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sat, 12 Sep 1992 14:13:41 CDT
Comments:     Answering received message
From:         THERESA BLACKWELL <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Subject:      ok, ok, ok....

 uh... geez....
 LEMME JUST SAY IT THIS WAY:
 "FOR BY GRACE ARE YOU SAVED THROUGH FAITH, and not of works,
 lest any man (or woman) should boast"..."it is the GIFT OF GOD
 ....."
 Ok... so I don't have my Bible with me right now.
 But that's somethin' close to Ephesians 2:8-10...
 I accept the fact that the Catholic Church holds Confession as
 a Sacred part of worship.
 Fine.
 But, lemme say this:
 I have Catholic friends who told me once, "If I need to ask forgiveness
 for my sins, I can just ask God when I pray...."
 For this reason, they don't go to Confession.
 THIS DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY ARE NOT CHRISTIANS.
 ------
 As a Protestant Christian, I hold the same belief that although
 some of my Catholic friends do attend Confession, I just tell them,
 "hey, look, gang... it's ok, you can go ahead... I'll just pray
 right here, and keep me in yours also... "
 This is common practice between me and some of my friends.
 These folks accept that I'm Southern Baptist, and they accept
 that I'm a Christian... even if I don't go to confesson.
 oops... (confession)
 -------
 I think that as long as you're gonna ask for forgiveness, why
 not just go to the source!!!!
 JESUS!
 (simple as that!)
 "G"

 * <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
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"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 22:36:00 CDT
From:         BKCOBB@LIFE.UAMS.EDU
Subject:      second parousia

>By its inherent design, escatalogical Scripture references do not and cannot
>have double meaning.
>Double meaning exists only in Scripture when such a case is EXPLICITLY stated.
>Otherwise, it does not exist, for we do not communicate thusly, and neither
>does the Lord to us, on our terms.

It seems to me that this is a pretty good argument against preterism as well.

If we should expect the Lord to communicate with us as we communicate, then
we should take language describing events literally, because the literal
interpretation of language describing events is the most natural
interpretation.

Therefore, we should interpret language describing events in Scripture
as literal unless explicitly stated otherwise.  This extends to language
in prophetic discourse which describes events.

Brian
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 13:44:00 CDT
From:         BKCOBB@LIFE.UAMS.EDU
Subject:      Re: The unelectable elect.

>You are a rascal.  Good play on my words.  Of course, I think that the
>Elect are not to be candidates for election, in the human sense.  Funny how
>God's election contains only one vote, His.  If God votes for you, nobody
>can vote against you.
>Even you can't vote against you, isn't that neat?
>

No, it really isn't.  If God abitrarily chooses who will be saved then
he just as arbitrarily chooses who will be lost.  The Bible says that
God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come
to repentance.  I submit that God willing that none should perish
and God arbitrarily choosing who will perish and who will not by
a sovereign act of election are contradictory ideas.


Brian
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu (Dr Nancy's Sweetie)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Governmental Theology
Date: 7 Sep 92 20:21:03 GMT
Organization: Rowan College of New Jersey, or So I'm Told


[ Note: I don't like `under God' in the Pledge of Allegiance because it goofs
  up the flow of the text; as originally written, the Pledge did not include a
  reference to God.  Of course, I don't say the Pledge anyway, so I'm not too
  uptight about how it goes. 8-) ]

Kurt Ludwick writes:

> If for no other reason, the fact that the vast majority of Americans believe
> in God should be reason enough for the US government to officialy recognize
> God, and do its best to respect His wishes.  "In God we trust" should remain
> on our money, "under God" should remain in the pledge, and humanism should
> not rule in our schools.

I do not believe it is the business of civil government to make religious
claims.  Civil governments exist to maintain public order, not to appoint
committees for the purpose of establishing an Official Theology.

It seems to me that if the government has the authority to put pro-theism
sound bites on coins, then it also has the authority to put anti-theism
slogans.  Do you accept that when most people are atheists, the government can
put "There Is No God"?


I personally think that Christians should spend a lot less time worrying about
what slogans are on our money or whether public schools require a Pledge to a
bit of cloth.  Those with children should use that time and effort making sure
that, whatever the Government may say, their kids have thorough teaching in
Christian history and belief -- neglecting this duty while saying "somebody
else, preferably the public schools, should do it for me" just won't do.


IGWT was first put on currency by Salmon P Chase, and it was made mandatory in
the 1950s (`under God' was added to the Pledge during the same period).  So
far as I am able to make out, at least some people thought that atheistic
Communists wouldn't use bills (or say Pledges) with theistic comments on them,
and then we'd be able to spot Communist spies.  As a result, not only do the
theists who put the message there look like they are trying to win by money
arguments they cannot win by reason, but they also look like they're too
stupid to know that a REAL Commie Spy would be a consistent churchgoer who
never fails to tithe, always says the Pledge, and writes letters to the Editor
denouncing Karl Marx.


Darren F Provine / kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu
"Romana; you can't be a successful crook with a _dishonest_ face, can you?"
                                          -- The Doctor, "The Ribos Operation"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
X-Orig-To: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 21:03:30 CDT
Comments:     Answering received message
From:         THERESA BLACKWELL <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Subject:      James....

 Whew!!! Man am I glad you didn't send that post!!!
 ;)
 "G"/Theresa

 * <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Orig-To: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 07:53:51 CDT
Comments:     Answering received message
From:         THERESA BLACKWELL <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Subject:      OZZY???

 huh????? you've gotta be kidding... ;)
 This is great!  I always remember accounts of Ozzy biting off
 bats' heads and etc. at concert shows (my friends went... i didn't!
 ... )
 "G"

 * <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
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"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 13:19:00 CDT
From:         BKCOBB@LIFE.UAMS.EDU
Subject:      Re: Tradition

>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.

I'm curious.  Are we talking about an oral tradtion here?

Brian
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:33:24 CDT
Reply-To:     bradk%isdgsm@rtsg.mot.com
From:         Brad Kaiser <bradk%isdgsm@RTSG.MOT.COM>
Subject:      John 6

Tom Brewer wrote earlier:

>Bro Mark:
>
>If you understood and believed my "view" as you call it, you would know
>I don't have to try to "prove" it. That it is taught by our Lord is good
>enough for me. The burden of "proof" is on those who say that Jesus did
>not teach the doctrines recorded in John 6.
>
>Tom

Wow!  I sure do agree with that.  Here's some of my favorite verses
from John 6 (Jesus talking, now):

  I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this
  bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh
  for the life of the world.
          -- Jn 6:51

  Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat of the flesh of the Son of
  Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.  Whoever
  eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise
  him up on the last day.  For my flesh is true food, and my blood is
  true drink.  Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me
  and I in him.
          -- Jn 6:53-55

Now a lot of folks dismiss this as mere metaphor.  Jesus didn't!  He
said:

  These words I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
          -- Jn 6:63b

And quite a few disciples walked away because of this teaching; we
read:

  As a result of this, many disciples ... no longer accompanied Him.
          -- Jn 6:66

Jesus *still* wouldn't call it a metaphor.  He asked the Apostles:

  Do you also want to leave?
          -- Jn 6:67b

And Simon Peter replied for them, and us, when he said:

  Master, to whom shall we go?  You have the words of eternal life.
          -- Jn 6:68

Which is why I and other Catholic, Old Catholic, Orthodox, and other
apostolic Christians know precisely Whom we receive when we take Holy
Communion -- and what a wondrous blessing that Sacrament is.

In Christ's Love,

Brad Kaiser
(bradk%isdgsm@rtsg.mot.com)

  "Hatred destroys.  Only love creates."
            -- St. Maximilian Kolbe, shortly before his arrest and
               martyrdom at the hands of the Nazis.
From: lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu (Louie Crew)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Prayers:  For Professors before Class
Date: 15 Sep 92 16:45:59 GMT
Reply-To: <lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu>
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

Since I profess at a state university, I hope that the government is not 
listening.  

Before class, I close my office door and alone, pray for the mind of God to be 
in us, for the Holy Spirit to awaken us to the wonder, mystery and magic of
creation...   I try to pray for each student by name, and when time permits,
expand on concerns raised in the students' last papers or other performances.

When rushed, I sometimes use collects from the Book of Common Prayer.  

Do other professors here have prayers of this kind to share?

Do other students have prayers to offer as models for their professors?

Louie/Quean Lutibelle

-- 
  ==========================================================================
  Louie Crew, Assoc. Prof., Academic Foundations Dept., Rutgers U./NWK 07102
  lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu                                   201-485-4503
                    Heteroprivilege is against New Jersey law!
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sat, 12 Sep 1992 11:46:25 -0700
From:         jstahley@QUALCOMM.COM
Subject:      Re: The Saving Work of Christ

>Dear everyone on Christia ;
>
>Just an announcement : If anyone missed my 5 part series on the "Atonement of
>Christ", I have all 5 short installments saved and can be e-mailed to anyone
>who is interested.I wrote this a few months back.
>
>
>
>Love in Jesus Christ ;
>
>Jesse Irwin Carnes( notjic at lsuvm)

HI,
COULD YOU PLEASE SEND ME THE 5 INSTALLMENTS FOR THIS.

THANKS
                                JSTAHLEY@ATHENA.QUALCOMM.COM

                                RECEIVING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 8 Sep 1992 10:28:26 EDT
From:         Lon Mendelsohn <LMENDELS@CMS.CC.WAYNE.EDU>
Subject:      Bishop Spong

Carol,

In reply to my questions about Bishop Spong's faithfulness to the
promises he made at his consecration, you state that what he publishes
privately held opinions.  I would tend to question whether a public
figure can really have private opinions that do not affect his role as
a public person.

For example, I think that we in the USA would not really want a person
who thought that the constitution was an unworkable document to serve as
a judge in a federal court.  Likewise, someone who has promised to uphold
the basic truths of orthodox Christianity as set forth in the creeds should
not be entertaining private doubts about their truthfulness.  If Bishop
Spong doubts the resurrection, for example, then as a man of integrity, he
should probably resign.

Shalom,

Lon Mendelsohn
From: psyrobtw@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Robert Weiss)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re: Spong
Date: 7 Sep 92 13:52:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <CHRISTIA%92090703155681@ASUACAD.BITNET>, Z_STAFF_CL@SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE.AC.UK writes...
>I can happily agree on most of what Nancy Tinkham said about
>Anglicans.  We are a free thinking bunch at times.  Remember
>the stir caused by the (then newly appointed) Bishop of Durham
>Prof. David Jenkins a few years ago ?  "Church of England
>Bishop say Reserection didn't happen"  That was not actually
>what he said 

[...]

	I remember the quote as being that the resurrection was a 
"conjuring trick with bones."  This came shortly after he made the 
news when he publicly questioned the virgin birth of Christ.
	
	What made it memorable was that a few days later, Yorkminster, the 
beautiful cathedral belonging to the diocese of Jenkin's archbishop, 
was struck by a bolt of lightning. Ceiling beams were knocked to the 
floor. "Coincidence or Wrath of God?" read the headlines.

	Heretical Bishop Sensationalized by the Press. Film at 11.

	One of the leaders of Prison Fellowship wrote about this 
episode. He was visiting Sri Lanka, and was meeting with the chairman 
of Lanka Prison Fellowship. After asking about the growth of the Christian 
church, he was told, "We're losing badly to the Moslems. It all began 
with the Jenkins business."

	The chairman explained that aggressive Moslems were visiting 
Christian communities, using Bishop Jenkin's quote as authoritative 
proof that Christians need no longer believe in Christ's resurrection. 
Since Moslems and Christians now see Jesus as merely a prophet, they 
argued, why not worship together in the mosque? "They are killing us 
with our bishop's own words," the chairman concluded.


	Compromising with the truth has grave consequences.


	This brings up another question: What can the sheep do when 
the wolves are on full time staff?

=============================
Robert Weiss
psyrobtw@ubvms.cc.buffalo.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Orig-To: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 20:21:56 CDT
Comments:     Answering received message
From:         THERESA BLACKWELL <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Subject:      ... CAROL....

 I don't really know how to answer this post about
 America sitting back on its haunches, and leaving God outta
 the whole mess... Geez... Can you take this turn to pinch hit???
 I know that's a big question to ask... but maybe since you're
 a person who's a bit more familiar with things that happen in
 this country, you can tell me what Dan was tryin' to say???
 He totally lost me with his last statment! :)
 Sorry, Dan...
 "G"

 * <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia