HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kipper@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Kip Ingram)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Dr. Gene Scott
Date: 17 Apr 92 02:29:15 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

Hi.  I've been listening a bit to Dr. Gene Scott on shortwave radio.  I find 
him to be very different from most mass media preachers, and at the very least
listening to him has prompted me to do the first Bible studying of my adult
life.  I was wondering if some of your folks out there could help me get a
handle on where Dr. Scott fits into the spectrum of religios thinking, and
give me any other info that might help me.  I'm basically a scientific type
that has a lot of trouble accepting things on faith.  This is one of the 
reasons Dr. Scott appealed to me; he described himself as "the most believing
agnostic and the most agnostic believer".  He makes great claims for the 
historical validity of prophecy; that appealed to me as at least a
semiscientific basis for establishing some confidence in the Bible.

In short, I'd love for Christianity to be fundamentally valid, but can't 
honestly just say "OK, I believe because this books says I should".  Advice
from anyone would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks
Kip Ingram
From: nathans@coos.dartmouth.edu (Nathan Shafer)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Paul: Did he meet Jesus?
Date: 13 Apr 92 05:30:16 GMT
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

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?

    This is not a simple question to answer. Basically, it has to do with
the fact that Paul, more than anyone else in the earliest church, was
supremely suited to spread the Gospel throughout the Hellenized world,
by virtue of his double background as both a Pharisee (that is, someone
rigorously trained in the intricacies of Jewish Law and ritual) and as
a Roman citizen with a Greek education. He understood and was versed in
the rhetoric of the Platonists and the Stoics; he was aware of the presence
of the various mystery religions; finally, he was able to speak to Diaspora
Jews spread throughout the Roman world. Also, although this is essentially
a matter of opinion, Paul was a theological genius, who was able to formu-
late the beginnings of Christian theology from a vague and diverse set of
experiences regarding the person Jesus of Nazareth.

    These facts alone would not have made Paul so important, however, had
the Destruction of the Temple and the forced Diaspora of the Jews from
Palestine not occurred. Essentially, there were two kinds of Christians
prior to these events of 70 A.D.: there were Hellenic Christians, for whom
Paul was the primary leader; he founded many of the churches, which were
essentially households (oikoi) converted to Christ. Then there were Jewish
Christians, who mostly lived in or around Judea, kept the Torah, worshipped
in the Temple, and were briefly considered another sect of Judaism. The
leaders of these Christians were primarily the disciples, most notably
Peter and James the brother of Jesus. However, this group of Christians
suffered a huge blow in 70 A.D., and the center of Christianity moved
from Jerusalem to the Roman world, eventually settling in Rome itself.
This is, of course, something of a simplification; one group of Christians
was the Johannine school, which looked to John, "the disciple whom Jesus
loved" as their teacher, and produced the Gospel of John and the letters
of John. John was one of the disciples, and therefore a Jew, yet the
Johannine school seems to have had a very Greek outlook (witness the
Christological hymn at the beginning of the Gospel of John).

   I hope this helped somewhat.

Nathan Shafer
Dartmouth College, NH
From: robp@landru.network.com (Rob Peglar)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: End times near?
Date: 7 Apr 92 02:46:57 GMT
Reply-To: robp@landru.network.com
Organization: Network Systems Corporation

In article 6069@dartagnan.rutgers.edu, bresson@cbnewse.att.com () writes:
>
- The Bible references occur in the last chapters of Daniel, where Daniel 
>

(deleted)

I would refer the author to the NRSV, (Oxford), and beg him read the
annotations below for latter chapters of Daniel.  Many people have
misunderstood these chapters, and I found that the NRSV annotations
cleared up not a few "modern" interpretations.  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.


As for the other end-time predictions (Europe, etc.), they are more of
the same that has been going on for over 1,000 years (ref. OFM's comment
about the end-timers just before the year 1000 AD).  The whole point
was made by both Jesus (and later) Paul when they insisted (ref. Matt.
24-25, 2 Thess 2) that the end of the age is entirely unpredictable.
We are to live and prepare for the end of the age at all times, in
our daily lives.  When it comes, the prepared will be with Christ.
How to prepare?  Short answer - Follow Him.


Peace.

Rob
---
-legal mumbo jumbo follows-
This mail/post only reflects the opinions of the poster (author), 
and in no manner reflects any corporate policy, statement, opinion,
or other expression by Network Systems Corporation.

[I think the annotations he's referring to are in the New Oxford
Annotated Bible (NRSV), not the NRSV itself.  The basic NRSV text has
no annotations, other than brief footnotes giving textual variants,
etc.  The Annotated version is a study Bible, with brief commentary by
various scholars.  Note that the New Oxford Annotated Bible comes in
both RSV and NRSV editions, and the title is almost identical.  --clh]
From: HOLFELTZ@LSTC2VM.stortek.com
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Election, Reprobation and in Between
Date: 11 Apr 92 06:45:59 GMT
Organization: StorageTek SW Engineering


 
It is a well known fact, and I do not keep it a secret that
I am an un-orthodox thinker. But in as much as I wish to
learn all I can before I lay this body down to rest, I would
like to know what you (of the various religions) believe
about the doctrine of election, reprobation and the worlds
in between.
 
Exactly, what is your understanding of these, how do you
achieve these things?
 
A poor wayfaring stranger in a strange land,
 
 +-----------------------------------------------------+
 | Roger Holfeltz   -  The truth can be made up,       |
 |                     if you know how                 |
 |                                                     |
 |  My mind IS a terrible, terrible thing              |
 +-----------------------------------------------------+
 | Disclaimer: Not my employer's opinion; probably     |
 |             not your's either!                      |
 +-----------------------------------------------------+
From: bresson@cbnewse.att.com
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: End times near?
Date: 9 Apr 92 08:02:15 GMT
Organization: AT&T

Thank you for your article Scott, it is quite enlightening.

In article <Apr.5.04.02.45.1992.8740@dartagnan.rutgers.edu> parsons@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Scott Parish) writes:

>>9) peace will last until the coming of the Antichrist.
>
>It is also believed that the peace will last for a while, but the 
>person who comes and disrupts this "peace" will not be the Anti-Christ,
>rather it will be Jesus Christ at his second coming.
>

I am not sure what sort of peace is referred to here. The four horses 
of the Apocalypse - Peace, War, Famine/Hunger and Death/Hades -
should be taken as chronological. So after peace, whose hoofbeats
we hear approaching today , comes war ...
These horses come before the Lord Jesus Christ's return.

>So what is my purpose in writing this?  To show that what is given as
>truth may not be exactly what it is.  Call me skeptical or what have
>you, but I find it hard to take these "prophecies" at face value.  The
>Revelation, portions of Thessalonians, the Gospels and the prophets 
>all speak of the End Times and the End of the Age.  They encourage us
>to be ready, because the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the
>night--no one knows the time.  The writer's of the NT also warn us that
>there will be many false teachers and false prophets who are sent to
>lead many away.  I encourage you as Paul does in 1 Thes. 5:19-21:
>"Do not put out the Spirit's fire; do not treat prophecies with contempt.
>TEST EVERYTHING.  Hold on to the good." 

Although we do not know the time or the hour I would take it to be
SOON : we are seeing things in our day and age that are a direct
fulfillment of Biblical prophecies. From the fig tree take a lesson,
for example, a literal state of Israel is highly significent.
Knowledge of events happening around us ought to quicken us in our 
walk with Christ, and to make the most of our time for the days are 
evil: it is also a call for endurance.

Of false teachers and false prophets, there are lying spirits which
seek to spread false messages - look at the story surrounding the
death of Ahab in 2 Kings for instance: where 400 prophets all spoke
with one voice to entice Ahab to go into battle. Revelations also
speaks of the 3 frog-like spirits used to gather up the nations to
Armaggeddon (Rev. 16.13-14). 

It is not a call to give up our studies or jobs (2 Thess - if he 
doesn't work let him not eat...) but rather strive to be salt and
light where we are, fellowshipping all the more as the day draws
near and studying the Bible .. the people who know their God shall
do great things (Daniel).

Barney Resson
"Many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall increase" (Daniel)
From: dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Coptic Church and Monophysitism
Date: 13 Apr 92 05:15:37 GMT
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA

In article <Apr.10.23.21.01.1992.12670@dumas.rutgers.edu> jhpb@sarto.budd-lake.nj.us (Joseph H. Buehler) writes:
>I personally would be interested in hearing more about the Coptic
>Orthodox religion, if you would like to talk about it.  Email is fine
>if you prefer.
>I am particularly interested in things liturgical.  What liturgy do
>you presently use?  Is it in a sacred language?

I'll bet there's a lot of interest to hear more.  Post here if you
care to!

-- 
Steve Dyer
dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer
From: masimo@netcom.com (Michael Maas)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: What is the Gospel (was Re: dealin w/atheist)
Date: 17 Apr 92 02:18:27 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

In an added note to an article <Apr.13.01.28.22.1992.22857@dumas.rutgers.edu> bertsche@llnl.gov (Kirk Bertsche) in which Kirk says: 

>....I like the 
>approach of Cliffe Knechtle, who says something like, "I don't know what 
>will happen to those who haven't heard the gospel.  I know that God is 
>just and that He will do what is right.  But I also know that whatever the 
>answer to this question is, it does not apply to you.  You HAVE heard the 
>gospel, and now you must either accept it or reject it."

our moderator writes:

>>[While I'm not objecting to your general approach -- with which I
>>think I agree -- the specific advice you quote from Cliffe Knechtle
>>still has at least 2 possible objections.  (1) that the person
>>speaking has made a competent presentation of the Gospel -- I've seen
>>some presentations that are probably worse than nothing at all...
>>--clh]

This is an interesting point.  What do people think the "gospel" is?

I've noticed that there are quite diverse viewpoints on this thread about
what it means to be a Christian.  Perhaps an exploration of what individuals
perceive the content of the gospel to be will help us to better understand
what it means to be a Christian.  I am sure we could agree on at least a
few points and perhaps even some of us could learn from others.

I guess that since I am calling for this I really ought to make an attempt
to say what I think the gospel is.  I reserve the right to change my mind
and to be convinced by others of either the inadequacy or the error of my
viewpoints.

First of all, I am neither a literalist nor an inerrantist.  I think of the
Bible as the records of various groups understandings of God's revelation
to them.  While inspiration is probable from my view the imperfections
of all men lead to the possibility of error nevertheless.  Moreover, I
believe that revelation continues to us today.  Finally I believe that
Jesus Christ is the definitive revelation of God but in saying this I
seek to understand how Jesus lived and related to his fellow men on earth
and then to treat that revelation as the gospel.  

So, I would define the gospel as the revelation of God's love for us and 
God's desire for us to love as God does as revealed through the life and 
acts of Jesus Christ.  I would hold that the gospel is present wherever
and whenever humans act in accordance with the ways in which Jesus acted
on earth as the revelation of God.  Therefore, if someone has not heard the
of Christ but has loved selflessly as did Christ they qualify as having
acted in accord with the Gospel and if having so acted is what defines a
Christian they are a Christian.  

This is enough for now.  I am confident this will be a somewhat controversial
idea I only hope that we can keep the conversation flame free and open.

In Christ,

Mike
From: lchang@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Ling Chang)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Any bible programs for Win3.1?
Date: 15 Apr 92 08:22:59 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

Hi!  I just wondering whether they're any  bible windows program 
for win 3.1?
(not including the one in cica).

So far, I've seen only DOS versions, like the one being offered
by Parsons technology,

Thanks and God bless,
Ling S. Chang
lchang@eniac.seas.upenn.edu
From: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Attacks
Date: 17 Apr 92 02:08:28 GMT

I have just refused a posting.  I'd like to indicate what the nature
of it was, and why, in case readers generally believe I'm making a
mistake.  There are a set of classic condemnations that various groups
throw around at each other: Catholics worship graven images instead of
God, etc.  I don't mind controversy -- one of the major purposes of
this group is for discussion.  But there comes a time when a posting
shows no knowledge of or interest in what others believe.  It picks a
caricature of someone else's faith and attacks it.  As I commented to
the poster, I have no problem with postings that say "This thing you
do seems really strange.  It looks to me like it violates ...  What
are you doing and why?"  But discussions that start out with blanket
condemnations just get worse...

[By the way, there is to some extent a double standard.  I will
sometimes allow attacks on Christianity by non-Christians which would
not normally meet this guideline, simply to allow Christians an
opportunity to talk with the person.  I believe I can hold Christians
to a higher standard.]
From: willimsa@unix1.tcd.ie (Gavin Williams)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Question on Catholic Doctrine (was Re: Dislike of Christianity)
Date: 9 Apr 92 08:26:24 GMT
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin

In <Apr.8.04.35.38.1992.28062@dumas.rutgers.edu> zaft@caritas.cotdazr.org (Gordon C. Zaft) writes:

>In article <Apr.1.04.35.32.1992.12959@dartagnan.rutgers.edu> mcr@meaddata.com (Mary Ries) writes:
>>Are you saying that Catholics believe that you can only be saved
>>through Christ?  Wow.  I did not know that.  I went to a Catholic

>	Certainly, Catholics believe that you can only be saved through
>Christ.  It is by and through Christ that the world is redeemed and
>salvation is possible.
>	To the best of my knowledge, the Church would say that salvation
>is possible for someone who has never heard of Christ, if that person
>attempted to live a righteous life according to the dictates of the
>natural law placed in his heart by God.  If you know of Christ but
>reject him, you cannot be saved.  Furthermore, before Christ came,
>no one went to heaven ('cept perhaps Enoch and Elijah); after Christ
>opened the gates of heaven by his Death and Resurrection righteous
>men (such as Moses) who lived before His coming entered into the
>places prepared for them.

I'm sorry, but if you live a good life, in my book, it shouldn't matter
whether or not you lived it with a christian label.  This brings us back
to the old thread about whether or not a person is unwilling to go to 
heaven if it means compromising his/her principles.



>	First of all, I would question your repentance if you just
>put off going to confession because you enjoyed sin.  Second, no matter
>how many bad things you'd done, 'though your sins be red as scarlet you
>can become white as snow' (or however the quote goes).

You may be thinking of John Donne?'s poem, where he says,
	Oh wash me in Christ's blood which,being red,
	Dies red things to white.
		
	or something :-)


--
         ______________________________________________________________
	|  A.G. Williams          |        Plus qu'il n'en faut.       |    
	|  willimsa@unix1.tcd.ie  |                                    |
	|_________________________|____________________________________|
From: ward@vlsi.waterloo.edu (Paul A.S. Ward)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Christian and Non-Christian
Date: 8 Apr 92 08:09:01 GMT
Organization: University of Waterloo

In article <Apr.6.23.07.38.1992.13292@dartagnan.rutgers.edu> smayo@wang.com (Scott Mayo) writes:
>ward@vlsi.waterloo.edu (Paul A.S. Ward) writes:
>
>>I don't know.  What's a non-Christian thing?  (For that matter, what is
>>a Christian thing?)  While we are on the subject, what is a non-Christian
>>friend (or even a Christian friend)?  I've never come across such things,
>>so I was wondering if you, or any other net-persons who believe in the
>>existence of such entities, could clarify the concept for me.

>I can't tell if your question was intended as flip, or as an attempt
>to shake some preconceived notions; 

It was mildly flipant, but it was basically intended, as you say, to shake
pre-conceived notions - specifically the pre-conceived notions that we have
after we have categorized people.  Eg; this person is a Latvian Buddist Monk,
therefore I will act in the following way.  These are my Christian friends,
therefore I will do this.  These are my non-Christian friends, therefore I
must be very careful (and try and squeeze in a little Gospel message).

I object to categorizing people.  Heck, I don't even notice skin colour most
of the time (someone asked me if the super in my apt. bldg was black or
white and I didn't know, even though I saw him and spoke with him frequently).

I don't think I ever read of an instance in the Bible where Jesus showed any
sort of distinction between his friends.  He met all people where they were
at.

Does this help to clarify my point?


>These are only my opinions.  You should hear my convictions.
>smayo@wang.com

These are my convictions.  You don't want to here my opinions :-)

-- 
Paul A.S. Ward                         |    am(X) :- think(X).
Dept of Elec. and Comp. Eng            |    think(i).
University of Waterloo                 |    ?-am(i). 
ward@vlsi.waterloo.edu                 |    yes.
From: ward@vlsi.waterloo.edu (Paul A.S. Ward)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Paul: Did he meet Jesus?
Date: 14 Apr 92 07:04:04 GMT
Organization: University of Waterloo

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?

Well, the only obvious answer to this question is, Jesus
definitely met Paul in the flash :-)
From: saake@anduin.ocf.llnl.gov (Mark Saake)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Jesus returns in 1996?
Date: 17 Apr 92 02:56:38 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Livermore Nat'l Lab.

In article <Apr.15.04.43.50.1992.4680@dumas.rutgers.edu> 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
->-- 
->-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
->                              John Kohnen
->                     jkohnen@skinner.cs.uoregon.edu
->                             GEnie J.KOHNEN

John -
	Apparently you haven't read Sir Robert Anderson's book titled
"The Coming Prince".  The book shows how Daniel 9 predicts Jesus' triumphant
entry on Palm Sunday to the day  over 500 years before it happens.  Anderson
was knighted for this work.  However, the book shows that God always deals with
360 day years.  There is also some evidence (both from physics modeling and
from archaelogy) that the earth actually used to be on a 360 day rotation 
around the sun until the time of Hezekiah.  If you use the 360 day year for 
your calculations and reasoning, Christ should have come several years ago. And
since I'm a pre-tribber and I'm still here.....    ;-)

BTW, calculations done by Chuck Missler also show that the bible predicts to 
the day both the date that Israel once again became a nation, and the
day that Israel would recapture Jerusalem (the six day war.)  For any of you
netters out there that would like info on this in more detail, you can write
to the following address for some free tapes explaining this.  The tapes are
free.

	FireFighters For Christ
	PO Box 2474
	Dublin, CA 94550.

Sorry, but I can't accept orders for tapes over the net.

Maranatha 
mark
From: mls@cbnewsm.att.com
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Coptic Church and Monophysitism
Date: 17 Apr 92 02:09:25 GMT
Organization: AT&T

In article <Apr.15.04.09.04.1992.4198@dumas.rutgers.edu>, tlc20700@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Thomas L. Carney) writes:

> I want to correct this...The liturgical language is Coptic, which is 
> related to Greek, and some parts of the liturgy of St. Mark are in Arabic.

Coptic includes a substantial vocabulary taken from Greek (so does English);
howver, it is a direct descendant of the pharaonic language of Egypt and
is classified as Hamitic, closer related to the Semitic langugages than to
other families (though there is some, moderately controversial, assertion
of a relation further back to the IE languages (which include Greek and
English.)
-- 
Michael L. Siemon		   "Oh, stand, stand at the window,
					As the tears scald and start;
mls@usl.com			   You shall love your crooked neighbor
standard disclaimer			With your crooked heart."