HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gjm11@cus.cam.ac.uk (G.J. McCaughan)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re: Some 50-words-or-less, off-the-cuff definitions of "Christianity"
Date: 16 Sep 92 00:03:21 GMT
Organization: U of Cambridge, England

In article <1992Sep15.200830.629@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, dzeigler@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Daniel R Zeigler) writes:

> References: (1) Rev 12:11; (2) Eph 1-6; (3) Luke 9:23-24; (4) 2 Cor 3:18;
>             (5) Michael Card, "God's Own Fool"

Spot the odd one out. :-)
(No offence intended to John, Paul, Luke or Michael.)

-- 
Gareth McCaughan     Dept. of Pure Mathematics & Mathematical Statistics,
gjm11@cus.cam.ac.uk  Cambridge University, England.    [Research student]
From: ohoward@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Todd Howard)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re: Newsweek: Gays Under Fire
Date: 15 Sep 1992 08:15:48 -0500
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu (Dr Nancy's Sweetie) writes:

[stuff deleted]

>Todd Howard wrote an article which seems to agree with me at some points and
>disagree at others (but I am not entirely certain).  One thing he writes is
>this:

>> I see too many "Gay rights" activists shouting "tolerate us!", but what they
>> are really saying is "condone us!".  Soon they will start to shout "you MUST
>> tolerate us!", but what they will be saying (and indeed, some already say
>> this) is "Shut up, my way is right (therefore you are wrong)!"

>This looks somewhat like a slippery-slope argument: right now they just want
>to be tolerated, but next they'll want control.  I do not believe that you can
>really say what will happen after homosexuals achieve `gay rights', and I am
>not willing to oppose people because of what they _might_ do next.

I apologize in advance.  What I was trying to point out was what
has already happened in the abortion arena.  I do not wish to see
the same thing happen with gay rights.  I too must admit that gays 
dont's seem to be seeking control, but I don't want anything contrary
to my faith in control of my Government.  Unfortunately, I can't
do everything.  I just got fired up, since the post I was following up 
was (seemed to be) messing with my faith and my right to speak.

[stuff deleted]

>Darren F Provine / kilroy@gboro.glassboro.edu
>"In starting any thesis, it seems to me, one should put forward as one's
> point of departure something incontrovertible; the expression should be
> simple and dignified."  -- Diogenes
-- 
 "The statistics on death are in, and they're pretty convincing.  One out
  of every one people die."   -Unknown

Todd O. Howard (ohoward@matt.ksu.edu)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 12:03:45 CST
From:         A16905@ITESO.BITNET
Subject: Re: very weird rumor

Ozzy Osbourne ??????????????????????

If it is true (ans sincere), PRAISED BE OUR MIGHTY GOD !

Shalom,
Memo.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 8 Sep 1992 12:39:04 CDT
From:         Jesse Carnes <NOTJIC@LSUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      HOW are we RIGHTEOUS in Christ?

Dear All on Christia ;

This is just a short thought on the idea of Christians' righteous
stutus in Christ.
I want to delineate between the Biblical idea of "Imputed" righteousness
versus the unbiblical notion of "Imparted" righteousness.
The Biblical view is found in its longest form in the book of Romans.
Chapter 4 is a good area to paruse.
Here, what we see in the example of Abraham is a legan or judicial standing
of the patriarch APART from works of his own.
God credited Abraham with a righteous standing ; that is, viewed Abraham as
perfect in His sight -- and the REAL righteous standing which backs up the
legal declaration is accomplished by none other than Christ via His shed
blood.
Abraham and all TRUE Christians are seen as "IN CHRIST."
Being united to Christ by His shed blood and subsequent propitiation, the
Christian is seen as perfect -- sinless-- due to his identification with
Christ, who bore that sinner's sins.

Now, a unbiblical view which is prevalent today is called "imparted" or
"infused" righteousness. On the surface, it looks plausible.
But, righteousnsessin its inherent state is an attribute belonging ONLY
to Diety, and not to anything created.
So, this presents problems to those who teach that righteousness can be
transferred ... imparted ... infused.
The ultimate problem is the idea that one eventually becomes a part of Diety
itself and this is what the Mormons teach, as well as others.

Just some thoughts...



Jesse Carnes
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sat, 12 Sep 1992 11:01:11 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Anabaptists
              11 Sep 1992 22:35:49 GMT from <nlt@GBORO.GLASSBORO.EDU>

Hi all:

I don't have a lot of time for this, and I will explain it as people
ask questions, but essentially, there are 3 things that distinguish
Anabaptists from Catholics and Protestants:

1) Adult believers' baptism
2) Defenselessness
3) Community discernment (as oppose to a hierarchy of priests OR the
   priesthood of the believer)

I'll explain if anybody wants me to, but I gotta go to work pretty soon.

Love INC,
         --Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 14 Sep 1992 12:14:30 EDT
Comments:     Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2X
From:         Angela Zimmerman <AMZIMM01@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU>
Subject:      Continuation of Homosexuality (the sequel)

Item Retrieval Assistant, DADS
Phone: 588-6757

>This kind of change will open the flood gates for every kind of evil in
>the
>name of freedom and human rights.  But, what about the freedom of people
>who do not wish to see homosexual obscenities but are forced to.  What

What about the freedom of people who do not wish to see heterosexual
obscenities but are forced to?

>about our rights to have our children be taught by teachers of high
>moral
>standards who can serve as role models? What about our rights to
>preserve
>of religious traditions without having them defiled by people who try to
>rise to positions of power within them for their own political motives?

I don't see any of this being threatened just because homosexuals would
like to have the right to choose their mates.


>Next, I am afraid fathers guilty of incest will decide that this is
>their
>sexual orientation and that they also must come out of the closet and
>demand
>that their art be funded, that they be able to marry their daughters (or
>sons), that they be able to become our priests and ministers.

The difference here is that the partners of people who commit incest are
very rarely willing participants, while homosexuals are mostly consenting
adults having sex with other consenting adults.

>As I said, we must be compassionate toward these confused people. We
>must
>be willing to listen and to help them.  We should welcome them into our

I haven't seen any evidence of compation or welcoming coming from you yet.
Is this a case of do as I say, not as I do?

>We don't need to create any more hell for ourselves than we already have
>in this country.

I agree.  That's why I also don't think we should go after any group of people
and tell them that they are wrong and are going to burn in hell.  Not only
is that putting them in their own hell (imagine being told that you were
going to hell unless you changed your sexual practices), but causing undue
stress on the person doing the cursing.  Learn to live and let live, and
do less judging of other people.  Isn't that what Christianity is all about?


amzimm01@ulkyvm.louisville.edu
or
amzimm01@ulkyvm.bitnet

Angela Z.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Nupop-Charset: English
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 17:54:17 CST
From:         Vernon Galloway <gallowav@CC.GETTYSBURG.EDU>
Subject:      RE:Drugs

Someone posted a message about people who sell drugs, how easy it is or is
not and how much they think.  (I deleated the message).

People who sell drugs (at least at the street level) really don't think at
all.  My son in law is a policeman.  A couple of years ago I was staying at
his house while house hunting.  One day he came from work laughing about an
incident that day.  The police were serving an arrest warrant and were
expecting trouble.  A SWAT type team of officers was setup to provide quick
response in case of trouble.  They were equipted with weapons, body armor,
uniforms and such like.  They were in a van parked on the street in
daylight.  While they waited for a call (that never came), a man walked up
to the van and rapped on the window.  The window was rolled down and the man
asked "Do you want to buy something?"  The answer was "What do you have to
sell?"  The dealer displayed his wares and was promptly arrested.

Those who sell on the streets are only thinking about the money they make
and/or their next fix.  Morals, at least as those of us who subscribe to
CHRISTIA would define them, are not a part of their world.

Vernon


Vernon Galloway
Gettysburg College
MicroComputer Technician
gallowav@gettysburg.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sun, 13 Sep 1992 21:15:29 G+3
From:         Karim Fawaz <CCA3102@SAKAAU03.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: JESUS IS ABOUT TO COME BACK

Dear brothers and sisters in CHRISTia:
     Three more prophecies about the end times are written in Rev 16:19. Befo-
re discussing it, I would like to mention that when the Revelation talks about
the great city, it talks about Babylon. And since Babylon is in Iraq, we can
say that: great city = Babylon = Iraq. (When St. John wrote the Revelation,
Iraq was not known with this name, that's why he calls it Babylon or the great
city). Keeping this in mind let's go back to Rev. 16:19. This verse tells us
three facts:

1) Great city was divided to three parts:
-----------------------------------------
These days people are talking about the division of Iraq to three parts.

2) Some nations will fall:
--------------------------
That's what happened to the USSR last year.

3) God will get angry from Babylon and will punish it:
------------------------------------------------------
That's what happened in the GULF WAR where the whole world was fighting against
Iraq.

These three events which were mentioned 1900 years ago are just being realised.
Remember Jesus saying: "The sky and the earth shall pass away, but my words
shall not pass away".



If you have any comments please post it.
There are still more prophecies in the Rev. which I will try to post it later.


Peace be with all of you in His Name,
Karim Fawaz
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Orig-To: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 20:47:42 CDT
Comments:     Answering received message
From:         THERESA BLACKWELL <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Subject:      CHILD'S VIEW/'MY GIRL'...

 Chris...
 I loved that movie!!!
 My Ex-boyfriend and I saw it one night here in Hattiesburg...
 It's a wonderful film to watch....
 Remember the beehive/hornet's nest scene????
 OK...
 So, I'm not fond of Hornets/bees/yellowjackets...etc.
 But, picture a 5'10" , 190-205lb. 31-year old as he sits there
 cringing!!! I had to reach out and just give the dude a BIG
 hug...
 Never seen anybody so scared of any one thing in my LIFE!
 As far as the way those two kids talkin' about Heaven???
 I agree with them both... it's just that simple also,
 about accepting Jesus Christ as Saviour....
 "Child-like Faith"... 's all it takes....
 Keep sending posts like that one.
 I needed that after the hectic rehearsal we went through.
 "G"

 * <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 12:01:48 CST
From:         A16905@ITESO.BITNET
Subject:      Re: How to FTP On-Line Bible

Bob,

I have OLD 5.00.17 and I will FTP version 6 as soon as it is available.
You say that I can use the text modules I have. Will v.6 text modules
be any different from current modules ?

What modules will continue the same ? what modules will be new ?
what modules will be upgraded ?

Thanks

Shalom,
Memo.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 21:42:19 CST
From:         William Jordan <JORDAN@LATECH.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: The unelectable elect.
              9 Sep 1992 09:43:00 EST from <GRAHAM%DRCV06.decnet
              @DRCVAX.AF.MIL>

Dan Graham has made the point that he thinks the elect (of God) should not
seek to become the elect (of men) through election to public office.  I have
a real concern with that statement.  If by that statement he means he does
not feel called to run for office, then that is fine with me.  When other
believers tell me that God has shown them something they should (or should
not) do, then I would not think of questioning that.

However, if Mr. Graham means that he thinks Christians should not seek
public office, then I must vigorously disagree with him.  I do not think
that God leads everyone to seek public office, but I do think God leads
some people to seek public office.  I think I am one of those people.

On November 3, I will be seeking office for the third time this year.  In
March I lost an election to the local governing board of the Louisiana
Republican Party.  In April I was elected at a caucus to be an alternate
at the Republican National Convention.  The person I defeated in April was
the same person who defeated me in March.  If I was to win one of those
contests (and lose the other one), there is no doubt that I would rather
win election to go to the national convention (which is what happened).

I am now running (against the same opponent) for a seat on the state wide
governing board of the Louisiana Republican Party.  My candidacy is part of
an organized attempt by us social conservatives to take over the party in
our state.   The large majority of us who are making this attempt are
evangelical or fundamentalist or charismatic or Catholic Christians.  If
what we are doing is so bad, why are there so many of Christians who have
become convinced that God wants us to become politically involved?

I think God may give each of us some firm convictions about what we should
or should not do.  Absent a clear command from the Bible, I think it is
dangerous to say that no Christians should do some thing just because I do
not feel called to do it.  In a similar vein, I feel absolutely convinced
that God does not want ME to drink alcoholic beverages.  However, I am not
convinced that all Christians have to come to the same conclusions as I do.
I have friends who drink alcohol, and I respect them just the same.  I only
suggest that those who do not feel called to be involved in the political
process, respect those of us who do feel called to be in politics.

In Christ, Bill

William M. Jordan            Voice       (318) 257-4304
Mechanical & Industrial      FAX         (318) 257-2562
     Engineering Dept.       Bitnet      IF20159@latech.bitnet
Louisiana Tech University    Internet    jordan@engr.latech.edu
Ruston, LA 71272
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 13:37:00 EST
From:         "DRCV06::GRAHAM" <GRAHAM%DRCV06.decnet@DRCVAX.AF.MIL>
Subject:      Sheep hear one voice.

Mark,

The elect cannot be deceived or led astray, permanantly.  John 10 is a
wonderful chapter about the elect, or the sheep, same difference.  I
believe that Jesus' words indicate that once an elect person has heard the
truth of the Shepherd, and they are born again, they will not be decieved
again.

What you said is true.  There are many of God's elect scattered throughout
all nations, families and churches.  The New Testament use of the word
"all" usually means "without distinction," thusly, we must never assume
that a group is entirely without God's children.  We agree on that, at
least.

Dan (going home early, yippee!) graham
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 03:47:32 -0700
From:         "Michael Alan Kline,
              Sr. Tech Support Manager" <MKLINE@VDH.BITNET>
Subject:      Test

 .         VDH, DIR, Main Street Station, 1500 East Main Street
 .         Phone:  (804) 786-1559         Profs id:  VDH(MKLINE)

 Test. Please ignore. Ha. Caught you. :-)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 18:48:33 EDT
From:         Bernice Tennant <U1A9A@WVNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Prayer request, Romania

A Prayer for Tom.  Pray with me if you want.

Our Heavenly Father,

        Forgive us our sin. Know that we are one, in our desire to serve you,
and please you.  Show us the way.  We ask that you would hear our prayers for
Tom Ford and his missions group that they may bring many to your Son Jesus and
you will receive glory.  Lord, we ask that you would be with them and guide
them and keep satan away from them. We ask that you would strengthen the Holy
Spirit in them and let them be a blessing to you.  We thank you Lord, for all
the blessings you have given us.  We love you Lord, and know that you are with
us.  Help us to be united.  Take away our pride and give us peace.  Keep us
from sin and keep us from smothering the Spirit.  We love you and desire to
know you better.  Strengthen us and keep us in the light of your path, in the
name of your Son Jesus I ask this, Amen.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 14 Sep 1992 12:40:43 EST
From:         "PHILLIP A. HALIBURTON" <Z$T@FCCJ.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: OK, YOU GUYS ASKED FOR THIS....

DEAR KERRY,

           WHY DO YOU THINK THE CATHOLIC CHURCH IS NOT A DENOMINATION?

                YOUR BROTHER IN CHRIST,

                 PHILLIP A. HALIBURTON
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sun, 6 Sep 1992 21:17:45 EDT
From:         Lon Mendelsohn <LMENDELS@CMS.CC.WAYNE.EDU>
Subject:      Definition of Morality
              5 Sep 1992 22:18:11 -0600 from <S05152@DOC.FLC.COLORADO.EDU>

Glennard Skynard cites Jesus quoting Deut.6:5 (Love the LORD your God with
all your heart and with all you soul and with all your might) and Lev.19:18
(Love your neighbor as yourself) as a basis for defining Christian morality.
Several years ago, I heard a series of sermons on the 10 Commandments in
which the preacher defined the first four commandments as the specifics of
Deut.6:4 and the six remaining commandments as the specifics of Lev.19:18.
He went on to say that the entirety of the rest of the Law of Moses fits
into the 10 Commandments and therefore into the two Great Commandments,
staiting that the first four commandments have to do with our relationship
with God, and the remaining six have to do with our relationship with one
another.

Just thought you might find this interesting . . .

Shalom,

Lon Mendelsohn
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 18:23:35 -0700
From:         MARK DRAKE <DRAKE@ASUCHM.LA.ASU.EDU>
Subject:      RE: HOW are we RIGHTEOUS in Christ?

>God has 2 types of attributes :
>
>1) communicable
>
>2) incommunicable

	Jesse,

I've never said otherwise.  I simply question your list of incommunicable
attributes, as well as your definition of holiness (and to some extent
righteousness).

Mark
drake@asuchm.la.asu.edu
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
From: creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Steve Creps)
Subject: Re: Seeking a Catholic Perspective
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 22:03:32 GMT

In article <BuDuzw.14L@world.std.com> timk@world.std.com (Tim King) writes:
>creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Steve Creps) writes:
>Okay... so what about the guy who knows what he believes, doesn't agree
>with Catholic teaching on every point, but believes that the Catholic
>church is *a* true church?  In other words, Catholicism is not a cult.
>He has committed no breach of his conscience, but to the Catholic dogma
>he has committed a heresy!  How does this differ from the Protestant, who
>believes that Protestantism also contains true churches but rejects
>much of Catholic doctrine, including that Catholicism is *the* true church?

   No one who belongs to the Catholic Church should believe that it is
not _the_ true Church, as this teaching is one of the basic doctrines
of the Catholic Church.  It's really as simple as that -- anyone who
remains in the Catholic Church without believing, or at least trying
to believe, her teachings is guilty of the sin of hypocrisy.

   The Catholic Church judges other churches thus: they are measured
by how close they are in belief to the Catholic Church.  The Church
recognizes that other churches contain some truth, even non-Christian
religions.  How much of this truth that it contains determines how
true each religion is.  In other words, the closer their beliefs are
to Catholic Christianity, the truer they are.  I believe the "ranking"
is something like this:

	Catholicism
	Orthodoxy
	Anglicanism
	Lutheranism
	other Protestant denominations, etc.
	Judaism
	Eastern religions
	Paganism
	Atheism


>It sounds like culpability is determined by one's desire to be right with
>God, and most Protestants and Catholics alike desire to be right with God.

   Yes, but it's more difficult outside the Catholic Church.
Basically one can be saved outside the Catholic Church, but that's not
saying it's _easy_ to be saved outside the Catholic Church.  Let's
save the how's and why's of this for later discussion.

>What are the effective results of this additional "Grace" that God can give
>only through a Catholic priest?  How does it differ from the Grace that God
>gives through His Son?  I'm making the assertion that God's Grace through
>His Son is imparted (did I get the right word, Jesse? :-) to all who believe,
>whether they be Protestant, Catholic, or whatever.

  You're making the incorrect assumption that the grace given through
a priest does not come through Christ.  Since Christ initiated the
priesthood, as well as the other sacraments, this grace comes from
Christ.  It is also His will that we receive His grace through His
sacraments, so rejecting the sacraments He gave through the Catholic
Church is rejecting His will, whether one knows it or not.

-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Steve Creps, Indiana University
creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 08:24:22 CDT
From:         Jesse Carnes <NOTJIC@LSUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Holiness/Righteousness
              9 Sep 1992 08:42:55 EDT from <LMENDELS@CMS.CC.WAYNE.EDU>

Dear Lon ;

The Lord says, "Be HOLY as I am HOLY."
(obviously an inherent attribute of God in that He is set apart from all that
is NOT holy).Holiness (kodesh, Heb.) is seperateness from sin and its
concomitant weaknesses, dibilitations, enthrallments, etc.
He is also righteous in that He can not do anything contrary to His inherent
nature and His nature is one of freedom from sin and its pollution.

Both attributes exist in their perfect forms in the Lord and they are an
inherent part of His nature.Christians are righteous via imputation.

I may have done a faux pas to interchange the two terms ... now I delineate
the two.  Any queries???



Jesse Carnes
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU