HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 14:49:01 EDT
From:         Lon Mendelsohn <LMENDELS@CMS.CC.WAYNE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Matthew 24
X-To:         Practical Christian Life <CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU>

Memo,

In Matthew 24:15, Jesus refers to Daniel's prophecy of the abomination which
makes desolate (Daniel 9:27, 11:31, 12:11), AKA the desolating sacrilege.

Shalom,

Lon Mendelsohn
From: psyrobtw@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Robert Weiss)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re: Catholicism
Date: 27 Aug 92 02:51:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <MAILQUEUE-101.920826175756.256@125law1.law.ucla.edu>, FRANK@LAW.UCLA.EDU writes...

Frank,

> When we ask the Saints or Mary for their prayers we ask them to
>do so, not for intercession, but in communion with us.  This is not
>unlike the many prayer requests that come down the line on CHRISTA.
	
	I understand this. However, we can be certain, due to 
responses and such, that our prayer requests are read by the members 
of Christia. We also presume that if they are read that they are acted 
upon. We have no scriptural basis that the departed believers can hear 
our prayers.

	There are two items in scripture that may bear on this. 
Hebrews 12:1, speaks of the cloud of witnesses. However it appears that they 
(witness=martyr) are witnesses to us, and not witnesses of us. There 
is also a passage in Revelation where the recently arrived saints ask 
the Lord `how long will you let this go on.' However, this passage 
doesn't indicate that those present in heaven had special knowledge, 
but rather that they were relaying the last info that they had on 
earth...


 en agape,
 Bob 
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sun, 30 Aug 1992 12:22:21 CDT
From:         CCCHRIS@MIZZOU1.BITNET
Subject:      Teaching Tyler to pray

From the time tbe boys were born, I've talked with them about Jesus.  In terms
I hoped they'd one day come to understand, I've planted seeds, hoping one day
they'd take root.  I deeply believe that children are God's best, most fertile
soil.

Today, sitting at my computer and scanning Christia, my 2 1/2 year, Tyler,
came up to me with his little hands folded, praying.  "I love Jesus.  I love
God."  And he thanked Jesus for Pippy (our cockatiel) and Spook (our kitty)
and Grandma and Grandpa, and finally, for cake and M&Ms and flowers.

:-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)  :-)

I know Tyler's been walking since he was 10 months old, but so far, I think
this is the biggest step he's ever taken.

I just wanted to share this with you,
with hopes you might enjoy it, too.

Thanks be to Jesus,

Chris Reed
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 14:38:12 EDT
From:         Lon Mendelsohn <LMENDELS@CMS.CC.WAYNE.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Jehovah's Witnessess & Blood
              3 Sep 1992 16:48:03 GMT from <kilroy@GBORO.GLASSBORO.EDU>

On Thu, 3 Sep 1992 16:48:03 GMT Dr Nancy's Sweetie said:

<deleted>

>> o They reject blood transfusions.
>>     o  They base this belief on their interpretation of Genesis 9:4 and
>>        similar O.T. passages.
>
>This is not correct.
>
>The Jehovah's Witnesses teach that gentile Christians are not under the Old
>Testament Laws given to the Jews; the OT prohibitions on blood are not the
>reason they refuse transfusions.
>
>They refuse blood transfustions based on their interpretation of the letter
>from the council at Jerusalem, recorded in the Bible at Acts 15:23-29.  In
>particular, the letter reads "you are to abstain from [...] blood."

Actually, the passage in Genesis 9 is not part of the Law given to Israel,
it the covenant of Noah which, according to the Jewish understanding,
applies to all Gentiles.  The passage in Acts 15 is rooted in the Genesis
9 passage.  I would have to do additional research on it to be sure, but
I think that you'll find that the JW's teaching on this subject is based
on both the Acts 15 and the Genesis 9 passages.

Shalom,

Lon Mendelsohn
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
From: timk@world.std.com (Tim King)
Subject: I'm back!!!
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 21:32:41 GMT

Hi y'all!  I decided to come back after all!  :-)

I had to go on nomail about a month ago due to work I was doing on a software
programming project...  Referring to the development tools:  Just _ once _
I'd like to use a software package that did what it says it does!

In any case, how did the vote turn out?

-Tim
-- 
Tim King                  |  Some of us favor logic in making decisions.
24 Myrtle Street          |  Some, emotions.  I, personally, get very    |\
Dedham, MA 02026          |  emotional about faulty logic! :-)           | >
timk@world.std.com        |                                             <>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 10:05:12 EDT
From:         Bernice Tennant <U1A9A@WVNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Baby Sarah (Prayer Request)
              BSCURR01@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU

I know you know it, but I just had to say it.  I am praying.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sat, 29 Aug 1992 18:18:31 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: JESUS IS ABOUT TO COME BACK

Hi all:

I don't know if anyone wants to get into this, but I have always
wondered what the time progression is in the Book of Revelation
(from chapter 4 onward).  For example, do we expect that the events
connected with the seals come first, followed by the trumpets and
then the bowls, or are they all somewhat overlapping?

This may be a topic too large to reach agreement on, but I think it
might be fun to discuss it.

Love INC,
         --Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  CHRISTIA
Original_cc:  HUTTER
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 14:03:00 N
From:         Wolfgang Hutter <HUTTER@DULRUU51.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: The Bible and Homophobia

In a message of Fri, 28 Aug 1992 14:13:50 GMT
Received on Fri, 28 Aug 92 18:18 N
75furlong@CUA.EDU wrote:

>A person chooses to be a murderer - if I step outside the office and decide
>that I feel like killing someone today (not as absurd as it sounds - I live in
>DC, and it's an all-too-frequent occurrence in some areas) I am a murderer and
>have chosen that identity for myself. As I have continually pointed out, this
>is not the case for homosexuals or bisexuals.

I was not dealing with homosexuality itself, but simply said that
certain Christian values are indeed implemented in national law and that
this very fact is not intrinsically unconstitutional.

>I'm mostly interested in your statement about Christian churches that perform
>same-sex marriages, though. These are not "new-age" radical groups but
>Episcopal and Methodist *Christian* churches. Are you saying that these
>congragations of people aren't "real" Christians, simply because they don't
>read the Bible _your_ way? This is not a rhetorical question - I really want to
>know.

I didn't say that tey aren't real Christians. I just said that I
believed that God wouldn't approve their actions, nor agrre with their
approval of homosexual marriages. But they are therefore no less
brothers and sisters. Don't try to make me more intolerant than I really
am. ;-)

Wolfgang <><
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  CHRISTIA
Original_cc:  HUTTER
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 16:02:00 N
From:         Wolfgang Hutter <HUTTER@DULRUU51.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Absolution

In a message of Fri, 28 Aug 1992 08:09:25 EDT
Received on Fri, 28 Aug 92 14:16 N
Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET> wrote:

>You ask  "What about the other way around? Can a Catholic or Orthodox
>Christian obtain God's forgiveness without confessing to anyone
>except to God?"  If I sin and ask God for forgiveness, my sins are
>forgiven.  (I am skipping details about kinds of contrition to stick
>to the basic point.)  However, even though they are forgiven I must
>still confess them to a priest out of obedience to God's plan.  In
>that case the absolution would be a reaffirmation of the forgiveness
>I had received when I confessed directly to God.

So if I understand it correctly, the better way is to go to a priest,
but if you don't then your sins are just as well forgiven? I understood
your citation of a statement of the Council of Trent in a different way.
You stated that 'the Council of Trent said, what the priest does is not
"the mere ministry of pronouncing and declaring that the sins of the
person confessing are remitted,..."'

>We believe that Jesus
>gave the power and authority to forgive sins in His name to the
>Apostles  (John 20:21-23) and that their successors are those organs
>of the body that have that function.

If there is a definite order of God that prefers this way of absolution
to any other or even excludes any other then I have no problem in
recognizing the priests/elders/bishops as those who are to function that
way. The step that I can't do right now is to see that the condition in
the last phrase is true.

>You are right.  This takes a lot of time.  However, it is important
>that Christians understand each other better and that misinformation
>be dispelled.  There are real differences between Christians, and
>they must be left to the Holy Spirit to resolve, but we can clear
>away misunderstandings that make us think we differ when we do not.

Thank you! May God always grant you enough time and strength to do this!

In appreciation

Wolfgang <><
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
From: anachem@bronze.ucs.indiana.edu (mark gilstrap)
Subject: Re: Second parousia in the past?
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 19:17:30 GMT

	I don't mean to get into an argument over correct doctrine
here, but only wish to express the Orthodox Church's belief which
was the *only* Christian belief for the first thousand years of
Christianity.  On this subject, you will find a unity of belief 
between the Orthodox and Romans to this day (nearly another 1000
years). Only recently have new sects interpreted, developed and
accepted new understandings. The traditional christian under-
standing has not changed to this day and seems a necessary starting 
point for any such discussions. 

	The Church has always held that Jesus Christ "will come
again to judge both the living and the dead; His Kingdom will
have no end." (the Nicene-Constantinpolitan Creed) 

He will come
only once, "the Second Coming" and that will be the end of this
age. The time of the Millenium is now. All hell will break
loose before the End (as we see presaged today). All who are
alive will suffer the tribulation. There will be no "rapture".
Christ will give final and Last Judgement when He comes and those
who are found worthy will partake of the Kingdom of Heaven (which 
is not the same as Paradise or what we call Heaven today). That
Kingdom will not last a thousand years, but forever. Those found
unworthy will be cast into eternal punishment with Satan and his
dark angels. (This is not the same as the Hell occupied by many of
the departed today.)

	We do not believe that Jesus will come a third or a fourth
time. It is important when trying to understand the Apocalypse (the
Book of Revelation) that such understanding is not completely
possible until events are ready to happen. Also it is not possible
to have a correct understanding of Scripture outside of and without
the context of the Holy Tradition from which Scripture was compiled.
This Tradition is found historically in the Orthodox and Roman Catholic
churches. Those who reject Tradition are bound to make many mistakes
in interpretation of Scripture. 

	Read the Holy Fathers if you want to see how Tradition inter-
prets the events to come. I think that in all honesty you must concern
yourself with the fact that your postulates and personal reasonings 
are of little relevance when they conflict with even the most basic
statements of Christian belief.

	Fr Mark
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 10:20:51 CDT
Reply-To:     bradk%isdgsm@rtsg.mot.com
From:         Brad Kaiser <bradk%isdgsm@RTSG.MOT.COM>
Subject:      Re: Catholicism
X-To:         CHRISTIA%ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU@motgate.mot.com

Kerry,

You write, very beautifully at that:

>> Good question.  I don't believe that, when we pray for each other,
>> we act as "intermediaries."  By praying for others, we join *with*
>> them in submitting our will to Christ, and telling Him explicitly
>> that we are certain of His providence.  The Holy Spirit indwelling
>> in us gives us direct access to God, and in seeking Him at the
>> same time or for the same purpose, we join to *each other* in
>> Christ.

>> Essentially, we are in unity, which is Christ's desire for His
>> church.  When we pray
>> at a distance, we are still joined in the Spirit, and God
>> gives us the knowledge (in our spirits) that we are joining
>> with others in *Him*.

I wish I could have written that!  I believe the same thing, but when
I say "when we pray at a distance, we are still joined in the Spirit",
I simply don't choose to regard physical death as a distance or
barrier that the Holy Spirit cannot overcome.

In His 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.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: psyrobtw@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Robert Weiss)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: confirmation versus receiving the Holy Spirit
Date: 26 Aug 92 03:22:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <CHRISTIA%92082420182986@ASUACAD.BITNET>, KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET (Kerry Stephenson) writes...
>Steve and others:

	I sneak in under the broad heading of "others" here...

>Steve says that all Catholics "receive the Holy Spirit" at confirmation.
>I have a very strong feeling that this meaning of "receive the Holy
>Spirit" is significantly different than what most Protestant Christians
>(especially Pentecostal and charismatic Christians!) mean by it.
> 
>Would some of the RCCs on the list give some impressions of how they
>felt at confirmation, how you knew you received the Holy Spirit,
>how it has affected you, etc?

	I was confirmed in fourth grade. I chose Joseph as my 
confirmation name.

	We (our class) were informed that we would be receiving the 
Holy Spirit, and that we would be endued with power from God to do his 
work and to be His witnesses to the world. I remember being excited 
with the anticipation that God would bless us at that moment.

	As the time came, during the service, we knelt along the 
communion rail. The bishop came along and asked the name that was 
chosen. After one responded he was annointed with Chrism 
(Holy Oil), and addressed in the confirmation name that he had 
received the Holy Spirit. The bishop then gave a light tap on the 
cheek to signify some of the suffering that we then would be able to 
face.
	
	In looking back, I remember a feeling of, "that's it?" I 
expected to at least feel something, or for there to be a change in my 
life. But there wasn't any feeling except for disappointment. And 
there wasn't any real change in my life. I remember how mechanical it 
all seemed.

	On the other side, about four years ago now, I was baptized in 
the Holy Spirit. It was spontaneous, as I was praising God. About a 
week before this happened, I was praying with a friend of mine. I 
wanted to have a real, close, personal walk with Jesus. An honest 
relationship. As my friend prayed that I would have a close fellowship 
with Jesus, inside me there was the scream of "Y E S !" I was startled 
at the way my inner voice screamed assent to that prayer.

	So, a week later, as I was praising God, and contemplating how 
He arranged things like a fishnet in my life... where one knot 
affected another one, and affected another one to reach a desired 
movement thirty knots away. How great you are God to mold and move 
things like that. And I felt the power of God descend on me. I felt 
like I was going to explode. I felt in such awe and joy at the same 
time, and tears were streaming down my face as I kept my eyes closed. 
I remember feeling that my body couldn't contain what was being poured 
on me, and I had a vision of a geyser of pure, clear water bubbling 
and shooting up.


 en agape,
 Bob 
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sun, 23 Aug 1992 03:24:25 EDT
From:         Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Excommunication and Interdict

David White,

You have been misinformed.  Excommunication bars people from the
other sacraments, but not Confession.  The whole purpose of excommu-
nication is to help the sinner recognize the enormity of his sins so
he will seek forgiveness.  As St. Paul wrote, "And if any man obey
not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with
him, that he may be ashamed.  Yet count him not as an enemy, but
admonish him as a brother." 2 Thes 3:14-15.

Excommunication applies only to individuals.  In the latter part of
your posting you are thinking of Interdict.  Interdict means that the
individual under it, or people in the territory under it may not
participate in certain liturgical services  or administer or receive
certain sacraments.  As the glossary in the Catholic Almanac says,
"Interdict is different from excommunication and does not involve
exclusion of a person from the community of the faithful."

Excommunication and Interdict have occasionally been misused in
Church history, but those cases were abuses by Church officials.

Marty Helgesen
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sun, 23 Aug 1992 01:06:15 EDT
Comments:     Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2X
From:         Angela Zimmerman <AMZIMM01@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU>
Subject:      Religion in Schools

Item Retrieval Assistant, DADS
Phone: 588-6757
Why should Atul have to go to a study hall to avoid prayer?  I still say
that since the public schools are for the public, and the public is not
all Christian, that prayer and bible readings should be left out of the
regular curiculum.  Christianity, at least when I was in high school,
was still in the text books, and that was only 2 years ago.  If I were in
a class and I was forced to listen to bible scripture or a prayer, I
wouldn't be offended, but I would be upset because that would be an
infringement on my religious rights.  The statement by the teen that
said that it would be alright for the person to kill him is a small
minority opinion.  I, nor does anyone that I know of, think it's alright
to kill someone "if you feel like it".
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  CHRISTIA
Original_cc:  HUTTER
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 08:51:00 N
From:         Wolfgang Hutter <HUTTER@DULRUU51.BITNET>
Subject:      Absolution (was Re: Forgiveness of Sins, by Priests?)

In a message of Thu, 27 Aug 1992 06:19:46 EDT
Received on Thu, 27 Aug 92 17:43 N
Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET> wrote:

>        In the Catholic Church, and, I think, in the Orthodox Churches,
>        which also have confession to a priest, confession is required.
>        It is required by God's command, rather than by the nature of
>        things.

I may have missed or misinterpreted the passag(es) that you refer to. As
I'm not so far away from your position as on other topics ;-), I
think that there would be a chance of having to change my mind on
confession. So would you please be so kind and explain your opinion?

>        That is, a Catholic or Orthodox Christian can obtain
>        God's forgiveness for his sins without confessing to a priest but
>        still must confess because God wants it that way.

What about the other way around? Can a Catholic or Orthodox Christian
obtain God's forgiveness without confessing to anyone except to God?

>        Also, in the
>        Catholic Church and, I think, in the Orthodox Churches, absolu-
>        tion by the priest is an essential part of the sacrament which
>        brings about the forgiveness.  As the Council of Trent said, what
>        the priest does is not "the mere ministry of pronouncing  and
>        declaring that the sins of the person confessing are remitted,
>        provided only that he believes himself absolved."

I can faintly imagine the answer, but I'd still like to ask you why we
should believe that God connected remission of sins under the New
Covenant to a certain class of clergymen.

Thanks for your willingness to explain. I sometimes wonder where you get
the time from, because I think that typing alone can't be the real
work...

Wolfgang <><
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 14:02:00 CDT
From:         "Love does not subtract, it multiplies." <HOLZMAN@FNAL.BITNET>
Subject:      RE: Gays are not violent

<    Angela said that Gays are not normally violent. I said that the
<article was not meant to be a stereotype of all gays, but then when I got
<home and listened to the 700 Club, this article came up....
<
<    Pat: Inside the convention hall, the Republicans have been charting
<their course to make sure George Bush stays in the White House, but
<outside the convention it's a different story. Groups of militant
<protesters have burned a police car and they're demanding something else,
<Deborah Whitson files this report...

I seem to recall riots in the streets in the '60s.  Wasn't gays rioting,
though.  Was Blacks.

My grandparents tell me of riots in the streets in the '20s.  Wasn't gays then,
either.  Was the jobless.

I recall riots in LA a few months ago.  Once again...

The notion that homosexuality leads to aggression is refuted by
counter-example.

Dan
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 02:30:22 EDT
From:         JEK@NIHCU.BITNET
Subject:      Mary the traveller?

Lately, there has been an exchange on the list dealing with the
question:  "Given that Mary accompanied Jesus everywhere during the
three years of His public ministry, what does this tell us about
whether she had other sons?"

I question the premise. Where is the evidence that she accompanied
Him regularly throughout these three years?
     She was present at the wedding feast at Cana, at the beginning
of His ministry, but that was close to Nazareth, and her sayings on
that occasion suggest that she had some connection with the family
of the bride.
     She was present at the Crucifixion, but it is possible that she
had come up to Jerusalem for the Passover (cf. Luke 2:41), or that
she had advance reason for special concern about her Son at that
time.
     She was present on one occasion during the middle of His
ministry (M 12:46-50  P 3:31-35 = L 8:19-21), but the account of
this occasion suggests that she had made a special visit, with other
family members, and that she was not a permanent member of His
entourage.

 Yours,
 James Kiefer
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU