HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 13:38:51 -0500
From:         "jones, mark" <JMJONES@UGA.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Tithing
              21 Jan 1993 13:31:48 -0500 from <violette@APXTG03.APEX.DG.COM>

Good counsel, in my opinion John (re: tithing and such)

If you are ready for this....
I recently heard some, well, um, erh, Okay, STATISTICS which said that
something like only 3-5% of Christians actually tithe. I've heard several
pastors say that it seems (no scientific survey) that typically about
10% of the people give 90% of the church income. Just think what would
happen if even half the Christians in America, the most materialistic nation
on the face of the earth would start sowing into God's kingdom. I mean just
be open to the Holy Spirit and follow his lead on how much, 10% or more, gross
or net, et.al. We would truly shake the gates of Hell! Some thoughts...Mark
From: SKLEPZI@SSB1.SAFF.UTAH.EDU (Steven Klepzig)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re: Huh?
Date: 26 Jan 93 16:52:00 GMT
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU
Comments:     <Parser> W: Invalid RFC822 field - "harling@PICTEL.COM,
              ispmom@ASUACAD.BITNET". Rest of header flushed.

Dan (and others),

These errant posts to Christia from other lists are being looked into by
Madge and I.  I don't know how the crossposting started.  Perhaps it was
started maliciously, perhaps not.  But it is being looked into.  Please be
patient.  I don't really suspect flame-baiting on the part of people that are
posting - I don't really suspect anything underhanded.  It's just e-mail.

BTW: If it's any consolation, I think that Christia's posts are also being
crossposted to these other lists.....

Steven
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Orig-To: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 11:09:10 CST
Comments:     Answering received message
From:         THERESA BLACKWELL <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Subject:      THANK YOU LAUREN!

Hey, if the "Pill" caused AIDS, I'd be dyin' right now, ...I've taken
the pill for almost 4 years without fail.
Lauren's point about "indiscriminate sex with many partners" also
was a good one.  I think that if someone who remains monogamous
doesn't want a child, then the pill is an effective way (99.9%) of
holding off a family until that person feels she can handle the
responsibility of rearing a child.
I'm totally against having multiple partners in ANY relationship,
due to the fact that AIDS is out there.  The PILL does NOT protect
against AIDS, - only against a young lady becoming pregnant when
she knows she can't take on that responsibility at the time.
Of course, there is always the possibility that the Pill can fail.
A friend of mine was surprised to find that her sister was going
to have a baby-only because her sister's Pills didn't work...
That's the biggest risk I think, of taking the pill, is having them
"not work" when they were supposed to.  That's when a young lady
should say, "ok, Doc...find another perscription that WILL work,
or another way for me to hold off the family I want to start at
a later date..."
--------
Even with all the methods of Birth Control out there, the only
sure way to prevent pregnancy, and STD's of any kind, is to
abstain.  Let me say firsthand, that sometimes that can be
EXTREMELY HARD TO DO.
In my case, I truly loved the guy I was with.  Talk about
decisions....sheesh!!!
I hope this post didn't offend anyone, but I hope it will
provide interesting thoughts from other Christia members.
In His Love,
Theresa

 * <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 14:23:30 -0500
Comments:     Resent-From: "jones, mark" <JMJONES@UGA.BITNET>
Comments:     Originally-From: John Violette <violette@APXTG03.APEX.DG.COM>
Comments:     Warning -- original Sender: tag was CHRISTIA@ASUACAD
From:         "jones, mark" <JMJONES@UGA.BITNET>
Subject: Re: Ten Commandments.

John Violette writes...
****************************
I originally posted a message about the 10 commandments, not the other stuff.

Seeing what Dan is talking about now makes me understand his view better.  I
still say we should keep to the 10 commandments as best we can.

**************************
I agree, John. Jesus made it a lot easier when He summarized it by telling
us the greatest command was to "Love the Lord your God..." and to "Love
your neighbor as yourself", and that in doing these two we wont have to
really worry about the rest, whether were talking 10 or 613, because its
a "done deal" Now in practice, that's not easy but I like things all tidy
and summarized! I'd rather concentrate on two items and cover all the bases!
Im also *BIG TIME* grateful that "If any man sin, he has an advocate with
the Father...Jesus Christ the Righteous", and that "If we confess our sins,
He is faithful to forgive us our sins..and to cleanse us from all
unrighteousness."-A very nice provision for people like me who continually
goof up.......Mark
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 16:27:41 -0500
From:         "jones, mark" <JMJONES@UGA.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Prayer Request

Dear Bernice,
I wish I had an answer re: suffering in this life. All I know for sure
is that, along with our old friend Job, I can say  "Though He slay me..
Yet will I trust Him" !  I also know that "my redeemer LIVES and that
he shall stand in the last day..." (emphasis mine). Stand tough, dear
sister. The Lord is near.

Father,
We lift up Bernice's mother to you for healing. Lord, we send the word
to this blood problem. Lord, even as you healed a woman with an issue
of blood by a touch of the hem of your garment, we know that you can
reach out by your mighty hand and touch Bernice's mother. Lord, let
it be done right now, we pray. Father, we pray for your peace to flood
the hearts and minds of Bernice, her mother and her whole family. Let
them know in a very special way that you are so near. Thank you Lord,
we pray in the Name of Jesus Christ....amen.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Organization: Young Chang R&D Institute
X-Mailer: uAccess LITE - Macintosh Release: 1.5v4
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 16:14:08 EST
Reply-To:     timk@ycrdi.com
From:         Tim King <timk@MFC.YCRDI.COM>
Subject:      Re: Three Short Notes

In Regards to your letter <01GTXYQO0TS299DJVG@asu.edu>:
> Whether or not we should abstain from work on Sat./Sun., I am glad
> that certain people do not: doctors, nurses, the armed forces, road crews
> (important in the frozen North where I grew up), and especially the clergy!

My pastor takes Monday off, since he works on Sunday.

-TimK

--
Tim King                  <>    |-_       A poorly-documented feature is not
timk@ycrdi.com            |     |  |      really there.  A poorly-documented
Young Chang R&D Inst.     | >  <>  |      limitation is far too present.
Makers of Kurzweil Music  |/      <>
Systems technology              *** Original material (C) 1992 J. T. King ***
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 14:25:52 EST
From:         Dan Harling <harling@ROADRUNNER.PICTEL.COM>
Subject: Re: Ten Commandments.

> Date: 22 Jan 1993 10:57:33 -0800
> From: Don Roberts <DSROBERTS@BIIVAX.DP.BECKMAN.COM>
> Subject: Re:  Ten Commandments.
> To: Multiple recipients of list CHRISTIA <CHRISTIA@asuvm.inre.asu.edu>
>
> > But we know we cannot keep the law and by the grace of God through the
> >shedding of Christ blood, we are forgiven.  The law shows us what is
 necessary
> >to be righteous in God's eyes.  Christ came and was baptised to fulfill all
> >righteousness.
>
> John, I had, up to this point, thought you were defending keeping the law.
> However this statement I've quoted says the opposite, the Christ fulfilled all
> righteousness, so the law is meaningless to the believer in Christ.
>
> But then you say:
>
> >If we are to follow Christ example, and Christ followed the
> > law,then we too are to follow the law.
>
> What does it mean to follow the law?  Did the apostles gather on the sabbath?
> Were they following the law?  Did Jesus defend or rebuke them?

We are missing a semantic distinction between "following" the law and
"obeying" the law.  Let us say that to "obey" the law is to behave
within its guidelines, whereas to "follow" the law is to base one's
salvation on obedience thereto.

Therefore, Christ obeyed the law, but he did not follow it.

(Please suggest alternate words for these two senses, if the ones I
have selected are not as clear)


> Date: 22 Jan 1993 14:09:46 -0500
> From: John Violette <violette@APXTG03.APEX.DG.COM>
> Subject: Re:  Ten Commandments.
> To: Multiple recipients of list CHRISTIA <CHRISTIA@asuvm.inre.asu.edu>
>
> Dan brings up a good point, one I didn't realize:
>
> context of the New Testament is referring to the entire Torah, not just the
> Ten Commandments.  Are you willing to keep the entire law, all 613 of them?
>
> I originally posted a message about the 10 commandments, not the other stuff.
>
> Seeing what Dan is talking about now makes me understand his view better.  I
> still say we should keep to the 10 commandments as best we can.

Yes, we should obey the commandments, as they are an accurate
indication of whether or not we are following Jesus, acting out of
faith and love.  We should not, however, treat disobedience as an
affront to the Law, but as an affront to our savior.
____________________________________________________________________________
Daniel A. Harling                        (harling@pictel.com)
PictureTel Corp.             Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of
Peabody, MA  01960                   PictureTel Corp. (so there!)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 11:09:11 -0500
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Last night's Rush Limbaugh Show
              23 Jan 1993 20:09:03 -0500 from <kilroy@GBORO.ROWAN.EDU>

Darren:

I know you miss Rush's humor by a mile, and I haven't time to explain it
all.

However, on one point you misconstrue so violently that I must elucidate.
The flyer on the inaugural was *not* about alcoholism, and Rush made
that clear.  The joke was about the (once universally acknowledged)
observation of many (including some of the most liberal of liberal
comics) that Republicans and Democrats party *differently.*

Whereas a "Republican" party involves black tie and so forth, and has
to be *planned,* Rush's point was that most Democrat parties of which
he has ever been aware were hastily put-together, publicly advertised
BYOB events (usually with one keg provided, after which a collection
has to be taken up).

Rush was merely pointing out that Clinton's alleged connection to the
young Democrats of the MTV set would logically suggest that he party on
their terms.

If you caught any of the MTV ball, you would have seen that he was
generally correct about the two parties (pun intended) being
different.  You wouldn't see Sonic Noise at a Bush function.

As a former college Democrat liberal, and a current Republican sympathizer,
I found the bit very amusing.  You might check out a book called (I think)
"Republicans and Democrats."  It is a very funny bit of trivia written
by one Republican and one Democrat, and makes much the same point.  Face
it:  Democrats are simply seen as more "fun" than Republicans.  If you
want to deny it, fine.  But don't criticize Rush for observing it and
using it for satirical purposes.

Love INC,
         --Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 27 Jan 1993 15:21:17 -0500
From:         John Violette <violette@APXTG03.APEX.DG.COM>
Subject:      Re: Mormon/LDS

>
> Ankerberg and Seldon have overgeneralized here in describing the

They, like most who sell something or their point of view, probably slant
things to their benifit.

> Christian position.  Both purgatory and universal salvation are points
> on which Christians disagree.  Large numbers of Christians (including
> most Roman Catholics and some Anglicans) expect purgatory after death;
> many other Christians (most Protestants) do not.  Similarly, the belief

Where in the Bible is purgatory mentioned or referenced?  On what is it based?

> many other Christians (most Protestants) do not.  Similarly, the belief
> that Christ's death will, in the end, save all people has been held by
> a small but not insignificant minority of Christians during the
> church's history;

Oh really?  John 3:36 "Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but
whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him."(NIV)

> to have held this belief, for example.  Purgatory and univeralism both
> fall within the range of orthodox, historic Christian beliefs; these
> cannot be used to distinguish "true" Christians from "false" ones.

True, there will be weeds or tares in the Church up until the very end...

+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
|John Violette <><            (UNIX-UNIX) violette@apex.dg.com        |
|Senior Production Tech.      (UNIX-CEO)  John_Violette@DGC.ceo.dg.com|
|Data General Corp.           (CEO-UNIX)  violette@apex.dg.com:dg-smtp|
|These are my own opinions and in no way reflect the opinions and     |
|policies of my employer.                                             |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"christia%asuacad.bitnet@vaxf.colorado.edu"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 23:21:28 -0700
From:         "Glenn Radinsky S05152@doc.flc.colorado.edu"
              <S05152@DOC.FLC.COLORADO.EDU>
Subject:      Rush and Clinton and the whole scene

> I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus
> Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no
> dissentions among you, but that you be united in the same
> mind and in the same judgement.  For it has been reported
> to me that there is quarreling among you, my brethren.
> What I mean is that each of you says, "I belong to Rush,"
> or "I belong to Clinton," or "I belong to Bush," or "I
> belong to Christ."  Is Christ divided?  Was Rush crucified
> for you?  Or were you baptized in the name of Clinton?

Amen and Amen

                            Glenn
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 26 Jan 1993 09:46:46 -0600
From:         jim coen <coen@ACC.WUACC.EDU>
Subject: Re: temporary goodbye

>Dear Christia,
>
>I am going to set nomail in a little bit.  It will probably last for
>2 weeks, until I get back from the conference in Washington.  I have
>a million things to do this week to prepare for it.  I have to give a
>talk at the conference, and I would appreciate your prayers.  Thanks
>for all your support.  You have ALL truly been a blessing to me.
>Goodbye for now.
>
>In Christ's Love,
>
>Scott D. Weberg
>

May God bless you as you go.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 25 Jan 1993 09:06:13 -0600
From:         jim coen <coen@ACC.WUACC.EDU>
Subject: Re: trial sign-off

Mark,
   I will miss you.

God Bless!

Jim Coen
coen@acc.wuacc.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: XGATE 2.00 MHS/SMTP Gateway
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sun, 24 Jan 1993 01:00:28 NZT
From:         Sandy Sartorelli <sandy.cit@MHSGATE.CIT.AC.NZ>
Subject:      Re: Defending yourself (was Re: Segregated churches)

> I have seen articles over the past couple of days saying that we
should not
> defend ourselves but that we do have a responsibility to defend other people,
> especially our family.
>    Would the fact that a person who has attacked you is extremely likely to
> then go on and attack someone else be a reason to defend yourself and try to
> restrain your attacker(s) if possible in order to prevent any further
> attacks?


In my humble O:-) opinion Peter, Yes!

Also think of the commandment (no, I 'm not getting onto that thread
here) " Love your neighbour as yourself."  This command works back
the front as well - if you love your neighbour enough to defend him,
surely you should love yourself enough to defend yourself as well?
(Obviously love should be extended to the attacker if possible also -
but I fail to see how tolerating his/her violent behavior shows love
to the attacker in the long run).  Enough already.

 Cheers, Sandy Sartorelli






---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy Sartorelli                Internet: sandy.cit@mhsgate.cit.ac.nz
                                              MHS: sandy@cit via nhub
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 07:43:44 -0500
From:         Braden Glen <d246@UNI05.LARC.NASA.GOV>
Subject:      ongsig

  'God in not interested only in Christian writers as such. He is concerned
with all kinds of writing. In the same way a sacred calling in not limited to
ecclesiastical functions. The man who is weeding a field of turnips is also
serving God.'
                             'Heaven, Earth and Outer Space' _Decision_ 10/63

  'If a man who cannot draw horses is illustrating a book, the pictures that
involve horses will be the bad pictures, let his spiritual condition be what
it may.'
                             _The Allegory of Love_ ch7, sec3

   'There is no neutral ground in the universe: every square inch, every split
second, is claimed by God and counterclaimed by Satan.'
                        'Christianity and Culture', _Christian Reflections_

   'Christians and their opponents again and again expect that some new
discovery will either turn matters of faith into matters of knowledge or else
reduce them to patent absurdities. But it has never happened.'
                           _The World's Last Night_   ch 6

  'You are told to love your neighbour as yourself. How do you love yourself?
When I look into my own mind, I find that I do not love myself by thinking
myself a dear old chap or having affectionate feelings. I do not think that I
love myself because I am particularly good, but just because I am myself and
quite apart from my character.... You dislike what you have done, but you
don't cease to love yourself....
   You may even think that you ought to go to the police and own up and be
hanged. Love is not affectionate feeling, but a steady wish for the loved
person's ultimate good as far as it can be obtained.'
                          _Answers to Questions on Christianity_

In His Love
Glen

 Glen A Braden                           D246@uni05.larc.nasa.gov
 System Analyst                          wk 804 865-9387
 UNISYS                                  hm 804 851-6530

 'By and by when I look at His face, beautiful face, thorn scarred face,
    By and by when I look at His face, I'll wish I've given him more...'
                                              -Hymn,
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 28 Jan 1993 09:21:43 CST
From:         A16905@ITESO.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Tongues

In my church, you don't have to go up front. Servicers come to you and
pray for you if you want during the Fundamental Evangelization Course
in the Charismatic movement.

Shalom,
Memo.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sat, 23 Jan 1993 09:48:18 -0600
From:         jim coen <coen@ACC.WUACC.EDU>
Subject:      Re: Last night's Rush Limbaugh Show

Scott Wilburn writes:

>Sorry, guys, but I do not like anyone doing what Rush Limbaugh does and that is
>putting down other people.  Jesus said love one another as I have loved you.
>Rush Limbaugh must not love himself since he seems to express hatred towards
>others.
>
>Scott Wilburn
>Gonzaga University
>SWILBURN@GONZAGA.BITNET
>

What do we mean by "putting down other people". I suppose a case could be made
that Jesus "put down" the Pharisees. (You brood of vipers. You blind guides.)

Jim Coen
coen@acc.wuacc.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: christia@asuacad.bitnet
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"christia%asuacad.bitnet@vaxf.colorado.edu"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 22 Jan 1993 14:38:25 -0700
From:         "Glenn Radinsky S05152@doc.flc.colorado.edu"
              <S05152@DOC.FLC.COLORADO.EDU>
Subject:      Thanks, Mark

Dear Mark:

     Thanks for the response.  I am going to find out this
Tuesday about the answer.  Since I have been waiting for it
a long time, I am getting rather antsy.  Keeping my fingers
corssed...

                         God Bless,



                            Glenn
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Via:      UK.AC.SOLENT; 21 JAN 93  9:20:45 GMT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 21 Jan 1993 09:22:00 +0000
From:         CAROL L <Z_STAFF_CL@SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE.AC.UK>
Subject:      Re: Defending Ourselves

From:        Marissa Ratcliff <MRATCLIF@EARN.UGA>
>  You can defend yourself physically and risk a beating , or even death.
>  Bruises will make it easier to prosecute the guy if he is caught.

Also you can deter the attacker to the point were he desists.  This
has now become the recomended course of action here because of that.
The police now believe that the statistics indicate that you are more
likely to avoid injury by fighting back in such a way as to deter.

>  On the other hand, you can submit and you will most likely survive.

The current thinking is that if a man is likely to kill (and they are
a small percentage of rapists) he will anyway.  Some theories also
suggest that those who may/may not kill are more likely to if the
rape is committed.  Fighting back is, therefore, about prevention
of rape.

If you can prevent someone from commiiting such a crime, which may in
turn lead to a worse crime, why take no action ?

Carol A Long,  Southampton Institute of Higher Education, England
        email     :  Z_STAFF_CL@UK.AC.SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE
DISCLAIMER - merely musings unless otherwise stated.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU