HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: petersob@uwec.edu (Brent Peterson)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: RE: And what *is* a Christian
Date: 16 Aug 92 05:42:27 GMT
Organization: Univ of Wisc - Eau Claire

I thought that your definition of a Christian was fine.  It could be 
expanded, but in its simplist from it involves a personal relationship
with Jesus.

>As extra credit, I'd be curious to hear what people here mean by "accept"
>Jesus and "believe on" Jesus, since these terms are in danger of becoming
>buzzwords without content. This is not an invitation to a flamefest - I
>just want to make sure that my dictionary has not gone out of date. :-)

You could open up an arguement about whether salvation is a one-time
event or a process.  I used to think that "accepting" Christ was a 
one-time deal for everyone.  Now, I've been more open because there
are people that can't remember the day, hour, or even year that they
were saved.  For me it was a little bit of both.  "Believing" in Jesus
to me is "a trusting response to God's grace".

Brent Peterson
petersob@uwec.edu
From: ptfarre@afterlife.ncsc.mil (Peter Farrell)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: You've GOTTA be kidding...
Date: 17 Aug 92 06:09:03 GMT
Organization: The Great Beyond

In response to this assessment: 
>
>[hmmm.... this could easily turn into a rehash of the homosexuality
>discussion.  But I think Keirsey's objection was to the form and
>attitude of the response, not the substance.  It was the stereotyping
>of "deceived liberal Christians", and the idea that we shouldn't
>bother listening.  --clh]
 
I would again like to add that I was not stereotyping liberal Christians
but using the term as it was suggested to me by the original posting.
The author of that posting, if memory serves, made the distinct
suggestion that he anticipated quite a few "liberal Christians" would
come in heavy in favor of this "polyamory" thing.  I personally doubt
there is such a thing as a "liberal Christian" or a "conservative
Christian"; there are people who obey Him and people who don't. (It's
just that some of those who don't obey Him are more up front about it
than others.)  There WILL be surprises on the great and terrible day when
He separates the sheep from the goats.
From: Steve.Hayes@p5.f22.n7101.z5.fidonet.org (Steve Hayes)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: What is co-dependance and what is the Bible's view of it?
Date: 20 Aug 92 06:10:30 GMT


 * Moved from SOC.RELIGION.CHRISTIAN (Usenet Xtian) by Steve Hayes

[Nancy Tinkham replied to a question (I can't tell from whom)
about co-dependency:
>     As far as I know, the Bible does not directly address codependency
>or related problems like addiction or low self-esteem.  These questions
>seem not to have been raised by the Biblical authors and their 
>culture.
--clh]

After seeing this exchange, I would be interested in knowing what 
co-dependency is from ANY point of view. I've never heard of it. Can anyone 
enlighten me?

Steve Hayes
P O Box 7648, Pretoria
0001 South Africa
--  
INTERNET: Steve.Hayes@p5.f22.n7101.z5.fidonet.org
via:  THE CATALYST BBS in Port Elizabeth, South Africa.
       (catpe.alt.za)   +27-41-34-1122 HST or +27-41-34-2859, V32bis & HST.
From: nlt@gboro.glassboro.edu (N. L. Tinkham)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: LXX      the SEPTUAGINT (in english)
Date: 20 Aug 92 06:06:34 GMT
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Glassboro State College

> I'm looking for an English version of the Septuagint or otherwise known as...
> LXX

My copy of the Septuagint is

	_The_Septuagint_With_Apocrypha:_Greek_and_English_
	Sir Lancelot C. L. Brenton, translator
	Hendrickson Publishers (P.O. Box 3473, Peabody, MA 01961-3473)
	1986
	ISBN 0-913573-44-2

It contains the Greek text of the Septuagint, with an English translation
in columns alongside the Greek.

The translation is a bit archaic in style -- it is an 1851 translation,
and it seems to be trying to copy the KJV style, with "thee"s and "thou"s.
It's readable enough to make the LXX accessible for study purposes.  If
you're just looking for an English translation of the Apocryphal books,
then I agree with the moderator that a modern translation would be more
useful.

_____________________________________________________________________________

                                              Nancy Tinkham
                                              nlt@gboro.glassboro.edu
From: SEANNA@bnr.ca (S.M.)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Question about St. Laurence
Date: 18 Aug 92 06:27:08 GMT

I am posting this on behalf of my son.  I will pass on all email
or posted replies.  No flames please ;).
...sw


My name is Trevyn Watson and I am 7 1/2.  I was wondering
if there was a saint named St. Laurence.  Was the river
named after a real person?  And if it was, why did they
pick that name?

--
Seanna Watson   Bell-Northern Research,
(seanna@bnr.ca) Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Opinions, what opinions?  Oh *these* opinions. | It's hard to seize the
No, they're not BNR's, they're mine.           | day when you must first
I knew I'd left them somewhere.                | grapple with the morning.
From: SEANNA@bnr.ca (S.M.)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Toronto legislation against Christians
Date: 16 Aug 92 04:43:59 GMT

I was surprised to see this very old thread pop up again yesterday,
and then I read last night in the Ottawa newspaper that there has
been a new development which people might be interested in.

The original proposed legislation would have banned groups which the
Toronto City Council deems discriminatory from using Toronto city
property.  The Salvation Army was considered discriminatory (against
gays, if I remember correctly), and therefore it would not be permitted
to use city facilities.  The legislation has been ammended to allow
any group which obeys the Ontario Human Rights Code to use the facilities.
This was done in order to free the city from responsibility of deciding
who was discriminatory.

Under the Ontario Human Rights Code, religious groups are exempt from
the requirement not to discriminate on the basis of religion.  It's
hard to see how the code could operate any other way--I certainly would
not want to see a Moslem, a Buddhist, or an atheist as Moderator of the
United Church of Canada, and no doubt people of other faiths would have
similar objections.  But, there are very sticky issues lurking under
the surface.  What if:

1) A religion does not permit people with dark skin to hold certain
positions.  We all (I hope) agree that this is wrong.  But how should
the legislation deal with it?

2) A religion does not permit women to hold certain positions.  Here
there is disagreement among Christians.  How should the legislation
for this differ from (1)?

3) A religion does not permit homosexuals to hold certain positions.
Here there is even more disagreement and controversy among Christians.
Again, how should the legislation deal with this?

My point here is not to address the issues that I cited above, but to
ask how we, as Christians, can simultaneously live in a non-Christian
society, uphold the downtrodden, uphold God, be true to our principles,
and be true to Christ.

The vast majority of Christian churches and organizations are supported
by the government through tax incentives etc; few choose to be totally
independent of society.  Somehow, we have to reconcile this relationship
with the requirement that we be "in the world, but not of the world".
When the stated values of society diverge from Christian values, I
think our response should not be to try to re-impose Christian values,
but to look again at our relationship to an increasingly non-Christian
society.  (BTW, I am not sure that this is such a bad development--if
Christianity is no longer the default, than both Christians and non-
Christians are challenged to consider more carefully their choices of
faith and morality, and as a result, Christians would hopefully be more
committed to these choices.)

--
Seanna Watson   Bell-Northern Research,
(seanna@bnr.ca) Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Opinions, what opinions?  Oh *these* opinions. | It's hard to seize the
No, they're not BNR's, they're mine.           | day when you must first
I knew I'd left them somewhere.                | grapple with the morning.
From: lazarus@wixer.cactus.org (Michael Lax)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Trying to define Christianity
Date: 20 Aug 92 06:24:10 GMT
Organization: Real/Time Communications

A questions about Christianity:

(But first, a few of _my_ assumptions)

     It is based, primarily, on a 2,000 year old book written about 100
     years after the protaginists died.  This book steals heavily from a
     5,000+ year old book.  BOTH have been heavily mistranslated, either
     from ancient Greek or ancient Hebrew & Aramaic.  Some claim both books
     are "divinely inspired," while others claim really wise men wrote
     them.  Few, anymore, claim that god wrote them.


Question:

There seems to be a common thread amongst devout Christians.  They have, in
some manner, found Jesus.  They have some experience or enlightenment, to
which they attribute this particular deity.  Now what confuses me is how,
when someone else brings up a similar occurrence, but attributes it to
something else, these same people say the experience is invalid.  And then
_they_ get angry and defensive when someone tries to logically explain away
their experience.  Huh?  I am very confused.


   _______________________                             _________________
   \        \            /  Michael Lax                |    ACT UP!    |
    \        \          /  12514 Esplanade St., #B     |  FIGHT BACK!  |
     \        \        /  Austin, Texas 78727-4409     |  FIGHT AIDS!  |
      \      / \      /  U.S.A.                        =================
       \    /   \    /  512.837.1596 (h), 512.836.9715 (fax)
        \  /     \  /  email:  lazarus@wixer.cactus.org
Please,  \/       \/
do not    \       /  Leviticus 18:22 vs. Samuel I 20 - hmmm?
feed or    \     /
tease the   \   /
straight     \ /      "Never let the bastards get you down"
people.       V
From: dabbott@augean.eleceng.adelaide.edu.au (Derek Abbott)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Paul, Could he be wrong?
Date: 14 Aug 92 09:12:35 GMT
Organization: Electrical and Electronic Eng., University of Adelaide

In article <Aug.10.00.39.49.1992.5874@dartagnan.rutgers.edu> Malachi.Robertson@lambada.oit.unc.edu (Malachi Robertson) writes:
>In article <Aug.5.23.47.16.1992.23795@dumas.rutgers.edu> aj@hoqas2.att.com (Ahmad M Jrad) writes:
>Now let's look at Jesus.  Yes, not a jot or tittle of the Law would
>pass away (something Paul would agree with, by the way), but he was

How does one explain that a jot and a few tittles were changed.

eg. When Peter sees the visions of animals on a sheet and declares that
we are free to eat anything. Doesn't this change the dietry laws?

I know it's only a minor tittle, but that's what's at issue here.
From: eje@irenaeus.mlo.dec.com (Eric James Ewanco)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Biblical Inerrancy
Date: 18 Aug 92 05:48:24 GMT
Reply-To: ewanco@kalvin.enet.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation

In article <Aug.16.01.30.10.1992.820@athos.rutgers.edu>, John_Graves@cellbio.duke.edu writes:
From: jam8j@galen.med.Virginia.EDU (James A. Murray)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: And what *is* a Christian?
Date: 16 Aug 92 05:41:57 GMT
Organization: University of Virginia

I have heard about these christians, but I don't remember
having met a real one.
--
James A. Murray                    |  Quantum materiae possit materiari
University of Virginia             |  marmota monax si marmota monax materiam
jam8j@galen.med.Virginia.edu       |  possit materiari?  
Compuserve: 71022,1000             |                     ______
From: GOGOLEKP@qucdn.queensu.ca (Peter Gogolek)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Jehovah's Wintnesses
Date: 20 Aug 92 06:24:18 GMT
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston

A small book I have read is "Jehovah's Witnesses" by
Anthony A. Hoekema, published by Eerdmans in 1972.  It is
a extraction and revision of the relevant sections of his
"The Four Major Cults".  The author is not a former JW but
he is certainly not sympathetic (to put it mildly).

Peter Gogolek
Kingston, Ontario, Canada
From: boon@cc.uow.edu.au (Boon Chye Lee)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Fasting
Date: 19 Aug 92 03:54:49 GMT
Organization: University Of Wollongong

amanda@intercon.com (Amanda Walker) writes:

>> So, is there  anyone out there with a similar history who has learned to 
>> use fasting as a spiritual discipline ?  Or anyone who tried and got 
>> burned ?  

>I have not had any problems with fasting, but admit that I have not noticed 
>any problems with food in general.  However, everything I have ever read or 
>heard about the practice (in non-Christian sources as well as Christian ones) 
>emphasizes one thing: NEVER FAST WITHOUT EXPERT SUPERVISION.  This can be 
>your priest or spiritual director (assuming they have experience with 
>fasting), your doctor, or some other qualified person, but it is NOT 
>something to try on your own.  Nutrition is the most obvious factor, but far 
>from the only one.  Anyone with any kind of eating disorder (even a mild one) 
>will find fasting to be playing with fire.  Fasting also induces altered 
>states of consciousness and perception, which can trigger other problems.

Some years ago I read Richard Foster's Celebration of Discipline.
One of the chapters deals in some detail with fasting and includes
a practical discussion of how to actually go about it - from 12-hour
fasts to more extended ones.  The book made quite an impact on me at
the time.

I have the book at home, and will look up more details if anyone's interested.

Boon Lee
Economics Dept
University of Wollongong
NSW, Australia
From: rreid@ecst.csuchico.edu (Ralph Reid III)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: thought for the day (8-12)
Date: 13 Aug 92 07:19:01 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico

Wednesday, August 12:

     Come you who have been blessed by my father, inherit the kingdom 
prepared for you from the founding of the world.  <Matthew 25: 34>

-- 
Ralph.  N6BNO.
Compuserve - 72250.3521@compuserve.com.  Phone 1-916-345-9155.
lectromail- rreid@cscihp.ecst.csuchico.edu.
I do not waste time expressing others' opinions!
From: iant@teleride.on.ca (Ian Thomson)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: Tai Chi: A Dynamic Meditation?
Date: 17 Aug 92 00:48:44 GMT
Organization: Teleride Sage Ltd.

I have studied and taught Yang style Tai Chi for over 6 years.  I have also
been studying Zen meditation and Chi Kung.  I personally find Tai Chi wonderful
and an excellent form of meditation.  Once the body knows all the movements
and is completely relaxed it begins to move of its own volition(sp?), the mind
becomes cvalm and serene.  Some times I am not even aware of where or who I
am I just exist.  Sometimes I am just an observer, observing my body move, and
feel the air as thick as water.  I even feel a warmth moving through my body
sometimes collecting on my joints.

I use the sitting forms of mediation to actually circulate the energy in the
micro-cosmic ( Small heaveanly circle ).  I use both Tai Chi and sitting as
meditation, it is the Yin and Yang of meditation for me.

I find it easier to have the peace of Tai Chi spread into my every day life
that just sitting meditation.

Ian
From: anand@binah.cc.brandeis.edu (SHALINI ANAND)
Subject: SRI KRSNA JANAMASTMI GREETINGS
Organization: Brandeis University
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 16:24:41 GMT


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

@@   @@
@@   @@
@@@@@@@   @@@@@  @@@@@  @@@@@  @@   @@
@@   @@    @  @  @@  @  @@  @   @   @
@@   @@    @@@@@ @@@@   @@@      @@@
                 @@     @@        @
                 @@     @@        @

                      
@@   @   @@  @   @ @   @@ @@   @@@@@
@@  @    @@@    @      @@  @       @
@@@@     @@     @@@    @@  @    @  @
@@  @    @@        @   @@  @    @  @ 
@@   @   @@     @  @   @@  @@    @@@@@


    @@  @@@@@  @@ @@  @@@@@  @@@@  @@@
    @@      @  @@  @      @  @@  @@ @@
    @@  @@ @@  @@  @  @@ @@  @@  @  @@
@   @@   @@@@@ @@  @@  @@@@@ @@  @  @@
@   @@
@@@@@
                @                 @
                @                 
@@@@@    @@@@  @@@@    @@@  @@@   @@
    @    @      @      @@ @@ @@   @@
 @  @      @    @      @@    @@   @@ 
 @  @       @   @      @@    @@   @@
 @@@@@  @@@@     @@@   @@    @@   @@

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

MAY THE CELEBRATION OF KRISHNA'S APPEARANCE DAY BE VERY AUSPICIOUS AND JOYFUL 

TO ALL THE READERS 

SRI KRISHNA JANAMASTMI KI JAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Shalini
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
From: farris@ruhets.rutgers.edu (Lorenzo Farris)
Subject: Re: In the beginning...
Organization: ----
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 16:04:51 GMT


Alan writes:

>Everything is perfect. All our suffering is merely an illusion...

>This answer is fine if we are merely interested in discussing
>philosophical theories. But, with all due respect, of what value
>is this viewpoint to people who are suffering real pain, crying
>real tears? Does not compassion for the suffering of others
>(not to mention our own pain!) compel us to take another look
>at these smooth explanations we learned in ashrams and
>meditation halls?

If all they are are smooth explanations, you are right, they are
of little use. But remembrance of our totality means we remember
that every being has the knowledge it takes to move beyond suffering. 
They choose not to exercize that knowledge.  And in that sense,
suffering certainly is an illusion.  But this remembrance
also means that feeding my fellow being is the same as feeding myself.
Comforting my fellow being is my own search for consolation and
understanding.  Showing my siblings the way to happiness is finding
where it is myself.  
Perhaps saying everything is perfect is the
wrong way to say it.  Everything just IS, and doesn't really care
whether we think it is perfect or shitty.  And when we experience
the universe more directly, value judgements have no meaning.  
Saying everything is perfect has nothing to do with the universe as
it is, except that saying this is also part of the universe.

Yours in rambling incoherence,
	Lorenzo
From: MORIARTY@VM1.NoDak.EDU
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: what bodhisattvas do (re Raj's re to pat)
Date: 17 Aug 92 17:59:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: qiclab.1992Aug18.000150.20280
Organization: North Dakota Higher Education Computer Network

Existence and non-existence are part of the onward flow of
samboghakaya.  The Large Sutra on Perfect Wisdom says that the
bodhisatva does not dwell on such matters.  (S)he is beyond
those questions in a realm where such matters are always already
reconciled in samadhi.

--
MORIARTY@VM1.NoDak.EDU
From: raj@globe1.att.com (Rajendra P Sharma)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: Proper understandings and renunciation
Keywords: Buddha Nature, "Renunciation of non-duality"
Date: 14 Aug 92 23:34:50 GMT
Organization: ----


Pat writes:

> since nonduality is nonexistence,


	Non-duality is not nonexistence [as many have criticized Buddhism
					 as nihilism.]

	On the contrary, non-duality includes all: the existence,
						   non-existence, and
						   what is beyond
						   existence and
						   non-existence.
						
						
> doesn't a Bodhisatva indeed renounce nonduality?


	Don't know what Bodhisatvas [really] do.

	Bodhisatvas [it is believed] are free of all concepts,
	            [including renunciation and non-renunciation,
	             existence and non-existence, and, indeed,
	             duality and non-duality].          

	Bodhisatvas are "tathagatas."
	


---raj
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
From: pjm@cshl.org (Pat Monardo)
Subject: Re: Proper understandings and renunciation
Keywords: Buddha Nature, "Renunciation of non-duality"
Organization: ----
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 15:59:55 GMT

In article <1992Aug13.181830.17507@cco.caltech.edu> raj@globe1.att.com (Rajendra P Sharma) writes:
>
>Pat writes:
>
>> Is it advisable to renounce nonduality?
>
>
>	The "one" who "attempts to renounce nonduality" is "in
>	duality." The "nonduality," by definition, is beyond
>	duality; in fact does not know "duality;" but is the
>	basis of "duality" as well.
>
>	Therefore, the question is absurd.

since nonduality is nonexistence,
doesn't a Bodhisatva indeed renounce nonduality?
this is something i am currently interested in so
any input would be nice.

-- 
-- Pat Monardo
-- pjm@cshl.org
From: tftang@comm.mot.com (Tang TingFook)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
Subject: Re: Enlightened Beings
Date: 20 Aug 92 15:19:08 GMT
Article-I.D.: qiclab.1992Aug20.183626.21253
Organization: Motorola Penang

In article <1992Aug19.081948.26026@qiclab.scn.rain.com>, bguest9@bsg9.Corp.Sun.COM (Kristian Skrinak) writes:
> 
> Are there any genuinely enlightened beings on the planet? Who and where
> are they?
> 
> Please, reply directly as well as post.
> 
> --
> bguest9@bsg9.Corp.Sun.COM (Kristian Skrinak)
> 
> 
There is a abbot in California by the name of Master Hsuan Hua which by
his deeds, speeches and experiences of his disciples, can be considered
as an enlighten being. 

I will provide more details when I get hold of the relevant materials.

--
tftang@comm.mot.com (Tang TingFook)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern
From: cup.portal.com!Tagi%portal@uunet.UU.NET
Subject: Re: Enlightened Beings
Organization: ----
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 21:15:21 GMT

Enlightenment?

NONenlightenment?

Yin?

Yang?

Ugh!
From: Linda.Birmingham@brunel.ac.uk (Linda Birmingham)
Subject: Re: Tai Chi: A Dynamic Meditation?
Organization: Brunel University, West London, UK
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 18:20:33 GMT

In article <1992Aug10.012001.23505@qiclab.scn.rain.com> jeffjc@cs.mcgill.ca (Jeffrey CHANCE) writes:
>
>I don't actually know Tai Chi, but I did go to an introductory
>session once and learned the first 8 or so moves, and seriously
I also have only had tastes of Tai Chi but will in time do a 
complete course.

>You have to concentrate very pointedly when doing the moves,
>and also since you`re moving the limbs you're increasing
>your circulation and generating positive effects for the
>body too, as well as the mind. I guess you could maybe say

More than this, the moves are very flowing and circular and
I am sure will remove energy blocks . Most
people I have spoken to that do Tai Chi have a very good understanding and
experience of energy flow within the body.

>it's a gradation: sitting meditation, then hatha yoga where
>you sit in various asanas, or do slow-moving routines, while
>in a meditative consciousness, and then Tai Chi, where you
>are still in a meditative consciousness but the motion is
>more dynamic, and the meditation is almost all concentration,

A gradation ? These are generalisations. I think
those that practise all the above forms of meditation practises would
each describe them in different ways. I myself do not see the
same gradation. Would an expert in Tai Chi say the the meditation
is all concentration ? I doubt it.

I think the concentration required in learning the form makes
Tai Chi  a good meditative practise to start with, especially if you are
a fidgety type of person. But I believe it would also bring you to
contemplation and wisdom with time.

I also believe it is good for balancing the male and female energies ...
.. and that I should start a course as soon as I can !

The Tai Chi students I have met, have in general seemed more peaceful
than the Hatha Yoga students and a few Tai Chi movements have a
much more calming affect on me than one or a few Hatha Yoga movements.

However, there are many different styles of Hatha Yoga (and tai Chi) and
I think done in a wise way Hatha and Tai Chi are comparable.


Linda.

-- 
Brunel University, Uxbridge, Middlesex, England.
janet: Linda.Birmingham@brunel.ac.uk

Newsgroups: soc.religion.eastern