HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bradk%isdgsm@rtsg.mot.com (Brad Kaiser)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: damnation/purgatory
Date: 5 Nov 92 07:43:25 GMT
Reply-To: bradk@isdgsm.rtsg.mot.com

Brad Kaiser <bradk%isdgsm@rtsg.mot.com> writes:
> The ancient Hebrews didn't believe in heaven at all -- they
> believed that the afterlife was just "Sheol", a realm of shades
> outside the presence of God.  Yet they wrote the most sublime
> hymns of praise ever penned, the Psalms.  Were they mistaken?

In article <Nov.1.00.12.02.1992.22234@geneva.rutgers.edu> David Wagner 
wagner@grace.math.uh.edu) writes:
>This, I submit, is pure rot. How could King David say, 
>
>	"and I will dwell in the house of the LORD forever" 
>	(Ps 23)?  

OOPS!!!  I should have said "SOME OF the ancient Hebrews didn't
believe that THEY went to heaven after death ..."

You've cited the Psalmic evidence for those who did; here's the
other side of the coin:

    Do you show your wonders to the dead?
    Do those who are dead rise up and praise you?
    Is your love declared in the grave, your
      faithfulness in Destruction?
    Are your wonders known in the place of darkness,
      or your righteous deeds in the land of oblivion?
                -- Ps 88:10-12

    No one remembers you when he is dead.
    Who praises you from the grave?
                -- Ps 6:5

(I believe there's another passage along these lines, too, but
I can't find it right now.)

>And, as Christ himself pointed out, God identified himself
>to Moses as the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and God
>is God of the living, and not the dead!

And the precise reason He had to point that out was that some
of His contemporaries (the Sadducees) did not believe that
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were alive with God in heaven!

See, it's only 50% rot! ;-)

>	"O Israel, put your hope in the LORD,
>	for with the LORD is unfailing love
>	and with him is *full* redemption.
>	He himself will redeem Israel from all their sins.

Here, we agree!

        "If you make the Most High your dwelling --
         even the LORD, who is my refuge,
         then no harm will befall you,,
         no disaster will come near your tent.
               Ps 91:9-10

>
>David H. Wagner			"I will not die but live,
>a confessional Lutheran		and will proclaim what the LORD
>					has done."  Ps 118:17

Brad Kaiser
(bradk%isdgsm@rtsg.mot.com)

	  Those who trust in Him shall understand truth,
	  and the faithful shall abide with Him in love;
	  Because grace and mercy are with His holy ones,
	  and His care is with His elect.
		    -- Wis 3:9 [NAB]
From: Bjorn.B.Larsen@delab.sintef.no (Bjorn B. Larsen)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: ECSTACY
Date: 10 Nov 92 06:47:31 GMT
Reply-To: bjorn.b.larsen@delab.sintef.no
Organization: delab

Dear Todd,

I have no experience with any drug, but I have seen the effects
mentioned in the news, and users in our meetings, and I must admit
that I am not able to find anything 'good' in any drug. But that is my
personal opinion. I should also say thay I am not in a position to
condemn you, nor do I have any desire to do so, but I must say that I
jumped in my chair when I noted that you are also on the Advisory
Committee (whatever that might be) of your church.

What you wrote about your experience with 'extacy' really scared me.
Not the fact that you felt only well, and loving everybody, but the
way you describe it! To me it sounded like a sales brochure. Sure,
there is nothing wrong in feeling good, or really loving other people
from the bottom of your heart. The problem is the way you acchieve
this feeling. And that is exactly what it is, a feeling. When the trip
is finished, the feelings leave you, and you will have to wait untill
next time. If you are lucky you may experience something similar then.

Satan may well appear as the angel of light, so why should it not be
possible for him to organize a drug that appears 'good?' It might even
feel so 'good' that you really want to feel 'good' once more. And what
do you do then? What can you possibly do when you have to go to work
and want to feel 'good' while at work?

I agree that the feeling sounds good, but I should point out that, as
you probably know, this feeling is obtainable in a legal way. That is,
without the use of 'extacy' or other drugs. Even if we are christians,
that is only the beginning. Jesus has far more in stock for us than
salvation. Indeed, that is the most important fact, but as I have to
stay on this earth for some years from my salvation till He comes for
me, He has also provided me with some gifts to help me.

Those are, for instance, the gifts mentioned in 1. Chor 12. Let Him
fill you with His Holy Spirit, and you shall eperience a feeling even
better than 'extacy.' It is legal, competely harmless, or should I say
that it will be of great benefit to you. You will feel love for
anybody, you may even end up doing a better job at work, no matter
what is your profession. And I could continue. This feeling is not
bound to the intake of any drug. The only requirement is a willing
heart, and a real desire to follow Jesus. An attitude like this is not
likely to be turned on and off as it might happen if it was depentent
on a pill. If you want to be a close follower to Jesus, then you
probably want this just as much on monday as on sunday, or in the
middle of the night, or ...

The question is only if one is willing to let Jesus _completely_ into
ones heart, and submit to Him in everything. Not only regarding
salvation.

In Him,

Bj{\o}rn
From: markc@eomer.hw.stratus.com (Mark Christensen)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Liberal/New Age Religion (Was: Santeria and animal-sacrifice)
Date: 13 Nov 92 06:50:45 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

>Sure, I agree fully that Christianity is often denied equal standing
>with other beliefs in society.  But this situation is not helped when
>loud vitriolic "Christians" spread what is viewed as a doctrine of
>hate.  In trying to achieve their goals, many modern fundamentalists

Arghhh!  Let's attack the fundamentalists again!  Granted that many
fundamentalists do indeed have the wrong approach sometimes, but many
more of us recognize the need of people for a savior.  It is, indeed,
possible to love people and hate their sin.  Jesus Christ had
much compassion for people, but not their sin.  I think fundamentalists
sometimes forget that positional sanctification is brought about by
salvation, but personal sanctification can be a gradual process...not
always instantanious.  But still, I think people in general like to
attack us fundamentalists because we believe in holiness and purity.
We believe in the fundamentals of the faith and in eccliastical and
personal separation.  Nothing wrong with that.  That's what the Bible
teaches. I enjoy Psalm 5:4 which says, "For thou art not a God that
hath pleasure in wickness: neither shall evil dwell with thee."
States rather clearly how God feels toward sin. 
Don't let the degradation of our society brainwash you into
thinking that God's word changes and that we have to "keep up" with
the way society goes.  God DOES NOT change.  Anyway, I just want to
educate others not to use the term fundamentalist as a replacement
for any type of religious zealot you can think of.  The definition
of a fundamentalist is very well defined amoung the fundamentalist.
You will find that Jim Bakker, Pat Robertson, Pat Buchanon, 
Jerry Falwell, Jimmy Swaggert, Billy Graham, etc are NOT
fundamentalist and they themselves do not consider themselves to
be fundamentalist.  I bet most of the readers of this newsgroup would
be hard pressed to name a fundamentalist or fundamentalist institution
since most are not pubically well known.

All this just to say, please don't use fundamentalist when you
really might mean political right wingers or religious zealots.
Thank you.

mc
From: bjr@expert.cc.purdue.edu (Brett Riester)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Messiah Soon?
Date: 6 Nov 92 06:19:39 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center

This article is directed to Michael A. Dalton who posted the article
in this newgroup about 'Messiah Soon?'; I know you wanted email instead
but I don't know how to reach your host from Purdue...

Hello,

You don't know me, but I read your newsgroup article in soc.religion.christian
about the 2nd coming of Christ.
I don't know if I can help you, but I strongly believe that these are the
"End Times" as mentioned in the Bible; although I am familiar with some
of the Books (Revelation, etc.) you mentioned, I am by no means an expert
on them [Revelation is extremely symbolic, and even in the Bible it says
that "you will not know the day or hour [of my coming]"; however, it also
says that "you will know when the [end times] are near; even when I am
at the door".]

The biggest source of my faith comes from the reported messages that our
Blessed Virgin Mother Mary has been giving to people around the world.

If you're interested in finding out more about these messages, I can give
you the address of a national newsletter devoted to informing as many
people as possible about Mary's messages about the Great Period of Trial
that we are now in.

As for what signs we should look for, I don't know exactly WHAT will happen.
But there'll supposedly be more global disasters (earthquakes, etc.) which
will cause a collapse of both the U.S. and world economies. Some sources
say that there will be a One World Government and a One World Religion.
It also says in the Bible that there will be many false prophets claiming
that "I am He" or "I am the Messiah" and not to believe because these things
must happen before His True Coming.

I have read various books about Revelation; I would suggest reading
"The Late Great Planet Earth" or some other book by Hal Lindsey.  I would
also suggest "The Final Hour" although I don't know the author off hand.

One thing is for sure, though, before the 2nd coming of Christ, there will
be a period of Great Suffering and Sorrow (often called the Tribulation).
Some Christians believe in the "Rapture" in which all those "saved" in
Christ will be swept up to heaven in the "blink of an eye" and will be
spared the Tribulation.  I, however, am a Catholic and do not believe
that there will be such a "Rapture"; we believe that everyone must
face the Hour of Trial in order to bring about the Victory of Jesus'
Sacred Heart.

You said in your article that your working on a "project"; what kind of
project is it (for school, church, personal, or otherwise)?

If you have any more questions, or would like the address of the newsletter
I mentioned (call A Call To Peace), please email me; I'm a sophomore in
CPT at Purdue University in West Lafayette, IN.  My email address is
bjr@expert.cc.purdue.edu.

Thanks for Hearing Me Out!

Brett
-- 
Riester
	riesterb@feserve.cc.purdue.edu
	bjr@expert.cc.purdue.edu
From: ricko@ee.uts.edu.au (Rick Jelliffe)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: ECSTACY
Date: 10 Nov 92 06:45:09 GMT
Organization: University of Technology, Sydney

twiggs_te@alice.lrc.edu writes:

>I recently tried the drug 'ecstacy' (xtc) in a club with a few of my friends.
>I don't know why I did it....I just wanted to see what the craze was about.

>It was nothing like I expected an illegal drug to be.  I mean, I am on the 
>Advisory Committee at my church (a Lutheran church), and have always thought
>that drugs were scary, evil substances.  But I was shocked as to how 
>spiritually enhancing this substance is.

Of course drugs are pleasant or amazing or strengthening, that's why
they're popular. The unpleasant parts are often not seen at first (habits,
needing money and therefore having to steal and cheat, paranioa, mistrust
of authority, etc.).

I`ve never taken ecstacy, so I don't know if my idea of heaven matches
yours (though your heaven seems to do without a direct vision of God,
which is interesting). And if it is physically safe (don't trust anyone
you buy it from!!), then it does sound fun.

But I think you should be very careful of where you buy it from. If you
buy something from a business that kills, whether policemen or rivals
or anti-drug campaigners, then you get their blood on your hands. To
me this makes a fundamental difference between alcohol (the drink
companies have not killed anyone to make and distribute their product)
and most drugs (can you be sure that your pleasure hasn't been ensured 
by murder).  Following this line, I also think marijuana grown at home for
private use is an entirely different kettle of moral fish than marijuana
bought from someone in the mafia system: both still have health and civic
arguments against them, but the latter is a million times worse in my view. 

So perhaps ecstacy might be harmless fun in your view (though haven't there
been a lot of heart failures at raves attributed to ecstasy?), but if it
puts you at the end of the money chain in a black market that does not
hesitate to use violence and murder to protect itself, then it is not
harmless at all: no matter how much fun it is, it compromises you.

Its just not loving to allow innocent people (e.g. policemen and their
families) to suffer because of something that gives you pleasure when dancing.

This point is also made by the English poet George Herbert(1593-1633), 
speaking about a woman's love of pearls for which some diver had risked
his life: "Who with excessive pride/ Her own destruction and his danger
wears."

-ricko
From: wiggins@raedwald.cs.odu.edu (Samuel E Wiggins)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Nudity - Why be ashamed?
Date: 11 Nov 92 07:31:17 GMT
Organization: Old Dominion University, Norfolk, VA, USA

In article <Nov.8.01.23.37.1992.8986@geneva.rutgers.edu> ba2cs252@troi.cc.rochester.edu (Leonidas Hepis) writes:

   Apparently, before disobeying God, Adam and Eve were both naked 
   and not ashamed.  Then they disobeyed God and so they became 
   ashamed of their nakedness.  Now... I see a problem.  Eve grabs an 
   apple from the tree and she eats it, and so does Adam.  If there's 
   anything they should be ashamed of, that would be their hands or 
   mouth - why be ashamed of their genitals ...

   People who are naked and not ashamed at nudist beaches, locker 
   rooms, and among close family members (such as with the spouse) 
   are proof that shame of our naked bodies is far from being part of 
   our nature but more an acquired attitude ...

   If Adam had perfect control of his body before he 'sinned', then 
   it would have been impossible for the body to go against (the soul 
   of) Adam.  I think the popular belief is that it was the soul's 
   fault - not the body's rebellion.

   -leo

True, it is the soul's fault.  I think you missed a key point, though.  As
Christians we are supposed to be setting a good example for everyone
around us and be blameless.  Now, granted there may be some Christians out
there, who have absolute self-control and would not sin (have no lust, etc.)
upon seeing other people naked along with themselves.  However, these would be
Christians, right?  What about the non-Christians who saw you naked?  There
may even be a few non-Christians who are not led into lust by seeing people
naked.  The vast majority would be, however.  Therefore, I think it is partly
for their sake that you can't go back to unashamed nakedness.  You can't 
expect them to be able to control themselves, since they aren't Christian.
And, we Christians must interact with these people every day.  If Christians
went around naked, many people would be led into temptation and sin.  This
would not be good.  Yes, the lust is their problem, but you can't lead someone
to the edge of a cliff and then, when he jumps, claim you had nothing to do
with it. 

Also, it is interesting to note that God, who created our bodies unashamed,
also made the first clothes for Adam and Eve unashamed (leaves don't count as
clothes).  Derive what you will, but it seems to me He supports the idea
of clothing.  After all, whenever Jesus is described after His resurrection,
He's wearing clothes -- I understand from the Bible that heavenly, glorified
people are sinless, without gender, and have no need of procreation or lust.
Yet, Jesus (in a glorified body like all Christians will get) is clothed.  (I
also understand we're supposed to get white robes, crowns, etc.)
(Also interesting to note: as part of the *SHAME* and humility of His trial
and crucifixion, Jesus was stripped and hung naked on the cross.)
What about all this?
From: Steve.Hayes@f22.n7101.z5.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: The first sin?
Date: 6 Nov 92 08:26:00 GMT

On <02 Nov 1992 22:33> Etienne de Bruin said to All :

 EdB>What would you say was the first sin ever done by a human.
 EdB>I am referring to the sin Adam and Eve committed in Eden.

Theft.

They took the one thing in the garden that was not given. 

If you visit me in my home, and I say "Make yourself at home. Feel free to eat 
anything in the fridge or the pantry. Anything you like, but please don't eat
the bananas in the fruit bowl on the dining-room table." and then I come home 
and find you've eaten the bananas - what happens to the relationship?
From: azamora@hexagon.cs.indiana.edu (Tony Zamora)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Power
Date: 11 Nov 92 07:58:59 GMT
Reply-To: azamora@cs.indiana.edu
Organization: Computer Science, Indiana University

In article <Nov.10.01.57.10.1992.12377@geneva.rutgers.edu>  
mussack@innerdoor.austin.ibm.com (Christopher Mussack) writes:

> Some Christian principles that should not be in government:
> - mercy, sentencing determined by how much remorse the guilty shows.
> - obedience, those in power are there because we elected them, not
> 	because God ordained it.

I agree that the government should not legislate blind obedience, but I  
strongly believe that those in power are there because God ordained it, not  
only because we elected them.  Romans 13:1-2 says "Everyone must submit himseld  
to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God  
has established.  The authorities that exist have been established by God.   
Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God  
has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves."  Even  
if the government is evil, we are to submit to its authority.  Nebuchadnezzar  
was a wicked man, but in Jeremiah 27:6-11, God not only calls  Nebuchadnezzar  
his servant but also says that he will punish those who don't serve  
Nebuchadnezzar.  Pilate had authority over Jesus because it was given to him by  
God (John 19:11).  I think the Bible is clear that all authority comes from God  
and that God works all things for the good of those who love him.

Tony
From: rreid@ecst.csuchico.edu (Ralph W. Reid III)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: thought for the day (11-05)
Date: 6 Nov 92 06:13:18 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico

Thursday, November 5:

     Finally, brothers, continue to rejoice, to be readjusted, to be
comforted, to think in agreement, to live peaceably; and the God of
love and of peace will be with you.  <2 Corinthians 13: 11>

-- 
Ralph.  N6BNO.  NOW LOOKING FOR A JOB!
Phone 1-916-345-9155.
lectromail- rreid@ecst.csuchico.edu.
I do not waste time expressing others' opinions!
From: huang@mwilliams.eche.ualberta.ca
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Power
Date: 9 Nov 92 05:44:50 GMT
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada

dcp@teak05.cray.com (Dennis Parker) writes:

> ... It is beyond human capability to install
> true Christianity in power.  That will have to wait for Christ's return.  In
> the meantime, the most that can be done is to install Christians.  Given that

[deleted] 

What is the difference between installing "Christians" and "Christianity?"
I think the distinction between these two is rather small in a democratic
society, for Christians vote in godly people to the offices and expect
them to govern in the fear of the Lord.  When Dan Quayle stood up for the
family values he was in a way attempting to institute Christianity.  It
is a Very Good thing for a highly visible person like him to preach  
to the ungodly what is right and wrong.  (Better yet, he was not ashamed
of the gospel.)  I cannot see the anything sinister when godly statesmen
like Henry Hyde or Bob Casey go on the airwaves to express their faiths.

______________________________________________________________________
Jim Huang		"What is at the centre of jerUSAlem?"
From: rreid@ecst.csuchico.edu (Ralph W. Reid III)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: thought for the day (11-04)
Date: 5 Nov 92 07:26:27 GMT
Organization: California State University, Chico

Wednesday, November 4:

     If you want to be perfect, go sell your belongings and give to
the poor and you will have treasure in heaven, and come be my
follower.  <Matthew 19: 21>

-- 
Ralph.  N6BNO.  NOW LOOKING FOR A JOB!
Phone 1-916-345-9155.
lectromail- rreid@ecst.csuchico.edu.
I do not waste time expressing others' opinions!
From: hwt@bnr.ca (Henry (H.W.) Troup)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Hell & Purgatory
Date: 12 Nov 92 07:47:19 GMT

A quote from Larry Niven: "Hell is the violent ward of a hospital for
the theologically insane".  This was a remark in context of his (& Jerry 
Pournelle's) science fiction novel "Inferno", which takes place in Hell, 
conforming to Dante's description.

It would seem to me (and C.S. Lewis, amongst others) that if there is a 
Hell, then redemption from in Hell must be possible.

Henry Troup - H.Troup@BNR.CA (Canada) - BNR owns but does not share my opinions
	"It's a good thing we don't get all the government we pay for."
From: ptrei@bistromath.mitre.org (Peter Trei)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: damnation/purgatory
Date: 6 Nov 92 06:13:09 GMT
Organization: The MITRE Corporation

Just a point of clarification:

In article <Nov.3.02.07.55.1992.734@athos.rutgers.edu> allan@sunk.hc.ti.com (Allan Poindexter) writes:
>                                              Even when dealing with
>human groups there are those that contend that you cannot leave them.
>Consider the Masons.  Masonry considers membership irrevocable.  

     This is incorrect. One can cease to be a Mason in at least three
ways:

1. Voluntarily, one can request a "DEMIT." This is granted as a matter
of course to any Mason in good standing who requests one, and frees
him from the duties and obligations of Masonry. It is most often used
by men who can no longer attend lodge, and do not wish to pay dues.
Re-admission is available.

2. If a Mason fail to pay dues for a long time, he is first suspended,
and eventually DISCHARGED. Readmission is available. This doesn't
really happen anymore - people are held on the suspended list
indefinitely, and can regain full status by paying back dues.

3. In extreme cases, people can be EXPELLED from Masonry. This
generally occurs in the case of criminal conduct: in many
jurisdictions, conviction on a felony is automatic grounds for
expulsion. It is permanent.

    The former Mason continues to be honor-bound not to reveal our
secrets (though there is nothing we can do to enforce this).

						Peter Trei
						ptrei@mitre.org
						Editor, Masonic Digest.
						Master of Wilder Lodge
						Leominster MA.

Add standard disclaimer.
From: DSIMON@thor.nafb.trw.com (D_SIMON)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Free Will and Evil
Date: 10 Nov 92 07:30:12 GMT