HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 14 Sep 1992 08:00:00 CDT
From:         BKCOBB@LIFE.UAMS.EDU
Subject:      Re: tradition/Assembly of God

>I certainly don't mean to put down the Assembly of God church in any way when
>I say "tradition you could cut with a knife."  You must surely know too that
>there is great variety between different local assemblies of God churches. So
>what I experienced at one (or two) may certainly be different than what I did.
>Anyway, yes, I am probably using "tradition" differently.  I guess I meant some
>teaching or way of doing something that is received through extra-biblical oral
>or written sources.  An example in the Assemblies of God that I was talking
>about would be the oral rule that no one could "preach" from the pulpit without
>a suit or sports jacket on.  Come to think of it, the use of the pulpit, the
>"altar," the church building, the meeting times, the format of the meetings,
>etc... would all be what I am talking about when I mean tradition.  Also doing
>a formatted doxology at the end of the service, the pastor standing at the
>back of the "church" to shake hands at the end of the service, the use of
>church bulletins to disseminate info, the way an offering was taken...I could
>go on and on....  This is probably somewhat different than the way others have
>been using the word "tradition."  But I wonder...I have seen resistance to any
>changes taking place in even some of these what would seem like very periferal
>traditions...
>                                         Peace, zane

I have no problem in using the word tradition when defined as above.  (And
incidentally, while still charismatic in belief I don't attend an AG church
anymore.  Nothing against AG's, it's just this church holds the pretty much the
same doctrinal viewpoint and is a lot more conveient to attend.)


What I do have a problem with if those who claim infallibilty or
inspiration for their tradition.
I can't imagine any AG minister claiming that wearing a three piece suit when
preaching is a commandment from the Lord.  Ditto for other things you mentioned.


Brian
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 07:02:21 -0700
From:         "Michael Alan Kline,
              Sr. Tech Support Manager" <MKLINE@VDH.BITNET>
Subject:      Tests

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

 The small tests I'm doing is because VDH should shortly become VDH.BITNET.

 I don't think all the routing tables have been updated yet. If you want,
 try sending a note to MKLINE @ VDH and if it don't fly, let me know just
 how many tables are left to be loaded. I know this is supposed to take
 a while, but it is exciting to know we're about to go "official".

 If the note don't go through, you will have to use:

                MKLINE%VDH.BITNET@VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU
        or a ".ddn vtvm2.cc.vt.edu(MKLINE%VDH.BITNET)"

 Soon, I hope.... Soon. :-)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
From: timk@world.std.com (Tim King)
Subject: Re: Seeking a Catholic Perspective
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 06:55:57 GMT

creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Steve Creps) writes:

>   No one who belongs to the Catholic Church should believe that it is
>not _the_ true Church, as this teaching is one of the basic doctrines
>of the Catholic Church.

<Protestant mode ON>
Bull!  If I believe that the Catholic church is incorrect in some of their
teachings I do not have to accept that this church is the one and only true
church in order for my conscience to be satisfied.  If the Catholic church
rejects me, I'll find a loving Protestant church that'll accept me as God
accepts me!
<Protestant mode OFF>


Look, Steve, Brad, Leo, and everyone else.  You guys seem really nice and
very sincere.  But, frankly, I'm fed up with all the regurgitated dogmatic
hogwash!  I want my original question answered!  Stop dodging the issue,
and answer my question!

What's the effective, practical difference between the Catholic who goes
to confession and the Protestant who couldn't care less about confession?
They both want to be right with God.  They are both saved.  They both
are forgiven.  This is by your own words!

I don't care to hear about how the priest has greater authority than my
minister.  I accept that you believe this and that this is why you're
Catholic... so good for you.  But I'm just as saved as you are.  I'm just
as forgiven as you are.  Even though I don't restrict myself to seeing a
priest to talk out my sins.  I know that God has forgiven me, and I don't
need a Catholic priest to tell that to me.

I accept that you believe that the Catholic church is the true church.
That's probably why you're Catholic!  I accept that you believe that it's
more difficult to be saved without being a Catholic.  But, by your own
words, it isn't impossible!  So what's the effective, practical, real-life,
bring-it-home-to-where-I-live difference between a saved Protestant and
a saved Catholic?!  Is one not going to get to heaven?  No...  So what if
I have to "ride in my own car"?


-TimK
-- 
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        |                                             <>
From: creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Steve Creps)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re:      Re: Church and Rome
Date: 10 Sep 92 02:46:05 GMT
Organization: Indiana University


   Bob, you recently used, as a reference against papal primacy, a
quote from "Eerdman's translation of the Ante-Nicene Fathers."  The
quote begins thus:

	"Launoi, the emminent Gallican, found but seventeen of the
	Ftahers and Doctors of the Church (among whom he reckons
	`Fathers' down to the twelfth century) who understand St.
	Peter to be `the rock,' and he cites forty of the contrary
	opinion..."

   A Gallican heretic is hardly an impartial or unbiased scholar in
this matter, as the Gallican heresy, a sort of French version of
Anglicanism, by definition rejected papal primacy (_Gallican_ comes
from the Latin for _French_).  The Gallicans also allied themselves
with the Jansenists, whose heresy was similar to Calvinism in the
belief of the total depravity of man.

   Here are some excerpts from _Our Sunday Visitor_'s _Catholic
Encyclopedia_:

	"At root, Gallicanism held for the autonomy of the French
	Church against the authority of the Roman Pontiff... The roots
	of Gallicanism are generally traced to the period of the
	Western Schism when, in 1398, the king of France announced his
	'rediscovery' of certain allegedly ancient rights and
	privileges to be accorded the French Church."

   According to Thomas Bokenkotter, _A Concise History of the Catholic
Church_,

	"In part [ Gallicanism ] reflects a general trend of European
	governments to subordinate the Church and make it a department
	of the state.  Whether we take the Church of England, the
	Lutheran Churches in Germany and Scandanavia, or the Catholic
	Churches in the Habsburg or Bourbon dominions, the picture is
	basically the same: a tight union of Church and state, with
	the Church reduced the the junior partner... In the latter
	part of the seventeenth century, Louis XIV nearly led the
	French Church into schism in his efforts to dominate the
	Church... He unilaterally extended the royal right of
	_regale_, a traditional prerogative that allowed the King to
	administer and appropriate the revenue of a diocese and make
	appointments on the death of a bishop..." [ pp. 242-3 ]

-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Steve Creps, Indiana University
creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Envelope-to: christia@asuacad.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"christia@asuacad"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sat, 5 Sep 1992 21:08:00 CDT
From:         BKCOBB@LIFE.UAMS.EDU
Subject:      Tradition

>> Are you saying that all christians who disagree with you are guilty of
>> intellectual dishonesty?  Are you saying that only your denomination
>> (I'm assuming Roman Catholicism given you mention of the Church at Rome)
>> is correct?

>Mark Gilstrap is Eastern Orthodox.  I doubt that he'd accuse Catholic
>and Protestant Christians of intellectual dishonesty, but, as far as I
>can tell, he does believe that only the Eastern Orthodox have faithfully
>maintained Christian teachings.

Yea, a wrong assumption on my point, obviously.

What bothers me about posts like Mark's is that they make extravagant claims
about the correctness of their particular denomination, and then ask one to
accept these claims on the basis of the authority of their church.  (Bear
in mind that I am not speaking of Eastern orthodoxy in particular.  Offhand I
can think of several denominations that believe that if you are not of their
denominational body you are going to hell.  And if Mark's view is out of
line with mainline orthodox teaching, I apologize for misinterpreting his
views as the views of the orthodox church.)

My view is that doctrinal truth should be determined from Scripture alone.
I cannot accept the authority of any body of believers as being sufficient
to establish it.  As I see it, their is no scriptural basis for any body
of believers having authority to speak infallibly for Christ

Brian
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sat, 5 Sep 1992 16:41:13 EDT
From:         Lon Mendelsohn <LMENDELS@CMS.CC.WAYNE.EDU>
Subject:      Human Sinfulness

This post is prompted by a recent exchange on the homosexuality issue.

Many years ago, a friend and dear brother in the Lord made the following
rather earthy comment when another brother was attempting to justify his
sinful behavior:

  "You're full of shit, but I can relate."

I would encourage us all to take this humble approach when dealing with
the sin of others, regardless of whether or not they recognize their
own sinfulness.

Shalom,

Lon Mendelsohn
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 15 Sep 1992 11:05:15 CDT
From:         Carol Slingo <slingo@CASBAH.ACNS.NWU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: New Age in Schools
              "MKLINE%VDH.BITNET@VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU" at Sep 14, 92 7:58 pm

>
> Subject: New Age in Schools
>
> Ankerberg is doing a lengthy program on New Age infiltration into schools?
>
> Any interest?
>
> Maks
>

Yes from me!
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 14 Sep 1992 17:37:00 GMT
From:         Z_STAFF_CL@SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE.AC.UK
Subject:      RE: Homosexuality (again)

From:     Steven Klepzig <SKLEPZI@EDU.UTAH.SAFF.SSB1>
Subject:  Re: Homosexuality (let's drop the subject)

>But unless something besides tired old arguments and name calling and
>personal attacks come up on this thread it will die now, at least on this
>list.

Steven,
Despite my interest in the subject, I am tempted to agree.
Incidently the abortion issue goes round in circles as well.

I look forward to a new thread.

Carol L
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Via:      UK.AC.SOLENT; 11 SEP 92 16:08:22 BST
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 16:08:00 GMT
From:         Z_STAFF_CL@SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE.AC.UK
Subject:      Re: The unelectable elect.

Thanks Tom for the info. on Rev 3:20 and John 6
I shall indeed look again at this passage - it's one of those ones that I've
probably heard so often taken out of context that I've taken the popular
interpretaion without really thinking about it. (What a thing to confess!)

Carol L
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 12:01:07 CDT
From:         Jesse Carnes <NOTJIC@LSUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Parousia and 2 Peter 3

Dear Lon et al. ;

This is a reply as to 2 Peter 3 being a done deal.

The main polemics I offer to prove my theory is the "Analogy of Scripture"
and the local context of 2 Peter 3.

First, as to the Analogy of Scripture ("Scripture interprets Scripture"),
there is a lot of evidence from other sections of the N.T.
In Hebrews 10, the audience is told that they SEE the Day approaching.
In 1 Pet 1, Christ is said to have been revealed in "... these LAST TIMES."
Peter goes on to say in another section that "... the END of ALL things is
NEAR, so be clear-headed ... so that you can pray." (obviously not the end of
the globe as we call it).
John in 1 John says that it "... is the LAST HOUR"
The level of imminence is HIGH as to this event.  Something, whatever it was,
had to be imminent ... at least by John's writing and Peter's writing on a
time scale.

In the Johannineaccount of 1 Jn, he says not only that it was the last hour
but also that many antichrists were on the loose and that THE antichrist
was coming as well.

Contextually, 2 Peter 3 shows the same level of immenence.
Peter even goes on to exhort his listeners to make sure that they are living
blaimless lives BECAUSE they were already looking forward to that day and were
told to SPEED its coming.  Again, imminence is seen in context.
If such an event were distant, his warning -- as he phrased it -- was without
any punch and was superfluous ... and remember folks that this is inspired
stuff, not quagmired fluff.

Interestingly, Paul states the change in the wind, "this world in its present
form is passing away.  Here is more cataclismic language to indicate the not
quite end of the globe.

Lon, the implicit of 2 Peter 3 must be compared to the more explicit of
the rest of Scripture.  When done so, it is apparentthat Peter was indicating
what Paul, and  John were also saying : That a new age was about to begin and
the world as they knew it was coming to and end.
This is the age of the Church and the old age was that of Judaism as the centre
of true religion.



Jesse Carnes
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 15 Sep 1992 08:12:20 PDT
From:         Barry Wadsworth <BARRYW@UCSFVM.BITNET>
Subject:      JUST READ ROMANS 1:26 (again)

Kerry,
I guess I opened a bag of worms. I didn't realize that there
were so many "Christians" that would be willing to refute
Biblical passages such as the Romans 1:26 passage I quoted
that clearly provides instruction against "accepting"
homosexuality.

I will be signing off for a while because I can't find my business
mail in all this listserv mail. But, thank you. I appreciate your
insight and support!
Love in Christ
BarryW
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
From: timk@world.std.com (Tim King)
Subject: Re: Absolution, Tradition, and Christianity
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 23:06:51 GMT

I have received several requests to lay off a little.  So I'd like to
reassure all of you Roman Catholics that I do love you and respect you.
I honestly think of you as fellow christians.  I do not see you as
deceived, and I strongly encourage you to continue in the traditions
in which you were taught!  Don't give them up, because your love for
God is clearly demonstrated in these traditions!!!

However, I plead with you not to look down upon your Protestant neighbors.
Most Protestants, however ignorant they may be, are nevertheless sincere,
and their traditions and practices are just as pleasing in God's sight as
yours.  There are pat answers to these theological questions, but the
end of them is that we are one body of Christ.

It's about time we started working together!  It's time for the Protestants
to stop hounding on the Catholics, mocking their many signs of faithfulness.
It's time for our Catholic brothers to accept us the way we are, without
putting any additional restrictions of ritual on us.  We are not evil, and
neither are you.

Let's make peace.
-TimK
-- 
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        |                                             <>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sun, 13 Sep 1992 17:32:26 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Gays want to be left alone???

Barry:

Very good post, IMHO.  I would add that there is a difference between
wanting to be permitted to live a deviant lifestyle within the laws
and mores of a culture--and wanting to change those laws and mores
to *accomodate* that deviant lifestyle.  Pressing for prosecution of
those who assault homosexuals under the current law is an example of the
first.  Demanding that such offenders be prosecuted under a special law
designed to punish them *more* because of their motivation is an example
of the second.

Love INC,
         --Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Organization: University of Massachusetts Dartmouth, North Dartmouth, MA, USA
X-Envelope-to: christia@asuacad.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN::"christia@asuacad"
X-VMS-Cc: EMOREAU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 14 Sep 1992 15:38:00 EDT
Comments:     A VAX cluster with VMS V5.5, PMDF V4.0-22, JNET V3.5 & UCX V1.3A
From:         LIZ MOREAU <EMOREAU@UMASSD.BITNET>
Subject:      Prayer Request

Dear Friends:

        I just learned that one of my neighbors (Sean,
age 16) was in a very bad car accident.  He has a broken neck.  Please
pray for him and his family and I will keep you updated when I hear
more.

        Thanks.

                                        God Bless,

                                                Liz
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sun, 13 Sep 1992 21:58:01 EDT
From:         MKLINE%VDH.BITNET@VTVM2.CC.VT.EDU
Subject:      Re: Gays under fire

Subject: Re: Gays under fire

Kerry -------------------------------------------------------------->
Nancy:

Could you please explain where you get the information that 10% of the
population is homosexual?

MAKS> Last I heard on this was either Ankerberg or Focus on the Family.
      I don't remember where the 10% came from, but they said that they
      did some surveys in New York City, reported to be the Gay capital
      of the east coast. Based on surveys of people needing medical
      attention, etc. they figure New York had 4% and the general
      population was about 1-2%.

      Problem is, it's hard to get those special rights unless you can
      claim to be 10% of the population. Wish I had the source, but
      it's been quite a while.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 14:35:05 MST
From:         Madge McBurney <ISPMOM@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Subject:      Praise report from Steven Klepzig

I thought I'd share this praise report from Steven.  --Madge

 -------------------------------------------------------------------------
On Fri, 4 Sep 1992 10:48 MDT Steven Klepzig writes:
Madge,

Thanks for posting that message to Christia for me.

Good news!!!!!!

No knee surgery for me in the immediate future!  The doc said that I have a
barometric knee - I'm able to tell when storms are coming (oh joy).

Erin & Ethan both had checkups today.  They are both perfect!  Of course, I
knew that but it's good to get a professional's opinion.  Erin is in the 75th
percentile in height & weight.  The doc said "she's a little larger for her
age but very well proportioned".  Ethan is in the 90th percentile in head
size, weight, and length!  He's a bruiser!  The doctor said that he's about 5
months ahead in physical development!  All he wants to do is stand up and
walk.  Praise God!  He did get shots today though, that will slow him down
for a few days.

Coming up on Erin's 4th birthday!  I can't believe it!

Thanks again!

Steven

BTW: this stuff is okay for release to Christia if you want.  I thought I
might try to do it myself but may not get to it.
From: ca850@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Steve P. Di Perna)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: PROPHECY FULFILLMENT
Date: 12 Sep 1992 22:52:18 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc10.ins.cwru.edu


Hi, I'm new to listserve.christia. In fact, I've never posted
anything anywhere before. I've been reading the recent postings
by Brian and Wolfgang concerning proper interpretation of scrip-
ural prophecy (they were talking about the preterist view, and 
whether or not prophecy has double fulfillment) and I thought I'd
post some of my own thoughts.

I've always had problems with Matthew's Gospel citing certain
"fulfillments" of O.T. prophecy in chapter 2.  For example,
Matthew says Hosea 11:1,"...and out of Egypt I called my son,"
was fulfilled when Joseph took Mary and the infant Jesus to 
Egypt until the death of Herod (Matt. 2:14). But an honest,
contextual reading of Hos.11:1 does not allow for such an inter-
pretation. The O.T. scripture is the LORD's recollection of how
he delivered the Hebrews from Egypt during the time of Moses.

Matthew again appears to misquote O.T. scripture when he connects
Herod's orders to kill all the boys, 2 years old and under, who
are living in and around Bethlehem (Matt. 2:16) with Jeremiah
31:15 by citing that verse in Matt. 2:17,18, "Then what was said
through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled: `A voice is heard in
Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her chil-
dren and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more.'"
A contextual reading of Jeremiah clearly shows the prophet was
referring to Israel's coming (from Jeremiah's standpoint) cap-
tivity into Babylon.

One possible answer to Matthew's seeming fast and loose inter-
pretation of the Old Testament is offered by J. Barton Payne:

       A number of Matthew's citations from the older canon
       are of a merely illustrative nature, e.g. the allus-
       ions in its second chapter (vv. 15,18) to Hos 11:1 and
       Jer 31:15. Neither passage was originally spoken in pre-
       dictive terms; and both are introduced in Matthew by the
       verb plerothe, which suggests an intent of "fulfilling"
       the earlier passages to the extent of giving their 
       teaching an additional illustration.... [The Ency-
       copedia of Biblical Prophecy. Payne, J. Barton. New
       York: Harper & Row, 1973, p.477]

Does this explanation seem satisfactory to everyone else reading
this, or does Payne seem to be tap dancing around an example of
the New Testament's misuse of Old Testament scripture?  I'd like
to hear from others on listserve, especially Wolfgang and 
Brian.

In Christ,

Steve Di Perna, North Olmsted, Ohio.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU