HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Steve.Hayes@f22.n7101.z5.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Question.......
Date: 6 Nov 92 08:26:39 GMT

On <02 Nov 1992 22:33> alexis gavras said to All :

 ag>I've seen the Armenian Apostolic church often reffered to as 
 ag>"Armenian Ortho-
 ag>dox" and yet I know that that they have a seperate patriarch as 
 ag>the head of 
 ag>their church and that often it is classified as seperate from 
 ag>the Eastern
 ag>(Greek, Russian, etc) Orthodox church. Can anyone tell me how 
 ag>similar or 
 ag>dissimilar these churches are? Do Armenian churches have 
 ag>Byzantine style 
 ag>icons? Do its adherents cross themselves in the same manner as 
 ag>the Byzantine 
 ag>rite Orthodox? Is it in communion with the Syrian Jacobite, 
 ag>Coptic, or other
 ag>"Oriental Orthodox" churches? Is Easter celebrated at the same 
 ag>time as the 
 ag>Orthodox? Thank you very much in advance for any help.

I can't answer all your questions, but I know the Armenian Church is one of 
the "Oriental Orthodox" or "non-Chalcedonian" churches, and it is in communion 
with the Syrian Jacobite and Coptic Churches. They only accept the first three
ecumenical councils, and specifically rejected the Council of Chalcedon in 451.

After 1600 years of schism, however, theologians from the Eastern Orthodox and 
Oriental Orthodox Churches met and declared in September 1990 that it was all
the result of a misunderstanding, and that they fundamentally share the same 
Christology. They recommended retraction of anathemas. Acceptance of each 
others councils might take a bit longer. Electing one Pope of Alexandria 
instead of two might take a bit longer still. But things are on the mend.

Some Copts visited our (Eastern) Orthodox Church last Sunday. They say 
they make the sign of the cross the other way (left to right). I don't 
know if the Armenians do, though.

In Canada, Eastern and Oriental Orthodox Churches have concelebrated the 
Divine Liturgy on occasion.

Steve Hayes
Department of Missiology
University of South Africa
P O Box 392
Pretoria
0001 South Africa

Fidonet: 5:7101/22.5
Internet: Steve.Hayes@f22.n7101.z5.fidonet.org
From: dcp@teak05.cray.com (Dennis Parker)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Power
Date: 8 Nov 92 05:49:01 GMT
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.

In article <Nov.6.03.35.08.1992.5496@geneva.rutgers.edu>, stehman@hubcap.clemson
.edu (Jeff Stehman) writes:

... A description of his experience in church discussions on politics and the
    efforts of some Christians, particularly the Christian Coalition, to
    make the U.S. a more godly nation by imposing Christianity on everyone.
    He concludes...

> I would like to hear the opinions of others on this matter, both from
> those who believe that putting Christianity in power (not Christians, but
> Christianity) would be a Good Thing, and any others who believe that it
> would be a Bad Thing.

It would be a Very Bad Thing.  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
Christians are just as fallible and just as susceptible to the corrupting
influence of political power as anyone else is, they are going to screw up.
For a description of what such a state would be like, I commend to you a
science fiction story by Robert Heinlein called "If This Goes On".

Political power is a very seductive temptation for Christians.  We know that
we're right and if we can just make everyone else see things our way, the
world will be a wonderful place.  While most everyone feels this way, many
(all ?) Christians are particularly susceptible.  We want to share the
blessings we've received from God so much that we sometimes try to force
them on people.  We justify it by saying it's for their own good.  History
is littered with the results.  The conditions in the church in the middle
ages led to the Reformation and a rift in Christianity that has lasted 500
years.

There are lot of folks who feel that the U.S. was explicitly founded on
Christian principles.  I don't share that view but I do think God was involved.
I'd be willing to bet that separation of church and state were His idea and
He did it to protect the church, not the state.

Christians long for a truly Godly society to live in.  I know I do.  But we
can't get it by imposing it on people.  We have to do it the old fashioned way -
the same way the apostles did it.  One person at a time.

- Dennis Parker
From: wagner@grace.math.uh.edu (David Wagner)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Calvin's eucharistic theology
Date: 6 Nov 92 06:29:51 GMT
Organization: UH Dept of Math

It was interesting to read of Calvin's belief in the real presence
of Christ in the Lord's supper.  Does this mean the real presence
of Christ's body and blood, or something else?

Didn't Calvin adhere to the idea that Christ's body could not be
present in the bread of the Lord's Supper since Christ's body
was seated "at the right hand of God?"  Or is this pure 
Zwingli?

What did Calvin mean by "real presence?"  It's hard to believe
that he took a fundamentally Lutheran viewpoint on the Sacrament.

David H. Wagner			"Is not the cup of thanksgiving
a confessional Lutheran		for which we give thanks
				a participation 
				in the blood of Christ?
				And is not the bread that we break
				a participation
				in the body of Christ?"
				--1 Corinthians 10:16

[Calvin's view is normally called "spiritual presence".  He believed
that we really feed on Christ's body in the sacrament, but that this
is mediated by the Holy Spirit.  He seems to be distinguishing between
physical presence and a more spiritual way of having contact with
Christ's body.  He definitely did not believe that Christ's body was
physically located with the bread.  In fact the quote from 1 Cor seems
to be exactly what he had in mind.  He was thinking of some sort of
participation in the body and blood, but a participation that didn't
require their physical presence.  Calvin's view is definitely not the
same as Zwingli's.  --clh]
From: jmrg9881@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Jon Reid)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Cell Church planter down south, please contact me
Date: 5 Nov 92 07:26:42 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

Would the fellow down south who was interested in starting a cell group
church and is taking care of his bed-ridden father please send me e-mail?
I have some information which may help you but I deleted your last mail
message...
-- 
Jon Reid    j-reid@uiuc.edu    GEnie: THE.REIDS
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose."
From: hamilton@hydra.cs.gmr.com (William E. Hamilton CS50 CS/50)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Need Christian Jokes...
Date: 10 Nov 92 07:10:21 GMT
Reply-To: rphroy!hydra!hamilton@uunet.uu.net (William E. Hamilton CS50 CS/50)
Organization: GM Research Labs, Warren, MI

In article <Nov.9.01.06.29.1992.10588@geneva.rutgers.edu> happy@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Rusty Soots) writes:
>
>  ...  I serve on the council of Baptist Campus Ministries at N.C. State,
>and I am in need of Christian jokes to put on the announcement sheets
>that I type up for our group every Monday night...
>
Try the Fellowship of Merry Christians, P. O. Box 668, Kalamazoo, MI
49005. They publish a newsletter called the Joyful Noiseletter, which
specializes in Christian humor. I don't know how good it is or
how much it costs to subscribe, but Christianity Today thought they
were interesting enough to write about a couple years ago. There's
also a magazine called The Wittenburg Door which publishes Christian
Humor, but I don't know how to make contact with them. Anyone else know?

Bill Hamilton
GM Research Labs
(formerly GM Research and Environmental Staff
	(formerly GM Research Labs))

The more things change the more they stay the same
sigh
From: ahwg@troi.cc.rochester.edu (Andrew Hwang)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: RSV Study Bible Wanted
Date: 13 Nov 92 07:18:09 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

I'm not quite sure if it is alright to post a WANTED ad here, but ...

I'm looking for a study bible in Revised Standard Version (and not the recent
revision, NRSV). I've contacted a few bookstores, including the Christian Book
Distributor (CBD). So far, all I found was copies of expensive leather version
of Oxford Annotated.

So, if you have a RSV study bible (e.g. Harper, Oxford) that you don't use
much anymore and are willing to sell, please contact me.

Thanks in advance,

Andrew K. Hwang
ahwg@troi.cc.rochester.edu
From: tony@swrinde.nde.swri.edu (Anthony R. Benitez)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Door-to-Door evangel.
Date: 11 Nov 92 07:56:37 GMT
Organization: Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, Texas

In article <Nov.10.01.58.42.1992.12422@geneva.rutgers.edu> SECBH@cunyvm.bitnet writes:
>In article <Nov.9.01.06.21.1992.10578@geneva.rutgers.edu>
>shimeall@taurus.cs.nps.navy.mil (timothy shimeall) writes:
>
>In response to suggestions on door-to-door evangelism:
>
>>  + try a multi-visit strategy, where the first visit is basically
>>    introducing yourself, the second is introducing the gospel, the
>>    third following up with them.
>
>Please keep in mind that this activity intrudes on the privacy of
>someone's home, and further that, uninvited, you are presuming to
>open a discussion about deeply held personal beliefs with people
>you don't know.
>
>Be considerate enough to make a quick and friendly departure and do
>*not* make multiple visits if the person does not respond positively.
>
>Jack Carroll

Has anyone ever read the verse:

JEREMIAH 31:34 "And they shall teach no more every man his neighbor,
and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all
know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the
Lord:for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin
no more."

If this is truely the prophesy of the New Testament Church, why is anyone
out trying to do the Lord's work?  The pharisees were severely rebuked
for proselyting "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye
compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make
him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves."

Why not let our Lord and Saviour make these visits.  Only he will 
enlighten them and bring the to the truth.

Anthony Benitez

[I think a more common view of Jer 31:34 would be that it describes an
ideal future which is only partially implemented by the Church.  Note
the passage says that people don't teach their neighbor because their
neighbor already knows God.  That ideal situation seems not yet to be
present.

Note the context to Mat 23:15.  Jesus is describing the Pharisees as
blind guides.  The problem is not that they are trying to convert
people, but that they are doing so while they themselves don't
understand what God is really about.  This is certainly a relevant
warning -- before trying to convert people, we should be sure that we
understand the Gospel well enough that we're really helping them.  But
given Mat 28:19-20, it's hard to believe that Jesus was really opposed
to trying to preach the Gospel to people.

--clh]
From: mjenkins@alfred.ccs.carleton.ca (Michael Jenkinson)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Genocide Treaty?
Date: 6 Nov 92 06:30:26 GMT
Organization: Carleton University

While doing an interview the other day, I was told that some kind of
genocide treaty exists, of which Canada is a signatory, that says
something to the effect of while genocide is illegal under
international law, Christians, being guilty of genocide themselves,
face the death penalty for it.

Anyone know anything about this? It strikes me as really bizarre, but
my source was adamant that such a thing exists.

Any leads, details, copies of the treaty, etc. greatly appreciated.

Send stuff e-mail to mjenkins@ccs.carleton.ca

Thanks,

Michael
From: hudson@athena.cs.uga.edu (Paul Hudson Jr)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Santeria and animal-sacrifice
Date: 13 Nov 92 07:17:55 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

In article <Nov.11.02.42.09.1992.14916@geneva.rutgers.edu> altheimm@nextnet.ccs.csus.edu (Murray Altheim) writes:
>As to your last two sentences, I thank God that you're not in charge of
>our Bill of Rights. While Paul may have written polemics against devils,
>you might consider that what is your devil might be someone else's god,
>and vice-versa. Just because Christian belief dictates that all other
>gods either are "of the devil" or plainly don't exist, doesn't invalidate
>either the true existence of those gods or those people's rights to
>practice their religion.

I was addressing comparing Santeria to Old Testament sacrifices.  The
question of whether paganism is protected by the constitution is a totally
different matter.  I certainly believe that many people do worship the
devil/devils.  

>And as regards proofs like healing, speaking in tongues, etc. you might 
>note that those "Christian" ideas are actually pre-Christian (ie., pagan)
>and are strong elements of Santerian and many other religious traditions.

Devils know foreign languages, too.  Other spirits can communicate with man
besides the Holy Spirit.  So I can certainly see how speaking in tounges
could be a part of Santeria.  Devils can even perform great wonders.  
There are many spirits which are called gods.  But there is one Most High
God.

Link.
From: 2893684@qucdn.queensu.ca (andy)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: US presidential curse
Date: 9 Nov 92 06:07:33 GMT
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston

On <02 Nov 1992 22:33> baresson@cbnewsi.att.com (5:7104/2) said to All :

bac>Since the subject of US presidents is topical at the moment, it
bac>is interesting to note the following. During last century a red
bac>indian curse was put upon the US presidency, that those
bac>presidents elected or serving in a year divisible by 20 would
bac>not survive beyond their term in office.

Hm, it's said that someone put a curse on the Chicago Black Hawks about 30
years ago which has prevented them from winning a Stanley Cup since, do you
think you could talk to these guys who prayed for Reagan...   :)
From: jgj@travis.csd.harris.com (Jeff Jackson)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Santeria and animal-sacrifice
Date: 11 Nov 92 07:47:49 GMT
Organization: I would rather be windsurfing.

I wrote:
> Once this is firmly established, it is only a matter of time
> before circumcision, communion, baptism, making your kids go to
> church, etc.  can also be banned.

Our Favorite Moderator writes:
> So far the only Supreme Court cases I've heard of say that religious
> practices may be interfered with when there's a law with a secular
> purpose that just happens to affect the religious practice. 

Well try these laws on for size:

1) Parents or Gaurdians may not have performed surgical procedures on
their children except for medical purpose or for the correction of
significant deformities.  ( This would prohibit ear piercing, tatoos
and circumcision. )

2) The law already prohibits serving alcoholic beverages to minors; why
does this not apply to those denominations that use fermented wine in
communion?

3) Privacy laws in Florida are already applied to children so that
they can get abortions without telling their parents and some kid just
recently sued his parents for "divorce."  I could easily see the
courts ruling that a kids freedom of religion was violated by parents
taking him to church.

--
============================================================================
Jeffrey Glen Jackson  _|_Satan jeered, "You're dead meat Jesus, I'm gonna
jgj@ssd.csd.harris.com |     bust you up tonight."
x5120                  | Jesus said, "Go ahead, make my day."
                   ~~~~~~~~~ -- Carman, "The Champion"
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[I do not deny that it's possible to come up with apparently
non-religious laws that in fact interfere with religion.  Your
suggestions are quite plausible, and I'm sure we can all think of
more.  However I had the impression that people were talking about
laws that were more overt in their religious intent.  I don't know of
any law that overtly prohibits religious practice that has been upheld
by the Supreme Court, though of course this case could prove me wrong.
--clh]
From: Kevin@ccc.amdahl.com
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Need Christian Jokes...
Date: 11 Nov 92 07:48:12 GMT
Organization: AM Development


     A man in his dream saw god approaching and told him to prepare himself,
and to improve this appearance because god will assign a very important task
to him.  When he awoke the next morning, he immediately went to take a shower
which he had not have for months.  He then went to the barber shop to get 
his hair cut which already covers his ears and shoulders.  Next, he stop by
a department store and bought some real nice and fashionable clothes.  That
afternoon, after putting on his new clothes, he took a stroll on the street.
He felt so good and satisfied with his new appearance.  All of a sudden, a
bolt of lightning struck him from the sky.  Obviously he died and went to 
heaven.  One morning, while walking in the garden, he saw god.  He ran up
to god that said:  
     _ "God, why did you tell me to improve my appearance so that you can 
give me important task and then let me die like that?"
     And god replied:
     _ "Uh, sorry, I just couldn't recognize you"
From: hudson@athena.cs.uga.edu (Paul Hudson Jr)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Santeria and animal-sacrifice
Date: 10 Nov 92 07:27:15 GMT
Organization: University of Georgia, Athens

In article <Nov.9.01.09.28.1992.10631@geneva.rutgers.edu> rolfe@dsuvax.dsu.edu (Tim Rolfe) writes:
>I'd be very interested in his basis for this claim.  The Old Testament
>most certainly does NOT contain such a prohibition; very much to the
>contrary, it prescribes the rituals for them.  In the New Testament
>we find Jesus objecting not to the animal sacrifice in the temple but to
>the commercialization of it.  We also find the Apostles frequenting the
>Jerusalem temple.  While the Epistles certainly speak of the temple
>sacrifices as being superceded, I don't believe any of them in their
>natural sense can be held to be prohibitions of animal sacrifice.

I am not familiar with the particular case, but from what I understand
Santeria is a lot like voodoo.  I don't think the animal sacrifices 
of Santerian's are based on Old Testament sacrifices, but rather on 
East African pagan practices.  The New Testament does speak against
idolatry and offering sacrifices to false gods.  Paul wrote against
eating at the table of devils and drinking the table of devils.  
Such animal sacrifice is certainly a way to interact with devils and has been
for thousands of years.  

Link Hudson.

[I hope no one has interpreted my defense of Santeria's legal
rights as approval of the religion.  --clh]
From: hovingh@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (William Hovingh)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Power
Date: 9 Nov 92 06:02:24 GMT
Organization: Louisville Presbyterian Seminary

At the risk of exposing myself to lots of flames, I'd like to jump into this
discussion of Christians in political power by pointing out that the United 
States of America is *not* a Christian nation, never will be, and (hate to say
it) never should try to be.

I grew up in the closest thing that America has to a theocracy, the State of
Utah.  The majority, including the bulk of men in political positions, were
(and are still) members of a church that is convinced that it has the final and
authoritative version of God's Truth.  Because (at the time I was growing up)
these people found this country's political and social system to be congenial,
they concluded that that system must have God's approval.  Thus, it was often
suggested that the Constitution of the United States was a divinely inspired
document.  (It's nice to have an open canon, isn't it?)

Unfortunately, my understanding of God's Word differs from that of the majority
in Utah.  In fact, it leads to *very* different conclusions about political
matters.  I find myself wondering if we read the same Bible.  We clearly have
a vastly different understanding of what "love of neighbor" means in the 
political process.

So who's right?  I found living in  Utah to be oppressive, and I doubt that
I'll ever move back.  On the other hand, the experience taught me that it
probably wouldn't work too well if I woke up one morning and found myself in
political power, free to advance my liberal Protestant agenda.  The folks in
Utah would probably want to secede from the Union.

I chose to talk about my experience in Utah because I think most of the non-LDS
readers of this group can empathize with my theological disagreement with
Mormonism.  But the truth is that the same kind of disagreement probably exists
between me and many of those same SRC readers.  I can either assume that I'm
right and forget the rest of y'all (in which case, since y'all do the same,
chaos results), or I can recognize that we're *all* fallible, *all* subject to
error, and *all* need to refrain from claiming that particular political 
preferences have God's approval.

The perfect earthly reign of God will begin when Jesus comes again. Until then,
the radical separation of religion and politics that we have in this country
*protects* us from our own arrogance.
From: whheydt@pbhya.pacbell.com (Wilson Heydt)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Door-to-Door evang..
Date: 13 Nov 92 07:18:47 GMT
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA

In article <Nov.12.02.35.20.1992.16978@geneva.rutgers.edu>, g91a2724@giraffe.ru.ac.za (MR GJ ANDREWS) writes:
> In article <Nov.8.00.47.04.1992.8483@geneva.rutgers.edu> bm90ash@brunel.ac.uk (Adrian S Harvey) writes:
> 
> >I was just wondering if there was anybody out there with door-to-door 
> >experiencethat they would like to share.
> 
> Try: "I'm not here to convert you just to be your friend if you'd like 
> someone to talk to." 

Which, since the purpose *is* conversion, is a lie....  (What was that
about ends and means...?)

	--Hal
-- 
Hal Heydt                    |    "Boycott Time-Warner"
Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |         --J. Danforth Quayle
510-823-5447                 |    "... kill all the lawyers."
whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM    |         --William Shakespeare