HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 15 Apr 1992 09:55:31 EDT
From:         Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Correctness and Truth

Tom,

You're partly right.  It is possible for different people to have
different insights into the same truth.  It also is possible for
different people to express the same truth in different language,
leading to the impression that they disagree when they do not.
However, when statements contradict each other, they cannot both be
true.  The statements, "Jesus is God" and "Jesus is a man" are both
true, although incomplete.  The statements "Jesus is God incarnate"
and "Jesus is ONLY a man" are incompatible and cannot both be true.

I think that scriptural passages such as 1 Cor 13:11-12 and Isaiah
55:9 mean that we cannot understand everything about God, not that we
cannot understand anything about God.

I am puzzled by your statement, "If we are so absolutely certain of
the correctness of our views, where then is faith?"  We may be using
the word "faith" differently.  The First Vatican Council (1869-70)
defined faith this way:  "The Catholic Church holds that Faith, which
is the beginning of human salvation, is a supernatural virtue by
which, through the help and inspiration of God's grace, we believe
the things revealed by Him to be true, not on account of the intrin-
sic truth of those things, as perceived by the natural light of
reason, but on account of the authority of God Himself revealing, Who
can neither deceive nor be deceived."  Faith is a means of attaining
certainty.

Marty Helgesen
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 14 Apr 1992 16:12:28 EST
From:         carol nemec <YA67@FERRIS.BITNET>
Subject:      Godspell

Kerry,
I haven't seen all of Godspell but I've heard it is a good
thing to see.  Oh, maybe I did see it all...I know I liked what
I saw.  It was much closer to Biblical than Jesus Christ Superstar!
In His love,
Carol
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL0]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sun, 12 Apr 1992 14:06:36 EST
From:         Ian Williams <iwilliam@AU.ORACLE.COM>
Subject:      Re: Contraception == abortion? (was Re: re:pro-choice)
X-To:         CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU
              Stephenson" at Apr 11, 92 6:14 pm

Steve (I think )

If the sexual union between to marriage partners is ONLY for the purpose
of procreation then why did the Father create the clitoris?? An organ that
(to my knowledge, not having one) serves no purpose other than to provide
sexual pleasure for the female..

I believe there is enough evidence in the bible to draw the conclusion that
God wishes us to have a happy, fulfulling and rewarding sexual lifestyle,
as long as it is confined to the marriage bed..



*****************************************************************************
Ian Williams          			Internet: iwilliam@au.oracle.com
Oracle Systems         			Phone   : +61 8 239 3900
Adelaide, Australia
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 09:37:05 EDT
From:         Bernice Tennant <U1A9A@WVNVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: ABORTION:Spec. legal

God forgive them.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Acknowledge-To: <S096556@UMRVMA>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 10 Apr 1992 04:01:34 CDT
From:         Lonnie Schubert <S096556@UMRVMA.BITNET>
Subject:      I'll be back

Fellow list members,
  I will set nomail Friday night.  (Central U.S.)
I regret this.  I so totally enjoy and benefit from the list.
I simply spend too much time with it right now.
Hopefully, I'll be able to sign back on about mid May after finals.
   God Bless!
  Lonnie Schubert
PS  I would appreciate copies of any "essays" that members compose and
post to the list.  I will still check my mail regularly.  Thanks.
S096556@UMRVMA
or
S096556@umrvma.umr.edu  (I think)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 07:37:44 MST
From:         Becky Harris <ISPBJH@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: The Prodigal Son (by Jess Harris)

As I posted on Friday, my 4 kids have each written a 2 page essay on the
topic of the Prodigal Son.  This was the subject of a sermon two weeks ago
in which all of my children seemed to be boared to tears.  The fourth one
I'd like to share with you is from my youngest son, Jess Harris--(11 yrs).
I have retained the original spelling, punctuation, and sentance structure.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was taught in the sermon is that a sinner is someone who goes to church
and learns and hears about god.  I think the story about the son is just
like I am going to be apart of this church.  I am going to research about
this man.  I think the church is a place where you worship god and you
forgive your sins.  I think I should think about god not just on Sunday's
but every day, after all he did many things for us.  I do think that we
should not watch TV on Sundays.

We did a bad thing, what we did about our mom took it upon herself to
research this wonderful man and now people ask her a question and she
stands right up there and says the answer, me on the otherhand doesn't
know nothing about the bible and god. I think that's sad.  I am going
to try and keep on trying to figure out who god is, what he did, and all
his brothers.

I think church comes before basketball.  I also KNOW that there are very
few moms like ours that cares about us going to church.  It's not her
decision to decide whether to research god. It's ours!  I believe basketball
comes lower than church, but it comes last than everything else.

I am very embarresed about what I don't know.  I don't know nothing about
god I have to admit.

Jess

Becky Harris
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 15 Apr 1992 16:26:00 EDT
From:         NWILSON@SMITH.BITNET
Subject:      adios....

Hi all,
        I'm signing off, hopefully for just two weeks, but probably until
the end of the summer. It's been a fun experience.
        Remember that God's desire is that we love one another as ourselves.
That doesn't mean being mushy or a soft all the time, but it means finding
a way to disagree without being insulting or hurtful. We're all guilty of
this from time to time, I suppose, but I have been surprised at how much
of it I have seen right here on this list. Sometimes it's necessary to
agree to disagree...
        If anyone wants to say hello or send me something interesting,
my addresses are:
        Nicole Wilson
        Smith College, box 7968
        98 Green Street
        Northampton, MA 01063-0100

        Nicole Wilson
        (oops): [NWILSON@SMITH.SMITH.EDU]
God bless all! Have a blessed Resurrection Day!!
                                Nicole
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 9 Apr 1992 12:28:00 CST
From:         "Darryl (The Other Brother) Johnson" <DJOHNSON@TCUCVMS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: re-pro-choice

From: Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
One can mix egg and sperm in a laboratory and not produce life.  We
     One can mix eggs and flour and not produce a cake.  What's
     your point?  If we can produce life more than 1% of the time,
     it obviously is not only God's blessing involved.  I will not
     deny that if it is done wrong, it doesn't happen.  This is
     true, as I said, for cakes too.  But if we can consistently
     do it right (as we can), then are we God too?  Or is it
     not a blessing of God?  Take your pick.

     Darryl at TCU
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 13 Apr 1992 05:59:29 EST
From:         Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Merit (WAS Our inheritance)

        Stephen,

        I disagree with large parts of what you have been posting lately,
        but I want to comment on something I agree with.  You point out
        the distinction between salvation and reward.  The failure to
        recognize this distinction leads many non-Catholic Christians to
        misunderstand some of the teachings of the Catholic Church.  Some
        people see references to "merit" and "works" and assume that the
        Catholic Church teaches that we can earn or merit salvation.
        Salvation depends entirely on the grace of God and cannot be
        earned.  However, someone who has been justified can earn an
        increase in reward in Heaven.  Not even this statement denies the
        essential nature of grace because we cannot perform a meritorious
        action without God's grace moving and enabling us to perform it.

        Marty Helgesen
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 6 Apr 1992 15:29:03 MST
From:         Becky Harris <ISPBJH@ASUACAD.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: How Do We Decide?

On Wed, 1 Apr 1992 04:47:32 CST Lonnie said:

>>Doug,
>>  Ok, you acknowledge that at least one (perhaps even the only one) of
>>B.Y.'s teachings was errant -- that of a fallible man, not a prophet.
>>So, how do we (or more specifically, you) decide which of his other
>>teachings are from God, and which are in err?

>A fair question.  The way we decide which teachings are from God, and
>which are not, is by the confirmation of the Spirit.  As Christians,
>we are taught not to rely on the "arm of flesh," are we not?  We should
>be founded on the rock of Christ.  That means to me that we should seek
>to obtain the inspiration of the Lord in regards to all gospel teachings,
>no matter what the subject.  I don't believe any of us can hope to
>understand the scriptures, for instance, without having the same Spirit
>to guide our understanding that inspired the original prophet who wrote
>a particular passage in the first place.  I have sought the confirmation
>of the Spirit in regards to Brigham Young's teaching and am satisfied
>I know what to believe regarding this controversy.
>
>I believe that's the only way we can ever be sure we're not being led
>by the philosophies of any man.  I have applied the test.  I urge you
>to do the same, in faith and humility.
>

Doug, I understand your reliance on having your own confirmation of the
Spirit before believing in doctrines that are spoken by your prophets.
Accordingly, I would like you to answer the following questions:

Have you ever received confirmation of polygamy?
Have you ever received confirmation of plurality of Gods?
Have you ever received confirmation that men can become Gods?
Have you ever received confirmation that God was once a man who became God?
Have you ever received confirmation that the Black race was ever inferior?
Have you ever received confirmation that God has many wife's?
Have you ever received confirmation that some sins cannot be covered by Jesus?

I would really appreciate an answer.

Becky Harris
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Organization: University at Buffalo
X-Envelope-to: christia@asuacad.bitnet
X-VMS-To: IN%"christia@asuacad.bitnet"
X-VMS-Cc: V063KC44
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 14 Apr 1992 21:22:00 EST
From:         The Nuzz <V063KC44@UBVMS.BITNET>
Subject:      to disable call waiting

Carol Slingo writes...

[... ...]

cs> If you can't do that, does your phone company have a symbol-number-number
cs> code to turn off call waiting on an individual call basis?

        Call waiting can be disabled for the period of a single call
by using the modem string atdt*70,###-#### [enter]. If you have pulse
dialing try using 1170 instead of the *70.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 20:21:34 CST
From:         CXKJP%UTXDP.bitnet@UTXVM.CC.UTEXAS.EDU
Subject:      RE: broken dreams
X-To:         CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.

How right you are, Nicole.  I always thought that motto "let go,
let God" was sappy. I learned recently how hard it is to truly
wait, and let God take care of things.

Kim
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 17 Apr 1992 02:10:50 EDT
From:         JEK@NIHCU.BITNET
Subject:      the names Maundy Thursday and Good Friday

 > ...does anyone know how "Good Friday" got its name?

I am told that in older English usage it was "God's Friday."

 > Can anyone give the history of Maundy Thursday?

Maundy Thursday commemorates the Last Supper, Jesus' farewell to His
disciples. The word "Maundy" comes from the same root as
"commandment." At that Supper, Jesus gave His disciples several
commandments.

     (1) He washed their feet, and told them to wash one another's
feet. Some Christian groups practice foot-washing whenever they
celebrate the Lord's Supper, but for many centuries the prevailing
custom was to observe this rite once a year, in connection with the
celebration of the Eucharist on Maundy Thursday, and this
foot-washing ceremony is known as the Maundy.
     (2) On Maundy Thursday, Christ instituted the Sacrament of His
Body and Blood, and commanded His disciples to observe it forever.
This commandment is also emphasized in the service on Maundy
Thursday.
     (3) He also said to His disciples, "A new commandment I give
you, that you love one another as I have loved you." This also we
remember on Maundy Thursday.

 Yours,
 James Kiefer
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 8 Apr 1992 13:30:00 CST
From:         "Darryl (The Other Brother) Johnson" <DJOHNSON@TCUCVMS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: rally

From: Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
  I truly hope I have misunderstood you.  Do you really believe that
members of the media are in constant contact with the truth?  Do you
     Yes, relatively.  They have MUCH more contact with the truth
     than we do.  We read what THEY write.


mean to imply that the information we get from the media is not
affected by bias?  The members of the media have opinions, as well
     No. Just because they have contact with the truth doesn't
     mean they always pass the truth on to us.


The top opinion leaders in this
country reject Christianity, while two thirds of American adults consider
themselves to be religious and one-third call themselves born-again
Christians.  The majority of media members in the Lichter/Rothman study
     Studies show nonChristians tend to be more intelligent than
     Christians.  Not better.  Just more intelligent.
     My point is simply that if you value intelligence, that
     fact MUST be considered.  When the same deal goes with
     abortion, again it should be considered.

|\ /\ |\ |\ \/ |   Texas         "I awoke in a fever;
|/ )( |( |( /  |..  Christian      the bedclothes were all
 DJohnson@tcucvms    University     soaked in sweat;
 DJohnson@gamma.is.tcu.edu         she said 'you've been having
                                  a nightmare, and it's not
 Never cut what you can untie    over yet!" -- Roger Waters
                                "4:41 A.M. (Sexual Revolution)"
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 12:07:00 EDT
From:         The List Minor <VCHAI@SMITH.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Abortion, the only option?

Kerry writes:
>Vicky:
>Abortion is never the only option.  You may assume that some women
>perceive it to be so.  My point is that those of us who know better
>must not allow that assumption to be made.

   My point too, Kerry.  My point too...
   I guess we're both trying to say that we should all do
   something about it, not just stop at saying, "Abortion is
   WRONG!" or, "Abortion is the woman's business!!"

   Okay, that cleared things up. :-)

   Vicky
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 15 Apr 1992 11:53:31 CST
From:         Tom Purcell <GE0110@SIUCVMB.BITNET>
Subject:      "Truth"

Marty writes...

>
>You're partly right.  It is possible for different people to have
>different insights into the same truth.  It also is possible for
>different people to express the same truth in different language,
>leading to the impression that they disagree when they do not.
>However, when statements contradict each other, they cannot both be
>true.  The statements, "Jesus is God" and "Jesus is a man" are both
>true, although incomplete.  The statements "Jesus is God incarnate"
>and "Jesus is ONLY a man" are incompatible and cannot both be true.
>

I do not disagree, but recognizing that only option one may be true in some
abstract sense does not lead one to a certain choice between them.  One is
left ultimately with a degree of uncertainty and an element of
"faith" in the choice....  If truth exists (and I believe it does also),
it cannot be recognized without some assumptions (faith).  This results in
a degree of uncertainty in our conclusions.  Our salvation, after
all, is a matter of faith and trust rather than a matter of
intellectual certainty.  (I am not trying to knock logic, by the way,
but merely pointing out the necessity of uncertainty and trust).

>I think that scriptural passages such as 1 Cor 13:11-12 and Isaiah
>55:9 mean that we cannot understand everything about God, not that we
>cannot understand anything about God.
>

To the degree that we agree that at some level our "understanding" is
necessarily incomplete and potentially flawed, I agree.

My life's experience has taught me not to be too certain of
my views.  Both as a social scientist and Christian, I have changed
my views on many things as I have learned more of life.  Yesterday's
"certainty" has often been viewed later only as a partial truth or
perhaps a mistake.  It is my judgement that should I live to be
1000, I would still be changing my views, understandings, and "truths".
It is of the nature of having a finite capacity, something we all share.

Perhaps the only really certain things in life are the subjective ones,
such as the confession of the blind man (John 9:25).  I would really like
to be more certain and to command understanding of more "truth", but it
is not my fate.  It helps me from time to time to realize this
and to be reminded that it is my faith, not my grasp of "truths" that
assures my future.  It is a good thing for me that it is so!
that it is so!

And now for a really radical thought......
Perhaps we would win more to Him by describing our experiences with
Him rather than with powerful and logical arguments of "truth".

Thanks for your interest.  I have learned much from your posting.
Perhaps we can learn a bit from one another, huh?
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 10:44:05 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: rally and various
              7 Apr 1992 11:23:38 EDT from <BSCURR01@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU>

For Brenda, et. al., regarding terminology:

I will clarify (at least my) terminology:

Prolife:  seeking to put an end to the legal (and illegal) practice of
  abortion, on the basis that it is the unjust ending of a human life.
  These people find it possible to justify (on a guilt/innocence or
  necessity basis) war, capital punishment, and other acts that others
  (see below) find unacceptable.

Completely Prolife (seamless garment):  Opposed to abortion as one part of
  a comprehensive acceptance of the gospel of peace as a theology.  These
  individuals oppose all taking of one (or more) human life by another (or
  by a group of others)

Anti-abortion:  Opposed to abortion for a possible variety of reasons, not
  necessarily having anything to do with morality.  For example, one may
  oppose abortion on economic, medical, or legal grounds.  This is primarily
  a legalistic, logic-based philosophy.  As such, it gets little to no press.

Proabortion:  Viewing abortion as a fundamental right of women in society.
  This position regards the moral aspect of the abortion option as irrelevant.
  It is also legalistic and logic-based and comes from an extremist form of
  radical feminism that posits pregnancy as a form of bondage which must be
  escaped.

Prochoice:  Personal position on abortion considered irrelevant.  Address the
  issue as a matter of public policy, arguing that abortion is an individual
  decision to be left to the woman.  More abstract (less direct) than pro-
  abortion, but argue for similar policies.

Prolife, but:  Personnally opposed to abortion, but prefer to remain entirely
   uninvolved in the issue.

Prochoice, but:  Personally opposed to interference with the individual or
   tampering with existing law, but prefers to remain uninvolved.

Prodeath:  Advocates for quality of life over sanctity of life on a variety
  of issues.  Favored outcome of public policy results in unnatrual deaths of
  individuals in order to preserve the quality of life for society as a whole
  (issues such as assisted suicide, abortion, and declaring anecephalic babies
  brain dead at birth to facilitate harvesting of fetal tissues and organs)
Hope this helps.
                     Love INC,
                              ---Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL8]
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 16 Apr 1992 08:05:46 CDT
From:         Carol Slingo <slingo@CASBAH.ACNS.NWU.EDU>
Subject:      Easter bunnies

In my neighborhood, for the first time _ever_--front yards are sprouting
colored eggs.  People are hanging them on trees all over the yard as if
they were putting up Christmas decorations 3 weeks in advance of the
holiday.  I find this very sad, but not surprising.  Does anyone know where
this practice came from?  Television?  (I haven't seen it in, for instance,
the heavily Catholic neighborhoods of Chicago.)
In Christ, and for a Blessed Easter,

Carol Slingo
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 7 Apr 1992 10:08:46 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Abortion, the only option?

Vicky:
Abortion is never the only option.  You may assume that some women
perceive it to be so.  My point is that those of us who know better
must not allow that assumption to be made.  Ever.  Neither by the
women in crisis, nor by politicians who accept it as a given.  The
only reason people view abortion as an only option is because they
themselves are unwilling to do what is necessary to provide another.
They fail to recognize that their selfishness is not shared by every-
one.  There is a vast network of care providers out there, and God
wants us to use it.  Hope that clears things up.
                                                Love INC,
                                                         ---Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU