HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Steve Creps)
Subject: Re:      very weird rumor
Organization: Indiana University
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 19:27:02 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.091757.1@cua.edu> 78witherspoo@cua.edu writes:
>	While I can't confirm or deny that incident, I can tell you that Ozzy
>Osbourne _has been_ a devout christian for most of his life.  His lyrics should
>be enough to confirm this.

[Lyrics to _Crazy Train_ deleted]

>All those rumors about biting heads off of doves and eating bats onstage are
>just that-- rumors.

   Are you sure about this?  Remember, he used to be part of the group
"Black Sabbath."  I've also seen some of his videos, and satanic
symbols are present, as well as symbols of death.  Not that I think
he's really into that (at least knowingly).

   As for the bat rumor, I thought it really happened, but he was
interviewed saying that someone threw the bat onstage, and he thought
it was just a fake rubber bat.

-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Steve Creps, Indiana University
creps@silver.ucs.indiana.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
From: timk@world.std.com (Tim King)
Subject: Re: tradition/Assembly of God
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 19:11:59 GMT

FACN34B@SAUPM00.BITNET (zane of dhahran) writes:

>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.
[stuff deleted... etc... etc... etc...]
>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...

These are *excellent* examples of what I mean by "traditions" in Protestant
churches!  They are not presented as commands offered by an infallible
church, but they are accepted and defended, often to the exclusion of accepting
a fellow christian.  While there's certianly *nothing* wrong with any of the
traditions Wolfgang mentions, they are, in most churches with which I am
familiar, firmly implemented and enforced.  Any change is sometimes violently
resisted, and this, in my opinion, is simply disgraceful!

-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
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:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 22:35:00 CDT
From:         BKCOBB@LIFE.UAMS.EDU
Subject:      Second Parousia

From:   IN%"bradk%isdgsm@rtsg.mot.com"  8-SEP-1992 21:12:46.23
To:     IN%"bkcobb%life.uams.edu@motgate.mot.com"
CC:
Subj:   Tradition

Received: from motgate.mot.com by LIFE.UAMS.EDU (PMDF #12019) id
 <01GOK0YAKLDC00055R@LIFE.UAMS.EDU>; Tue, 8 Sep 1992 21:12 CDT
Received: by isdgsm@rtsg.mot.com             ; Tue, 8 Sep 92 21:12:59 CDT
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 21:12:59 CDT
From: bradk%isdgsm@rtsg.mot.com (Brad Kaiser)
Subject: Tradition
In-reply-to: BKCOBB@LIFE.UAMS.EDU's message of Sat,
 5 Sep 1992 21:08:00 CDT <9209062105.AA00263@motgate.mot.com>
To: bkcobb%life.uams.edu@motgate.mot.com
Reply-to: bradk%isdgsm@rtsg.mot.com
Message-id: <9209090213.AA24176@motgate.mot.com>



Hi Brian,

You write:

>> 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.

I'm curious which denominations you think believe that.  To me, a God
who would condemn millions to hell simply on account of their own
ignorance is barely conceivable, and certainly not lovable.  Christ
didn't die to condemn the world, but to save it.

Many misinformed folks believe that the Catholic Church says that only
Catholics can be saved.  She doesn't.  What she does say is that the
Catholic Church is the earthly part of the community Jesus Christ
Himself founded for the express purpose of leading men and women to
salvation.  Therefore, "there is no salvation outside the Catholic
Church".  That is *not* the same, however, as saying that one must
profess the Catholic faith during one's earthly sojourn to be saved.
God doesn't punish people for ignorance.  From the Catholic point of
view, one must join the Catholic Church to be fully obedient to God's
will, *but*, if one fails to join by reason of failing to recognize
that truth, he is not condemned by that failure.  One who recognizes
that truth but fails to join out of malice, however, is condemned,
because he knew God's will for him, yet rejected it.

Interestingly, in the 1940's there was an American priest named Fr.
Feeney who had a rather popular radio show.  He was censured by Rome
for teaching heresy and ordered to recant (which he subsequently did).
His error?  He taught that only persons "whose names appeared on a
Catholic parish registry" could be saved.

May God bless you richly!

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

  "Hatred destroys.  Only love creates."
            -- St. Maximilian Kolbe, shortly before his arrest and
               martyrdom at the hands of the Nazis.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
From: nabil@cae.wisc.edu (Nabil Ayoub)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re: Tradition (was Re: Second parousia in the past?)
Date: 11 Sep 92 15:59:46 GMT
Organization: U of Wisconsin-Madison College of Engineering

In article <BuDxtx.58M@world.std.com> timk@world.std.com (Tim King) writes:
>nabil@cae.wisc.edu (Nabil Ayoub) writes concerning James Keifer's essay
>on Sola Scriptura:

[ some stuff deleted ]

>
>The article SOLA SCRIPT *does* make a very well stated reply to the
>objection in question.  Read it, and come to your own conclusions.

Yes please read it and come to your conclusion ...

>
>>Here is another verse that supports the authenticity of Tradition :
>
>>   Acts 20:35  [quote of Christ deleted]
>
>>...
>>this quote cannot be found anywhere in any of the four gospels. Morover, St.
>>Paul did not hear it firsthand, but it was probably passed to him by another
>>disciple. This is Tradition, pure, plain and simple!
>
>I'll assume that Paul was actually quoting Jesus and not paraphrasing Him.
>
>(1) You found this quote in the book of Acts.
>(2) The book of Acts is part of scripture.
>(3) Therefore, this quote is part of scripture.
>
>And *I'm* not even a logician!!!

Then you have missed my point! The point is that this verse proves that the
Scriptures do not contain everything that the Lord said, since none of the
Gospel authors said this verse. It proves *beyond doubt* that there are
unrecorded teachings that were passed on (i.e. Tradition). Your conclusions
are true, but they cannot deny the authenticity of Tradition (unless you can
prove that this quote is the *only* quote that the four Evangelists missed!
However this is unlikely ... see John 21:25).

I'm not a logician too!! 

Irene pasi

Nabil
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Organization: University of Central Queensland
X-Vms-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 9 Sep 1992 08:39:00 +1000
From:         Ken Diefenbach <DIEFENBAK@TOPAZ.UCQ.EDU.AU>
Subject:      "Outer" vs "puter" hugs :)

Hmm. Thanx "G: for the hug. (and the explanation - I thought it might be
something in the American vernacular we Aussies haven't been blessed with yet..

2 more days to holidays - not soon enough, but too much to do before I go :(

We're all looking forward to a relaxing break. We've lowered our sights on
the distance we're going to travel by a couple of thousand kilmetres (1200
miles for you "imperial"ists) so that Lyn and I in particular don't have to
push ourselves in the amount of driving.

I'll miss my email fix in the mornings however.

God bless you all
Ken D (not nomail today, but RSN - real soon now)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Orig-To: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 21:09:21 CDT
Comments:     Answering received message
From:         THERESA BLACKWELL <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Subject:      I think HE heard this!!!

 Your prayer musta reached the Throne, and I hope that whoever
 it's for will know that there is peace in Jesus!
 G

 * <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 09:40:07 CDT
From:         Tom Brewer <NOTTMB@LSUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: The unelectable elect.
              11 Sep 1992 07:05:53 -0700 from <DRAKE@ASUCHM.LA.ASU.EDU>

Bro Mark:

If you understood and believed my "view" as you call it, you would know
I don't have to try to "prove" it. That it is taught by our Lord is good
enough for me. The burden of "proof" is on those who say that Jesus did
not teach the doctrines recorded in John 6.

Tom
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
From: timk@world.std.com (Tim King)
Subject: Re: John 6
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 07:21:34 GMT

Brad Kaiser <bradk%isdgsm@RTSG.MOT.COM> writes:

>Bob Weiss writes (in regard to John 6):

>>> 	You seem to have overlooked 6:35

>>> 	"He who has comes to Me shall never hunger,
>>> 	He who believes in Me shall never thirst."

>... I fail to see your point.

I fail to see your point, Brad, but I see Bob's plainly.  You said that
the verses about Jesus's body being food and His blood being drink were to
be taken literally.  However, verse 35, in the same passage, is clearly
figurative in nature.  Why assume that Jesus changed between metaphorical
language and literal?  As a matter of fact, the metaphor of food and drink
seems to be carried thoughout the entire passage, doesn't it?

I am not trying to advocate one side or the other.  Transsubstantiation,
the teaching that the bread and drink in communion (eucharist) actually
change into the body and blood of Christ, is held by many good christians.
It has apparently been debated for a long time, and, although I don't
know the details, it probably would've seen a solution if the answer were
clear.  I can only suppose that the Lord's supper is important, but
concerning oneself with transsubstantiation is not.  (Besides, I don't
like typing in 6-syllable words! :-)

-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        |                                             <>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
From: timk@world.std.com (Tim King)
Subject: Re: Catholicism ?s
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 21:37:59 GMT

Tom Brewer <NOTTMB@LSUVM.BITNET> writes:

>... Catholic doctrine states "The Sacrament of Matrimony bestows
>Sanctifying Grace on the contracting parties."

Could someone who understands explain to me how this is true?  I am somewhat
ignorant on much of Catholic teaching, and I don't know what justification
is used for most Catholic beliefs that are not also held by most Protestants.

Specifically:

  * How is Grace bestowed on me by the Sacrement of Matrimony?  (Remember
    that Grace is God's giving us something good although we did not
    deserve it.)

  * What logic or reasoning is used to support this doctrinal statement?
    Or what scripture(s)?

-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
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:         Sun, 13 Sep 1992 08:54:00 CDT
From:         BKCOBB@LIFE.UAMS.EDU
Subject:      Prophecy

Dear Steve;

>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.

I have problems with the passage being merely illustrative in nature
because I don't think the Bible gives one that option when taken
at face value.  Regarding the prophecy from Jer. 31:14 -- Matt. 2:18,
in Matt. 2:17 we read "Then what was said through the prophet
Jeremiah was fulfilled".  The word for fulfilled (pleroo) means literally
"to fill up".  I take this to mean that the prophecy found partial
fulfillment in Jeremiah's time and finds complete fulfillment in Matthew.

Ditto that for Hos. 11:1 -- Matt. 2:15.

Brian
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 17:18:50 -0700
From:         John Baskette <jfb@MACSCH.COM>
Subject:      Hal Camping prediction of Return of Christ

Hello,

	What do any of you all know about the prediction by Hal
Camping of the return of Christ by September 1994?  Hal Camping
is host of a show called "The Open Forum" on the family radio
network.  I understand him to be a reformed calvinist type.  The
few times that I have heard him have not left me with the impression
that his scholarship is all that great, but this lastest rumor
is surprising to me.  What's up?

Thanks in advance.

no sig yet.  This is my first post to the net.   John Baskette
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Orig-To: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 10 Sep 1992 18:48:04 CDT
Comments:     Answering received message
From:         THERESA BLACKWELL <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Subject:      CHAPTER....

  Carol,
 I forgive!!!
 There aren't too many people who often make that mistake, gal.
 Not a biggie.
 Rehearsal went well, I thought.
 Except for a few spots, we're in good shape for this next show.
 I am sooooooo tired, and need to get a shower, but there's some
 interesting mess happening with the dude I told you about:
 This fella can't leave situations alone, and I have found out that
 he no longer works for David.
 Now he's beginning to make more trouble !!!!
 I think David's gonna have to kick him off the system for good.
 Robert might just have met his match in all of those who he's been
 messin' with.
 (He ganged up on three of my newest friends today...that's not
 cool with "the G"... nada chance of them takin' that....)
 I got sick of him playin' games a long time ago.
 And, everyone else is beginning to do the same.
 We've tried to be friends to him, and he just keeps shunnin' us.
 OH well...
 Catch you later, Gal...
 God Bless you!
 "G"

 * <TBLACKWL@USMCP6.BITNET>
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Mailer: QuickMail/SMTP interface.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:29:35 EDT
From:         Leo W <Leo_W@QM.CIRCA.UFL.EDU>
Subject:      Re>Absolution

TimK wrote: "What are the effective results of this additional "Grace" that God
can give only through a Catholic priest?"

Wolfgang wrote: "And what is this special grace that is administered in the
sacrament?"

Let me quote Sullivan again:

"This sacrament is NECESSARY FOR THE SALVATION of those who have fallen into
mortal sin after Baptism ... What about baptized Protestants who are in good
faith? ... God MAY BE READY to forgive the sins of those non-Catholic
Christians ..."

This is salvation by grace through faith, RCC style.  The grace which is
necessary for salvation is administered and distributed through the Church,
Christ's kingdom on earth.  If one is in the RCC, one is in Christ's kingdom.
Membership has its priviledges, and the sure, certain, effectual administration
and distribution of Christ's grace and merits upon RCC kingdom members is the
greatest priviledge.

Those outside MIGHT also receive grace from Christ, but they are not directly
connected to the 100% reliable grace network.  They dial-in remotely and
sometimes might make a good connection and receive some saving grace, but no
guarantees.

We Christians who are outside the RCC often fail to understand how vitally
important the RCC is for the salvation of RCC'ers.  Let me quote The Creed of
the Council of Trent (1564):

"I also acknowledge that there are truly and properly seven sacraments of the
New Law, instituted by Jesus Christ our Lord, and that they are necessary for
the salvation of the human race, although it is not necessary for each
individual to receive them all .... I also accept and acknowledge the customary
and approved rites of the Catholic Church in the solemn administration of these
sacraments."

Some Christians, including myself, believe saving grace is distributed directly
from God to the individual believer with no human intermediary, such as a
priest.  Others believe saving grace is distributed through rites administered
by a priesthood (not only RCC'ers).  This difference is really the crux of the
mosh.

Yours in Christ Jesus,
Leo
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 14 Sep 1992 09:33:55 CDT
From:         Jesse Carnes <NOTJIC@LSUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      JSTAHLEY address

Dear JSTAHLEY ;

I did not know quite how to figure out your name in your E-mail address.
What is it??



Jesse Carnes
From: spk@uk.ac.aber (Stephen Kingston)
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Subject: Re: Spiritual experience
Date: 9 Sep 92 16:28:00 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept., University of Wales at Aberystwyth.

Z_STAFF_CL@SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE.AC.UK wrote:
> I am not quite sure how to explain this but it is a bit of research I
> am doing which I'd like your insights on.
> 
> Periodically, you get to hear of people who experience the "Presence of GOD"
> (sorry about the jargon) in a physical way.

I am not quite certain what you mean by this. Certainly I believe that 
all Christians may truly know the presence of God. However, there are some
experiences which might be purely emotional.

TV-Evangelist style preachers who pray and push people over backwards are 
inducing emotional experiences, and such experiences should be avoided in
my opinion. Likewise, there is a possibility that the power of suggestion
may come into play. For instance, if I am in a meeting where the minister
says "The Holy Spirit is really moving now, let him minister to you now."
then I may experience some sensation, such as a tingling in my hands or
a "warm fuzzy", but this is simply beacuse of my own excited expectation.

I do believe that a promise is given to each and every one of us in 
scripture regarding one experience in particular. Peter says in Acts 2:
"This promise is for you, your children and all those who are far off."

What is this experience? It is the Baptism with the Holy Spirit. As an 
example (which I have quoted before), read this account from a book 
about Howel Harries (a founder of Calvinistic Methodism in Wales):

"Doubtless, the experience of forgiveness in Talgarth church was
sweet. Yet it left a feeling of further need in his soul which he
could not define. But when he was at secret prayer in Llangasty
church, the sacred spot where he had given himself to God, God now
gave Himself to him.

"The richest biblical terms are heaped one on another in an attempt to
give expression to his experience at that time, He was there cleansed
from all his idols, and the love of God was shed abroad in his heart.
Christ had come in previously, but now He began to sup with him; now
he received the Spirit of adoption, teaching him to cry Abba Father,
and with it a desire to depart and be with Christ. All his fears
vanished for months, and pure love took their place."

This experience is repeated countless times in the lives of countless
people throughout church history. Even Thomas Aquinas had such an
experience, and you could not find much more of a rationalistic person
then he. (I shall perhaps write more of this experience at a later date).

All the best,
  Stephen.

-- 
Gweleis i rac neb nym gweles pop annwyl. ef diwyl yneges. Gweleis i pasc.
(I saw the one above all men,  he saw me;  he, the beloved of his people,
who fulfills his mission. I saw Easter.) "Yspeil Taliesin" ---Taliesin---
spk@uk.ac.aber --- spk%uk.ac.aber@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk --- Stephen Kingston
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
X-Vmsmail-To: SMTP%"CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 11 Sep 1992 07:05:53 -0700
From:         MARK DRAKE <DRAKE@ASUCHM.LA.ASU.EDU>
Subject:      Re: The unelectable elect.

>our Lord teaches no man can come to Christ UNLESS/EXCEPT/UNTIL the Father
>first draws the man to Christ.
>
>Tom Brewer

	You will find that those who belive that God does not force our
salvation also believe the statement above.  It really is of no value in
proving your view to us.

draw <> force

Mark
drake@asuchm.la.asu.edu
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU