HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Original_To:  CHRISTIA
Original_cc:  HUTTER
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 28 Aug 1992 12:18:00 N
From:         Wolfgang Hutter <HUTTER@DULRUU51.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: The Bible and Homophobia

In a message of Thu, 27 Aug 1992 14:49:25 GMT
Received on Thu, 27 Aug 92 19:45 N
75furlong@CUA.EDU wrote:

>> ACT 15:28  For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay
>>  upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;
>> ACT 15:29  That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from
>>  blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which
>>  if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.
>>
>> Btw: I'm no Greek scholar, but I suspect that homosexuality would fall
>> under 'fornication' in this context.
>
>Well, no, actually - sex outside of marriage, homosexual _or_ heterosexual, is
>fornication. This passage makes no differentiation between homosexuality and
>heterosexuality.

Well, since homosexual activities are outside of marriage then their
prohibition is indeed stated in the verses I cited.

>Just think - if
>lesbigay people were allowed to marry here, they would no longer be
>fornicators, would they?

Yes, they would, because the One who defines sin also defines marriage
and as far as I know it is defined as the unification of a man and a
woman:

MAT 19:5  And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and
 mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one
 flesh?
MAT 19:6  Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What
 therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.

So I doubt that if any government on earth would chose to declare a
lesbigay couple 'married' God would say, "Well, they got me at last. I
will have to change my mind on marriage..."

>Many same sex marriages have
>occured _within Christian churches_, but are not legally recognized.

Neither are they divinely recognized.

>These
>people can no longer be considered fornicators, since they have been joined in
>marriage. Does the bible still condemn them?

Your question rests on a false foundation. The marriage is no marriage
in God's eyes and so God will indeed punish the sin.

>Politicos who say that same-sex marriages are un-Christian or go against
>"family values" are denying these people the chance to have a traditional
>(Christian or not) marriage and family. These politicians are also forgetting
>that the US doesn't have a national religion and that imposing Christian
>beliefs through law is unconstitutional.

This is not true, since the prohibition of murder is also an
implementation of Christian ethics to national law. That the view on
murder is not exclusively Christian changes nothing since to my
knowledge the view on homosexual marriages is also the same among
Christians, Jews and Moslems, just to mention some.

Wolfgang <><
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 09:34:17 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Guacamole Salad or No Cold Springs in Hell

Tom:

I can't believe you didn't get the "impressions" post.  It was a JOKE.
It was supposed to imply that some things are true (answers to math
tests) and can't just be tossed off as "impressions."  The "can't
we all be brothers?" comment was meant to show just how ridiculous it
is to assume that abosolutes are somehow made less so by the desire to
get along, and to imply that the real motivation behind those who so
dismiss such absolutes is that they just can't deal with reality
(i.e., they are flunking the math tests.)

Get real.


Love INC,
         --Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 14:23:46 EDT
From:         carol nemec <YA67@FERRIS.BITNET>
Subject:      sex/fantasy verses

I found another...I thought there had to be something in Proverbs!

Try Proverbs 6:24...

Carol
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 12:03:55 CST
From:         A16905@ITESO.BITNET
Subject:      Re: Catholicism

Yes, Kerry, and the numerous prayer requests posted to the list are
needless.....But they were posted. Hmmmmmmmm.... Why ?

Shalom,
Memo.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sat, 29 Aug 1992 22:31:12 EDT
From:         JEK@NIHCU.BITNET
Subject:      Genesis 19 in the light of Luke 10

Peter Gomes cites Luke 10:10-13 as evidence that the sin of Sodom
was one of inhospitality. Wolfgang replies that the argument here is
far from obvious.

Jesus, sending out his disciples on a preaching mission, tells them:
"If a city rejects you... it will be punished more severely at the
Last Day than Sodom will be." (Luke 10:10-12 parphrased)

Gomes, as I understand him, takes Jesus to mean that a city that
behaves inhospitably to the disciples is worse than Sodom, which
behaved inhospitably to the angels. (One might also argue that a
city that refuses to hear the warning of impending judgment and call
to repentance preached by the disciples is worse than Sodom, which
rejected the warning of impending judgement and call to repentance
brought by the angels.)

I think he has a point, in that, when we say of someone, by way of
censure, "He is worse than X," naming a notorious bad man of the
past, we are likeliest to do this if there is some resemblance
between the faults of the man we are censuring and the faults of the
ancient villain. On the other hand, someone may say, "Jones is worse
than Adolf Hitler," without being prepared to name ways in which the
sins of Jones and Hitler are similar. Hence, Sodom is probably cited
as an example of an ancient city with similar sins, but possibly
just as an example of an ancient city that had been wicked and
punished for it.

 Yours,
 James Kiefer
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 09:29:00 EST
From:         "DRCV06::GRAHAM" <GRAHAM%DRCV06.decnet@DRCVAX.AF.MIL>
Subject:      Christians and governmental involvement.
X-To:         christia <christia@asuvm.inre.asu.edu>

I guess I'm a little confused.  I have put forth the verses from 1 Cor
5:12,13 before where Paul clearly, or at least, clearly to me, says that we
Christians should be involved in church matters, but let the world go about
its way because God will judge them.  How can this be consolidated with the
seemingly pervasive view that Christians must be involved in government?
My exegesis of these verses indicates that it means exactly what it seems
to say, we should keep hands off the world.  Let them go on, God will deal
with them.  How else can these verses be construed?  I am really curious
and interested in other informed opinions.

Dan Graham
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
X-VMS-Cc: CORJB
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 10:29:36 -0500
From:         Jason Briggs Cormier <CORJB@RHODES.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: We survived Andrew!

I too would like to add a "praise God" because
my family suffered almost no damage from Andrew.
A branch fell from our pecan tree and put a little
hole in the roof of our porch, but there wasn't even
any power outages in my home town.  God is good.

Jason
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 09:26:00 GMT
From:         Z_STAFF_CL@SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE.AC.UK
Subject:      Re: FYI: homophobic

>From: Steven Klepzig <SKLEPZI@EDU.UTAH.SAFF.SSB1>
>Subject: FYI: homophobic
>
>Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, page 578, next to last entry in
>second column:
>
>ho.mo.pho.bia /ho-me-fo-be-a/ n [homo + phobia] (1969): irrational fear of
>homosexuality or homosexuals - ho.mo.pho.bic /-fo-bik/ adj
>
>Just thought there might be some interest in the dictionary meaning of this
>label that is so widely applied to us "fundamentalists".
>
>Personally, I am not afraid of either (except when I receive direct bodily
>threats) and I am certainly not irrationally afraid of those.  In fact, I'd
>say that most of the time I'm not even irrational.

Steven,

I am sure that all would feel fear when faced with the sort of threat you
allude to - "gay" or "straight" - and all christians would condem sure a
threat - in both camps (forgive the unintentional pun.)

Simmilarly, "gays" are quite justified to object to the sort of threats they
receive in the name (but not the spirit) of christianity.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Carol A Long,  					DISCLAIMER - unless otherwise
IT Service,					stated this message contains
Southampton Institute of Higher Education	my opinion...probably only mine
East Park Terrace,
Southampton	SO9 4WW,   England		RELEASE - Repost at will, with
						acknowlegements to author.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Z_STAFF_CL@UK.AC.SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE
===============================================================================
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sat, 22 Aug 1992 23:41:32 EDT
Comments:     Converted from PROFS to RFC822 format by PUMP V2.2X
From:         Angela Zimmerman <AMZIMM01@ULKYVM.LOUISVILLE.EDU>
Subject:      Religion in schools

Item Retrieval Assistant, DADS
Phone: 588-6757

Kerry,

Where do you get your information that school officials are punishing
children for bringing bibles to school?  I brought one with me many
times and was never reprimanded; I even had heated discussions about the
bible with friends in class and we were never told not to discuss the
bible (of course this also wasn't in the middle of class when we were
supposed to be working).  We had a couple of Christian groups that
met after school in the building.  The only time I can think of when someone
has had a bible taken away from them is when they were reading passages
from the Satanic Bible in the middle of class (out loud).  What I'm
wondering, however is if the teacher would have done the same thing had
it been the Christian Bible.  Chances are, no.  She may have asked him
not to read aloud during class, but I doubt that she would have taken it
away (he never got the book back, incidentally--which in my opinion is
theft).  In my history class, we did study Christianity as well as other
religions.  I don't remember for sure, but I believe we even studied
Christianity in my high school Humanities class.  We are still a very
Christian dominated society.  The stores open late and close early on
whose sabbath?  The Christian one.  What holidays are federal holidays?
The Christian ones.  The only real difference, religiously, between now
and twenty or so years ago is that now people are starting to actually
acknowledge that there are other religions out there.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sun, 23 Aug 1992 17:42:24 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Barbara's speech
              23 Aug 1992 03:54:24 GMT from <kilroy@GBORO.GLASSBORO.EDU>

Darren:

One more thing.  If you really believe that the media is going to
start attacking Clinton if Bush "bounces" high enough, you don't
know enough about the media.

And if you think the American people *like* the garbage coming out of
Hollywood and Atlanta, you haven't been listening to them.  In the
eyes of the public, the media ranks somewhere between the Mafia
and Saddam Hussein.  Even during the Gulf War, with most of the
nation glued to their sets, "the media" remained an enemy.  The
Perot people say it, the Republicans say it, the prolife movement
says it, evangelicals say it--even Brian Lamb says it.  The only
people who don't say it seem to be the leaders of the Democrat party.

Love INC,
         ---Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Sun, 23 Aug 1992 03:18:08 EDT
From:         Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Saints (WAS Jesus...OR Pope?

Kerry,

In Catholic usage the word "saint" has three meanings:  Canonized
saints in Heaven, all saints in Heaven (Cf. All Saints Day) and all
Christians in this world or the next ("the Communion of Saints")  I
have no idea when it took on the specific connotation of someone in
Heaven.

Marty Helgesen
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Fri, 4 Sep 1992 12:24:00 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Prayer for Somalia

Well, no one seems to have got to it yet, and I have to go to work soon,
so the Holy Spirit said, "go."

Here goes:

Heavenly Father,
Precious Jesus,
We come before you as sinners, sinning in our doing nothing, sinning in our
ability to pretend the pain is not there.  Lord we ask for your forgiveness
for our failure to remember those who suffer far from where we see an
immediate way to help.  Lord we ask your permission to come before your
throne and offer to you our humble pleas for those in another land who are
suffering so terribly.
Lord Jesus, we ask that you would send Your people to bring to those in need
not only those things needed for their physical survival, but the means
by which they may eternally live.  Where there is no water, bring Your
living water, that never runs dry.  Where there is no food, bring the
bread of life, the Son of Man.  Where there is no hope, bring the
source of unending hope for all who are lost, lonely, hungry, sinful,
and dying.  Let there be a great revival of love and life in this
nation, this nation of precious people, babies, old people, mothers
and fathers, husbands and wives.
  Bring, Oh Lord, your perfect peace to those who have no peace.  Send
those who did not think they were to go.  Open the hearts and the Spirits
of Your servants, that we may see the way You have chosen us to help
in this desperate situation.  Sensitize our spirits to Your Holy Spirit,
that the suffering and the pain may break our hearts to Your will for
the lost and for us.
  Father, only You know the beginning and the end, the need and the command.
We ask you, Father, in Your mercy, and by the precious blood of Your Son,
the only begotten whose sacrifice permits us to come before You as perfected,
that you would grant us the opportunity to serve You in some capacity to
ameliorate the suffering of the humanity for which Your Son died.
  Lord, as we go through this world, give us Your eyes to see with, Your
heart to love with, Your desires upon which to act.  Let us not be hardened
by our human desire to ignore.  Let us not hear without listening.  Let us
not observe without seeing.  Dear Lord, in our pain, and for our brothers
and sisters in Somalia, and for all the lost and the broken-hearted,
we ask your precious mercy and your love.  In the name of Jesus, the lamb
of God who taketh away the sin of the world, we pray.
                                                     Amen.

Love INC

    --Kerry
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 01:27:59 EDT
From:         Marty Helgesen <MNHCC@CUNYVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Catholics Being Born Again

Yvette,

Frank is correct in saying that Catholics believe we are born again
at Baptism.  The following fuller explanation is from _ Catholic and
Christian _ by Alan Schreck:  "Catholics believe that they are first
born again of water and the Holy Spirit when they receive the sacra-
ment of baptism.  Therefore, a person who has been validly baptized
has been 'born of water and the Spirit' and can attain salvation.

     "However, Catholics also believe that baptism only _ begins _
the work or mission of the Holy Spirit in the life of the believer.
The Spirit also comes in new and deeper ways in the other sacraments
of the church, and through the fervent and expectant prayer of Chris-
tians.  Salvation, as we have seen, is a life-long process that de-
pends upon continually living in the power of the Holy Spirit and by
the Spirit's guidance.  Catholics do not believe that its enough to
be 'born again' once (say, in baptism) and depend upon that fact
alone for salvation.  Paul stresses that it those who _ live _ ac-
cording to the Spirit of God who will attain salvation, '... for if
you live according tot he flesh you will die, but if by the spirit
you put to death the deeds of the body you will live.  For all who
are led by the Spirit of God are sons of God' (Rom 8:13-14)"

Marty Helgesen
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 11:44:19 EDT
From:         AISARMSTRONG%IST%VMI@IST.VMI.EDU
Subject:      SEx
X-To:         CHRISTIA@ASUVM.INRE.ASU.EDU

Does anyone have any Bible verses or passages that I can send to the Freetalk
group that is right know talking about this sin of sexural fantasy?
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 26 Aug 1992 09:44:26 EST
From:         Kerry Stephenson <KSTE@PURCCVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Managing The News (was Political Speeches)
              26 Aug 1992 04:23:12 GMT from <kilroy@GBORO.GLASSBORO.EDU>

Darren:

One the things many people fail to take into account is the effect of
Watergate.  After Watergate, fewer and fewer reporters feel that
objectivity is a virtue.  The media has the idea now that it is their
duty not only to give facts, but to stand as the defenders of
ideology, as well.  Reporters are crusaders now, not scribes.

But there is another disturbing problem with the media.  You demonstrate
that reporters make mistakes and it is up to us to read with discernment.
Fine.  But newspaper articles are also *sources* for more influential
pieces of prose, such as journal articles, books, editorials, and
research.  Social science researchers don't go look up other sources
to make sure that a public figure said what the paper says he said.
They don't have the time or the money.  They have to depend on the
on-site journalist to give them facts.

Researchers analyze poll results from newspapers, they analyze
editorials, they predict trends in policy and *make important
policy recommendations* based, in part, on information that comes
from newspapers and news magazines, and later interpretations made
by others of those things and mixed into academic articles,
studies, and influential books.

Thus, when the NYT says Bush says something, that quote reappears
over and over again, popularly and in the academic journals, and
eventually it becomes unquestioned "fact."

When the media pushes its agenda, that agenda is reproduced time and
again, until it returns back to the public to reinforce the false
impression that opinion is fact.

Eventually, all the qualifiers drop off (the data *appear* to show),
and impressions become part of the paradigm.

Maybe this is not a problem in the "hard" sciences, where experiments
are done on the thing itself, but in the behavioral and social
sciences, it is a very real danger.

For Christians, the problem has become apparent to those who have
actually *been involved in* events reported by the media.  A pro-life
leader is quoted wrongly, a number is underestimated, and those "facts"
become part of the academic discourse on religion in America.  The
academics both assume the "fact" is correct and don't have any interest
in finding out otherwise.  That misinterpretation becomes both the
theoretical basis for future research and part of the interpretive
paradigm through which the data is analyzed.

Maybe I'm the only one, but I think this is *bad*, unjust, and
*wrong*.

Love INC,

           ---Kerry
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Tue, 1 Sep 1992 13:04:00 GMT
From:         Z_STAFF_CL@SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE.AC.UK
Subject:      Self praise is no recomendation

As part of a conversation via private mail about the latest few
offerings on the homosexuality debate, I have just mailed a
comment that just about sums up how I feel about this list.
As my subject line says "self praise is no recomendation" but I
hope most of you may find some agreement with it ...........


Don't give up on Christia, they'll get there in the end with a little help.
I don't think it matters, in this world, who is wrong.  What does matter is
the way we treat each other and the way we discuss our beliefs and grow in
God.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Carol A Long,  					DISCLAIMER - unless otherwise
IT Service,					stated this message contains
Southampton Institute of Higher Education	my opinion...probably only mine
East Park Terrace,
Southampton	SO9 4WW,   England		RELEASE - Repost at will, with
						acknowlegements to author.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Z_STAFF_CL@UK.AC.SOUTHAMPTON-INSTITUTE
===============================================================================
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Wed, 2 Sep 1992 12:40:01 CST
From:         A16905@ITESO.BITNET
Subject:      Re: 2 Peter 3

Thanks Lon, uffffff. I was starting to worry about my memory.

Shalom,
Memo.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Original_To:  BITNET%"CHRISTIA@ASUACAD.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 27 Aug 1992 09:55:00 EST
From:         WKJ <JAMES@XAVIER.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: FYI: homophobic

Marty,

On vacation I read the Rocky Mountain News ( a fairly decent paper ). They have
a listing of obscure definitions on each  issue. One caught our attention.

HOMOLIPHOBIA

Who out there knows what this is?

WKJ
Username: SURVEY SAYS!
PASSWORD: we laughed for nearly one hour at this
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 3 Sep 1992 10:21:19 CST
From:         A16905@ITESO.BITNET
Subject: Re: Jehovah's Witnesses (1st of 3)

They stated about 10 dates for the return of the Lord between 1876 and
1914. They were wrong in all of them. Conclusion: False Prophets.

Shalom,
Memo.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Delivery-Notice:  SMTP MAIL FROM does not correspond to sender.
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Mon, 31 Aug 1992 14:12:00 EST
From:         "DRCV06::GRAHAM" <GRAHAM%DRCV06.decnet@DRCVAX.AF.MIL>
Subject:      Local church names.
X-To:         christia <christia@asuvm.inre.asu.edu>

We spotted this very interesting situation, too about two years ago in our
little church.  We immediately dropped any pretense of finding a name and
call ourselves "The church at Concord."  We are in Concord, NH.  The
Baptist minister took exception and asked if we were "the" church in
Concord, what were they?  We responded that they were a group of Christians
that hadn't yet learned they shouldn't have a denominational name.

I am fully convinced that this early picture of the church is what we
should still have.  No denominations or hierarchical organizations should
characterize the physical manifestation of Christ's church.

Dan Graham
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU