I need to get this off my chest...

3 views
Skip to first unread message

Everyman

unread,
Jan 12, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/12/98
to

Perhaps someone out there can explain to me why this is:

I can be found lurking at a number of newsgroups, most of which are secular
and pertain to music or Science Fiction. Most of the people who post to
these groups have a pretty good sense of decorum (not that there aren't the
occasional jerks), and maintain some pretty good conversations (now to
preface any further remarks let me state that what I am about to say is in
no way an attack or judgment on this group or anyone in particular who posts
here, but I have made a few notable observations here).

I have found that in many cases when I visit a so-called "Christian"
newsgroup or chat room there is more offensive conversation, foul language
and profanity (spam not included in the analysis) than in many secular
groups based on the same type of subject matter. For example, someone
posted a message here about some recent movies and I was amazed that on this
Christian newsgroup someone looked favorably upon certain films such as
"Grosse Point Blank", "Topless Women Talk About Their Lives", "Boogie
Nights", &c. I've been to movies which I've had to leave the theater and
repent having even been in there in the first place such as "Showgirls"
(which was not widely publicized in my area and was grossly misrepresented
to me. I spent 20 minutes in the theater for that one before loudly
demanding my money back at the box office). Where are we as Christians when
we celebrate obscenity and shun decency and moral integrity as these films
endeavor to do?

Not only that, but I've seen more profanity in one night here than I've seen
on any other group which I frequent. Even if you're only re-iterating what
someone else has said, why do you feel we need a verbatim account in order
to get the point? Another example: There was a post here about Nazism.
Could someone explain to me who was the Christian and who was the Nazi in
this thread? The language and ideas left me wondering which side of the
fence either of these guys were on.

Bottom line is this: I just want to know if there's anyone out there who
really loves Jesus anymore? In the words of Steven Curtis Chapman,
"Nobody's perfect, but I just want to see somebody living what they say they
believe." Is anyone out there who loves Jesus? What are you doing at this
point in your life to show that love to the world around you? This is not
an attack, but a desperate cry of a wounded soldier who's been struggling
with his own faith for so long, he just needs to know he's not totally alone
out here. Thank you for listening.


"Do you see, do you see all the people sinking down? Do you care, don't you
care? Are you going to let them drown? How can you be so numb, not to care
if they come? Don't close your eyes, don't pretend the job's done.

" 'Bless me, Lord!' 'Bless me, Lord!' It's all we ever hear! No one aches,
no one hurts or even sheds a tear. But He cries, He weeps He bleeds and he
cares for our needs and we just sit back and keep soaking it in. Can't you
see it's such a sin..."

-Beloved late brother in Christ, Keith Green

Tony Ewen

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

I heartily agree. Come on people, how about a bit of civility and
politeness? It pains me to note that EVERY entry in my twit list originates
from this group!


Everyman wrote in message ...

Dave Vandervies

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

On Mon, 12 Jan 1998 21:49:44 -0500, "Everyman"
<ask_me_and_I'll_t...@once.com> wrote:

> [...]

i'd like to respond by email but need your address for that.


paul...@diespammererinet.com

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

In article <34bafa58...@fs25nt3.mlmic.com> dav...@earthling.net (Dave Vandervies) writes:
>From: dav...@earthling.net (Dave Vandervies)
>Subject: Re: I need to get this off my chest...
>Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 05:30:00 GMT

>> [...]

Maybe he's had the same experience I once had that anyone who complains about
the excessive nasty attitude and foul language on this list gets privately
spammed by the same people who are so offensive publicly.


(When replying, remove the DIESPAMMER from my return
address.)

Paul D. Race
Breakthrough Communications

If the expressed opinions are not those of management,
they probably should be.

Chuck Pearson

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

paul...@DIESPAMMERerinet.com wrote in response to dav...@earthling.net (Dave
Vandervies):

: >On Mon, 12 Jan 1998 21:49:44 -0500, "Everyman"
: ><ask_me_and_I'll_t...@once.com> wrote:
: >> [...]

: >i'd like to respond by email but need your address for that.

: Maybe he's had the same experience I once had that anyone who complains about
: the excessive nasty attitude and foul language on this list gets privately
: spammed by the same people who are so offensive publicly.

now come on, paul. i'd like to hear some specifics.

besides, most of the "offensive" people i know 'round these parts are
savvy enough to know how to remove DIESPAMMER from the reply-to address.

chuck [who simply gets tired of telling people about what rec.music.christian
is and what it is not]
--
[thanx to douglas giancoli.]
if music be the food of physics, play on.
cpea...@freenet.columbus.oh.us

Jerry B. Ray

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

In article <69etvn$ht4$1...@news.mel.aone.net.au>,
Tony Ewen <Ewen...@cabs.com.au> wrote:

>I heartily agree. Come on people, how about a bit of civility and
>politeness? It pains me to note that EVERY entry in my twit list originates
>from this group!

Newbiefiles for everyone!

>Everyman wrote in message ...

>>I have found that in many cases when I visit a so-called "Christian"


>>newsgroup or chat room there is more offensive conversation, foul language
>>and profanity (spam not included in the analysis) than in many secular
>>groups based on the same type of subject matter.

You're apparently NOT excluding all of the spam, because as a long time
poster to this newsgroup (since the beginning, actually...), and someone
who CAN identify the trolls and spam from the "content," I can say that
your assessment is untrue. (Not that contributions from the "actual
Christians" in the newsgroup are all devoid of "offensive conversation,"
but neither is it as prevalent as you seem to believe.)

>>For example, someone
>>posted a message here about some recent movies and I was amazed that on this
>>Christian newsgroup someone looked favorably upon certain films such as
>>"Grosse Point Blank", "Topless Women Talk About Their Lives", "Boogie
>>Nights", &c.

Well, I haven't seen _Boogie Nights_ but it didn't really sound like something
I'd want to see, content-wise. I'm not particularly interested in Marky
Mark's schlong, honestly. I've never even HEARD of _Topless Women..._ but
it sounds like some sort of artsy thing to me. I saw _Grosse Point Blank_,
enjoyed it, and didn't find it particularly offensive. People have
different standards, even within mainline Christianity, so I wouldn't be
so quick to judge folks on what they find offensive in movies. Plenty
of Christian folk find the _Star Wars_ trilogy offensive due to it's content,
while I see those movies as just about as inoffensive as possible. (The
ability to distinguish fantasy from reality helps in that particular example,
I've found.)

>>I've been to movies which I've had to leave the theater and
>>repent having even been in there in the first place such as "Showgirls"
>>(which was not widely publicized in my area and was grossly misrepresented
>>to me. I spent 20 minutes in the theater for that one before loudly
>>demanding my money back at the box office).

Hmm. What _were_ you expecting from a movie called _Showgirls_, anyway?

JRjr
--
%%%%% vap...@prism.gatech.edu %%%%%%%% Jerry B. Ray, Jr. %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
"I am so amazingly cool you could keep a side of meat in me for a month.
I am so hip I have difficulty seeing over my pelvis."
-- Zaphod Beeblebrox

Jerry B. Ray

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

In article <69foe1$q...@login.freenet.columbus.oh.us>,
Chuck Pearson <cpea...@freenet.columbus.oh.us> wrote:

>:Maybe he's had the same experience I once had that anyone who complains about

>:the excessive nasty attitude and foul language on this list gets privately
>:spammed by the same people who are so offensive publicly.

>now come on, paul. i'd like to hear some specifics.

Hmm. Why do that, when it's easier to do a drive-by, shooting-in-the-dark
post? Much easier...

Matt Laswell

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

Tony Ewen (Ewen...@cabs.com.au) wrote:
: I heartily agree. Come on people, how about a bit of civility and
: politeness? It pains me to note that EVERY entry in my twit list originates
: from this group!

One might suggest that referring to a "twit list" is hardly civil or
polite...

- matt


Matt Laswell

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

Jerry B. Ray (vap...@prism.gatech.edu) wrote:
: In article <69foe1$q...@login.freenet.columbus.oh.us>,
: Chuck Pearson <cpea...@freenet.columbus.oh.us> wrote:

: >:Maybe he's had the same experience I once had that anyone who complains about
: >:the excessive nasty attitude and foul language on this list gets privately
: >:spammed by the same people who are so offensive publicly.

: >now come on, paul. i'd like to hear some specifics.

: Hmm. Why do that, when it's easier to do a drive-by, shooting-in-the-dark
: post? Much easier...

To be fair, Paul's not strictly a drive by. He's been around for a good
long while and used to contribute more than he does now. Of course,
he was hardly the innocent victim he's making himself out to be, either.
IIRC, he tended towards the "insult people for Jesus" and the "Keith
Green was the ultimate christian" schools of thought.

- matt

Everyman

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

paul...@DIESPAMMERerinet.com wrote in message ...


>In article <34bafa58...@fs25nt3.mlmic.com> dav...@earthling.net (Dave
Vandervies) writes:
>>From: dav...@earthling.net (Dave Vandervies)
>>Subject: Re: I need to get this off my chest...
>>Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 05:30:00 GMT
>

>>On Mon, 12 Jan 1998 21:49:44 -0500, "Everyman"
>><ask_me_and_I'll_t...@once.com> wrote:
>
>>> [...]
>
>>i'd like to respond by email but need your address for that.
>

>Maybe he's had the same experience I once had that anyone who complains
about
>the excessive nasty attitude and foul language on this list gets privately
>spammed by the same people who are so offensive publicly.


Well, that's the problem, see? If I give you my e-mail I also would be, by
default, giving you my name and I don't know what someone's intentions might
be in wanting my address. I've had enough with viruses and nasty letters
and I've already changed my phone number once, so sorry but if you would
like to respond, please do it here. :)

ga...@cam.ac.uk

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

> I have found that in many cases when I visit a so-called "Christian"
> newsgroup or chat room there is more offensive conversation, foul language
> and profanity (spam not included in the analysis) than in many secular

> groups based on the same type of subject matter. [-snip-]


> Where are we as Christians when we celebrate obscenity and shun decency
> and moral integrity as these films endeavor to do?

Where are we? Giving in to the world, or trying to take the idea of
"meeting it on its own terms" to extremes.

Although I do believe that Christians need to understand the people we're
trying to spread the word to, I think many of us can tend to use this as
an excuse (or not feel they need an excuse at all) to indulge in some
worldly pleasures.

But there are lots (and *lots*) of 'Christian' hypocrites out there,
people who call themselves believers but live in a way totally against
what Jesus taught us. I don't quite know what we can do for these guys;
but we're told to "rebuke and correct" each other. And it's got to be
absolutely central to our attitude to them to treat them with love.

> Bottom line is this: I just want to know if there's anyone out there who
> really loves Jesus anymore? In the words of Steven Curtis Chapman,
> "Nobody's perfect, but I just want to see somebody living what they say they
> believe." Is anyone out there who loves Jesus? What are you doing at this
> point in your life to show that love to the world around you? This is not
> an attack, but a desperate cry of a wounded soldier who's been struggling
> with his own faith for so long, he just needs to know he's not totally alone
> out here. Thank you for listening.

Be reassured, man. Although we may _seem_ to see worldliness and
hypocrisy wherever we turn, there are many really fired-up, humble
Christians I know, who acknowledge their failings but are just trying to
follow the Lord as best they can.

By way of example, here in Cambridge University, England we're having a
BIG mission (called Paradigm Shift - no musical reference intended),
where all the members of the Christian Unions across Cambridge are giving
their friends copies of John's gospel and undergoing evangelism training,
just for a big push in the week of the 8th-15th of February to speak the
word to our unsaved friends. We'd really appreciate any prayers from
anyone whatsoever who wants to support our cause.

Take care

Yours through Christ
__ -. .--. O
/ ) / __ \/ o\ o
/--/ / /__) \/ /\ /
/ (_(_(_____/\ -' '--'

Empty? Jesus said "I am the bread of life" - John 6:35
Stumbling? Jesus said "I am the light of the world" - John 8:12
Stressed? Jesus said "I will give you rest" - Matthew 11:28
Useless? Jesus said "I am the true vine" - John 15:1
Seeking Guidance? Jesus said "I am the Good Shepherd" - John 10:11
Alone? Jesus said "I am with you always" - Matthew 28:20
Without Hope? Jesus said "I am the resurrection and the life" - John 11:25

-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet

Chuck Pearson

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

Everyman (ask_me_and_I'll_t...@once.com) wrote in response to
paul...@DIESPAMMERerinet.com, etc.:

: >>i'd like to respond by email but need your address for that.

: >Maybe he's had the same experience I once had that anyone who complains
: >about the excessive nasty attitude and foul language on this list gets
: >privately spammed by the same people who are so offensive publicly.

: Well, that's the problem, see? If I give you my e-mail I also would be, by
: default, giving you my name and I don't know what someone's intentions might
: be in wanting my address. I've had enough with viruses and nasty letters
: and I've already changed my phone number once, so sorry but if you would
: like to respond, please do it here. :)

well, i'm sorry if you feel that way, but frankly those who refuse to give
out names and proper e-mail addresses lose all credibility in usenet
discourse. proper nettiquite and all that.

i've been posting in this neighborhood for the better part of six years
now, and have never once given a bogus e-mail address or a bogus name in a
post. have i recieved my share of spam and annoying e-mails? heck yeah i
have. i also know how to handle those things through proper channels
[being my postmaster and sysadmins]. and if you deal with those things
coming to your addresses, and you don't know the proper response to make,
then i'm inclined to say you deserve the grief that you put up with.

so quitcher' whinin'. all of you. there is no big secret as to what
rec.music.christian is about, and how most of the regular posters feel
about it. and if you think there is, then go away until you get a clue.

chuck

Thor, God of Thunder

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

Everyman wrote:
>
> Perhaps someone out there can explain to me why this is:
>
> I can be found lurking at a number of newsgroups, most of which are secular
> and pertain to music or Science Fiction. Most of the people who post to
> these groups have a pretty good sense of decorum (not that there aren't the
> occasional jerks), and maintain some pretty good conversations (now to
> preface any further remarks let me state that what I am about to say is in
> no way an attack or judgment on this group or anyone in particular who posts
> here, but I have made a few notable observations here).
>
> I have found that in many cases when I visit a so-called "Christian"
> newsgroup or chat room there is more offensive conversation, foul language
> and profanity (spam not included in the analysis) than in many secular
> groups based on the same type of subject matter. For example, someone

> posted a message here about some recent movies and I was amazed that on this
> Christian newsgroup someone looked favorably upon certain films such as
> "Grosse Point Blank", "Topless Women Talk About Their Lives", "Boogie
> Nights", &c. I've been to movies which I've had to leave the theater and

> repent having even been in there in the first place such as "Showgirls"
> (which was not widely publicized in my area and was grossly misrepresented
> to me. I spent 20 minutes in the theater for that one before loudly
> demanding my money back at the box office). Where are we as Christians when

> we celebrate obscenity and shun decency and moral integrity as these films
> endeavor to do?
>
> Not only that, but I've seen more profanity in one night here than I've seen
> on any other group which I frequent. Even if you're only re-iterating what
> someone else has said, why do you feel we need a verbatim account in order
> to get the point? Another example: There was a post here about Nazism.
> Could someone explain to me who was the Christian and who was the Nazi in
> this thread? The language and ideas left me wondering which side of the
> fence either of these guys were on.
>
> Bottom line is this: I just want to know if there's anyone out there who
> really loves Jesus anymore? In the words of Steven Curtis Chapman,
> "Nobody's perfect, but I just want to see somebody living what they say they
> believe." Is anyone out there who loves Jesus? What are you doing at this
> point in your life to show that love to the world around you? This is not
> an attack, but a desperate cry of a wounded soldier who's been struggling
> with his own faith for so long, he just needs to know he's not totally alone
> out here. Thank you for listening.
>
> "Do you see, do you see all the people sinking down? Do you care, don't you
> care? Are you going to let them drown? How can you be so numb, not to care
> if they come? Don't close your eyes, don't pretend the job's done.
>
> " 'Bless me, Lord!' 'Bless me, Lord!' It's all we ever hear! No one aches,
> no one hurts or even sheds a tear. But He cries, He weeps He bleeds and he
> cares for our needs and we just sit back and keep soaking it in. Can't you
> see it's such a sin..."
>
> -Beloved late brother in Christ, Keith Green


Man, you said it. It saddens me too. It seems that this group takes the
idea of freedom in Christ too far. I also lurk in lots of different
groups pretty much just point here and alt.religion.christianity. This
newsgroup is by far the worst. It saddens me too because people are
gonna read this stuff and say "man, they aren't any different" and go
away.

Jeff Holland

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

Thor, God of Thunder wrote:
>

> Man, you said it. It saddens me too. It seems that this group takes the
> idea of freedom in Christ too far. I also lurk in lots of different
> groups pretty much just point here and alt.religion.christianity. This
> newsgroup is by far the worst. It saddens me too because people are
> gonna read this stuff and say "man, they aren't any different" and go
> away.

Essay for the day:

How does the Bible recommend rebuking a fellow Christian?

Hint: In what kind of forum?

Bigger Hint: In front of how many people?

Even Bigger Hint: To whom should the rebuke go to?

One Hour Limit, no more than a page. Double-spaced and
in a font no larger than 12-point. On my desk by tommorrow.


Jeff
(*boggle*)


--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Holland, IBM Education and Training
Office E-mail: jeff...@us.ibm.com
Personal E-mail: jhol...@cc.gatech.edu

Jason and Heather

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

Thor, God of Thunder <we...@lexmark.com> wrote:
>
> Man, you said it. It saddens me too. It seems that this group
> takes the idea of freedom in Christ too far. I also lurk in lots
> of different groups pretty much just point here and
> alt.religion.christianity. This newsgroup is by far the worst. It
> saddens me too because people are gonna read this stuff and say
> "man, they aren't any different" and go away.

What makes you think that being "different" impresses non-Christians?

Of all the characteristics I look for in a person, difference for
the sake of being different isn't one of them.

jason
r.m.c resident atheist

--
"The man who marries a modern woman marries a woman who expects to vote
like a man, smoke like a man, have her hair cut like a man, and go without
restrictions and without chaperones and obey nobody."
BOBBED HAIR - John R. Rice, 1941 http://www.primenet.com/~steiners/

FunnyBoy

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to
I love you man!

Jason and Heather

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

Peter Thomas Chattaway <pet...@unixg.ubc.ca> wrote:
> Jerry B. Ray (vap...@prism.gatech.edu) wrote:
> > Well, I haven't seen _Boogie Nights_ but it didn't really sound like
> > something I'd want to see, content-wise. I'm not particularly
> > interested in Marky Mark's schlong, honestly.
>
> Don't worry, the schlong you see is just a prosthetic (although I think
> you can see a glimpse of the real thing behind it) ...

Not just a prosthetic, but an _obvious_ prosethetic. So obvious that
I thought it was intentional. ie. Dirk's cocaine habit has had such
an effect that he's forced to use one. That would have been a truly
bizarre ending. If it wasn't intentional, then the final scene is
just lame. Definitely not one of the year's best flicks either way.

Jason and Heather

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

Wednesday <wedn...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:

> ga...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
> > By way of example, here in Cambridge University, England we're having a
> > BIG mission (called Paradigm Shift - no musical reference intended),
> > where all the members of the Christian Unions across Cambridge are giving
> > their friends copies of John's gospel and undergoing evangelism training,
> > just for a big push in the week of the 8th-15th of February to speak the
> > word to our unsaved friends. We'd really appreciate any prayers from
> > anyone whatsoever who wants to support our cause.
>
> Good luck not getting wet this year...
>
> [Explanation to the nonCambies: one of the ways people would deal with the
> issue of being evangelised to was to dump buckets of water on the heads
> of the evangelising -- two years ago, IIRC.]

Now, now. Let's not persecute the Christians. It only encourages them.

Hollering Harry

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to


Everyman wrote:

> I have found that in many cases when I visit a so-called "Christian"
> newsgroup or chat room there is more offensive conversation, foul language
> and profanity (spam not included in the analysis) than in many secular

> groups based on the same type of subject matter........

> "Do you see, do you see all the people sinking down? Do you care, don't

> youcare? Are you going to let them drown? How can you be so numb, not to care


> if they come? Don't close your eyes, don't pretend the job's done.

> " 'Bless me, Lord!' 'Bless me, Lord!' It's all we ever hear! No one aches,
> no one hurts or even sheds a tear. But He cries, He weeps He bleeds and he
> cares for our needs and we just sit back and keep soaking it in. Can't you
> see it's such a sin..."
>
> -Beloved late brother in Christ, Keith Green

Thanks so much for this post. Couldn't have said it better.


Hollering Harry

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

Everyman

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

>: Well, I haven't seen _Boogie Nights_ but it didn't really sound like

>: something I'd want to see, content-wise. I'm not particularly
>: interested in Marky Mark's schlong, honestly.
>
>Don't worry, the schlong you see is just a prosthetic (although I think
>you can see a glimpse of the real thing behind it) ...


Ladies and gentlemen, the Prosecution rests its case.

Everyman

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

>so quitcher' whinin'. all of you. there is no big secret as to what
>rec.music.christian is about, and how most of the regular posters feel
>about it. and if you think there is, then go away until you get a clue.
>
>chuck


Okay, Chuck. Call me naive, but I guess I've not been let in on the secret.
And I wonder if you'll dodge the question, as another has already: what is
this group all about?

Everyman

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

>Man, you said it. It saddens me too. It seems that this group takes the
>idea of freedom in Christ too far. I also lurk in lots of different
>groups pretty much just point here and alt.religion.christianity. This
>newsgroup is by far the worst. It saddens me too because people are
>gonna read this stuff and say "man, they aren't any different" and go
>away.

Worse yet, most of those people will slip into the next world lost and whose
fault will that be? Those of us who put up with the garbage and decide that
it's not our problem. I cannot believe the attitudes of some of the people
who post here; their utter defiance of Godliness and moral character. It's
sickening. Let those of us who know the truth and are trying hard to let it
make us a little more free every day pray for those who don't seem to care
about their own Spiritual conditions or those of others.

Everyman

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

>I love you man!

Thanks, Funnyboy. If you're being sincere, I love you, too. Even if you're
not being sincere, I love you anyway, 'cause that's what Christ would do.
So there. :)

Pray for this group and others like it within the realms of cyberspace...

Jason and Heather

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

Everyman <ask_me_and_I'll_t...@once.com> wrote:
>
> > It saddens me too because people are gonna read this stuff and say
> > "man, they aren't any different" and go away.
>
> Worse yet, most of those people will slip into the next world lost
> and whose fault will that be?

According to what passes for standard Christian doctrine, theirs. At
least, they'll bear the responsibility for it, while all the Christians
get to go to heaven and live happily ever after regardless.

> Those of us who put up with the garbage and decide that it's not
> our problem. I cannot believe the attitudes of some of the people
> who post here; their utter defiance of Godliness and moral
> character.

Correction: your definition of Godliness and moral character. Others
think differently. What God thinks is anyone's guess, assuming he
thinks anything at all.

> It's sickening. Let those of us who know the truth and are trying
> hard to let it make us a little more free every day pray for those
> who don't seem to care about their own Spiritual conditions or
> those of others.

How kind of you to judge. Not that I have a problem with that. I
respect people who bother to make judgements, even if I believe
they're wrong. And yes, much as I may disagree with you, you're
included. However, I'm told that God also thinks humility is a virtue,
and in my judgement, you're not exactly overflowing with it.

Brian Trosko

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

Everyman <ask_me_and_I'll_t...@once.com> wrote:

: Pray for this group and others like it within the realms of cyberspace...

How do you pray for a *newsgroup*? "Oh Lord, we most humbly beseech thee,
bless these inodes and spindles so that they may pass into the Holy
Namespace. Let thy T3 connection and forged cancel messages comfort us,
and mayest thou cast Sanford Wallace into the fires of perdition."

Something like that?

Discord

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

In article <u2ycwnJI9GA.237@upnetnews03>,

Everyman <ask_me_and_I'll_t...@once.com> wrote:
>Worse yet, most of those people will slip into the next world lost and whose
>fault will that be? Those of us who put up with the garbage and decide that

>it's not our problem. I cannot believe the attitudes of some of the people
>who post here; their utter defiance of Godliness and moral character.

Actually, it's bigoted, small-minded people who can't stand anything
outside of their narrow view of what's right and wrong that turns people
like me off of Christianity as a worship system.

If I'm lost -- and I don't think I am, but am aware that other people
disagree, which is fine -- it's my problem. It's between me and God.

Outside of the actual phrase "God damn" or relatively close alternatives,
I'm not aware that the Bible is against swearing.

As to "moral character", although the Bible is fairly clear on certain
points of what constitutes moral behavior and what is not, there is still
a fair amount of room for interpretation. Failing to discuss potential
interpretations of such does not make one more "godly." Being tolerant of
things that don't fall into one's precise idea of what constitutes
"moral" on the other hand is something I think could be classified as
Christlike. Jesus taught a great deal about love and tolerance; it's a
pity so many of the people who say they follow his teachings seem to be
lacking in both.

Discord
Who recommends Luke 6:37 to the poster.

Brian Trosko

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

Everyman <ask_me_and_I'll_t...@once.com> wrote:

: If you're an Atheist, what exactly are you doing here? What interest would
: you have in the subject matter?

What? Just because someone is an atheist means he is precluded from
liking Christian music?

What a joke.

: I would caution you not to comment about
: the contents of a book you don't read,

And now being an atheist means one is precluded from reading the Bible?

This might come as an utter shock to you, but really, some people out
there have rigorously examined Christianity and...not believed in God.

: else. If you have nothing better to do with your time than wait like a thug
: in an alley for someone to bully, I recommend that you shut off your
: computer and go out and find yourself a life. Just a suggestion.

This from someone who jumped in and castigated an entire *newsgroup*,
mostly read and posted to by *Christians*, for behavior he found
objectionable.

Mote/beam.

--
"In the unlikely event of losing Pascal's Wager, I intend to saunter in to
Judgement Day with a bookshelf full of grievances, a flaming sword of my
own devising, and a serious attitude problem." - Rick Moen


`4GiVeN

unread,
Jan 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/13/98
to

Everyman wrote:
>
> paul...@DIESPAMMERerinet.com wrote in message ...
> >In article <34bafa58...@fs25nt3.mlmic.com> dav...@earthling.net (Dave
> Vandervies) writes:
> >>From: dav...@earthling.net (Dave Vandervies)
> >>Subject: Re: I need to get this off my chest...
> >>Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 05:30:00 GMT
> >
> >>On Mon, 12 Jan 1998 21:49:44 -0500, "Everyman"
> >><ask_me_and_I'll_t...@once.com> wrote:
> >
> >>> [...]
> >
> >>i'd like to respond by email but need your address for that.
> >
> >Maybe he's had the same experience I once had that anyone who complains
> about
> >the excessive nasty attitude and foul language on this list gets privately
> >spammed by the same people who are so offensive publicly.
>
> Well, that's the problem, see? If I give you my e-mail I also would be, by
> default, giving you my name and I don't know what someone's intentions might
> be in wanting my address. I've had enough with viruses and nasty letters
> and I've already changed my phone number once, so sorry but if you would
> like to respond, please do it here. :)
d00d what have you been doing that would cause you to have to go through
all those changes?????????????
--
We should let the Lord be the Potter and ourselves be the Clay,
instead of us always wanting to be both the Potter and the Clay

homepage: www.geocities.com/SunsetStrip/Alley/7870

Peter Thomas Chattaway

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

Jerry B. Ray (vap...@prism.gatech.edu) wrote:
: Well, I haven't seen _Boogie Nights_ but it didn't really sound like
: something I'd want to see, content-wise. I'm not particularly
: interested in Marky Mark's schlong, honestly.

Don't worry, the schlong you see is just a prosthetic (although I think
you can see a glimpse of the real thing behind it) ...

--
Peter T. Chattaway | "I say there are some things we don't want to know
16397 Glenmoor Ct. | -- IMPORTANT things!" -- Ned Flanders
Surrey, BC V4N 1V2 | "History is filled with the sound of great minds
pet...@unixg.ubc.ca | meeting -- head on." -- Poul Anderson

Wednesday

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

In article <884701234...@dejanews.com>, <ga...@cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>By way of example, here in Cambridge University, England we're having a
>BIG mission (called Paradigm Shift - no musical reference intended),
>where all the members of the Christian Unions across Cambridge are giving
>their friends copies of John's gospel and undergoing evangelism training,
>just for a big push in the week of the 8th-15th of February to speak the
>word to our unsaved friends. We'd really appreciate any prayers from
>anyone whatsoever who wants to support our cause.

Good luck not getting wet this year...

[Explanation to the nonCambies: one of the ways people would deal with the
issue of being evangelised to was to dump buckets of water on the heads
of the evangelising -- two years ago, IIRC.]

>Yours through Christ


> __ -. .--. O
> / ) / __ \/ o\ o
> /--/ / /__) \/ /\ /
>/ (_(_(_____/\ -' '--'
>
>Empty? Jesus said "I am the bread of life" - John 6:35
>Stumbling? Jesus said "I am the light of the world" - John 8:12
>Stressed? Jesus said "I will give you rest" - Matthew 11:28
>Useless? Jesus said "I am the true vine" - John 15:1
>Seeking Guidance? Jesus said "I am the Good Shepherd" - John 10:11
>Alone? Jesus said "I am with you always" - Matthew 28:20
>Without Hope? Jesus said "I am the resurrection and the life" - John 11:25

Short on bandwidth? Jesus kept to a four-line limit.
--
wednesday * wedn...@chiark.greenend.org.uk * djsd100's answer.
The student of Apostle Paul molded a daemon out of a man in the name of Christ.

Kirsten G. Partanen

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

Thor, God of Thunder, stated:

> It seems that this group takes the idea of freedom in Christ
> too far.

A couple of comments here:
(1) Please remember that this is a newsgroup to discuss Christian
music, and that does not automatically imply that all posters
are Christian.
(2) What is "taking freedom in Christ too far". Can we really
judge whether someone is being too free? Romans 14 speaks
of not putting stumbling blocks in the way of the weaker
brother. It also speaks of not judging your brother on
account of what he can and can not eat ( . . .or do. . .
or say. . .I think can also be inferred here).
{I realize that it is hard to convey tone in print, so
please realize that I am not attempting to share this
in a confrontational manner, but rather as things which
I am mulling over and learning these days.}

> It saddens me too because people are gonna read this stuff
> and say "man, they aren't any different" and go away.

I have to say that I agree with Jason (did I just say that?)
on his response to this. Though I do not have his exact
wording here, it had to do with people being _more_ turned
off by Christians being _different_.
Christians, especially evangelical christians have, for
too long, been locked away in their little evangelical world.
I speak as one who has long been guilty of that.
I believe that, though there will be a difference that is
seen in Christians, it can not be a difference that comes
from locking ourselves away from the world. For Christians
to make a difference in the world today they need to
engage their culture. They need to respond to what is out
in the rest of the world. Christians are human, as well.
Perhaps every response is not going to be a godly response.
Perhaps every response is not going to be a response
which the rest of the Christian world agrees with (which
doesn't necessarily make it wrong). Perhaps a response
is going to lead a non-Christian to challenge what the
Christian has said, and say "Hey, I didn't think that
you Christians thought that way" which may just open
up some great conversation about faith, grace, and many
other things.

Now, I know that I'm on a bit of a ramble here, and am
probably not making as much sense as this was in my
mind (I think that a few sentences got lost somewhere
between my brain and fingers), but bear with me as I
throw out one more proposition:

By and large, the world is less put off by an honest
person who makes some mistakes than a hypocrite.
Perhaps people say things sometimes which show their
less refined side, but I would rather have someone be
honest about where they are at than someone who has
on a veneer of saying the right thing, and being
proper, because the latter often don't admit or
perhaps even realize when their actions aren't
matching their words.

Well, that's more than enough for one evening.

Kirsten


Peter Thomas Chattaway

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

Discord (ti...@huitzilo.tezcat.com) wrote:
: Jesus taught a great deal about love and tolerance . . .

Actually, I'd say Paul taught more about that than Jesus did. (Which is
one of a few reasons why I don't quite understand Bev's antipathy towards
Paul.)

Everyman

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

>How kind of you to judge. Not that I have a problem with that. I
>respect people who bother to make judgements, even if I believe
>they're wrong. And yes, much as I may disagree with you, you're
>included. However, I'm told that God also thinks humility is a virtue,
>and in my judgement, you're not exactly overflowing with it.
>
>jason
>r.m.c resident atheist

If you're an Atheist, what exactly are you doing here? What interest would

you have in the subject matter? I would caution you not to comment about
the contents of a book you don't read, a God you don't worship or the
character of people with whom you don't identify. Resident Atheist, huh?
You strike me more as a resident Whiny Rabble Rouser more than anything

Everyman

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

>If you're an Atheist, what exactly are you doing here? What interest would
>you have in the subject matter? I would caution you not to comment about
>the contents of a book you don't read, a God you don't worship or the
>character of people with whom you don't identify. Resident Atheist, huh?
>You strike me more as a resident Whiny Rabble Rouser more than anything
>else. If you have nothing better to do with your time than wait like a
thug
>in an alley for someone to bully, I recommend that you shut off your
>computer and go out and find yourself a life. Just a suggestion.


And just one more thing... There's a difference between having humility and
being a doormat for the likes of people like you. Humility comes from
recognizing who God is and who you are in comparison and. I'm constantly
being reminded of how small I am and how big He is. Your problem is that
you have no one and no "thing" to which you feel you are accountable.
Prepare yourself for a shock...

Bridgette and John Moore

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

Everyman wrote:

> If you're an Atheist, what exactly are you doing here?

Everyman really is a newbie, huh???


What interest would
> you have in the subject matter? I would caution you not to comment about
> the contents of a book you don't read, a God you don't worship or the
> character of people with whom you don't identify. Resident Atheist, huh?
> You strike me more as a resident Whiny Rabble Rouser more than anything
> else. If you have nothing better to do with your time than wait like a thug
> in an alley for someone to bully, I recommend that you shut off your
> computer and go out and find yourself a life. Just a suggestion.


Go get him Jason!!!

Everyman, I lurk more than I post
cause I don't get much (any) Christian
music in my neck of the woods. But I
love the differing views on different
subjects in this group. It's given me a
springboard to think why I believe what.

People have told you before:

Not everyone here is Christian.
Not everyone here has the same closed mind you do.

Re-reading your post to Jason you are really going to win him
over to Christ. I feel you think there is a level you have to
reach in order to be declared a Christian. Until all of your sins
and problems are dealt with, you are not WORTHY to be a christian.
Maybe there is an Everyman Christian test. Those who pass are true
christians, the others have to stand outside the door and beg scraps.

Note to Bev: Due to netscape wanting
more new material than old but still
having to quote enough to make people
understand.


Dave Vandervies

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

On Tue, 13 Jan 1998 11:39:44 -0500, "Everyman"
<ask_me_and_I'll_t...@once.com> wrote:

>
> paul...@DIESPAMMERerinet.com wrote in message ...
> >In article <34bafa58...@fs25nt3.mlmic.com> dav...@earthling.net (Dave
> Vandervies) writes:
> >>From: dav...@earthling.net (Dave Vandervies)
> >>Subject: Re: I need to get this off my chest...
> >>Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 05:30:00 GMT
> >
> >>On Mon, 12 Jan 1998 21:49:44 -0500, "Everyman"
> >><ask_me_and_I'll_t...@once.com> wrote:
> >
> >>> [...]
> >
> >>i'd like to respond by email but need your address for that.
> >
> >Maybe he's had the same experience I once had that anyone who complains
> about
> >the excessive nasty attitude and foul language on this list gets privately
> >spammed by the same people who are so offensive publicly.
>
>
> Well, that's the problem, see? If I give you my e-mail I also would be, by
> default, giving you my name and I don't know what someone's intentions might
> be in wanting my address. I've had enough with viruses and nasty letters
> and I've already changed my phone number once, so sorry but if you would
> like to respond, please do it here. :)

actually, my response was going to be mostly similar (non-usenet)
experiences i've had and what i learned from them, which would be (in
my opinion) far enough off-topic to be inappropriate for posting here.
if you'd like to see them anyways, just say so.

btw if its just giving out your name that youre worried about, check
out any of these forwarding services:
www.iname.com
www.bigfoot.com
www.netforward.com
www.netaddress.com (also offers web-based email and POP mailboxes)
www.myownemail.com


Jason and Heather

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

Everyman <ask_me_and_I'll_t...@once.com> wrote:
>
> > How kind of you to judge. Not that I have a problem with that. I
> > respect people who bother to make judgements, even if I believe
> > they're wrong. And yes, much as I may disagree with you, you're
> > included. However, I'm told that God also thinks humility is a virtue,
> > and in my judgement, you're not exactly overflowing with it.
> >
> > jason
> > r.m.c resident atheist
>
> If you're an Atheist, what exactly are you doing here? What
> interest would you have in the subject matter? I would caution you
> not to comment about the contents of a book you don't read, a God
> you don't worship or the character of people with whom you don't
> identify.

But I have read the book, and I do identify with the people. I also
happen to like the music. As for the God, well... I did worship him
once upon a time. And if Christians can feel free to comment on gods
they don't worship - and they do - then there's no reason I can't
do likewise.

You have seen fit to comment, and comment rather obnoxiously I might
add, on the beliefs of others. Did you really expect to be allowed to
pontificate without any challenge whatsoever? Are we to accept your
word as the infallible voice of God? Apparently, that's what you
expect.

But that's not the way it works. If you want to throw punches, be
prepared to take a few, or get the hell out of the ring.

> Resident Atheist, huh?

That is correct.

> You strike me more as a resident Whiny Rabble Rouser more than
> anything else.

Hate to break it to you, but if that's the way you want to put it,
you've just labeled yourself as "rabble".

> If you have nothing better to do with your time than wait like a
> thug in an alley for someone to bully, I recommend that you shut
> off your computer and go out and find yourself a life. Just a
> suggestion.

Which I will ignore, since I have a nice life, and don't wish to bully
anyone. Challenge, yes. You ideas and belief are fair game, just like
everyone else's. I have not yet made any personal comments about you,
merely your ideas. You have not shown similar restraint. If your
ideas are so weak that they cannot stand up to a little questioning
from those with differing viewpoints, then I submit that they are not
worth having.

Just a suggestion.

Jason and Heather

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

Peter Thomas Chattaway <pet...@unixg.ubc.ca> wrote:
> Discord (ti...@huitzilo.tezcat.com) wrote:
> >
> > Jesus taught a great deal about love and tolerance . . .
>
> Actually, I'd say Paul taught more about that than Jesus did.
> (Which is one of a few reasons why I don't quite understand Bev's
> antipathy towards Paul.)

I'll have to throw in with Peter on this one. Jesus was not a
particularly tolerant fellow. The statements that most people
understand as expressions of tolerance are actually closer to
statements of universal judgement. "Let he who is without sin cast
the first stone" is not a call to tolerate sin, but a broad and
scathing indictment.

Jesus demanded a lot. Abandon your family, sell everything you own,
don't resist your enemies, don't prepare for the future. If your eye
offend you, pluck it out. Throw it all away, come follow me, and
you'll be saved. And he required not only absolute purity of deed,
but purity of heart as well.

I can't speak for Bev, but that's why I don't like Paul. He
appropriated the commandments of Jesus, and used them as a guilt trip
to promote his own religion. "See, you can't ever live up to the law,"
- the law of Jesus, Jewish law was never that harsh - "but here's
what you can do instead..." It's a textbook example of a mental
manipulation (ie. brainwashing) technique. Set up a conflict in the
minds of your victims, then offer them a convenient way out in order
to resolve that conflict.

Jesus only set up the first half of that. It was Paul who used the
convictions Jesus planted.

Jason and Heather

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

Kirsten G. Partanen <dp...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
>
> I have to say that I agree with Jason (did I just say that?)
> on his response to this. Though I do not have his exact
> wording here, it had to do with people being _more_ turned
> off by Christians being _different_.

Thanks for the vote of confidence, but I do want to clarify. I'm not
particularly turned off by Christians being different. But I'm not
particularly impressed, either. I _am_ turned off to Christians who
think that just being different is enough, and go out of their way to
be different for the sake of being different, as if that'll prove
anything.

Show me _real_ virtues. Things like honesty, like practicing what
you preach, like a willingness to attack ideas instead of people.

> By and large, the world is less put off by an honest person who
> makes some mistakes than a hypocrite.

Amen.

Chuck Pearson

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

Everyman (ask_me_and_I'll_t...@once.com) wrote in response to me:

: >so quitcher' whinin'. all of you. there is no big secret as to what


: >rec.music.christian is about, and how most of the regular posters feel
: >about it. and if you think there is, then go away until you get a clue.

: Okay, Chuck. Call me naive, but I guess I've not been let in on the secret.


: And I wonder if you'll dodge the question, as another has already: what is
: this group all about?

<whisper>
http://www.tezcat.com/~wednsday/rmc/
</whisper>

chuck [look especially at the link labeled "newbie guide."]

--
[thanx to douglas giancoli.]
if music be the food of physics, play on.
cpea...@freenet.columbus.oh.us

Everyman

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

>Thanks for the vote of confidence, but I do want to clarify. I'm not
>particularly turned off by Christians being different. But I'm not
>particularly impressed, either. I _am_ turned off to Christians who
>think that just being different is enough, and go out of their way to
>be different for the sake of being different, as if that'll prove
>anything.
>
>Show me _real_ virtues. Things like honesty, like practicing what
>you preach, like a willingness to attack ideas instead of people.
>
>> By and large, the world is less put off by an honest person who
>> makes some mistakes than a hypocrite.


If people, CHRISTIAN PEOPLE would simply understand that and go out into the
world and do it (show the world REAL virtues, that is, without all the
flamboyance) there would be fewer Atheists. I forget who said it, but I
heard this quote recently:

"The leading cause of Atheism in this world today is Christians who profess
Christ with their words, yet deny Him with their lifestyle. That is what
the unbelieving world finds simply unbelievable."


Michael A. Vickers

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

while under the influence of a chili onion supreme from wally's weiner world,
Brian Trosko <btr...@primenet.com> erupted:

>How do you pray for a *newsgroup*? "Oh Lord, we most humbly beseech thee,
>bless these inodes and spindles so that they may pass into the Holy
>Namespace. Let thy T3 connection and forged cancel messages comfort us,
>and mayest thou cast Sanford Wallace into the fires of perdition."
>
>Something like that?

*chuckle*

'...and five is right out.'

michael

there are flies & blue skies & the just & the unjust all walk side by side KX
--[michael a. vickers]-------------------------------[mavi...@cryogen.com]--

Joshua Spencer

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

Chuck Pearson (cpea...@freenet.columbus.oh.us) wrote:
> Everyman (ask_me_and_I'll_t...@once.com) wrote in response to
> paul...@DIESPAMMERerinet.com, etc.:

> : >>i'd like to respond by email but need your address for that.

> : >Maybe he's had the same experience I once had that anyone who complains
> : >about the excessive nasty attitude and foul language on this list gets
> : >privately spammed by the same people who are so offensive publicly.

> : Well, that's the problem, see? If I give you my e-mail I also would be, by
> : default, giving you my name and I don't know what someone's intentions might
> : be in wanting my address. I've had enough with viruses and nasty letters
> : and I've already changed my phone number once, so sorry but if you would
> : like to respond, please do it here. :)

> well, i'm sorry if you feel that way, but frankly those who refuse to give
> out names and proper e-mail addresses lose all credibility in usenet
> discourse. proper nettiquite and all that.

I'm not even a part of this discussion, but that's BULLSHIT. "Proper
netiquette" is necessary to a degree I suppose (to prevent chaos), but
credibility is gained through the wisdom and personality of one's posts as
far as I'm concerned, not some internet elitist's rule.

> i've been posting in this neighborhood for the better part of six years
> now, and have never once given a bogus e-mail address or a bogus name in a
> post. have i recieved my share of spam and annoying e-mails? heck yeah i
> have. i also know how to handle those things through proper channels
> [being my postmaster and sysadmins]. and if you deal with those things
> coming to your addresses, and you don't know the proper response to make,
> then i'm inclined to say you deserve the grief that you put up with.

So maybe he doesn't know how to handle those things the way you do, or
maybe he doesn't want to mess with the postmaster/sysadmins. Step down
from your pedestal.

> so quitcher' whinin'. all of you. there is no big secret as to
what
> rec.music.christian is about, and how most of the regular posters feel
> about it. and if you think there is, then go away until you get a clue.

I didn't agree with his whining either, because I dig how r.m.c. plays
itself out. BUT there's no need for you to attack his views on the
shallow basis that he doesn't want to give out his name/phone no./email -
it has nothing to do with anything. DOWN with absurd rules that serve
only to puff their followers up....

caleb

Frederick A. Lajoie

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

Everyman wrote:
>
> >Thanks for the vote of confidence, but I do want to clarify. I'm not
> >particularly turned off by Christians being different. But I'm not
> >particularly impressed, either. I _am_ turned off to Christians who
> >think that just being different is enough, and go out of their way to
> >be different for the sake of being different, as if that'll prove
> >anything.
> >
> >Show me _real_ virtues. Things like honesty, like practicing what
> >you preach, like a willingness to attack ideas instead of people.
> >
> >> By and large, the world is less put off by an honest person who
> >> makes some mistakes than a hypocrite.
>
> If people, CHRISTIAN PEOPLE would simply understand that and go out into the
> world and do it (show the world REAL virtues, that is, without all the
> flamboyance) there would be fewer Atheists.

Everyman,

I think it's time to shake the dust off your sandals and move on.

Fred
--
remove JUNK at the end of my email address to REPLY!

My only X lives in Tex.
http://fox.nstn.ca/~fred_l/index.htm

Steven R. Shoop

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

<snippage>

>flamboyance) there would be fewer Atheists. I forget who said it, but I
>heard this quote recently:
>
>"The leading cause of Atheism in this world today is Christians who profess
>Christ with their words, yet deny Him with their lifestyle. That is what
>the unbelieving world finds simply unbelievable."
>
It's on DC_Talk's _Jesus Freak_ at the beginning of <title? what if they
stumble? something like that?>.

Steve the Shoop

Michael A. Vickers

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

while under the influence of a chili onion supreme from wally's weiner world,
twos...@email.unc.edu (Joshua Spencer) erupted:
>Chuck Pearson (cpea...@freenet.columbus.oh.us) wrote:

>>well, i'm sorry if you feel that way, but frankly those who refuse to give
>>out names and proper e-mail addresses lose all credibility in usenet
>>discourse. proper nettiquite and all that.

>I'm not even a part of this discussion, but that's BULLSHIT. "Proper
>netiquette" is necessary to a degree I suppose (to prevent chaos), but
>credibility is gained through the wisdom and personality of one's posts as
>far as I'm concerned, not some internet elitist's rule.

well, i dont agree that one loses _all_ credibility in usenet discourse by
not giving their name or email out, but it's rather naive to think that they
dont lose a good portion of it.

doing something as simple as putting your name and email address to a post
says, to me, that you actually believe in what you are posting and will
actually take the risk of receiving email disagreeing, perhaps vehemently,
with your views. on a very small scale, it's putting money where your mouth
is.

so, while we're on the topic of bullshit

>>i also know how to handle those things through proper channels
>>[being my postmaster and sysadmins]. and if you deal with those things
>>coming to your addresses, and you don't know the proper response to make,
>>then i'm inclined to say you deserve the grief that you put up with.

>So maybe he doesn't know how to handle those things the way you do, or
>maybe he doesn't want to mess with the postmaster/sysadmins. Step down
>from your pedestal.

well, josh, dont place him on the pedastal.

see, i think what chuck was trying to get at is that people who take an
interest in the internet, and especially usenet, do owe it to themselves to
find out what proper protocol is to deal with situations. if he doesnt want
to deal with those protocols, then i'd say he very well should get used to
putting up with whatever he's getting.

it's great that any person with even a modest amount of resources can tap
into the net... however, they SHOULD take the time to educate themselves on
the proper way of doing things. we require education and training, by law,
for other things, such as driving a car, because certain things have to be
done properly, and certain things are dealt with in a certain fashion. i
dont mean to imply that we should be licensed to access usenet (although the
thought is intriguing), but we should educate ourselves, as we do with other
ventures, before or while we employ its use on a regular basis.

>BUT there's no need for you to attack his views on the
>shallow basis that he doesn't want to give out his name/phone no./email -
>it has nothing to do with anything.

yer absolutely right, except chuck didnt attack his views (at least, not
those whiney views alluded to here) with this post you quoted... not from
what i can tell, at least. he DID attack his reasons for not giving out his
email address.

>DOWN with absurd rules that serve only to puff their followers up....

storm the walls! call in the brigade! off with their heads!

Wednesday

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

In article <69htfc$n...@nntp02.primenet.com>,

Jason and Heather <stei...@primenet.com> wrote:
>I can't speak for Bev, but that's why I don't like Paul. He
>appropriated the commandments of Jesus, and used them as a guilt trip
>to promote his own religion. "See, you can't ever live up to the law,"
>- the law of Jesus, Jewish law was never that harsh - "but here's
>what you can do instead..." It's a textbook example of a mental
>manipulation (ie. brainwashing) technique. Set up a conflict in the
>minds of your victims, then offer them a convenient way out in order
>to resolve that conflict.

That's quite of bit of my problem with Paul, yes. The rest is mostly
academic.

Wednesday

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

In article <69ifon$1mu$1...@fddinewz.oit.unc.edu>,

Joshua Spencer <twos...@email.unc.edu> wrote:
>I'm not even a part of this discussion, but that's BULLSHIT. "Proper
>netiquette" is necessary to a degree I suppose (to prevent chaos), but
>credibility is gained through the wisdom and personality of one's posts as
>far as I'm concerned, not some internet elitist's rule.

It has nothing to do with internet elitism and everything to do with baseline
respect, common decency, and not sucking up system resources to an
excessive level. Pop by alt.fan.wednesday and read the argument.

It's not like there aren't perfectly acceptable and nonabusive ways of fil-
tering unwanted mail, protecting one's RL identity without masking means
of contact, etc.

procmail, remote shell or POP account, a little hax0r clue. It's not hard.

>So maybe he doesn't know how to handle those things the way you do, or
>maybe he doesn't want to mess with the postmaster/sysadmins. Step down
>from your pedestal.

"I just want to drive my car. I don't want to know how to fill the gas
tank or operate within traffic regulations or tell the difference
between traffic lights. I just want to drive."

>I didn't agree with his whining either, because I dig how r.m.c. plays

>itself out. BUT there's no need for you to attack his views on the


>shallow basis that he doesn't want to give out his name/phone no./email -

>it has nothing to do with anything. DOWN with absurd rules that serve


>only to puff their followers up....

It's not absurd -- it's common sense.

Discord

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

In article <69hg81$sc4$3...@nntp.ucs.ubc.ca>,

Peter Thomas Chattaway <pet...@unixg.ubc.ca> wrote:
>Discord (ti...@huitzilo.tezcat.com) wrote:
>: Jesus taught a great deal about love and tolerance . . .
>
>Actually, I'd say Paul taught more about that than Jesus did.

I don't necessarily agree, but in any event, even if he said /more/ on
the topic, it's not Paul who is the focal point of the religion.

Much of the middle portions of Luke 6 are what I'm referring to. Or
several other versions of that. Luke just happens to be the one I chose
as an example.

> (Which is
>one of a few reasons why I don't quite understand Bev's antipathy towards
>Paul.)

Which I share.

I don't think either of us have ever claimed /nothing/ Paul said was any
good. My antipathy to Paul is that a great deal of what he preached did
/not/ seem to follow logically from what Jesus taught, a lot of the
gender- and sex-related stuff really gets up my nose, and that I'm always
a little wary of someone who proclaims themselves the mouthpiece of God.

It's an opinion. As such, I don't expect anyone else to share it.

Not even Bev.

--
I have a sweet and innocent mind. Honest. || Discord is:
It's just that I left it in my coat pocket. || ti...@tezcat.com
*muses* And I'm not sure whose it is... || http://www.tezcat.com/~tina/

Gabe White

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

No. Not again. We'd best set this boy straight.

People say bad things in here. Sorry. People here don't act "christian" all
the time. Some aren't Christians. Some are Christians, but still say things
that other Christians might consider "wrong". Sorry again. We all have
different standards and morals (to an extent) and the bible does say
something about "judge not lest ye be judged" in the back somewhere...

Gabe

--
"In a song I sing along and right or wrong the concept sticks. I get my fix
and I become a part of the glorious propaganda machine that hates me."
-Blackball (one more sucker)


Chemically Imbalanced Spice

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

In article <69htfc$n...@nntp02.primenet.com>,
stei...@primenet.com (Jason and Heather) wrote:
[peter's comments snipped]

> I'll have to throw in with Peter on this one. Jesus was not a
> particularly tolerant fellow. The statements that most people
> understand as expressions of tolerance are actually closer to
> statements of universal judgement. "Let he who is without sin cast
> the first stone" is not a call to tolerate sin, but a broad and
> scathing indictment.

I'll disagree. I believe God meant that all have sinned, and he is the
only one who can judge anybody. I believe what he is saying is, don't
judge other people, that is His job, and He will do it when He sees fit.
I think it is a call to tolorance for we as 'earth people'.

> Jesus demanded a lot. Abandon your family, sell everything you own,
> don't resist your enemies, don't prepare for the future. If your eye
> offend you, pluck it out. Throw it all away, come follow me, and
> you'll be saved. And he required not only absolute purity of deed,
> but purity of heart as well.

In my mind, Jesus isn't commanding us to do those things, He just wants
us to be willing to do them if He asks us to. And God usually doesn't ask
that of people. A lot of that was symbolism anyway.

> I can't speak for Bev, but that's why I don't like Paul. He
> appropriated the commandments of Jesus, and used them as a guilt trip
> to promote his own religion. "See, you can't ever live up to the law,"
> - the law of Jesus, Jewish law was never that harsh - "but here's
> what you can do instead..." It's a textbook example of a mental
> manipulation (ie. brainwashing) technique. Set up a conflict in the
> minds of your victims, then offer them a convenient way out in order
> to resolve that conflict.

I don't know if Paul is exactly guilty of that, or Jesus, but I think a
lotof humans on earth are. I think preachers in authority sometimes try
to control their flock, because they have misread the scriptures.

Donnie

-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet

Matt Laswell

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

Peter Thomas Chattaway (pet...@unixg.ubc.ca) wrote:
: Discord (ti...@huitzilo.tezcat.com) wrote:
: : Jesus taught a great deal about love and tolerance . . .

: Actually, I'd say Paul taught more about that than Jesus did. (Which is


: one of a few reasons why I don't quite understand Bev's antipathy towards
: Paul.)

You assume, of course, that Bev's given both Paul and Jesus a
fair, unbiased reading...

- matt

Chemically Imbalanced Spice

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

In article <ePP4xzKI9GA.159@upnetnews04>,

"Everyman" <ask_me_and_I'll_t...@once.com> wrote:
>
> >How kind of you to judge. Not that I have a problem with that. I
> >respect people who bother to make judgements, even if I believe
> >they're wrong. And yes, much as I may disagree with you, you're
> >included. However, I'm told that God also thinks humility is a virtue,
> >and in my judgement, you're not exactly overflowing with it.
> >
> >jason
> >r.m.c resident atheist
>
> If you're an Atheist, what exactly are you doing here?

It's a free world. I'm a Christian, but if Jason, or any other Athiest
wants to be here, more power to them. Anybody who wants to hang out on a
ng has the freedom to do so.

>What interest would
> you have in the subject matter? I would caution you not to comment about
> the contents of a book you don't read, a God you don't worship or the

> character of people with whom you don't identify. Resident Atheist, huh?


> You strike me more as a resident Whiny Rabble Rouser more than anything

> else. If you have nothing better to do with your time than wait like a thug


> in an alley for someone to bully, I recommend that you shut off your
> computer and go out and find yourself a life. Just a suggestion.

Maybe you should visit Jason's homepage for a better explanation. And
maybe YOU shoud get a life.

Matt Laswell

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

Everyman (ask_me_and_I'll_t...@once.com) wrote:
: >jason
: >r.m.c resident atheist


: If you're an Atheist, what exactly are you doing here? What interest would


: you have in the subject matter?

That's funny. My local christian radio station claims to be a witness
to the unsaved. I'd think, given all the similar claims I hear from
the various parts of the Christian music industry, that you'd
*expect* people who don't believe to be interested in the music.

- matt

Neiby

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

>I don't think either of us have ever claimed /nothing/ Paul said >was any
>good. My antipathy to Paul is that a great deal of what he >preached did
>/not/ seem to follow logically from what Jesus taught, a lot of the
>gender- and sex-related stuff really gets up my nose, and that I'm >always
>a little wary of someone who proclaims themselves the >mouthpiece of God.

This brings up an interesting subject that would be interesting to discuss.
It's been my experience that there are many, many "brands" of Christianity out
in the world right now. The cause seems to be either differing interpretations
of Scripture, or a willingness to dispense with portions of Scripture that we
disagree with.

In the above case, it seems that at least someone out there may be suggesting
that the writings of Paul are not Scripture (my words, not theirs!! I'm just
guessing...) This would certainly not be the first case I've seen of selective
belief in different portions of the Bible.

This is why I truly believe they are called dispensationalists: because they
dispense with the parts they don't believe in! :) j/k

I guess it comes down to this: how do we really know what "Scripture" is? Do
we decide by committee? Do we believe maybe James, but not Paul? or Paul, but
not John? Or Revelation, but not Genesis? How do we know which parts are true
and accurate, and which parts might be embellished?

Think about the sort of things we generally hold to be true:

1. The fall of the entire human race, and separation from it's Creator, was
caused by a snake convicing a woman (made out of a rib) to eat an apple......

2. People used to live to be 900 years old.

3. A bunch of guys marched around a city and yelled really loud and it's walls
fell over.

4. A donkey spoke with a human voice.

5. There was a world-wide flood. Possible? or not?

6. During said flood, there were representatives of all the animals on the
earth, all together on one boat.

7. We have people wrestling with God. Know anyone that's happened to
recently?

These are just a few examples to get my point across. The other thing that
concerns me about stories such as these is that there are similar stories in
the myths and legends of other cultures. If you ask anyone how this sort of
thing happens, they say "it's a miracle!" Well, any religion or culture can
justify anything, no matter how odd, by calling it a miracle.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not ready to turn my back on God just yet! :) I'm just
starting to wonder if we need to adjust our perspective on certain things and
re-evaluate some of what we've been taught.

Peter Thomas Chattaway

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

Everyman (ask_me_and_I'll_t...@once.com) wrote:
: If you're an Atheist, what exactly are you doing here? What interest
: would you have in the subject matter?

The fact that he *used* to be a Christian may be relevant here ...

: I would caution you not to comment about the contents of a book you
: don't read . . .

Uh, Jason *does* read the Bible. That's what makes his critiques so
spooky and, at times, so spot-on.

: . . . a God you don't worship . . .

Just because you've divorced somebody, that doesn't mean you can't talk
about 'em. Besides, Christians comment on gods they don't worship all
the time! If we can dish it, we can take it.

: . . . or the character of people with whom you don't identify.

Oh, but I think he *does* identify with us. That's why he's here.

: Resident Atheist, huh? You strike me more as a resident Whiny Rabble


: Rouser more than anything else. If you have nothing better to do with
: your time than wait like a thug in an alley for someone to bully, I
: recommend that you shut off your computer and go out and find yourself
: a life. Just a suggestion.

Yep, no whiny rabble rousing on *your* part, nosiree ...

Matt Laswell

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

Bridgette and John Moore (jnbm...@top2.ficnet.net.tw) wrote:
[to everyman]
: Re-reading your post to Jason you are really going to win him

: over to Christ. I feel you think there is a level you have to
: reach in order to be declared a Christian. Until all of your sins
: and problems are dealt with, you are not WORTHY to be a christian.
: Maybe there is an Everyman Christian test. Those who pass are true
: christians, the others have to stand outside the door and beg scraps.

I got that same impression, really. And, of course, a particularly
salient scripture reference on the subject comes from the sermon on
the mount: "you will be judged in the same way you judge others"
(Matthew 7.2). Everyman judges people in this newsgroup according
to whether or not their postings perfectly reflect Christ. Fair
enough.

Lets turn that around.

Do you stand up to the same test, everyman? Lets see... Jesus
said the greatest commandment is to love God iwith all your heart, soul,
mind and strength. Do you live up to that standard? Jesus said the
next greatest commandment is to love your neighbor as you love yourself.
Did your response to Jason show the love of Christ? You criticised
people in the newsgroup for talking about going to see "Gross Pointe
Blank" but you yourself went to "Showgirls" (and what did you think
that was about, especially given the suggestive posters they doubtless
had around the theatre?).

There is only one standard any of us can judge others with that we
ourselves can live up to: "Lord have mercy on me, a sinner."

- matt

Peter Thomas Chattaway

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

Jason and Heather (stei...@primenet.com) wrote:

: Peter Thomas Chattaway <pet...@unixg.ubc.ca> wrote:
: > Discord (ti...@huitzilo.tezcat.com) wrote:

: > > Jesus taught a great deal about love and tolerance . . .
: >
: > Actually, I'd say Paul taught more about that than Jesus did.
: > (Which is one of a few reasons why I don't quite understand Bev's
: > antipathy towards Paul.)

:
: I'll have to throw in with Peter on this one. Jesus was not a

: particularly tolerant fellow. The statements that most people
: understand as expressions of tolerance are actually closer to
: statements of universal judgement. "Let he who is without sin cast
: the first stone" is not a call to tolerate sin, but a broad and
: scathing indictment.

[ nod ]

: Jesus demanded a lot. Abandon your family, sell everything you own,


: don't resist your enemies, don't prepare for the future. If your eye
: offend you, pluck it out. Throw it all away, come follow me, and
: you'll be saved. And he required not only absolute purity of deed,
: but purity of heart as well.

"Don't prepare for the future"? Not quite. The whole point of his
movement was that he *was* preparing for the future. Certainly, it was
a different kind of future than most people envisioned, but he expected
great things to happen within history and he wanted both himself and
his followers to be ready for it.

And I think it reasonable to suppose that Jesus was being intentionally
hyperbolic with regards to plucking out eyes and the like. Anyone who
can talk about people having beams in their eyes has to have *some*
sense of imagination and exaggeration ...

It's questionable, too, just how universal Jesus' command to "throw it
all away" would have been. He did, after all, dine in the houses of
some of his followers, and it does not seem that he asked them to get
rid of their buildings.

: I can't speak for Bev, but that's why I don't like Paul. He

: appropriated the commandments of Jesus, and used them as a guilt trip
: to promote his own religion. "See, you can't ever live up to the law,"
: - the law of Jesus, Jewish law was never that harsh - "but here's
: what you can do instead..." It's a textbook example of a mental
: manipulation (ie. brainwashing) technique. Set up a conflict in the
: minds of your victims, then offer them a convenient way out in order
: to resolve that conflict.

And it's a textbook technique that you use yourself from time to time,
Jason. Not least by imagining a conflict between Paul and Jesus, and
then offering us the convenient path of atheism as a way out in order to
resolve that conflict.

While there are obvious differences betwen Jesus and Paul, I don't see
the two as being particularly in conflict with each other. Certainly,
they may have had different emphases -- I think the epistle of James is
more likely to reflect Jesus' views than any epistle of Paul's -- but
they were rooted in a common truth. Despite their surface disagreements
I do they think they can be reconciled. (It wouldn't be the only time
people have argued over something that they actually agreed upon.)

Besides, what "law" was Paul saying his audience could never live up to?
The law of circumcision was the flashpoint for much of that debate, and
you'd better believe there were a lot of Gentiles for whom circumcision
was a stumbling block. Paul was quite right to say that there was no
point in following that law, since it was never intended for Gentiles;
and there most likely *were* Jewish Christians who insisted on
circumcising everyone because they believed one had to be Jewish in
order to take part in the salvation that God had brought to the world
through Jews. As far as *those* Jews and *that* law were concerned, I
dare say they *did* seem pretty harsh to any Christian with a foreskin.
There was nothing imaginary about *that* conflict.

: Jesus only set up the first half of that. It was Paul who used the
: convictions Jesus planted.

Nonsense. Whenever Paul refers to the specific commands of Jesus -- as
in the divorce debate -- he adheres to them.

Or are you still working under the misconception that Hebrews was
written by Paul?

Peter Thomas Chattaway

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98
to

Everyman (ask_me_and_I'll_t...@once.com) wrote:
: I forget who said it, but I heard this quote recently:

: "The leading cause of Atheism in this world today is Christians who
: profess Christ with their words, yet deny Him with their lifestyle.
: That is what the unbelieving world finds simply unbelievable."

You can't believe *everything* DC Talk tells ya, y'know.

Besides, there are many ways of being an unbeliever and *not* being an
atheist. Being a Moslem, for one. Or a Hindu. Or a Jew. Or a ...

Peter Thomas Chattaway

unread,
Jan 14, 1998, 3:00:00 AM1/14/98