Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

    Does anyone have access to the interfaith cable network VISN?  My local
    cable system has several religious channels, but VISN is not one of
    them, and I am curious about what kinds of programming VISN provides.

    -- Mike

from Note 66.

>	For years, one of the local car dealers, Will Perkins, has devoted
>	his TV commercials during the Advent season to messages of salvation,
>	offering a telephone number for viewers to call and claim their
>	"gift of redemption".

	Well, Ol' Will is back with his amateur televangelist routine again
this year.  This time he gives you a phone number so you can "compare your
ideas with the facts."

	Assumption:  Your ideas are not the facts.

	Assumption:  We possess the facts.

	Assumption:  If your ideas do not match our facts, you are
		     are pitifully unaware of the Truth, and it will
		     likely cost you your salvation.

Alas,
Richard

    Jamey,
    
    	Welcome back!
    
    	I must've stepped on your toes, somehow.  Are you Will's kin by
    blood or marriage?  (The Springs is really a small town after all)
    
    	Did I make any false statements in .2?  Am I not allowed a
    viewpoint at variance with a television commercial?
    
    	Are you saying you are more tolerant of Christians who don't share
    your version of Christianity than I?  If so, I would like to know what
    makes you think that.
    
    Peace,
    Richard

Woah, Richard and Jamey!

Peace be with you. I know how Richard feels, Jamey. I attended a
Morman university and got constantly bombarded because I was not
part of their kind of religious (note I do mean religious; not
religion).

You see, in Fundamentalist or Evagelical terms, those who have
not been "born-again" are not Christians. I and some other main
line "Bible beliving", "born again", and baptised Christians do
find it beligerant folks who tell me what I am not part of
Christian-dom.

I do know that Will Perkins is reaching for the folks that are
the un-churched (my term) and would like to reach that group that
is searching. After all, what is preaching to the world all
about?

Remember, Jamey, this note is a Christian perspective and what
offends some is a message for others.

In His peace,

Calvin

    
    Per the request of a fellow noter, I have deleted my entries to this
    topic. 
    
    Jamey

    Gosh,.....I'm afraid I missed it!  Oh, well.  I noticed last night that
    two other Will Perkin's commercials had replaced the one I had spoken
    about.
    
    Peace,
    Richard

	I have watched the 700 Club for the past 2 days.  Former presidential
candidate Pat Robertson is certain the U.S. will go to war against Iraq.
His words yesterday were, "You can put money on it!"

	His fervent and impassioned prayers beseech the Almighty to guide
the decisions of our President, to protect our troops and watch over Israel.
(I seem to recall Jesus saying something about praying for those who would be
your attackers, but,.<sigh>..oh, well.)

	Today, Robertson proclaimed that Saddam Hussain derives his power
from none other than Satan, himself.  He insisted that Hussain's power
"doesn't come from normal megalomania!"

	"Normal megalomania?"  I asked myself.  "I wonder what that is!?" &^}
I also wondered how different Robertson's posture would be if Iraq was
predominantly Christian or Jewish, rather than Moslem.

Peace,
Richard

    Well, Richard, the man claims to be so favored by God that the Almighty
    even steers hurricanes away from his home state of Virginia (so that
    they can instead wreak destruction and suffering on less favored
    people, like the residents of South Carolina).  So I would say that if
    there is anyone who is an expert on the various categories of
    megalomania, it would be Pat.

    -- Mike

    RE-last two.

    Yeah, and it twas Pat Robertson along with Jimmy Swaggert who were giving 
    financial aid to the Contras in Nicaragua. Of course any fool would
    know that the contras were God serving people. *)

    Peace
    Jim

I think that the fact that Hussein is a Moslem has a very significant
impact on Robertson's position.  It is the position of Christianity 
that Moslem's worship a false God (Allah), not the true God (Yahweh).

Collis

I think Robertson's line of thinking is this: Christian men voted
for Christian president. President under constitution declears
jihad on the infidels so therefore the war must be a just war.
Did you noticed that Saddam Hussein did the same thing today? He
decleared a jihad.

sigh,

calvin

    Maybe we should let Pat Robertson and Saddam Hussein battle it out. See
    whose god wins, Allah or God?

>>>    whose god wins, Allah or God?

Islam claims that the God of Israel is the same God of Islam.

cal

Christianity claims the same thing, as well.

    re .14 (SYSTEM::GOODWIN)
    
>    Maybe we should let Pat Robertson and Saddam Hussein battle it out. See
>    whose god wins, Allah or God?
    
    	I think "Allah" isn't so much a proper name, as a title, which
    means "God."  (It sounds as though it's the Arabic equivalent to the
    Hebrew word for god, _el_.)  We often here of the expression, "Allah
    akbar" (sp?), which is translated, "God is great."

    What is the Moslem-Christian connection?
    Both claim the identical geneology up to Abraham!
    Moslems claim the lineage descended from Hagar and Abraham.
    Judeo-Christians claim the lineage descended from Sarah and Abraham.
    
    Incidentally, the Qoran has a nice write up of Jesus Christ!
    
    Peace,
    Richard

    Perhaps I should have said the god of Pat Roberston and the god of
    Saddam Hussein. They would appear to be different, if both sides
    believe they are right, and this is the start of a holy war against the
    unbelievers.
    
    Pete.

Last night, I was channel surfing and came across EWTN. I heard
the priest pray that Saddam Hussein and George Bush soften their
hard ways and work for peace. Then I came across the "family"
channel with Brother Pat Robertson praying that God will guide
the decisions of the American military to a swift victory. That's
quite a contrast between two Christian clerics.

Just as we are not a total christian nation; Iraq is not a total
Isamic nation. There are a few thousand christians in Iraq that
just might be killed in the name of a Isalmic jihad. What about
our Christian brothers in Iraq, Pat?

cal hoe

	... but don't remeber where, so I'll repeat it.  :>)

	A Lebanese native who works for the SBC in Atlanta spoke at our
church some weeks ago about the Middle East.  He said that the most tolerant
nation to non-Islamic faiths among the Gulf Region Islamic states was Iraq!
He said even street corner Christian evangelists were not abused or bothered.
Don't remember if that extended to Jews, as he was concerned with Christian
religions.

	... but don't remeber where, so I'll repeat it.  :>)

The same for my recollection... Saddam's info minister or his
prime minister is a Marionite Christian in the Bathe Political
party.

cal

    Richard,
    
    Re the Moslem-Christian connection.
    
    The lineage is correct as I understand it from what you wrote in .18.
    The story goes something like this:  Abraham's was unable for a time to 
    have children with his wife (Hagar?), so he began his family with the 
    "maid" (Sarah).  But then oneday Hagar got pregnant and no longer wished 
    Sarah to maintain her 'place' in the household so Sarah left with her
    children.  Mohammad descended from one of the mother's children, Jesus 
    from the other, and Abraham was the common father.  
    
    Karen

    re: .23
    Only Sarah was the wife and Hagar was Sarah's handmaid.

    Re: Christians in Iraq.
    
    True, since my mother is from Iraq. Her father was a Presbyterian
    priest and her mother a Catholic. As soon as I mention my mother's
    origins, people assume she is Moslem and Arabic. In fact, she is
    neither, being a Christian and an Assyrian.
    
    Pete.

	I regularly watch the re-runs of "Highway to Heaven."  What
a schmaltzy show!  Yeah, it's corney.  Yeah, it's contrived.  But,
it's rare the time that it fails to tug at my heartstrings or bring
a tear to my eye.  Furthermore, I like it because people hardly ever
get killed in it.  [I liked it's predecessor "Little House on the Prairie,"
also, because the protagonist never got to blow away the enemy.  They
always had to find ways to deal with the antagonist.]

	"Highway"'s star and producer is Michael Landon, who will always
be Little Joe Cartwright to me and people my age and older.  Though on
the tube Mr. Landon frequently dons a cleric's collar, in real life
he's Jewish; not a Christian.

	Today's episode was very funny.  A small time con-artist was
garbed as priest to elude his pursuers.  Circumstances forced him to
hear to a woman's confession.  She speaks the traditional, "Bless me,
Father, for I have sinned."

	His reply: "Yeah?  Well, nobody's perfect.  Don't worry about it."

&^}

Richard

    "Amazing Grace" with Bill Moyers is being shown again this month on
    Channel 2 (in the greater Boston area), August 23 at 6:30 pm.
    
    Check local PBS listings for other areas.
    
    Karen
    

Article: 1758
Path: nntpd.lkg.dec.com!pa.dec.com!decwrl!looking!clarinews
From: clarinews@clarinet.com (DAVID E. ANDERSON, UPI Religion Writer)
Newsgroups: clari.news.religion,clari.news.features
Subject: Interfaith TV effort launchs new season, money-raising effort
Keywords: religion
Message-ID: <Ureligion_2fc@clarinet.com>
Date: 20 Sep 91 00:02:53 GMT
Lines: 59
Approved: clarinews@clarinet.com
Xref: nntpd.lkg.dec.com clari.news.religion:1758 clari.news.features:3340
Location: standing features
ACategory: commentary
Slugword: religion
Priority: advance
Format: feature
ANPA: Wc: 600; Id: a0604; Sel: na--k; Adate: 9-13-1aed; Ver: adv20
Codes: ynr.fxk.
Note: adv fri sept 20
 (600)
 (Commentary)
 
_ _R_e_l_i_g_i_o_n_ _i_n_ _A_m_e_r_i_c_a
	Vision & Values on ABC; Horizons of the Spirit on NBC; Culture and
Religion on CBS: it's some of the best programming on television,
certainly some of the best religious programming.
	Both Vision & Values and Horizons of the Spirit are produced by the
Interfaith Broadcasting Commission, one of the best examples of
cooperation among differing religious faiths that does not dilute the
particularity of that faith.
	The four programs in this fall's Vision and Values series, scheduled
to premier Sept. 22, provide a good example.
	The first program is titled ``The Streets.'' It has been produced by
the Southern Baptist Radio and Television Commission and follows the
struggle of some religious groups to rescue inner-city life from poverty
and despair.
	On Oct. 20, ``A Time to Build'' will air. That program, produced by
the U.S. Catholic Conference, examines the future of the Roman Catholic
church in Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary.
	The third program in the series ``The Sabbath,'' produced by the
Jewish Theological Seminary of America, looks at the spiritual meaning
of ``the day of rest'' for peoples around the world. It will air on Dec.
8.
	Finally, on Jan. 19, the National Council of Churches-produced 
``Search for Spirituality'' will air. It will focus on the growing
emphasis in America on spirituality.
	One program in an earlier series, ``China: Walls and Bridges,''
produced by the Southern Baptists, won an Emmy Award.
	Nevertheless, the two networks have told the Interfaith Broadcasting
Commission -- made up of representatives of the four producing groups --
that they can expect sharply reduced financial aid.
	``At a time when Americans struggle with crises in the family, in the
larger community, and, increasingly, on a global scale, we feel it's
more important than ever to present programs that reflect creative
approaches to shared problems,'' said the Rev. Dave Pomeroy, chairman of
the IBC.
	``We want to be able to do whatever is necessary to keep these
programs on the air, despite the difficult economic times,'' he said.
	Since 1987, direct grants from ABC and NBC have helped the faith
groups to finance the production while IBC members have supported
promotion of the programs.
	But the economic recession currently afflicting the country and
across-the-board cutbacks at the networks have resulted in dwindling
funds for the religious documentaries as well as the IBC's ability to
finance promotional efforts.
	According to Pomeroy, although ABC has slightly increased the money
it has made available for Vision & Values over the past two years,
network officials have told IBC that future support may decrease.
	At NBC, executives have informed the IBC board that it will provide
no more money at all for this season's Horizons of the Spirit series,
scheduled to air in the spring of 1992.
	But NBC did say it woull continue to provide air time for the four
hour-long programs in the series.
	Pomeroy said IBC has hired MBH Productions of New York City to lead a
money-raising effort for the interfaith effort. He said the group will
seek support from private foundations, corporations and interested
individuals.
	It will be an interesting test, in the midst of all of the religious
criticism of television's mindlessness and its pandering of sex and
violence, of whether the support for such programming exists.
 _a_d_v_ _f_r_i_ _s_e_p_t_ _2_0

Pat Robertson is the founder and chief puppeteer of an organization he
christened the "American Center for Law and Justice."  It is the right-wing
version of the American Civil Liberties Union.  Robertson, by his own words,
regards the ACLU as "our old nemesis" and "the greatest evil in America today."

The sole purpose of the American Center for Law and Justice is to promote
Robertson's own brand of the conservative agenda in court regarding issues
such as separation of church and state.

Needless to say, the American Center for Law and Justice receives plenty of
praise from Robertson and frequent public exposure through air time on the
700 Club.

Peace,
Richard

Note 91.787

>Perhaps we are not to criticize Pat without clear evidence to the
>contrary?  To suppose that Pat has contempt for gays and then
>criticize him for it when, I expect, he would claim just the
>opposite (to love people whether they are gay or not) does not
>strike me as an appropriate thing to do - especially in a
>"Christian" conference.

I'm not certain we could all agree on what constitutes clear evidence.

Doubtlessly Robertson would *say* that he loves homosexuals.  Doubtlessly
Robertson would *say* that he loves liberals, humanists, members of the
Pro-Choice constituency and the ACLU.

At the same time, from regularly watching the 700 Club, I've observed that
Robertson's remarks about each of these groups are unswervingly negative,
accusatory and condemnatory.

Perhaps my observations are not enough to conclusively prove Robertson's
contempt for gays.  But, it's enough for me!

As for the appropriateness, I thinks it's alright to publicly express
opposition, especially with public figures, whether they claim to be
Christian or not.

Peace,
Richard

Sheila Walsh serves as Pat Robertson's co-anchor on the 700 Club.  Sheila
was something of a rock-gospel singer earlier in her career and evidently
still accepts concert engagements.

Walsh projects a lot of personality.  This combined with her crisp Scottish
accent adds a lilt to the program which is sorely missing when she is absent.
From the input I've received from others, she comes off as a bit aloof.  But
I suspect that that's an inaccurate assessment.  She's just not very "folksy"
or "down home," in the American sense.

Walsh has ribbed Robertson on a number of occasions, most often when he makes
one of his more sexist remarks.  She seems to be able to get away with it.
Though one might get the sense that Walsh doesn't always agree with the
assertions Robertson makes, she never directly contradicts what he says,
at least, not on camera.

Peace,
Richard

	Even Pat Robertson deserves time off once in awhile.  And when
Robertson is absent from the "700 Club," a gentleman by the name of David
Gyertson is usually the man who fills in.

	Gyertson is the President of Regent University, the school
founded by Robertson and promoted extensively on the "700 Club."
Lacking charisma, Gyertson represents no real threat to Robertson
as a possible permanent replacement for the television evangelist.

	Similarly, when Sheila Walsh is absent,	our co-anchor is most
often an attractive and congenial woman by the name of Terry Meeuwsen.

	Gyertson and Meeuwsen might both be descibed as photogenic,
clean-cut and wholesome.  Both seem to be well-versed in articulating
the conservative Christian agenda.  Unfortunately (for them), both lack
the spark and sparkle of Robertson and Walsh.

Peace,
Richard	

Trivia question:

	Where does the name "700 Club" come from?



	Pledging $700 per year to the support of the program
makes you a member.

Peace,
Richard

    RE:33
    Now I know why I never joined.
    
    Jim

       Last night I watched the first program in this Series
    "Fundamentalisms Observed". Much of the show was about Bob Jones
     University including interviews with current students and alumni.
     Also, interview segments with Bob Jones Jr., son of the founder
     and Bob Jones III. This piece and all the other segments were 
     done a very straightforward documentary style. No editorial comments
     or expose' type material. Some would probably find it kind of dry
     going.

        Another segment was about Randall Terry founder of "Operation
    Rescue" and the third major segment was about a Fundamentalist
    minister, his family and his church. Again all of this was presented
    in a very factual manner. Any opinions or conclusions you came away
    from this show with you had to come up with yourself.

        I am not sure what the next two shows will be about, but I will
     make a point of watching them. I was impressed by how the program
     presented Fundamentalist Christians in their own words at work and
     at play in their schools and churches. I would expect that quite a 
     few people in this conference would find this program worthwhile.

                                                               Mike  

                                       

        Even though "Fundamentalisms Observed" was on Public
        Broadcasting (you know: liberal, democrat, secular
        humanist...), it seemed to be rather even-handed and perhaps
        even sympathetic to the subject. 

        At one point a fundamentalist spokesman (it may have been Bob
        Jones, Jr.) emphasized how their position was based upon the
        "four fundamentals" which they used to distinguish their
        (correct) belief from the beliefs of any others who merely
        claimed to be based on the Bible.

        I am amazed that they don't realize that the use of these
        "four fundamentals," as a supplement to the Bible, is in its
        application just a human creation.  They weren't satisfied
        with "just" the Bible -- it wasn't separatist enough, I
        suppose.

        Bob

[Statement of qualification: the following comments and related news clips
(101.38, 101.39) happen to be about a former Roman Catholic priest.  It is
not, however, about Roman Catholicism or the priesthood.  It is about trust
and the betrayal of trust.  It's about something which might have occurred
within any religious body.]

	Primetime, ABC's investigative reporting journal, last night
broadcast the story of the childhood victims, now adults, of James
Porter, an ex-Roman Catholic priest who has admitted to molesting up
to a hundred boys and girls while assigned to church operated schools
in the 1960's.

	Porter's victims, who for years suppressed beneath their consciousness 
the dark secrets of what Porter did to them, claim this number to be far
too low.  During the segment Diane Sawyer interviewed a group of about 30
of Porter's alleged victims.  Many claimed to have been violated numerous
times, sometimes even while their parents were in the next room.

	Account after agonizing account was retold by several of the alleged
victims.  The stories that most outraged me personally were of incidents where
another priest, Fr. Armando Annunciato, allegedly walked in while the act was
in progress and turned a blind eye to what was going on.

	When asked why they didn't tell someone, one victim said, "You have
to remember that in those days priests were so revered.  How do you tell on
God?"

May God have mercy,
Richard

                   * For Internal Use Only *

    Stories from CLARInet may not be redistributed to non-Digital
    employees.

Subject: Priest admits molesting 100 children
Date: Fri, 8 May 92 14:05:36 PDT
 
	NEW BEDFORD, Mass. (UPI) -- A prosecutor Friday doubted whether he can
take action against a former Roman Catholic priest who admitted to
molesting up to 100 southeastern Massachusetts children in the early
1960s.
	The greatest obstacle to taking James R. Porter to court is a statute
of limitations that was six years when the sexual assaults occurred,
Bristol County District Attorney Paul Walsh said.
	Walsh also saw problems with witnesses remembering what occurred and
evidence deteriorating.
	``Cases do not get better with age,'' he said. ``Proving cases three
decades ago is nearly impossible.''
	Despite his pessimism, however, Walsh said he would consider
prosecuting Porter if more victims came forward and asked him to.
	One alleged victim, insurance adjuster and private detective Frank
Fitzpatrick of Cranston, R.I., has requested Walsh prosecute Porter. But
Walsh said his staff reviewed Fitzpatrick's case and decided against
prosecuting because of the statute of limitations, his ``vague'' memory
of what occurred and jurisdictional concerns.
	Nine men and women, including Fitzpatrick, have notified the Catholic
Church they will sue if it fails to compensate them for Porter's alleged
sexual misconduct and help bring him to justice.
	Porter's told WBZ-TV on Thursday night that he molested ``between 50
and 100 children'' while serving in churches in the Fall River-New
Bedford area.
	Porter now lives in Oakdale, Minn., with his wife and four children.
he has never been criminally or civilly prosecuted. He told the station
he believed he was cured of pedophilia when he left the church but
admitted he ``still has the urge'' to molest children.
	Fitzpatrick, now 42, told the station he repressed the memories
until about two years ago and then began trying to find Porter and others
the ex-priest allegedly molested.
	He said the Fall River diocese of the church knew Porter sexually
molested children but, rather than remove him from the priesthood, sent
him to a treatment center and then transferred him to another church.
	``There's no question the church covered it up,'' Fitzpatrick said. 
``He should be in jail for what he did. I don't believe a word of what
he says about being cured.''
	Roderick MacLeish Jr., a lawyer representing the nine accusers,
demanded the church compensate his clients for the suffering.
	One of his clients, Patty Wilson, said Porter ``was the master of
deceit. He made us feel so guilty, like it was our fault, and we never
told.''
	Several said they are angry at the way the church handled the case.
	``I want the church exposed for what they did,'' said one victim,
identified only as Joe, who said he has suffered form major depression
and post-traumatic stress syndrome as a result of being molested by
Porter when he was 12.
	``He (Porter) got top-flight care and they discarded us like
dishrags. To this day it is still being ignored.''
	There was no immediate reaction from church officials.
	The U.S. Catholic Conference has said the church takes the problem of
sexual abuse more seriously now than five or 10 years ago, when it was
seen as a ``moral failing.''

Subject: Ex-altar boys join dozens alleging priest molested them
Date: Tue, 12 May 92 5:39:36 PDT
 
	FALL RIVER, Mass. (UPI) -- Three former altar boys scheduled a meeting
with prosecutors Tuesday to file charges alleging they were raped and
molested by a Roman Catholic priest 30 years ago.
	They are among about 50 people who have now come forward to allege
they were raped or molested by the Rev. James R. Porter when he served
in churches in southeastern Massachusetts three decades ago.
	A man identified as Porter last week admitted on a taped conversation
broadcast over Boston television station WBZ-TV that he had sexually
assaulted between 50 and 100 children.
	Since that disclosure last Thursday, some 45 more alleged victims
have come forward to join those who already had told authorities they
were victimized by Porter, 57, who later left the priesthood and now
lives with his wife and four children in Oakdale, Minn.
	Porter has declined to be interviewed by the media.
	One of his alleged victims, John Robitaille, 43, said he had
repressed memories of being raped repeatedly when he was an altar boy 30
years ago, but ``the horror of what happened came back to me'' last
Thursday when he heard the initial broadcast reports about Porter.
	``I almost drove off the road,'' said Robitaille, who now lives in
West Warwick, R.I. ``I guess it was the validation, the realization that
I wasn't the only one who this happened to.''
	Robitaille, Dennis Gaboury, 41, of Baltimore and Steve Johnson, 43 --
all who said Porter sexually assaulted them while they were altar boys
at St. Mary's School in North Attleboro 30 years ago -- said they planned
to file charges against him Tuesday.
	Bristol County prosecutors said they will be interviewing some 30
alleged victims this week but have not yet decided whether to prosecute
Porter.
	Gadboury said Porter raped him in a rectory office when he was a 10-
year-old altar boy. He said Porter would take students out of their
classrooms at St. Mary's school for a project. ``Then he would rape them
and bring them back. It was brutal. I've talked to people who he raped
on the altar after mass. It's unbelievable,'' Gadboury said.
	Robitaille alleged that another priest, identified as the Rev.
Armando Annunciato, walked in once when Porter was raping him in St.
Mary's rectory.
	``He saw me, he looked me in the eye and he turned around and walked
back upstairs,'' Robitaille said. ``He turned his back on me and when he
did so, it was really symbolic of the whole church's attitude toward
victims of this crime.''
	Last week Annunciato said he only heard of the sexual abuse
allegations ``after the fact.''
	Johnson said Porter would take groups of altar boys for projects and
end up playing blind-man's bluff ``and then rape us.''
	Johnson said that ``when Father Porter raped me, he pointed a finger
in my face and said, 'What you have done was bad and God will punish you
if you tell anyone.'''
	Roderick MacLeish, a Boston lawyer who is representing many of the
alleged victims, said they will probably sue the Catholic Church and
Porter.
	The Fall River Diocese has only noted that Porter left the diocese
more than 21 years ago and declined further comment ``since this has
become a legal matter.''

Note that the UPI articles in .-1 and .-2 are two months old.

The Bristol County D.A. has determined that the Massachusetts statute of
limitations specifically states that the clock stops when the suspect moves
out of state.

Thus the time period specified by the statute of limitations has not run out,
and charges will be filed within the next two or three weeks.

He can only be charged with indecent assault, and not rape, because until
1974, Massachusetts law did not consider that males could be raped.

/john

    North Attleborough is a neighboring town to ours.  We used to live in
    an even closer town, where my husband was pastor of the Methodist
    church.  I believe Father Porter had left at that time, but my husband
    knew Father Annunciato from various clergy meetings.   Father
    Annuciato is now pastor of the Catholic church in Mansfield, where we
    live, but he has been on a leave of absence since the news broke.  One
    account said he is recovering from surgery for throat cancer.
    
    Nancy

I caught the last half of Primetime last night.  The program appeared to
be devoted to exposing some of the half-truths and misrepresentations of
certain televangelists.

The segment I saw in its entirety focused on Robert Tilton, who, according
to Primetime, brought in more money last year than did Madonna and Michael
Jackson combined.  Tilton's average financially contributing viewer, according
to the demographics, is over 50 years old, a woman, and has an annual income
of between $15,000 and $25,000 per year.

Tilton owns a lakeshore mansion in Texas and other pricey chunks of real
estate elsewhere.  Meanwhile, only a tiny fraction of the money Tilton rakes
in actually goes to the project or mission the viewer is lead to believe
(s)he's supporting.

Tilton has been clever enough to be able to ride the edge of the law or, at
least, not make the same mistakes as Jim & Tammy Faye Bakker made.

Primetime closed with the promise of a follow-up report on James Porter
(Note 101.37-41) on July 23rd.  Primetime will not air next week due to
the Democratic party convention.

Peace,
Richard

	Conservative politics and conservative religion reach convergence
on the agenda of at least one television evangelist.  Pat Robertson is having
a field day on the 700 Club with the Democratic party convention in progress.

	Clinton-Gore lost points with Robertson's organization because
gay activists support the ticket.  The Democratic candidates were denounced
for accepting gay support while at the same time espousing family values.
And of course the ticket was dinged for its stance regarding legal abortions.
The only thing liberal was the liberal use of terms of religious derision,
such as "demonic," "darkness," and "of Satan."

	Tomorrow's program promises to equally stir the hearts of conservatives.
The 700 Club is scheduled to feature a segment on Rush Limbaugh entitled
"Rush for Excellence."

Peace,
Richard

    What motivates your ridicule of conservatives in this conference?
    
    Pat Robertson has opinions that I agree with and would defend.

    Pat Robertson has opinions that I disagree with.  I also think this an
    appropriate forum to voice my disagreement.
    
    Richard

     I would disagree that Pat Robertson is a conservative. Pat's ideas
    on how the country should be run and how he would interpret the
    constitution give most of the conservatives I know nightmares.

     Pat Robertson seems to me to exhibit a strong sense of paranoia.
    He says he has visions, that is he sees demons and angels and also
    events that will occur in the future. Quite often these visions of
    the future are extremely violent in nature. He also claims he hears
    voices. 

      I really think that given these symptoms, paranoia, visual and
    aural hallucinations that Pat Robertson in mentally ill. I am quite
    serious about this. 

      Do not think for a minute that I am trying to associate mental
    illness with Christianity or political conservatism. This means
    you, Pat Sweeney ;-) 

                                                               Mike

    The tone of ridicule isn't an invitation to debate opinion, it's an
    implicit threat to ridicule the people who dare to challenge the clique
    here and to defend the views of Pat Robertson.

    Pat Robertson didn't talk about "visions" he said that he saw a city
    destroyed.  That city is New York, destroyed by guns and drugs. Anyone
    with eyes can see it.

    Look, if you want to contend that people of New York City would be
    better off _not_ to follow the advice for living Pat Robertson has than
    _to_ follow it, that would be an interesting discussion.

 Re.47

    Pat:

     There was a period in my life about 12 to 14 years ago when I
    watched the 700 Club everyday. This went on for about 3 years.
    It is a fact that on numerous shows during that time Pat Robertson
    described visions he had and in describing these visions he spoke
    of seeing angels and demons. It is also a fact that that on numerous
    shows during this period he described having visions in which he saw
    future events and his descriptions were often of horribly violent
    events some of which could be described as natural disasters and some
    of which were man made. On numerous shows during this time he spoke
    of hearing voices. Some of these voices were angelic in nature and some
    were demonic in nature. Also during this time Robertson regularly spoke
    of how certain groups and forces were trying to discredit him personally
    and destroy his ministry. 

     You may try to casually dismiss what I said as a distortion of what
    Pat Robertson said in one particular instance and I can understand why
    you would, but I know what I saw and heard on those shows. 

     Pat Robertson has made very deliberate effort in the past few years
    to soften his image from a vision seeing, voice hearing televangelist
    to a conservative to moderate, pragmatic GOP politician which he most
    certainly is not. He is an extremist whose political and religious
    ideas are very far removed those of mainstream America and these beliefs
    of his represent a threat to the basic political and religious freedoms
    in this country and that if he were to be elected President that he 
    would try to turn this country into theocratic dictatorship.

     I believe that his hallucinations and paranoia are symptoms of serious
    mental instability and are not indicative of ecstatic religious experience
    which I do not consider symptomatic of mental illness. 

     I am no more interested in debating Pat Robertson's ideas than I am
    in debating the ideas of Lyndon Larouche and as far as I am concerned
    the two are birds of a feather...a couple of dangerous lunatics who 
    would destroy this country if either of them ever became President.

     If you want to discuss conservative Christian views on politics
    and religion I'd enjoy it, but Pat Robertson is not representative
    of either conservative Christians or politically conservative
    Americans. 

                                                               Mike
      

    If you have no interest in defining and explaining your views, then I
    have no interest in them either.

    Re.49
    
    Pat:

           There you go putting words that I never said in my mouth 
         again. I am willing and interested in defining and explaining
         my views. By the way, in case you missed it, I just explained
         what some of my views are in my previous reply.

           However, I am not willing to debate the ideas of a dangerous
        extremist like Pat Robertson under the pretense of a discussion
        of religious and political conservatism. To do would be an insult
        to true religious and political conservatives who do not deserve to
        be put into the same category with the likes of Pat Robertson.

                                                               Mike

            

Today on the 700 Club Pat Robertson stopped just short of claiming
outright blasphemy in use of the phrase "new covenant" by Presidential
candidate Bill Clinton in his acceptance speech during last Thursday's
Democratic National Convention.

Robertson also claimed that Satan is behind the environmentalist movement
because "Satan doesn't like it that we were made in God's image and that
we were given dominion over the Earth."

Peace,
Richard

>Today on the 700 Club Pat Robertson stopped just short of claiming
>outright blasphemy in use of the phrase "new covenant" by Presidential
>candidate Bill Clinton during his acceptance speech during last Thursday's
>Democratic National Convention.

I was a little bit offended by it as well, especially with it having come
on the heels of a bunch of secularized misquoting of the Bible.

>Robertson also claimed that Satan is behind the environmentalist movement
>because "Satan doesn't like it that we were made in God's image and that
>we were given dominion over the Earth."

Robertson needs to learn about stewardship in the context of that dominion!

/john

    If we're reviewing the religious rhetoric of the Democratic National
    Convention, Jackson's claim regarding Mary the Mother of God was
    either blasphemous or confused.

    Joseph was married to Mary and the two of them raised Jesus.

    .53  Brother Patrick,
    
    According to Luke, Joseph and Mary were not married at the time
    of Mary's pregnancy.  Luke 2:4-6; a very familiar portion of Scripture.
    
    Peace,
    Richard

They were as married as any couple would be after their wedding
but before consummation.

Compare Luke with Matthew 1:24.

/john

    
    RE: 101.51
    
    IMO, this is the type of mindset that has contributed to the 
    environmental mess we find ourselves in today.
    
    Carole

    .56,
    
    Agreed!!  Also with John (.52) that Robertson has a lot to
    learn about stewardship.  Personally, when the good Reverand 
    says stuff like this I'm convinced he's definately whacked.
    
    Karen  

    Pat Robertson is a strange sort of fellow.  He is obviously a
    successful businessman, and he does have his fans, but I do wonder
    about the intellectual capacity of that particular group of people.
    
    To my mind, Pat Robertson is to Christianity what Geraldo is to
    televison journalism and the National Enquirer is to print journalism. 
    
    Mike

    Hey guys, be careful about criticizing Pat Robertson.  The guy has so
    much pull with God that he can get the Almighty to alter the course of
    hurricanes for him.  He even got God to steer Hurricane Hugo away from
    Virginia so that it would instead cause havoc and suffering in South
    Carolina.  When a guy has that much pull, who's to say that he wouldn't
    just send a hurricane *your* way some time.  It's not nice to fool with
    Mother Nature, or with Pat Robertson!  :-)

    -- Mike

    (By the way, it has been my theory, which I call the Televangelist
    Divine Radius Principle, that if the U.S. would only station
    Televangelists of Robertson's stature all along the Gulf and Atlantic
    coasts, we would never be hit by a hurricane again.)

    Mike .59,
    
    Yeah, you're right.  This is a man to be respected.  
    
    Gee, just think if we had had enough smarts to assign him
    temporarily to Kuwait last year.  Using the same thing he's got
    with hurricanes, he coulda made one gigantic mud puddle outta
    Iraq.  Sure woulda saved us Americans bundles of tax dollars.
                                                                  
    :-)
    
    Karen

    RE: .58
    
    Nice analogy Mike!
    
    Marc H.

	According to Matthew 1:24, as you pointed out in 101.55, Joseph did
marry Mary, but not before she became pregnant.  In the context of this string
and specifically note 101.53, it is this aspect I which suspect the Reverend
Jesse Jackson was addressing.

	In all honesty, I did not hear Rev. Jackson's speech, but from what
I heard about it, it sounds like he made quite a reach.  I would not draw a
parallel between Herod and Quayle, myself.  I think of Herod as being a whole
lot more intelligent.

Peace,
Richard

Just about half an hour ago I entered a reply here that maybe we should
stop speculating on what Jesse had said until we had a chance to read it.

And then, suddenly, the text appeared before me in another conference,
and it appears to be simply a way to try to call Quayle Herod, without
any basis in fact:

[....]

 Lastly, a lot of talk these days about family values, even as we spurn
 the homeless on the street. Remember, Jesus was born to a homeless
 couple, outdoors in a stable, in the winter.  Jesus was the child of a
 single mother.  When Mary said Joseph was not the father, she was abused
 and questioned.  If she had aborted the baby, she would have been called
 immoral.  

 If she had the baby, she would have been called unfit, without family  
 values.  But Mary had family values.  It was Herod - the Quayle of his
 day - who put no value on the family.  

 When Dan Quayle tried to ride both sides of this private religious moral  
 issue, he is above his potato.  

[....]

    Jesse Jackson and our own moderator are not adverse to making a cheap
    shot aganist Vice President Dan Quayle.
    
    What motivates the ridicule of Dan Quayle?

    Re: .64
    
    Dan Quayle himself is the prime source of ridicule.
    
    I'm what you could label a " conservative" with regard to politics.
    Dan Quayle, while certainly not in the same catagory as King Herrad,
    certainly is *NO* spokesman for family values.
    
    He is a joke.
    
    Marc H.

    RE .59
    
    It would be interesting to know if any 700 Club funds were sent to
    South Carolina to help the people there who were devastated by that
    hurricane.
    
    
    RE: .64
    
    > What motivates the ridicule of Dan Quayle?
    
    Ummm....because he deserves it?
    
    Couldn't help it....must be my warped sense of humor this morning 8^D.
    
    
    Carole

    Quayle gets the opprobrium heaped on him because he is a conservative
    Republican who is in a high political office.  The press hates such
    people, as do people of a Liberal political bent.  The fact that Dan
    Quayle is about as clumsy a public speaker as any politician any of us
    have ever seen doesn't help matters any.  However inept a speaker
    Quayle may be, however, he is not a stupid man.  
    
    Mike

    Why then, do people motivated by hatred ridicule someone in discussion
    conference on the Christian Perspective?

    Patrick, why do you assume the people are motivated by hatred? and
    why can't someone make a remark about a public figure?

    First, the assertion of hatred was made by Mike Smith, not me
    in response to my question.
    
    Secondly, I'm not talking about any "remark" but about "ridicule".
    
    If ridicule motivated by hatred is part of the Christian perspective,
    perhaps that needs to be explored in a note of its own.

    RE: .68  Mr. Sweeney
    
    			
    			How can voicing an opinion be called "hatred" and
    "ridicule"?  Even the people in his own party are unusually quiet about
    him.  Mr. Sweeney.....Me thinks you doth protest too much.
    
    
    Dave_who_thought_he_lived_in_a_country_with_free_speech.

    What is ridicule but the expression of an opinion without the attempt
    the explain or discuss something, but merely to mock, to laugh at.

    I don't make the assertion that it's motivated by hatred.  Only one who
    is doing it, or understands why others do can speak to the motivation
    for it.

    1 Peter 3:9

    "Do not return evil for evil or insult for insult.  Return a blessing
    instead. This you have been called to do, that you may receive a
    blessing as your inheritance".

   re: .68
    
    I don't know, Pat.  And I should add that I have no way of knowing the
    motivations of those in CP who are ridiculing Quayle.  My use of the
    word hatred was mostly meant in a general sense, but was, perhaps a
    poor choice of words.  (A consequence of noting on the run, you see.)
    
    Mike

    I lived in Indiana when Quayle was a Senator there.  When Bush picked
    Quayle as his running mate, it just so happened that both my home
    state's senators were conservative Republicans.  One of them was a
    Rhodes scholar, and distinguished leader in the Senate; he was erudite,
    capable, and intelligent.  The other senator regretted not having
    learned Latin in high school so that he could converse better with the
    people in Latin America.  Guess which one of these two men Bush chose
    as the Vice Presidential candidate of his party.

    The other Indiana Senator was Richard Lugar.  I have a great deal of
    respect for Senator Lugar, even if I don't often agree with his views. 
    On the other hand, I never had any respect for Quayle.  The problem
    with Quayle is not his politics per se; the problem is that he is not
    the swiftest person in the world.  Had George Bush picked that other
    conservative Senator from Indiana as his running mate, things would
    have been quite different.  Bush would have actually had a competent
    man in the role, a man who could have assumed the presidential office
    with dignity.  Unfortunately, when he turned to my home state for a
    running mate, he chose someone else.

    -- Mike

Re: .74

My sentiments exactly, Mike.

				-- Bob

re Note 101.68 by SDSVAX::SWEENEY:

>                             -< Motivated by hatred >-
> 
>     Why then, do people motivated by hatred ridicule someone in discussion
>     conference on the Christian Perspective?
  
        As in many areas, there are two kinds of people in the world: 
        those who believe that humor directed towards institutions
        (including the leaders of those institutions) is wrong,
        disrespectful, and is tantamount to an attack on those
        institutions, and those who think such humor is just
        good-natured fun.

        I enjoy almost none of the same humor as my parents.  They
        seem to interpret almost all the humor I enjoy as political
        and therefore not funny or worse.  While I enjoy a good Dan
        Quayle joke, I also enjoyed a good humorous slam on Michael
        Dukakis (four years ago we had to choose between four years
        of Dan Quayle jokes and four years of Michael Dukakis jokes
        -- I have to admit, Dan is easier to laugh at).

        I don't believe that those who are truly motivated by hatred
        resort to humor -- or at least their humor is not funny.  I
        don't believe that good-natured jabs or jokes are an
        expression of hatred.

        Americans have a very long tradition of political humor.  If
        you're ever looked at the political humor of a century or
        more ago, you would soon realize that we are far more kind
        and gentle with our humor today than we have been through
        most of our history.

        But some people can't take a joke, I guess.

        Bob

    Re: .76
    
    Nicely said Bob! The day that we can't ridicule/poke fun at public
    officals is the day that we have lost our freedoms.
    
    Pat Sweeney.....you are making a sweeping judgement by saying
    (and repeating a comment) that you *HATE* Dan Q. just because
    he can't spell potato......and you let people know how bad it
    is that the Vice President of the US talks about how bad our
    schools are and then tells a student that he spelled a word
    wrong!
    
    No...people don't hate Dan Q.....they are just upset that a President
    would pick someone like Dan Q. This has nothing to do with Christian
    values at all.
    
    Marc H.

>        Americans have a very long tradition of political humor.

I don't think that what The So-Called Reverend Jesse Jackson said equating
Dan Quayle to Herod can be called a joke.

Jesse said:

> If [Mary] had the baby, she would have been called unfit, without family  
> values.  But Mary had family values.  It was Herod - the Quayle of his
> day - who put no value on the family.  

This is pure nonsense.  Mary did have the baby and was never called unfit,
never claimed to not have family values.  In fact, she and her spouse
Joseph are the epitome of family values and of submission to God's Will.

Equating Dan Quayle with Herod is not humour, it's dishonesty.

/john

re Note 101.78 by COVERT::COVERT:

> I don't think that what The So-Called Reverend Jesse Jackson said equating
> Dan Quayle to Herod can be called a joke.

        I believe that the topic of discussion to the general
        Quayle-targeted humor in the media rather than Jackson's
        comments.

        In fact, I do not consider Jackson's comments to be an
        attempt at humor at all, or even "ridicule" in the usual
        sense of that word.  It was quite direct political criticism
        using historical contrast.

> Jesse said:
> 
> > If [Mary] had the baby, she would have been called unfit, without family  
> > values.  But Mary had family values.  It was Herod - the Quayle of his
> > day - who put no value on the family.  
> 
> This is pure nonsense.  Mary did have the baby and was never called unfit,
> never claimed to not have family values.  
          
        According to Matthew 1:19:  "Then Joseph her husband, being a
        just [man], and not willing to make her a public example, was
        minded to put her away privily."

        Jesse Jackson was offering a hypothetical which, apparently,
        Joseph would have agreed with before he was subsequently
        informed of the special circumstances.  At the point of
        Joseph's discovering Mary was pregnant, he, and most of his
        peers had they known, would have judged Mary unfit.  

> In fact, she and her spouse
> Joseph are the epitome of family values and of submission to God's Will.

        This is off the subject, but invokes a pet peeve of mine. 
        Next to nothing is known about the family life of Joseph,
        Mary, and the child Jesus.  Yet they are held up as the
        "epitome of family values" not only by you but by many,
        including the Roman Catholic Church.

        How useful is a role model about which is known very little? 

        Bob

>        I believe that the topic of discussion to the general
>        Quayle-targeted humor in the media rather than Jackson's
>        comments.

Of course you would, but prior to your reply, the discussion was about
ridicule, not humor.

If you search this topic for "humo", your first match will be someone
talking about a personal sense of humor, and then your reply.

The issue is ridicule, not satire or any other form of humor.

/john

    My copy of Webster's defines satire as "a writing ridiculing vice or
    folly; an invective poem; sarcastic or contemptuous ridicule."  I have
    rarely known ridicule not to be an important aspect of satire.

    Most political satire that I am familiar with attempts to ridicule
    something.  One of the characteristics of satire is that it produces
    completely different responses, depending on whether you agree with the
    satirist or not.  If you agree, the work is brilliantly funny; if you
    disagree, the response is one of anger and great offense.  The response
    is usually not one of indifference.  I often feel that way about the
    columnist Mike Royko; when I agree with him, he is funny, but when I
    disagree I think he is simply being an obnoxious jerk.  

    I suspect that the reason why the Dennis Miller show was canceled was
    that his satire on the news was either too on target or just too over
    people's heads (as satire sometimes is.)  An example of his satire from
    last night's show featured a photograph of George Bush walking in an
    empty field; Miller reported that Bush was demonstrating his commitment
    as the environmental president by talking a walk through the Sequoia
    National Forest.  That, in my view, was brilliant satire--not to
    mention rather funny.

    Dinosaurs, by the way, contains a considerable amount of satire also;
    but it seems to get away with it by couching it in a children's puppet
    show, and of course by referring to elements of a fictional realm that
    just so happen to resemble elements of the world we know and love.  We
    all know that DTV is their parody of MTV, and that DSPN is their parody
    of ESPN, but it is all one step removed from our world.  I've forgotten
    what I learned about Jonathon Swift from my high school days, but I
    suspect that a the satire in his Gulliver writings were similarly
    couched in a fictional world for that reason.

    -- Mike

    The motivation for humor that I employ and enjoy is to lighten the
    mood.  We all need humor.  I am pro-humor.
    
    The ridicule of Dan Quayle is systematic and has as a purpose more than
    changing a mood, but to denigrate him personally and denigrate the
    ideas which he advocates which is a political goal.
    
    By repetition, the liberal media actively want to undermine his
    reputation rather than address directly what he talks about.
    
    What motivates the ridicule of Vice President Dan Quayle?  None of the
    people who ridicule him are offering a answer.  I don't believe that it
    is a national shortage of humor.
    
    Dan Quayle enjoys a joke.  The way the media has treated him is an
    outrage.

re Note 101.82 by SDSVAX::SWEENEY:

>     The motivation for humor that I employ and enjoy is to lighten the
>     mood.  We all need humor.  I am pro-humor.
>     
>     The ridicule of Dan Quayle is systematic and has as a purpose more than
>     changing a mood, but to denigrate him personally and denigrate the
>     ideas which he advocates which is a political goal.
  
        I submit that a given verbal act can be for both purposes
        simultaneously.

        A lot of people are hurting in today's American economy.  You
        and I may disagree on this, but believe it or not a lot of
        people hold the current administration at least partly
        responsible for the economy and thus their suffering.  Dan
        Quayle is a part of that administration, and is one of its
        most strident advocates for "family values".

        If your family is hurting, and you are then lectured on
        "family values", wouldn't you get a little bothered?

        It would seem entirely understandable for some in America to
        ridicule Dan Quayle and to do it in a way that gives them a
        humorous lift in their otherwise dreary lives.

        Political humor almost always, like lightning, strikes for
        the exposed point.  It is often harder to address complex
        issues in a one-liner.  Dan Quayle is the administration's
        exposed point.
          
        Having said all the above, I do not believe that Jesse
        Jackson's comparison of Quayle to Herod falls under the
        category of political humor.  It was political criticism
        emphasized with irony -- nothing funny about it to me,
        either.  It wasn't meant to be funny.  It isn't funny.

        Bob

    Bob, are you saying that ridicule of Dan Quayle (distinct from general
    humor and political debate) is morally wrong but in the context  of the
    economic environment of the United States justifiable or
    understandable?
    
    Pat Sweeney

    While I am not a die hard Dan Quayle fan, it is clear to me that the
    ridicule continuously directed toward him by the press and certain
    political opponents is far from humorour in intent and in fact.
    
    They are using the man to attack a political opponent, which is George
    Bush, and nothing more.  
    
    Mike

re Note 101.84 by SDSVAX::SWEENEY:

>     Bob, are you saying that ridicule of Dan Quayle (distinct from general
>     humor and political debate) is morally wrong but in the context  of the
>     economic environment of the United States justifiable or
>     understandable?
  
        Absolutely not.

        Ridicule of a public figure in a journalistic, political, or
        civic discussion may be inappropriate at times, but is not
        generally wrong.

        Bob

re Note 101.85 by SOLVIT::MSMITH:

>     While I am not a die hard Dan Quayle fan, it is clear to me that the
>     ridicule continuously directed toward him by the press and certain
>     political opponents is far from humorour in intent and in fact.
>     
>     They are using the man to attack a political opponent, which is George
>     Bush, and nothing more.  
  
        Of course!

        Are you implying that Dan Quayle is some naive innocent who
        has been associated through no fault of his own, perhaps
        maliciously, with the Bush administration?

        Well, perhaps you are right.

        Bob

    I am saying that the ridicule leveled at Quayle by the media and
    Democrat political opponents has nothing to do with humor.  And the
    Democrats accuse the Republicans of dirty campaigning?  Hypocrisy
    of the first order.  Especially when done by a man of the cloth, the
    Rev. Jesse Jackson.
    
    
    Mike

Note 101.82

>    The motivation for humor that I employ and enjoy is to lighten the
>    mood.  We all need humor.  I am pro-humor.

I'm not sure we've seen this side of you in this file, Brother Sweeney.
If I've missed a humorous entry of yours, would you point it out for me?

Peace,
Richard

    Re: .88
    
    Mike,
     I'm sure that you will agree that BOTH sides are equally guilty.
    
    Marc H.

    Of course, Marc.
    
    Mike
    

	In last Thursday's installment of "The Simpsons," Homer believes he
is visited by God in a dream.  God is stereotypically portrayed as a White
male with a long, white beard.  Well, it *is* a cartoon, for goodness sake!

    	Anybody see it?
    
Peace,
Richard

>God is stereotypically portrayed as a White male with a long, white beard.

God the Father is incorporeal, isn't he?  Isn't that what the MM creed says?
Isn't that our Jewish and Christian tradition of him?

/john

    I saw the Simpsons.  I watch it each week.
    
    It treated the religions of the people of Springfield with humor and
    respect.  It also emphasized the value of teaching children and passing
    down to them beliefs about God.

    "Spitting Image" regularly has god appearing as an old man in a flowing
    white beard. In last night's episode he was playing the part of
    "J.R.Hartley" in an advert for Yellow Pages - asking around if anyone
    had found his book, the bible. His son comforted him and suggested he
    try the Yellow Pages. He descovered someone who had a copy of the bible
    and he was asking if they believed every word of it and then acted
    surprised when they said they did...
    
    Pete.

    I don't watch the Simpsons, and I don't let my children watch it
    either. Its junk....
    
    Marc H.

    My mother kept some pictures I drew of God when I was 3 years old.  She
    still has them in a box of memorabilia.  The pictures feature an old
    man with an extremely (and I mean *extremely*) long, flowing beard.
    
    -- Mike

re: Note 101.94 by "Patrick Sweeney in New York" 

I agree.  (!)  .-)

Peace,

Jim

I normally miss "The Simpsons."  But my spouse is frequently tickled by it
and she usually gives me a run-down each week on what the show was about.

I just happened to catch it last Thursday.

And I was particularly amused by the group of young people with the
guitar-playing leader who hounded Homer with that campfire song that
I've heard a bazillion times, but don't know the name of.  8-)

Homer had to go to extremes to avoid them. "Look!  The heathen is getting
away!" said one of the songsters.

Peace,
Richard

I watched an hour-length TV program last Saturday evening called "Miracles
and Other Wonders."

Hosted by veteran actor Darren McGavin, the program followed the format
of numerous other "re-enactment" shows, interspersing interviews of the
actual people involved with narrated dramatizations of their stories.

Four or five stories of the unexplainable and the miraculous unfolded in
this particular episode, which appeared to me to be a possible pilot for
a series.

One of the stories was of a long distance trucker who, during a night run,
received a peculiar distress call over his citizen band (CB) radio -- peculiar
because for some distance the cb radio had not been receiving any other signals.
The call for help pinpointed his location and stressed the urgency of the
situation.  After unsuccessfully attempting to rouse someone closer to the
location on the cb, the trucker detoured from his planned destination to come
to the roadside rescue of a man suffering from a heart ailment.  After
administering medicine at the direction of the conscious victim, our hero
learned that - in defiance of any plausible explanation - the man whose life
he'd just saved had no radio on which to transmit a call for help.

But that wasn't the end of the story.  Twelve years later, our rescuer's life
was saved under the most improbable of circumstances by the very same stranger
who he'd come to the aid of that most extraordinary night.

Another segment detailed the "weeping" picture of Jesus in the Texas home
of a Coptic Christian family.  Two miraculous healings have been associated
with the otherwise common and familiar print, which seems to sweat beads of
moisture.

These indeed were strange and wonderful stories, stories which conveyed a
sense of hope and wonder.

Peace,
Richard

ABC's PrimeTime is scheduled to have a segment Thursday evening of this week
on the growing phenomenon of people claiming to have witnessed Satanic rituals
as children.

Richard

I confess, as one of bourgeois and liberal leanings, I watched PrimeTime
Live Thursday night, January 7th. (See Note 101.101)

Apparently there is phenomenal growth in the number of cases of persons
claiming to have resurfaced suppressed childhood memories of Satanic
abuse.

One woman, who has severed all ties with her family of origin, claimed her
father was a High Priest in the service of Satan.  Actually, her father was
a small town Baptist pastor in Texas.  Her father and mother were flabber-
gasted at their daughter's accusations.

From what I could see, at least some psychotherapists are planting suggestions 
in the minds of their Satanic abuse patients.  If the impressions don't come,
the patient is told to keep working on it.

It came as no surprise for me to learn that there is a lot of money to be
made from these long-term care patients.

Richard

    RE: .102
    
    I too, have been very skeptical about TV as a truth messenger. Most
    times, TV is a waste of time.
    
    That said, I do believe in Satan.
    
    Marc H.

    Tomorrow night, Friday, July 9th, 1993, on 20/20, there's supposed to
    be a segment entitled "Minister of Hate?"
    
    I won't be able to see it due to a pre-existing commitment, but I'd
    be interested in what others have to say about it.
    
    Richard
    

"The Stand," a mini-series based on an apocalyptic book by
St. Stephen the Macabre, Stephen King, that is, is due to be airing
on television soon.  Hope it's better than "Tommyknockers."

Shalom,
Richard

    Looks like "The Stand" (.105) will begin Sunday evening on the ABC
    network.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

Next Tuesday, May 24th, on NBC there will be an hour-long special on angels
hosted by Patty Duke.  9:00 Eastern, 8:00 Central.

Shalom,
Richard

    I'm trying not to be skeptical, but I'm not expecting much... 
    especially if Shirley Maclaine will make an appearance.  Sort of like
    the recent "Ancient Prophecies" shows on NBC.  They dwelled on
    Nostradamus' prophecies where he appeared to be close, but never
    mentioned the many where he was way off.  
    
    Makes you wonder about NBC lately too with these spiritually-focused
    programs.
    
    Mike

    .107 is merely an informational announcement, not an endorsement.
    
    Richard
    

Among the latest lineup of unengaging television is "Touched by an Angel."

I only saw parts of one episode, and based on that single exposure I don't
hold much hope of this "Highway to Heaven" look-alike making it through the
season.

Too bad, too.  I have long enjoyed Della Reese, who co-stars as a wise and
patient angelic counterbalance to a young, beautiful and somewhat impulsive
angel of Irish origin.

Has anyone else seen "Touched by an Angel"?

Your impressions?

Shalom,
Richard

	When is it on, what station carries it? (NBC, ABC, CBS, FOX, OTHER)

    Uhh...I dunno the time slot.  I think it's on NBC.
    
    Peace,
    Richard
    

Jack van Impe and Rexella.

Has anyone else seen these two on TV?

Their half-hour weekly show rehashes current events with an apocalyptic
emphasis through Jack's interpretation of the Bible.  The show is probably
either syndicated or distributed independently.

Rexella, as far as I can tell, is just there to be on the payroll, to look
good (both have well-starched hair), to be in subordination to Jack, and to
ask him "unrehearsed" questions.

Shalom,
Richard

    Yeah I've seen it.  "Jack you're so smart, you're my hero!"  
    
_    /|            _    /|             _    /|            _    /|
\'o.O'             \'o.O'              \'o.O'             \'o.O'
=(___)=   Aack!!!  =(___)=   Aack!!!   =(___)=   Aack!!!  =(___)=   Aack!!!
   U                  U                   U                  U
    

    Actually, the programs aired by TBN are funny yet sad at the same time. 
    They have programs on there by people who don't even accept the Trinity
    doctrine, yet their network is called 'Trinity Broadcasting Network.'
    
    I caught my first glimpse of "laughing in the Spirit" the other day on
    Richard Roberts' show.  Talk about fake and contrived!  
    
    These people don't have a clue and it's sad how they abuse God's name.
    
    Mike

Whenever I catch the Jack & Rexalla show during an occassional channel surf, I get the
impression that, although Rexalla seems submissive and demure, she really calls
the shots behind the camera.  Just a feeling.  Anyway, the show is good for an
occassional laugh - they are great at fitting *any* event into Revelations/Daniel.

/Mike

>the shots behind the camera.  Just a feeling.  Anyway, the show is good for an
>occassional laugh - they are great at fitting *any* event into Revelations/Daniel.
    
    I never questioned the man's knowledge of Revelation though. 
    Considering today's events and how close we are, fitting them into the
    prophetic books is becoming easier and easier.  That alone should tell
    us that something's coming.
    
    Even secular sources like "Intelligence Digest" declare that a major
    outbreak in the Middle East is quickly approaching.  
    
    Mike

>    Even secular sources like "Intelligence Digest" declare that a major
>    outbreak in the Middle East is quickly approaching.  
    
And when, may I ask, hasn't the tension is this region existed?  It really
doesn't take all that much "intelligence."

Richard

PS  Who puts this publication out?

    I can't recall the name of the top of my head, but found it interesting
    to recently hear that the editor is co-writing a book with Hal Lindsay.
    It seems he found that "Intelligence Digest" quite often found itself
    agreeing with some of Hal's scenarios.  The editor asked Hal to do this
    project with him.  Hal presents the Biblical scenario and how it
    relates to what the ID editor presents in the secular scenario.  Sounds 
    like it will be fascinating!  The book is called "The Last Battle" and 
    should be out within a few months.
    
    Mike

| <<< Note 101.115 by FRETZ::HEISER "Grace changes everything" >>>


| These people don't have a clue and it's sad how they abuse God's name.

	Mike, you may not like the show, that's fine and dandy. But what about
it makes you think they abuse God's name? Not having seen it myself I don't
know. Does it try to give a message? Is the message wrong or just badly acted?


Glen

    See .1 in CHRISTIAN in the new topic on 'laughing in the spirit'

    .111  Touched by an Angel
          Wednesday evening
          CBS
          check local listings for time and channel
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

Next Thursday, March 16, Peter Jennings (ABC) will host a program, "In
the Name of God," focusing on some of the current phenomena in American
church worship.

Shalom,
Richard

A new television series, "Amazing Grace," starring Patty Duke in the role
of a clergyperson will begin this Saturday, April 1, on NBC.  Check your
local listings for time and channel.

Shalom,
Richard

	Richard, this isn't an April fools joke, is it? :-)

    The epic motion picture "The Ten Commandments" will be aired this coming
    Sunday, April 9th.  I'm uncertain of the network, but I think it's ABC.
    Check your local listings for time and channel.

    "The Ten Commandments" is discussed in another topic.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    Thanks Richard...I taped it 6 years ago and would like to retape since
    the quality is starting to go down hill.
    
    -Jack

I do not have cable television.  Still, with only a console-mounted antenna
(rabbit ears), I can pull in ten stations.  Three of them are primarily of
the right-wing Christian variety:

* Channel 38 (religion) The Worship Network
* Channel 53 (religion)
*            (religion) Trinity Broadcasting Network

             (Spanish-speaking) UNIVISION

  Channel 11 (CBS)
  Channel 13 (ABC)
  Channel 15 (PBS) out of Pueblo
  A PBS station out of Denver (poor reception)
  Channel 21 (Fox)
  Channel 30 (NBC)

Additionally, channels 11, 13, 21, and 30 each carry *some* religious
programming.  Even PBS offers weekly classical organ recitals interspersed
with religious messages.  Would you say we're a little saturated here?  How
different is it where you live?

Shalom,
Richard

          <<< Note 101.128 by CSC32::J_CHRISTIE "Unquenchable fire" >>>
    
    	I do exactly as you do, Richard, and make do with rabbit ears.

    	I thought there was also a channel 48 (or 43?) a channel 63,
    	and a channel 68 that we get.
    
    	I rarely venture into those stations.
    
>Would you say we're a little saturated here? 

    	I never watch the religious stations, so understand that I'm not
    	taking a defensive posture.
    
    	Even if 60 UHF stations popped up as religious stations, I 
    	wouldn't consider it excessive.  They are purely market-driven.
    	If they don't raise the financial support to continue, they
    	wither.  Apparently they have ample support today.  Maybe 
    	the current number of stations *is* the saturation point, and 
    	any more would cause one or more to wither.  Or maybe the area
    	could support still more.  
    
    	Do you see the current number of commercial religious stations 
    	as being a bad thing?  Would having more be a bad thing?  Would
    	you rather they be replaced with a Playboy channel?  :^)  (It's
    	interesting to note that in many cable markets the playboy-type
    	channels rarely last long.  Back when we used to have cable here
    	they *did* have one, but it eventually got replaced by a sports
    	channel.)
    
    	My channel changer can be programmed to skip over any channel I
    	want (if using the next/previous-channel buttons.)  Maybe yours
    	can be too, and then you won't have to worry about saturation
    	any more!

Dan Rather will be hosting a CBS Special Report on "The Christian Right"
this evening.

Of course, everybody knows Rather is a flaming liberal and it won't be
as objective as it might be if it came from Pat Robertson or Rush Limbaugh.

Shalom,
Richard

    Pat Robertson makes it clear as to what his agenda is.  He is clear of
    his intentions...that he has a ministry and a conservative agenda. 
    People can either watch or not watch...and most people don't.
    
    Limbaugh is an entertainer but has also made his agenda clear. 
    Limbaugh caters to the conservative right.  He is on at crazy hours and
    people know to watch him or not watch him.  There is no mistake.
    
    So who is Dan Rather and what does he stand for.  Well, he claims to be
    a news anchor on a major network.  He is supposed to be unbiased, he is
    supposed to report the news accurately.  So what am I to conclude? 
    Well, the same thing you concluded.  Dan Rather is a flaming liberal
    who caters to the left.  Fine, but don't claim to be a news anchor!
    
    -Jack

>    So who is Dan Rather and what does he stand for.  Well, he claims to be
>    a news anchor on a major network.  He is supposed to be unbiased, he is
>    supposed to report the news accurately.  So what am I to conclude? 
>    Well, the same thing you concluded.  Dan Rather is a flaming liberal
>    who caters to the left.  Fine, but don't claim to be a news anchor!
    
    >    -Jack
    
    That's pretty funny, Jack!
    
    jeff

    I'd Rather Dan stick reporting the news as it happens instead of trying
    to push his personal agenda on the minds of Americans.
    
    Mike

    There is no such thing as unbiased writing of any kind.  Every person
    has a perspective and that perspective comes through in everything they
    do say and write.  Every reader has a perspective and what is written
    is also mediated through the perspective of the reader.
    
    The best that any writer can do is to be up front about their
    perspective.
    
    THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS UNBIASED JOURNALISM!
    
                                           Patricia

    Patricia:
    
    Not sure if you have cable but CSPAN is excellent at keeping their
    opinions to themselves.  The CSPAN anchors are private and in no way
    shape or form even give a hint of their political ideologies.
    
    McNeil Lehrer is also ranked excellent in this arena, and I applaud
    them for their ability to do so.  This is why I believe unbiased
    journalism can take place and this is why I loathe people like Dan
    Rather and Commie Chung.
    
    -Jack

I can't believe my remark (.130) was perceived as other than facetious.

Richard

    I know it was fecitious Richard.  I was simply trying to annoy you
    further because you have been acting like a cranky person the last 24
    hours!
    
    -Jack

    	facetious:  one of a handful of words that have all the vowels
    	in order -- a e i o u.  "Facetiously" is even better.
    
    	Now, back to our program!

I watched the CBS Special Report "Faith and Politics: The Christian Right"
last evening.

Was it Leftist?  Liberal?  Not by my use of the term.

It basically brought out all the points that have been raised here repeatedly.

Richard

    	I found it to be relatively balanced.

    I missed it.  Oh well...

    I was watching my grass grow...

        re .142

    Is that like contemplating your navel? :^)

    Nope, I was never in the Navy.

    "New Visions of the Future: Prophecies III" is due to air on NBC
    tonight.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    I regret that this didn't get announced earlier to prompt some interest.
    
    On Saturday evening, June 8, NBC will air two programs:
    
    "The Mysterious Origins of Man" (hosted by the ever-credible Charleton
    Heston) and "Ancient Prophecies" (the third edition, I believe).
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    .146
    
    It turns out the "Ancient Prophesies" program was the fourth in the
    series.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    I saw the last half or so of it.  Interesting, but the part about our
    appliances attacking up was a BIT much, though.  
    
    A lot of the non-Biblical prophesies pralleled scripture in certain
    areas, which I found interesting.
    
    
    -steve

    Yeah, that segment reminded me of an episode of the old "Twilight Zone"
    series.
    
    Allegorically, however, I can see how technology might rise up against
    humanity.
    
    Shalom,
    Richard
    

    Well now, allegorically, I too can see how technology could rise up and
    bite us all on the bum.  That's different.  8^)

"Searching for God in America"
 PBS
 9:00 PM, Fridays (Colorado Springs)

I've been impressed by this series of interviews with a divergent
cross-section of religious figures (Rabbi Harold Kushner, the Dalai Lama,
Elder Maxwell of the Mormon church, for example) conducted by fiery-eyed
evangelical Christian, Hugh Hewitt.

Have others seen any of these programs?

Shalom,
Richard

 I saw part of it, quite accidentally the portion on which Charles Colson
 was interviewed.  I was pleased with the way he presented his testimony.



 Jim 

    .152
    
    I haven't seen the one with Chuck Colson yet.  Hopefully I didn't
    miss it.
    
    Richard
    

I watched an episode of "7th Heaven" last night.  This is a new sitcom
about a minister and his large family.  It was an hour long program with
three interwoven plots centered around different members of the family.

I thought it was fairly positive but the Christianity was kept pretty much
in the background, and the fact that the father was a minister was only
mentioned a couple times.  I didn't see the whole show, but from what I
saw they didn't show the family actually in church or praying or anything.

I'd be interested in reactions from anyone else who watches this program.

				-- Bob

Did anyone else watch Larry King interview Larry Flynt (the publisher of
Hustler magazine) and Jerry Falwell on CNN last night?  I only saw part of
it, but it was hilarious!  They were discussing the movie "The People vs.
Larry Flynt", the highlight of which is the lawsuit that Falwell filed
against Flynt for libel, which ended up in the Supreme Court.

Jerry told Larry that he loved him, and God loved him, and that he'd give
him a great big hug once Larry saw the light and accepted Jesus as his
savior.  Jerry said he hated the sin but loved the sinner.  Larry said
that Jerry didn't really love him and was just trying to get publicity for
his ministry.  They constantly interrupted each other and talked at the
same time, but there didn't seem to be open hostility so much as just very
sharp disagreement.  It even looked like Jerry had his hand on Larry's
shoulder at one point.

It was interesting to see Flynt talk about his brief conversion to
Christianity several years ago.  This happened soon after Flynt was shot
and paralyzed in a failed assassination attempt.  Ruth Carter Stapleton
(the president's sister) visited Flynt in the hospital, and Larry became a
born again Christian, at least for a few months.  In the King interview,
Flynt said that his conversion was sincere at the time but that he was
under the influence of the drugs he took to control his pain, and that
once his mind cleared up he went back to being an atheist.

Fun stuff.  Of course they disagreed about whether pornography leads to
violent crime: Jerry said it did and Larry said it didn't.  But what would
you expect them to say?

				-- Bob

 Z   Ruth Carter Stapleton
 Z   (the president's sister) visited Flynt in the hospital, and Larry
 Z   became a born again Christian, at least for a few months. 
    
    This is an impossibility.  One is either brought into a new life or one
    is not.  "What shall we say then...shall we continue in sin that grace
    may abound??  God forbid, for how are we who are alive and dead to sin
    remain therein?"

    
    So, is Flynt "brought into a new life" or not? 
    
    Eric

    I don't know.  By his own admission and actions it would appear not to
    be the case.
    
    -Jack

    
    So we end up in the once saved, always saved debate...
    
    Eric

    How can it be genuine if he admitted to being under the influence?
    
    If you take it a face value, the Arminians have a great case.  If you
    take in context that he was intoxicated/stoned, the Calvinists have an
    argument.  Personally, I reject them both and look at the fruit.

>    argument.  Personally, I reject them both and look at the fruit.

   Alright, Mike.  How often do you look at the fruit of Larry
   Flynt's labor?

   :*)

| <<< Note 101.163 by PHXSS1::HEISER "Maranatha!" >>>

| Personally, I reject them both and look at the fruit.

	I'm right here! :-)

	Btw, I agree that if he is under the influence, how can he really have
been saved?


Glen

    I'm talking about the fruit of his life.  What glory does he bring to
    our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ?  None.
    
    Again personally speaking, I find the "fruit" of his chosen profession
    totally disgusting.  I saw one of his issues in my BC days and I
    thought his "work" was trash then too.  Praise God though, when you
    come to Him, He cleans you up and gives you new/better loves,
    new/better dislikes, new/better wants, new/better needs.  This includes
    a severe dislike for pornography and exploitation and the damaging
    control it has over people.

    Problem with guys like this is they're exploiting women for personal
    gain.  The victims in this case seem to be clueless that their boss is
    using them and defiling their person.
    
    -Jack

	Sort of like you and your relationship with your mil. In other
words, Jack, you too are one of those other guys. You're not including
sex with it, just the exploiting.

    Oh...sure Glen.  I mean all I've ever do is wake up and go into my
    everyday ritual.  I look at my big pin up picture of Josephine and
    exclaim..."Now just how can I take advantage of you today you Kennedy
    bumb kisser!!?"  
    
    Oh and Lord knows it has been a life of ease Glen.  I mean...just
    dealing with the complex estate issues she has left me with has been an
    absolute exploitation picnic...that's fer sure!!!
    
    Glen if you can help me think of any other nifty ideas, please feel
    free to share!!!
    
    -Jack

	No problem, Jack. And I'm sure you won't ever claim to having said
anything good about her, at least not in notes.

    Why do I get the feeling there's interconference laundry being aired
    here?
    
    Richard
    

    I will close only to say the subject of my Mother n law has come up
    strictly in the realm of voting issues, i.e. her blind admiration for
    the Kennedy clan here in Massachusetts.
    
    I have plenty of good quality memories of my Mother n law!
    
    -Jack

    Soul Man, Tuesdays at 8:30 (EDT)

    Dan Ackroyd as a minister!? Yes. And done surprisingly well, in my
    opinion. 

    Eric 

    Wasn't "Soul Man" one of the songs the Blues Brothers did?
    
    Wasn't that Ackroyd and Belushi?
    
    Richard
    

    Yes and yes.

	I too enjoyed the show. That surprised me. :-)