Re: Easter & Christmas (was RE: [asa] Noah's Ark- the debate over floods... and biblical interpretation)

Please think clearly. The Passover is linked to the first full moon after
the spring equinox and as the death and resurrection of Jesus occurred at
the same time than they coincide (except occasionally as last year)

The date of "Easter" is based on the Passover but also coincides with pagan
festivals

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH PAGAN FESTIVALS AT OR AROUND THE EQUINOX. It is
simply a matter of coincidental timing and of course equinoxes and
longest.shortest day are often held to be significant.

What happened was that Christians took over post-equinox customs i..e.
Easter and gave them a new Christian meaning. Perhaps we ought to speak
French and call Easter Pasque and then we wouldn't have the problem.
Further during the 4th century after Constantine churches were often built
on pagan sites to show not the pagan roots of Christianity but to
demonstrate the superiority of Christianity over paganism.

There is a long history of Christianity taking over pagan customs and
thoughtforms and subverting them by christianising them.

Sadly in this country Easter is often reduced to bunnies and Easter eggs,
with little reference to the resurrection.

Anyway the only animals we have had in church this Holy Week have been a
pony as a donkey substitute on Palm Sunday (It came into church with a child
sitting on it followed by children and went right up to the chancel
steps)and a life size model of a yearling lamb to be tied into the last
supper - the Lamb of God which takes away the sin of the world.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jack Syme" <drsyme@verizon.net>
To: "Christine Smith" <christine_mb_smith@yahoo.com>; <asa@calvin.edu>
Sent: Friday, April 10, 2009 6:53 PM
Subject: Re: Easter & Christmas (was RE: [asa] Noah's Ark- the debate over
floods... and biblical interpretation)

> To me your argument is not convincing. The date of Easter Sunday is
> determined by the Spring Solstice which is clearly of pagan origin. Even
> the name Easter can be traced to one of a dozen pagan fertility goddesses.
> The only thing that is Christian about it is that it is on Sunday.
>
> At least Christmas contains the name of Christ and mass. But when we
> celebrate Christmas has nothing to do with when Jesus was actually born,
> but is related, again, to a pagan solstice celebration. So is it not just
> pagan trappings and symbols that have infiltrated into these celebrations,
> but it seems to me, that the Christian celebrations have infiltrated the
> pre existing pagan celebrations.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Christine Smith" <christine_mb_smith@yahoo.com>
> To: <asa@calvin.edu>
> Sent: Friday, April 10, 2009 11:03 AM
> Subject: Easter & Christmas (was RE: [asa] Noah's Ark- the debate over
> floods... and biblical interpretation)
>
>
>>
>> Hi Bernie,
>>
>> You wrote:
>> "just as Easter and Christmas were
>>> adapted from pagan things to give new Christian meaning to
>>> them."
>>
>> I think this is an overstatement. Certainly, things like Easter bunnies,
>> Easter eggs, Christmas trees, etc. did not originate from Christian
>> traditions, but that's not what makes Easter, Easter, and Christmas,
>> Christmas. These holidays originated within Christianity, and in the
>> course of celebrating these holidays and explaining the theology behind
>> these holidays to others, we've incorporated some of the trappings and
>> symbols from outside cultures along the way. This incorporation does not
>> mean that Easter and Christmas themselves came from pagan origins.
>>
>> In Christ,
>> Christine
>>
>> "For we walk by faith, not by sight" ~II Corinthians 5:7
>>
>> Help save the life of a homeless animal--visit www.azrescue.org to find
>> out how.
>>
>> Recycling a single aluminum can conserves enough energy to power your TV
>> for 3 hours--Reduce, Reuse, Recycle! Learn more at www.cleanup.org
>>
>>
>> --- On Thu, 4/9/09, Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com> wrote:
>>
>>> From: Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com>
>>> Subject: RE: [asa] Noah's Ark- the debate over floods... and biblical
>>> interpretation
>>> To:
>>> Cc: "ASA" <asa@calvin.edu>
>>> Date: Thursday, April 9, 2009, 2:57 PM
>>> Dick:
>>> "It was to terminate evil doers. Do you think a king
>>> and his family could just slip out of town unnoticed?"
>>>
>>> You think all the evil doers were concentrated. That
>>> sounds too far-fetched to me. I think they spread out all
>>> over the globe- aren't all people evil? Even God said
>>> that... they were all evil... not just the locals.
>>>
>>> It sounds to me like you have your theology then shape the
>>> Scripture to meet it- eisigesis. It is a local flood. How
>>> long? The Bible says, but ignore that part. How high? The
>>> Bible says, but diminish it (mountains = hills). What was
>>> on the ark? The Bible says (all animal species with the aim
>>> to preserve them), but ignore that part.
>>>
>>> To me, it seems so straight-forward to recognize and accept
>>> what the Bible says, then understand it as adapting myth for
>>> theological purposes... just as Easter and Christmas were
>>> adapted from pagan things to give new Christian meaning to
>>> them.
>>>
>>> ...Bernie
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Dick Fischer [mailto:dickfischer@verizon.net]
>>> Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2009 12:32 PM
>>> To: Dehler, Bernie
>>> Cc: ASA
>>> Subject: RE: [asa] Noah's Ark- the debate over
>>> floods... and biblical interpretation
>>>
>>> Hi Bernie, you wrote:
>>>
>>> >How high were the flood waters for Noah's local
>>> flood- thousands of feet? If not, there was no need for a
>>> boat- simply walk to higher ground<
>>>
>>> Ziusudra is the last name on the Sumerian king list before
>>> the flood. (Some lists, others don't include him at
>>> all.)
>>>
>>> Read Ziusudra here: http://www.piney.com/EriduGen.html
>>>
>>> Remember the purpose of the flood? It was to terminate
>>> evil doers. Do you think a king and his family could just
>>> slip out of town unnoticed? Building a boat was a perfect
>>> solution. He and his family just climbed inside and shut
>>> the door. This would have the effect of keeping the people
>>> in one place. They would have had to hike many miles east
>>> to get to high enough ground to survive. The Sumerians had
>>> an advantage already living further east with low lying
>>> mountains in easy reach.
>>>
>>> Had the flood been even a hundred feet high it would have
>>> wiped out the Sumerians too. They survived and occupied the
>>> region up until the time of Abraham when Ur was destroyed by
>>> the Gutians and Elamites around 2000 BC.
>>>
>>> Dick Fischer, GPA president
>>> Genesis Proclaimed Association
>>> "Finding Harmony in Bible, Science and History"
>>> www.genesisproclaimed.org<http://www.genesisproclaimed.org>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
>>> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Dehler,
>>> Bernie
>>> Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2009 11:53 AM
>>> Cc: ASA
>>> Subject: RE: [asa] Noah's Ark- the debate over
>>> floods... and biblical interpretation
>>>
>>> Dick said:
>>> "If you remember the flood of 1993 in the midwest the
>>> water stayed for months before receding."
>>>
>>> The midwest water stayed for months? Really? What do you
>>> mean by Midwest water stayed- that it rose a few hundred
>>> feet and stayed that high for months? Or was the Midwest
>>> months of flood just tens of feet? How high were the flood
>>> waters for Noah's local flood- thousands of feet? If
>>> not, there was no need for a boat- simply walk to higher
>>> ground.
>>>
>>> ...Bernie
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
>>> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Dick
>>> Fischer
>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 08, 2009 1:20 PM
>>> To: 'D. F. Siemens, Jr.'
>>> Cc: ASA
>>> Subject: RE: [asa] Noah's Ark- the debate over
>>> floods... and biblical interpretation
>>>
>>> Hi David:
>>>
>>> The other night I saw part of the movie Hamlet. Although I
>>> found it interesting, I must admit I couldn't understand
>>> over 20% of the dialogue. I perked up at "Alas, poor
>>> Yorick," and "To be or not to be ...", but by
>>> and large I couldn't pick up the lingo at all. We
>>> don't talk that way anymore. Genesis is typical ANE
>>> literature. If you aren't used to ANE literature from
>>> reading a boatload of it, you are going to miss some things.
>>> Then there is Jewish jargon to deal with, the odd scribal
>>> error, and the translation from one language to another.
>>> It's a wonder to me any of it makes sense.
>>>
>>> What I find typical of ANE literature is that persons,
>>> places, and clashes between cities seem to be reliable. The
>>> insertion of various gods in the affairs of men is quite
>>> common and cannot be considered "true" history.
>>> So when the flood comes in Atrahasis we read "Enki made
>>> ready to speak, and said to Nintu the birth goddess:
>>> "You, birth goddess, creatress of destinies, establish
>>> death for all peoples!"
>>>
>>> (http://www.livius.org/as-at/atrahasis/atrahasis.html)
>>>
>>> Okay, a fabricated conversation from one god or another in
>>> ANE literature is typical. So how about this conversation:
>>> And God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our
>>> likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the
>>> sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and
>>> over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that
>>> creepeth upon the earth" (Gen. 1:26). What makes this
>>> conversation genuine and the conversation in Atrahasis
>>> bogus? Simple. We all know there is only one God and we
>>> don't believe in many gods. Plus the Bible is inspired.
>>>
>>> But the type of literature is the same. Insertions of
>>> conversations from God or gods are the norm in all ANE
>>> literature, Genesis included. So you accuse me of waffling?
>>> May I suggest that if you want to understand ANE
>>> literature, you should read some of it.
>>>
>>> Specifically to your questions, you wrote:
>>>
>>> >The Bible says that there was no help for him while you
>>> posit tens of thousands of people living in the valley, lots
>>> of women, with more elsewhere on earth.<
>>>
>>> There was no help mate "suitable." There were
>>> not "tens of thousands" living in Eridu, more like
>>> a hundred or less at the beginning, and none of the other
>>> cities had been established at that early date. There is
>>> roughly 600 years between the first city, Eridu, and the
>>> city Cain built, Enoch, which was the second city. By 7,000
>>> years ago the entire earth was sparsely populated in the
>>> millions. Read Jacquetta Hawkes, The Atlas of Early Man.
>>>
>>> > How does the notion that Noah simply stayed aboard the
>>> ark for two seasons work? I can imagine him stuck on a sand
>>> bar where there was at least an area of the ark from which
>>> he could drop a bucket to draw water for the creatures
>>> aboard. This would not help the food problem unless he could
>>> barter with the locals. But Mesopotamia has a distinct lack
>>> of wood. Would a mass of wood as big as the ark not be
>>> salvaged by the locals?<
>>>
>>> I'm not sure the voyage lasted a year. The Bible
>>> writer seemed to think so, and we are stuck trying to make
>>> sense of it. So I'm trying. The size of the ark is
>>> another problem area if we try to envisage the ark as a
>>> massive 450 foot long ship. A seriies of smaller baskets
>>> lashed together to form the overall dimensions might work,
>>> or maybe the writer mismeasured, or maybe the original
>>> dimensions have been changed. There are options. Choose.
>>>
>>> > Floods flow downstream, with increased speed as there
>>> is more water. If the ark were in the current, it would head
>>> for the Persian Gulf. If it got into an area where water
>>> overflowed the banks, the water would be ponding and going
>>> nowhere. So how did the ark head upstream to the area of
>>> Ararat? Or is this an inaccuracy that does not disturb the
>>> message?<
>>>
>>> If you remember the flood of 1993 in the midwest the water
>>> stayed for months before receding. The Gilgamesh legend
>>> mentions punting holes and punting is still a means of
>>> locomotion on the canals of Iraq. Animals on the bank
>>> pulling the boat also might work.
>>>
>>> There could be inaccuracies. I'm not saying there
>>> couldn't possibly be inaccurracies in the inspired text.
>>> When Genesis depicts the God who created the entire
>>> univerrse taking a stroll through the Garden of Eden
>>> enjoying the coolness of the air and sniffing petunias, I,
>>> even I, have to put on my wading boots. Still, the flood
>>> appears to be a genuine event that actually happened. There
>>> are possible answers to the typical questions raised.
>>>
>>> Dick Fischer, GPA president
>>> Genesis Proclaimed Association
>>> "Finding Harmony in Bible, Science and History"
>>> www.genesisproclaimed.org<http://www.genesisproclaimed.org>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: D. F. Siemens, Jr. [mailto:dfsiemensjr@juno.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 6:59 PM
>>> To: dickfischer@verizon.net
>>> Cc: bernie.dehler@intel.com; asa@calvin.edu
>>> Subject: Re: [asa] Noah's Ark- the debate over
>>> floods... and biblical interpretation
>>>
>>> Dick.
>>> It seems to me that you argue whichever view fits at the
>>> time. For example, Genesis 1 uses the cosmology of ANE, with
>>> a solid firmament with sun, moon and stars on the
>>> terrestrial side and water on the side away from the earth.
>>> How does that make the apology for monotheism invalid? In
>>> Genesis 2, that Adam named the animals implies that they had
>>> no names previously, though you claim that the Mesopotamian
>>> civilization had risen earlier. The Bible says that there
>>> was no help for him while you posit tens of thousands of
>>> people living in the valley, lots of women, with more
>>> elsewhere on earth.
>>>
>>> How does the notion that Noah simply stayed aboard the ark
>>> for two seasons work? I can imagine him stuck on a sand bar
>>> where there was at least an area of the ark from which he
>>> could drop a bucket to draw water for the creatures aboard.
>>> This would not help the food problem unless he could barter
>>> with the locals. But Mesopotamia has a distinct lack of
>>> wood. Would a mass of wood as big as the ark not be salvaged
>>> by the locals?
>>>
>>> Floods flow downstream, with increased speed as there is
>>> more water. If the ark were in the current, it would head
>>> for the Persian Gulf. If it got into an area where water
>>> overflowed the banks, the water would be ponding and going
>>> nowhere. So how did the ark head upstream to the area of
>>> Ararat? Or is this an inaccuracy that does not disturb the
>>> message?
>>> Dave (ASA)
>>>
>>> On Tue, 07 Apr 2009 14:44:03 -0400 "Dick Fischer"
>>> <dickfischer@verizon.net<mailto:dickfischer@verizon.net>>
>>> writes:
>>> Hi Bernie:
>>>
>>> You raise a valid point, one that I have asked myself for
>>> many years. The broad question is whether or not there was
>>> a flood, and if there was, when was it and what was the
>>> extent? I think that question can be answered readily. The
>>> question you raise is the accuracy of the account. Did the
>>> Bible writer get all his facts straight? If there are
>>> mistakes in the narrative, are there enough to discount or
>>> disbelieve the entire narrative in Genesis altogether?
>>>
>>> Compared to the parallel flood accounts the one in Genesis
>>> is the odd one out on the subject of duration. Parallel
>>> accounts describe a week long voyage while Noah's trip
>>> in Genesis takes a year. But whatever the case, mistake or
>>> not, scribal error or not, that is no reason to jump to some
>>> other position that can't be defended by anything.
>>>
>>> Rainy seasons are annual events in Iraq occurring in the
>>> spring when the snow melts on the mountains in the north and
>>> surges down the rivers on to the flat plain that is southern
>>> Mesopotamia. If there were two back to back flood episodes,
>>> and Noah chose to remain in the boat to ride out two rainy
>>> seasons, that could take a year and might explain the long
>>> voyage in Genesis versus the short voyage in the parallel
>>> accounts. I'm only throwing that out as one possible
>>> explanation.
>>>
>>> So, say my guess is wrong. In court trials where witnesses
>>> give their accounts of a crime they have seen rarely are all
>>> testimonies exactly the same. Perspectives differ,
>>> perceptions aren't the same, memories vary. Yet the
>>> judge or jury must decide guilt or innocence on the totality
>>> of evidence presented. Conflicting testimonies are normal
>>> and to be expected.
>>>
>>> I agree the primary focus should be on the theological
>>> lessons based upon the historical narrative. If the
>>> historical account was a fabrication, however, would that
>>> not also call into question the theological lessons derived
>>> therefrom?
>>>
>>> Dick Fischer, GPA president
>>> Genesis Proclaimed Association
>>> "Finding Harmony in Bible, Science and History"
>>> www.genesisproclaimed.org<http://www.genesisproclaimed.org>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
>>> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Dehler,
>>> Bernie
>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 12:22 PM
>>> Cc: ASA
>>> Subject: RE: [asa] Noah's Ark- the debate over
>>> floods... and biblical interpretation
>>>
>>> Hi Dick- Scientifically, the problem with a local flood is
>>> that there's no way the water could be contained for a
>>> year. You need a bowl shape to do that, and there is no
>>> bowl shape. How were the rivers dammed-up? If you believe
>>> in a flood, how long do you think Noah was floating on an
>>> ark- for about a year as the bible indicates?
>>>
>>> Ancient history is full of myths, so it would be no
>>> surprise to find another. However, the Lamoureux position,
>>> which I represent, says the history and science of the Bible
>>> is incidental- the theology is what the Bible is good for.
>>> It uses the science and history of the day to give theology.
>>>
>>> Don't worry about pile-up's on me- I usually find
>>> them humorous if they happen ;-)
>>>
>>> ...Bernie
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
>>> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Dick
>>> Fischer
>>> Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 8:55 AM
>>> To: 'Merv Bitikofer'
>>> Cc: ASA
>>> Subject: RE: [asa] Noah's Ark- the debate over
>>> floods... and biblical interpretation
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't mean to "pile on" anybody, especially
>>> a brother in Christ. It's just that I feel a little
>>> frustration, like a rancher whose barn catches on fire and
>>> as soon as he pulls the horses out they run back in again.
>>> Admittedly the evidence for Adam that I've talked about
>>> on this list for many years now, while tantalizing, is less
>>> than conclusive. But the total evidence for a flood in
>>> southern Mesopotamia around 2900 BC is overwhelming in my
>>> judgment.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> As for a global flood, the Nephilim (giants) in Gen. 6:4
>>> are ancestral to the Anakim in Num. 13:33. If the
>>> Pentateuch itself tells us there are flood survivors then
>>> the flood cannot be global nor did the writer(s) of Genesis
>>> think it was. Add to that the Sumerian king list that
>>> enumerates pre-flood kings and post-flood kings and the
>>> absence of any geological evidence, and that should settle
>>> it. End of debate.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The flood was local to the immediate area and judgment on
>>> Noah's kin.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dick Fischer, GPA president
>>>
>>> Genesis Proclaimed Association
>>>
>>> "Finding Harmony in Bible, Science and History"
>>>
>>> www.genesisproclaimed.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
>>> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On Behalf Of Merv
>>> Bitikofer
>>> Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 10:49 PM
>>> To: asa
>>> Subject: Re: [asa] Noah's Ark- the debate over
>>> floods... and biblical interpretation
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, since Dick may have started a "let's pile on
>>> Bernie" activity, I
>>>
>>> don't want to feel left out; so I challenge you, Bernie
>>> on a different
>>>
>>> point. Why does attempting to be faithful to both the Bible
>>> and science
>>>
>>> weaken the testimony of both? If somebody's
>>> *understanding* of the Bible
>>>
>>> becomes clearly seen to be false, (whether shown by other
>>> deeper
>>>
>>> Biblical insights, science, or anything else) then that
>>> *understanding*
>>>
>>> should be shed for the millstone it is, and the remaining
>>> faith, if it
>>>
>>> ever was true, should get clearer focus with another false
>>> prop removed.
>>>
>>> Pity the one, though, who was hoisted up using a false prop
>>> but hasn't
>>>
>>> yet crawled off it onto a sturdier foundation. How many of
>>> us have been
>>>
>>> vulnerable like that? --I swallow my own flippancy. The
>>> only sure
>>>
>>> foundation I ever had is Christ.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --Merv
>>>
>>> (from the top-of-the-head stuff is fun, Bernie, if you
>>> don't mind being
>>>
>>> picked on and having it picked apart later.)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dehler, Bernie wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > Here's my take, from the top of my head:
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > Global flood:
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > Strength: The Bible appears to be reporting real
>>> history, and this
>>>
>>> > interpretation treats it as such.
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > Weakness: Almost completely ignores evidence from
>>> modern science.
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > Local Flood:
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > Strength: It tries to integrate the story of the Bible
>>> with scientific
>>>
>>> > evidence.
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > Weakness: Tries to be faithful to both the Bible and
>>> science and in so
>>>
>>> > doing, weakens the testimony of both.
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > No Flood:
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > Strength: Most closely aligns to scientific evidence
>>> from geology and
>>>
>>> > biology.
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > Weakness: Destroys faith in the Bible as
>>> "inerrant" in matters of
>>>
>>> > history and science.
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > ...Bernie
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>>
>>> > From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu
>>> [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]
>>>
>>> > On Behalf Of gordon brown
>>>
>>> > Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 2:04 PM
>>>
>>> > To: asa@calvin.edu
>>>
>>> > Subject: Re: [asa] Noah's Ark- the debate over
>>> floods... and biblical
>>>
>>> > interpretation
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > On Mon, 6 Apr 2009, Dehler, Bernie wrote:
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > > I'm going to be debating Noah's Ark-
>>> global flood, local flood, or no
>>>
>>> > flood. I'm taking the no flood position.
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > >
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > > Curious-
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > >
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > > What all do you think would be the best argument
>>> for each position?
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > >
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > > Please keep your answers short- no essays.
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > >
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > > Info on my event:
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > > http://www.meetup.com/sciligion/calendar/9503416/
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > >
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > > ...Bernie
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>> > >
>>>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
>>>
>>> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the
>>> message.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>> Research online bachelor degrees from leading universities
>>> today.<http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2142/fc/BLSrjpTL9zcKM5oequNo5FSc0lpph9Qmg522eAYUELcXLdE9S6C1kdeyUCE/>
>>
>> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
>> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Apr 10 15:42:49 2009