Rowland's site
Blobert!
from the ng; I spent a good while perusing his site this afternoon, and it
is far worse than I imagined.
I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and find
profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic possession. But
now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher.
And any man that stands by him and Mark Tindall surely has no idea
whatsoever of what being a Christian is all about.
If this is Christianity in Australia, Australia is in deep trouble.
Bob<><
Mark T
<baa and blah deleted>
A new Trew Kristyun commandment I give unto you, That you luv one another as
long as they are Trew Kristyuns ... hunt out the other heretical buggers in
a Trew Kristyun Inquisition and burn them alive at the stake ... in Trew
Kristyun luv. - Mark 17:666 (Trew Kristyun Version )
Please note - If you do not have the same beliefs as we do, you are going to
burn in Hell forever.
ROCK
"I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and find
profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic possession. But
now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher."
I say:
You missed the porn links I see. He has those also.
"Blobert!" <OneN...@Under.Blob> wrote in message
news:939Wc.804$Y%3....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
Mark T
> You missed the porn links I see.
Find Christian Porn at
Bradley
news:epmdnT8V1cl...@comcast.com
> You Said:
> "I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and find
> profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic
> possession. But now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher."
>
> I say:
> You missed the porn links I see. He has those also.
Anyone like to provide some links to back up their statements?
<snip>
--
regards,
Bradley
pedro
> I knew the man was a hypocritical anti-Christian loon, but only just
> from the ng; I spent a good while perusing his site this afternoon, and it
> is far worse than I imagined.
It's surprising that anyone goes there. The look of him is enough to
frighten anyone away! :)
> I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and find
> profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic possession. But
> now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher.
> And any man that stands by him and Mark Tindall surely has no idea
> whatsoever of what being a Christian is all about.
Blobert.. how do you reconcile Wowlands 'anti-christianity' with the
fact that he continually posts articles on the ng's here informing of
Christian persecution worldwide?
> If this is Christianity in Australia, Australia is in deep trouble.
> Bob<><
>
Bob.. take a look at this-
--
rgds,
Pete.
-----
http://pedro.spyw.com
'Press any key...no, no, no, NOT THAT ONE!'
Qolon
15:25:09 PDT = [#26, #10 *, #66, #5 - Natural Guidance/ The Function of
Emptiness, (#54, #28) as Jeconiah - preparation, or stability, of the Lord
{Autonomous Nature}]
Sun, 22 Aug 2004 = [#27, #24, #24, #55 - Abstruse Signs/ The Signet of the
Mysterious, (#35, #47 *) as Boaz - in strength {Harmony? (Nature surmounts
Nature / Transforming Nature)}]
"Blobert!" <OneN...@Under.Blob> wrote in message
news:939Wc.804$Y%3....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
QOLON NOTE:
If we take perhaps take the example of the anonymous user Brother Bob <bob
@bob .bob > with whom you have corresonded, "in a couple of posts you
questioned the validity of my ordination to Christian ministry. I'm assuming
this was without malice, and an honest enquiry. You're a biblical Christian
and wouldn't act with malice... " [ Rowland Croucher 2004-05-24 15:19:18
PST]
It has been my singular expereince that the individual not only writes
incoherently, but with malice, "I am not the least bit concerned what dolt
does. I've been standing amazed by his ignorance for 5 years. OK, what do
you want, all possible Lagrange points for Ganymede? Pi to how many
decimals? Why are queers going to hell? Whatever......." [Thursday, July
01, 2004 9:10 AM]
And that with their definitive knowledge of psychiatric pharmaceuticals,
there is notionally a view which may be raised concerning their claim to
Christianity, that questionably it contains no rationality: "There are
wonderful new anti-psychotic medications that can help. I'd recommend 200mg
bid Anafranil with 50mg Zyprexa at bedtime. If not; ECT at 2000 volts for 2
hours, twelve times daily should do the trick." [Thursday, July 01, 2004
4:35 AM
Indeed I responded to Bob , that "Those [who] have such a familarisation of
psychotropic drugs as to be acquainted within their marketing brandnames are
usually only those who use them on prescription (ie. subject to diagnosis)
or have the social responsibility to dispense them (ie. a doctor or
pharmacist).
Whether this is due to failure of his belief system or the incongruity of
his 'christian' lifestyle, I cannot tell... but [while] he seems to be still
capable of making autonomous {autos / one's true self, the soul + nomos /
Torah} choices, he is incongruously dismissive of ethical behavior because
he doesn't have to abide by a set of moral codes, as he feels free to
determine their own conscience based on his own desires as appetite.
Evidently the pills don't stop him being incontinent."
As I've indicated to you previously. Evidently Bob is simply conveying more
of his anti-semitism as frequent instances of religious overbearing and
intolerance, and which he now extends to include: Seventh-day Adventists,
Mormons [Church of Jesus Christ and Latter Day Saints] and Freemasons--As
though we need his permission to hold a belief, thought and conscience as a
religious value statement that is inclusive of ourselves as human, religious
and Constitutional right.
- dolf
- < http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/telos/kabbalah/patent.html#AXIOM4 >
ROCK
"Mark T" <ma...@home.in.oz> wrote in message
news:4129...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
::: vera :::
I wnated to keep you informed about your success in the world, Mark Tindall,
and there is the latest news related to your activities:
==================================================
Religious Freedom in Laos: Persecution Alongside Progress
Fresh news has emerged of arrests and intimidation of Christians in Laos.
August 20, 2004 (Christian Solidarity Worldwide) -- Four believers from Kasy
District in Vientiane Province were arrested on 2nd August 2004 and are
currently detained. Two of them, Khamsay and Thong Soun, are Christian
leaders from Vieng Samay village. The other two, Khamphaay and Pheang, are
from Hua Muang village. The authorities have been coercing Christians in Hua
Muang village to renounce their faith, with intimidation so intense that
eight families have already given in to the pressure.
Vieng Samay village has also been the scene of intense persecution designed
to force Christians to renounce their faith. Believers have been
particularly targeted after a witchdoctor blamed six deaths on spiritual
conflict caused by the faith of the Christians. The villagers rose up in
response to drive the Christians out of the village. However the Christian
leaders refused to leave. The Christians initially appealed to the District
Governor, who refused to simply accept the witchdoctor's account.
The arrests take place in the conflicting context of ongoing pressure
alongside significant steps of overall progress regarding religious freedom
in Laos. The numbers of believers detained have dropped dramatically and a
number of churches that were closed have been re-opened. Nevertheless
pressure remains high in areas, with anti-Christian rhetoric, intimidation
and harsh measures still used to force Christians to abandon their faith.
For example, on 11th August 2004 Mr Nouhak Phoumsavan, Advisor to the
President, held a meeting in Savannakhet City to stop Christians gathering
in homes throughout the province. The believers are only allowed to assemble
in church buildings that have government permission, with believers in the
whole of Champon District only allowed to meet in one church.
Similar pressure has been applied in Chonburi District in Savannakhet
Province. The district only has three churches: Gyongya Church, Nongana
Church and Nongbou Church. Yet the Chonburi district chief ordered
Christians to cease meeting in the Gyongya Church as from 1st August 2004,
even though the church has been a place of worship for many years. The
believers have been told that they are not allowed to worship unless they
obtain permission from the central authorities to assemble.
The pressure is also being applied in the capital. A house church which has
operated without problems for two years in the city of Vientiane was ordered
to close on Sunday 2nd May 2004. About 45 people came to the church that day
and cried loudly when they were told that they would not be able to meet
there together anymore.
A further example of persecution suffered by believers is that in Nam Thuam
village where harsh pressure has been exerted by local authorities. Between
March and April 2004 the police forced Christians to remain at home and
prevented them from tending their rice fields. The authorities then insisted
that the Christians feed them every day. It is reported that at the end of
this ordeal the authorities burnt their rice fields and took their
citizenship papers. This persecution was so intense it succeeded in forcing
the believers to officially resign from the Christian faith.
However, on a more positive note, there has been progress over the treatment
of believers in the district of Sanamchai in Attapeu Province, where lands
and livestock were confiscated and death threats were made against
Christians in February 2004. In an encouraging development, Christians who
had been imprisoned and evicted from their homes were able to gather to
worship in the homes of their leaders in Banmai village and in the city of
Sanamchai at the beginning of August.
CSW's National Director Stuart Windsor said: 'While we commend the positive
developments that have occurred regarding religious freedom in Laos, we
continue to be concerned about the ongoing incidents of persecution of
Christians in the country. We call for the release of those imprisoned and
for true respect for religious freedom.'
http://www.worthynews.com/christian-persecution/laos-freedom-persecution.htm
l
=================================================
Sleep well tonight if you can
::: vera :::
--
::: http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de :::
::: http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de/Israel.htm :::
::: vera :::
pedro <pe...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> Blobert! wrote:
>
>> I knew the man was a hypocritical anti-Christian loon, but only
>> just from the ng; I spent a good while perusing his site this
>> afternoon, and it is far worse than I imagined.
>
> It's surprising that anyone goes there. The look of him is enough to
> frighten anyone away! :)
>
>> I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and
>> find profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic
>> possession. But now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher.
>> And any man that stands by him and Mark Tindall surely has no
>> idea whatsoever of what being a Christian is all about.
>
> Blobert.. how do you reconcile Wowlands 'anti-christianity' with the
> fact that he continually posts articles on the ng's here informing of
> Christian persecution worldwide?
I am not Blobert, but maybe he wants to inform Mark about his good success
in the world?
Or he wants to make a good impression. It is a good advertising for his
13,000+.
>> If this is Christianity in Australia, Australia is in deep
>> trouble. Bob<><
>>
>
> Bob.. take a look at this-
>
> http://www.wrighteous.net
As far as I know it is ROCK'S website - I like it very much, it is
excellent, and done with much love.
God's Bless,
::: vera :::
I found this just on the run:
http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/4884.htm
Rowland recommends porn and masturbation.
Blobert!
> You Said:
> "I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and find
> profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic possession.
But
> now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher."
>
> I say:
> You missed the porn links I see. He has those also.
Why am I not surprized?
Blobert!
"pedro" <pe...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:412975b1$0$30602$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Blobert! wrote:
>
> > I knew the man was a hypocritical anti-Christian loon, but only just
> > from the ng; I spent a good while perusing his site this afternoon, and
it
> > is far worse than I imagined.
>
> It's surprising that anyone goes there. The look of him is enough to
> frighten anyone away! :)
I wasn't going to say anything, but he could play Uncle Ernie in a stage
version of "Tommy".
>
> > I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and
find
> > profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic possession.
But
> > now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher.
> > And any man that stands by him and Mark Tindall surely has no idea
> > whatsoever of what being a Christian is all about.
>
> Blobert.. how do you reconcile Wowlands 'anti-christianity' with the
> fact that he continually posts articles on the ng's here informing of
> Christian persecution worldwide?
You seem to be knowledgeable militarily; you do know that warships carry
smoke generators capable of emitting a cubic mile of smokescreen in short
order, eh?! He is either using it as a smokescreen or possibly =encouraging=
them to commit even more atrocities. I didn't think much of Rowland before,
but this is the last straw.
>
> > If this is Christianity in Australia, Australia is in deep trouble.
> > Bob<><
> >
>
> Bob.. take a look at this-
>
> http://www.wrighteous.net
>
POPSEC on the ball!
Blobert<><
Mordecai!
::: vera ::: wrote:
Pardon? Did you read the article?
It discusses masturbation - from a few points of view. Including the liberal and conservative - the medical
and the issues of individuals ..
it certainly does NOT recommend it ...
Is it a sin to take out something from a closet which everyone else is hiding it ... and look at it?
How many pastors have to deal with this issue in their congregations? In counselling individual people? I
suppose pastors are to find the answers on their own and not discuss it - after all, merely to discuss such a
problem is obviously "recommending porn and masturbation."
I do not usually bother to go to other's sites - I am not interested. You want to talk? talk.
But Rowland has said he wants the hard issues to be discussed and people to be free to think about them.
This article does exactly that - discusses a topic most people refuse to discuss - presents a variety of
points of view - and allows the individual to choose which of the many approaches they prefer and how they (as
an individual) might respond to the issue.
What is your own personal standard WRT masturbation - and why?
Blobert!
"::: vera :::" <ver...@acc-growing-deeper.de> wrote in message
news:2ou34oF...@uni-berlin.de...
> In news:FkbWc.3431$D7....@news-server.bigpond.net.au,
> Bradley <no_jun...@address.com> wrote:
> > "ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
> > news:epmdnT8V1cl...@comcast.com
> >> You Said:
> >> "I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and
> >> find profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic
> >> possession. But now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher."
> >>
> >> I say:
> >> You missed the porn links I see. He has those also.
> >
> > Anyone like to provide some links to back up their statements?
ROTFLMAO!!!!!
Bradley is the webmaster and wants to play Mr. Innocent with us about
the content he's posted. LOL!!!!
Ninure Saunders
<no_jun...@address.com> wrote:
-"ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
-news:epmdnT8V1cl...@comcast.com
-> You Said:
-> "I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and find
-> profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic
-> possession. But now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher."
->
-> I say:
-> You missed the porn links I see. He has those also.
-
-Anyone like to provide some links to back up their statements?
Well of coirse they won't...because they are engaging in lies and slander.
It is amazing to me that people who claim to be Christian, who claim that
the Bible is not only is God's literal word/dictated word have no problem
in ignoring what the Bibe says about insults, slander, lies, and the
like.
Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
http://Rainbow-Christian.tk
Take my polls
http://ninure.100megsfree5.com
My Yahoo Group
http://Ninure.tk
My Online Diary
http://www.ninure.deardiary.net
-
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.MCCchurch.org
The Bible Site - help provide free scripture
http://www.thebiblesite.org
To send e-mail, remove nohate from address
Ninure Saunders
-I gotta laugh at this one Mark, because only you would have a reply link.
-
-"Mark T" <ma...@home.in.oz> wrote in message
-news:4129...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
-"ROCK" wrote:
-
-> You missed the porn links I see.
-
-
-Find Christian Porn at
-
-http://www.recoveryman.com/dox/porn.htm
Os that link on Rowland Croucher's site?
No, it is not.
Was that link posted by Rowland Croucher?
No it was not.
You are therefore a liar, and a slanderer.
Pastor Dave
Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:20:10 GMT,
RainbowChri...@Rainbow-Christian.tk (Ninure
Saunders) screamed out:
>In article <FkbWc.3431$D7....@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, "Bradley"
><no_jun...@address.com> wrote:
>
>-"ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
>-news:epmdnT8V1cl...@comcast.com
>-> You Said:
>-> "I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and find
>-> profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic
>-> possession. But now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher."
>->
>-> I say:
>-> You missed the porn links I see. He has those also.
>-
>-Anyone like to provide some links to back up their statements?
>
>
>Well of coirse they won't...because they are engaging in lies and slander.
>
>It is amazing to me that people who claim to be Christian, who claim that
>the Bible is not only is God's literal word/dictated word have no problem
>in ignoring what the Bibe says about insults, slander, lies, and the
>like.
Slander and lies are never good. But what really
amazes me, are those who claim to be Christian, who try
to twist God's word into something that says that
homosexual fornication is righteousness before God.
--
Pastor Dave Raymond
"Were they ashamed when they made an abomination?
They were not at all ashamed, nor did they know
to blush. So they shall fall among those who fall.
At the time I visit them, they shall be cast down,
says Jehovah." - Jeremiah 6:15
"And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of
the Spirit, which is the word of God:" - Ephesians 6:17
/
o{}xxxxx[]::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::>
\
http://www.drdino.com/cse.asp?pg=real_video
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
pedro
> In article <X8qdnZ1AkYj...@comcast.com>, "ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote:
>
> -I gotta laugh at this one Mark, because only you would have a reply link.
> -
> -"Mark T" <ma...@home.in.oz> wrote in message
> -news:4129...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> -"ROCK" wrote:
> -
> -> You missed the porn links I see.
> -
> -
> -Find Christian Porn at
> -
> -http://www.recoveryman.com/dox/porn.htm
>
> Os that link on Rowland Croucher's site?
>
> No, it is not.
>
> Was that link posted by Rowland Croucher?
>
> No it was not.
>
> You are therefore a liar, and a slanderer.
And you need to read better. ROCK never said that was the link he saw.
And it's not a real porn link anyway.
--
rgds,
Pete.
-----
http://pedro.spyw.com
'A printer consists of three main parts: the case, the jammed paper tray
and the blinking red light'
Blobert!
news:bnvji096vm3nbnh1s...@4ax.com...
> While skydiving off of the Empire State Building on
> Mon, 23 Aug 2004 14:20:10 GMT,
> RainbowChri...@Rainbow-Christian.tk (Ninure
> Saunders) screamed out:
>
> >In article <FkbWc.3431$D7....@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, "Bradley"
> ><no_jun...@address.com> wrote:
> >
> >-"ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
> >-news:epmdnT8V1cl...@comcast.com
> >-> You Said:
> >-> "I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and find
> >-> profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic
> >-> possession. But now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher."
> >->
> >-> I say:
> >-> You missed the porn links I see. He has those also.
> >-
> >-Anyone like to provide some links to back up their statements?
> >
> >
> >Well of coirse they won't...because they are engaging in lies and
slander.
> >
> >It is amazing to me that people who claim to be Christian, who claim that
> >the Bible is not only is God's literal word/dictated word have no problem
> >in ignoring what the Bibe says about insults, slander, lies, and the
> >like.
If she wants to find it; it won't take her long. But I'm not doing her
footwork for her; what would be the point? She'd just clam up and sulk.....
Ninure Saunders
<pe...@nowhere.com> wrote:
-Ninure Saunders wrote:
-
-> In article <X8qdnZ1AkYj...@comcast.com>, "ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote:
->
-> -I gotta laugh at this one Mark, because only you would have a reply link.
-> -
-> -"Mark T" <ma...@home.in.oz> wrote in message
-> -news:4129...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
-> -"ROCK" wrote:
-> -
-> -> You missed the porn links I see.
-> -
-> -
-> -Find Christian Porn at
-> -
-> -http://www.recoveryman.com/dox/porn.htm
->
-> Os that link on Rowland Croucher's site?
->
-> No, it is not.
->
-> Was that link posted by Rowland Croucher?
->
-> No it was not.
->
-> You are therefore a liar, and a slanderer.
-
-And you need to read better. ROCK never said that was the link he saw.
No?
Then what did he mean by:
"You missed the porn links I see."
-And it's not a real porn link anyway.
Of course it isn't.
Just like there are NO porn links on Rpwland's site.
But apprently ROCK either fif not know that..or did not mind lying.
-
-
---
-rgds,
-
-Pete.
------
-
Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
http://Rainbow-Christian.tk
The Lord is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
::: vera :::
Mordecai!" <"mldavis[please dont spam] <"mldavis[please dont
spam]"@internode.on.net> wrote:
>>>> vera ::: wrote:
>
>> In news:FkbWc.3431$D7....@news-server.bigpond.net.au,
>> Bradley <no_jun...@address.com> wrote:
>>> "ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
>>> news:epmdnT8V1cl...@comcast.com
>>>> You Said:
>>>> "I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and
>>>> find profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic
>>>> possession. But now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher."
>>>>
>>>> I say:
>>>> You missed the porn links I see. He has those also.
>>>
>>> Anyone like to provide some links to back up their statements?
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>
>> I found this just on the run:
>>
>> http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/4884.htm
>>
>> Rowland recommends porn and masturbation.
>
> Pardon? Did you read the article?
As I said - on the run.
> It discusses masturbation - from a few points of view. Including the
> liberal and conservative - the medical and the issues of individuals
> ..
>
> it certainly does NOT recommend it ...
That is how he summarizes it himself:
><> ><> start quote from Rowland Croucher's article ><> ><>
Summary:
The Bible says nothing specifically in favor or against masturbation. Sorry
about that.
><> ><> end quote from Rowland Croucher's article ><> ><>
The Bible is quite clear with that topic (though does not mention it
literally - it seems Rowland Croucher takes the Bible more literally than me
when it pleases him):
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> Know ye not
that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of
Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. What? know ye
not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he,
shall be one flesh. But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit. Flee
fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that
committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. What? know ye not that
your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of
God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore
glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's. (1
Corinthians 6:15-20 KJV)
<>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <>< <><
Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery,
fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred,
variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders,
drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I
have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not
inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace,
longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against
such there is no law. And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh
with the affections and lusts. If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in
the Spirit. Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another,
envying one another. (Galatians 5:19-26 KJV)
><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
In Germany we call it "Unzucht" - which means all sexual actions that take
place outside of a marriage. It is a sin, yes.
> Is it a sin to take out something from a closet which everyone else
> is hiding it ... and look at it?
Yes, many websites do so, they even show pictures.
Does this also have to be on a Christian website? Who does Mr. Croucher want
to please? Those who have a problem with sin. But instead of helping them to
overcome, he encourages them to go on.
> How many pastors have to deal with this issue in their congregations?
> In counselling individual people? I suppose pastors are to find the
> answers on their own and not discuss it - after all, merely to
> discuss such a problem is obviously "recommending porn and
> masturbation."
Such matters belong into a private conversation between two people.
> I do not usually bother to go to other's sites - I am not interested.
> You want to talk? talk.
> But Rowland has said he wants the hard issues to be discussed and
> people to be free to think about them.
He can do so - but not with the label "CHRISTIAN" on it.
> This article does exactly that - discusses a topic most people refuse
> to discuss - presents a variety of points of view - and allows the
> individual to choose which of the many approaches they prefer and how
> they (as an individual) might respond to the issue.
>
> What is your own personal standard WRT masturbation - and why?
As I said above, it is a sin - not a very big one, but a sin. It can be a
bigger one the more important it becomes for people.
G-d's Bless,
::: vera :::
There are Bible bashing links to these page on Rowland Croucher's website,
too: http://www.evilbible.com/ and http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/
... and another link to a wesite that encourages born again believers to
give up their faith: http://www.angelfire.com/pa/greywlf/
I quote from there:
"This website has been created to support those who have decided to leave
born again fundamentalism, who are in the process of leaving it or are
thinking about leaving. It is for those who have begun to think for
themselves. It is for those who have questions and aren't sure.
Walking away can be a very difficult process. If you have made or are making
that decision, may these pages be helpful in your journey.
This site is not intended to take anyone away from a spiritual belief in
which he or she is comfortable and does not wish to leave. It is intended to
reveal the truth about born again fundamentalist Christianity to anyone who
wishes to know it."
This linklist http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/13261.htm is also
very interesting!!! I will quote the beginning:
"The Foolishness of Fundamentalism
Some of you have been posting some great comic articles that really present
the foolishness of fundamentalism well. I would like to encourage you to
post more. These wonderful newsgroups are worthy of our support, and your
articles will have a wider outreach...."
Could it be worse than that? They are really supporting each other in
bashing fundamental Christians. Links on that list are - for example:
http://www.landoverbaptist.org/
http://www.cheesyjesus.com/online-store/scstore/
http://www.biblesexstories.com/
and others.
*sigh heavily*
I hope that soon all will know what cuckoos they have in the nest.
How can serious Christians support such a bashing?
God's Bless,
Qolon
- dolf
"::: vera :::" <ver...@acc-growing-deeper.de> wrote in message
news:2outcqF...@uni-berlin.de...
ROCK
"Anyone like to provide some links to back up their statements?"
I Say:
Here is your link
http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/948.htm
"Bradley" <no_jun...@address.com> wrote in message
news:FkbWc.3431$D7....@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
"ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
news:epmdnT8V1cl...@comcast.com
> You Said:
> "I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and find
> profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic
> possession. But now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher."
>
> I say:
> You missed the porn links I see. He has those also.
<snip>
--
regards,
Bradley
ROCK
Nudity And Sex
http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/948.htm
"Ninure Saunders" <RainbowChri...@Rainbow-Christian.tk> wrote in
message
news:RainbowChristiannoh...@h-68-164-224-83.chcgilgm.dynamic.covad.net...
ROCK
Of course he will remove it before others see it. Below is from his site.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
Nudity And Sex
G'day all.
A 'Net friend writes:
>Melbourne's Moomba celebrations at the weekend included a parade that in
>the words of the Melbourne Herald Sun newspaper gave melburnians the
>'sock treatment' with "topless street artists and raunchy floats
>spicing up a traditional family day".
[...]
>So I would ask what is it that we are supposedly needing to look forward
>to? One spectator commented "I personally thought it's gone to paganism,
>and completely disintegrated from something children enjoy." So is this
>the future that Mr. Scobie speaks of? A pagan festival that we need to
>hide from our children? As these events seek to outdo themselves each
>year, can we look forward some way down the track to naked couples
>copulating on city streets???
This is not directed at you in particular, Peter, but I've never understood
why when people are on the topic of nudity, they immediately leap to the
topic of sex. I don't understand why the two concepts are so tightly coupled
(to use an unfortunate term).
The fact that some partial nudity at Moomba immediately brings to mind the
Sydney Mardi Gras (where sex _is_ a more common theme) and suggests that
next year we might find explicit sex in the parade IMO says more about our
insecurity with nudity than the intent of the parade organisers.
>That maybe an exaggeration, and I'm no
>prude, but there has been a constant trend towards nakedness in live
>theatrical productions, the film industry, and all forms of media.
The uncovered human body has always been with us in our art, from
prehistoric times to the present. There just happened to be less of it in
the Western world between the Victorian era and the mid-20th century. There
was a similar coyness in the counter-reformation era, as my wife has just
informed me, so nudity probably just goes in and out of fashion.
I think I understand what you mean, though. There's a qualitative difference
between Manet's "Olympia" and http://www.hotporn.com (haven't checked to see
if that's a real web site, but it probably is), and the difference is good
versus bad taste. I think that rather than a trend towards the unclothed,
what you're noticing is a trend towards pulp media. That is, the amount of
rubbish is increasing at the same time as nudity is becoming more
acceptible, so we're seeing a lot of bad uses of nudity.
>The children of Israel descended into paganism in the
>wilderness and were punished by God.
There's a difference between nudity and worship of idols, too.
Cheers, Andrew
top of page
© John Mark Ministries. Articles may be reproduced in any medium, without
applying for permission
(provided they are unedited, and retain the original author/copyright
information - and perhaps a reference to this website :-)!
"Ninure Saunders" <RainbowChri...@Rainbow-Christian.tk> wrote in
message
news:RainbowChristiannoh...@h-68-164-2-43.chcgilgm.dynamic.covad.net...
ROCK
on his site. Read below. Thank you.
http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/948.htm
Nudity And Sex
G'day all.
A 'Net friend writes:
[...]
>copulating on city streets???
Cheers, Andrew
news:RainbowChristiannoh...@h-68-164-224-83.chcgilgm.dynamic.covad.net...
::: vera :::
ROCK <n...@email.com> wrote:
> I hope you read this Ninure Saunders. I did NOT lie. there is a link
> to porn on his site. Read below. Thank you.
> http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/948.htm
>
> Nudity And Sex
>
>
>
>
> G'day all.
I saw that link too, and I have saved the page.
I wonder what all this on the pastornet pages has to do with God. But they
will say they have not written that article themselves and are not
responsible for anything.
God bless you,
Vera
ROCK
"Well of coirse they won't...because they are engaging in lies and slander.
It is amazing to me that people who claim to be Christian, who claim that
the Bible is not only is God's literal word/dictated word have no problem
in ignoring what the Bibe says about insults, slander, lies, and the
like.
But apprently ROCK either fif not know that..or did not mind lying."
I say:
I am not sure if I translated all that correctly. At any rate I hope your
day gets better.
GBU
"ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
news:fsmdnTl3j5c...@comcast.com...
sensi
Blobert! <OneN...@Under.Blob> wrote in message
news:939Wc.804$Y%3....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> from the ng; I spent a good while perusing his site this afternoon, and it
> is far worse than I imagined.
But
> now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher.
> whatsoever of what being a Christian is all about.
> If this is Christianity in Australia, Australia is in deep trouble.
> Bob<><
>
How come you always imagine the worst and then seek to find the worst?
Perhaps it has something to do with fund-a-mental cause. You look for cheap
tricks to fund your mental cause and then you bring them forth in ink with a
conceited emotional twist to set out to prove that Mr. Croucher falls
beneath your standards of Christianity and then you deem it a likelihood
that a whole country is in deep trouble all because they think different
than you.
You act like Christianity is all about you and no one else is allowed to
have
a view other than your view. Kind of conceited isn't it?
And that's what this fundamental thing that Mark keeps bringing to the
forefront
is really all about.
Some thoughts are so ugly you just want to kill them.
Kill the conceit and take up compassion, it is far more fitting of being
Christ-like.
Sincerely,
sensible2me
Jani
written "there is a qualitative difference between Manet's Olympia and an
Internet porn site", rather than making up the name of a supposed site as an
illustration?
Jani
"ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
news:tLmdnTgWmL4...@comcast.com...
ROCK
on the link. oh hmm.
"Jani" <ja...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
news:2ov7ntF...@uni-berlin.de...
Ninure Saunders
-http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/948.htm
-Of course he will remove it before others see it. Below is from his site.
And now since you posted it that article in three newsgroups...I can now
say that " ROCK post porn on the internet", correct?
That wouldn't be the least dishonest, would it?
Any reason why I should NOT?
Ninure Saunders
-I hope you read this Ninure Saunders. I did NOT lie. there is a link to porn
-on his site. Read below. Thank you.
-http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/948.htm
-
ROCK posts porn in the christian newsgroups!!
Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
http://Rainbow-Christian.tk
The Lord is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
::: vera :::
news:RainbowChristiannoh...@h-68-164-8-155.chcgilgm.dynamic
.covad.net,
Ninure Saunders <RainbowChri...@Rainbow-Christian.tk> wrote:
> In article <tLmdnTgWmL4...@comcast.com>, "ROCK"
> <n...@email.com> wrote:
>
> -http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/948.htm
> -Of course he will remove it before others see it. Below is from his
> site.
>
>
> And now since you posted it that article in three newsgroups...I can
> now
> say that " ROCK post porn on the internet", correct?
>
>
> That wouldn't be the least dishonest, would it?
It woild be a lie.
You called ROCK a liar and a slanderer. What about that?
> Any reason why I should NOT?
Because it would be a lie - he did not post any porn here. The link to the
por site, however was on Rowland Croucher's website. I am not sure if you
might see the difference. Then the motivation of posting that stuff was
quite different. What have such links to do on a Christian website? What
have your links to do here all the time? It does not interest any Christian
how often you commit a sexual sin - do it, or let it be, but don't tell
others to sin, too.
Your link list is really disgusting - as you do not care at all about your
fellow Christians who you mislead - or want to mislead - all the time. Who
is interested in your sexual life? Go to sex groups - there are really
enough of them, and take Mark Tindall and Rowland Croucher with you. You can
live happily ever after - I have no problem with that. Should Jesus really
touch you or them some day, please come back anytime.
> Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
> http://Rainbow-Christian.tk
>
> The Lord is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
> http://Ninure-Saunders.tk
>
> Take my polls
> http://ninure.100megsfree5.com
>
>
> My Yahoo Group
> http://Ninure.tk
>
> My Online Diary
> http://www.ninure.deardiary.net
> -
> Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
> http://www.MCCchurch.org
>
> The Bible Site - help provide free scripture
> http://www.thebiblesite.org
>
> To send e-mail, remove nohate from address
Your boldness is hard to top...
No, I will not sign that.
Mordecai!
::: vera ::: wrote:
Oh - well the article in question agrees it is a sin by all the theologians quoted - and discusses how big a
sin it is and compares how the various people discuss it.
It brings in "it is a big sin" to "it is a small sin" to it is "not a very important sin."
So we find that the article agrees with your position - looks at it from more than JUST your point of view and
they all come to almost the same position ... and allows people to come to an informed position on the subject
which all basically agree with your position ...
And it is wrong because it discusses it?
That is the part I find reprehensible. This is a discussion paper - not a theological standard. It is designed
to promote thought. It succeeds. It keeps to Christianity - agrees in this case with the NT - and with the
theological positions and indeed with your own position - and it is vilified not for deviant position but
BECAUSE IT DISCUSSES IT.
Now in Judaism - we have violent arguments about all sorts of things - taking some rather extreme
interpretations of verses ... throwing them into the mix.
Some are based on rather fanciful interpretations of words and grammar - some on literal meanings - and
everything is thrashed out. Sometimes we come to a conclusion and sometimes we do not.
That is what Lawrence is doing ... nothing more.
There are no links, no pictures, no suggestion of lewdity - nobody reading the article will be sexually
stimulated to go and masturbate ...
Indeed, I could not even find anything to suggest his own opinion on the subject - there were opinions by
others.
So my objection is that the charge against Rowland is that he has the temerity to allow people with different
opinions to discuss them ... and this is the real charge against him.
Your standard is there .. and so are other people's standards. The only point made is it is INTERPRETATION -
and that is the point he makes. It is interpretation. Nothing wrong with interpretation ... and if it is
interpretation - then other people have as much right to interpretation as yourself.
Jani
Jani
"ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
news:CsKdnWYeJuk...@comcast.com...
Russell McDade
> You Said:
> "Anyone like to provide some links to back up their statements?"
>
>
> I Say:
> Here is your link
> http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/948.htm
Dear 'ROCK', I don't wish to get involved in the disputes of others, but
I see that you are holding dear Rowland to a very high standard, in the
interests
of fair play I think that you should be held to the same standard. You said:
"You missed the porn links I see. He has those also."
Then you posted *a* link to Rowland's site that includes a link to a porn
site.
But your accusation is plural, you will need to provide evidence of more
than
one link or the charge against you stands. ...and with what measure ye mete,
it shall be measured to you again...
Russell
Barry OGrady
>"ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
>news:epmdnT8V1cl...@comcast.com...
>> You Said:
>> "I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and find
>> profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic possession.
>But
>> now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher."
>>
>> I say:
>> You missed the porn links I see. He has those also.
>
> Why am I not surprized?
Possibly because there is no such word as surprized?
>>
>> "Blobert!" <OneN...@Under.Blob> wrote in message
>> news:939Wc.804$Y%3....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>> I knew the man was a hypocritical anti-Christian loon, but only just
>> from the ng; I spent a good while perusing his site this afternoon, and it
>> is far worse than I imagined.
>> I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and find
>> profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic possession.
>But
>> now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher.
>> And any man that stands by him and Mark Tindall surely has no idea
>> whatsoever of what being a Christian is all about.
>> If this is Christianity in Australia, Australia is in deep trouble.
>> Bob<><
>>
>>
>>
>
-Barry
========
Web page: http://members.iinet.net.au/~barry.og
Atheist, radio scanner, LIPD information.
Barry OGrady
>In article <FkbWc.3431$D7....@news-server.bigpond.net.au>, "Bradley"
><no_jun...@address.com> wrote:
>
>-"ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
>-news:epmdnT8V1cl...@comcast.com
>-> You Said:
>-> "I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and find
>-> profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic
>-> possession. But now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher."
>->
>-> I say:
>-> You missed the porn links I see. He has those also.
>-
>-Anyone like to provide some links to back up their statements?
>
>
>Well of coirse they won't...because they are engaging in lies and slander.
>
>It is amazing to me that people who claim to be Christian, who claim that
>the Bible is not only is God's literal word/dictated word have no problem
>in ignoring what the Bibe says about insults, slander, lies, and the
>like.
And especially people who ignore what the Bible says about homosexuality, women,
and black people.
>Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
Mark T
> I gotta laugh at this one Mark, because only you would >have a reply link.
I don't know whether this is on Rowland's site or not ...but it should be.
The "Enter" sign moves all around the page so you never get to enter.
Another example of parody by Christians.
> > You missed the porn links I see.
> Find Christian Porn at
> http://www.recoveryman.com/dox/porn.htm
Mark T
> I found this just on the run:
>
> http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/4884.htm
>
> Rowland recommends porn and masturbation.
The full article.
Vera needs English comprehension lessons.
Silly little Kraut!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
'Masturbation is nothing to be ashamed of. It's not something to be
particularly proud of, either.' (Matt Groening)
There's a brand of milk in Australia called 'Big M'. On the 'Net, there's
also a big M, masturbation. The following (from various newsgroups) are
typical:
*** 'Addicted To Masturbation'
> 'I am a born again Christian and pornography is probably the one of the
toughest issues that I and probably everyone else face. The Lord let me know
that pornography was no longer something I needed nor was it EVER good for
me. I used to be the guy with a drawer full of Playboys in the bathroom and
I would masturbate every day! I also know that all of my friends have most
of their problems when it comes to pornographic and other sexual issues. I
am telling you that the Devil is really pouring on his attack right now and
everyday it's getting a little easier to get your hands on some of the junk.
Although I threw out every shred of pornography and cleaned out my hard
drive quite some time ago, I notice that my addiction to masturbation has in
no way been broken. The Devil is sneaky and it's absolutely true that he
attacks from behind and little by little people become enslaved. I am not
concerned any longer about salvation (I am a believer and know the grace of
the Lord - that is faith and not works)...
I have remained a virgin through all of this for which I am VERY thankful,
but I know that Christ reigns in glorious victory and I wish to become
stronger in His Spirit and I NEED some help all of this stuff.
The thing is that sex is everywhere!! I don't need to look at pornography. I
can open a People magazine and start to masturbate although I may not EVEN
HAVE ANY DESIRE to do some other then psychologically.
The truth is that I was on the Internet just about 30 minutes ago and I was
running all over the place looking for some pornography. Just a naked body,
that's all I wanted to see. I knew that it was certainly not a good thing,
but I find more and more porn every time I look and after I was through
masturbating I knew things were just not right and that I need some extra
insight into this particular struggle of mine.'
*** And another:
>> 'Hi fellow Christians, there is a question that has been bugging me for
the longest time, but have not spoken to anyone (except my husband) about it
because of its intimate nature: if masturbation is a sin, how is a woman
ever to attain orgasm (it is a known fact that most women cannot reach
orgasm during intercourse) then? I mean, sometimes I wonder, not at all
intending to be blasphemous, why is itthat men can achieve orgasm during
intercourse and most women cannot? I mean I understand the physiological
explanation, but if masturbation is a sin, then it makes me (as a woman)
feel that (do I dare say it?) that God *gulp* is not very fair about this!'
*** And another:
> 'I have been wondering why God has made the mechanism of women having
menstruations and men having wet dreams and yet call it "unclean" as in the
book of Leviticus. I guess the "unclean" here refers to poor hygiene and not
sin. Regarding masturbation, I know that lust is a form of adultery and
thinking about the act before putting it into action may be a sin, but what
about "fantasies"? Are fantasies sinful? And if it's just the action and
mechanism alone, is masturbation still sinful? I believe some of you out
there would think that God does not give boys penises to "play with
themselves" but eventually make love with a women and masturbation is
actually misusing the organ, then isn't sucking our thumb, bitting our
fingernails sinful too? Men have sex drives and it is very very difficult to
control it, and if the penis is only for sex alone (as well as urination)
then why did God give us the ability to erect (babies as well) even if we
are not having sex? Why doesn't he make it that only married men can have
sex? Why does he give people sexual feelings before marriage?'
*** A single woman, in her forties, a staff-member in a fundamentalist
church came for counseling. She'd been referred by her senior pastor, who
didn't know her 'problem', and she didn't want to tell him, but she said she
'needed to talk to someone about something.' She sat nervously on the edge
of the chair, briefly sketched some aspects of her history, and then paused
for a long time. Eventually she stuttered: 'Actually my problem's a terrible
one. My church preaches that I'll go to hell for doing this... It's the 'big
M'.' 'Oh,' I said, 'masturbation'...
Consider this:
*** 'Sexual release is just as important as any kind of emotional release.
Saying that you shouldn't masturbate is like saying that you shouldn't cry
when you're upset or hurt, or that you should hold in anger and other
emotions. I see no difference between sexual release and emotional release.
Not releasing will only result in stress and health problems. And I know
that I need no more stress in my life. I figure, if something helps a person
relieve stress, clear their mind, and make them feel better (that doesn't
hurt others, mind you), then more power to them'. (Woman on Internet
newsgroup).
Or, on the other hand, this:
*** The Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994 pp. 564-566) lists six
'Offenses against chastity': lust, masturbation, fornication, pornography,
prostitution, and rape. Masturbation (to which most space is given of the
six!), 'is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action'. However, some
'psychological and social factors' may 'lessen or even extenuate moral
culpability'...
Why is masturbation so controversial for most Christians? Is it simply a
'rub and tickle' that may be good for you? Or is it a habit the devil
especially encourages to induce destructive guilt and/or rob us of our
'sexual purity'? How did masturbation get such a 'bad rap' from so many
Christian preachers?
An Encyclopedia of Sexual Behaviour notes: 'No form of sexual activity has
been more frequently discussed, more roundly condemned and more universally
practised than masturbation.' (They say 90% of men masturbate and the other
10% are liars. No one knows how many women masturbate: estimates range from
30% to 90%).
In my counseling practice the subject comes up, almost always without any
prompting from me, at least once a fortnight. Men and women are concerned
about the fantasies - of real or imaginary people - as they 'do it'. For
some women, and a few men, involuntary orgasms are a problem - while
dreaming, or, for a woman recently, while she does her floor exercises. In
discussions about human sexuality on Internet newsgroups it may come in
second to homosexuality. The Internet search engine Alta Vista gave me
26,714 references to the noun (only 11,585 for the verb!). So a lot of
people are worried, angry, confused, guilty - or just plain thinking - about
masturbation.
The Conservative Approach
For conservative Christians - Catholic, Protestant and others - 'self-abuse'
is the misuse of the body, which is the temple of the indwelling spirit of
God. God intended the _process of procreation_ to be pleasurable, but to
seek that pleasure as an end in itself is - to varying degrees, depending on
the group - deadly folly. According to traditional medieval theology, the
body and its pleasures are to be treated with disdain. If you 'abuse'
yourself you may go insane or blind. Indeed the derivation of the word
(Latin 'manus' - hand, and 'stuprare' - to defile) has a pejorative
connotation. Pope Leo IX forbad masturbators from being admitted to sacred
orders. Aquinas believed masturbation was a worse sin than rape, incest, and
adultery (because in these other sins procreation is a possibility). The
Jansenists, in the seventeenth century held that the human body is
inherently evil.
I found this somewhere on the Net: 'Scientists compounded the fear and
loathing - like the 18th century Swiss physician Tissot who believed that
blood-flow changes during any kind of sex would cause nerve damage and
perhaps insanity; masturbation was especially hazardous. (Those who cared
for inmates of insane institutions noted how they frequently masturbated).
In the first published psychiatric text published in America, physician
Benjamin Rush attributed mania, seminal weakness, dimness of sight,
epilepsy, loss of memory, and even death to masturbation. Antimasturbatory
devices became available, including a tube lined with metal spikes that fit
over the penis. Until this century, young men were sometimes put to bed in
straitjackets or with their hands tied to bedposts to make sure they didn't
do it. Then there was Kellogg, the cornflakes man, who invented the cereal
as one element of a diet he thought would quench the sex drive. For those
masturbators whom snacks could not cure, Kellogg suggested circumcision
without anesthesia. Finally, around the turn of the century, (despite Freud,
who said masturbation may cause a neurosis characterized by fatigue, worry,
and lack of physical and mental alertness) physicians started to realize
that masturbation was not the evil earlier generations thought it was.
Still, it was not until 1940 that a respected textbook, "Diseases of Infancy
and Childhood," removed its discussion of masturbation from the chapter
titled "Functional and Nervous Disorders."'
For modern conservative Christians, the first question (and it's a good one)
usually is: 'What does the Bible say?' They have probably heard preachers
and campfire youth speakers quote these texts: 2 Corinthians 7:1: "Let us
cleanse ourselves of all filthiness of the flesh." Ephesians 4:22: "Laying
aside the old self, which is being corrupted in accordance with the lusts of
deceit." Romans 6:12: "Don't let sin reign in your mortal body that you
should obey its lusts." 1 Peter 2:1: "Lay aside all evil." Verse 11:
"Abstain from fleshly lusts, which wage war against the soul." Then, if the
preacher is warming to his (women don't preach on this, much) theme, he'll
cite the story of Onan and some passages from Leviticus.
Onan's sin (Genesis 38:4-10, 46:12, Numbers 26:19, 1 Chronicles 2:30 was not
masturbation but failure to impregnate his dead brothers' wife, Tamar. Under
the law, if a husband died without his wife having a child, the man's
brother was required to marry her and try to get her pregnant, so she would
not have to suffer the disgrace of being a woman without children. But Onan
didn't want any children of Tamar to be heirs to his brother's estate, so he
practised coitus interruptus to prevent her from conceiving. His punishment
wasn't for masturbating or coitus interruptus, it was for deliberately
disobeying a specific requirement of the ancient Mosaic law.
Then there's Leviticus 15:16-18: 'When a man has an emission of semen, he
must bathe his whole body with water, and he will be unclean till evening.
Any clothing or leather that has semen on it must be washed with water, and
it will be unclean till evening. When a man lies with a woman and there is
an emission of semen, both must bathe with water, and they will be unclean
till evening.' (See also Deuteronomy 23:10).
This moral/ceremonial requirement of the law has to be put into the context
of Israel's purification rituals. 'Who shall stand in the Lord's holy place?
Whoever has clean hands and a pure heart...' (Psalm 24:3,4). Most religions
have ceremonial rites associated with washing, and Israel was no exception.
The Israelites put 'unclean' things into five categories: some foods,
diseases (especially leprosy), bodily discharges, dead bodies, and idolatry.
I remember reading a book by a Dr. Macmillan ('None of These Diseases' -
it's still in print) which says that Jews have always had higher survival
rates (eg. during the Black Death) than others because of their purification
laws. For example in many Greek and Roman cities the dump was located in the
middle of the city. But God instructed the Israelites to take their garbage
outside the city. Similarly with washing your hands after touching a dead
body. These purification rites do not condemn masturbation (if anything, a
'discharge' is accepted as the sort of thing that frequently happens).
Summary:
The Bible says nothing specifically in favor or against masturbation. Sorry
about that.
The liberal approach
Masturbation and pornography are not evil in themselves according to many
liberal Christians. After all, it's your own body and your own private life
and may be a form of very safe sex.
I found this somewhere on the Net: 'Kinsey and the latest Sex in America
report show there's a whole lot of shaking going on. Today's sex researchers
have come to grips with the fact that masturbation has important physical
and emotional benefits for both men and women. 'Masturbation is a normal,
natural activity throughout life,' says Robert Pollack, a psychology
professor at the University of Georgia. It may even contribute to mental
health and not doing it may lead to psychosexual problems.
'For men, masturbation or regular sex is good for the prostate and can
prevent painful prostate blockage. For women it can help reduce cramping and
for both men and women has been shown to have a healthy effect on the immune
systems as well as reducing overall tension and helping emotions.
'Besides being healthy for the body, a private grope can help both a man and
a woman better understand their own sexuality. If you can learn to lie back
and enjoy it and really pay attention to the pleasure it gives your body -
no one knows better than you what gives you maximum pleasure - you can share
that knowledge with a partner and have more mutually fulfilling sexual
pleasure sharing. The self-awareness gained from masturbation makes it a
central feature of many sex therapy programs.
'Evolution may have even designed us to be masturbators. Notice when you are
standing where your hand falls if you hang it in front of you. Apes do it,
dogs and cats do it, elephants do it and even porcupines have been observed
doing it, probably very carefully. One reason we may be so programmed,
paradoxically, is to increase our odds of producing offspring. Older sperm
can lose their ability to swim well. A good masturbatory flush guarantees
fresh, robust sperm for mating.
'Storing seminal fluids for long periods can also cause prostate congestion,
which in turn can lead to urinary and ejaculatory pain. Regular
ejaculations, either through masturbation or intercourse, can help ward off
this condition, also called nonspecific prostatitis and, for obvious
reasons, "sailor's disease" and "priest's disease."
'Another reason why nature designed us to masturbate is to strengthen PC
muscles, much like "Kegel" exercises. This is especially true in females
where strong PC muscles are practically the sole factor in whether labor is
easy and fast or long and difficult. Females masturbating regularly with
multiple orgasms would develop strong PC muscles and should have easier
labor.
'Masturbation is also an ever-renewable health resource. In fact, the people
who start the earliest and do it the most often are the ones who do it
longest into old age. So, as with all sexual activity, it's "use it or lose
it."' And so on...
But both conservatives and liberals may be missing the point. Conservatives
may be wrong: not all masturbation is sinful. Liberals may be wrong: some
masturbation may be harmful or even evil.
'Lonely' masturbation is self-isolating sex without intimacy. It
disassociates the sexual act from a loving relationship, and is therefore
often a symptom of a deeper problem. When an act is purely centered on self,
it can become spiritually unhealthy. Many homosexuals I counsel have a
particular problem here.
Now, in the context of a marriage spouses caress one another for mutual
gratification. And I know some couples who agree to masturbate to avoid sin
when apart. Those who travel on business are particularly vulnerable: I know
men who masturbate to fantasize about their wife and to prevent thinking of
other objects of sexual fantasy or to avoid getting involved with porn in
lonely motels. And masturbation can provide a non-destructive genital outlet
when sexual intercourse is not possible e.g. for celibates, or those with
sick spouses.
For Christians, I've found there are three broad issues. First, the
masturbation habit has produced heaps of bad shame, guilt, confusion and
condemnation in a lot of people, particularly younger Christians. Most of it
has been stoked by guilt-producing preaching. It's the old story: the
intolerant pharisee in us all majoring on sins of the flesh rather than on
sins of the spirit, which are worse, according to Jesus.
The second issue is self-control - a product of the Holy Spirit's presence
in our lives (Galatians 5:23, 2 Timothy 1:7). If a habit has mastery over
us - particularly if it is obsessive - it can be a serious problem. If, for
example, you are going to great lengths trying to find nudity on the net to
masturbate, that becomes a bondage. You are no longer in control and Jesus
is not in control of you.
Now disciplined self-control is not one of the favorite topics for the
liberals I know. But without it we will never mature --in life or in the
Christian life. When someone comes for counseling and sincerely wants to
break this habit, I take their resolve seriously - even if I may not agree
with the seriousness with which they view it all. I agree with them:
determination is the first step. That is where we begin. You must decide
that you will end this practice, and when you make that decision, the
problem will be greatly reduced at once. But it must be more than a hope or
a wish, more than knowing that it is good for you. It must be actually a
decision. If you truly make up your mind that you will be cured, then you
will have the strength to resist any tendencies which you may have and any
temptations which may come to you. Remember - 'First a thought, then an
act' - so never read pornographic material. Follow a program of vigorous
daily exercise to reduce emotional tension and depression. Above all, pray
daily, ask for the gifts of the Spirit to strengthen you against
temptation...
The third issue is fantasizing, where we imagine general or specific scenes
or persons as we masturbate. This is associated with the deadly sin of
'lust' - coveting someone else for our gratification (see Matthew 5:27-28).
If a habit like masturbation becomes compulsive in this respect, it would be
good to get professional advice.
The conservatives have been wrong. To quote the relevant article in the
respected 'Dictionary of Pastoral Care and Counseling' (Abingdon, 1990):
'There is no evidence that masturbation, regardless of frequency, leads to
physical or mental disorders. [Sneezing and masturbation] are both usually
orgasmic experiences in which tensions are relieved... Never has a more
harmless activity provoked more harmful anxiety.'
But is it totally harmless? The problem with liberal thinking is its denial
of the self-centeredness of this habit. This means that for years you know
how to gratify self and when you are with your marriage partner, self may
still be the focus of your sexual relationship. This is dangerous to a
marriage because you may not be seeking what will make your partner happy
but purely your own fulfilment. And let's not kid ourselves: pornography was
created largely to simulate lust - and for masturbation. They both go hand
in hand. You have to take control of your own life. Don't let your sex
organs do your thinking for you. My strong suggestion to those whose habit
is out of control: feed your mind with good things (Philippians 4:8). Learn
to pray well. Burn all your pornography and don't ever buy any more. Get one
or two trusted others to pray with/for you and keep in touch. We are all in
this together. This goes for those trying to break free from a homosexual
lifestyle also. It's not going to be easy. The 'world, the flesh and the
devil' will constantly attack some through their sex drive to pervert their
mind. God created our sex drive for the marriage relationship. As one pastor
exhorted: 'Put the Sword of the Spirit back into your hand. Put the Shield
of Faith in the other. Then your hands won't be free to commit sin.'
To teenagers I hear myself saying: 'Sexuality is not evil. This is not
something strange you are going through. God knows you are a sexual being
and created you that way. God created you to have a blessed sexual
relationship with your spouse. We were born with sexual urges and unless you
become a eunuch you will have the sex drive until you are old and grey. That
is not sin. Puberty is preparing you for the adult world. You have new
desires and you are in unfamiliar territory. The human body was created to
be able to reproduce. Part of the reproductive process is stimulation of the
genitals, and for men erection and ejaculation. In pre-industrial cultures,
when children reached puberty and they started maturing sexually, they
married. When they got the urge, it was time to marry. Better to marry than
to 'burn' writes an ancient Christian, the apostle Paul. Today, there is
such a great gulf between the first sexual urges and the age where a human
is mature enough to accept all the responsibilities of marriage and a
family. When nakedness is being hidden from children and adolescence, it is
supposedly done so that the sexual urge will not be fed.'
To married couples I hear myself saying: 'Talk about your sexuality frankly
with your partner. Learn what is pleasurable for you and teach your spouse:
he or she hasn't got your body, and they won't know instinctively. For some
women whose sexual needs are not as demanding as their male partner's, and
who need more time to climax, you may agree to offer the gift of frequency
in exchange for the gift of time. Today's glossy magazines promise mutual
orgasms whenever you want them. Life isn't like that for most people.
Certainly mutual orgasmic experience is wonderful: but it won't always be
mutual - not even the crescendos. Orgasms - fast or slow, mild or wild - are
not the basic goal of sex, but rather mutual love and intimacy...
At this point some are asking, 'OK. Rowland what do you really think about
masturbation?' This quote from evangelical counselor/author Gary Collins
would represent my own general position:
'Christian counselors differ in their view of masturbation. It has been
called 'sin', 'a gift from God', and an issue which is 'no big deal... on
God's list of priorities.'
Masturbation can... produce guilt; can be a means of escaping from
loneliness and interpersonal (including sexual) relationships with others
into a world of fantasy; can increase self-centredness and lowered
self-esteem; and can stimulate and be stimulated by lust... Masturbation is
rarely helped by a direct determination to quit. This focuses attention on
the issue, increases anxiety, and makes failure more incriminating.
Masturbation can be reduced by prayer, a sincere willingness to let the Holy
Spirit control, involvement in busy activities involving others, an
avoidance of sexually arousing material (such as erotic pictures or novels),
a practice of not dwelling on harmful sexual fantasies, and a recognition
that sin (including lust) will be forgiven when it is confessed with
sincerity and sorrow... When there is open communication on the subject of
sex, including masturbation... it will... not become a major problem... It's
high time we stop making such a 'big deal' out of masturbation and give it
the well-deserved unimportance it merits.
Gary Collins, Christian Counseling, Waco Texas: Word Books, 1980, p.296,
from Rowland Croucher, The Family: at Home in a Heartless World
(HarperCollins), quoted with permission.
And finally this: a quote from a medical doctor who counsels missionaries,
Dr. Marjorie Foyle: 'Masturbation is in my view often no more than a
pressure cooker blowing off steam. Usually some life adjustment resolves the
problem... [in times of tension] the pressure cooker blows: in anger, in
masturbation, or in other ways.' ('Overcoming Stress in Singleness', EMQ,
April '85, pp. 141-2).
If masturbation is addictive, as with all addictions there will be
withdrawal symptoms. It will be hard for you. But I know you can do it
because Jesus will give you the strength. And remember you are not alone.
God will guide you (Proverbs 3:5,6) and bless you.
Bradley
> I hope you read this Ninure Saunders. I did NOT lie. there is a link
> to porn on his site. Read below. Thank you.
> http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/948.htm
I did not claim you lied, I just asked for a link to what you were
referring to so we can all make our own judgement. Is that ok?
I think the following quote is apt for you....
"I've never understood why when people are on the topic of nudity, they
immediately leap to the topic of sex".
I've informed Rowland that the link in the article is actually a real
site. The link was not hyperlinked initially but has been done so
automatically by our new management software. Regardless, as it turns
out to be a real site there is no question it should be removed.
--
regards,
Bradley
Mark T
> > I found this just on the run:
> > http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/4884.htm
> > Rowland recommends porn and masturbation.
>
> Pardon? Did you read the article?
Of course not! Vera thinks reading while using your God given brain is a
sin and "of the flesh" ... just like Griz!
> What is your own personal standard WRT >masturbation - and why?
Since most men masturbate at some point in their life ...and it is not
condemned in the scriptures ... or even mentioned in the scriptures ...it
would appear to be natural and normal.
Bradley
> In news:fsmdnTl3j5c...@comcast.com,
> ROCK <n...@email.com> wrote:
>> I hope you read this Ninure Saunders. I did NOT lie. there is a link
>> to porn on his site. Read below. Thank you.
>> http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/948.htm
>>
>> Nudity And Sex
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> G'day all.
>
> I saw that link too, and I have saved the page.
>
> I wonder what all this on the pastornet pages has to do with God. But
> they will say they have not written that article themselves and are
> not responsible for anything.
>
> God bless you,
>
> Vera
Responsibility has been taken and action taken to remove the link.
Thanks to Rock for alerting us to the link.
--
regards,
Bradley
Mark T
> The Bible is quite clear with that topic (though does not >mention it
literally
How can it be "quite clear" and yet the bible "does not mention it
lkiterally"?? That is contradictory.
> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> ><> Know ye
not
> that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members
of
> Christ, and make them the members of an harlot?
How is masturbation linked to prostitution????
> G-d's Bless,
What does this phrase mean????
Bradley
> You Said:
> "Anyone like to provide some links to back up their statements?"
>
>
> I Say:
> Here is your link
> http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/948.htm
Yep, and I responded in another post :)
Thanks.
--
regards,
Bradley
Mark T
> So my objection is that the charge against Rowland is that he has the
temerity to allow people with different
> opinions to discuss them ... and this is the real charge against him.
This is the long standing problem. The Trew Kristyuns think that everyone
should be their clone. They admit no other worthwhile belief in God.
Of the many Christian websites out there Rowland's site is one of the more
outstanding one in its presentation of a wide variety of opinions to be
discussed.
Mark T
> It is amazing to me that people who claim to be Christian, who claim that
> the Bible is not only is God's literal word/dictated word have no problem
> in ignoring what the Bibe says about insults, slander, lies, and the
> like.
Can they talk about anything else?
Trew Kristyuns wage war on anyone who is not their clone.
I'm trying to find something on these ngs where they have not polluted good
discussion with their brain-dead bondage.
Compare their narrow little fundy world to the wide range of topics on
Rowland's site.
Mark T
<snipped>
Are you controlling the symptoms of your illness well?
Mark T
> I hope you read this Ninure Saunders. I did NOT lie. there is a link to
porn
> on his site. Read below. Thank you.
> http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/948.htm
>
> Nudity And Sex
Your point being? The article is not porn. It is a topic of discussion ...
and a very good topic because Trew Kristyuns often don't understand the
difference between art, sexual orientation and porn.
> This is not directed at you in particular, Peter, but I've never
understood
> why when people are on the topic of nudity, they immediately leap to the
> topic of sex. I don't understand why the two concepts are so tightly
coupled
> (to use an unfortunate term).
They aren't! Any artist is aware of this. I recommend reading John
Berger's "Ways of Seeing" (BBC; London:1972) and Kenneth Clark's "Thew
Nude"(Penguin; Hammondsworth:1956)
...and this post on Rowland's site
http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/12438.htm
###########################################
Mark and Bev Tindall" wrote in message
WHY CENSOR ART??????
I think the photo in question it is like Lenny Bruce saying that if Jesus
were here in the flesh today he would be killed and the symbol of
Christianity would be the electric chair.
The photo depicts Jesus being nailed to the cross with a nail gun. If
Jesus had been crucified today they probably would have used a nail gun
because of its economuic efficiency.
from Franky Scaheffer's "Sham Pearls For Real Swine: Beyond the Cultural
Dark Age (Wolgemuth & Hyatt; Brentwood , Tennesse: 1990) [Son
of fundamentalist theologian Francis A Schaeffer]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ p. 27 -28
The arts ask hard questions. Art incinerates polyester / velvet dreams of
inner healing and cheap grace. Art hurts, slaps and defines. Art is
interested in truth: in bad words spoken by bad people, in good words spoken
by good people, in sin and goodness, in life, sex, birth, colopur, texture,
death, love, hate, nature, man, religion, music, God, fire, water and air.
Art tears down, builds up, and redefines. Art is uncomfortable.
Good art (which, among other things, means truth-telling art) is good in
itself, even when it is about bad things. All art is in a sense an
icon - an image of man who is created in God's image; a testament to the
fact that the physical world has been redeemed by the incarnation of Christ.
Good art expresses an interest in everything. Art, like the Bible, is not
defined by one period of history. Art explores immorality and immortality.
There are no taboo subjects for good art,
any more than there is taboo news for newspapers, because art is unafraid of
the truth. Art, like Christ, comes to sinners in an imperfect world. People
who imagine themselves to be perfect do not like at. The middle-class
church, living in a cocoon of false expectations, resents people who weild
sharp razor blades or worse, disturb their sleep. Art is fleshly yet
eternal. Art is human. Art is a mirror to the world. Art is the bridge
between flesh and soul. "Art is science in the flesh," as jean Cocteau wrote
in Le Rappel a L'Orde.
Because art destroys a false sense of security, it is looked on with
suspeicion, even perceived as the enemy by the middle class and its
spokespersons in the church, who, through ignorance, subdue artists and
discourage talent. "Do not offend yiour brother" is a Bible verse
often misused to intimidate the same way as "turn the other cheek" is
sometimes taken out of biblical context to justify "Christian" pacificism.
There is a bible verse handily available for every tyrannical cuase, to be
exploited by those who use the Bible as an idealogical weapon.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Art has its own meaning as God's creation; it does not need justification.
it's justification is being a God-given possibility." -
H R R Rookmaaker
Another poster:
What is immoral or aweful and what is considered art?
Mark:
All subjects are able to be used by the artist ... including the immoral and
awful. This is included in the bible's injunction "whatever is TRUE ...
think about these things." (Phillipians 4:8)
Other:
Would your wife naked in a huge painting on your front lawn be art?
Mark:
It could be.
Could a couple having sex be the subject of a work of art? Yes! The Christin
artist depicted just that in the "The Great Bed"!
Could a old person urinating be a subject for a work of art? Yes! The
Christian artist Rembrandt drew a series of sketches on it!
Rembrandt was the first Christian artist to feature Chruist at the centre of
all his work. Remabrandt also painted himself at the foot of the cross -
helpoing to raise it -in "The Raising of the Cross" thus acknowledging his
own sin.
I previously posted the anger of the Christian Michelangelo at the attempt
to censor his work in the Sistine Chapel as it was considered obscene. Hisd
contemporary Vasari wrote: "There are many kings but only one Michelangelo!"
Would you find that objectionable?
No. The nude is a great theme within art. Read
- The Nude - Kenneth Clark - Ways of Seeing - John Berger
I think you would, so why shouldn't I find it objectionable to see Thy Holy
Mikita as a joke under the nailing of my savior!
If you understood art you would not object.
It is wrong and is in bad taste!
I disagree as a Christian artist. My Christian art has constantly been
banned over the last 30 years by pietist Christians who do not understand
art. My new novel will be a shocker ... as will the illustrations!
CHRISTIAN READING LIST ON VISUAL ART (Painting / Photography)
Hans R Rookmaaker - Art Needs No Justification - Modern Art and the Death of
A Culture - The Creative Gift: The Arts and the Christian Life
Francis A Schaeffer - Art and the Bible
Franky Schaeffer - Sham Pearls for Real Swine: Beyond the Cultural Dark
Age - Addicted to Mediocrity: 20th Century Christians and the Arts
Vasari - Lives of The Painters
J R R Tolkein
- Tree and Leaf (by Niggle)
The Letters of Vincent Van Gogh
Albert J Lublin - Stranger On Earth: Vincent Van Gogh
#############################
Mark T
>They are really supporting each other in
> bashing fundamental Christians. Links on that list are - >for example:
>
> http://www.landoverbaptist.org/
>
> http://church.broomleigh.org/
These are very good parodies of Trew Kristyuns like you, Vera.
Why do you think they are more popular than your site???
Most rational people are sick of fundamentalism.
> How can serious Christians support such a bashing?
How can serious Chroistians support the brainless anti-art antics of Trew
Kristyun funnyMENTALists???
Mark T
> You act like Christianity is all about you and no one >else is allowed to
have
> a view other than your view. Kind of conceited isn't it?
Yep! That's what Trew Kristyun funnyMENTALists are all about.
> Some thoughts are so ugly you just want to kill them.
> Kill the conceit and take up compassion, it is far more >fitting of being
Christ-like.
Aaaaaarrrgggghhhh!!!!
That means following what Jesus said!!!!!!!!!!
Do they dare?????
We are to love God with all our minds just as Jesus said was the first and
most important commandment. Jesus did not say to worship the bible, himself
or fundamentalist doctrine.
All who love God with all their minds are fullfilling Jesus command.
One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that
Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, "Of all the commandments,
which is the most important?" "The most important one," answered Jesus, "is
this: 'Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your
God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your MIND and
with all your strength.' (NIV, Mark 12:28-30)
Why do Trew Kristyuns forget this command and focus on the little black book
(the Bible)????
Roy Mock
"Mark T" <ma...@home.in.oz> wrote in message
I'd taken the analogy of the newspaper - read selectively or widely to suit
your needs at the time. It's sometimes helpful to understand where others
are coming from.
Cheers.
(: Lawrence Meckan :)
I'm still trying to figure out how I rate a mention here when I'm not
Rowland, nor did I write the article in question..
Perhaps Bob's urbane arcana post where he mistook my words for Rowland's
has now turned into a Christian urban legend that I'm <supposedly>
Rowland ???
lawrence
ROCK
plural)
"Russell McDade" <donteventhinkaboutit@all> wrote in message
news:412a7ab9$0$29950$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
ROCK
>© John Mark Ministries. Articles may be reproduced in any medium, without
> applying for permission
> (provided they are unedited, and retain the original author/copyright
> information - and perhaps a reference to this website :-)!
>
"Ninure Saunders" <RainbowChri...@Rainbow-Christian.tk> wrote in
message
news:RainbowChristiannoh...@h-68-164-8-155.chcgilgm.dynamic.covad.net...
Bradley
news:412ac...@news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com
I don't even think Rowland wrote it.... it's a copy of a post from ACR.
Thanks to those who are taking time to read the correct context of the
article.
--
regards,
Bradley
Bradley
> As long as you follow his copyright statement. I dont care what you
> do.
>
>> © John Mark Ministries. Articles may be reproduced in any medium,
>> without applying for permission
>> (provided they are unedited, and retain the original author/copyright
>> information - and perhaps a reference to this website :-)!
Repeating it to make your argument puts you just as much in the wrong.
--
regards,
Bradley
::: vera :::
On my website they are coming from Japan, China, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia and
other countries. Do you think a website is more for personal use than for
publishing purposes? In that case Rowland Croucher should put his heresy
(yes, heresy!) behind closed doors on his website. Not only liberal
Australians are reading there. It is a shame what people who are looking for
God find there. Those people cannot all discern what is a satire website and
what is not - not even grown Christians here can that at once. As long as
Mark Tindall is to be taken seriously, all the links to the slander
websites, for example, or to porn pages must be as well.
Why do you always defend such a heresy? Why do you not tell Rowland Croucher
what it is? Why do you always rectify this evil doing?
God's Bless,
::: vera :::
Well this link is VERY obvious, coloured - but the webmaster did not see
that?
LOL
::: vera :::
ROCK
one that was on the page. It would depend on how legalistic you would want
to get. At least I didn't violate his copyright notice. And I answered. Yes
I am making fun of the situation.
"© John Mark Ministries. Articles may be reproduced in any medium, without
applying for permission
(provided they are unedited, and retain the original author/copyright
information - and perhaps a reference to this website :-)!"
Frankly I think its funny that it was linked. In their haste to cut and
paste they forgot to check the links.
I wonder how many months that was on there. I know it has at least been
about 3 months.
"ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
news:9aWdnbpiY_N...@comcast.com...
Mark T
> Perhaps Bob's urbane arcana post where he mistook my words for Rowland's
> has now turned into a Christian urban legend that I'm <supposedly>
> Rowland ???
Well ... with Vera turning into an Uncle ...all things are probable.
Gob's bless.
Mark T
> God's Bless,
Gob's bless.
<Vera's baa & blah deleted>
(: Lawrence Meckan :)
Yeah, well, she's got a suprise coming.. :-)
lawrence
Russell McDade
> On the other hand you could say there were 2 links, one to his page. Then
> one that was on the page. It would depend on how legalistic you would want
> to get. At least I didn't violate his copyright notice. And I answered.
Yes
> I am making fun of the situation.
cool
Rowland Croucher
"Bradley" <spam...@blocked.com> wrote in message
news:412a87f8$1...@news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com...
And let me add my thanks to all who have so graciously and conscientiously
monitored my website... :-)
Anyone noticed any devotional
http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/catalog/section/adev1.htm
or evangelistic material
http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/catalog/section/afnc1.htm there?
(Reminds me of the surrealist artist who painted a field of daffodils by
grossly enlarging the manure heap in the corner :-(
--
Shalom!
Rowland Croucher
http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/
http://articlesandreviews.blogspot.com/
Bradley
>> I don't even think Rowland wrote it.... it's a copy of a post from
>> ACR. Thanks to those who are taking time to read the correct context
>> of the article.
>
> Well this link is VERY obvious, coloured - but the webmaster did not
> see that?
>
> LOL
The problem was addressed as soon Rowland was made aware (something that
could have been done in private instead of re-posting such an unsavoury
link, IMO).
--
regards,
Bradley
Bradley
> On the other hand you could say there were 2 links, one to his page.
> Then one that was on the page. It would depend on how legalistic you
> would want to get. At least I didn't violate his copyright notice.
> And I answered. Yes I am making fun of the situation.
>
> "© John Mark Ministries. Articles may be reproduced in any medium,
> without applying for permission
> (provided they are unedited, and retain the original author/copyright
> information - and perhaps a reference to this website :-)!"
>
> Frankly I think its funny that it was linked. In their haste to cut
> and paste they forgot to check the links.
> I wonder how many months that was on there. I know it has at least
> been about 3 months.
As mentioned in another post it was not hyperlinked originally. We have
upgraded to a mostly automated content management system that
automatically hyperlinks things.
--
regards,
Bradley
Rowland Croucher
> "ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
> news:CsidnQajwvX...@comcast.com
> > On the other hand you could say there were 2 links, one to his page.
> > Then one that was on the page. It would depend on how legalistic you
> > would want to get. At least I didn't violate his copyright notice.
> > And I answered. Yes I am making fun of the situation.
> >
> > "© John Mark Ministries. Articles may be reproduced in any medium,
> > without applying for permission
> > (provided they are unedited, and retain the original author/copyright
> > information - and perhaps a reference to this website :-)!"
> >
> > Frankly I think its funny that it was linked. In their haste to cut
> > and paste they forgot to check the links.
> > I wonder how many months that was on there. I know it has at least
> > been about 3 months.
>
> As mentioned in another post it was not hyperlinked originally. We have
> upgraded to a mostly automated content management system that
> automatically hyperlinks things.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> --
> regards,
>
> Bradley
It will be interesting to see if any of those who made a loud noise about
this alleged offense will offer any apologies...
(Though I won't hold my breath :-)
However, that said. I'm appreciative of the censors, oops, I mean concerned
folk who searched through 13,000 articles to spot the naughty link :-)
Rowland Croucher
"Mordecai!" <"mldavis[please dont spam]"@internode.on.net> wrote in message
news:4129E0C0...@internode.on.net...
>
>
> ::: vera ::: wrote:
>
> > In news:FkbWc.3431$D7....@news-server.bigpond.net.au,
> > Bradley <no_jun...@address.com> wrote:
> > >> You Said:
> > >> "I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and
> > >> find profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic
> > >> possession. But now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher."
> > >>
> > >> I say:
> > >
> > >
> >
> > I found this just on the run:
> >
> > http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/4884.htm
> >
> > Rowland recommends porn and masturbation.
>
> Pardon? Did you read the article?
liberal and conservative - the medical
> and the issues of individuals ..
>
> it certainly does NOT recommend it ...
>
hiding it ... and look at it?
counselling individual people? I
> suppose pastors are to find the answers on their own and not discuss it -
after all, merely to discuss such a
> problem is obviously "recommending porn and masturbation."
>
want to talk? talk.
> But Rowland has said he wants the hard issues to be discussed and people
to be free to think about them.
>
discuss - presents a variety of
> points of view - and allows the individual to choose which of the many
approaches they prefer and how they (as
> an individual) might respond to the issue.
>
> What is your own personal standard WRT masturbation - and why?
Interestingly, this article has been one of the top three people have turned
to on our site, when we had statistics operating for a few years which
detailed who-landed-where. It's a very common problem for many. In
counselling I come across people regularly who ask about this (including a
woman associate pastor who thought she was going to hell for it, 'cos her
senior pastor preached that).
Roy Mock
> In news:412a9acc$0$6809$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au,
> Roy Mock <roymock...@optusnet.com.au> wrote:
> > "Mark T" <ma...@home.in.oz> wrote in message
> > news:412a8a85$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> >> "Mordecai!" wrote:
> >>
> >> Of the many Christian websites out there Rowland's site is one of
> >> the more outstanding one in its presentation of a wide variety of
> >> opinions to be discussed.
> >
> > I'd taken the analogy of the newspaper - read selectively or widely
> > to suit your needs at the time. It's sometimes helpful to understand
> > where others are coming from.
> >
> > Cheers.
>
> On my website they are coming from Japan, China, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia
and
> other countries. Do you think a website is more for personal use than for
> publishing purposes? In that case Rowland Croucher should put his heresy
> (yes, heresy!) behind closed doors on his website. Not only liberal
> Australians are reading there. It is a shame what people who are looking
for
> God find there. Those people cannot all discern what is a satire website
and
> what is not - not even grown Christians here can that at once. As long as
> Mark Tindall is to be taken seriously, all the links to the slander
> websites, for example, or to porn pages must be as well.
>
> Why do you always defend such a heresy? Why do you not tell Rowland
Croucher
> what it is? Why do you always rectify this evil doing?
I don't need to defend myself nor Rowland. Aren't the days witch-hunting
and inquisitions over?
If 'factiousness' or 'divisiveness' define 'heresy'
http://ancienthistory.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http%3A%2F%'2Fww
w.ritchies.net%2Fp1wk5.htm, then I suggest that non-Australian visitors to
ARC have done just that: All the regulars have all but disappeared
altogether since November 2003.
On the other hand, Rowland serves to unify by enabling us to appreciate each
other's orientation, enriching our understanding, and encouraging each other
as we struggle toward holiness by God's grace.
So, who's the heretic? I suggest it is one who breaks the fellowship that
unites us in the Lord.
pedro
He said why he did. He was asked to prove there was/were porn link/s
there. He gave the link, but also said he thought that Rowland would
remove the article- or rather that you would as webmaster.. the same
person who originally put it there- so he posted the text as well.
--
rgds,
Pete.
-----
http://pedro.spyw.com
'Press any key to continue or any other key to quit... '
pedro
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 12:06:13 GMT, "Blobert!" <OneN...@Under.Blob> wrote:
>
>>"ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
>>news:epmdnT8V1cl...@comcast.com...
>>
>>>You Said:
>>>"I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and find
>>>profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic possession.
>>>But now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher."
>>>
>>>I say:
>>>You missed the porn links I see. He has those also.
>>
>> Why am I not surprized?
>
> Possibly because there is no such word as surprized?
Why do you bother with your trivial nonsense? If you can't say anything
of value, don't say anything.
>>>"Blobert!" <OneN...@Under.Blob> wrote in message
>>>news:939Wc.804$Y%3....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>> I knew the man was a hypocritical anti-Christian loon, but only just
>>>from the ng; I spent a good while perusing his site this afternoon, and it
>>>is far worse than I imagined.
>>> I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and find
>>>profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic possession.
>>>But now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher.
>>> And any man that stands by him and Mark Tindall surely has no idea
>>>whatsoever of what being a Christian is all about.
>>> If this is Christianity in Australia, Australia is in deep trouble.
>>> Bob<><
--
rgds,
Pete.
-----
http://pedro.spyw.com
'Press any key...no, no, no, NOT THAT ONE!'
pedro
> "Ninure Saunders" wrote:
>
>>It is amazing to me that people who claim to be Christian, who claim that
>>the Bible is not only is God's literal word/dictated word have no problem
>>in ignoring what the Bibe says about insults, slander, lies, and the
>>like.
>
> Can they talk about anything else?
>
> Trew Kristyuns wage war on anyone who is not their clone.
They don't wage war on me. Explain that. You can't. The remark is not
true. They only 'wage war' on those, like yourself, who seek to
misrepresent Christianity.
> I'm trying to find something on these ngs where they have not polluted good
> discussion with their brain-dead bondage.
>
> Compare their narrow little fundy world to the wide range of topics on
> Rowland's site.
--
rgds,
Pete.
-----
http://pedro.spyw.com
'There are 3 kinds of people, those who can add up and those who can't'
pedro
> http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/948.htm
> Of course he will remove it before others see it. Below is from his site.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Nudity And Sex
>
> G'day all.
>
> A 'Net friend writes:
>
>
>>Melbourne's Moomba celebrations at the weekend included a parade that in
>>the words of the Melbourne Herald Sun newspaper gave melburnians the
>>'sock treatment' with "topless street artists and raunchy floats
>>spicing up a traditional family day".
>
> [...]
>
>>So I would ask what is it that we are supposedly needing to look forward
>>to? One spectator commented "I personally thought it's gone to paganism,
>>and completely disintegrated from something children enjoy." So is this
>>the future that Mr. Scobie speaks of? A pagan festival that we need to
>>hide from our children? As these events seek to outdo themselves each
>>year, can we look forward some way down the track to naked couples
>>copulating on city streets???
>
> This is not directed at you in particular, Peter, but I've never understood
> why when people are on the topic of nudity, they immediately leap to the
> topic of sex. I don't understand why the two concepts are so tightly coupled
> (to use an unfortunate term).
>
> The fact that some partial nudity at Moomba immediately brings to mind the
> Sydney Mardi Gras (where sex _is_ a more common theme) and suggests that
> next year we might find explicit sex in the parade IMO says more about our
> insecurity with nudity than the intent of the parade organisers.
>
>>That maybe an exaggeration, and I'm no
>>prude, but there has been a constant trend towards nakedness in live
>>theatrical productions, the film industry, and all forms of media.
>
> The uncovered human body has always been with us in our art, from
> prehistoric times to the present. There just happened to be less of it in
> the Western world between the Victorian era and the mid-20th century. There
> was a similar coyness in the counter-reformation era, as my wife has just
> informed me, so nudity probably just goes in and out of fashion.
>
> I think I understand what you mean, though. There's a qualitative difference
> between Manet's "Olympia" and http://www.hotporn.com (haven't checked to see
> if that's a real web site, but it probably is), and the difference is good
> versus bad taste. I think that rather than a trend towards the unclothed,
> what you're noticing is a trend towards pulp media. That is, the amount of
> rubbish is increasing at the same time as nudity is becoming more
> acceptible, so we're seeing a lot of bad uses of nudity.
>
>>The children of Israel descended into paganism in the
>>wilderness and were punished by God.
>
> There's a difference between nudity and worship of idols, too.
>
> Cheers, Andrew
>
> top of page
> © John Mark Ministries. Articles may be reproduced in any medium, without
> applying for permission
> (provided they are unedited, and retain the original author/copyright
> information - and perhaps a reference to this website :-)!
>
>
> "Ninure Saunders" <RainbowChri...@Rainbow-Christian.tk> wrote in
> message
> news:RainbowChristiannoh...@h-68-164-2-43.chcgilgm.dynamic.covad.net...
> In article <412a034e$0$16615$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>, pedro
> <pe...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>
> -Ninure Saunders wrote:
> -
> -> In article <X8qdnZ1AkYj...@comcast.com>, "ROCK" <n...@email.com>
> wrote:
> ->
> -> -I gotta laugh at this one Mark, because only you would have a reply
> link.
> -> -
> -> -"Mark T" <ma...@home.in.oz> wrote in message
> -> -news:4129...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> -> -"ROCK" wrote:
> -> -
> -> -> You missed the porn links I see.
> -> -
> -> -
> -> -Find Christian Porn at
> -> -
> -> -http://www.recoveryman.com/dox/porn.htm
> ->
> -> Os that link on Rowland Croucher's site?
> ->
> -> No, it is not.
> ->
> -> Was that link posted by Rowland Croucher?
> ->
> -> No it was not.
> ->
> -> You are therefore a liar, and a slanderer.
> -
> -And you need to read better. ROCK never said that was the link he saw.
>
> No?
>
> Then what did he mean by:
>
> "You missed the porn links I see."
>
> -And it's not a real porn link anyway.
>
> Of course it isn't.
>
> Just like there are NO porn links on Rpwland's site.
>
> But apprently ROCK either fif not know that..or did not mind lying.
Interesting choice of article. Guess who wrote the original article that
is being replied to? Me! :) [not the one with the porn link- to avoid
any confusion] So here's a good example of Rowland's characteristic
behaviour. I post an article basically lamenting the decline in social
standards with regards nudity, based on the example of the Moomba
parade, which is traditionally a family affair, and saying in essence..
'why do we need this crap?'.. And what happens? I get a reply saying (in
essence) 'Oh gee, it's not so bad' And so what does Wowland do? Does he
post my original article exhorting the upholding of values of social
decency and morality? Does he post what I would call the 'positive' one?
No of course not. He posts the 'negative' one- an article questioning
whether such standards need to be upheld at all!
And for anyone who's interested, here's my original post-
14/3/2001
Melbourne's Moomba celebrations at the weekend included a parade that in
the words of the Melbourne Herald Sun newspaper gave Melburnians the
'shock treatment' with "topless street artists and raunchy floats
spicing up a traditional family day". The Melb HS went on to say
"Generations of families, young and old lining the city centre for the
public holiday parade, were stunned by the sight.. topless women and men
replaced clowns.. a partly naked couple eating grapes in a clear plastic
bubble joined new-look floats". The parade, described as Madi Gras
style, was defended by the Moomba festival director Ian Scobie who
claimed that "a new-look parade was the right move to ensure that Moomba
had a future. If Moomba is to survive it has to look forward and not
back."
So I would ask what is it that we are supposedly needing to look forward
to? One spectator commented "I personally thought it's gone to paganism,
and completely disintegrated from something children enjoy." So is this
the future that Mr. Scobie speaks of? A pagan festival that we need to
hide from our children? As these events seek to outdo themselves each
year, can we look forward some way down the track to naked couples
copulating on city streets??? That maybe an exaggeration, and I'm no
prude, but there has been a constant trend towards nakedness in live
theatrical productions, the film industry, and all forms of media. Where
is it all headed? Where are we going as a society? These questions need
to be asked. The children of Israel descended into paganism in the
wilderness and were punished by God. Despite ones religious beliefs we
reap what we sow in life. That is true of an individual as much as it is
of a Government, a Nation, or a society. Our future is determined by the
decisions of today. We need to look seriously at these issues, and
ignore the directives of political correctness that demand unequivocal
adherence to the status quo, or current trends.
________________________________________________________________________
--
rgds,
Pete.
-----
http://pedro.spyw.com
'(A)bort, (R)etry, (P)anic (D)eny this ever happened!'
pedro
> In news:939Wc.804$Y%3....@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net,
> Blobert! <OneN...@Under.Blob> wrote:
>
>> I knew the man was a hypocritical anti-Christian loon, but only
>>just from the ng; I spent a good while perusing his site this
>>afternoon, and it is far worse than I imagined.
>> I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and
>>find profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic
>>possession. But now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher.
>> And any man that stands by him and Mark Tindall surely has no idea
>>whatsoever of what being a Christian is all about.
>> If this is Christianity in Australia, Australia is in deep
>> trouble. Bob<><
>
>
> There are Bible bashing links to these page on Rowland Croucher's website,
> too: http://www.evilbible.com/ and http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/
>
> .... and another link to a wesite that encourages born again believers to
> give up their faith: http://www.angelfire.com/pa/greywlf/
>
> I quote from there:
> "This website has been created to support those who have decided to leave
> born again fundamentalism, who are in the process of leaving it or are
> thinking about leaving. It is for those who have begun to think for
> themselves. It is for those who have questions and aren't sure.
>
> Walking away can be a very difficult process. If you have made or are making
> that decision, may these pages be helpful in your journey.
>
> This site is not intended to take anyone away from a spiritual belief in
> which he or she is comfortable and does not wish to leave. It is intended to
> reveal the truth about born again fundamentalist Christianity to anyone who
> wishes to know it."
>
> This linklist http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/13261.htm is also
> very interesting!!! I will quote the beginning:
>
> "The Foolishness of Fundamentalism
>
>
>
>
> Some of you have been posting some great comic articles that really present
> the foolishness of fundamentalism well. I would like to encourage you to
> post more. These wonderful newsgroups are worthy of our support, and your
> articles will have a wider outreach...."
>
>
>
> Could it be worse than that? They are really supporting each other in
> bashing fundamental Christians. Links on that list are - for example:
>
>
> http://www.landoverbaptist.org/
>
> http://church.broomleigh.org/
>
>
>
> http://www.cheesyjesus.com/online-store/scstore/
>
>
>
> http://www.biblesexstories.com/
>
>
> and others.
>
> *sigh heavily*
>
> I hope that soon all will know what cuckoos they have in the nest.
>
>
>
> How can serious Christians support such a bashing?
>
>
> God's Bless,
>
> ::: vera :::
> --
> ::: http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de :::
> ::: http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de/Israel.htm :::
Vera... You have shown without a shadow of a doubt that Rowland
Croucher, a Baptist Pastor, is clearly anti fundamental Christianity.
There can be no doubts about his intent.
--
rgds,
Pete.
-----
http://pedro.spyw.com
'Opportunity knocks once. Temptation leans on the doorbell'
pedro
> "ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
> news:fsmdnTl3j5c...@comcast.com
>
>>I hope you read this Ninure Saunders. I did NOT lie. there is a link
>>to porn on his site. Read below. Thank you.
>>http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/948.htm
>
>
> I did not claim you lied, I just asked for a link to what you were
> referring to so we can all make our own judgement. Is that ok?
>
> I think the following quote is apt for you....
> "I've never understood why when people are on the topic of nudity, they
> immediately leap to the topic of sex".
There's no doubt that they're closely related. Rather difficult to have
sex with all your clothes on!
You probably also think that the way a woman dresses and behaves has no
bearing on the amount of attention she gets, wanted or not, from the
male gender.
> I've informed Rowland that the link in the article is actually a real
> site. The link was not hyperlinked initially but has been done so
> automatically by our new management software. Regardless, as it turns
> out to be a real site there is no question it should be removed.
--
rgds,
Pete.
-----
http://pedro.spyw.com
'Always tell the truth- there's less to remember!'
pedro
> I don't know. Never the less the link does exist. Go to the page and click
> on the link.
Only if you want to see vaginas, penises, oral sex, and anal and vaginal
penetration- and that's without even entering the site.
> oh hmm.
>
> "Jani" <ja...@dsl.pipex.com> wrote in message
> news:2ov7ntF...@uni-berlin.de...
> Good article. Would people be frothing at the mouth rather less if he'd
> written "there is a qualitative difference between Manet's Olympia and an
> Internet porn site", rather than making up the name of a supposed site as an
> illustration?
>
> Jani
>
> "ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
> news:tLmdnTgWmL4...@comcast.com...
>
>>http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/948.htm
>>Of course he will remove it before others see it. Below is from his site.
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
--
rgds,
Pete.
-----
http://pedro.spyw.com
'Dinner not ready: (A)bort (R)etry (P)izza'
pedro
> "Mordecai!" wrote:
>
>
>>>I found this just on the run:
>>>http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/4884.htm
>>>Rowland recommends porn and masturbation.
>>
>>Pardon? Did you read the article?
>
>
> Of course not! Vera thinks reading while using your God given brain is a
> sin and "of the flesh" ... just like Griz!
>
>
>
>>What is your own personal standard WRT >masturbation - and why?
>
>
> Since most men
and women of course.
> masturbate at some point in their life ...and it is not
> condemned in the scriptures ... or even mentioned in the scriptures ...it
> would appear to be natural and normal.
>
A recent survey on masturbation concluded that only 10% of ppl
masturbate. Another recent survey also concluded that when questioned
about masturbation 90% of ppl lie! :)
--
rgds,
Pete.
-----
http://pedro.spyw.com
'I lose my weight, but it keeps finding me again!'
pedro
> "ROCK" wrote:
>
>
>>I hope you read this Ninure Saunders. I did NOT lie. there is a link to
>
> porn
>
>>on his site. Read below. Thank you.
>>http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/948.htm
>>
>>Nudity And Sex
>
>
>
> Your point being?
That he proved his point. There is a link to porn on the Devils website.
--
rgds,
Pete.
-----
http://pedro.spyw.com
'Beta version: Latin for 'doesn't work yet''
pedro
The link was still there. Hyperlinked only means that it can be cliked
on to automatically launch the users browser to go to the site, as
opposed to typing it into the address bar.
--
rgds,
Pete.
-----
http://pedro.spyw.com
'ERROR: Too much diskspace detected, Windows will generate data'
Mordecai!
"(: Lawrence Meckan :)" wrote:
> Mordecai! wrote:
> >
> > ::: vera ::: wrote:
> >
> >
> >>In news:4129E0C0...@internode.on.net,
> >>Mordecai!" <"mldavis[please dont spam] <"mldavis[please dont
> >>spam]"@internode.on.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>>>>>vera ::: wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>In news:FkbWc.3431$D7....@news-server.bigpond.net.au,
> >>>>Bradley <no_jun...@address.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>"ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
> >>>>>news:epmdnT8V1cl...@comcast.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>You Said:
> >>>>>>"I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and
> >>>>>>find profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic
> >>>>>>possession. But now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher."
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>I say:
> >>>>>>You missed the porn links I see. He has those also.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Anyone like to provide some links to back up their statements?
> >>>>>
> >>>>><snip>
> >>>>
> >>>>I found this just on the run:
> >>>>
> >>>>http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/4884.htm
> >>>>
> >>>>Rowland recommends porn and masturbation.
> >>>
> >>>Pardon? Did you read the article?
> >>
> >>As I said - on the run.
> >>
> >>
> >>>It discusses masturbation - from a few points of view. Including the
> >>>liberal and conservative - the medical and the issues of individuals
> >>>..
> >>>
> >>>it certainly does NOT recommend it ...
> >>
> >>>Is it a sin to take out something from a closet which everyone else
> >>>is hiding it ... and look at it?
> >>
> >>Yes, many websites do so, they even show pictures.
> >>
> >>Does this also have to be on a Christian website? Who does Mr. Croucher want
> >>to please? Those who have a problem with sin. But instead of helping them to
> >>overcome, he encourages them to go on.
> >>
> >>
> >>>How many pastors have to deal with this issue in their congregations?
> >>>In counselling individual people? I suppose pastors are to find the
> >>>answers on their own and not discuss it - after all, merely to
> >>>discuss such a problem is obviously "recommending porn and
> >>>masturbation."
> >>
> >>Such matters belong into a private conversation between two people.
> >>
> >>
> >>>I do not usually bother to go to other's sites - I am not interested.
> >>>You want to talk? talk.
> >>>But Rowland has said he wants the hard issues to be discussed and
> >>>people to be free to think about them.
> >>
> >>He can do so - but not with the label "CHRISTIAN" on it.
> >>
> >>
> >>>This article does exactly that - discusses a topic most people refuse
> >>>to discuss - presents a variety of points of view - and allows the
> >>>individual to choose which of the many approaches they prefer and how
> >>>they (as an individual) might respond to the issue.
> >>>
> >>>What is your own personal standard WRT masturbation - and why?
> >>
> >>As I said above, it is a sin - not a very big one, but a sin. It can be a
> >>bigger one the more important it becomes for people.
> >>
> >>G-d's Bless,
> >>
> >>::: vera :::
> >>--
> >>::: http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de :::
> >>::: http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de/Israel.htm :::
> >
> >
> > Oh - well the article in question agrees it is a sin by all the theologians quoted - and discusses how big a
> > sin it is and compares how the various people discuss it.
> > It brings in "it is a big sin" to "it is a small sin" to it is "not a very important sin."
> > So we find that the article agrees with your position - looks at it from more than JUST your point of view and
> > they all come to almost the same position ... and allows people to come to an informed position on the subject
> > which all basically agree with your position ...
> >
> > And it is wrong because it discusses it?
> >
> > That is the part I find reprehensible. This is a discussion paper - not a theological standard. It is designed
> > to promote thought. It succeeds. It keeps to Christianity - agrees in this case with the NT - and with the
> > theological positions and indeed with your own position - and it is vilified not for deviant position but
> > BECAUSE IT DISCUSSES IT.
> >
> > Now in Judaism - we have violent arguments about all sorts of things - taking some rather extreme
> > interpretations of verses ... throwing them into the mix.
> > Some are based on rather fanciful interpretations of words and grammar - some on literal meanings - and
> > everything is thrashed out. Sometimes we come to a conclusion and sometimes we do not.
> >
> > That is what Lawrence is doing ... nothing more.
>
> I'm still trying to figure out how I rate a mention here when I'm not
> Rowland, nor did I write the article in question..
>
> Perhaps Bob's urbane arcana post where he mistook my words for Rowland's
> has now turned into a Christian urban legend that I'm <supposedly>
> Rowland ???
>
> lawrence
Coz I am an idiot ... sorry.
Blobert!
"pedro" <pe...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:412b0393$0$32656$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Bradley wrote:
> > "ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
> > news:25udnavRGJO...@comcast.com
> >
> >>As long as you follow his copyright statement. I dont care what you
> >>do.
> >>
> >>>© John Mark Ministries. Articles may be reproduced in any medium,
> >>>without applying for permission
> >>>(provided they are unedited, and retain the original author/copyright
> >>>information - and perhaps a reference to this website :-)!
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > Repeating it to make your argument puts you just as much in the wrong.
>
>
> He said why he did. He was asked to prove there was/were porn link/s
> there. He gave the link, but also said he thought that Rowland would
> remove the article- or rather that you would as webmaster.. the same
> person who originally put it there- so he posted the text as well.
Senor,
Brad-Lie has no shame; he is just a knee-jerk reflexive defender no
matter what Rowland posts. Or tells Brad-Lie to post......
Blobert!
"pedro" <pe...@nowhere.com> wrote
> Interesting choice of article. Guess who wrote the original article that
> is being replied to? Me! :)
I figured it had to be you; the coincidence was too great.
[not the one with the porn link- to avoid
> any confusion] So here's a good example of Rowland's characteristic
> behaviour. I post an article basically lamenting the decline in social
> standards with regards nudity, based on the example of the Moomba
> parade, which is traditionally a family affair, and saying in essence..
> 'why do we need this crap?'.. And what happens? I get a reply saying (in
> essence) 'Oh gee, it's not so bad' And so what does Wowland do? Does he
> post my original article exhorting the upholding of values of social
> decency and morality? Does he post what I would call the 'positive' one?
> No of course not. He posts the 'negative' one- an article questioning
> whether such standards need to be upheld at all!
That's our Rowland!!! He is only interested in destroying Christianity
and bringing it all down to his level so he can be the lord of it all.
Blobert!
>
> > On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 12:06:13 GMT, "Blobert!" <OneN...@Under.Blob>
wrote:
> >
> >>"ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
> >>news:epmdnT8V1cl...@comcast.com...
> >>
> >>>You Said:
> >>>"I would not expect to log on to my (or any) pastor's website and find
> >>>profanity and articles equating fundamentalism with demonic possession.
> >>>But now I know to expect it from Rowland Croucher."
> >>>
> >>>I say:
> >>>You missed the porn links I see. He has those also.
> >>
> >> Why am I not surprized?
> >
> > Possibly because there is no such word as surprized?
There is according to my "Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary".
It is listed as a valid alternate spelling, and surely, knowing my
penchant for spelling things in a silly fashion, you must have realized that
I would choose to do this. But then, it looks like you aren't as smart as
you think you are, but then we all knew that already.
Blobert<><
Blobert!
"pedro" <pe...@nowhere.com> wrote
> Vera... You have shown without a shadow of a doubt that Rowland
> Croucher, a Baptist Pastor, is clearly anti fundamental Christianity.
He is against any kind of Christianity except the heretical blasphemous
irreverent kind he promotes every hour of every day.
> There can be no doubts about his intent.
Yup.
Blobert!
> Bradley wrote:
>
> > "ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
> > news:fsmdnTl3j5c...@comcast.com
> >
> >>I hope you read this Ninure Saunders. I did NOT lie. there is a link
> >>to porn on his site. Read below. Thank you.
> >>http://www.pastornet.net.au/jmm/articles/948.htm
> >
> >
> > I did not claim you lied, I just asked for a link to what you were
> > referring to so we can all make our own judgement. Is that ok?
> >
> > I think the following quote is apt for you....
> > "I've never understood why when people are on the topic of nudity, they
> > immediately leap to the topic of sex".
>
> There's no doubt that they're closely related. Rather difficult to have
> sex with all your clothes on!
Not as difficult as you think! <eg>
>
> You probably also think that the way a woman dresses and behaves has no
> bearing on the amount of attention she gets, wanted or not, from the
> male gender.
>
> > I've informed Rowland that the link in the article is actually a real
> > site. The link was not hyperlinked initially but has been done so
> > automatically by our new management software. Regardless, as it turns
> > out to be a real site there is no question it should be removed.
Boy, some webmaster he is! He posts the URL of a site and doesn't even
check to see what it is. My 10yo knows better than that. How old is
Brad-Lie? Is he out of single digits yet?
Blobert!
It's not "alleged"; it is still there as of 815AM EDT Tuesday. Face it;
you guys screwed up and are too proud to admit it. You need to apologize to
us (and God!!!) for having a "christian" site with a link to porn.
> >
> > (Though I won't hold my breath :-)
>
> The link was still there. Hyperlinked only means that it can be cliked
> on to automatically launch the users browser to go to the site, as
> opposed to typing it into the address bar.
What you do with a link that is not hyper linked is just highlight it,
click copy and them paste it into the address bar. Takes 3 seconds tops.
Happens all the time.
::: vera :::
pedro
Your absolutely right. Nothing 'alleged' about it is there.
> it is still there as of 815AM EDT Tuesday.
It's gone now. Did you refresh your browser? Sometimes the cached copy
gets reloaded.
> Face it;
> you guys screwed up and are too proud to admit it.
Yep!
> You need to apologize to
> us (and God!!!) for having a "christian" site with a link to porn.
Yes, he is the one who should do the apologising. But rather than simply
admit his error, and own up to it, he still tries to weasel out!
>>>(Though I won't hold my breath :-)
>>
>>The link was still there. Hyperlinked only means that it can be cliked
>>on to automatically launch the users browser to go to the site, as
>>opposed to typing it into the address bar.
>
>
> What you do with a link that is not hyper linked is just highlight it,
> click copy and them paste it into the address bar. Takes 3 seconds tops.
> Happens all the time.
>
Yep!
--
rgds,
Pete.
-----
http://pedro.spyw.com
'The bible says love your neighbours and your enemies.
Probably because they are the same people'
::: vera :::
That's an excellent article, your Majesty Pedro. May I have it and post it
on my website under "Words of Wisdom"? I would really love to. :-)
Maybe if I post all the good stuff to which Bad-Lie posts the answers...
That might get the frontiers clear, and people can read the good stuff on my
website, and the bad stuff on Bad-lies -eh, (or was it the the bed-stuff?) I
mean Mr. Croucher's.
Yeah.
Please let me know...
Be blessed,
::: vera :::
--
::: http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de :::
::: http://www.acc-growing-deeper.de/Israel.htm :::
________________________________________________________________________
::: vera :::
But he supports Mark Tindall's Christian bashing links. He knows about that,
because he even supported them expressively - which is a hit into the face
of every serious Christian.
He also suggested Jesus was a homosexual. Was he aware of it then, of was it
a mistake, maybe?
::: vera :::
Mark Tindall and his bosom friend Rowland Croucher are of course.
> I suggest it is one who breaks the fellowship
> that unites us in the Lord.
Yes, Mark Tindall and Rowland Croucher. They did so, came along, did not
know any of us, and just destroyed the fellowship that united us in the
Lord.
I have lost many friends. I am still losing friends. But I don't mind. I
have got the best friend you can ever have, and some others as well. I your
"Fellowship" is based on the destruction of the fellowship of Christian
Brothers and Sisters, I do not know what a kind of "fellowship" it is.
Blobert!
Blobert!
> Blobert! wrote:
> > It's not "alleged";
>
> Your absolutely right. Nothing 'alleged' about it is there.
>
> > it is still there as of 815AM EDT Tuesday.
>
> It's gone now. Did you refresh your browser? Sometimes the cached copy
> gets reloaded.
No, I dump everything when the browser shuts down and I have a glitch
that will not allow me to read news and surf the web at the same time. It
was there.
>
> > Face it;
> > you guys screwed up and are too proud to admit it.
>
> Yep!
>
> > You need to apologize to
> > us (and God!!!) for having a "christian" site with a link to porn.
>
> Yes, he is the one who should do the apologising. But rather than simply
> admit his error, and own up to it, he still tries to weasel out!
Birds fly, dogs bark, weasels, uh, weasel!!!
Blobert<><
::: vera :::
> news:CsidnQajwvX...@comcast.com
>> On the other hand you could say there were 2 links, one to his page.
>> Then one that was on the page. It would depend on how legalistic you
>> would want to get. At least I didn't violate his copyright notice.
>> And I answered. Yes I am making fun of the situation.
>>
>> without applying for permission
>> (provided they are unedited, and retain the original author/copyright
>> information - and perhaps a reference to this website :-)!"
>>
>> and paste they forgot to check the links.
>> I wonder how many months that was on there. I know it has at least
>> been about 3 months.
>
> As mentioned in another post it was not hyperlinked originally.
But you do know that a link is something that links you with the internet?
Have you ever heard of the term "link"? When you posted this link - what did
you think you would have to do to hyperlink it?
You cannot be serious...
The hyperlink was not hyperlinked...
> We
> have upgraded to a mostly automated content management system that
> automatically hyperlinks things.
Please write down 100 times:
I do not have to hyperlink a hyperlink, neither do I have to do that
automatically, nor manually! A hyperlink hyperlinks itself, that's why it is
called hyperlink.
Ninure Saunders
<spam...@blocked.com> wrote:
-"ROCK" <n...@email.com> wrote in message
-news:25udnavRGJO...@comcast.com
-> As long as you follow his copyright statement. I dont care what you
-> do.
->
->> © John Mark Ministries. Articles may be reproduced in any medium,
->> without applying for permission
->> (provided they are unedited, and retain the original author/copyright
->> information - and perhaps a reference to this website :-)!
-<snip>
-
-Repeating it to make your argument puts you just as much in the wrong.
Thank you!!!
I am glad you got my point/
Also thank you for saying that you will talk to Rowland about that
"hyperlink". thing.
Ninure Saunders aka Rainbow Christian
http://Rainbow-Christian.tk
The Lord is my Shepherd and He knows I'm Gay
http://Ninure-Saunders.tk
Take my polls
http://ninure.100megsfree5.com
My Yahoo Group
http://Ninure.tk
My Online Diary
http://www.ninure.deardiary.net
-
Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches
http://www.MCCchurch.org
The Bible Site - help provide free scripture
http://www.thebiblesite.org
To send e-mail, remove nohate from address
::: vera :::
Rowland Croucher <rccro...@removethispleaseoptusnet.com.au> wrote:
> "Bradley" <spam...@blocked.com> wrote in message
> news:412af...@news.melbourne.pipenetworks.com...
>>> On the other hand you could say there were 2 links, one to his page.
>>> Then one that was on the page. It would depend on how legalistic you
>>> would want to get. At least I didn't violate his copyright notice.
>>> And I answered. Yes I am making fun of the situation.
>>>
>>> (provided they are unedited, and retain the original
>>> website :-)!"
>>>
>>> Frankly I think its funny that it was linked. In their haste to cut
>>> and paste they forgot to check the links.
>>> I wonder how many months that was on there. I know it has at least
>>> been about 3 months.
>>
>> have
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> upgraded to a mostly automated content management system that
>> automatically hyperlinks things.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> --
>> regards,
>>
>> Bradley
>
> It will be interesting to see if any of those who made a loud noise
> about this alleged offense will offer any apologies...
An apology that Bradley did not hyperlink the hyperlink? LOL LOL LOL
> (Though I won't hold my breath :-)
>
> However, that said. I'm appreciative of the censors, oops, I mean
> concerned folk who searched through 13,000 articles to spot the
> naughty link :-)
It is not difficult to find enough mud and slander and other Christian
bashing there. It is harder to find Christian material there, much harder. I
have not found it by now, but I will surely watch. A blind chicken may also
find a corn from time to time.