The JA Thesaurus ;) -- Jesus Army Watch Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, [10] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 9/03/09 8:45:54pm
Author: Tom
Subject: The JA Thesaurus ;)
In reply to: Peter Eveleigh 's message, "Rodding is the JA word" on 9/03/09 8:33:20pm

>Beating is a strong word, but it is a rather strong
>issue. The JA word, if you prefer, was "rodding",
>which I think is rather nastier because it was coined
>by the fellowship.

Rodding is not a word invented by the JA. The reference it to the bible verse "spare the rod, spoil the child".

>If you have any doubt about whether rodding took
>place, you only have to look at the wikipedia article
>on the JA, which is almost entirely a JA whitewash,
>yet which includes this: "Allegations that the JA had
>too authoritarian a style of leadership and that
>members were under pressure to commit to life-long
>celibacy, together with the fact that corporal
>punishment of children (rodding) was practised, and
>that community members were required to hand over
>their material possessions, left them vulnerable to
>accusations of cultic practices."

I have no reason to disbelieve you but it it not something that I have personally seen nor been aware of. We live in a different generation now - one where most children would cringe at the idea of putting their kid over their knee and teaching them a lesson, myself included. My father however - that's a different matter, at the time he and many others would have thought nothing of it.

To focus on what was an [incorrectly IMO] generally accepted thing in general polulation and if I may add, education [belt, cane - both of which I experienced] and say it was only used in the JA is a bit off to be honest. Next thing the JA will be the sole cause of global warming by trekking their cars from one end of the country to the other ;)

>Actually, I wrote it, but because I could provide
>citations which John Campbell could not refute, it is
>a statement which cannot be excised from the largely
>pro-JA advert the entry has become.

Ah, Wikipedia is hardly a definitive source of information. Labour and the Tories could tell a tale or two ;)

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

rodding is JA vernacular, not biblical -- Peter Eveleigh, 9/03/09 8:52:08pm
- What can I say? -- Tom, 9/03/09 8:59:49pm
  - Noel defends what you now deny -- Peter Eveleigh, 9/03/09 9:58:53pm
    - Hmmmmmm -- Tom, 9/03/09 10:09:54pm
      - Re: Hmmmmmm -- Peter Eveleigh, 9/03/09 10:17:50pm
        Re: Hmmmmmm -- Tom, 9/03/09 10:19:48pm
        fashions and bannings -- Peter Eveleigh, 9/03/09 10:33:35pm
        Re: fashions and bannings -- nelly, 9/03/09 10:52:21pm
        Re: fashions and bannings -- Peter Eveleigh, 9/03/09 11:08:50pm
        Name and shame -- Tom, 9/03/09 11:53:17pm
        Re: Name and shame -- nelly, 10/03/09 12:31:30am
        Re: Name and shame -- Peter Eveleigh, 10/03/09 7:17:20pm
        Tabloid headlines are they the new gospel? -- Tom, 9/03/09 11:58:35pm
        red tops sensationalise the unusual, not the commonplace -- Peter Eveleigh, 10/03/09 7:20:27pm

[ Login ] Create Account Not required to post.
Post a public reply to this message | Go post a new public message
* HTML allowed in marked fields.
Message subject (required):

Name (required):

Expression ^{(Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)}

E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:
>>Beating is a strong word, but it is a rather strong >>issue. The JA word, if you prefer, was "rodding", >>which I think is rather nastier because it was coined >>by the fellowship. > >Rodding is not a word invented by the JA. The >reference it to the bible verse "spare the rod, spoil >the child". > >>If you have any doubt about whether rodding took >>place, you only have to look at the wikipedia article >>on the JA, which is almost entirely a JA whitewash, >>yet which includes this: "Allegations that the JA had >>too authoritarian a style of leadership and that >>members were under pressure to commit to life-long >>celibacy, together with the fact that corporal >>punishment of children (rodding) was practised, and >>that community members were required to hand over >>their material possessions, left them vulnerable to >>accusations of cultic practices." > >I have no reason to disbelieve you but it it not >something that I have personally seen nor been aware >of. We live in a different generation now - one where >most children would cringe at the idea of putting >their kid over their knee and teaching them a lesson, >myself included. My father however - that's a >different matter, at the time he and many others would >have thought nothing of it. > >To focus on what was an [incorrectly IMO] generally >accepted thing in general polulation and if I may add, >education [belt, cane - both of which I experienced] >and say it was only used in the JA is a bit off to be >honest. Next thing the JA will be the sole cause of >global warming by trekking their cars from one end of >the country to the other ;) > >>Actually, I wrote it, but because I could provide >>citations which John Campbell could not refute, it is >>a statement which cannot be excised from the largely >>pro-JA advert the entry has become. > >Ah, Wikipedia is hardly a definitive source of >information. Labour and the Tories could tell a tale >or two ;)
Choose Message Icon: [ View Emoticons ]

Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.

Forum timezone: GMT+0
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums^(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.