Thank you to Lance

From Signposts3:

“…a switch just went on, he’d had enough of the pente c…p and instead of a farewell he just pulled the plug.”

~ Teddy, giving Lance’s explanation for why he deleted the original Signposts2.

Lance’s site was controversial and entertaining, exposing anything supporting the view that pastors are ‘pond scum’ and Pentecostal churches are evil institutions, just after your money. He also published articles covering abuse of church members in various forms and the gay Christian debate.

Lots of us enjoyed debating the posts, from the full spectrum of viewpoints, and Lance never deleted posts he didn’t like even though torrents of abuse were hurled in his direction.

Thanks for doing the site Lance. You are always welcome back here and your views will not be censored.

15 thoughts on “Thank you to Lance

  1. Whatever his reasons for quitting, if i was Lance I would have been a little unsettled by “G’s” comments:

    From signposts2 wednesday 9/4/08
    FL, Lance won’t come down. He’s a pussy. But my spies in WA have been doing some digging. Oh the dirt! You should see what I got sent today!!! heheeeeeheeeeeeeeeeeee.

    but you can’t! ‘cos that would ruin it all!”

    This is how shady characters, cults and nefarious organisations deal with their critics and perceived enemies. Threats and intimidation. Seriously, this is how it’s done.

    Threats like blackmail(be careful or we’ll make public your most humiliating secrets past or present) and intimidation (we have people watching you, implying; following you, looking through your garbage, recording you, stalking you) tend to create paranoia, stress and anxiety. Most critics and whistleblowers will eventually give up because of the strain. Not saying that’s why Lance quit but you can understand how these things work.

    “G” went on to say concerning why Lance quit the blog:

    From signposts3

    G Says:
    April 11, 2008 at 9:51 am

    ” Bollocks!!!!

    He knew what was waiting to be unleashed! My spies see all! And they document it very well too.”

    “G” feels his tactics paid off.

    So I asked “G” on signposts3:
    Aren’t threats, intimidation, stalking, blackmail and the like crimes in you’re world “G”?

    Maybe critics are “fair game” in some churches.

    It strikes me that Christians who espouse non-critical positivity and claim leading of the Spirit will attack their detractors in such an unethical way and i wonder if their church sanctions the threats and intimidation or whether the church leaders turn a blind eye while goons from the congregation carry out the dirty work. What church was it that felt so threatened? Why go to such lengths?

    Maybe I’m the only one interested in this? I just didn’t think it should go unnoticed in the story of signposts2 ending. Thanks

  2. Well, I for one don’t condone the use of threats like this.

    Lance and I had our issues, differences and battles, but we mostly faced off one on one, well, that is, until he went upstairs, so from that time on I admit I did my best to provoke him to come down and comment on a level playing field, rather than from afar, where there was no record of comments or right of reply or rebuttal, but I did so as an encouragement to debate issues, not as a put down.

    Not my style, and a very regrettable incident.

  3. No church that I have attended, evangelical or Pentecostal, would have condoned the type of attack that G claimed he made on Lance.

    G perceived Lance as an enemy. (Just to be clear, I never regarded Lance as my enemy.) G claimed to be a Christian. But G did not seem to think that Jesus word’s applied to him:

    Luke 6:27: “But I tell you who hear me: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, 28bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.

    We can debate doctrine to our hearts content, but for those of us wanting to follow Jesus, even when we feel we are being attacked, we are called to love our enemies and bless those who curse us, not attack back, especially in the physical fashion that G implies he was doing. Which may also have just been empty bragging.

  4. G’s behaviour was perfectly compatible with Christianity. You know that ravingpente, so don’t try to squirm out of it, you dishonest person.

  5. Facelift – Whatever the politics I don’t really care but i get what you’re saying. You can see how bad it is. It’s a dangerous mentality.

    If “G” and his cohorts get encouraged by this and face no exposure then who’s the next target for silencing? A legitimate church can’t afford to breed a culture like that otherwise the whole church is heading into spiritual oblivion and scandal right amongst the singing and clapping not to mention the damage to the people being silenced. If no-one notices and no-one does anything then the darkness is already setting in.

    Ravingpente – all that’s kind of what I thought. Although bluff or not it still works the same way.

    David – I know you get the point. Most Christians I know and you know would be pretty pissed off if a group from their church did this and probably shocked as well. Yet there it is. Obviously not all.

    The thing is if it was scientology I’d say sure, if you protest them then wear a mask, if you take them on you’ll want to go to great lengths to conceal your identity whether you have anything to hide or not. Because otherwise they may find out who you are and work on you. It’s Hubbard doctrine. Critics have learnt that the hard way. Most people who know anything about it aren’t shocked or surprised. But with Christianity even an atheist can see the contradiction, especially an atheist because they like to look for and find contradictions between the rhetoric and the reality.

    Anyway, i think I’ve made my point. that’s how I feel about it.

  6. Nice to know you are still out there posting interesting things, Lance. I’m looking forward to having a good look at your site.

  7. Lance! Did he intend to make that new name Christiany but seedy? It’s a disturbing name. I’m gonna say hi!

  8. It seems ironic that Lance was considered to be harassed and copping heaps of abuse, on the face of it.

    I suppose calling all Pastors pond-scum and all Pentecostals quasi Christians is no longer considered offensive! What a sad world we live in.

    I can only remember G as being particularly horrible, and I think that was a provocative attempt at a comeback for some comments he copped.

    Lance is not the most inoffensive of persons. I think he asks for much more than he receives.

  9. i don’t think people generally, on these sites, believe pastors and penties are pond scum. I think they would say that some teachings are wrong and some people go along with it (for whatever reasons).

    You should hear what wordly people think of them and right-wing Christianity

  10. I’m with you, mj. Most people here are not that extreme. Most of us are just really sad at some of teh things we’ve seen, and the way its all gone over the years. Prosperity gospel and its supporting doctrines going further and further over time…

  11. i think i liken the teaching of the Bible to school. If my children are at a school learning, say maths, and the school didn’t teach what was true and right and on the proper curriculum i would complain. Other parents would complain too and that teacher would be “dealt” with by the authorities.

    Teaching about Jesus is the same, it must be done properly. Some people may be able to learn without a teacher, many I know have read many good Christian books and open discussion should be encouraged.

Comments are closed.