You got to chuckle at a person who feels it necessary to complain about these photos and include his "title" (apparently) of "Elder" in his signature. I get the impression we're dealing with a squirrelly, wrinkled old prune of a man who sits at the entrance of the church, checking the length of each skirt that comes in he door to make sure they don't rise more than a full inch above the knees.

Anyone who thinks these photos were "soft core porn" obviously spends far too much of his time obsessing about sex and needs to grow up.

Mr. Boyd,

You said "todays young people have a tough time with their sexuality. With what you advertise they won't have to pick up a Playboy magazine".

Haha...I am sorry, but sexuality has nothing to do with seeing the human body exposed. Artists for centuries have used the naked body as a centerpiece. And these pictures soft core porn? I'll bet you almost have a stroke when the Victoria Secret commercials come on TV.

These pictures were very tasteful, and showed nothing indecent. I was really trying to think of something to say that really emulates how I feel about the "born again believers" who insist that their way is the only way...but I can't. All I can say is I feel sorry for you...I hope God lets you wear pants in heaven.

Undoubtedly the "Elder" has vision problems. In the letter it is stated, "I was appalled that you showed the picture of the young men running naked." While two of the three appear "young," obiously the third does not appear "young" at all.

I agree with my above poster's!

Didn't Adam and Eve raom naked?

So what's the problem Mr. Boyd?

Oh yea, get a life!

are we to believe that ones libido is not stirred when they view naked people.....if yours is not stirred then maybe it's broken.
"...I am sorry (a confession?), but sexuality has nothing to do with seeing the human body exposed"

Main Entry: sex�u�al�i�ty
Pronunciation: "sek-sh&-'wa-l&-tE
Function: noun
: the quality or state of being sexual : a : the condition of having sex b : sexual activity c : expression of sexual receptivity or interest especially when excessive

then how do we separate the state of being sexual from being aroused by the naked body of another ? i agree with mr. boyd that NR demonstrated poor taste in running the picture. mr. boyd would have done well to leave off 'elder' - it leads one to the impression that he is 'nicolaitan'. i would assume there are many of us born again Christians (sorry gaytony)who feel basically like mr.boyd. nakedness in and of itself (for me anyway)is not the issue, the issue arises when we allow our minds to transport us to a place not either honoring ourselves or God.

The writer has a point. The newspaper really is at fault for giving these kinds of dumb people publicity. If they want to run around with their penises flopping around, whatever. It's not news, and just reflects the poor judgment of some editor.

God save us from fanatics who call themselves elder

mr. harper,
for those uninformed, please tell the rest of the story about adam & eve roaming naked. explain why they chose to 'cover' themselves instead of continuing their naked roamings.

Interestingly, due to the composition of the photo, if the writer hadn't told us they were naked we wouldn't have known they were naked so the sin is not in the photo, it's in our own minds. Elder Boyd wishes us to be protected from impure thoughts.

Good luck to him in that.

Actually I sympathize with him somewhat for our society and media is focused on what titilates, but this is small potatoes compared to lots of other things that pass for news.

I took the writers comment on sexuality to mean people struggling with their sexual identity.

In this case, i stand by my original comment...sexuality has nothing to do with seeing the human body exposed.

" I took the writers comment on sexuality to mean people struggling with their sexual identity. "
i believe this comment reveals the posters proclivity towards a personal bias. this sounds like a minority viewpoint. the vast majority of adolesences know whether the are attracted to the opposite or same sex, leaving them confident of their sexual identy (imo). maybe you can answer the question i posed to mr. harper.. " explain why they (adam & eve) chose to 'cover' themselves instead of continuing their naked roamings. " to me there was an apparent reason (and that reasomn may be the first recorded instance of this phenomenon).

I want to see MORE young naked men in the paper, and also on LTE blog.
Elder, we came into this world naked, we most likely will end up naked on the morgue table.
It's just one of them thangs.

I can't resist. I have to admit I ran in that race and it was not my first. It was great! Lots of fun and I don't recall anyone being asked about their sexuality. I also recall the Bible says not to judge. You might be suprised to who did show up. Obviously you have not read the background of BTK. He was also the fine pillar of the comminity, Scout leader and church elder. People on glass houses shouldn't throw rocks.

The blatent atrocity in the paper is all the articles and pictures of humans getting blown up and disfigured in Iraq. There is nothing wrong with the human form. After all it was created by God.

If these folks had been on a beach and a ribbon somehow covered up their trunks, would there have been such gnashing of teeth and wailing? I doubt so. If it had been highschool track members practicing, without shirts and the pic been snapped causing it to appear that they had on no clothes would people complain? If the picture had appeared and made no mention that the runners were naked, would there have been this overzelous out cry? I don't beleive that anyone in this picture was attempting to seduce or lead anyone into temptation. Those with pure hearts, clean hands and I might add clean minds would not be worrying about the what if's of this picture. Nakedness is not a dirty word unless God has changed his mind
recently. Dirt is only in the mind of the perceiver.

Amen, Mr. P. With all the REAL problems we face individually and as a nation, I would not think this photo would rank anywhere near the top of anyone's worry list. But then again, I thought it was a very skillfully shot photo.

I am somewhat ammused at pious Elder M.J. Boyd . . . I mean really with all those Priest have sex with little boys . . . and then this, this picture causes his soul distress. "Wake up born againers and roll about the floor, neck'd people are a runn'in down thar!" What a rube. Oh and when these runners are turning the other cheek in the next picture frame, I'm sure the Elder would want to kiss that and forgive all men . . . what a horse poop.

In the Bible, public nakedness is associated with shame in both the Old and New Testaments. In numerous passages in both the OT and NT, the people of God are urged to cloth any brother or sister who is without clothing, and to give clothing to any poor person who is naked.

This verse is found is Revelation 16: "Blessed is he who watches, and keeps his garments, lest he walk naked and they see his shame."

Some of the posts in this thread seem to imply that God is cool with public nudity, and I just wanted to point out that His Word suggests otherwise.

God certainly does love the human form, which He created. But Scripture indicates that God's people have always worn clothes, ever since God Himself first clothed Adam and Eve (Genesis 3): "Also for Adam and his wife the Lord God made tunics of skin, and clothed them."

I don't mind a bit if you guys argue all day about being naked or not, or printing photos of naked people in the paper, but if you want to talk about what God says about being naked in public, it's a good idea to actually look in the Bible and not just write from your assumptions and opinions about what God thinks. He already told us. Read it.

Peace and love, y'all.

OK, Let's "set the record straight". I have to ask did you and the Elder ride here together?

The location for this event was not "in public". Everyone (300+) came that day of their own free will. I did not see anyone kicking and screaming (gnashing of teeth, if you will) as they were being thrown through the gate. As they say: A good time was had by all.

BTW: Who can tell us who the first streaker was and yes, it's mentioned in the Bible?

mr.flash,
don't know what your definition of streaker is - but right off the top of my head i can recall two incidents that might fit your question.....one is God telling Isaiah to take off his clothes and he did so and walked around naked (for three years).......another possibility is the demon possesed man (or men) in the tombs of the Gadarenes who were naked and seemed to roam the mountains and the tombs and no man could bind them.
now i have a question - why did the two garden inhabitants hide from God, when they heard His (God's) voice walking in the garden ?

dr.flash,
i don't know what your definition of streaker is but i can think of two incidents recorded that might fit the answer......Isaiah is told by God to take his clothes and sandals off, which he did and walked around (and stayed naked for three years)........another possibility is the demon possesed man (or men) in the tombs by the Gadarenes who also were naked and apparantely roamed around the mountains and the tombs. don't know if this is what you were looking for,
i have a question....why did the garden inhabitants hid from God when they heard His (God's) voice walking in the garden ?
if this post shows up twice - sorry it did not seem to work the first time i tried to respond.

I will ask once again and then leave this alone. If there had been no mention of these men being naked would anyone, other than some real prude, actually have noticed?
I suppose now I will have to go back and rip out all the pages of my over 50 year old collection of National Geographic Mags which have pictures of naked people in them.

Close Buz. I was refering to Mark when he ran naked from the Garden when the guards came to arrest Jesus.

Isiah is another good example. Are you Quaker? That was the premis for their streaking events in the spring. LOL

If your not guilty you have no reason to hide.

Oh BTW: What happened to the Elder who started this anyway?

mr.dr.flash,
forgot completely about that reference you mentioned. no not a quaker , just a Christian saved by grace. are you serious about the quaker streaking thing ?
concerning where has elder gone - it is my impression some people just write in to N/R with their comments but may be unaware of the blogsite.

mrproduce,
even the prudes of this world have a right to their opinion - that'a what this forum is about...OPINIONS ! you have to admit there are some "bodies" that once you see them.....you wished you hadn't !!
"Dirt is only in the mind of the perceiver." - have you noticed that perception is as strong or stronger than reality.

buz, no where did I say that no one was not allowed an opinion. I stated that if one looked with a" true eye" there would be nothing to see except some men running who happen not to be wearing shirts.If I saw only that(some bodies) then please pray tell why I would wish I had not seen them.Now I can name you some occassions of some bodies that I had rather not seen but that was under much different circumstances and those bodies or parts there of were dead, not running a race.
I actually found no parts of the body showing that I would not see on any beach in this country or swiming pool for that matter. Please advise me if you saw anthing any different, like body parts. Perhaps my eyes are growing dim at age 60 or perhaps it is your imagination which is keener than mine.

Yes, I understand perception very well and that was to total point of the statement. It certainly was stronger than reality in the case of this picture. Come on buz, what did you actually see? Had there been no label to say this was at a clothing optional area would you have actually paid any attention to the picture. I beleive that if you are honest you will say no you would not have.

Folks harping on how bad this is remind me of my late uncle who was a Baptist preacher, and use to preach on the sins of dipping snuff and chewing tobacco, and yes even ,heaven forbid, going to see a Lone Ranger movie and Bugs Bunny cartoons. He condemned me, my mother and father to hell for my going and their allowing me to go. As he grew older and wiser he soon departed from such judgemental opinions. I am sure that he would object to many of the movies today just as I do but I do not condemn the individual who attends. That is not my job.

MrP., I think a lot of people forget what you just so eloquently said. Judgment is NOT our job. You are hot this morning!!! Good Job!

mrproduce,
you never did mention the word opinion - i was reading between the lines when you said "other than some prude" - i took that as your opinion and thought you meant that prudes don't deserve an opinion....so i came to the defense of the prude. i apologize if i have misunderstood. and i was tonque in cheek when i said "some bodies" we wish we had not seen. let the world run around naked, as for me i'll keep my clothes on...i may be one fo "those bodies" you wish you hadn't seen .
i could noot agree more with your statement "it's not my job".
what does gaytony know about you that we don't?...."You are hot this morning!!! " ???????

Tongue and cheek again, I assume buz?

gaytony i am glad you recognize humor ( even if it's not that good ) when you see it. we gotta relax a little now and then and have some fun. being too serious make those little wrinkles on your forehead ya know !!
no offense intended gaytony

Seems most everything's already been sed. Just like to assure people that there are plenty of Christians out there who are just fine with public nudity and just fine with the Lord. People mature enough to distinguish between nudity and lust. Jesus first appeared naked after the resurrection, which was why Mary thought he was the gardener. Nudity was very common then, and for much of human history. Only comparitively recently has it become taboo. Personally, I don't tend to look at every person around me as a potential sex object, so I don't really mind them being physically unattractive.

A bit of cotton and polyester ain't gonna make that "Where's-The-Beef?" Lady look like Julia Roberts, nor is a conventionally "pretty" body gonna make up for the personality of a Gar Pike. Therefore, I tend to simply accept people, naked or not, as people - flawed, imperfect, brothers and sisters.

I would rather people be comfortable enuf with their own bodies as well as those of others to go naked in public, than to have millions of little girls waking up each morning, crying their eyes out into their wheaties, then puking them up in the school washroom, simply because society tells them their bodies are shameful. Since they've never seen real naked imperfect human bodies, they beleive the Clavin Klein commercials that show them that Beautiful is 90lbs, sickly pale, blonde, and anemic.

And oh yes, now we got little boys doing it too.