|
Post by blandie on May 22, 2016 16:10:06 GMT -5
Your point making out that jesus advocated remaining silent about wrongs in the church is plain wrong. As for judging - I merely asked a question based on your posts - that intentionally or not - too often sound like pushing the same rationalizations that enablers trot out to justify going along and doing nothing - which you've also chosen to remain silent about too. btw its also said ' The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.' Sitting around silently and letting things go on is not a recipe for change - its a vote/non-vote for maintaining the status quo. All I did was to point out that remaining silent was an action taken by Jesus on one occasion, it was nothing new, I have nowhere indicated that it was/is the correct thing to do to coverup or encourge wrong doing in any church i have condenmed this in many of my postings in the past on this forum. I have spoken out against abuse, and CSA in particular, shunning, and exclusivism and some other things that I perceive to be wrong. Silence can be golden in some circumstances, there is a time and a season for everything., a time to be silent and a time to be outspoken at the opportune moments when the impact is most forceful and telling. But you just jumped off the rail and put your on interpretaion to it and quetioned my integrity. i have found that rather offensive , to be honest. Exactly as I said - its completely misreading the bible to use jesus remaining silent before those accusing HIM as a rationale for remaining silent and sitting still regarding wrongs and abuses and false doctrine or other things in the church. You make it sound like one cannot disagree with your position - or with how your posts come across - without questioning your integrity or 'being offensive'?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2016 16:16:40 GMT -5
All I did was to point out that remaining silent was an action taken by Jesus on one occasion, it was nothing new, I have nowhere indicated that it was/is the correct thing to do to coverup or encourge wrong doing in any church i have condenmed this in many of my postings in the past on this forum. I have spoken out against abuse, and CSA in particular, shunning, and exclusivism and some other things that I perceive to be wrong. Silence can be golden in some circumstances, there is a time and a season for everything., a time to be silent and a time to be outspoken at the opportune moments when the impact is most forceful and telling. But you just jumped off the rail and put your own interpretaion to it and quetioned my integrity. i have found that rather offensive , to be honest. So - one cannot disagree with your position - or with how your posts come across - without questioning your integrity or 'being offensive'? Of course, but you have been very offensive and insulting in your responese and I take exception to such uncivil behaviour. Anyway, blessings and best wishes to you. Goodbye.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 22, 2016 17:41:29 GMT -5
I can't agree with applying those maxims to justify doing nothing - not even to raise a voice in disagreement - and I've heard those 'be patient and change will come' for near a half century and nothing of substance and nothing that addressed the core problem was done and in the meantime how many have been lured into that by such hopeful delusions? You're oversimplifying the "silence does not always give or mean consent' caveat - that is called 'tacit approval' - remaining silent when one should have and was able to speak does imply assent. The caveat is when one is under restraint or feels threatened or cannot speak then silence doesn't imply anything but thats not the case here - and I expect more than me have seen folks and groups nod in assent and continue to give their active support despite absolutely outrageous trash spoken by a worker which goes beyond tacit assent and is actual assent/consent. Well we will have to agree to differ. Jesus at one point remained silent to His accusers too.That does not mean that He agreed with them and gave assent/consent.Obviously your experiences differ from mine as we are located in different parts of the world and it has been ascertained the practices are not universal. That reason doesn't apply in this circumstance. After all, when Jesus remained silent to his accusers it was because they were accusing him. It was not due to some harm someone had done to another person.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2016 17:48:36 GMT -5
Well we will have to agree to differ. Jesus at one point remained silent to His accusers too.That does not mean that He agreed with them and gave assent/consent.Obviously your experiences differ from mine as we are located in different parts of the world and it has been ascertained the practices are not universal. That reason doesn't apply in this circumstance. After all, when Jesus remained silent to his accusers it was because they were accusing him. It was not a harm someone had done to another person.
Yes I grant you that, but Jesus used it as a sort of technique and I am suggeting that others here may be using it similarly, for whatever reason, who knows? i never said that it was the right or justifiable thing to do morally. I speculated on a possible reason.
|
|
|
Post by blandie on May 22, 2016 17:56:36 GMT -5
Of course, but you have been very offensive and insulting in your responese and I take exception to such uncivil behaviour. Anyway, blessings and best wishes to you. Goodbye. Can you say what why and how you are offended or what is uncivil? As I recall being drummed into my head in school - giving feedback consisting only of feelings and vague charge without specifying what and why something is wrong doesn't tell anyone - including yourself - anything. I have not even attempted to read your mind or assume anything beyond what you wrote and I have quoted. Yeah you and I disagree with some of those things as you have stated - unless you were actually arguing in favor of speaking up or taking action against wrongs? I sure didn't and don't get that from what you wrote - quite the opposite and it is not uncivil to point out that & why I disagree with the be quiet and do nothing approach thats encouraged in the F&W's. I am sorry that you find my comments offensive or uncivil for whatever reason.
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 22, 2016 18:34:19 GMT -5
That reason doesn't apply in this circumstance. After all, when Jesus remained silent to his accusers it was because they were accusing him. It was not a harm someone had done to another person.
Yes I grant you that, but Jesus used it as a sort of technique and I am suggeting that others here may be using it similarly, for whatever reason, who knows? i never said that it was the right or justifiable thing to do morally. I speculated on a possible reason. It is one thing to not try & defend yourself by not speaking up in your defense, -specially when you know it is hopeless any way. It is quite another to be silent when you observe another person being harmed.
I have been in that circumstance in both cases. I knew it was useless for me to try & defend myself. Among others who knew what was happening to me, there was only one who spoke up for me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 22, 2016 18:59:29 GMT -5
Yes I grant you that, but Jesus used it as a sort of technique and I am suggeting that others here may be using it similarly, for whatever reason, who knows? i never said that it was the right or justifiable thing to do morally. I speculated on a possible reason. It is one thing to not try & defend yourself by not speaking up in your defense, -specially when you know it is hopeless any way. It is quite another to be silent when you observe another person being harmed.
I have been in that circumstance in both cases. I knew it was useless for me to try & defend myself. Among others who knew what was happening to me, there was only one who spoke up for me.Ok, you speak from first hand experience and IBelieve you and will respect that.
|
|
|
Post by rational on May 23, 2016 7:25:02 GMT -5
Tacit approval, or remaining silent when one should have spoken up, is a very serious issue. There is a word for folks who try to have it both ways by keeping their mouth shut - cowards. Furthermore, tacit approval is criminal is some cases such as one parent standing by while the other parent abuses a child. This is one of the many issues that can be explored by examining the answers people provide to the trolley thought experiment posted elsewhere on this forum. Is standing by and doing nothing really the cowardly move? Moral decisions based on a person's personal morals may well have considered other alternatives. Would a omnipotent omniscient being, standing by and remaining silent, giving tacit approval of child abuse that the being is aware of and could prevent, be considered a coward?
|
|
|
Post by Gene on May 23, 2016 17:28:16 GMT -5
Tacit approval, or remaining silent when one should have spoken up, is a very serious issue. There is a word for folks who try to have it both ways by keeping their mouth shut - cowards. Furthermore, tacit approval is criminal is some cases such as one parent standing by while the other parent abuses a child. This is one of the many issues that can be explored by examining the answers people provide to the trolley thought experiment posted elsewhere on this forum. Is standing by and doing nothing really the cowardly move? Moral decisions based on a person's personal morals may well have considered other alternatives. Would a omnipotent omniscient being, standing by and remaining silent, giving tacit approval of child abuse that the being is aware of and could prevent, be considered a coward? "Cowardly criminal," perhaps?
|
|
|
Post by joanna on May 23, 2016 22:38:30 GMT -5
Rational wrote "Would a omnipotent omniscient being, standing by and remaining silent, giving tacit approval of child abuse that the being is aware of and could prevent, be considered a coward? "
This is particularly concerning when the abusers are serving this supposed omniscient,omnipotent and benevolent being. The lack of intervention in these instances should inspire serious contemplation regarding the efficacy of the christian deity.
|
|