|
|
Post by ts on May 16, 2012 2:06:00 GMT -5
Where is the magnetic field that governs a moral compass? There's a lot of good moral advice taught in the bible, but I expect RAT our resident atheist has a better moral compass than some workers and elders. If all you are expecting out of your spiritual leaders is a good moral compass, then you might as well have an atheist as your spiritual leader or a Buddhist monk. Personally, I think the workers have stooped really low to only rely on the moral code of the world around them and the righteousness of the legal system. They don't need a moral compass. They need the life of Jesus Christ lived out in them. Sadly, this life is not evident in some of the key leadership positions in the work. |
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on May 16, 2012 10:59:59 GMT -5
I'll second that, especially for the non-violent. Great idea! I wonder how many cases there are of csa amongst f&w world wide and are they handled the same way in each country? By handled the same way I mean swept under the carpet? I don't know the complete question to this, jwatt, but I strongly suspect the CSA is handled very similarly worldwide in the 2x2s. (At least, what I've heard in NZ matches up with my experiences.) My reasoning for this is simple. For regular 2x2 sins (watching TV, women wearing pants, missing a meeting because you're sick), it's up to the individual overseer's discretion as to how he'll punish the 2x2 sins. (These folks with the 2x2 sins are usually low-ranking 2x2s and can easily be lost from the meetings - no harm to the overseer's position or his money flow.) For true evil, such as CSA, the overseers of different areas have to meet and discuss the "acceptable" punishment (if any). This discussion MUST happen because it's likely that the offender is good friends with other overseers and/or rich 2x2s. The overseer is terrified to handle/punish true evil on his lonesome because he's afraid of losing his overseer position by upsetting buddies of his fellow overseers or influential 2x2s. |
|
|
|
Post by Happy Feet on May 16, 2012 15:33:25 GMT -5
Professing people are also afraid to speak out against issues such as sexual abuse for fear of being kicked out. Look how JO was treated by noels for speaking out against it.
I admire people like JO and others on here who fear God more than man.
Many tend to forget that eternity is a long time and prefer to look good in this life and receive the praise of the workers.
|
|
|
|
Post by SharonArnold on May 16, 2012 16:07:35 GMT -5
Professing people are also afraid to speak out against issues such as sexual abuse for fear of being kicked out. Look how JO was treated by noels for speaking out against it. I admire people like JO and others on here who fear God more than man. I agree that there are a number of really admirable 2X2’s on this board. Like JO. I grew up among a number of such-minded people, and it is for this reason that I will never choose to see only the bad in the 2X2 system. I often think of Pinky’s response ( professing.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=truth&action=display&thread=18101&page=8) to noels statement that he was simply unable to understand how God could use people like Jo and Clearday: “Here's how God uses such minded people. He uses them to give those like me hope that one day things will be better. That it's possible to be professing but also tolerant, respectful, non exclusive, and non judgemental of outsiders and former members. That it's possible to be a member but acknowledge the bad and the ugly as well as the good, because things won't change without doing so. And that it's possible to see both sides of the fence with objectivity, instead of simply and blindly wearing the hat of F&W apologist. That's why I hang around TMB. I hope to see change within the system, and long for the day it filters down and I see some of the above 'thawing' in my own family. These 'such minded people' are the bridge builders around here, the ones we need, and the more, the better. I appreciate and thank God for them!” I am watching and waiting (probably as are others). Hoping that what seems to have gone down here (as evidenced on this thread) didn’t really happen. It saddens me. It disappoints me. But it does not surprise me. noels has a lot of maturing to do. Hopefully he does not do too much damage in the meantime. |
|
simon
New Member
Posts: 33
|
Post by simon on May 18, 2012 15:12:38 GMT -5
It is now one month since this thread started.
We all know there are gaps in the way this case was handled. Not everyone advised, meeting left in the home. And so on.
I thought I would check with some friends who live in the north of the country who have been aware of the situation for a number of years.
As far as they are concerned there has been no recent developments or changes whatsoever. All continues as it ever did.
Everyone reading here must recognise that a wrong has been done and continues to be done. I urge everyone to keep pointing out the case whenever you speak with those who have any authority in the fellowship. Many may want to "bury" the case out of sight out of mind, and therefore want to bury it in deceit or platitudes. Let it be sorted, and then the burial can take place legitimately,legally and with a sense of justice. Wrong must not be allowed to continue unchallenged. Keep asking, keep prodding until NZ becomes the place that Noels says it is already. He is very sadly mistaken on where he says NZ currently stands regarding csa. The handling of this case speaks for itself. There’s nothing wrong in setting out to improve how these things are handled in NZ but it’s not wise or truthful to exaggerate where things currently stand – it just leads to embarrassment when the reality clearly falls so far short from the desired vision.
|
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on May 18, 2012 17:21:18 GMT -5
If there are multiple families attending this meeting in NZ, why is the only home "worthy of the privilege" of having the Sunday morning meeting the house of a CSA offender?
Why can't the meeting be moved, or rotated, among these other families?
|
|
|
|
Post by JO on May 18, 2012 21:19:02 GMT -5
What we're seeing these days is a form of godliness but denying its power.
Its the result of decades of focusing on a gospel of form rather than a gospel of power.
It seems that I'm rather old-fashioned in my expectations that workers and elders should have power over their zippers.
I'm still hoping that righteousness and godliness will once again become important to us as a fellowship.
------------------ ------------------- ------------------ --------------- ------------- ----------------- --------------
2 Timothy 3
3 But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days.
2 People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy,
3 without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good,
4 treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God—
5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people.
6 They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over gullible women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires,
7 always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gene on May 18, 2012 22:52:15 GMT -5
What we're seeing these days is a form of godliness but denying its power. Its the result of decades of focusing on a gospel of form rather than a gospel of power. It seems that I'm rather old-fashioned in my expectations that workers and elders should have power over their zippers. I'm still hoping that righteousness and godliness will once again become important to us as a fellowship. ------------------ ------------------- ------------------ --------------- ------------- ----------------- -------------- 2 Timothy 3 3 But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. 2 People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3 without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, 4 treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people. 6 They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over gullible women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, 7 always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth. Perhaps the problem is that there is no 'God' in it, and as long as men rely on an entity of their imagination to provide direction and moral guidance, they will be left adrift to winds and tides of the same pride, greed and lust from which they created their god. |
|
|
|
Post by JO on May 19, 2012 1:29:07 GMT -5
Some interesting stats around disclosure of child sexual abuse:
Less than 40% of survivors of sexual abuse are likely to disclose the abuse (Mullen et al., 1991).
The Anderson study (1993) found that only 7.5% of cases of child sexual abuse were ever officially reported.
Research conducted by Dr Kim McGregor (2003) of 191 women with histories of child sexual abuse found that they took 16 years on average before they told anyone about the abuse.
Only 3.8% disclosed immediately. The majority of disclosures (76%) were first made to family, friends and partners.
Only 15% of first disclosures were made to therapists and less than 4% to doctors and other health professionals.
|
|
|
|
Post by JO on May 19, 2012 2:03:25 GMT -5
A message to offenders from Dr Kim McGregor's book:
Seek help for yourself from someone who specialises in dealing with child sexual offenders. You are unlikely to stop abusing children without specialised help, even if you believe you can.
Many people sexually abuse children - you are not alone in this. Reach out for help to specialists who work with people who are attracted to children. They will not judge you. Instead, they will work with you to help you stop offending.
You are not necessarily a completely 'bad' person, but your behaviour is likely to have caused great harm to people who trusted you. If you genuinely want to stop your abusive behavior and gain a non-abusive lifestyle, you can. However, it will require willingness and commitment on your part.
The benefits for you and those who love you will be enormous - if you get the help you need. Be strong enough to take responsibility for what you have done and try not to minimise or deny any of your past actions.
Be warned, however, that even after you have completed an offenders' programme, you should never allow yourself to be left alone or unsupervised with a child or children ever again - no matter how inconvenient or costly this may be to arrange.
Furthermore, you must ensure that you remove yourself from any situation in which you may re-offend. You must also never allow yourself to be in a position where you are rewarding or punishing children. Once you have abused your position of trust and authority over children, you should not hold such a position again.
---------------------------- -------------------------- ---------------------- ---------------- ------------------
Some questions the church needs to consider in light of the foregoing professional advice:
1. Is it appropriate for anyone who has sexually abused a child to serve as an elder? (Or host a meeting in his home)
2. Is it appropriate for anyone who has sexually abused a child to serve as a worker?
3. What steps should be taken by the church to protect children from those who have a history of having sexually abused a child?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2012 5:10:09 GMT -5
Some interesting stats around disclosure of child sexual abuse:Less than 40% of survivors of sexual abuse are likely to disclose the abuse (Mullen et al., 1991). The Anderson study (1993) found that only 7.5% of cases of child sexual abuse were ever officially reported. Research conducted by Dr Kim McGregor (2003) of 191 women with histories of child sexual abuse found that they took 16 years on average before they told anyone about the abuse. Only 3.8% disclosed immediately. The majority of disclosures (76%) were first made to family, friends and partners. Only 15% of first disclosures were made to therapists and less than 4% to doctors and other health professionals. I'll add to that. Back in the early 90s I was involved in the investigation of a case where two male "carers" at a resdidential school for boys from unfortunate backgrounds, systematically b-gg---d the boys in their care over a period of years. The matter did not come to light until many years later through another line of enquiry, not a direct report of the matter by any of the victims. A minimum of 36 victims, now adult males, were traced by the police and interviewed about the matter. Only "6" wished to make a complaint and even then one of them later withdrew his complaint. Those who did not want to complain had their own reasons for doing so, such as not wanting to bring up the past; they were now married with families of their own and didn't want their families to know about things; face going to court, etc, etc. Still, the 5 complainers were sufficient to put the two culprits behind bars for a while and the case resulted in the residential school being closed down and demolished. Whilst the wishes and needs of victims are paramount, it is very unfortunate that where a victim does not wish the matter to be investigated by the authorities, this presents an ideal opportunity for pertrators and their protectors to allege the victim has made false allegations, citing the "non-action" as proof of their defence. In the current Scottish case where the perpetrator has admitted the allegations made against him to his overseer etc, and the victim has made it known they do not wish the matter reported to the aurthorities, there is now spreading of the evil claims of "all lies and false allegations," no doubt in order to save face for the system. Another example of denying the history. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2012 5:13:16 GMT -5
It feels like the original topic on this thread is now winding down. I have been glancing around the Board at different threads, and feel I have nothing more to add anywhere. I also notice I don’t really ‘feel at home’ on the Board. I am also amazed at how much time I have spent here looking on the Board, with knock-on effects on time used elsewhere. Taking all these things into consideration I have decided this will be my last post.
Before leaving the Board, I would like to make a comment about the opening post and especially this sentence. “I understand that the evidence of the abuse (via legal statements by a couple of the abused children) has been given to the overseer but no action has followed.”
The position I find myself in is that some are clear that the statements referred to were legal statements while others are just as adamant that they weren’t. I feel I don’t have sufficient evidence to change what’s written, but thought it was fair to note that this difference in view exists, and has been a concern to some.
The last couple of days I have been doing my own check on where the case has reached and I am now fully satisfied that
a) any gap that existed with people with children in this man’s meetings not being informed, has now definitely been closed
b) safeguards have been put in place to ensure such a gap doesn’t open up again.
Personally I would have preferred the meeting to be removed from the man’s home, for the same reasons others have expressed previously on the Board. At some point I hope that that still happens. On the other hand I do think the points listed above are more important in protecting children at risk.
My best wishes to all
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2012 9:06:17 GMT -5
Thanks for your help Steffan. Perhaps your interest will rise again on the next NZ case but your participation on this is greatly appreciated.
Filling in the cracks of the "need to know" part of this has been a fruitful part of this exercise.
Allowing a known offender to have a meeting in the home is definitely problematic. Appointing a meeting home confers a level of trustworthiness on the host of the meeting by the ministry group and the fellowship group as a whole. Blind trust is one major element which makes children vulnerable to abuse.
The fellowship/ministry also needs to let the victims know through their representative that they are not only sympathetic, but also are willing to listen to and appropriately respond to whatever the victims wish them to do to try to make things right. "What do you want us to do to make things right?" should always be a primary question. The victims may not want anything but they will always appreciate the acknowledgement of the wrong and the sentiment of willingness to help. This alone can be a big factor in the healing of the victims, thus putting the fellowship on the right side of a difficult situation.
JO points out what offenders should do according to Dr. McGregor. " Seek help for yourself from someone who specialises in dealing with child sexual offenders. You are unlikely to stop abusing children without specialised help, even if you believe you can." That is good advice if the offender is not willing to turn himself in to the authorities for his crimes.
As far as what we know to date, a little has been done in case but not enough. It will probably remain open until such time as the ministry is seen as proactively doing what is right, not just the bare minimum.
We await further good news on this case.
|
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 19, 2012 16:01:08 GMT -5
A message to offenders from Dr Kim McGregor's book:Seek help for yourself from someone who specialises in dealing with child sexual offenders. You are unlikely to stop abusing children without specialised help, even if you believe you can. Many people sexually abuse children - you are not alone in this. Reach out for help to specialists who work with people who are attracted to children. They will not judge you. Instead, they will work with you to help you stop offending. You are not necessarily a completely 'bad' person, but your behaviour is likely to have caused great harm to people who trusted you. If you genuinely want to stop your abusive behavior and gain a non-abusive lifestyle, you can. However, it will require willingness and commitment on your part. The benefits for you and those who love you will be enormous - if you get the help you need. Be strong enough to take responsibility for what you have done and try not to minimise or deny any of your past actions. Be warned, however, that even after you have completed an offenders' programme, you should never allow yourself to be left alone or unsupervised with a child or children ever again - no matter how inconvenient or costly this may be to arrange. Furthermore, you must ensure that you remove yourself from any situation in which you may re-offend. You must also never allow yourself to be in a position where you are rewarding or punishing children. Once you have abused your position of trust and authority over children, you should not hold such a position again. ---------------------------- -------------------------- ---------------------- ---------------- ------------------ Some questions the church needs to consider in light of the foregoing professional advice: 1. Is it appropriate for anyone who has sexually abused a child to serve as an elder? (Or host a meeting in his home) Generally speaking, no. Which of Dr. McGregors suggestions do you interpret would disallow that?2. Is it appropriate for anyone who has sexually abused a child to serve as a worker? No3. What steps should be taken by the church to protect children from those who have a history of having sexually abused a child? The guidelines that have been made available are generally good. |
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 19, 2012 16:02:17 GMT -5
It feels like the original topic on this thread is now winding down. I have been glancing around the Board at different threads, and feel I have nothing more to add anywhere. I also notice I don’t really ‘feel at home’ on the Board. I am also amazed at how much time I have spent here looking on the Board, with knock-on effects on time used elsewhere. Taking all these things into consideration I have decided this will be my last post. Before leaving the Board, I would like to make a comment about the opening post and especially this sentence. “I understand that the evidence of the abuse (via legal statements by a couple of the abused children) has been given to the overseer but no action has followed.” The position I find myself in is that some are clear that the statements referred to were legal statements while others are just as adamant that they weren’t. I feel I don’t have sufficient evidence to change what’s written, but thought it was fair to note that this difference in view exists, and has been a concern to some. The last couple of days I have been doing my own check on where the case has reached and I am now fully satisfied that a) any gap that existed with people with children in this man’s meetings not being informed, has now definitely been closed b) safeguards have been put in place to ensure such a gap doesn’t open up again. Personally I would have preferred the meeting to be removed from the man’s home, for the same reasons others have expressed previously on the Board. At some point I hope that that still happens. On the other hand I do think the points listed above are more important in protecting children at risk. My best wishes to all Thank you. We appreciate your willingness to communicate and be a messenger. |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on May 19, 2012 19:05:31 GMT -5
What we're seeing these days is a form of godliness but denying its power. Its the result of decades of focusing on a gospel of form rather than a gospel of power. It seems that I'm rather old-fashioned in my expectations that workers and elders should have power over their zippers. I'm still hoping that righteousness and godliness will once again become important to us as a fellowship. ------------------ ------------------- ------------------ --------------- ------------- ----------------- -------------- 2 Timothy 3 3 But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. 2 People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3 without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, 4 treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people. 6 They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over gullible women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, 7 always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth. Amen! |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on May 19, 2012 19:10:36 GMT -5
"Some questions the church needs to consider in light of the foregoing professional advice:
1. Is it appropriate for anyone who has sexually abused a child to serve as an elder? (Or host a meeting in his home)
2. Is it appropriate for anyone who has sexually abused a child to serve as a worker?
3. What steps should be taken by the church to protect children from those who have a history of having sexually abused a child?"
Quoted from JO
IF one wants the right answer, we need to look to what the authorities say...do they not demand that CSA convicts NOT be in the presence of children, never be alone with children, never serve a duty where children are, never have a job wherre children are.
Ex CSA convicts do not ever get to be around children again, except their own, IF they so happen to have them
|
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 19, 2012 20:13:36 GMT -5
IF one wants the right answer, we need to look to what the authorities say...do they not demand that CSA convicts NOT be in the presence of children, never be alone with children, never serve a duty where children are, never have a job wherre children are. Ex CSA convicts do not ever get to be around children again, except their own, IF they so happen to have them In some cases only supervision is required, I believe. |
|
|
|
Post by JO on May 19, 2012 20:26:28 GMT -5
A message to offenders from Dr Kim McGregor's book:Seek help for yourself from someone who specialises in dealing with child sexual offenders. You are unlikely to stop abusing children without specialised help, even if you believe you can. Many people sexually abuse children - you are not alone in this. Reach out for help to specialists who work with people who are attracted to children. They will not judge you. Instead, they will work with you to help you stop offending. You are not necessarily a completely 'bad' person, but your behaviour is likely to have caused great harm to people who trusted you. If you genuinely want to stop your abusive behavior and gain a non-abusive lifestyle, you can. However, it will require willingness and commitment on your part. The benefits for you and those who love you will be enormous - if you get the help you need. Be strong enough to take responsibility for what you have done and try not to minimise or deny any of your past actions. Be warned, however, that even after you have completed an offenders' programme, you should never allow yourself to be left alone or unsupervised with a child or children ever again - no matter how inconvenient or costly this may be to arrange. Furthermore, you must ensure that you remove yourself from any situation in which you may re-offend. You must also never allow yourself to be in a position where you are rewarding or punishing children. Once you have abused your position of trust and authority over children, you should not hold such a position again. ---------------------------- -------------------------- ---------------------- ---------------- ------------------ Some questions the church needs to consider in light of the foregoing professional advice: 1. Is it appropriate for anyone who has sexually abused a child to serve as an elder? (Or host a meeting in his home) Generally speaking, no. Which of Dr. McGregors suggestions do you interpret would disallow that?2. Is it appropriate for anyone who has sexually abused a child to serve as a worker? No3. What steps should be taken by the church to protect children from those who have a history of having sexually abused a child? The guidelines that have been made available are generally good. Dr McGegor's advice was "Once you have abused your position of trust and authority over children, you should not hold such a position again". Do you think a child being raised in meetings might see the man of the Sunday AM meeting home as in a position of trust and authority? How would you like to be the person to tell the families in the meeting that the elder or meeting host is a child sexual abuse risk? Emy: The guidelines that have been made available are generally good.JO: The guidelines won't be effective until endorsed by the ministry and brought to the notice of all friends and workers. Has any overseer anywhere endorsed them? |
|
|
|
Post by JO on May 19, 2012 20:33:02 GMT -5
We are doing things correctly here in NZ. Advice is sought from professionals as appropriate and where necessary. In consulting with a professional in such a matter recently he expressed appreciation for our way of handling CSA issues and said he wished all church groups that he dealt with handled them in such a manner. I wonder how professionals would feel about child sex offenders hosting Sunday AM church services? |
|
|
|
Post by emy on May 19, 2012 21:26:47 GMT -5
JO: Dr McGegor's advice was "Once you have abused your position of trust and authority over children, you should not hold such a position again". Do you think a child being raised in meetings might see the man of the Sunday AM meeting home as in a position of trust and authority? I don't have broad experience with this. Thinking of my own experience with elders when I was a child, no, I can't say I would have given them more authority than any other man in the meeting just because they were elders.
Guessing at my own children's experience, I would say the same. I do know of cases where elders and their wives become sort of surrogate granparents if biological grandparents don't live near. Authority figures? Not that I know of.How would you like to be the person to tell the families in the meeting that the elder or meeting host is a child sexual abuse risk? A very rhetorical question, imo. But I'd say it might depend on the facts of the case. The guidelines won't be effective until endorsed by the ministry and brought to the notice of all friends and workers. Be patient. You asked for appropriate steps, not how to force it to happen.Has any overseer anywhere endorsed them? I do not know. |
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on May 19, 2012 23:50:58 GMT -5
Maybe, JO, the better questions to ask is: Why are we willing to sacrifice our children?
Most professing folks, when reading the passages in Deuteronomy, Judges, Leviticus, and II Kings about sacrificing the children as burnt offerings, will proclaim, "Why, that was bad because they were worshipping false gods!"
Now, when workers place CSA offenders in positions of trust within the meetings, professing folks do not view this as sacrificing children or worshipping a false god. They view this is as...something like..."not offending," or "upholding a standard"...or "respecting the work"... or something.
Is there really a difference in these two scenarios? What makes it reasonable for us to sacrifice children?
|
|
|
|
Post by JO on May 20, 2012 1:03:45 GMT -5
JO: Dr McGegor's advice was "Once you have abused your position of trust and authority over children, you should not hold such a position again". Do you think a child being raised in meetings might see the man of the Sunday AM meeting home as in a position of trust and authority? I don't have broad experience with this. Thinking of my own experience with elders when I was a child, no, I can't say I would have given them more authority than any other man in the meeting just because they were elders.
Guessing at my own children's experience, I would say the same. I do know of cases where elders and their wives become sort of surrogate granparents if biological grandparents don't live near. Authority figures? Not that I know of.How would you like to be the person to tell the families in the meeting that the elder or meeting host is a child sexual abuse risk? A very rhetorical question, imo. But I'd say it might depend on the facts of the case. The guidelines won't be effective until endorsed by the ministry and brought to the notice of all friends and workers. Be patient. You asked for appropriate steps, not how to force it to happen.Has any overseer anywhere endorsed them? I do not know. Emy, we're talking about child sexual abuse. Do you honestly think its wise of workers to put Sunday AM meetings in the homes of child sex abusers? I can hardly believe you would say something like this without being alarmed: "I do know of cases where elders and their wives become sort of surrogate granparents if biological grandparents don't live near."Elder with history of child sexual abuse... Elder becomes a sort of surrogate grandparent... Recipe for disaster??? Does anyone care about our children??? |
|
|
|
Post by JO on May 20, 2012 3:28:31 GMT -5
Maybe, JO, the better questions to ask is: Why are we willing to sacrifice our children? Most professing folks, when reading the passages in Deuteronomy, Judges, Leviticus, and II Kings about sacrificing the children as burnt offerings, will proclaim, "Why, that was bad because they were worshipping false gods!" Now, when workers place CSA offenders in positions of trust within the meetings, professing folks do not view this as sacrificing children or worshipping a false god. They view this is as...something like..."not offending," or "upholding a standard"...or "respecting the work"... or something. Is there really a difference in these two scenarios? What makes it reasonable for us to sacrifice children? Quizzer, I believe the way the friends and workers treat child sexual abuse is appalling before God and man. Apple posted the testimony of another child sacrificed by the church: "As a child I was sexual abused for many years by a church member (also a relative). My family hid this as they didn’t want upheaval in the church. I was told in around about way that it was the lesser of two evils for me to be a sacrifice for the family and the church. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2012 4:00:59 GMT -5
Maybe, JO, the better questions to ask is: Why are we willing to sacrifice our children? Most professing folks, when reading the passages in Deuteronomy, Judges, Leviticus, and II Kings about sacrificing the children as burnt offerings, will proclaim, "Why, that was bad because they were worshipping false gods!" Now, when workers place CSA offenders in positions of trust within the meetings, professing folks do not view this as sacrificing children or worshipping a false god. They view this is as...something like..."not offending," or "upholding a standard"...or "respecting the work"... or something. Is there really a difference in these two scenarios? What makes it reasonable for us to sacrifice children? Quizzer, I believe the way the friends and workers treat child sexual abuse is appalling before God and man. Apple posted the testimony of another child sacrificed by the church: "As a child I was sexual abused for many years by a church member (also a relative). My family hid this as they didn’t want upheaval in the church. I was told in around about way that it was the lesser of two evils for me to be a sacrifice for the family and the church. These cultural characteristics are nothing less than the fruits of adverse cultic influences at work within the system. There is no other logical explanation. |
|
|
|
Post by sharonw on May 20, 2012 9:23:11 GMT -5
What we're seeing these days is a form of godliness but denying its power. Its the result of decades of focusing on a gospel of form rather than a gospel of power. It seems that I'm rather old-fashioned in my expectations that workers and elders should have power over their zippers. I'm still hoping that righteousness and godliness will once again become important to us as a fellowship. ------------------ ------------------- ------------------ --------------- ------------- ----------------- -------------- 2 Timothy 3 3 But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. 2 People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3 without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, 4 treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people. 6 They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over gullible women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, 7 always learning but never able to come to a knowledge of the truth. Perhaps the problem is that there is no 'God' in it, and as long as men rely on an entity of their imagination to provide direction and moral guidance, they will be left adrift to winds and tides of the same pride, greed and lust from which they created their god. A good point, Gene! Though I do believe there is a God, a triune Godm I have to say many of us forget or never know that what God is is what we all really need more of and that is love for the bible itself says that "God is love." The first two commandments are good for believers and non-believers and IF an atheist cannot see how that can be, just remember that God is love and if one loves Love with all their heart, mind, soul and strength, then they've got it down to what it means. And next to share that love with our neighbors, as ourselves. |
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on May 20, 2012 17:44:59 GMT -5
The first two commandments are good for believers and non-believers and IF an atheist cannot see how that can be, just remember that God is love and if one loves Love with all their heart, mind, soul and strength, then they've got it down to what it means. And next to share that love with our neighbors, as ourselves. |
|
|
|
Post by Greg on May 20, 2012 18:12:33 GMT -5
The first two commandments are good for believers and non-believers and IF an atheist cannot see how that can be, just remember that God is love and if one loves Love with all their heart, mind, soul and strength, then they've got it down to what it means. And next to share that love with our neighbors, as ourselves. Atheist do that one their own. Theists need commandment....and some apparently fail (disobey) miserably. |
|
