Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2014 1:00:58 GMT -5
Nathan $ MILLIONS IN ONE LUMP SUM. If followers dont donate enough stiff,,but do you see maintainence on property,sheds,etc where todays value would be $millions? Where is it? Medicare looks after a great deal of human cost. People give them free board and lodgings.ONE LUMP SUM,A FORTUNE? so is any of this yours? |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 12, 2014 1:12:19 GMT -5
Nathan $ MILLIONS IN ONE LUMP SUM. If followers dont donate enough stiff,,but do you see maintainence on property,sheds,etc where todays value would be $millions? Where is it? Medicare looks after a great deal of human cost. People give them free board and lodgings.ONE LUMP SUM,A FORTUNE? so is any of this yours? If you donate do you retain ownership? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2014 2:41:27 GMT -5
Nathan $ MILLIONS IN ONE LUMP SUM. If followers dont donate enough stiff,,but do you see maintainence on property,sheds,etc where todays value would be $millions? Easily. Millions would be required for maintenance. Think of the number of convention grounds. Trust funds? Bank accounts? Certificates of deposit? Medicare is only available for people who are in their 60's and who have been sorking and paying into social security. And even then the plan only pays 80%. You seem to be overly concerned about the money. If money/property is donated it belongs to the group it was given to. If you gave someone a car and they decided to sell it years later do they owe you anything? Medicare in the land down under is a little more supportive. I suspect it is this medicare the poster had in mind.  |
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Apr 12, 2014 2:41:27 GMT -5
Rational, in Australia Medicare looks after more than just people who are in their 60's ! It does not cost to go to the Doctor if they bulk bill ! As to the number of convention grounds.... well lets see in Victoria there are 5 convention grounds ... maybe I have forgotten one ! I cannot imagine the money from the sale of a Convention ground in Victoria going to NSW or QLD ! Maybe they need to look at who got paid to get Mr Barry off the CSA charges, wonder where the money is coming from for the current case ??
|
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 12, 2014 7:09:40 GMT -5
Medicare in the land down under is a little more supportive. I suspect it is this medicare the poster had in mind. :) My error - I was thinking locally. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2014 7:15:11 GMT -5
The problem with the money system: The practices of managing it are at high risk of abuse, fraud and embezzlement. The reason why it won't ever get fixed: The overseers don't want people to know that they control large sums of money. Maintaining the appearance of having little or no money under their control is far more important than managing it with good stewardship practices. Sound stewardship would require, among other things, disclosure. Clearday- give us credit for a little intelligence. Of course we know that the overseers handle large amounts of money. how else would things get paid for. I have total trust in our overseer to handle that money wisely. But if he doesn't at the end of the day he and all of us have to answer to God and that's all that matters really. I don't doubt your intelligence. That being the case, perhaps then you could explain the reason why overseers will not disclose the assets at their disposal nor account for the expenditures they make. 21Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 22Abstain from all appearance of evil. Do you lock your car or home when you leave it? Do you share your bank passcodes? Do you let your children or grandchildren be taken care of by just anyone? Do you ask salespersons questions about their products? Do you ask for references when hiring someone or engaging a service? Do you give money to just any charitable organization without checking how well they manage the money? Do you invest in companies without looking at their financial statements? I will presume the answers to all the above questions are yes. These aren't the result of paranoia. You don't ignore any of that and "let them answer to God at the end of the day". These are all wise and normal activities we undertake in order to live an orderly life. Exactly what is it that makes the workers exempt from any of that? You trust the overseers to let Chris Chandler run free among unsuspecting and trusting friends in their homes with children while they knew that he was a child molester. Is this the sort of trust you value and are prepared to allow them to continue to maintain your trust for whom they will send into your home? |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 12, 2014 7:16:31 GMT -5
Rational, in Australia Medicare looks after more than just people who are in their 60's ! It does not cost to go to the Doctor if they bulk bill ! As to the number of convention grounds.... well lets see in Victoria there are 5 convention grounds ... maybe I have forgotten one ! I cannot imagine the money from the sale of a Convention ground in Victoria going to NSW or QLD ! You do not think there is any reallocation of funds?If bribery is suspected it should certainly be investigated. Using donated funds for illegal purposes is over a good thing. As to paying for legal services, it is not uncommon for organizations to pay for legal services for their members. Often there is a provisional clause that withdrawn the payment should the member be found guilty of the crime. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2014 7:54:16 GMT -5
Rational, in Australia Medicare looks after more than just people who are in their 60's ! It does not cost to go to the Doctor if they bulk bill ! As to the number of convention grounds.... well lets see in Victoria there are 5 convention grounds ... maybe I have forgotten one ! I cannot imagine the money from the sale of a Convention ground in Victoria going to NSW or QLD ! You do not think there is any reallocation of funds? When it comes to Victoria, probably not. Victoria is considered much more independent from other Aussie states who collaborate and share things among themselves far more than with Victoria. I could imagine (but doubt) reallocation among the Western North American states/provinces. However, reallocation of funds between the East and West has pretty close to a nil chance of occurring. [/quote] I don't think isobelrose is suggesting bribery here......just asking where the money came from for legal fees (at least that is how I interpret the question) even though it does sound a bit like a suggestion of bribery....ie "who got paid to get Mr. Barry off". If that is the case that the question is about where the funds came from for the legal defences for these two cases , a top drawer lawyer was indeed hired for Mr.Barry. There is reason to believe however, that those funds did not come from the "kingdom bank account", but directly from some wealthy friends close to the Victoria overseer. The same wealthy friends are also close to Chris Chandler. If I may read the tea leaves here and do some speculation, I am thinking that it is possible that those friends have come to realize they made a huge blunder with their financial support of Ernie Barry who is now known to have a long list of alleged victims over a long period of time and it would not be unjust for him to be locked up for life. Knowing the advisers/financial backers, I doubt they would have supported EB had they known (or believed) the information and allegations against him but really got caught up supporting David Leitch. Chris Chandler, on the other hand, is not believed to have the same heinous track record of Ernie Barry yet he has pleaded guilty. I am suspecting that the financial supporters have come to their senses and urged CC to plead guilty, which urgings would have a lot of weight since they control the purse strings to the legal defence. While my last paragraph is speculative, it is not speculative without the aid of numerous peripheral facts and evidence which point to a reasonable possibility of that scenario. |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 12, 2014 10:13:59 GMT -5
The problem with the money system: The practices of managing it are at high risk of abuse, fraud and embezzlement. The reason why it won't ever get fixed: The overseers don't want people to know that they control large sums of money. Maintaining the appearance of having little or no money under their control is far more important than managing it with good stewardship practices. Sound stewardship would require, among other things, disclosure. Clearday- give us credit for a little intelligence. Of course we know that the overseers handle large amounts of money. how else would things get paid for. I have total trust in our overseer to handle that money wisely. But if he doesn't at the end of the day he and all of us have to answer to God and that's all that matters really. You can get very caught up with all the things that people 'might do' and end up trusting no one. Just wondering if you apply that mindset to CSA too? |
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Apr 12, 2014 19:39:41 GMT -5
Rational, what I meant was the amount of money that was paid to a expensive lawyer, sorry about that ! I wasn't suggesting bribery .... ! As to relocation of funds from Vic to any other state, I would say a very big no ! If you live in NSW you are not suppose to go to Convention in Vic or any other state, so I cannot imagine Vic sharing their funds with another state !
|
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 12, 2014 19:58:50 GMT -5
Rational, what I meant was the amount of money that was paid to a expensive lawyer, sorry about that ! I wasn't suggesting bribery .... ! As to relocation of funds from Vic to any other state, I would say a very big no ! If you live in NSW you are not suppose to go to Convention in Vic or any other state, so I cannot imagine Vic sharing their funds with another state ! Thanks for the clarification. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2014 20:02:58 GMT -5
Rational, what I meant was the amount of money that was paid to a expensive lawyer, sorry about that ! I wasn't suggesting bribery .... ! As to relocation of funds from Vic to any other state, I would say a very big no ! If you live in NSW you are not suppose to go to Convention in Vic or any other state, so I cannot imagine Vic sharing their funds with another state ! interesting your only allowed to go to the convention thats located in your state? |
|
|
|
Post by whyisitso on Apr 12, 2014 20:48:43 GMT -5
Rational, what I meant was the amount of money that was paid to a expensive lawyer, sorry about that ! I wasn't suggesting bribery .... ! As to relocation of funds from Vic to any other state, I would say a very big no ! If you live in NSW you are not suppose to go to Convention in Vic or any other state, so I cannot imagine Vic sharing their funds with another state ! interesting your only allowed to go to the convention thats located in your state? This 'rule' has relaxed slightly in recent years with southern queenslanders being 'allowed' to cross the border to NSW for Glencoe or Booyong convs. Particularly since rochedale ended in Brisbane. But definitely has been frowned upon. And absolutely no visiting conventions at weekends. You pick one and that's where you go. My experience in nth America was far different. Lots of ppl I know went to one full conv and several other weekends. Esp young singles. I never heard anyone discouraged from doing that. The more the merrier it seemed. Here you have to have your name in for your intended conv about 1-2 mths prior for 'planning' purposes. Very rigid. I had a sister worker almost hyperventilating cause I had planned to stay off the conv grounds and so it was a massive issue for her to find someone else to fill my spot (1 of a team of 4 ppl) of washing cutlery after second sitting yes, it's THAT planned! (And Bert if you're reading this it is a true story .... PM me if you'd like names, dates & times to check my facts!!) |
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Apr 12, 2014 21:46:28 GMT -5
Well I can second that whyisitso ! Yes the rule has relaxed to what is was, but from experience in Victoria it is still if you live in Vic you go to Convention in Victoria ! No weekend visiting it even says that on the bottom of the Convention notice ! Also one convention only ! ( Bert if you like I can provide names, and dates to back up my facts also !)
|
|
|
|
Post by reallyandtruly on Apr 12, 2014 23:29:54 GMT -5
Clearday- give us credit for a little intelligence. Of course we know that the overseers handle large amounts of money. how else would things get paid for. I have total trust in our overseer to handle that money wisely. But if he doesn't at the end of the day he and all of us have to answer to God and that's all that matters really. I don't doubt your intelligence. That being the case, perhaps then you could explain the reason why overseers will not disclose the assets at their disposal nor account for the expenditures they make. 21Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 22Abstain from all appearance of evil. Do you lock your car or home when you leave it? Do you share your bank passcodes? Do you let your children or grandchildren be taken care of by just anyone? Do you ask salespersons questions about their products? Do you ask for references when hiring someone or engaging a service? Do you give money to just any charitable organization without checking how well they manage the money? Do you invest in companies without looking at their financial statements? I will presume the answers to all the above questions are yes. These aren't the result of paranoia. You don't ignore any of that and "let them answer to God at the end of the day". These are all wise and normal activities we undertake in order to live an orderly life. Exactly what is it that makes the workers exempt from any of that? You trust the overseers to let Chris Chandler run free among unsuspecting and trusting friends in their homes with children while they knew that he was a child molester. Is this the sort of trust you value and are prepared to allow them to continue to maintain your trust for whom they will send into your home? Quite honestly I have never asked the overseer because I have no need to. I have seen no evidence ever in this country of anything that would cause me to question in the $$ department. As for appearances of evil - It definitely doesn't appear that way to me. Locking my car etc... well actually to put it in context yes I should but no I wouldn't if I was at convention because I am among people that I trust. I haven't 'locked my tent' for 50 years and I have never had anything stolen. My point in using that example (before people leap in with stories of things been stolen by people at cons!!  is that until someone breaks your trust (or is proved dishonest) you should continue to trust them, otherwise you can become a very cynical person seeing people as 'guilty until proven innocent' Until I see funds being used dishonestly by the ministry I will continue to trust them, and if they use it dishonestly and it goes undetected they ultimately must answer to God. The Chris Chandler case - no allowing someone into peoples homes when it is known that he is was a molester is totally not acceptable. The person that made that decision was wrong BUT it doesn't mean that I would loose trust in the ministry as a whole or never trust another overseer. |
|
|
|
Post by reallyandtruly on Apr 12, 2014 23:43:08 GMT -5
Clearday- give us credit for a little intelligence. Of course we know that the overseers handle large amounts of money. how else would things get paid for. I have total trust in our overseer to handle that money wisely. But if he doesn't at the end of the day he and all of us have to answer to God and that's all that matters really. You can get very caught up with all the things that people 'might do' and end up trusting no one. Just wondering if you apply that mindset to CSA too? Oh dear - usual TMB post. You show support for the ministry and someone comes back with a random question like that! Anyway Snow Yes that is exactly the mindset I apply to CSA. We were always very open with our children, we talked to them and tried to teach them what to watch out for, what was acceptable behaviour from others towards them etc and what to do if something unacceptable happened. We armed them as best we could and then we had to trust people. If we hadn't we would never have allowed them to go on school trips, camps, stay at friends places, go to convention, go on holiday with others etc etc. Of course you must use wisdom and common sense, but if you don't trust anybody about anything you would lead a very miserable life. |
|
|
|
Post by magpie on Apr 13, 2014 2:09:58 GMT -5
STOPSTOPSTOPSTOP NOW NOW. I MAGPIE, ASKED ONE QUESTION.WE KNOW FROM OVER 100 YEARS HOW THE 2x2s MINISTRY SURVIVES. THEIR GIFTS,DONATIONS,FREE BOARD AND LOGDINGS,FREE VEHICLE USE,ETC. "A FORTUNE LUMPSUM"? OTHER MINISTRIES SURVIVE THE SAME ACCEPT IT IS OPEN TO SCRUTINY? "NOW",MY QUESTION BEFORE LIKE THE WORD PEDOPHILE,OR MINISTRY ADULTRIES,LESBIAN/HOMOSEXUAL HISTORY,INSTEAL OF CRAPP WAFFLE,JUST ONE ANSWER WOULD BE ENOUGH?
THE SUM OF A $ FORTUNE OF ONE SALE OF DANDENONG PROPERTY,ONE QUESTION ONLY,NO NEED FOR FOLLOWING WAFFLE IT CAUSESES "JUST ONE SIMPLE ANSWER,THAT IS ALL. DONT SHOW YOUR IGNORANCE,SEEK THE ANSWER FIRST,ONE HONEST ANSWER,NOT HYPERTHETICAL RUBBISH,WHERE DID THIS FORTUNE "GO:".AND IT WAS THE PROCEEDS OF A 1920/30s GIFT FOR USE,AS MANY FARMS FOR CONVENTIONS ONLY?
|
|
|
|
Post by magpie on Apr 13, 2014 2:13:20 GMT -5
HOPE YOU ARE PRAYERFULLY SEEKING AN HONEST OPEN ANSWER? AWAIT (PATIENTLY)FOR "THE" ANSWER.
|
|
|
|
Post by Roselyn T on Apr 13, 2014 2:15:47 GMT -5
Magpie you know there will be no answer ....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2014 6:32:12 GMT -5
I don't doubt your intelligence. That being the case, perhaps then you could explain the reason why overseers will not disclose the assets at their disposal nor account for the expenditures they make. 21Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. 22Abstain from all appearance of evil. Do you lock your car or home when you leave it? Do you share your bank passcodes? Do you let your children or grandchildren be taken care of by just anyone? Do you ask salespersons questions about their products? Do you ask for references when hiring someone or engaging a service? Do you give money to just any charitable organization without checking how well they manage the money? Do you invest in companies without looking at their financial statements? I will presume the answers to all the above questions are yes. These aren't the result of paranoia. You don't ignore any of that and "let them answer to God at the end of the day". These are all wise and normal activities we undertake in order to live an orderly life. Exactly what is it that makes the workers exempt from any of that? You trust the overseers to let Chris Chandler run free among unsuspecting and trusting friends in their homes with children while they knew that he was a child molester. Is this the sort of trust you value and are prepared to allow them to continue to maintain your trust for whom they will send into your home? Quite honestly I have never asked the overseer because I have no need to. I have seen no evidence ever in this country of anything that would cause me to question in the $$ department. As for appearances of evil - It definitely doesn't appear that way to me. Locking my car etc... well actually to put it in context yes I should but no I wouldn't if I was at convention because I am among people that I trust. I haven't 'locked my tent' for 50 years and I have never had anything stolen. My point in using that example (before people leap in with stories of things been stolen by people at cons!! is that until someone breaks your trust (or is proved dishonest) you should continue to trust them, otherwise you can become a very cynical person seeing people as 'guilty until proven innocent' Until I see funds being used dishonestly by the ministry I will continue to trust them, and if they use it dishonestly and it goes undetected they ultimately must answer to God. The Chris Chandler case - no allowing someone into peoples homes when it is known that he is was a molester is totally not acceptable. The person that made that decision was wrong BUT it doesn't mean that I would loose trust in the ministry as a whole or never trust another overseer. Your logic goes like this: "I see no thieves lurking in my neigbourhood so until my house gets robbed, I don't ever need to lock the doors." In spite of the fact that the money system is designed so poorly that even an overseer wouldn't know if the funds are being embezzled, there have been numerous known incidences of fraud and embezzlement as well as misuse of funds. Of course, those incidences are kept quiet as possible too. "Appearance of evil" is right in front of us. Any objective outside financial person will tell you that non-disclosure of funding like this has the appearance of wrongdoing written all over it. Chris Chandler is just one of many cases like this all over the world and it wasn't just one person who made a mistake in the Chandler case, this has been ongoing for a long time. Overseers all over the world have indicated that they think they can fool you by not telling you about important things which could affect the safety of your children. It's only when these things have become known and an uproar follows that action occurs. The money system is even easier to hide the problems because abused money doesn't talk like abused people. The disclosure and audit that I am suggesting is something so ordinary and common that it defies any level of reasonableness to do otherwise. This is one of the very few trustee systems in the world which do not account for their assets and expenditures and have no safety controls in place. That's why I asked you if you could suggest any good reason for the trustees to continue to hide the funding system. There is none. |
|
|
|
Post by magpie on Apr 13, 2014 8:14:20 GMT -5
A MURDER MYSTERY?,,As this money thing was 40+ years ago and within months answers were unavailable. How it got into the news was "Via-a-murder". Fredericks the lawyer Christian Assemblies were using for some time was a crook. So one of his other clients he upset murdered his wife. Maybe God was able to use this media coverage to let the blinded sheep know they were having the wool pulled over their eyes again?Over 40+ years and no one is,or has let on.. Perhaps the 4x trustees at that time (inc Dolph Shultz,Norm Ruwoldt,Gordon Gunst,+one?)families can shed some light on how their daddy's secretly covered up this fortune? Remember 40+ years ago NEARLY 20 years less than when the two x workers stopped CSA'ing me. I said no time for wishy washy hypertheticals,I've had to listen to decades of that sort of rubbish,more than enough for my life time.
|
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 13, 2014 10:39:20 GMT -5
Just wondering if you apply that mindset to CSA too? Oh dear - usual TMB post. You show support for the ministry and someone comes back with a random question like that! Anyway Snow Yes that is exactly the mindset I apply to CSA. We were always very open with our children, we talked to them and tried to teach them what to watch out for, what was acceptable behaviour from others towards them etc and what to do if something unacceptable happened. We armed them as best we could and then we had to trust people. If we hadn't we would never have allowed them to go on school trips, camps, stay at friends places, go to convention, go on holiday with others etc etc. Of course you must use wisdom and common sense, but if you don't trust anybody about anything you would lead a very miserable life. That's not what I mean. Do you believe that if someone has done something like CSA that it should be left up to God to punish them, for God to take care of it? That it will all work out when they die? I recognize that we need to trust people but use caution which it appears to be what you do, but your comment that if the workers steal you just leave it up to God, caused me concern if you carried that mindset over into other matters such as CSA? |
|
|
|
Post by reallyandtruly on Apr 13, 2014 12:32:52 GMT -5
Oh dear - usual TMB post. You show support for the ministry and someone comes back with a random question like that! Anyway Snow Yes that is exactly the mindset I apply to CSA. We were always very open with our children, we talked to them and tried to teach them what to watch out for, what was acceptable behaviour from others towards them etc and what to do if something unacceptable happened. We armed them as best we could and then we had to trust people. If we hadn't we would never have allowed them to go on school trips, camps, stay at friends places, go to convention, go on holiday with others etc etc. Of course you must use wisdom and common sense, but if you don't trust anybody about anything you would lead a very miserable life. That's not what I mean. Do you believe that if someone has done something like CSA that it should be left up to God to punish them, for God to take care of it? That it will all work out when they die? I recognize that we need to trust people but use caution which it appears to be what you do, but your comment that if the workers steal you just leave it up to God, caused me concern if you carried that mindset over into other matters such as CSA? No I don't think it should just be left up to God to take care of but if anyone does anything wrong and it goes undetected they haven't 'got away with it'- they still have to answer to God. Of course if CSA is reported, which it often isn't due to the victims reluctance to relive the horror, then of course it must be dealt with immediately by the police. If it is not reported and the offender is not held accountable in this life they still must answer for that action one day. |
|
|
|
Post by reallyandtruly on Apr 13, 2014 12:40:33 GMT -5
Your logic goes like this: "I see no thieves lurking in my neigbourhood so until my house gets robbed, I don't ever need to lock the doors." No thats not my logic. Because I don't know those in my neighbourhood I would lock my doors. If I knew them and trusted them yes I would leave my house unlocked. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Apr 13, 2014 13:07:28 GMT -5
If it is not reported and the offender is not held accountable in this life they still must answer for that action one day. This line of logic is harmful. If the victim believes that at some point god will punish the offender there is a greater likelihood that the crime will go unreported and, if the criminal is a serial abuser, more individuals could become victims. There is no problem with people believing in god but past experience has shown that god takes little interest in the abuse of children and without people stepping up nothing is accomplished and the abuse continues. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 13, 2014 14:22:42 GMT -5
Your logic goes like this: "I see no thieves lurking in my neigbourhood so until my house gets robbed, I don't ever need to lock the doors." Fair argument except that you wouldn't be giving your neighbours the passwords to your bank accounts either. You will likely have some level on which you would take precautions with other people. You had stated that the basis of your trust is that you hadn't heard of any wrongdoing. That indicates that rather than taking normal precautions of security, you are prepared to wait until you are violated to do so. I'm not prepared to do that in most cases and regardless of how much I trust someone, it is good practice to take precautions. "Trust, but verify"....Ronald Reagan. We have been inundated with reasons to be cautious with overseers. TMB member maja has done an extensive study on whether overseers can be trusted to disclose workers with known abuse problems or immorality issues so that people can decide if they want to risk an overnight visit from that person. The overseers have utterly failed to convince the family that they will act appropriately. If they can't be trusted to keep alleged molesters out of your home, they can hardly be trusted with secret bank accounts. |
|
|
|
Post by reallyandtruly on Apr 13, 2014 14:52:55 GMT -5
If it is not reported and the offender is not held accountable in this life they still must answer for that action one day. This line of logic is harmful. If the victim believes that at some point god will punish the offender there is a greater likelihood that the crime will go unreported and, if the criminal is a serial abuser, more individuals could become victims. There is no problem with people believing in god but past experience has shown that god takes little interest in the abuse of children and without people stepping up nothing is accomplished and the abuse continues. Rational - we obviously have very different views on God and his working BUT that aside I do think you are missing my point. I would do ALL I could to encourage a victim to report abuse, if for no other reason than to stop the same thing happening again and again by the same offender.But you cannot force a person to give evidence against someone if they are unwilling, and sometimes it is just more than victims can face. Others may then think that the offender has got off without punishment. My only consolation is that God will judge them. That in no way replaces the fact that they should be judged on earth and others should be aware of their offending. Of course the other reason why someone must be encouraged to take it further is for the (alleged )offenders protection also. It is possible that the allegation could be false (as is very here common during child custody battles)and imagine the rumour going out that you were a sexual offender but then never having a chance to prove your innocence. So it's a two way thing. |
|
|
|
Post by snow on Apr 13, 2014 16:58:09 GMT -5
That's not what I mean. Do you believe that if someone has done something like CSA that it should be left up to God to punish them, for God to take care of it? That it will all work out when they die? I recognize that we need to trust people but use caution which it appears to be what you do, but your comment that if the workers steal you just leave it up to God, caused me concern if you carried that mindset over into other matters such as CSA? No I don't think it should just be left up to God to take care of but if anyone does anything wrong and it goes undetected they haven't 'got away with it'- they still have to answer to God. Of course if CSA is reported, which it often isn't due to the victims reluctance to relive the horror, then of course it must be dealt with immediately by the police. If it is not reported and the offender is not held accountable in this life they still must answer for that action one day. Thank you, that is what I wanted to know. While I don't agree with you about the end judgment, I agree otherwise. |
|
is that until someone breaks your trust (or is proved dishonest) you should continue to trust them, otherwise you can become a very cynical person seeing people as 'guilty until proven innocent'