|
|
Post by deepdeep on May 2, 2023 9:32:40 GMT -5
Is money really the objective? As I kept banking on to Internationalstudies, justice must be done, but to a victim, justice must also be seen to have been done. Money doesn't provide closure, but it can be part of a package.
The church has legal obligations, and moral obligations.
Certain topics have their own gravity....CSA is definitely one of them. It is very difficult to detach emotionally to discuss what to do on topics that have this gravity. Money is on that list. In the U.S. (and probably a lot of the western world), money has become essentialized such that when justice is seen to have been subverted, there are civil monetary penalties that get pursued. Historically, when nobody really had any money, there were onerous social penalties imposed instead. It seems like, in modern times, money is this blade that cuts both ways. We often use the civil court system to try and redress wrongs that the criminal court system cannot. These efforts, even when successful, often feel unsatisfactory. The famous OJ Simpson case is a classic example of this. Nobody really feels like justice was done in the deaths that he was criminally cleared of doing. As far as I know, the complainants in that case have not seen a penny of that civil judgement and probably won't until Simpsons death...and that assumes there will be anything left of his estate. Justice delayed is justice denied in this case. The path towards real healing will involve real justice....and there is so much evidence that putting price tags on offenses like murder and CSA does nothing to help victims and embitters and may even embolden wealthy perpetrators. Perhaps if you can't get a criminal conviction, then some sort of court ordered monetary penalty would be seen as the next best thing....and I suppose it is, but it's a solution and a system that is not working and should be changed. If a legal authority completely strips the money from these alleged "trusts" tomorrow it seems likely that this will turn down the heat on those in charge even in the absence of any real reform. |
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on May 2, 2023 18:07:19 GMT -5
professing.proboards.com/thread/25089/2x2-business-model-exposedThis section really points out a difference. “ The beauty of this business model, despite being illegal, is that if one of the 'Workers' commits a crime such as sexually assaulting a child, the victims of the crime are unable to successfully sue for damages from the Worker since the Worker himself/herself has no personal assets to seize. In a normal organization, the victims could sue the organization as well. But in 2x2ism case who do you sue since you don't even know who controls what or where the money is? Furthermore, there is no 2x2 legal entity to sue. This is the exact legal defense that a 2x2 Overseer used - that he was not a minister since there was no church that he was a minister of, and therefore how could he be held accountable. Beautiful. This is exactly how organized crime is set up. Even worse, all that hidden away money is then used by Overseers to pay for expensive lawyers to defend any 2x2 minister charged with a crime. What a racket. Or to put it in legal terms - racketeering. Thankfully in the US the Dept of Justice can use the RICO act to pierce the organizational structure. ” Am I having deja vu or do you keep posting this on multiple threads? That's called gaslighting. |
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on May 2, 2023 18:09:32 GMT -5
It is my response to you reposting this on multiple threads. I find it strange. Are you trying to make sure everyone sees it or what is your point. Btw I am not in support of the 2x2 system. . It’s a relevant point that I am suddenly passionate about and it’s real vent to every thread that I post it in, if you don’t find it relevant then explain why. It's illegal. Gaslighting it makes you look silly. |
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on May 2, 2023 18:10:24 GMT -5
I definitely find it relevant but I start to discount it when I see it in every thread. Maybe it’s from having things pushed down my throat as a 2x2. Maybe it feels that way because every topic is the same and nothing is going to really change. Who wants to change to something that's illegal? |
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on May 2, 2023 18:14:37 GMT -5
The overseer hoarding the money part is not provable and probably not accurate. When a professing bank teller sees 7 figures in the name of the overseer, one is tempted to believe it. |
|
|
|
Post by verna on May 2, 2023 18:50:33 GMT -5
Am I having deja vu or do you keep posting this on multiple threads? That's called gaslighting. Hey - I suspect you’re correct. |
|
|
|
Post by luke2236 on May 2, 2023 19:29:30 GMT -5
Maybe it feels that way because every topic is the same and nothing is going to really change. Who wants to change to something that's illegal? You are completely confused. The illegal system is what the 2x2s have currently. |
|
|
|
Post by luke2236 on May 2, 2023 19:30:50 GMT -5
. It’s a relevant point that I am suddenly passionate about and it’s real vent to every thread that I post it in, if you don’t find it relevant then explain why. It's illegal. Gaslighting it makes you look silly. You are confused - this is the current 2x2 system. Your chastisement makes you look silly. |
|
|
|
Post by luke2236 on May 2, 2023 19:33:46 GMT -5
The overseer hoarding the money part is not provable and probably not accurate. When a professing bank teller sees 7 figures in the name of the overseer, one is tempted to believe it. one would probably transfer one’s funds if one had been identified by one professing teller. And then ones funds would no longer be believable by one. |
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on May 3, 2023 22:58:51 GMT -5
Who wants to change to something that's illegal? You are completely confused. The illegal system is what the 2x2s have currently. So why switch? |
|
|
|
Post by luke2236 on May 3, 2023 23:01:40 GMT -5
You are completely confused. The illegal system is what the 2x2s have currently. So why switch? Good question, I suppose to show they care about the victims. |
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on May 3, 2023 23:02:08 GMT -5
When a professing bank teller sees 7 figures in the name of the overseer, one is tempted to believe it. one would probably transfer one’s funds if one had been identified by one professing teller. And then ones funds would no longer be believable by one. However, some thing one cannot unsee.  |
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on May 3, 2023 23:14:21 GMT -5
Good question, I suppose to show they care about the victims. But the ministry is more important to salvation that the victims. |
|
|
|
Post by luke2236 on May 3, 2023 23:27:38 GMT -5
Good question, I suppose to show they care about the victims. But the ministry is more important to salvation that the victims. That’s definitely problem #1! |
|
|
|
Post by lk1243 on May 6, 2023 11:28:36 GMT -5
. It’s a relevant point that I am suddenly passionate about and it’s real vent to every thread that I post it in, if you don’t find it relevant then explain why. It's illegal. Gaslighting it makes you look silly. It is not illegal . . . churches are not liable for taxes on charitable donations unless they have a conjoined but unrelated substantially profit-bearing operation (for example, an ice cream parlor). Churches are also not required to file any documentation for taxes. Submitting for 501(c)(3) protected status is voluntary, although 501(c)(3) formally protects churches regardless of whether they register. But since formally registering creates evidence of a liability for ministers who speak about what the Bible has to say in regard to the actions of political candidates, and filing gives the government insight into the church, which in times past has been used to destroy churches and persecute believers, it is actually a very good thing when a church chooses not to register. |
|
|
|
Post by deepdeep on May 6, 2023 12:13:34 GMT -5
It's illegal. Gaslighting it makes you look silly. It is not illegal . . . churches are not liable for taxes on charitable donations unless they have a conjoined but unrelated substantially profit-bearing operation (for example, an ice cream parlor). Churches are also not required to file any documentation for taxes. Submitting for 501(c)(3) protected status is voluntary, although 501(c)(3) formally protects churches regardless of whether they register. But since formally registering creates evidence of a liability for ministers who speak about what the Bible has to say in regard to the actions of political candidates, and filing gives the government insight into the church, which in times past has been used to destroy churches and persecute believers, it is actually a very good thing when a church chooses not to register. Whoah...mind blown...I had totally forgotten about historical nugget! you are right...If you can't tell...I'm usually a bit leery of a "well meaning" government. I'm not terribly libertarian top to bottom but the U.S. government has enough blood on it's hands that I feel like the right orientation towards them is skeptical, orderly, and questioning. |
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on May 8, 2023 18:07:42 GMT -5
It's illegal. Gaslighting it makes you look silly. It is not illegal . . . churches are not liable for taxes on charitable donations unless they have a conjoined but unrelated substantially profit-bearing operation (for example, an ice cream parlor). Churches are also not required to file any documentation for taxes. Submitting for 501(c)(3) protected status is voluntary, although 501(c)(3) formally protects churches regardless of whether they register. But since formally registering creates evidence of a liability for ministers who speak about what the Bible has to say in regard to the actions of political candidates, and filing gives the government insight into the church, which in times past has been used to destroy churches and persecute believers, it is actually a very good thing when a church chooses not to register. Then, whether you know it or not, your support for not registering has been the greatest tactic of those who have been working the decades long coup to overthrow democracy in this country. And they, unlike the F&W, have no underlying theological principle that calls for them not to register. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 9, 2023 9:11:01 GMT -5
It is not illegal . . . churches are not liable for taxes on charitable donations unless they have a conjoined but unrelated substantially profit-bearing operation (for example, an ice cream parlor). Churches are also not required to file any documentation for taxes. Submitting for 501(c)(3) protected status is voluntary, although 501(c)(3) formally protects churches regardless of whether they register. But since formally registering creates evidence of a liability for ministers who speak about what the Bible has to say in regard to the actions of political candidates, and filing gives the government insight into the church, which in times past has been used to destroy churches and persecute believers, it is actually a very good thing when a church chooses not to register. Then, whether you know it or not, your support for not registering has been the greatest tactic of those who have been working the decades long coup to overthrow democracy in this country. And they, unlike the F&W, have no underlying theological principle that calls for them not to register. Ah, the boogeyman hunt again... |
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on May 9, 2023 15:05:55 GMT -5
Then, whether you know it or not, your support for not registering has been the greatest tactic of those who have been working the decades long coup to overthrow democracy in this country. And they, unlike the F&W, have no underlying theological principle that calls for them not to register. Ah, the boogeyman hunt again... Yup |
|
|
|
Post by jonathan on May 10, 2023 13:45:23 GMT -5
Pope Francis on abuse and abusers: Condemning abusers Another question asked the Pope for clarity on how one can live God's mercy and compassion when faced with someone who has committed inexcusable acts of abuse. The Holy Father recognized how even if God's merciful love extends to everyone, including abusers, this needs to be reconciled with the necessary punishments, and that they need to be corrected, as one would correct a brother. He recalled the way that sexual abuse scars victims in ways that stay with them their entire lives. "The abuser," he said, "is to be condemned, indeed, but as a brother. Condemning him is to be understood as an act of charity. There is a logic, a form of loving the enemy that is also expressed in this way. And it is not easy to understand and to live out." "The abuser," he continued, "is an enemy. Each of us feels this because we empathize with the suffering of the abused. When you hear what abuse leaves in the hearts of abused people, the impression you get is very powerful. Even talking to the abuser involves revulsion; it’s not easy. But they are God’s children too. They deserve punishment, but they also deserve pastoral care. How do we provide that? No, it is not easy." From: www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2023-05/pope-francis-encounter-with-the-jesuits-of-hungary.html |
|
|
|
Post by luke2236 on May 11, 2023 21:04:51 GMT -5
It is not illegal . . . churches are not liable for taxes on charitable donations unless they have a conjoined but unrelated substantially profit-bearing operation (for example, an ice cream parlor). Churches are also not required to file any documentation for taxes. Submitting for 501(c)(3) protected status is voluntary, although 501(c)(3) formally protects churches regardless of whether they register. But since formally registering creates evidence of a liability for ministers who speak about what the Bible has to say in regard to the actions of political candidates, and filing gives the government insight into the church, which in times past has been used to destroy churches and persecute believers, it is actually a very good thing when a church chooses not to register. Whoah...mind blown...I had totally forgotten about historical nugget! you are right...If you can't tell...I'm usually a bit leery of a "well meaning" government. I'm not terribly libertarian top to bottom but the U.S. government has enough blood on it's hands that I feel like the right orientation towards them is skeptical, orderly, and questioning. Now you are supporting the monetary system this is perfect! You should be a worker, sounds like you are a fan. You talk about being naive and then find most things in favor of people who have hurt so many and offer the counter point almost every time. You really should just offer to join the work. I’m pretty sure that’s the only way you won’t be naive any longer. |
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on May 11, 2023 23:46:14 GMT -5
Whoah...mind blown...I had totally forgotten about historical nugget! you are right...If you can't tell...I'm usually a bit leery of a "well meaning" government. I'm not terribly libertarian top to bottom but the U.S. government has enough blood on it's hands that I feel like the right orientation towards them is skeptical, orderly, and questioning. Now you are supporting the monetary system this is perfect! You should be a worker, sounds like you are a fan. You talk about being naive and then find most things in favor of people who have hurt so many and offer the counter point almost every time. You really should just offer to join the work. I’m pretty sure that’s the only way you won’t be naive any longer. What are you talking about? |
|
|
|
Post by luke2236 on May 12, 2023 10:20:52 GMT -5
Now you are supporting the monetary system this is perfect! You should be a worker, sounds like you are a fan. You talk about being naive and then find most things in favor of people who have hurt so many and offer the counter point almost every time. You really should just offer to join the work. I’m pretty sure that’s the only way you won’t be naive any longer. What are you talking about? Deep deep says he is an outside party that is interested but naive in the 2x2 way because they had a 2x2 friend. Ironically everything that the 2x2s do (aside from CSA, and SA) deep deep says are no big deal, over and over again. Just seems pretty fake but that’s the internet for you. |
|
