|
Post by whatsup on Jun 30, 2024 11:20:05 GMT -5
I understand some of the ABUSERS in ireland have attended conventions this is very upsetting to the abused people who are pretty much disowned by workers and some friends. So much for the letter of assurance . distributed by Craig Fulton and John Connolly re abusers attending meetings. Children and adults must be free to attend meetings safely
|
|
|
Post by Pragmatic on Jun 30, 2024 15:18:31 GMT -5
Yes, it seems like they say one thing to appease the masses and authorities, and then do another to appease the "old boys club".
I understand the BBC will be doing a series of Podcasts this month on the church. It could be worthwhile contacting them with this information, and also filling in the FBI form. Check out Advocates for The Truth (AFTT)
Like sleazy politicians, they seem to rely on peoples' short term memories!
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Jun 30, 2024 22:00:36 GMT -5
The management team in the cult show that they are not interested in change. Change would affect their income and lifestyle.
|
|
|
Post by themaninthemirror on Jul 26, 2024 4:13:02 GMT -5
I understand some of the ABUSERS in ireland have attended conventions this is very upsetting to the abused people who are pretty much disowned by workers and some friends. So much for the letter of assurance . distributed by Craig Fulton and John Connolly re abusers attending meetings. Children and adults must be free to attend meetings safely I would suggest that this is more to do with the amount of money the wealthy friends who are hosting one of the accused more than anything. That being said, the only thing the accused is meant to have done is groom - which obviously isn’t acceptable, but probably the desired punishment outweighs the crime. I am sure there are plenty of people on here who have hit their children (40 years ago very common practise!) and caused a huge impact on their child, should they also be completely disowned ?
|
|
|
Post by intelchips on Jul 26, 2024 8:20:56 GMT -5
I understand some of the ABUSERS in ireland have attended conventions this is very upsetting to the abused people who are pretty much disowned by workers and some friends. So much for the letter of assurance . distributed by Craig Fulton and John Connolly re abusers attending meetings. Children and adults must be free to attend meetings safely I would suggest that this is more to do with the amount of money the wealthy friends who are hosting one of the accused more than anything. That being said, the only thing the accused is meant to have done is groom - which obviously isn’t acceptable, but probably the desired punishment outweighs the crime. I am sure there are plenty of people on here who have hit their children (40 years ago very common practise!) and caused a huge impact on their child, should they also be completely disowned ? I was thinking they could heal these children by introducing a Football (soccer ball) on the pitch at convention. Abuse of children can take many forms besides sexual abuse. For instance, denying children the opportunity to participate in sports can also be considered a form of abuse. Interestingly, a careful reading of Paul’s writings reveals that he never spoke negatively about sports. On the contrary, he frequently used sports as a metaphor in his teachings, which would have given him several opportunities to criticize sports if he believed they were harmful. The New Testament is rich with metaphors and analogies that draw from the cultural context of its time. One of the fascinating aspects is the Apostle Paul's frequent references to athletic practices, particularly those related to the Greek gymnasium and sports. These references serve to illustrate spiritual truths in a way that was easily relatable to his contemporaries. Let's explore how Paul uses these athletic metaphors, especially the vivid imagery of "punching the air," to convey his message. In the ancient Greek world, the gymnasium was more than just a place for physical exercise. It was a central institution in Greek cities, where young men received physical, intellectual, and sometimes even moral training. Athletic contests, including the famed Olympic Games, were highly prestigious events, and athletes were celebrated figures. Paul, a well-educated man familiar with Greek culture, leveraged this widespread appreciation for sports to communicate his teachings. By using metaphors drawn from athletic training and competition, Paul made his messages more accessible and impactful to his audience. One of Paul's most famous athletic references is found in 1 Corinthians 9:24-27, where he compares the Christian life to a race: "Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one receives the prize? So run that you may obtain it. Every athlete exercises self-control in all things. They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we are imperishable. So, I do not run aimlessly; I do not box as one beating the air. But I discipline my body and keep it under control, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified." In this passage, Paul emphasizes the importance of discipline and self-control. Just as athletes undergo rigorous training to win a prize, Christians must practice spiritual discipline to achieve their eternal reward. The phrase "I do not box as one beating the air" vividly depicts a boxer who practices with purpose and precision, not wasting his energy on aimless punches. This metaphor highlights the importance of intentionality and focus on the Christian life. Paul continues to use athletic imagery to describe the Christian's struggle against spiritual adversaries. In 1 Timothy 6:12, he exhorts Timothy to "fight the good fight of the faith." Here, Paul likens the Christian journey to a boxing match, where one must contend vigorously and persistently. This imagery would have resonated deeply with his audience, who were familiar with the intense and often brutal nature of Greek athletic competitions. In Ephesians 6:12, Paul expands on this theme by describing the nature of the Christian's opponents: "For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places." The term "wrestle" evokes the image of a Greek wrestler grappling with his opponent, emphasizing the close and personal nature of the spiritual struggle. Another significant reference is found in 1 Timothy 4:7-8: "Have nothing to do with irreverent, silly myths. Rather train yourself for godliness; for while bodily training is of some value, godliness is of value in every way, as it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come." Here, Paul acknowledges the value of physical training but places a higher emphasis on spiritual training. The Greek word for "train" (gymnaze) is the root of the English word "gymnasium," further reinforcing the connection to athletic discipline. Paul urges believers to invest in their spiritual development with the same dedication and effort that athletes invest in their physical training. Paul's references to the Greek gymnasium and athletic practices are more than mere illustrations; they are powerful tools that connect spiritual truths with everyday experiences. By drawing from the familiar world of sports, Paul communicates the importance of discipline, perseverance, and intentionality in the Christian life. His metaphors remain relevant today, reminding believers of the need for spiritual rigor and dedication in their walk of faith. In a world where sports and physical fitness continue to play a significant role, Paul's athletic imagery offers timeless insights into the nature of spiritual growth and the pursuit of godliness. Whether running a race, boxing with purpose, or training for godliness, the principles Paul espouses challenge and inspire believers to live their faith with the same intensity and commitment as an athlete striving for victory.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Jul 26, 2024 18:47:43 GMT -5
I understand some of the ABUSERS in ireland have attended conventions this is very upsetting to the abused people who are pretty much disowned by workers and some friends. So much for the letter of assurance . distributed by Craig Fulton and John Connolly re abusers attending meetings. Children and adults must be free to attend meetings safely I would suggest that this is more to do with the amount of money the wealthy friends who are hosting one of the accused more than anything. That being said, the only thing the accused is meant to have done is groom - which obviously isn’t acceptable, but probably the desired punishment outweighs the crime. I am sure there are plenty of people on here who have hit their children (40 years ago very common practise!) and caused a huge impact on their child, should they also be completely disowned ? I agree with you. I'm not about to criticize the efforts of those who are presently delving into the pursuit of justice for those who have committed SA and CSA. I've contributed to that myself. However, I'm seriously disturbed about what a few individuals are advocating that appears to be more like revenge than justice -- quite beyond the principles of Christian belief in forgiveness. The notion that an offender who has repented and conformed satisfactorily to legal standards, should be banned from fellowship or service for life is offensive. I've played both sides of this game. 25 years ago I maintained my friendship with a worker offended who I actually reported and had imprisoned for life. I don't have to be involved with the role of judging or punishing offenders -- the Christian thing is to be the "friend" of sinners -- the scriptures say that temporal governments are there to serve us in that capacity. Simultaneously I maintained my friendship with a young offender who was accused of statutory sexual seduction, proven to involve neither sexual intercourse nor a predatory history through the legal system -- where he pleaded guilty to precisely what he did, did his time in jail, and on the recommendation of both his parole supervisor and the presiding judge deemed him worthy to be discharged early from parole and have all civil rights restored. The judge also issued an order that the "victim" and her family not interfere further with the case or with the accused's civil rights. Yet it has now been determined that he is not fit to have a meeting in his own home -- after a decades clean record and having raised two daughters to adulthood without incidents -- the result of the gossip site where someone deemed it necessary to release the lurid details of the original offense. The ministry at the time admitted TO ME they protected the predatory rapist CSA worker from the legal system and assigned him to meetings where there were potential victims, and blacklisted me internationally for befriending this young fellow who honestly and patiently confessed and endured all the state threw at him. I was recently told I should be ashamed of myself -- probably I should be ashamed of something, but of this I plead not guilty.
|
|
|
Post by christiansburg on Aug 14, 2024 12:52:11 GMT -5
I understand some of the ABUSERS in ireland have attended conventions this is very upsetting to the abused people who are pretty much disowned by workers and some friends. So much for the letter of assurance . distributed by Craig Fulton and John Connolly re abusers attending meetings. Children and adults must be free to attend meetings safely Can you explain to me how abused people are "pretty much disowned"?
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Aug 14, 2024 15:58:06 GMT -5
I would suggest that this is more to do with the amount of money the wealthy friends who are hosting one of the accused more than anything. That being said, the only thing the accused is meant to have done is groom - which obviously isn’t acceptable, but probably the desired punishment outweighs the crime. I am sure there are plenty of people on here who have hit their children (40 years ago very common practise!) and caused a huge impact on their child, should they also be completely disowned ? I agree with you. I'm not about to criticize the efforts of those who are presently delving into the pursuit of justice for those who have committed SA and CSA. I've contributed to that myself. However, I'm seriously disturbed about what a few individuals are advocating that appears to be more like revenge than justice -- quite beyond the principles of Christian belief in forgiveness. The notion that an offender who has repented and conformed satisfactorily to legal standards, should be banned from fellowship or service for life is offensive. I've played both sides of this game. 25 years ago I maintained my friendship with a worker offended who I actually reported and had imprisoned for life. I don't have to be involved with the role of judging or punishing offenders -- the Christian thing is to be the "friend" of sinners -- the scriptures say that temporal governments are there to serve us in that capacity. Simultaneously I maintained my friendship with a young offender who was accused of statutory sexual seduction, proven to involve neither sexual intercourse nor a predatory history through the legal system -- where he pleaded guilty to precisely what he did, did his time in jail, and on the recommendation of both his parole supervisor and the presiding judge deemed him worthy to be discharged early from parole and have all civil rights restored. The judge also issued an order that the "victim" and her family not interfere further with the case or with the accused's civil rights. Yet it has now been determined that he is not fit to have a meeting in his own home -- after a decades clean record and having raised two daughters to adulthood without incidents -- the result of the gossip site where someone deemed it necessary to release the lurid details of the original offense. The ministry at the time admitted TO ME they protected the predatory rapist CSA worker from the legal system and assigned him to meetings where there were potential victims, and blacklisted me internationally for befriending this young fellow who honestly and patiently confessed and endured all the state threw at him. I was recently told I should be ashamed of myself -- probably I should be ashamed of something, but of this I plead not guilty. As you know Bob, there have been many cases where CSA perpetrators have been forgiven, only to reoffend repeatedly. A worker abuses children in one jurisdiction so he is transferred to another. And another. The forgiveness-reoffending cycle continues until eventually he is asked to leave the work. A few years later this forgiven ex-worker is made an elder with meeting in his home. And he continues to abuse children, sometimes even his own. How can the Christian desire to forgive be ballanced with the need to protect children from "forgiven" CSA perpetrators?
|
|
|
Post by Pragmatic on Aug 14, 2024 18:06:22 GMT -5
I agree with you. I'm not about to criticize the efforts of those who are presently delving into the pursuit of justice for those who have committed SA and CSA. I've contributed to that myself. However, I'm seriously disturbed about what a few individuals are advocating that appears to be more like revenge than justice -- quite beyond the principles of Christian belief in forgiveness. The notion that an offender who has repented and conformed satisfactorily to legal standards, should be banned from fellowship or service for life is offensive. I've played both sides of this game. 25 years ago I maintained my friendship with a worker offended who I actually reported and had imprisoned for life. I don't have to be involved with the role of judging or punishing offenders -- the Christian thing is to be the "friend" of sinners -- the scriptures say that temporal governments are there to serve us in that capacity. Simultaneously I maintained my friendship with a young offender who was accused of statutory sexual seduction, proven to involve neither sexual intercourse nor a predatory history through the legal system -- where he pleaded guilty to precisely what he did, did his time in jail, and on the recommendation of both his parole supervisor and the presiding judge deemed him worthy to be discharged early from parole and have all civil rights restored. The judge also issued an order that the "victim" and her family not interfere further with the case or with the accused's civil rights. Yet it has now been determined that he is not fit to have a meeting in his own home -- after a decades clean record and having raised two daughters to adulthood without incidents -- the result of the gossip site where someone deemed it necessary to release the lurid details of the original offense. The ministry at the time admitted TO ME they protected the predatory rapist CSA worker from the legal system and assigned him to meetings where there were potential victims, and blacklisted me internationally for befriending this young fellow who honestly and patiently confessed and endured all the state threw at him. I was recently told I should be ashamed of myself -- probably I should be ashamed of something, but of this I plead not guilty. As you know Bob, there have been many cases where CSA perpetrators have been forgiven, only to reoffend repeatedly. A worker abuses children in one jurisdiction so he is transferred to another. And another. The forgiveness-reoffending cycle continues until eventually he is asked to leave the work. A few years later this forgiven ex-worker is made an elder with meeting in his home. And he continues to abuse children, sometimes even his own. How can the Christian desire to forgive be ballanced with the need to protect children from "forgiven" CSA perpetrators? We have seen this situation play out in our little country, and see victims writing about similar experiences almost daily in the US and Canada.
I have seen some of the vicious texts and emails sent to victims of CSA by professing Friends, who blame the victim. How can a barely pubescent teen be blamed?
It's as though highlighting the evil that has been perpetrated is more evil than the rape of a child. Let's not sugar coat it, because that is what it is.
I was talking to a victim recently who said that many Friends would not believe him, and supported the perpetrator, saying he was such a nice person. When he was asked by the overseer if he was going to lay charges, the overseer prefixed it with, "We'd rather you didn't". Given the power differential, how did that make him feel? Disowned, dis believed? Of course it did.
In the time span from being disbelieved till now, the offender has molested many victims. Disbelieving and disowning sure has a price. Professing Friends would cross the street when they saw the victims coming toward them. How did that make them feel? And the workers never discouraged the culture that fomented this behaviour.
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Aug 14, 2024 21:23:13 GMT -5
Perpetrators are considered victims.
Actual victims are considered "a piece of work", seducers, mental cases etc.
All have to live with their own conscience.
For me, I'll defend the rights of children to be protected from exploitation as sexual playthings.... even if it requires the disfellowshipping of predators.
|
|
|
Post by Pragmatic on Aug 14, 2024 23:51:28 GMT -5
Ditto that - Amen brother!
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Aug 15, 2024 0:54:26 GMT -5
I agree with you. I'm not about to criticize the efforts of those who are presently delving into the pursuit of justice for those who have committed SA and CSA. I've contributed to that myself. However, I'm seriously disturbed about what a few individuals are advocating that appears to be more like revenge than justice -- quite beyond the principles of Christian belief in forgiveness. The notion that an offender who has repented and conformed satisfactorily to legal standards, should be banned from fellowship or service for life is offensive. I've played both sides of this game. 25 years ago I maintained my friendship with a worker offended who I actually reported and had imprisoned for life. I don't have to be involved with the role of judging or punishing offenders -- the Christian thing is to be the "friend" of sinners -- the scriptures say that temporal governments are there to serve us in that capacity. Simultaneously I maintained my friendship with a young offender who was accused of statutory sexual seduction, proven to involve neither sexual intercourse nor a predatory history through the legal system -- where he pleaded guilty to precisely what he did, did his time in jail, and on the recommendation of both his parole supervisor and the presiding judge deemed him worthy to be discharged early from parole and have all civil rights restored. The judge also issued an order that the "victim" and her family not interfere further with the case or with the accused's civil rights. Yet it has now been determined that he is not fit to have a meeting in his own home -- after a decades clean record and having raised two daughters to adulthood without incidents -- the result of the gossip site where someone deemed it necessary to release the lurid details of the original offense. The ministry at the time admitted TO ME they protected the predatory rapist CSA worker from the legal system and assigned him to meetings where there were potential victims, and blacklisted me internationally for befriending this young fellow who honestly and patiently confessed and endured all the state threw at him. I was recently told I should be ashamed of myself -- probably I should be ashamed of something, but of this I plead not guilty. As you know Bob, there have been many cases where CSA perpetrators have been forgiven, only to reoffend repeatedly. A worker abuses children in one jurisdiction so he is transferred to another. And another. The forgiveness-reoffending cycle continues until eventually he is asked to leave the work. A few years later this forgiven ex-worker is made an elder with meeting in his home. And he continues to abuse children, sometimes even his own. How can the Christian desire to forgive be ballanced with the need to protect children from "forgiven" CSA perpetrators? That's so true. They have the naive opinion that "forgiveness" absolves an offender of accountability. But there's a lesson to be learned - from the person who addresses the condemned murderer of their loved one in court, who says "I forgive you", but it's not an expectation that the court would reduce the penalty for the crime. "Forgive and forget" does not trump a "hard lesson learned". Forgiveness among humans is for the benefit of the victims, not the offenders. It can be done -- it so happens that, despite the fact that I reported a worker for his heinous crimes, I did not fail to tell him that I was still his friend. I've visited such people in prison -- but he knew perfectly well he deserved what he got and that he should never be in a school again. I understand that to love someone does not mean you excuse their crimes. We have proper civilized ways to hold people accountable without resorting to vigilantism.
|
|
|
Post by Annan on Aug 15, 2024 6:37:11 GMT -5
As you know Bob, there have been many cases where CSA perpetrators have been forgiven, only to reoffend repeatedly. A worker abuses children in one jurisdiction so he is transferred to another. And another. The forgiveness-reoffending cycle continues until eventually he is asked to leave the work. A few years later this forgiven ex-worker is made an elder with meeting in his home. And he continues to abuse children, sometimes even his own. How can the Christian desire to forgive be ballanced with the need to protect children from "forgiven" CSA perpetrators? We have seen this situation play out in our little country, and see victims writing about similar experiences almost daily in the US and Canada. I have seen some of the vicious texts and emails sent to victims of CSA by professing Friends, who blame the victim. How can a barely pubescent teen be blamed? It's as though highlighting the evil that has been perpetrated is more evil than the rape of a child. Let's not sugar coat it, because that is what it is. I was talking to a victim recently who said that many Friends would not believe him, and supported the perpetrator, saying he was such a nice person. When he was asked by the overseer if he was going to lay charges, the overseer prefixed it with, "We'd rather you didn't". Given the power differential, how did that make him feel? Disowned, dis believed? Of course it did. In the time span from being disbelieved till now, the offender has molested many victims. Disbelieving and disowning sure has a price. Professing Friends would cross the street when they saw the victims coming toward them. How did that make them feel? And the workers never discouraged the culture that fomented this behaviour.
Had I been a victim, my parents would have blamed me. I believe snow said the same thing. The workers could do no wrong. I would have been made out to be a tease somehow. When I told my father about CSA in the cult, he said you all are liars. And so it goes...
|
|
meg1
Junior Member
Posts: 148
|
Post by meg1 on Aug 20, 2024 13:47:21 GMT -5
[ quote author="BobWilliston " source="/post/1077447/thread" timestamp="1723701266"]
It can be done -- it so happens that, despite the fact that I reported a worker for his heinous crimes, I did not fail to tell him that I was still his friend. I've visited such people in prison -- but he knew perfectly well he deserved what he got and that he should never be in a school again. I understand that to love someone does not mean you excuse their crimes. We have proper civilized ways to hold people accountable without resorting to vigilantism.
[/quote][/font] I have been thinking about the difference between forgiveness and reconciliation. I have not come to firm understanding about the relationship between the two acts. I believe that creating a safe place for vulnerable children and adults is the driving principle of my beliefs. I also believe that I cannot forgive a perpetrator on behalf of anyone else. So, as I consider the appropriateness of lifetime bans from fellowship gatherings I am more in favor than against that stance. I do not see it as vigilante justice. I see it as a protective act for vulnerable people. Like most social justice ideas it is complicated. If another person is injured because I felt the need to forgive and condone a general reconciliation I believe I am complicit in the harm caused. I know this harm is a life-long injury. ?? Complicated....
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Aug 21, 2024 19:31:49 GMT -5
[ quote author="BobWilliston " source="/post/1077447/thread" timestamp="1723701266"]
It can be done -- it so happens that, despite the fact that I reported a worker for his heinous crimes, I did not fail to tell him that I was still his friend. I've visited such people in prison -- but he knew perfectly well he deserved what he got and that he should never be in a school again. I understand that to love someone does not mean you excuse their crimes. We have proper civilized ways to hold people accountable without resorting to vigilantism.
[/font] I have been thinking about the difference between forgiveness and reconciliation. I have not come to firm understanding about the relationship between the two acts. I believe that creating a safe place for vulnerable children and adults is the driving principle of my beliefs. I also believe that I cannot forgive a perpetrator on behalf of anyone else. So, as I consider the appropriateness of lifetime bans from fellowship gatherings I am more in favor than against that stance. I do not see it as vigilante justice. I see it as a protective act for vulnerable people. Like most social justice ideas it is complicated. If another person is injured because I felt the need to forgive and condone a general reconciliation I believe I am complicit in the harm caused. I know this harm is a life-long injury. ?? Complicated....[/quote] It is a complicated matter. And I agree with your distinguishing between forgiveness and reconciliation. And I understand the logic of a lifetime ban. There still remain a couple of things that I find a bit difficult with them. (1) Jesus didn't advise banishment for anyone who wanted fellowship. But he didn't advise that children be exposed to the "sinners" he consorted with. There remains a great difference between a predator and a lapse of moral integrity. I've been in meetings where a young man was banished completely for heavy petting with his teenage fiancee, but the worker who had been raping prepubescent children was allowed to go home with anyone in the meeting who had little kids. Interestingly, neither of these people was a danger to anyone while they were in the meeting room. I think with an acceptable Christian spirit and openness, duplicity of that situation could have been far better handled. (2) Who determines who needs to be banished from fellowship for life. This idea of a period of banishment as a test of one's sincerity is not really smart. If things are handled appropriately when they are first discovered, the courts can easily determine who is a predator and who is not. Right now I am painfully aware that one consensual lapse 25 years ago if denying him meeting in his home, despite the fact that he has been fully vindicated by the court for his better moral character than that of his "victim". The gossip that floats around among the "purity" enforcers among the 2x2's is very much a problem.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Aug 21, 2024 22:47:50 GMT -5
I agree, anyone who goes to any church and sexually abuses another person or child should be permanently banned. If a person acts out in church, they obviously have absolutely no self-discipline and are incapable of controlling their perversion. Even if they repent, who can trust them not to have a relapse and re-offend. God might forgive them, their victim might forgive them, but forgiving doesn't warrant trust. When someone proves they are capable of harming others, you've got to banish them for the sake of potential targets and all the civilized church goers. There's just no middle ground for heinous crimes, especially when perpetrated against adolescence and children.
|
|
|
Post by Pragmatic on Aug 21, 2024 23:12:30 GMT -5
I think too, that many are ignorant of the fact the Pedophilia is regarded as incurable in most. Regardless of how much repentance there is, how much acknowledgment of how wrong it is, it still continues. Yes it is possible for an offender to only offend once, but that is a very small minority, and in order to protect children, and reduce triggering among victims, separation is the only way society has that works.
Chemical castration etc, does not work, because that isn't where the problem is. They are just wired that way.
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Aug 24, 2024 12:32:49 GMT -5
I have been thinking about the difference between forgiveness and reconciliation. I have not come to firm understanding about the relationship between the two acts. I believe that creating a safe place for vulnerable children and adults is the driving principle of my beliefs. I also believe that I cannot forgive a perpetrator on behalf of anyone else. So, as I consider the appropriateness of lifetime bans from fellowship gatherings I am more in favor than against that stance. I do not see it as vigilante justice. I see it as a protective act for vulnerable people. Like most social justice ideas it is complicated. If another person is injured because I felt the need to forgive and condone a general reconciliation I believe I am complicit in the harm caused. I know this harm is a life-long injury. ?? Complicated....
Forgiveness does not mandate reconciliation Forgiveness is not forgetting Forgiveness is not trust Forgiveness does not erase the offense/sin (the cross did)
Forgiveness removes resentment
|
|
|
Post by passingby on Aug 27, 2024 14:50:46 GMT -5
It seems to me this constant attention to abuse, is a constant testament to the abject failure of and the lie of the promise(s) of Christianity. Obviously there is no protection by God, of the innocent. There is no Great Physician, with healing in His wings. Revenge or Justice, is Mine Sajith the Lord - is bullocks among the Christians here.
That's just the short list of the glaringly obvious
|
|
|
Post by Dan on Aug 27, 2024 16:31:35 GMT -5
It seems to me this constant attention to abuse, is a constant testament to the abject failure of and the lie of the promise(s) of Christianity. Obviously there is no protection by God, of the innocent. There is no Great Physician, with healing in His wings. Revenge or Justice, is Mine Sajith the Lord - is bullocks among the Christians here. That's just the short list of the glaringly obvious
True, there is no protection from God. No where in the bible does it say God protects Christians.. And no one is innocent. Since there's no promise, there's no lie.
And "Vengeance is mine saith the Lord" (Romans12:19) is a reference to judgement, which has yet to come.
|
|