 |
Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Message |
Author |
 |
bonnie knox |
That's hilarious since you were the one who brought it up.
| Quote: | 'Pro-abuse' just turns into a rhetorical label at some point, that doesn't mean much. We need to consider our beliefs in a bit more detail and lay off the labels and think things through.
|
|
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
3/10/16 9:30 pm
|
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
| |
bonnie knox |
It might be 'odd,' but it's classic complementarian. As are bringing up the comparison to homosexuality, suggesting the woman's story might not be true, and making straw men arguments about egalitarians.
| Patrick Harris wrote: | Link
I find it odd every time this subject come ups and abuse is mentioned you to change the subject either by pointing out that women abuse men or that "abuse" is not always abuse.
Whether mental or physical it's still abuse and shouldn't be tolerated.
I've have friends that left an abusive relationship, both physical and drugs, only to be told by the church they needed to return to their spouse, because that was the spiritual thing to do.
The mans leadership in the house is not inviolate. Once they start down the road of abuse they have forfeit their right of leadership and any expectation that their wife should be submissive.
In addition, the Holy Spirit inspired Peter to say the things he did, however, the culture under the greco-roman world is not the same as today and neither was their form of slavery the same as our was in the 1800's. |
|
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
3/10/16 9:36 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
| Quote: | | The woman on the blog had a clip from John Piper. I think John Piper had a clip telling about St. Augustine's mother. The other women would show bruises from their husbands. Her husband was known to have an awful temper, but the story goes she was so submissive to him that he never laid a hand on her. |
Are you indeed saying that a woman can avoid physical abuse by being submissive?
Great, that sounds like typical Piper (the guy who concerns himself with making sure a woman doesn't instruct a man, that woman aren't muscular because men are turned on by a woman pumping iron, the guy that suggests rather than calling the police if she is physically abused, she should wait till the next morning and tell elders--elders who have been given the example of St. Augustine's mother???!!!!!!!). Instead of being struck by the reality that abuse was prevalent and accepted as normal and condemning the men for being abusive, he insinuates that if the women were just as submissive as Augustine's mother, they could have avoided the abuse as well.
How in the world is this something to be held up as exemplary? |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
3/10/16 9:48 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
| bonnie knox wrote: | | It might be 'odd,' but it's classic complementarian. As are bringing up the comparison to homosexuality, suggesting the woman's story might not be true, and making straw men arguments about egalitarians. |
I can't recall where I've read where complementarians have compared egalitarian arguments to those of homosexuals, but it makes sense. The pro-gay marriage interpreters of the Bible also often point out the culture was different in the first century. They try to do away with Biblical doctrine based on that.
Suggesting the woman's story may not be true? From time to time I'll point out, when we read an article about someone, that we aren't reading that other person's side of the story or that the press can make mistakes, too. IF you were being publically accused of something, I'm sure you would appreciate if people took the time to stop and realize that when one person accuses the other, there are two sides to the story. We all should be happy to live in a legal system where the underlying assumption is innocent until proven guilty.
| Quote: |
In addition, the Holy Spirit inspired Peter to say the things he did, however, the culture under the greco-roman world is not the same as today and neither was their form of slavery the same as our was in the 1800's. |
Okay, we are dealing with a different culture. I'd venture to guess that none of us have household slaves. The principle that God finds it commendable for righteous people to bear up under unjust suffering for Christ's sake, following the example of Christ still applies. Some people like to blame victims of abuse for staying, too, when some of them do so with a heart to honor God.
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
3/11/16 8:20 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
| Quote: | | I can't recall where I've read where complementarians have compared egalitarian arguments to those of homosexuals, but it makes sense. |
Makes sense? That's laughable. It would only make sense if treating a wife like an adult equal is a sin like homosexuality. That's bizarre.
You said,
'The egalitarians can try to paint Christians with a traditional view of marriage as being pro-abuse. The gay rights advocates can try to paint people with a traditional view of marriage as being in favor of cruelty to teenagers who struggle with same-sex identity.'
First of all, you use that word pro-abuse here--the one you brought into the conversation, and the one you say is a label that needs to be dropped. Wow, sounds like projection to me.
Second, with respect to the book we are discussing, that is a straw man argument since the author Ruth Tucker says this:
| Quote: | | Your final critique of the book is that I give many examples of good marriages, some of which you say are complementarian. I think you are right, though I didn�t check out their headship views before I wrote about them. A good marriage is a good marriage, whether based on egalitarian or complementarian positions. I celebrate all good marriages. Do you? |
|
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
3/11/16 9:58 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Seriously?? |
bonnie knox |
| Link wrote: |
Suggesting the woman's story may not be true? From time to time I'll point out, when we read an article about someone, that we aren't reading that other person's side of the story or that the press can make mistakes, too. IF you were being publically accused of something, I'm sure you would appreciate if people took the time to stop and realize that when one person accuses the other, there are two sides to the story. We all should be happy to live in a legal system where the underlying assumption is innocent until proven guilty. |
Link, does that have anything to do with Ruth Tucker's story? She wrote a book about how she was abused in marriage many years ago. It was a story that she dreaded to write but says she felt she must when she saw a picture on TV on the ball player Ray Rice dragging his unconscious girlfriend out of the elevator [after he had assaulted her].
It's great to have empathy for folks falsely accused, but where is the empathy for the victim of abuse who can find no one to believe his or her story and instead is met with insinuations that the victim is just making it up. Have you ever truly tried to put yourself in the shoes of a victim of abuse??
People are being abused. It really happens. Are we turning a blind eye to it??
I'm happy to live in a legal system of innocent till proven guilty, you are happy to live in that legal system, I have no doubt Ruth Tucker is also glad to live in that system.
But we also live in a legal system where witness testimony is used. This book is the testimony of the witness. Do you believe her?
If you don't believe her or don't want to commit yourself to making a judgment (as ridiculous as I find that in this particular case), are you willing to acknowledge that women do get abused? |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
3/11/16 10:15 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| Also, about the homosexual issue... |
bonnie knox |
Link, you say you've not heard complementarians saying that egalitarians are using the same argument that pro-homosexuals use. Open your eyes and ears and you will notice it.
There is a whole chapter about that in the book that Tom Sterbens has recommended, Discovering Biblical Equality. You should read it.
| Nick Park wrote: | | One of the problems is that sometimes people will cojoin the term 'feminist theology' with other terms such as 'liberation' and 'LGBT', even in cases where no such connection exists. Continual use of such associations creates the impression, quite wrongly, that all forms of feminist theology are part of a Communist homosexual Satanic plot to destroy the church. Which is why, if you dare to suggest that women could actually contribute to the General Council of the Church of God, then someone will soon start shouting about how we are on a slippery slope and are in danger of ordaining homosexuals. |
|
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
3/11/16 10:26 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
| Quote: | | Some people like to blame victims of abuse for staying, too, when some of them do so with a heart to honor God. |
Who says this??? Do you not actually converse with people who have been abused? Yes, I know (as in personally know, Link, not just someone whose blog I read) a woman who stayed with an abusive husband for years. Eventually he shot himself. I believe she truly felt she was doing the right thing by being submissive to him, which to her meant catering to his whims and demands and counting on God to keep her alive. I believe she was misguided. The blame I place on the husband for meting out the abuse and on a church culture that says this is what wives are supposed to do.
Yes, it does bother me that she is now instructing other women that this is what submission in marriage means. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
3/11/16 10:34 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
| bonnie knox wrote: | | Quote: | | Some people like to blame victims of abuse for staying, too, when some of them do so with a heart to honor God. |
Who says this??? |
No one has gone quite so far as to do this on this thread, but I've seen similar statements on other forums in years past, things like saying someone who endures abuse isn't glorifying God or things along those lines.
| Quote: | | Do you not actually converse with people who have been abused? |
I have, and I do from time to time. A lot of people have been abused.
| Quote: | Yes, I know (as in personally know, Link, not just someone whose blog I read) a woman who stayed with an abusive husband for years. Eventually he shot himself. I believe she truly felt she was doing the right thing by being submissive to him, which to her meant catering to his whims and demands and counting on God to keep her alive. I believe she was misguided. The blame I place on the husband for meting out the abuse and on a church culture that says this is what wives are supposed to do.
Yes, it does bother me that she is now instructing other women that this is what submission in marriage means. |
It sounds like she was delivered from her hardship in a way. David was delivered from his abuser in a similar way, a sword rather than a firearm.
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
3/11/16 11:57 pm
|
|
|
| |
|
| Re: Seriously?? |
Link |
| bonnie knox wrote: |
Link, does that have anything to do with Ruth Tucker's story?
|
You are the one who made a big deal about one short comment I made.
| Quote: | It's great to have empathy for folks falsely accused, but where is the empathy for the victim of abuse who can find no one to believe his or her story and instead is met with insinuations that the victim is just making it up. Have you ever truly tried to put yourself in the shoes of a victim of abuse??
People are being abused. It really happens. Are we turning a blind eye to it??
I'm happy to live in a legal system of innocent till proven guilty, you are happy to live in that legal system, I have no doubt Ruth Tucker is also glad to live in that system.
But we also live in a legal system where witness testimony is used. This book is the testimony of the witness. Do you believe her?
|
I haven't read her book. Just as a general rule, when someone is accused of something, especially a believer, and especially a minister of the gospel, I try to keep in mind that accusations may not always be true or accurate, and may be a bit skewed coming from the perception of one individual. You've probably seen me make other comments like that in other contexts other than abuse. I think you've even commented on it.
The Bible says not to accept a charge against an elder except from two or three witnesses. There are even supposed to be two or three witnesses when a 'brother' is accused of something before the church in Matthew 18. You talk about a book- an accusation made by one witness against a preacher.
| Quote: | | If you don't believe her or don't want to commit yourself to making a judgment (as ridiculous as I find that in this particular case), are you willing to acknowledge that women do get abused? |
I haven't read the book, so I can't say that I believe her or not. But if the issue is whether her ex-husband was guilty or not, I shouldn't even make a determination until I've examined the testimony of two or three witnesses, anyway.
Do I believe there are men who abuse women? Of course? I'm sure there are plenty of guys out there-- in number probably not percentage-- who fit the classic profile of the Lifetime TV movie wife abusive husband, who beats his wife, emotionally abuses her. There are probably guys out there who get a wife from Vietnam or the Philippines and lock them in the closet unless they want food or sex and try to get them to give sexual favors to their drinking buddies-- probably not to common, but I suspect it happens. There are men who rape who think of having sex with unwilling women as their right and enjoy making women suffer. Not too many percentagewise, but I do believe there are guys who fit that type of rapist profile out there.
I also believe there are various shades of grey on the abuse spectrum when it comes to physical abuse. There are the 'monster' type who are very abusive. There are also abusive women married to men (or living with men) who are averse to hitting women, but after a while the guy snaps or breaks down and hits back. If she hits him and he calls the police or if he hits back and she calls the police, he may end up leaving the site in handcuffs. Feminists have complained when too many women, in their opinion, were cuffed in areas where it was basically mandatory for police to cart someone back to the jailhouse after a domestic violence complaint.
There are serial rapists, but I suspect there are also college guys who would be willing to engage in some fornication with a girl if she is a bit drunk if consent is a bit fuzzy who don't fit the stereotypical rapist profile. And I suspect there are guys who would do this if the girl had been engaging in some sort of sexual behavior short of the actual act, but not otherwise.
I'm sure there are cases where a man becomes mentally ill, has a bad reaction to illegal drugs, or abuses drugs or alcohol and is violent to his wife when he normally wouldn't be if he were in his right mind. And I'm sure there are women who are the same way.
Then there are people who are perpetually verbally abusive. But I suspect most people have engaged in something that could rightly be labeled 'verbal abuse' on at least one occasion or a few occasions.
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
3/12/16 12:25 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
When I was a teenager, a female relative of mine was at my grandmother's house. She'd split with her husband who had what sounded like some mental problems. He wasn't actually physically violent, but his mental illness had scared her. She was talking about some literature she had from the domestic violence center, which stated that certain behaviors were abusive, and I could see how reading this stuff, her marital problems seemed to get really inflated in her mind. I'm sure she had some really rough times with her marriage problems and I didn't know all of them and I know I didn't know the whole story, but I believe she was pretty clear that he hadn't hit her. I read some of the literature and the story they presented was that if a man did these things, he was an abuser. Once a man was an abuser, he was always an abuser, and there was no changing that. It basically demonized any man that had engaged in any of those behaviors.
A lot of the domestic violence centers are run by feminists, and a lot of their theories and models have no real scientific backing. They'll take a case study about one man who had an abusive personality, and project that on any man who engages in abuse. Some models imply that complementarians are abusive. Quoting scripture about wives submitting to husbands is listed as part of an abusive pattern of behavior.
On the other hand, we have conservative men who are very much anti-abuse, too. The colonial Puritans/Separatists in Massachusetts believed in traditional roles in marriage, but they also outlawed wife beating. A man who beat his wife would likely face some punishment that wouldn't be allowed under our modern interpretation of the Constitution. It's good that abuse of women and children is highly stigmatized. A lot of men get angry hearing or seeing this sort of thing. I do, too. But we have to realize that revenge and violence (OTCP's backslidden deacons) toward those who do such things may not be the Lord's will.
If a conservative Christian man hears about a man who rapes a teenage girl, especially one of his own relatives, his first impulse might be to want to go kill the man. Even looking at the Old Testament, though, that isn't really justice.
Wife beaters are a highly stigmatized thing in our culture, which is different from Arab Mus|im culture for example. But as Christians, we need to be ministering to people to help them get delivered from sin through the gospel. We need to help restore marriages, not just declare them invalid. Jesus never said abuse canceled out His teachings about remarriage or adultery.
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
3/12/16 12:46 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
| Quote: | | The Bible says not to accept a charge against an elder except from two or three witnesses. There are even supposed to be two or three witnesses when a 'brother' is accused of something before the church in Matthew 18. You talk about a book- an accusation made by one witness against a preacher. |
So how does that work out if an eleven-year-old boy is sodomized by the senior pastor in a bathroom when no one else is present??
See, this is the problem when a woman is abused by her pastor husband with no witnesses. Or when clergy rapes a minor, etc., etc. Someone takes a verse and with a rigid black and white interpretation refuses to hear the accusation because there are no other witnesses.
Last edited by bonnie knox on 3/12/16 1:07 am; edited 1 time in total |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
3/12/16 12:50 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
Patrick Harris wrote,
| Quote: |
I find it odd every time this subject come ups and abuse is mentioned you to change the subject either by pointing out that women abuse men or that "abuse" is not always abuse. |
Those are important points. I recall a while back that one of our posters said that if there is abuse, get out. I believe that poster was you. If you look at the lists of behaviors that get labeled as 'abuse', that's a pretty broad list of labels.
In the US, and probably the UK, domestic violence centers are typically run by feminists. Their literature has a wide range of behaviors that can be considered part of an abusive pattern (such as quoting verses like those in Ephesians 5, or the man being in charge of the money, or a husband giving his wife a look of displeasure.) Women with marital problems can read this type of literature on the Internet, and they may have a broad definition of 'abuse' and use that when they come to a pastor for counseling.
The pastor who tells a woman "If there is abuse, get out", may just be giving carte blanch permission to separate a couple for a wide variety of behaviors. Just about any couple that has had a really nasty fight has probably engaged in some behaviors that some 'expert' might label as 'abusive.'
| Quote: | | Whether mental or physical it's still abuse and shouldn't be tolerated. |
We shouldn't accept any kind of abuse, physical or verbal. But we should also teach forgiveness. If a couple got into an argument and one of them started off on the other with, "You are just like your mother. You always...", that shouldn't be permission to divorce. We need to be specific when we talk about divorce. Pastors need to be aware of the language people are using when they talk about marriage.
We also need to be aware that all of us have skewed perceptions. Maybe you've never had a disagreement with your wife. I've had some with mine, though. One thing I've noticed is that her perspective about what happened when we've had some conflict is different from mine. Her perception of what was said, what was meant by what was said, etc., can be very different from mine.
I knew a couple once that was having marital problems. The man had been a bad husband in a number of ways. The wife called my house, wanting to talk to my wife, but unloaded on me. They were poor and on the verge of being evicted. She said while they were talking about it, he'd say stuff like, "Maybe I should just go live on the beach, then." She said he was so selfish, he wanted to leave his kids and go live on the beach. She said he'd talk about killing himself, too. She thought that was selfish.
Then they stopped by our apartment and we heard them both talk. She constantly criticized him, cut him off when he talked. I don't think I'd ever seen a wife so difficult. But I realized she was stressed with being evicted, just having become homeless, with 8 or 9 kids, and she had low blood sugar until we fed her something, too.
But I saw her a few weeks ago and she just berated the guy constantly. And I saw what was going on. She'd say such awful negative things about him, that he'd respond with stuff like, "I guess I shouldn't be alive then." He was just responding to the bad stuff she was saying about him. He didn't seem to be seriously threatening suicide or sleeping on the beach. He was just saying, "If I'm that bad, then..." It was commentary on her extreme criticism. They had a serious communication problem. And they ended up divorcing after a while.
One thing I really learned from this is that one person's perception of marital problems isn't necessarily a well-rounded view. People going through marital problems also often re-write the history of their relationship. Suddenly they were never really in love. Everything was obligation. That man or woman was always cold and distant. Things were awful all the time. Sometimes the one filing for divorce rewrites the history and the other one is trying to reconcile.
| Quote: | | The mans leadership in the house is not inviolate. Once they start down the road of abuse they have forfeit their right of leadership and any expectation that their wife should be submissive. |
Can you show me this principle in the word, please?
Seeing submission as a man's 'right' doesn't seem to me to be the right way of looking at it. A woman is to submit to her husband as unto the Lord. She is to do it to please the Lord, as an act of submission to the Lord. It's not about the man deserving it. I Peter 3 indicates that wives are to submit to husbands even if they don't obey the word, and the Lord can use the wife's submission as a means of winning her husbands.
| Quote: |
In addition, the Holy Spirit inspired Peter to say the things he did, however, the culture under the greco-roman world is not the same as today and neither was their form of slavery the same as our was in the 1800's. |
It was probably a more abusive world. How does that relate to our discussion? How should that effect our interpretation... specifically, referring to specific texts?
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
3/12/16 1:03 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
| bonnie knox wrote: | | Quote: | | The Bible says not to accept a charge against an elder except from two or three witnesses. There are even supposed to be two or three witnesses when a 'brother' is accused of something before the church in Matthew 18. You talk about a book- an accusation made by one witness against a preacher. |
So how does that work out if an eleven-year-old boy is sodomized by the senior pastor in a bathroom when no one else is present?? |
I suspect, sadly, that those who do such things do it more than once and produce more than one witness.
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
3/12/16 1:06 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
Nice way to skirt the issue. So the first victim cannot be believed???
| Link wrote: | | bonnie knox wrote: | | Quote: | | The Bible says not to accept a charge against an elder except from two or three witnesses. There are even supposed to be two or three witnesses when a 'brother' is accused of something before the church in Matthew 18. You talk about a book- an accusation made by one witness against a preacher. |
So how does that work out if an eleven-year-old boy is sodomized by the senior pastor in a bathroom when no one else is present?? |
I suspect, sadly, that those who do such things do it more than once and produce more than one witness. |
|
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
3/12/16 1:08 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Link |
| bonnie knox wrote: | Nice way to skirt the issue. So the first victim cannot be believed???
| Link wrote: | | bonnie knox wrote: | | Quote: | | The Bible says not to accept a charge against an elder except from two or three witnesses. There are even supposed to be two or three witnesses when a 'brother' is accused of something before the church in Matthew 18. You talk about a book- an accusation made by one witness against a preacher. |
So how does that work out if an eleven-year-old boy is sodomized by the senior pastor in a bathroom when no one else is present?? |
I suspect, sadly, that those who do such things do it more than once and produce more than one witness. |
|
The Bible says not to accept a charge against an elder except by two or three witnesses. That does make it difficult when there aren't two witnesses willing to testify. I know of a case where this appeared to be the case. The church shouldn't find one guilty unless there are two witnesses.
But God also works in these cases, 'vengeance is Mine saith the Lord', and God also causes wickedness to be exposed as well, and He hears cries for justice.
If one person lied about you and accused you of doing something like this, this horrific, but there were no other witnesses, would you want that person to be believed?
_________________
Link |
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11849
3/12/16 1:35 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Quiet Wyatt |
| Nowadays, we often will have the scientific ability to quite conclusively determine the truth or falsity of accusations, regardless of a plurality of witnesses. If a rape kit and DNA proved an elder had indeed committed a crime, the church would be absolutely misguided (and criminally negligent) if they ignored his criminal record just because there were not two or three witnesses. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12817
3/12/16 1:42 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
| Quote: | | The church shouldn't find one guilty unless there are two witnesses. |
Sorry, that doesn't make sense if your daughter was raped, but was ashamed to tell you till 3 months later. Now, there is no evidence. It's just your daughter's word against a beady-eyed lecher who comes across as a personable clergyman.
And you're telling me the church should let that reprehensible creep carry on like it's business as usual? |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
3/12/16 1:50 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
Dave Dorsey |
| bonnie knox wrote: | Sorry, that doesn't make sense if your daughter was raped, but was ashamed to tell you till 3 months later. Now, there is no evidence. It's just your daughter's word against a beady-eyed lecher who comes across as a personable clergyman.
And you're telling me the church should let that reprehensible creep carry on like it's business as usual? |
Bonnie, I have agreed with most if not nearly all of what you have posted in this thread, and have found many of Link's statements disturbing.
With that said, in this case, while I understand and empathize strongly with your point, he has a point as well.
If you were the pastor or leader of a church, and someone said you molested them 3 months earlier, and there are no other victims and no other evidence, what should your church do to handle a reprehensible creep like you?
The answer for me is NOT "nothing", but I am curious what your answer is. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13654
3/12/16 6:08 am
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
bonnie knox |
Dave, I don't deny it would be a difficult situation, but my point is that in the situation here, the interview with Ruth Tucker about her book, there seems to me to be no reason to doubt her story. Yet Link found that necessary to do:
| Quote: | | I'm sad to hear if this woman's husband beat her up. I don't know her or her husband. I don't know his side of the story, either, of course. |
{emphasis mine}
I don't know if it is based on a refusal to grapple with the practical outworkings of one's beliefs, which was a major concern of Ruth Tucker's as stated in the OP '....But I do want them to reassess their position and how it plays out in practical terms.' Link seems very concerned that Ruth Tucker has made the suggestion that her ex-husband's view of headship was somehow connected to the way the relationship eroded to the point of threats and violence.
As Patrick said, whenever the issue of women being abused comes up, Link wants to change the subject to men also being abused or that what is called abuse is not really abuse.
This tangent about believing the victim is also predictable. The caution about not believing someone until you've heard both sides hardly seems relevant in this case because one must still ask if the complementarian view of headship means that a husband could, for example, isolate a woman from her support system by taking away her keys and phone.
So, I think the demand to know how I would feel about being falsely accused is an attempt to detract from the issue at hand, although it seemed to me to be an example of a 'black and white Bible' when Link brought up the topic of having to have at least 2 witnesses.
(I had just recently read that a fundamentalist church would not accept the testimony of a girl if she was raped unless she had witnesses.)
In these discussions, I cannot detect in Link's conversations on this forum empathy for hurt women, unless it is tempered by the caveat that maybe she wasn't actually abused. I thought perhaps, if I used a scenario where the victim of abuse was a young boy, he might show some empathy for the victim, but again, in what was written here, he seemed to me to be more concerned with his rigid interpretation of the 2 scriptures mentioned. |
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 14803
3/12/16 9:22 am
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
