WHERE ARE ALL THE PROTESTANT PEDOPHILES?

[bbyrd009]

I forgive 'for me' much of the time...not always for him.
I even say sorry even when I believe the breakdown was not on my side but his.
I cannot afford any unforgiveness in my life with anyone...it eats like a sickness...

word

 

[bbyrd009]

Turn around, go the other way

"rebound" iow? i found the term apt anyway. Like a trampoline


"repent" is a Catholic word, not even supported by the Lex.

 

[Triumph1300]

Bbbyrd, What business is it to you to forgive, for instance, a rapist who raped my daughter?
The whole point is that only the people directly suffering are in the position to forgive the criminal.

--------------------------------------


And as far as your link:

Here's my point:
God gives salvation after repentance.
Without repentance there's no salvation.

-----------------------------------------


Automatic Forgiveness Keeps People from Christ:

Should repentance be superfluous? Many unbelievers have rejected Jesus Christ in part because of the false teaching that Christians should forgive others regardless of whether or not there is repentance. For Jesus Himself taught that ordinarily, repentance should be a prerequisite for Christian forgiveness. For example see Luke 17:3.

 

[bbyrd009]

What business is it to you to forgive, for instance, a rapist who raped my daughter?
The whole point is that only the people directly suffering are in the position to forgive the criminal.

diff subject now, right, and if you are asking me my reply is that if a bystander can be convinced to condemn, then he can also forgive, and not only can, must. Otherwise what business is it of yours to be forgiving your daughter's rapist anyway? She's an adult, right. By extension what business was it of Christ's to be forgiving the woman at the well?

 

[Triumph1300]

By extension what business was it of Christ's to be forgiving the woman at the well?

That's bizarre.
He's God.
You'r not God.

 

[Triumph1300]

Otherwise what business is it of yours to be forgiving your daughter's rapist anyway? She's an adult, right.

Yes, she's my daughter.
We have family ties.
She's not your daughter, and you don't suffer like me, HER father, you don't even know her.

 

[bbyrd009]

Yes, she's my daughter.
We have family ties.
She's not your daughter, and you don't suffer like me, HER father, you don't even know her.

but now the subject has changed again, i dispute none of this, but my premise still holds true; you are even verifying it.
He has long forgotten by now; you are the prisoner now, right

 

[Phoneman777]

Blame it on Mickey Mouse and Goofy.

Why?

 

[Phoneman777]

About nine months ago, the University of Oxford posted this: (It might help get you started for an answer to your confusion.)
Published November 11, 2017 | By Brian D. Earp

By Brian D. Earp (@briandavidearp)
Republican politician Roy Moore has been accused of initiating sexual contact with a 14-year-old girl when he was in his early 30s. Social media sites have since exploded with comments like these:
Roy Moore is now FUNDRAISING to conservative Christians after being outed as a pedophile.
This is truly sick. pic.twitter.com/NF5NLIGWKA
— Mikel Jollett (@Mikel_Jollett) November 9, 2017
Roy Moore is a sick man. He is a pedophile. This story is deeply sourced. It is credible and I believe the women.
— Steve Schmidt (@SteveSchmidtSES) November 9, 2017
Adult sexual contact with an underage minor is a crime and a serious moral wrong. Pedophilia, by contrast, is a psychiatric disorder involving primary or exclusive sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children (not just any person under the age of 18), which — if acted on — is a crime and a serious moral wrong. Actually, even then, it is the act that is wrong; the involuntary sexual attraction, so long as it remains disconnected from behavior, is probably not wrong in and of itself.
In short: pedophilia and child sexual assault are two different things, and conflating them is not a good idea. This is not just a matter of semantics. For one thing, confusing psychiatric disorders (requiring treatment) and sex crimes (which may or may not follow from such disorders) is likely to hamper clear moral reasoning. But more importantly, it may actually increase harm to children.
Consider the following: many people with pedophilia (1) hate their desires, (2) do not act on them for moral reasons (and should therefore plausibly be praised rather than vilified), and yet (3) often do not seek treatment precisely because they are aware that people in general cannot seem to tell the difference between:
(a) feeling involuntarily sexually attracted to young children (not wrong in and of itself), and
(b) molesting or sexually assaulting children (very wrong in and of itself, no matter the reason).
And here’s the kicker: failing to seek treatment for (a) is precisely the sort of thing that makes (b) more likely to happen. So, please, whatever your politics — stop saying Roy Moore has been “accused of pedophilia” (he has not). Say instead: “he has been accused of sexually assaulting a minor.”
The latter, not the former, is a sex crime and a serious moral wrong. If the goal is to protect children from harm, as it should be, then we should stop stigmatizing pedophilia per se and start stigmatizing (or keep stigmatizing) those who actually sexually abuse children for whatever reason, whether they happen to be pedophiles or not.
In other words, non-offending pedophiles should not be stigmatized so long as they do not offend, nor be mistaken for sexual abusers. Instead, they should be encouraged to seek treatment for their disorder before they might cause harm to children — which will only happen if we can keep clear about the difference between (a) and (b).

I’m not confused about anything. The false accusations against Moore were nothing but a political hit job designed to wipe out his campaign - we Conservatives all knew the accusations would cease as soon as the political damage was done - liberalism’s practitioners are so predictable that its almost like the gift of prophecy was poured out on everyone right of center.

 

[bbyrd009]

Yes, she's my daughter.
We have family ties.
She's not your daughter, and you don't suffer like me, HER father, you don't even know her.

just so we're clear here; i would have forgiven him already, or do it now, but that doesn't mean that if he did not confess with remorse that i would not also take it upon myself to sterilize him too ok, if he has been identified. But i would have to be convinced that a rape had actually occurred, and i mean beyond a shadow of a doubt, to do that, and even then i would set up a scenario where he gets another chance to confess and display remorse first, without any threat of sterilization present, etc.
A 4 hour mickey and one of those clips we use on goats works great, but i gotta stress again that both your and your daughter's pov on the rape is not evidence for guilt. i would want a third party, a PI or someone, or an eyewitness or even a previously offended by the same party to also concur, and even then i would prolly stalk him until i saw some direct evidence of abuse. Iow i would not undertake the sterilization as long as it would make me or my DIL happy ok, we're talking about a serious thing. Better to forgive him first, and do it with remorse only if all other avenues for relief have been exhausted; iow a recorded confession under duress of the immanent threat of sterilization would not work for me at that point, even if the authorities would accept it, which they wouldn't anyway, but see the point hopefully. At that point his stones are already gone iow--even though i would much prefer to put him away for several years, a much easier way out for me then--as i would have given him an opp--prolly several--to express remorse already, which he could do w/o even ever mentioning your daughter's name, see; i would be looking for a changed heart iow. And i would also refrain if it would relieve my "suffering," bc imo that is lack of forgiveness wadr, which i don't mean to imply that i don't empathize there either

 

[Triumph1300]

i dispute none of this,

Great, right. ;-)

 

[Triumph1300]

just so we're clear here; i would have forgiven him already, or do it now, but that doesn't mean that if he did not confess with remorse that i would not also take it upon myself to sterilize him too ok, if he has been identified.

You'r to nice imho.

 

[Triumph1300]

If someone does not repent, you should NOT forgive them.

Millions of Americans who believe in God but reject Christ's Gospel believe that God is all forgiving,
and that forgiveness is automatic and does not require repentance.

The false Christian teaching that we should automatically forgive everyone puffs up our own flesh making us holier-than-thou,
and worse, it helps send millions to hell with the false belief, given to them from Christians, that forgiveness is automatic and does not require repentance.

However, Jesus taught that if someone sins against you, "rebuke him! And IF he repents, forgive him."

Right. :)

 

[Triumph1300]

Why?

Because they are rodents.

 

[Triumph1300]

I cannot afford any unforgiveness in my life with anyone...it eats like a sickness...

I agree, if we dwell on it.
But some people are difficult to like.
But I guess we don't have to like them.
But it says love your neighbour.
But I guess we need help from the lord.
That's 4x but. (With one T)

 

[bbyrd009]

You'r to nice imho.

not sure how to take that,
when considered in a frame of community responsibility, i might object to the insinuation :)

 

[bbyrd009]

If someone does not repent, you should NOT forgive them.

Millions of Americans who believe in God but reject Christ's Gospel believe that God is all forgiving,
and that forgiveness is automatic and does not require repentance.

The false Christian teaching that we should automatically forgive everyone puffs up our own flesh making us holier-than-thou,
and worse, it helps send millions to hell with the false belief, given to them from Christians, that forgiveness is automatic and does not require repentance.

However, Jesus taught that if someone sins against you, "rebuke him! And IF he repents, forgive him."

Right. :)

absolutely; both are true. Prolly a variance in the definition of "forgive," just what is being heard there. i'm sure on some level you can also recognize how forgiving them is not for them though, too, it's for you. So don't let the SiT impede the point maybe. If you don't "forgive" him it will only damage you; if he "repents," he keeps his stones, they are forgiven lol, at least as long as she says so. of course i would strongly counsel her to forgive him face to face and not take his stones too ok

 

[bbyrd009]

Millions of Americans who believe in God but reject Christ's Gospel believe that God is all forgiving,
and that forgiveness is automatic and does not require repentance.

forgiveness is automatic, and does not require repentance, as hard as that is to believe. It certainly sounds counterintuitive, but it comes from a frame where a better frame would fit. Forgiveness will not save one, either, as may be believed. So maybe this serves to help make the point. Forgiveness is not absolution, you still reap what you sow, and it is confession and rebound that will allow one to again stand in the light, but we are already forgiven for everything. It is us who runs and hides when we see that we are naked right

 

[Willie T]

Amid all the foolishness, may I interject some sane advice?

If, perhaps one of you in a fit of selfish vengeance considers actually kidnapping someone and castrating them, let me make you aware of the very grave danger you may well be placing other children in. This has actually been known to trigger "revenge murder" of future children... because that is all you have left the person with to get even with you. Especially if they do not know your identify.

 

[bbyrd009]

Amid all the foolishness, may I interject some sane advice?

If, perhaps one of you in a fit of selfish vengeance considers actually kidnapping someone and castrating them, let me make you aware of the very grave danger you may well be placing other children in. This has actually been known to trigger "revenge murder" of future children... because that is all you have left the person with to get even with you. Especially if they do not know your identify.

oh, i wouldn't be hiding that, there would be a crowd, and you are expressing a valid perspective there, yes, only it may not obtain in...an isolated community of 100, say, right? So the perspective changes. Which one is "right?" i stated the other extreme on purpose btw, the point really is forgiveness imo.