The Reformers talked about "civil righteousness" and common grace. We can't make everyone sinless, but we can improve society.Are you saying that didactic instruction can stop sin in unregenerate man?
Upvote
0
The Reformers talked about "civil righteousness" and common grace. We can't make everyone sinless, but we can improve society.Are you saying that didactic instruction can stop sin in unregenerate man?
The Reformers talked about "civil righteousness" and common grace. We can't make everyone sinless, but we can improve society.
That's just it.... it's not just men and boys. It's everyone. Man or woman, boy or girl, humans can grow up to be abusive. For whatever reason, culture, education, home life, role of father or lack of the role of a father, abusive parent, a narcissistic belief that they are always right... the list goes on.So you don't think we can do anything to form Godly character in our men and boys?
Sure, but it's hard to believe that in a vaguely Christian country, individual Christians don't have a duty to promote good behavior as well. The concept of common grace is that God cares about the kind of environment we're surrounded by. He wants to restrain evil, and get at least a secular kind of justice. But he doesn't do it by lightning bolts. We're his agents. And in the US at least, our votes and other ways of expressing ourselves determine what the State does.Isn't common grace something that God orchestrates? And, isn't civil righteousness brought about by the state rather than the Christian? By law and enforcement of it?
Sure, but it's hard to believe that in a vaguely Christian country, individual Christians don't have a duty to promote good behavior as well. The concept of common grace is that God cares about the kind of environment we're surrounded by. He wants to restrain evil, and get at least a secular kind of justice. But he doesn't do it by lightning bolts. We're his agents. And in the US at least, our votes and other ways of expressing ourselves determine what the State does.
The solution lies in socio-economic changes to give women economically sustainable ways out of abusive situations and educating women on the psychological profiles of abusive men so women can avoid them entirely.
I help support a mission that aids abused women. In my experience, the changes needed aren't economic in nature. There are plenty of jobs that will allow a woman to support her family.
Again, in my experience, the secondary problem with abusive relationships is that the abused individual struggles to extract themselves from the relationship. Often, they won't press charges against their abuser. They cover for the abuser, making excuses for their injuries.
That's just it.... it's not just men and boys. It's everyone. Man or woman, boy or girl, humans can grow up to be abusive. For whatever reason, culture, education, home life, role of father or lack of the role of a father, abusive parent, a narcissistic belief that they are always right... the list goes on.
To limit this to "our men and boys" is sexist as well. We have already seen on this thread that men and women are abused. We have also, I would say unanimously, agreed it is wrong and sinful.
So, let's stop limiting this to a male problem and understand that abuse is a problem, period.
We are to treat each other with kindness. Treat your neighbor as yourself. Any time we don't do this, it is a sin.
Stretch that to abuse and we have even more problems. This is not any more a problem for men than it is for women.
It's just plain wrong. The thing is, it is, many times, learned from the parents and other adult examples as a child grows up and combined with the character of the child and the culture of the home, region and culture.
She may be able to get a job but how about taking care of her children and holding a job at the same time? That is going to be a struggle for sure...Even at best, life is not going to be as easy as when she was married to her abusive husband (if only he wasn't abusive).
I understand what you're saying but I don't find this insinuation that men minimize or deny that abuse is a problem to be true, at all. In today's societies any aggression toward women is noticed like a bright light in a dark tunnel. Just try saying something degrading to women in a group sometime......JacksBratt - overall, this is true. Statistics do show both sexes can abuse and are abused. I go back to the OP and that has what I believe is different between the sexes based on my experience in our church and what we learned from other churches we consulted with on the topic. Men have a much greater tendency to not see abuse as a problem that impacts those in their sphere of influence. Men who abuse (or are abused) tend to not talk about it with other men. Women, generally because they are more likely to confide in other women about abuse, have a greater tendency to see it as a problem. I think some of the factors and language in the OP were the result of Paidiske's personal background and interactions, but the main message still is valid. Why do "so many" men minimize or deny that abuse is a problem in their sphere of influence and how can abuse prevention be improved? That is a different topic from who abuses who.
I understand what you're saying but I don't find this insinuation that men minimize or deny that abuse is a problem to be true, at all. In today's societies any aggression toward women is noticed like a bright light in a dark tunnel. Just try saying something degrading to women in a group sometime......
Maybe where she is from it is an issue. However, in Canada men are well aware and definitely not minimizing it.
I see this happen time and time and time again.
The statistics are there. They're not invented and they're pretty frightening, when we look at the reality of what proportion of women are abused in their own home.
So why, instead of being outraged and working with us to eradicate this, do so many men seem to want to minimise or deny it?
I honestly don't understand what good comes of trying to pretend this isn't real.
I'm not familiar with the details of the UBI but, as a libertarian, it looks like more government involvement in and control of our lives. Not a good thing. I can't name a single financial program in which the government is involved that isn't an absolute mess.
Democracy is pretty much an illusion now.Seems to be no other way. Automation is ramping up. Without UBI, and with high unemployment rates due to automation in the near future, the global economy will crash. UBI is the only solution to maintain economic growth in the face of automation. Sounds stupid but it's either that or ban automation or ditch capitalism.
Theoretically, it will be good for everyone due to much reduced financial pressure. Will directly result in reduced crime and it will deal a major blow to abusive people who use financial pressure to gain the upper hand - lots of them does!
Although I agree, it could leverage the government's control over people. It will certainly consolidate more power to the government. They'll have the overwhelming votes of the masses to support new policies or measures....from that point, democracy is no longer real but an illusion.
I see this happen time and time and time again.
The statistics are there. They're not invented and they're pretty frightening, when we look at the reality of what proportion of women are abused in their own home.
So why, instead of being outraged and working with us to eradicate this, do so many men seem to want to minimise or deny it?
I honestly don't understand what good comes of trying to pretend this isn't real.
I'm not confident that being outraged leads to eradication.
I don't recall that ever working.
Nothing else can effect change if outrage won't.
And yes, it works. It always works.
Outrage is just an individuals failure of reason.
If Scripture can speak of even the Holy Spirit being outraged (as in Hebrews 10:29), does that not suggest there is a place for it in the Christian life?