Actscelerate.com Forum Index Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
@actscelerate Twitter  @actscelerate Facebook 

RZIM Confirms Ravi Zacharias's Sexual Misconduct .....saddened
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
   Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Message Author
Post Casey... Aaron Scott
caseyleejones wrote:
People are found guilty by a jury of peers where there is no video or audio or confession.

RZIM acted just that way. I would also say they extended far more grace than a court of law. But not even they could cover it up.

FYI, yeah, I am that hyper grace guy as you say. I was also an avid follower of RZ. Listened to his stuff all the time.

Let's call it like it was.....


I hear you, my friend. I am going on the assumption that RZ DID do those things. And while he was guilty and should have stepped down and went through restoration, etc., as it is the Lord stepped him down. And now that he is gone, what value has been wrought by us hearing of the sordid things?
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5694
12/27/20 9:44 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Re: Dave... Dave Dorsey
Aaron Scott wrote:
Now that RZ is dead, there is absolutely nothing that will "fix things" for these women. Whether they hear a sermon, a speech, a video clip, or what have you, they will ALWAYS think little of the man--and rightly so. However, now it has also been spoiled for the rest of us!

IT DID NOTHING TO IMPROVE THE LIVES OF THE VICTIMS (AND IN ANY CASE IT COULD HAVE BEEN VIA A PRIVATE APOLOGY AND SETTLEMENT WITH THE VICTIMS), BUT IT CRUSHED THOSE WHO DIDN'T KNOW.

Respectfully, this is 110% your conjecture and is completely inconsistent with the way victims generally find healing and closure concerning their abusers.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13652
12/27/20 9:53 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Dave... Aaron Scott
Dave Dorsey wrote:
Aaron Scott wrote:
Now that RZ is dead, there is absolutely nothing that will "fix things" for these women. Whether they hear a sermon, a speech, a video clip, or what have you, they will ALWAYS think little of the man--and rightly so. However, now it has also been spoiled for the rest of us!

IT DID NOTHING TO IMPROVE THE LIVES OF THE VICTIMS (AND IN ANY CASE IT COULD HAVE BEEN VIA A PRIVATE APOLOGY AND SETTLEMENT WITH THE VICTIMS), BUT IT CRUSHED THOSE WHO DIDN'T KNOW.

Respectfully, this is 110% your conjecture and is completely inconsistent with the way victims generally find healing and closure concerning their abusers.



Dave, scenario:

You injure someone by hitting them with your car. You never apologize, etc. At some point you die. I go to the person who you hit and say "sorry."

Well, first, that's a sorry sorry. It didn't come from the perpetrator, so how much does it really mean.

Then, to top it off, I take out an ad in the paper and say that "Dave Dorsey hit this person with a car, and it's just terrible that he did."

So now I, who had nothing to do with the matter, am still made aware of it. But why? So I can posthumously be angry at you, think you are not a very nice guy?

In other words, TO WHAT END?

If they had apologized to those women, that's great (even if it must mean very little, since it is not coming from RZ). But why do WE need to know, HAVE to know?

We don't. It was, in my opinion, an unnecessary blow, struck with a twisted sense of morality. RZ was, in a sense, executed for his crimes. Not only did THEY know he was a moral failure, they made sure everyone else knew too.
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5694
12/28/20 6:26 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
Aaron... read the French piece. Sexual sin and its denial and cover-up is an institutional sin in the church that requires corporate acknowledgment and repentance.

I know you mean well, I absolutely do, but your view perpetuates that sin.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13652
12/28/20 8:25 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
I have followed this for awhile. RZ's accusers have been slandered as gossips and liars -- by the church. The world has been told their stories are false and that they are liars. RZIM likewise refused to believe the accusations could be true, as they acknowledged in their statements.

These victims deserve now for the world to know the truth. It is institutional sin for the church to say no, we need to keep this in darkness for our sake. So we can continue enjoying RZ's teachings. We slandered them publicly, but we'll make it right to them privately.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13652
12/28/20 8:36 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Cojak
My wife and I discussed this over breakfast. She is the sweetest thing i have ever known. She is a dedicated Christian. It would be hard to find a fault in her life. BUT she like many women and a bunch of men say this could have been 'nipped in the bud' by the women. They could have said NO! Huh uh!

In the workforce I have seen many women working. VERY FEW can work for a woman. IMO girls are tough on girls.

I know in theory she is right, this could have been stopped by the females if the situation had been black and white. BUT a person in 'power' and with a persuading mind becomes the ultimate 'con-man'. It is ignorant to be conned but not a sin in itself.

In my opinion the situation could have been handled better, but I have no stones to throw at the organization in the end.

I have some bitter thoughts of a man who stands and declares the Word of God WHILE HE KNOWS he himself is living a lie. Embarassed Embarassed Embarassed
_________________
Some facts but mostly just my opinion!
jacsher@aol.com
http://shipslog-jack.blogspot.com/
01000001 01100011 01110100 01110011
Posts: 23625
12/28/20 12:09 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Link
Dave Dorsey wrote:
I have followed this for awhile. RZ's accusers have been slandered as gossips and liars -- by the church. The world has been told their stories are false and that they are liars. RZIM likewise refused to believe the accusations could be true, as they acknowledged in their statements.


I don't know the real story. What I know is that I've read some articles online about Ravi Zacharias that say he co-owned a spa, that women, whose names are not given, accused him of certain things. Zacharias is not around to give his side of the story. What if RZIM confessing to Zacharias' behalf could be a conditions of a more favorable legal settlement?


Is this an institutional sin that needs to be repented for? What scripture do we base that on? And what is the institution? Is the institution you speak of RZIM? Or is it the churches, the evangelical movement, or some broad category of religion? Is your argument based on the idea of Israel repenting for ancestral sins? What is your Biblical case for your approach to this issue?

If this were a first century church, I would imagine the apostles would have accusers bring their accusations before the assembly and require two or three witnesses.

I Timothy 5:19 says,
Do not receive an accusation against an elder except from two or three witnesses.

I don't know if Ravi Zacharias was an elder in any church, but Matthew 18 speaks of two witnesses when a brother is accused and brought before the assembly. So this principle probably applies to all, and elders are not exempt.

Here, the witnesses are women whose names we do not know that we hear about through the written rumor mill of blogs and Christian news magazines.

One of the accusers who wrote a book about Ravi Zacharias is an unbeliever. I saw a video of him in an interview with someone who seemed to be a kind of radical atheist. The author of the book against RV was an unbeliever, but maybe not as unreasonable about his atheist stance as the interviewer. Some of the claims against Zacharias have to do with his presenting his credentials inaccurately or in a way that the audience would think more of them than is reasonable-- references to his time at Cambridge, for example. RV's accuser said he had a 'non academic Masters degree.' If what I have read about it is correct, RV had a Masters of Divinity from Trinity International University. Their seminary is ATS accredited, from what I have read.

Quote:

These victims deserve now for the world to know the truth. It is institutional sin for the church to say no, we need to keep this in darkness for our sake.


Are you closer to this than the rest of us? I heard Ravi Zacharias speak twice in person. He was at The Ohio State University once when I was studying there, and I attended that, and I went to a church that hosted him in Jakarta. Maybe I did the latter twice. I can't remember. I heard him on the radio several times, and saw a few YouTube videos.

Were you close to his ministry? Can you say from your own experience that he invested in a spa? Have you talked to the workers?

If you were a massage worker at a spa, would you want it publicized that someone had made sexual overtures toward you, or that you had performed some kind of illegal act? If you were a spa worker who was not propositioned or who said 'no' to something like this, how would you feel about a preacher on the Internet insisting that we all owe it to you to make the fact that the place you worked at was a brothel? I cannot comment on the truth of the whole scenario, but I'd imagine some women in the massage industry who had either worked up a customer to a state of excitement to sell more services, or reluctantly caved to customer requests in order to keep their job or not be deported might not want their story broadcast for the world to see-- whether it is right or wrong on our part to expose the issue. I cannot see how 'owing it to the victims' is much of an argument. No doubt a number of sexual abuse victims of all sorts do not come forward because they do not want their personal uncomfortable experiences examined in public.

If it is in the local church, I can see the argument for exposing sin like this, if not repented of, if participants are still alive, right in a meeting for the church to have a kind of trial. That is what I see in Matthew 18 for sins of one against another, and something similar is recommended in I Corinthians 5 for sexual sin-- at least with the determination being made in public. I do not think we have a Biblical obligation to the world to expose all internal church scandals.
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11588
12/31/20 10:36 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
What if, what if, what if.

We've got facts and testimony in front of us, but what if these hypotheticals that absolve the abuser are true instead?

Rinse and repeat.

"I don't know, but..."

"I'd imagine..."

I understand and agree with the necessity of being skeptical of allegations until they are clearly and compellingly demonstrated as true. Everyone is owed the presumption of innocence. But I will never understand the way some people are driven to try to wash it all away even after allegations are proven. At some point we have to accept that things are beyond the point of reasonable doubt.

Refusing to do, and continuing to deny victims healing, and continuing to run interference for their abusers, is the sin the church commits institutionally.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13652
12/31/20 11:39 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
I'm done with this thread. If a report published by the man's own ministry isn't enough to set our hearts toward the victims, certainly nothing I say will be.

It's clear folks will apply the full strength of their imaginations to envisioning any hypothetical that could absolve the accused. It's the same category of wrong committed by those on the woke left who cannot fathom that an accused person might be innocent.

Blessings to those here who have put RZ's victims first, regardless of how his ministry had blessed them.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13652
12/31/20 12:00 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post This right here.... caseyleejones
Dave Dorsey wrote:
I'm done with this thread. If a report published by the man's own ministry isn't enough to set our hearts toward the victims, certainly nothing I say will be.

It's clear folks will apply the full strength of their imaginations to envisioning any hypothetical that could absolve the accused. It's the same category of wrong committed by those on the woke left who cannot fathom that an accused person might be innocent.

Blessings to those here who have put RZ's victims first, regardless of how his ministry had blessed them.


I was a big time listener and follower or RZ. Admittedly, one of my weak areas is separating the person from the message. I will move on.
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11680
12/31/20 7:42 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
I wasn't a huge follower of RZ, but I appreciated his ministry very much. I don't doubt them at all when they say what they found in their investigation was completely at odds with the RZ they knew publicly and privately. I think especially of the late Nabeel Qureshi, who I did follow. I cannot imagine that he knew any of this, or had even the slightest inkling. [Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13652
12/31/20 8:29 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Link
Dave Dorsey wrote:
What if, what if, what if.

We've got facts and testimony in front of us, but what if these hypotheticals that absolve the abuser are true instead?


Either you have access to information I do not have, or you have gossip or accounts of accounts. Have you heard the spa worker's testimonies first hand.

Does the Bible teach that we can judge someone based on second or third-hand information?

Quote:

I understand and agree with the necessity of being skeptical of allegations until they are clearly and compellingly demonstrated as true. Everyone is owed the presumption of innocence. But I will never understand the way some people are driven to try to wash it all away even after allegations are proven. At some point we have to accept that things are beyond the point of reasonable doubt.


Have you seen the evidence that is beyond reasonable doubt? Do you think the spa workers appreciate your getting justice for them by publicizing what allegedly took place?

Quote:

Refusing to do, and continuing to deny victims healing,


How so? Maybe they feel like an out of court settlement will make them heal.

Btw, should we get their names and publish them because it takes two to tango?.... unless it was a rape or assault. I have not heard that type of allegation.

It is a sin for a masseuse to engage in sexual activities of whatever variety with some man that isn't her husband, even if he's their boss and they depend on the job for a visa.

How do you think the church should deal with institutional sin, and what is the Biblical basis for your reasoning on this?
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11588
12/31/20 9:00 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
An report from RZIM about their lengthy investigation -- an investigation done in response to the accusers and their desire to have their accusations validated -- is not gossip or an account of accounts. Give me a break!

That's like saying you are unwilling to consider any convicted criminal guilty unless and until you have personally examined all of the evidence. Absolutely 100% ridiculous.

And I'm not at all surprised you want to talk about the sin of the women, who were coerced and forced into sexual acts. Should the women have done anything they could to resist? Should they have allowed themselves to be fired and deported? What if violence was threatened against them? (Since you're so fond of hypotheticals.) These aren't easy questions, but how incredible that you want to talk about their sin while raising every doubt you can about the actions committed by their abuser.

Not going any further here. Have a nice night.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13652
12/31/20 10:14 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post georgiapath
I don't listen to TV preachers. I think they are all just in it for the money. Never heard of him until someone posted when he passed away. Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 7361
1/1/21 8:39 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Link
Dave Dorsey wrote:
An report from RZIM about their lengthy investigation -- an investigation done in response to the accusers and their desire to have their accusations validated -- is not gossip or an account of accounts. Give me a break!


If they released a lengthy report, I am not aware of it. I am reading third hand accounts. If yours are second-hand, you still did not examine the evidence yourself.

Quote:

That's like saying you are unwilling to consider any convicted criminal guilty unless and until you have personally examined all of the evidence. Absolutely 100% ridiculous.


As far as I know, this case was never taken to a court of law. What if RZIM were being incentivized by out of court settlement offers to interpret the information as they have? If the one being accused were innocent in this situation, he would be there to maintain his innocence and help interpret the assertions made.

Quote:

And I'm not at all surprised you want to talk about the sin of the women, who were coerced and forced into sexual acts. Should the women have done anything they could to resist? Should they have allowed themselves to be fired and deported?


If you were working overseas, and a married woman demanded sex with you, wouldn't you refuse? It would be a sin to give in, too. Giving in to that type of pressure to engage in sexual sin is still sin. That would be a despicable thing for an employer to do, of course, on top of sexual sin.

Foreign workers are in a weak position, but a woman in that situation with some boldness would have some ammo to threaten him back by telling others about the proposition.

Quote:
What if violence was threatened against them? (Since you're so fond of hypotheticals.)


What if it was. What if it wasn't. It might not be politically correct, but the Torah assumes a raped virgin would scream and people in the city would hear... which kind of implies people who heard would do something about it.

Quote:

These aren't easy questions, but how incredible that you want to talk about their sin while raising every doubt you can about the actions committed by their abuser.


Again, we are talking hypotheticals. If a man coerced spa employs into sexual acts, he would be guilty, not just of sexual sin but also of the use of his power in the situation.

I'm wondering about this 'owe it to the abuser' argument you are making. My guess is women in this situation would probably feel embarrassed if people knew he owned the spas. And the ones who had not engaged in such activities would likely bare a stigma by all the publicity.

Have you got some Biblical arguments specifically for what to do in this case.... as you understand it to be..., either to make it right to women a Christian went to for prostitution-like activities or coerced into performing them after the male in the case is deceased, or how institutional repentance is supposed to be organized?
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11588
1/1/21 9:18 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Dave Dorsey
Link wrote:
If they released a lengthy report, I am not aware of it. I am reading third hand accounts. If yours are second-hand, you still did not examine the evidence yourself.

It is impossible to respond rationally to an argument this dense. If you are unwilling to accept any information as truth unless you personally examine it, that's your choice, but don't act like it's biblical or virtuous. If three people sustained an accusation under the Law and someone was executed, the rest of the Israelites would not say "bUt WE didN't eXamINe the EvIDenCE" when the elders reported to them what had happened.

You also missed my point about criminal convictions. We don't personally examine the evidence in every criminal trial, we trust appointed intermediaries who do so unless we have a reason not to. I guess the Bible requires us to consider Ted Bundy innocent, because we only have second-hand accounts from the trial. After all, we haven't personally examined the evidence against him or spoken to his purported victims. If the word of RZIM is insufficient for you, then we will not accomplish anything here except running in circles.

Link wrote:
but a woman in that situation with some boldness would have some ammo to threaten him back by telling others about the proposition.

This is beyond parody. This entire affair is about women with boldness telling others about the proposition. Reread your posts in this thread and ask yourself how that's worked out for them.

Link wrote:
My guess is women in this situation...

If only there was a way for you to learn more about this case and the efforts of the women to have their stories heard. Then you wouldn't have to conjecture from ignorance on an internet forum. Although I understand why you haven't made any effort to educate yourself, since that information would all be second hand (even when it is reporting containing direct quotes from primary sources).

Link wrote:
how institutional repentance is supposed to be organized?

Three easy steps to repenting of the institutional sin the church commits in this area:

1) When women make accusations, protect the presumption of innocence for the accused, but take the accusations seriously. Do not weaponize the Bible to silence and attack the accusers. (This happened repeatedly in this case.)

2) If the accusations are investigated and sustained, don't make asinine arguments to spread doubt about the actions of the abuser while continuing to weaponize the Bible to silence and attack the victims.

3) Recognize our shared propensity to do the above and grieve it, and ask God to forgive us where we have done these things both personally and in our shared institutions, and give us grace to behave differently in the future.


I keep breaking my word about being done here. With God's grace, this will be where I leave it.
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13652
1/1/21 12:33 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Link
Dave Dorsey wrote:
Link wrote:
If they released a lengthy report, I am not aware of it. I am reading third hand accounts. If yours are second-hand, you still did not examine the evidence yourself.

It is impossible to respond rationally to an argument this dense. If you are unwilling to accept any information as truth unless you personally examine it, that's your choice, but don't act like it's biblical or virtuous. If three people sustained an accusation under the Law and someone was executed, the rest of the Israelites would not say "bUt WE didN't eXamINe the EvIDenCE" when the elders reported to them what had happened.


We aren't talking about the elders of Israel. We are talking about bloggers and online news reporters. Do you know the names of any of the women? Do the online journalists know?

Most times I've seen a news article about anything I know about in detail, there are inaccuracies. Someone even wrote some made-up nonsense about me in a newspaper once. I have read 'Christian journalism' isn't much different from secular journalism.

Btw, do you know of any cases where Israelite elders or judges tried a case in which the accused was deceased? In Matthew 18, the accused in that case has a chance to 'hear the church.' He has a chance to discuss the issues with witnesses prior to that.

Quote:

You also missed my point about criminal convictions. We don't personally examine the evidence in every criminal trial, we trust appointed intermediaries who do so unless we have a reason not to. I guess the Bible requires us to consider Ted Bundy innocent, because we only have second-hand accounts from the trial.


They do write these things down in legal documents, and you are talking about the situation after a trial. Here, there has been no trial, just bloggers, news articles reporting what RZIM said.

Quote:
If the word of RZIM is insufficient for you, then we will not accomplish anything here except running in circles.


If the stuff I've been seeing about RZIM's claims about Ravi's credentials are true... I don't know much about that ministry beyond the fact that it was named for RV, and I read they have taken in millions of dollars. An organization like that might still have a lot of money if it were to be sued.

Quote:

Link wrote:
but a woman in that situation with some boldness would have some ammo to threaten him back by telling others about the proposition.

This is beyond parody. This entire affair is about women with boldness telling others about the proposition. Reread your posts in this thread and ask yourself how that's worked out for them.


I have not read any reports about masseuse's claiming to be propositioned and claiming to turn him down. Maybe you have.

Quote:

Link wrote:
My guess is women in this situation...

If only there was a way for you to learn more about this case and the efforts of the women to have their stories heard. Then you wouldn't have to conjecture from ignorance on an internet forum. Although I understand why you haven't made any effort to educate yourself, since that information would all be second hand (even when it is reporting containing direct quotes from primary sources).


I can spend a little time in the threads. What does it accomplish to read all the details about every case like this? If you are ministering to the women or someone close to the situation, it might be worth it.


Link wrote:
how institutional repentance is supposed to be organized?

Three easy steps to repenting of the institutional sin the church commits in this area:

1) When women make accusations, protect the presumption of innocence for the accused, but take the accusations seriously. Do not weaponize the Bible to silence and attack the accusers. (This happened repeatedly in this case.)

2) If the accusations are investigated and sustained, don't make asinine arguments to spread doubt about the actions of the abuser while continuing to weaponize the Bible to silence and attack the victims.

3) Recognize our shared propensity to do the above and grieve it, and ask God to forgive us where we have done these things both personally and in our shared institutions, and give us grace to behave differently in the future.


I keep breaking my word about being done here. With God's grace, this will be where I leave it.[/quote]

These kinds of situations have to be dealt with by those close to the situation, by a local church, by people in his ministry. It's hard to do anything if the accused is dead.
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11588
1/1/21 8:51 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post I don't believe much healing will be accomplished... Aaron Scott
A woman who tells us that RZ acted amiss with her FIFTY TIMES...well, I agree with Cojak's wife.

What "healing" is this woman seeking? It's kind of like saying, "I rode that bull 50 times, and I got trampled every time."

It seems mighty akin to the old "Fool me once, shame on me..."

The first time, even the second, even the THIRD, I can appreciate that this woman might have been unsure of what to do. But at some point, she is aiding and abetting the person who is taking advantage of her.

THIS DOES NOT EXCUSE RZ! His organization should pay a hefty settlement to the women, if RZIM is sure of the validity of their claim. After all, while the woman might have some sort of complicity in this matter, RZ was supposed to be a man of spiritual integrity, so he bears the larger burden.

But, again, I don't see how any healing is accomplished by making it public. I assume that settlement allows that RZ did act inappropriately. But WE are not edified AT ALL by knowing this.

And I have yet to understand how the women might have some "healing" by it being spread far and wide that RZ wasn't all that we thought he was.
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5694
1/4/21 2:39 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Acts-Celerate Post new topic   Reply to topic
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Acts-celerate Terms of Use | Acts-celerate Policy
World News Network | Acts-celerate Chat
Contact the Administrator.


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group :: Spelling by SpellingCow.