jump to navigation

Love and Lies January 11, 2012

Posted by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus in Uncategorized.
trackback

One of the more systematic refrains that appeared in the comments made about my article was that I’m “unloving” for publishing it.  How cruel I must be to doubt the stories that the Hephzibah Haters has splattered all across the internet!  How un-Christlike of me to ask for evidence instead of credulously believing everything I read on some random internet forum!  The thrust of the “argument” made by many in the comments section was simply that love demands that I would not challenge the HH accusers, but instead would automatically believe and support them in their attacks upon that ministry.

No. 

It’s not loving to allow somebody to slander somebody else with potentially life-destroying accusations without calling them to account for their charges.   Love does not slur people around the internet, while refusing to put its accusations to the test.  Love does not assume that simply because an accusation is made, then it must be true, and the accused condemned – untried – accordingly. 

I fail to see what is “unloving” about asking that people actually provide evidence for their accusations before we condemn the ones they are accusing. 

Isn’t that sort of what the whole point to the “innocent until proven guilty” basis of our legal system is all about?  A person is not to be punished or destroyed unless the charges brought against them can be shown to be true?  Indeed it is.  That principle is a godly one, and ultimately stems from the Judeo-Christian basis upon which so much of our civilisation was founded.  Ultimately, it goes back to the verses I cited in my article: Deuteronomy 5:20, which demands that a witness be truthful, and Deuteronomy 19:18, which tasks the judge in a matter with determining the truthfulness of the testimony of witnesses, even if they technically met the “two or three witnesses” requirement.  Now, there were some spurious arguments presented against this in the comments, which will be dealt with in more detail in a future post.  Suffice it to say, the arguers presented a very poor case in their efforts at getting around these simple requirements from God’s Word.  Which is, of course, only to be expected, since the Bible is pretty clear about this issue – if an accusation is made, then its truth value needs to be independently verified to the best of the investigator’s ability. 

Not doing so is an affront to God.  Simply making accusations, and failing (or even refusing) to assent to them being put to the test, is actually contrary to God’s revealed will, both for mankind’s systems of justice, as well as God’s own nature, what He has told us about Himself, and is therefore contrary to love, which God is.

Yet, I find it interesting that the HH accusers positively refuse to actually substantiate their claims against Hephzibah House.  They refuse to let other people put their claims to the test.  They go to great lengths on internet forums to try to “gang up on” and shut up anybody who would question them.  I found one particular comment on my article by one of the accusers to be most enlightening, however.  You can see the screen shot of an early part of the exchange here, with the trouble spot circled in red.  A commenter named Shelly Merideth-Adams says, “And I don’t need proof either.”  Well yes, Shelly, you do.  She tries to claim some sort of moral high ground by arguing that “no one believed Jesus was who He said He was either” (which is actually not true, of course, since the apostles and other early Christians obviously did…)  Well, Jesus also had false accusers make charges against Him that they weren’t able to verify either (Mark 14:55-59).

I’m sorry people, but I do not consider it at all out of line to challenge the statements of the various HH accusers, especially seeing as how they have not brought forth any evidence to back themselves up with.  Are we to condemn HH, Ron Williams, and the rest on the basis of accusations alone?  Sorry, but that’s not acting like God.  In fact, it’s acting like satan, the accuser of the brethren.

I’m sure Paul Burritt, of Turtle Lake, Wisconsin could use a little less of the type of “love” that the HH accusers and their sycophants on the internet display.  Mr. Burritt, who is a driver for a handicapped transportation service, was arrested back in December after an 11-year old girl who was one of his riders accused him of driving her to his home and sexually molesting her.  Burritt was arrested immediately, without any initial investigation on the part of the police, his name being drug through the gutter by the media, probably being condemned and excoriated in a fashion not dissimilar to how HH is by its enemies.  Problem was, once the police finally got around to checking the GPS records from the van Burritt drives, they found out that the girl had been lying, as the GPS data fully supported his testimony that he had dropped her off at her house as usual – no trip to his house, no lost time, anything.  When confronted with this evidence, the girl admitted she was lying.

What’s sad is that the only thing that saved an innocent man from having his reputation entirely destroyed (it’s always going to be damaged, even though he was innocent) and facing a long jail sentence was technology that was able to objectively refute the girl’s “eyewitness” testimony.   If this case had happened before GPS was invented or widely used, he would have been on the losing end of a “he said – she said” argument, which she would have won, since we all know that no children would ever lie about being abused by an adult…

The story also reports that the girl has been “referred to juvenile authorities” for making the false report.  Unfortunately, she’ll probably just get a slap on the wrist, when what she should get is some time in juvenile hall that would then extend to her going to adult jail once she turns 18.  She was obviously old enough to make a false accusation, so she should be punished just as stiffly as anyone else would.  Though she probably won’t be.

If this is the kind of “love” that the Hephzibah Haters think ought to be displayed, then I want no part of it.

There was one commenter, a fellow by the name of Ken Hood (one of the ones I mentioned who initially tried to pretend to be a “neutral, impartial observer” when he obviously was not), who tried to lecture me about “the law of love” and about how my religion and his are clearly different.  I told him that they surely are, because I serve a God of justice, fairness, and truth, while Ken serves a god of lies, innuendo, and false accusations.  Ken’s “law of love” is not GOD’S law of love.  Ken, and the HH haters in general, show no grace – their “charity” is not of the kind that “thinketh no evil” (I Cor 13:5), the kind that does not automatically assume the worst about someone who is being accused of something, no matter how horrible.

The story of Mr. Burritt’s saga perhaps sheds some light on the question of WHY the HH accusers seem to be so adamantly against having their stories checked out, and why they don’t like people asking for evidence of the allegations.  Perhaps, just maybe, like the 11-year old girl who falsely accused Paul Burritt and against whom objective evidence stood, they also know that the narrative they’ve spent the last several years bringing to a boil would not stand the test of close investigation?

Advertisements

Comments»

1. Stephen Nissley - January 11, 2012

Tim, I want to thank for your unbiased articles. It has been my experience in the past when dealing with the HH haters to realize they have an agenda and it is to destroy a sad to say much needed ministry today. I realized this a few years ago when I questioned a person using the name “mailman” on the Fighting Fundamental Forum” to the authenticity of his charges toward HH. He referred me to his pastor who he said would back his story and give him credibility. I called the church and found out the pastor had retired a few years ago. I was given the retired pastors phone number and called him. He said he didn’t know anything about HH and never had talked to Dr Williams in his life. I asked him about the person called “mailman” and he told me who he believed he was. He then refused to answer anymore questions and hung up on me. I relayed this story to “mailman” and he called me a liar. The whole bunch of HH haters on the forum “mailman” frequents then turned on me with a vengeance. Some of these people call themselves IFB pastors! Keep up the good work and may God continue to bless you.

Lucinda - February 3, 2012

mailman and his wife Susan are liars and haters of all that is truth…they make up stuff like hormones in powder milk..LOL


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: