2. How should abuse be valued ?
That depends on where the criteria are drawn from, but it is my strong opinion that from all three main sources I can think of, the human hart, religion, and the law, it should be evident that all forms of abuse are undesirable, wrong, and absolutely unacceptable.
3. Is abuse acceptable in any form at all ?
The only argument I can think of to make people go through experiences that they do not chose to take part in, is an argument of education, and in the religious sense a 'sacrifice', but then it immedeately should be clear that there is no need for an unvolantarily sacrifice, and in general it every action against someone's will should not be made according someone's will by telling that person lies to have a different opinion than what truth would make him or her think.
And in case of edification, at least the person involved should be enabled to be a good education consumer, by beforehand having a truthfull image of what the education is for and how is composed, and what will the the requirements and the benefits of undergoing it, and the fair estimate of the chance of success.
4. Is the answer to 3. effectively questioned by certain people,
groups, or organizations ?
Many religious systems are familiar with the concept of sacrifice, and that extends to significant portions of society. I have no problem with the concept of 'reaping what one sows', but the idea of going to heaven by undergoing the most horrible rites is definately unscriptural, and is probably a common factor of all pagan relgions who do not, I would almost say after good calvinist teaching, believe in a God that Himself solves the problem that keeps people away from Him, or alludes to that be merely sacrificing animals. Old and New Testament are very clear in their rebukal of the idea of sacrifices as the ultimate will of God and the means to save someone, "Sacrifices I have not desired, but mercy", "however expects good from works of law is damned" are some OT en NT (near) quotes to indicate what I mean.
A religious, or theological answer, but I deem it quite usefull to get to the source of certain types of sacrifice, because that same book teaches there is a god of a world that is supposed to be changed that does ask sacrifices, except it forgets to mention that the purpose is only to slay man (literal quote) because it is a liar from the beginning, seeking to turn away from the God that spends major chapters from major books to condemn for instance the sacrifying of children, and sacrifices to the Baal, where marriage is used to control people and maintain financial riches. One of the lexicons I checked (Young's) translated Baal as "husband man".
These subject are profond material in both Old and New Testament, and there is no doubt that whoever seeks to ascribe the need for such practices to god is refering to the god that major portions of scripture warn about. In fact, Isreal was made to serve under a system (the Babylonic system, started by Nimrod) that virtually invented the majority of horrible rites including child sacrifices, canibalism, extreme forms of enforces sexual abuse on little children, presenting them as mysteries to slowly draw people in and keep them in by their own shame. And it served their as a punishment, to learn to get away from all that, not to become a new implementor of it, as, according to the book of revelation, Rome has become. I hope there is no doubt about my point of view in all this, and about the fact that incredibly clear wanrings against these things are all over the Bible, cover to cover, and that in fact these things were the things that caused the wrath of God to come upon people, were the legitimation for the violent overtake of portions of the promised land, and that the solution to the problems caused by this type of pagan religion was amoung the prime characteristic victories of the early NT faith. And the latter not by stupid, serene holiness, but by people who were able to not be mastered be the sexual and spiritual, but be truthfull and reliable withnesses of the One that got the victory both over the evil world system as the human heart of those who find Him, and provided tangible evidence to underline who is God, and that He can give grace (greek "charis", free gift, also meaning "outward beauty", graciousness, etc.) in freedom.
Admittedly, this is a very short summary of the subject, and I would like to refer to some of my other pages to make clear that a very strong foundation can be found for these bold assertions.
5. Is there legal justification for abuse ?
No. I think that is the simplest answer possible, wars have been fought and wom to ascerain that civilians have the right to have their physical, emotional, civil, and professional integrety and freedom defended by a just and peacable system of state. That is an achievement that is very much worth protecting, and I fail to see there is any remotely valid motivation to tumble back into the cruel, dark, inquisition and power greed driven middle ages or even further back into the atrocities of the roman system.
And again the answer to the question is simply: NO. Any type of abuse, when properly proven can only lead to the apprehension, trailing and sentencing of the one committing such a crime, and no person, group or system can change a thing about that without changing the constitution of just about every sensible state that I am aware of. And in order to change the constitution and derived laws to enable child abuse, blackmail, and other types of abuse, a vast majority of people would have to instruct their representatives to vote for such a change with great or even total majority, an event which I fortunately can seriously doubt to ever become a serious option. And until that moment, everything that is illegal is simiply to be punished according to law. Including abuse and blackmail that have their roots or are directly to be found in religious systems or clubs.
A criminal is a criminal, regardless of wether mafioso structures have almost elevated them above the grip of civil law, or wether they wear robes and call themselves holy. And I could add a sincere "and thank God for that" to it, but even without such a religious taint, the statement is clear, and in my mind irrefutable. Someone who acts against the law should simply be judged by the law, and as far as I can see, in most legal systems the partakers in of state are evn obliged to provide evidence against criminals and their organizations, and to inform the enforcers of law about any illegal activity they are aware of. And I challenge anyone to, in public, deny me the right to make statements like this, or the annul their truthfulness.
6.Do we put church above state ?
7. How can large cases of repeated, grave, and organized
abuse be deakt with ?
8. Is this desirable ?
9. Is this biblical ?
10. Can it be done, and if so: how ?
11. Does a solid, sane, workable, freedom and openness based,
respectable relational and sexual moral affect society away from
various types of abuse ?
12. How do existing moral codes qualify to achieve this ?
13. Are there alternatives, and how can their effects be
(the seed of David)
14. Which relational and sexual behaviour is legal ?
15. Can the government judge religious systems ?
16. When part of society are heavily affected by "subversive",
underground, semi-tolerated situations of abuse, what are
desirable and feasible scenarios to solve this ?
17. Is it acceptable to argue that these type of situations
are insoluable, desirable from some point of view, or simply
should be ignored ?
18. Is it acceptable that constitutional freedoms are infringed
on, and that decisions concerning serious areas of personal and
professional life are made or profoundly influenced by known
or unknown third parties in ways undesired by the person involved ?
Sound like maffia godfathers to me.
19. When structures that affect the above are preeminent
in some parts of society can they and should they be fought ?
20. Is exposure of any of the above a christian act ?
21. Is our society built on such structures, so that the
dismantling of them will cause its downfall or render it unstable ?
22. How much suffering is inflicted by all types of abuse ?
23. What do biblical sources seem to say about these type of
24. Is it reasonable to assume that God wants human sacrifices of
an abusive type ?
Which God, the manslayer from the beginning and the father of lies or the father of lights, the way the truth and the life.
25. Is freedom a scriptural concept, and can it breed situations
pleasing to God ?
26. What should the place of christianity be in all this ?
Breaking down of barriers, produce a sweat smelling sacrifice, ...
27. How are the powers distributed in the heavenly
28. Is it acceptable that christian claim the insolubility
of certain evil situations
The apocaliptic prohesies firstly refer to a 2 times three and a half year time period where the withholder (the Holy Spirit) is gone and the shit realy hits the fan, and secondly does not in any way indicate that the misery is the only thing there will be, in fact the contrary, it sais that even right where the throne of satan is people wil find the true God and His life. So I see no reason not to keep the cancer as small as possible.
29. Is illegal behaviour christian ?
30. Is the posotion of christian faith as a source of just
government contradictory to a democratic and rational state,
and does this yield theoretical or practical problems ?
Let's say the greek had a good look at the jewish religion.
31. Does the christian faith and its implementation differ
from other religions ?
32. Does scripture contain clues for desirable governmental
and actionwise behaviour and are there ways of ascertaining that
the God who it concerns is powerful to do as He promises ?
I guess Luther would have a thing or two to remark about that.
33. Are statements like the above contrary to the answer of 30. ?
34. Do new technological developments (such as internet, camera's,
etc.) threaten freedom, justice and "christian" life ?
As I remember, reformation didn't exactly stop with the invention of bookprint. Lets give that beast with eyes all over some more eyes. Or have you something to hide ?