Another problem of pandemic proportions is the important matter of verifying the truth. The Bible teaches that every matter is to be established through two or three witnesses. A very high standard is set for those who would accuse anyone. But in this brave new world of counseling, no one has to prove anything. Suppose a woman comes in and tells her counselor that she was abused as a child. The first question in a pastor’s mind should be, “Is this true?” In other words, he must make a decision about whether he is teaching a true victim of real abuse (the kind of abuse a policeman could tell you about), or whether he is talking to a liar, or perhaps someone who has spent too much time in the wrong section of a Christian bookstore.
Douglas Wilson
3 Comments
Comments are closed.
What’s silly in the the Wight and Sitler cases is that there WERE multiple witnesses in each, so both cases actually fell within this extremely high bar. Both cases had testimony from one or more victims PLUS the admissions of the men themselves and the witnesses of the people that those men confessed to. Has the fact that Wight admitted it stopped Natalie from getting skewered? Uhh, no.
Wilson’s quote above also somehow equates the standard for court cases in ancient Israel with the standard of proof required to believe someone personally begging you for help in your office, which is absurd. Two witnesses are not required for something to be true, only for something to be proven in a court system that isn’t even the same as our current one.
“Has the fact that Wight admitted it stopped Natalie from getting skewered?”
Exactly. Wilson blows smoke about witnesses, justice, biblical principles, blah, blah, blah. But he doesn’t mean a word of it, as demonstrated by his abuse of Natalie and her husband.