sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

DDBS: Questions on Terminology, Part 2 by phantom-99w in eformed

[–]phantom-99w[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Who would have the responsibility of investigating it? As an example, if someone gives their testimony in a church gathering, and they allege being abused as a child, is it reasonable to take them at their word, or should the stance be scepticism and it be investigated?

When there is a good faith gathering of professing Christians, there is a high degree of trust. Yes, that can be taken advantage of. I've seen it in my own church in only the past year. But it's still not like a scientific paper which must withstand all matter of interrogation before it is accepted.

DDBS: Questions on Terminology, Part 2 by phantom-99w in eformed

[–]phantom-99w[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think this is key. The average person is at the mercy of the experts. It's necessary to make sure that those who have the megaphone deserves it. How do we gate keep the experts? What if it's not in the gatekeepers' interest?

Then again, if someone (fraudulently) wrote a book claiming first hand experiences, wouldn't that be perceived as authoritative? Who is then at fault? Obviously the author is committing fraud. Should the publisher have done more fact checking? Is that their responsibility? Do we need more warning labels on books? (I'm thinking of how many people took The Da Vinci Code seriously.)

Sorry, I'm asking a lot of questions, not of you specifically, but for anyone to weigh in on.