3abn Continued

steffanphilip · Apr 5, 2007

Pickle said:
Are you that hard up for solid answers?

Just think, Pickle - even when you are trying to speak to the unconverted world, your tactics are so loathsome that ... well ... I'll let the below included text speak for itself

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Str1977/Archive4#DrPickle_and_Vicarius_Filii_Dei

You might like to take a look at Vicarius Filii Dei. A user. Bob Pickle, who writes internet sites promoting the myth that the Pope has the title Vicarius Filii Dei and that that title is written on a papal tiara, is determined to push that agenda in that article. He does this using the "when did you stop beating your wife?" trick of insisting that WP prove there are no tiaras with the words. It is an old trick. It can never be physically proven that such a tiara did not exist and was not destroyed until you travel back in time. In reality there is not a single shred of evidence that such a tiara existed; no independent verification, no photographs, no reports by independent sources, etc. The only "evidence" is (i) POV claims "produced" by the Seventh-day Adventist Church which pushed the idea (all of it dodgy claims that popes wore such a tiara at a High Mass when tiaras were never worn at Mass, a supposed witness statement by a former Catholic which suggests the guy is lying as the supposed former student priest got his terminology about Catholicism all wrong, something highly unlikely if one was a former priest who had spent a lifetime up to that time attending Catholic Masses and sacraments.) (ii) dodgy secondary sources such as a forged mediaeval document, a magazine article (yes! They "evidence" is something written in one Catholic US magazine published nearly century ago which the magazine itself admitted was wrong!!!) and a book by a nineteenth century cardinal that was famed at the time for its clangers and mistakes!
I have given up even communicating with Pickle on the talk page. I just revert his edits to the article at this stage. In true conspiracy theory style Pickle refuses to supply evidence for his claims, just demands you disprove his unevidenced claims. Your contribution would be welcome.

Adventist Dissident · Apr 5, 2007

Hey don't forget to take the poll

We went to here your opinon. you have one tell us what ist is.

Is Danny lying, Is Linda lying. theread

1 click and you can be counted.

Lets see were every one stands.

StormyOne · Apr 5, 2007

steffanphilip said:
But....your lack of thought is really showing....

as is your delusional belief system....

noahswife · Apr 5, 2007

I keep reading that the main reason some of you are posting here is to make sure that the truth is told about 3abn. When I read the following post on another forum, the poster's words reminded me so much of my parents love for and belief in 3abn. With the permission of the author of these words, I present his post for the consideration of those looking for the truth.

With all due respect, i'd like to add that this isn't just about defending linda or revealing other wrongdoing at 3abn. This is about people we have loved and trusted betraying us, deceiving us, the 3abn audience and contributors.

Shelly quinn has eluded to some horrible finger pointing towards linda and even linda's daughter! That is just plain wicked in so many ways i won't go into it at this time. Ms.quinn was not present in the shelton home. She doesn't know any more about the situation than what danny has told her and most of us don't know anymore than what has been told to us. ms.quinn has no right to speak to the world about such matters on 3abn and her slant on these subjects shows zero discernment and very anti-christlike behavior. How can we trust any teaching or preaching this woman does?

John lomacang (whom i have loved to watch over the years) has shocked me and hurt me with the same antics; lifting danny up to sainthood and making others look like the devil. He is deceived and it's very sad and very disappointing.

IMO, these people are wrongly using this ministry and we have a right and a duty to do something about it.

That's not why God built 3abn.

Many have gone astray over there (as anyone with any insight whatsoever can see) and i believe it is because they have put "blind faith" in a human being.

I give danny every benefit of the doubt that maybe he has something emotionally wrong with him that makes him want to control people and manipulate them. I would rather he have some mental or emotional illness than to think he is fully aware of the wrong things he has done and refuses to be accountable for. the same goes for the rest who have partaken of this unholy ground.

The whole thing has been very hurtful not only to those in the line of fire but to us, the viewers.

3abn is broken...badly broken.

Now for those who want to respond to this by turning the tables on me, save it. There's no point. We all know things can be looked at in many different ways, but my point here is that it is bad enough that certain people at 3abn are behaving the way that they are behind the scenes, but even worse that they are behaving this way in front of the cameras of this wonderful ministry. They don't have the right !! They all need to be banished from 3abn and let God appoint new people with fresh, untainted hearts and minds.

We need to remember that what they have done, they have done to all of us.

Adventist Dissident · Apr 5, 2007

FYI

This is the most viewed thread ever on CF adventist section and the most replied theread. Seems like ever one has and opionion.

steffanphilip · Apr 5, 2007

Pinkpanther007 said:
We are just normal people saying what we think. You on the other hand represent an organization that "represents Jesus to the entire world."

But... I am just a normal person saying what I think. I have no ties other than the one which leads me to speak up in disgust against slander and sleaze - especially when uttered by Adventists trying to tear down 3ABN.

What you represent is making many of us believe that the Televangelist, and the "Behind the scenes at 3ABN" is accurate. Most of us have never seen such hatred and animosity out of "Christ" and would never have thought it possible.

And the "Christ-filled" writing in those two narratives were uplifting and soul-inspiring? I just picked two at random. Did you check out the rest of the sleaze that was put out on BSDA? There can be only one reaction after reading those things - disgust.

Mind you, not non-Adventists out to attack Adventism. But Adventists trying to tear down 3ABN via every insinuation and slander that was possible.

Thanks man! Keep it up!!!!

Your words of encouragement are very kind. I shall certainly keep it up.

steffanphilip · Apr 5, 2007

StormyOne said:
as is your delusional belief system....

Said the one who writes (on his own BSDA forum) that the Bible is wrong....

steffanphilip · Apr 5, 2007

noahswife said:
I keep reading that the main reason some of you are posting here is to make sure that the truth is told about 3abn.

Sorry, still looking for the truth. Didn't find it in your post, just some more allegations...

steffanphilip · Apr 5, 2007

noahswife said:
We need to remember that what they have done, they have done to all of us.

Versus allegations, let's look at the proof....of the savior of 3ABN at save3abn.com

Princessdi · Apr 5, 2007

First of all, Rosie, I want to thank you for the Christ-like manner in which you have presented your posts. It is much appreciated.

However, Beleive it or not, Danny knows exactly how I feel about this from my response when his letter was first posted. A response then might have cleared up quite a few [mis]conceptions. Also, he has been on BSDA enough to get it straight. He and his group hae been invited and pleaded with to post something that will contradict that which we felt about his words and actions. he has only responded to them on his how, still lying, but a response. Just like he sent athat emai., he send another and it will be posted. He can come, join and post each and everyday if he wants(now this is just from the book of Princess, but I am not altogether sure he has not dont this already). Contrary to popular belief Danny knows exactly how to get in touch with me. I am an Admin at BSDA, therefore forfeit my annonymity. There is no secret to finding me. Quite frankly, at this point, I am almost sure Danny would not answer anything coming from me. Just stating the facts.

I don't really mean to sound harsh or cruel, especially to you who hae asked and answered so kindly, but it really depends on who you talk to at 3ABN. There are others who say the exactly opposite to what the people you spoke with.

Anywa, once again, your Christ-like manner is truly appreciated and refreshing.

TTFN
Di

Rosie55 said:
Thank you Princessdi for making it easy for me to find Danny's letter.

In investigating this, several from 3abn have said that even after the divorce Danny and Linda were friends and did spend a lot of time together. In fact many at 3abn felt Danny shouldn't keep trying to get her back. They were not happy with Linda and what she did but Danny even then was willing to try to work things out.

I believe that when Danny wrote this letter, in his heart, and at that time, he and Linda were trying to patch things up. In Danny's mind the divorce didn't make things final and he still was hoping for a reconciliation.

Obviously at the beginning of the letter, Danny was upset. But that doesn't make his letter a lie. It just makes it rude.

I did not talk to Danny directly but talked to people who did. So this is third-party information. But Princessdi, you can surely phone or email Danny and ask him about the descrepancy there. Let him tell you about it.

You can't blame him for still wanting to try to get back with Linda. He was in love with her and didn't want it to end. I don't know if you've ever experienced rejection but it isn't fun.

Anyway, thanks for making it easy to find the letter.
Rosie55

tomatoe · Apr 5, 2007

Pickle said:
I got an email today from someone claiming that Fallible Human Being over at BSDA was a certain Thompson from Madison, Wisconsin. Anyone ever heard that before?

Oddly enough, I called up a friend of mine near Madison, and she told me that Dr. Walt Thompson does have a son with the very initials that Fallible used in the emails he's sent me. Fallible had indicated that his last name began with "T."

That would explain why Fallible has felt so strongly in defending Danny, even when Danny was caught in obvious lies.

Even though Fallible and I see a lot of things differently, I will say that I commend him for being so supportive of his dad.

Well, if you got an email and then someone told you that Dr. Walts son has those initials, that certainly makes it a fact....yah right....

truthmagnet · Apr 5, 2007

steffanphilip said:
But... I am just a normal person saying what I think. I have no ties other than the one which leads me to speak up in disgust against slander and sleaze - especially when uttered by Adventists trying to tear down 3ABN.

And the "Christ-filled" writing in those two narratives were uplifting and soul-inspiring? I just picked two at random. Did you check out the rest of the sleaze that was put out on BSDA? There can be only one reaction after reading those things - disgust.

Mind you, not non-Adventists out to attack Adventism. But Adventists trying to tear down 3ABN via every insinuation and slander that was possible.

Your words of encouragement are very kind. I shall certainly keep it up.

SP, you need to get one thing very straight, no matter which side you are on. that one thing is that no one is slamming the 3ABN ministry. no one wants to tear down, destroy or eradicate the 3ABN ministry. this is about INDIVIDUALS ! if you care for the 3ABN ministry, then try to remember to separate the two. TY

tomatoe · Apr 5, 2007

Jimlarmore said:
I fully understand why they don't come foward immediately in most cases. I used to investigate these things and they always made me sick to my stomach. As far as the conviction of a 20 year old case of child molestation I'd say you need to check your facts sir. In most states the statutes of limitations run out far sooner than 20 years. Check it out and see if this is not true , also in most of these cases like with the Catholic priests , if you notice it's not criminal convictions that these folks are really after but money. The Catholic church has very deep pockets.

In one case Dr. Thompson told me about a lady who has falsely accused Tommy and wants him to pay for her son's college education now. I have suggested to you that the victims you claim to be valid get together and explore a class action law suit if it is that bad. I have a feeling you may not be as truthful about all of this as you claim. I would certainly be interested in seeing all of them come foward and make these claims themselves instead of relying on your word.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

Jim since you are somewhat of an expert in this area, I have a question. What would you have done had a case been handed to you where the allegations of molestation were 20 years old and the "victims" himself admitted to being 20 years old at the time of the alleged incident. Also as you investigated you found out that there were no weapons held on the person and in fact no coercion (don't know spelling on that) of any kind as well as no actual sexual act. This is hypothetical but would like your take on where a case like that would go.
Thanks

Pickle · Apr 5, 2007

steffanphilip said:
Just think, Pickle - even when you are trying to speak to the unconverted world, your tactics are so loathsome that ... well ... I'll let the below included text speak for itself

If anyone takes the time to look at the edits and discussion regarding Vicarius Filii Dei at WikiPedia while I was working on that page, they will see that the original page spoke negatively regarding Seventh-day Adventists, and had erroneous information in it.

The one complaining is an apologist defending the papacy, and he did not like my attempts to make that page more neutral. But eventual;ly one of the other fellows, a more objective editor who may have also been an apologist, had to back down.

For example, if I recall correctly, a pre-1844 book for kids quoted by an Adventist claimed that a traveler to Rome had seen the pope wearing a miter with Vicarius Filii Dei on it. The original WikiPedia article claimed that that reference was talking about the miter when it was not.

But I already went over all of this at BSDA, and the fact that Steffan brings it all up again over here indicates that his agenda is not one of truth.

Over at BSDA there was a Bystander and a WWJD who were posting from the same computer, and who may have been the same person. Given how they spelled certain words the same as Danny does, and such, it has been felt by some that they were Danny.

But when Bystander launched an :"Authorized Version of 3ABN" that went into detail about Kenny, it was thought by some that they might be Kenny Shelton instead.

At any rate, I heard there were some PM's sent to the owner of BSDA that led the owner to ban them last weekend. Now Steffan appears here with others and raises the same kind of diversionary arguments as they did over there, including defending the positions of apologists for the papacy over at WikiPedia.

Now anyone who knows anything about Adventists and about how 3ABN claims to be giving the undiluted Three Angels' Messages to all the world will see that there is something dread wrong with the way Steffan and these others are representing 3ABN.

And that helps make clear the dire need we have of all praying that 3ABN may be saved.

Pickle · Apr 5, 2007

Rosie,

In light of your kind post, I'd like to ask you a question: Do you have any suggestions on how we can arrive at as positive as possible of a resolution for all of this, a resolution that truly comes to grips with the problems people are perceiving?

I think it is safe to say that all concerned, including you, want a resolution that will be best for 3ABN. Any suggestions?

tomatoe · Apr 5, 2007

Pickle said:
I am curious, Rosie, why you are so certain about this. I would hope that this is true, but thus far I couldn't prove it. Why are you so certain?

We definitely have letters by Danny right after the divorce talking about reconciliation, but then we also have long diatribes by him as well. And we are also left with the question of why Danny divorced her at all if he was immediately talking about reconciliation.

But we should make it clear for our readers here that Seventh-day Adventists do not approve of Danny's stated reason for ending the marriage: That Linda hid his gun. Fornication is the only accepted biblical reason for divorce and remarriage, and as of July 17, 2004, one month after the divorce, was final, Danny still didn't know whether Linda had committed fornication.

It is therefore clear that according to Seventh-day Adventist beliefs, Danny Lee Shelton could be subjected to church discipline in the form of either censure or disfellowship for his unbiblical divorcing of Linda because she hid his gun.

Mr. Pickle, of all of your special talents with word manipulation this one line that you have written over and over again is probably the most laughable. (and believe me it is hard to pick a favorite there are so many.) Anyone that learned to read in first grade can read the entire email for what it is. He is simply explaining to Linda's family that if the relationship had deteriorated to the point to where she hid his gun, there wasn't much to salvage. The even deeper meaning, IMO, is that she cared so little about him that she was trying to play the "scared victim" role by hiding the gun. Anyone who has kept up with this story knows she wasn't scared in the least...If so she would have never had him build her a porch when she moved out. She would never have had him help her move. She certainly would'nt have went out for dinners with him. That pretty much tells me the gun thing was a ploy to make him look bad and make her look scared when she wasn't. The fact that you keep saying the divorce was over hiding a gun is deceitful, misleading, ridiculous and actually an out and out lie. After posting your conclusion of that particular email, how could anyone take anything you say seriously?

Pickle · Apr 5, 2007

-------- Original Message --------
From: Danny Shelton
To: ******
Subject: Re: *** *** *** here; personal & confidential
Date: Tuesday, April 27, 2004 6:12 PM

******,

Please advise Linda that it is time to leave me and start a new life for herself. Anytime that our relationship would degrade to the point that she would listen to such foolish advice as hiding my gun, the relationship is over. In 22 years that I have known her I have never even gotten mad at her enough to shoot a paper wad at her, let alone a real gun. Besides you only had her hide one gun and I have two. I will not try to stop her from leaving and going to the doctor. At this point I would welcome it.

With the advice that she is getting from family she will never be able to put aside all the "junk advice that she has gotten from them. Her life's a mess now. Thanks to bad advice, she no longer has a chance, nor the witts to put it aside and save her marriage.

As you know, I've taken care of her for 20 years. She's going to need you more now than ever before. I do hope all that advice turns into more that just words. She needs you to be there loving her and caring for her needs and helping her financially if so necessary in the future.

Danny

Looks to me like he said the marriage was over because she hid his gun. Plain and simple.

Now if you put that together with Danny's emails, I think written before this one, in which he acknowledged that Dr. Abrahamsen thought he had a mental problem, then it is quite plausible that she didn't feel safe around him and hid his gun for that reason.

I also have an email by her mother in which she is frantic that Linda's life was in danger.

So why did she allow him to build her porch? I don't know. But a lot of battered wives, mentally or physically, do dumb stuff like that. And there are likely some women readers here who will vouch for that, and who maybe can explain to us dense fellows how that works.

Pickle · Apr 5, 2007

Tomatoe, are you Danny? If not, are you one of his relatives?

The reason I ask is that the detail in your last post regarding Danny and Linda's interaction is not something the average person would write. It's kind of like Bystander going on a lengthy, Danny-like diatribe against Linda, calling her "crazy as a fox." The average person who is not Danny and is unrelated to Danny is just not going to write stuff like that.

tomatoe · Apr 5, 2007

Pickle said:
I have contacted Tommy I believe more than once, but he has chosen not to reply.

The primary issue, though, has not been Tommy. It has been Danny's covering up of the allegations against Tommy. In dealing with that primary issue, I've had to see if the allegations were credible, and then contact Danny and Walt in regards to how they handled these allegations.

It still remains a fact that even if the allegations are all false, wrong has been done. When you are in charge of a ministry like 3ABN, you don't handle allegations in the way that they have been handled.[/quote]

That pretty much lines up with what I already knew: If the allegations against Tommy are false, they weren't handled correctly....If Linda is guilty as sin, she wasn't treated fairly...If the 3abn books are in order they are still wrong because they didn't file a certain form the right way....If everything about Danny's books are aboveboard it wasn't done in a way to look right so is still wrong....If everything is numbered and accounted for on their inventory list then it is wrong to have that much inventory..... and on and on and on
No one believes you Mr. Pickle when you say you don't want to bring 3abn down. No one. You want to find anything you can find to tear it down and nothing they could ever show you or tell you would make a difference. They are aware of that and also aware that whatever they said would never be repeated accurately by you or Mr. Joy. They are extremely wise not to get involved with you and yours. I commend them.

truthmagnet · Apr 5, 2007

tomatoe said:
Mr. Pickle, of all of your special talents with word manipulation this one line that you have written over and over again is probably the most laughable. (and believe me it is hard to pick a favorite there are so many.) Anyone that learned to read in first grade can read the entire email for what it is. He is simply explaining to Linda's family that if the relationship had deteriorated to the point to where she hid his gun, there wasn't much to salvage. The even deeper meaning, IMO, is that she cared so little about him that she was trying to play the "scared victim" role by hiding the gun. Anyone who has kept up with this story knows she wasn't scared in the least...If so she would have never had him build her a porch when she moved out. She would never have had him help her move. She certainly would'nt have went out for dinners with him. That pretty much tells me the gun thing was a ploy to make him look bad and make her look scared when she wasn't. The fact that you keep saying the divorce was over hiding a gun is deceitful, misleading, ridiculous and actually an out and out lie. After posting your conclusion of that particular email, how could anyone take anything you say seriously?

tomatoe, i don't know where you get your information but you must be very close to the source to know all those details and state them as the facts & the truth.
you called mr. pickle a liar. how can you do that when he is just quoting what danny said in this very email that he even made instantly available by the links within his post. how can that be a lie, etc. when it's right there in the email? i think you owe him an apology.

3abn Continued

Active Member

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Junior Member

Senior Veteran

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Active Member

Attachments

Regular Member

Active Member

Regular Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Regular Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency