3abn Continued

[Pickle]

I want to personally thank Steffan for editing out the inflammatory language out of your posts on pages 21 and 22 of this thread. Avoiding that kind of language will greatly help your cause. And once Google has those pages out of their cache, the original posts will no longer be freely available eithe4r on this forum or in Google.

 

[steffanphilip]

Hi there Steffan

Just in case you are wondering, I have only talked to one of these individuals once in my life so you seem to be projecting again.

As for you dealing in documented facts. You seem to have documented yourself as a liar since you just can't stop talking.

You said to me:


Since Mozart was not a member of BSDA until very recently, how could you possibly know about Mozart posting at BSDA unless you had either been there or you are conferencing with someone else who is?

Care to unpack that one for us?

My friends keep me informed.

I stopped visiting BSDA in September 2006 because of the sheer amount of sleeze. Johann then PM'ed me in November 2006 to falsely accuse me of writing something about him. I logged in, told him to contact me via my email, and logged out. But surely your "friends" would have told you all that?

And last of all, Google. Each time I search, I pray that there has been a resolution to the matter.

 

[Pickle]

What I have not heard is that there was a church buisiness meeting. Was there one?

If she was going to be censured they should have done that, transfer or not. And what kind of action is only learned of when you go to transfer? Action should be upfront, with her there to defend herself.

As to the pastor telling her what she can or cannot do, that is not official church discipline. The pastor is not allowed to do discipline on his own. He must go before the whole church. This is only after efforts to work out things behind the scenes, but even the church business session should be with the goal of reconcilation ("if he does not listen to the church").

So the church never dealt with her, Danny won't present the evidence against her--for those who say she did it--why?

Seems like it was around October 2005 that she was notified that she was up for church discipline, after requesting a transfer the previous December. That's what I recall.

Linda asked Danny for a release from Danny's 3ABN one-way gag order so that she could defend herself, and Danny refused to consider that before Linda would agree to return all the money she had already received. Without that release she could not defend herself at any business meeting. But Danny continued to be free to say whatever he wanted whenever he wanted.

One has to wonder why Linda would consent to such injustice as the one-way gag order, the one-way property transfer, and such. Looking at it objectively, she appears to be one that is easy to take for a ride. Now that's not complimentary, I know, but how else do you explain her agreeing to silence about Danny when Danny never agreed to silence about her? How else do you explain why she signed over furniture to him without him signing over one single piece of furniture to her including her own kids' baby chairs?

Thus it seems plausible to me that she may have been clueless about a lot of the corruption going on while she was vice-president. I say "may" since I do not know for sure. But it sounds plausible given how she signed these stupid agreements on June 4, 2004.

 

[steffanphilip]

I want to personally thank Steffan for editing out the inflammatory language out of your posts on pages 21 and 22 of this thread. Avoiding that kind of language will greatly help your cause. And once Google has those pages out of their cache, the original posts will no longer be freely available eithe4r on this forum or in Google.

And I would like to thank Pickle for editing his posts to remove his inflammatory language.

 

[Pickle]

Steffan,

What do pastors where you attend think of what is going on at 3ABN?

 

[djconklin]

And I would like to thank Pickle for editing his posts to remove his inflammatory language.

I have never known him to use any inflammatory language.

 

[Pickle]

I have never known him to use any inflammatory language.

Thanks, dj. Not even Dirk has accused me of that, right?

 

[djconklin]

A influential individual has indicated that Danny probably made hundreds of thousands of dollars from that book

Oh, I'd love to see the financials on that deal! From what I understand extrememly few writers make that kind of money. This claim fails the "sniff" test. Back to the drawing board and never, ever use an unnamed source for anything--this is a more typical tactic of the critics of the church.

 

[djconklin]

Thanks, dj. Not even Dirk has accused me of that, right?

Right!

Sounds like a whole lot of heat being flung around with very little in the way of documented evidence. Perhaps this is why the good Lord had me do the in-depth study of the plagiarism claim so I could tell when people are basically engaging in gossip vs. doing a diligent search for the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

 

[steffanphilip]

Steffan,

What do pastors where you attend think of what is going on at 3ABN?

I have spoken to pastors, conference personnel and even a friend of mine whose father attended the birthday party of Dr. AA.

Funnily enough, my friend's father refused to comment in any way about Dr. AA's propensity to adultery. He just refused to say anything.

Now if I were you, I would immediately think the worst of this refusal. But you know what, my friend's father did the right thing. He refused to open his mouth and, in his own words, "add anything to this mess."

Now the pastors...this is the unanimous response - "that group should stop all their allegations and let God do His work" - but that's not what you want to hear, do you?

 

[djconklin]

Now if I were you, I would immediately think the worst of this refusal. But you know what, my friend's father did the right thing. He refused to open his mouth and, in his own words, "add anything to this mess."

Now the pastors...this is the unanimous response - "that group should stop all their allegations and let God do His work" - but that's not what you want to hear, do you?

My mom used to say that if you can't say anythinbg good about anyone then you should say anything at all. So, since you have had a similiar experience then why didn't you learn it? Here I thought I was the only thick-headed Irish-German who needs a good dinging up along the side of the head to learn. It appears I'm not alone.

 

[Pickle]

Oh, I'd love to see the financials on that deal! From what I understand extrememly few writers make that kind of money. This claim fails the "sniff" test. Back to the drawing board and never, ever use an unnamed source for anything--this is a more typical tactic of the critics of the church.

Actually, dj, newspapers quote unnamed sources all the time. But the fact of the matter is that the individual who wrote the email in question ought to know the facts. And we presently have some of the same basic information from multiple sources, including Danny hmself.

 

[Pickle]

Now the pastors...this is the unanimous response - "that group should stop all their allegations and let God do His work" - but that's not what you want to hear, do you?

Then maybe you aren't from GNY after all, or maybe you and I have just talked to different pastors.

 

[djconklin]

[Actually, dj, newspapers quote unnamed sources all the time.

Major reputable newspapers may quote un-named sources, but they have it in writing and the staff has confirmed it. What we have here is a lot of hear-say without any corrobrating proof whatsoever. Since we do NOT have all the info we need the best thing that should be done is for us to be quiet and let God do His work and we do what He assigned us, eh? We are only hurting God's work do this nonsense. We are not advancing His cause one iota. Satan must be filled with glee watch all these posts flying back and forth.

 

[tall73]

Seems like it was around October 2005 that she was notified that she was up for church discipline, after requesting a transfer the previous December. That's what I recall.

Linda asked Danny for a release from Danny's 3ABN one-way gag order so that she could defend herself, and Danny refused to consider that before Linda would agree to return all the money she had already received. Without that release she could not defend herself at any business meeting. But Danny continued to be free to say whatever he wanted whenever he wanted.

One has to wonder why Linda would consent to such injustice as the one-way gag order, the one-way property transfer, and such. Looking at it objectively, she appears to be one that is easy to take for a ride. Now that's not complimentary, I know, but how else do you explain her agreeing to silence about Danny when Danny never agreed to silence about her? How else do you explain why she signed over furniture to him without him signing over one single piece of furniture to her including her own kids' baby chairs?

Thus it seems plausible to me that she may have been clueless about a lot of the corruption going on while she was vice-president. I say "may" since I do not know for sure. But it sounds plausible given how she signed these stupid agreements on June 4, 2004.

So did a business session ever happen? What was the finding?

 

[djconklin]

So did a business session ever happen? What was the finding?

If they answered in the affirmative how would you know?

 

[tall73]

If they answered that it happened?

Please clarify.

 

[steffanphilip]

Then maybe you aren't from GNY after all, or maybe you and I have just talked to different pastors.

That won't work with me, Pickle...

 

[bonedealer]

speaking of pastors . . . robert, are you or are you not a pastor . . . and if the answer is the affirmative, then where was your last parish or appointment . . . and if not, then why did gailon joy introduce you as a pastor during the asi event . . . another question, granting you that you didn't "pull out" of the asi situation, isn't it true (as is obvious in the context of the letter from harold lance) that you were an incorrigible group who wouldn't be a part of real process . . . but rather just demanded that everybody do what you want, the way you want, when you wanted it to be done, etc . . .

just 2 cents worth of questions from the bonedealer

That won't work with me, Pickle...

 

[djconklin]

If they answered that it happened?

If someone said XYZ event happened, does that mean it happened? If they say XYZ event happened and here's what it means what proof do you have of either claim?