3abn Continued

[Pickle]

Again, that would be because she/you never requested the transfer after that. If it was no problem and the membership transfer could have been done without censure then why did she/you join another church by proffesion of faith and when a simple transfer would do?

Because she was up for censure at Thompsonville and Danny wouldn't release her from her gag order so that she could defend herself at that business meeting.

 

[tall73]

Again, that would be because she/you never requested the transfer after that. If it was no problem and the membership transfer could have been done without censure then why did she/you join another church by proffesion of faith and when a simple transfer would do?

Ok, this is where I am confused.

The new church, all are agreed, had no censure.

The other church apparently threatened to censure but never did?

I have gotten two stories on that.

Did they censure or did they just consider censure if there was a transfer?

Generally a censure is something done apart from any other action. A later transfer would be held up by a previous censure, but wouldn't be the occassion for one where there wasn't one already.

So...was she or was she not ever officially censured?

 

[djconklin]

I think tall that the only way to know for sure is to ask them:

web site: http://thompsonville22.adventistchurchconnect.org/

phone: 618-627-2999

 

[Pickle]

So...was she or was she not ever officially censured?

My understanding is that she was not. My understanding is that, threatened with a censure but not being able to defend herself, she chose to request that her name be dropped, and it was dropped at her request. She then was accepted in elsewhere by profession of faith.

At the time I wrote her and told her I thought that was a wrong approach.

 

[Pinkpanther007]

Ok, this is where I am confused.

The new church, all are agreed, had no censure.

The other church apparently threatened to censure but never did?

I have gotten two stories on that.

Did they censure or did they just consider censure if there was a transfer?

Generally a censure is something done apart from any other action. A later transfer would be held up by a previous censure, but wouldn't be the occassion for one where there wasn't one already.

So...was she or was she not ever officially censured?

She was never censured.

 

[Pickle]

I think tall that the only way to know for sure is to ask them:

web site: http://thompsonville22.adventistchurchconnect.org/

phone: 618-627-2999

And http://www.whitepages.com/10001/log...=IL&default_listing=phone&extra_listing=mixed gives Lomacang's phone number.

 

[tomatoe]

That's not the issue. The issue is whether we've got a conflict of interest that could jeopardize 3ABN's tax-exempt status, and whether we've got fraud.

Well, "we" meaning you of course, shouldn't be concerned.
1. As stated previous that would be for the IRS to handle.
2. To pretend that you care if 3abn's tax exempt status is violated would be a joke when you have done everything within your power to destoy them.
3. You have done nothing but speculate from one end of the spectrum to the other to paint a deceiving picture of "do WE have fraud?"
You have made up scenerios, called friends and gave them your scenerios to ask what they think and of course given those scenerios they tell you what you want to hear. You have questioned, insinuated, planted seeds of doubt in the reader and all with nothing to back it up. You have absolutely no answers, facts or documents concerning the 10 commandment book. That being the case, you were wrong to ever bring it up. Anyone can raise doubt on any subject or any person in the world if they just want to play the what if and speculation game. Reasonable people can see just how devoid of information you are.

 

[tall73]

Ok,

1, calling them might work.

2. the accounts seem to make sense if she withdrew her membership, so calling may be unnecessary.

If she withdrew her membership then that was that. I agree, that was a poor approach. But I can see where she might do that.

Unfortunately it left the larger church with no real resolution here. Thanks all for helping me understand what happened.

 

[tomatoe]

I think tall that the only way to know for sure is to ask them:

web site: http://thompsonville22.adventistchurchconnect.org/

phone: 618-627-2999

Excellent idea. Go to the source and I believe this will be explained to your satisfaction.

 

[Pickle]

Well, "we" meaning you of course, shouldn't be concerned.

So are you against anyone other than the IRS from asking questions? I think that's the wrong approach. Anyone can ask such questions of a 501(c)3, can't they? This is America.

3. You have done nothing but speculate from one end of the spectrum to the other to paint a deceiving picture of "do WE have fraud?"

That is what we are looking at if Danny knowingly did not properly report all his assets and income on the financial affidavit he filed last July, isn't it? And did not Danny indicate to me in writing that he was hiding information about his royalties until after his case was settled? Didn't he?

 

[truthmagnet]

SP, this forum has been covering this topic for quite some time. it's not new. arguing is a waste of time. we should be able to share ideas and findings and disagree without throwing insults and sarcasm and misinformation around.

My dear brother,

I agree.

I took that advice back in Septermber 2006 on the BSDA forum. I have been happily cruising along in this forum and then what do I see? The same allegations, gossip and lies from BSDA that they want to spread here!

If anything, I have to speak up to let this group know that they can't go around poisoning this forum too.

Is this Christian? Sometimes, I too, wonder - and then realize that people, in the guise of upholding a ministry, are actively engaged in trying to tear it down.

 

[truthmagnet]

Tall73, may i ask; are you a practicing SDA pastor?

Ok,

1, calling them might work.

2. the accounts seem to make sense if she withdrew her membership, so calling may be unnecessary.

If she withdrew her membership then that was that. I agree, that was a poor approach. But I can see where she might do that.

Unfortunately it left the larger church with no real resolution here. Thanks all for helping me understand what happened.

 

[awesumtenor]

To my understanding it did. The finding would be censure. Obviously her "gag" order did not apply to speaking to the church board or the 3abn board for that matter. That is just another spin by Pickle. She could have went before either at anytime. She chose not to.

Were you present at the business meeting where she was censured? Who presented evidence of Linda's alleged adultery? Who made the motion? Who seconded? Was the vote unanimous?

Or are you just relying on what someone told you for your facts but actually witnessed or participated in none of it?

In His service,
Mr. J

 

[awesumtenor]

Again, that would be because she/you never requested the transfer after that. If it was no problem and the membership transfer could have been done without censure then why did she/you join another church by proffesion of faith and when a simple transfer would do?

If church discipline is indicated, whether or not a transfer of membership has been requested is irrelevant. If the church was only willing to censure her if she tried to leave, then that church is WRONG and in violation of the Adventist church's policy on church discipline as noted in the current church manual.

If she was deserving of church discipline she should have been disciplined. If she was not deserving of church discipline then the church was remiss in not releasing her membership... not to mention the pastor and the officers of that church, in holding her membership hostage like that put themselves in a position where they could, and, in all likelihood, should have face discipline themselves. Given the continued recalcitrance of those who persist in making Linda wear a scarlet letter to produce actual evidence of the alleged adultery, no discipline could move forward until said evidence was presented to the church.

In His service,
Mr. J

 

[tall73]

Tall73, may i ask; are you a practicing SDA pastor?

Yes, I am a practicing pastor, and one day I hope to get it right

 

[Pinkpanther007]

Were you present at the business meeting where she was censured? Who presented evidence of Linda's alleged adultery? Who made the motion? Who seconded? Was the vote unanimous?

Or are you just relying on what someone told you for your facts but actually witnessed or participated in none of it?

In His service,
Mr. J

No, Mr. J, Tomatoe was not present at the business meeting where she was censured, nor was anyone else. No one presented evidence of Linda's alleged aultery, no one made the motion, no one seconded, and there was no vote. This is because it never happened. IT NEVER HAPPENED. No such meeting happened.

Tomatoe's allegations about censure are as valid as Danny's lies about adultery. IT NEVER HAPPENED.

 

[Pinkpanther007]

If church discipline is indicated, whether or not a transfer of membership has been requested is irrelevant. If the church was only willing to censure her if she tried to leave, then that church is WRONG and in violation of the Adventist church's policy on church discipline as noted in the current church manual.

If she was deserving of church discipline she should have been disciplined. If she was not deserving of church discipline then the church was remiss in not releasing her membership... not to mention the pastor and the officers of that church, in holding her membership hostage like that put themselves in a position where they could, and, in all likelihood, should have face discipline themselves. Given the continued recalcitrance of those who persist in making Linda wear a scarlet letter to produce actual evidence of the alleged adultery, no discipline could move forward until said evidence was presented to the church.

In His service,
Mr. J

Linda submitted a request that she be excused from her contract with 3ABN for the purpose of testifying at the church business meeting that John Lomacang had insisted on in which Linda was to be censured. Danny let her know that to do so would cost her $150,000.00 her 3ABN severance pay.

Take into consideration that half of Lomacang's salary comes from 3ABN, his wife's full salary comes from 3ABN, their home is provided by 3ABN, his television career is provided by 3ABN, his music career is promoted by 3ABN, his church is owned by 3ABN and is on 3ABN property, Most of his church board gets their income from 3ABN, Most of the church members get their income from 3ABN, and Linda's exhusband controls 3ABN. How wise would it be to entrust her membership to people who are beholden to her exhusband for their careers and income? Considering his demonstrated animosity and malicious behaviour toward her and those associated with her? I believe that she made a difficult decision, but one in which she had little real choice.

Would such people be facing the fate of Jean Fiscalini and lose their jobs as a result of defying Danny on church matters? These are a few of the things that Linda had to consider. He who conrols what the people want, controls the people. This principle is fundamental to this whole mess.

 

[MrNoah]

Yes, I am a practicing pastor, and one day I hope to get it right

LOL, a soft answer turneth away...

 

[Jimlarmore]

My dear brothers and sisters in Christ,

I fully understand, and have used, the adversarial approach to settle disputes in a court of law. However with that being said I must ask all these questions; Have we, as the Body of Christ, the church, become "worldly" in our approach to problems within the church such as this? Is a public forum the correct place to debate such matters? There has been a great deal of time and effort spent by all on this matter; Have each of you spent the same amount of time and energy in prayer over this?

I do not ask these qustions to offend anyone. I only ask them because the tenor of this thread, as well other threads, seems to be lacking in a spirit of brotherly love and makes me wonder WHAT WOULD JESUS DO?

Respectfully, your brother in Christ,
Doc

Amen brother and by the way happy birthday. I will share with all of the readers on this thread my experience this weekend. I intended to go to Oklahoma City to see the 3ABN crew but unfortunately I couldn't go. I had to take care of my sister instead. Anyway I have been praying over all of this a lot. I got a still small voice message from the Lord. He told me to quit all of this fighting and that He would take care of this in His own time. The voice said the guilty would be exposed and the innocent exonerated.

I have said before but I really don't think this medium is the proper way to take care of these problems. The Lord is not glorified at all. Take a deep look into your hearts and pray for the Lord to make things right for you concerning this. If we are really Christians we should be about seeking the Lord's face and will in all things. Is what we are doing here the Lord's will? Will the Lord's will insite hate and contention? Think about who is being served here. I am not going to say I will not post again here but I am going to refuse to fight or argue anymore. I refuse to disobey my Lord.

God Bless
Jim Larmore

 

[Peach45]

No, Mr. J, Tomatoe was not present at the business meeting where she was censured, nor was anyone else. No one presented evidence of Linda's alleged aultery, no one made the motion, no one seconded, and there was no vote. This is because it never happened. IT NEVER HAPPENED. No such meeting happened.

Tomatoe's allegations about censure are as valid as Danny's lies about adultery. IT NEVER HAPPENED.

You keep repeating ths but it is simply not true,

There had to have been a business meeting of the entire Church for that is what it takes, in order for a letter of Censure to be written.

Even Linda who denies being under censure now or at any time, only does so by a technicality, for she too admitted in writing on her website, that a letter of censure was written and claims she dropped her membership to avoid it. (Or implies it was or will be dropped, that part is not clear)

It sounds rather like the person who in the midst of being fired announces "you can't fire me! I quit". The person can tell everyone else that he quit, but that doesn't change the facts, they were still fired.

And the problem is, according to the Church manual someone under Church discipline is not supposed to be able to drop or transfer membership unless, and until the problems are resolved, and the censure is removed. If they refuse to cooperate in the attempt at reconcillliation and restoration, (for that is the purpose of Church discipline) then the Church moves on to disfellowshipment.

They may certainly attend any Church they like, but the censure is supposed to go with them...

It appears someone dropped the ball in this situation, and unfortunatly, although it may have been done out of compassion, it appears to me it was misguided, and had it not been, could have helped, at least partially, to prevent, or avoid this big mess we are in right now.

Note to tallman: I'm going to see if I can't find some documentation from both sides about this for you. I know I have read first person statements regarding this from both L.S. and W.T in all this hoopla and mess somewhere.