3abn Continued

[Princessdi]

Betrayal is always a difficult thing. JL admitted that it was Linda who was instrumental in bringing he and his wife to 3ABN, and he is now basically sta....well, I don't have to say it, do I? One more chance at reconcilliation is not out of the norm.

let me say first that if Linda did not feel comfortable and felt John would be unfair why did she contact him when all of this first started to come over and talk to them? Why, because knowing him, she knew that he wasn't in DS's pocket and that he would tell it like it is. Only after hearing both sides and what had transpired he went against what she wanted. Then all of a sudden he is in DS's pocket and being ordered to do what DS says. You can see by the letter, Linda did not think that about him or would never have called him in the first place. Also let me add some facts.

Danny at no time discussed the church membership issue with JL or any board member of the Thompsonville church. Neither was he ask for his opinion in the situation. He had no idea what they had decided until later, after the fact.

2. Out of 20 + board members, 11 are not employed by 3abn.
3. John as stated in his later already was singing and preaching on TV and has been the pastor of several different churches. He is employed by the conference. The thompsonville church is not a 3abn church. It is a conference church. 3abn does pay 1/3 of his salary and the conference the rest. He could have his choice of a number of churches and televised speaking and singing engagements elsewhere. He is not dependant on 3abn except for the fact he believes God sent him there. At Linda's invitation I might add.
And yes. I have permission to post these letters. The one by Linda she has already posted but those by the Thompsonville church, I ask for permission when I ask they be sent to me.

 

[Princessdi]

Naw, those are jsut not working for me. JL wants to show no conflict of interests here the only thing he can say is the ocnference pays ALL of his salary. As long as he being paid by 3ABN, he should hav recused himself from theis situation.....he is biased.[quote=tomatoe;33758262]
2. Out of 20 + board members, 11 are not employed by 3abn.
3. John as stated in his later already was singing and preaching on TV and has been the pastor of several different churches. He is employed by the conference. The thompsonville church is not a 3abn church. It is a conference church. 3abn does pay 1/3 of his salary and the conference the rest. He could have his choice of a number of churches and televised speaking and singing engagements elsewhere. He is not dependant on 3abn except for the fact he believes God sent him there. At Linda's invitation I might add.
And yes. I have permission to post these letters. The one by Linda she has already posted but those by the Thompsonville church, I ask for permission when I ask they be sent to me.[/quote]

 

[Sophia7]

also, your wife, sophia7, (i think is her id) doesn't claim to be a Seventh Day Adventist here. her id just says "Christian" so that confused me.

Many Adventists here use the general Christian symbol rather than the Adventist one. I'm a Christian first and an Adventist second.

 

[djconklin]

Linda could not and did not transfer her membership.

She tried to transfer it in December of 2004

She asked to have her membership dropped after she heard about the letter of Censure.

Please note that I had the words "transfer her membership" in quotes--I had shortened what had gone on.

This is from a letter which Dr. Walter Thompson wrote, as posted by both Gregory Matthews on Maritime and then Ice dragon on BSDA:
"One more thing. Linda has said that she was not censured by her church. The fact is, her church did meet and confidentially went over all of the evidence they had, and wrote an 8 page letter outlining the reason they had to conclude that she was wrong. Rather than drop her from membership, out of concern for her, they agreed do a letter of censure."

Maybe it was from too many graduate school courses but I'd like to see the original evidence. Is there anyway to get a scanned image of the letters--sure seem to be a lot of them floating around about this subject?

I have more, David, from both the Church manual and from first person testimony, but this forum has this crazy point system, making it difficult to post links etc and cite your evidence, and prove what you are saying.

I understand your frustration with this board--it has one long thread vs threaded.

 

[djconklin]

And as pointed out elsewhere, Walt was wrong again. He said that the church confidentially went over everything.

How could they go over everything without hearing from those involved?

We had incidents at our church when my Dad was head elder and he, another elder and the Pastor went and talked in person with the people.

In this incident(s) it sounds like it was already decided before anyone did ANY listening* to the participants.

* Then there's the elder(s) who went but it was obvious that they had already made up their mind before they got to the door so it was a complete waste of time.

 

[djconklin]

Hmm, the clock is 10 minutes off! Now its only 4 minutes off! Very weird!

Now, its 7 minutes off!

 

[steffanphilip]

Watch yourself, now. Ok just I was asking, don't want to get things twisted.

And yet you tried to introduce a twist, very interesting.

 

[Pickle]

For instance, Adventists are currently not allowed to discuss two of our doctrines here in the main forums--Our view of hell, and our view of the anti-christ.

The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod still ascribes to the Reformation view of antichrist on their website. And you can find such material, last I knew, on the Wisconsin Synod's website too.

So John Wycliffe and William Tyndale, if they were alive today, could not post their views about hell on this forum? That just sounds a bit odd.

 

[Pickle]

Apparently Peach45 either hasn't read or has misread my reply.

It's kind of interesting. Someone just sent me a comparison between posts by Lee, Eye Witness, and Joe Smith over on BSDA. They all misspelled the same word in the same way.

I just wonder how many personas Mrs. Joe Smith is writing under, either here or at BSDA. Should I publish the email correspondence I had with "Joe Smith," or quote from it? How he started asking me the same kind of questions?

And then after reading the horrid, final words of one persona before it got banned, I wondered if I should chat with a good friend of mine in that conference that they had a pastor there who needed some help. Couldn't catch him in, and now I wonder if it's just best to let it lie.

Hadn't heard from Joe for sometime now, but the fact that he and Lee and thus perhaps Peach or Rosie all misspell the same word the same way make me wonder if Joe or his wife are still around.

 

[tall73]

So John Wycliffe and William Tyndale, if they were alive today, could not post their views about hell on this forum? That just sounds a bit odd.

Yup.

Here is a thread I started on the antichrist issue along similar lines:

http://www.christianforums.com/t5019065-would-luther-calvin-wesley-be-welcome-at-cf.html

 

[steffanphilip]

Apparently Peach45 either hasn't read or has misread my reply.

It's kind of interesting. Someone just sent me a comparison between posts by Lee, Eye Witness, and Joe Smith over on BSDA. They all misspelled the same word in the same way.

I just wonder how many personas Mrs. Joe Smith is writing under, either here or at BSDA. Should I publish the email correspondence I had with "Joe Smith," or quote from it? How he started asking me the same kind of questions?

And then after reading the horrid, final words of one persona before it got banned, I wondered if I should chat with a good friend of mine in that conference that they had a pastor there who needed some help. Couldn't catch him in, and now I wonder if it's just best to let it lie.

Hadn't heard from Joe for sometime now, but the fact that he and Lee and thus perhaps Peach or Rosie all misspell the same word the same way make me wonder if Joe or his wife are still around.

Oops! Your diversion is showing....

 

[Pickle]

Quite some time ago, 3ABN posted the following news item:

“Recently I received a call from someone overseas asking for literature,” says Pastor John Dinzey, our Pastoral Ministries Director. ...

“I’ve worked here long enough to simply say that God’s Word is mending broken people through the programs on 3ABN,” says Pastor Joe O’Brien.

I hear positive things about both these men. Yet do they both have Theology degrees? Are they both ordained ministers? Have they both pastored churches either now or in the past?

The whole matter is a big to do over nothing.

 

[Pickle]

Let me be crystal clear that I know of no reason at this time to say anything critical about either of these men just named. Whether it is appropriate to call them "pastor" only because they are part of the pastoral department, I don't know, but I'm not about to crucify them over it.

 

[bonedealer]

the talk of fruits reminded me of this . . .

www (dot) makeadifferencemovie (dot) com

2 cents from the bonedealer
(sorry, can't post an active link yet)

I wanted to put this up one more time before I went home for the Sabbath.
Let's do a logical conclusion:

Fruits of Danny Shelton and 3ABN= Love of Christ and bring folks closer to the Lord. Helping them to live happier healthier lives.

Fruits of Pickle, Joy and others= Gossip, lies, hate, name calling, contention, going against Chrit's admonition. Need I say more?

God Bless everyone and happy Sabbath,

Jim Larmore

 

[Pickle]

Since the topic of this thread is 3ABN, it would be good to summarize from time to time the facts that have been brought out:

• On July 17, 2004, a month after his divorce, Danny was uncertain whether Linda had committed fornication or not.
• On Dec. 31, 2006, Danny launched an alleged pedophile off into a three-month-early retirement with a pretty nice, televised tribute.
• The alleged adulteress never got any such tribute before being replaced as production manager by the alleged pedophile. Her name disappeared. His name did not.

 

[bonedealer]

then fact it is, so lets include the fact that emails have been significantly misrepresented, misappropriated, and edited in an effort to create false ideas and perceptions . . .

robert, you didn’t edit the email from danny in regards to the “gun incident” this is true . . . though we have no idea if you did or didn't . . . however, you do misrepresent his words and I find it shocking that so many people are blinded by your words . . . here is what is said by danny:

quote: “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.”

it is so obvious that danny’s words do not indicate that hiding a gun led to the divorce . . . that in fact is an aside to the real point of his email . . . his emphasis is that the relationship had no foundation what so ever, if linda is willing to listen to ridiculous advice such as she got . . . it is also evident that someone was trying to poison the well between danny and linda by putting inane thoughts in linda’s head . . .

now . . . an example of your hack and edit misrepresentation . . . observations from this page from the site you are heavily involved with:

www(dot)save3abn(dot)com(slash)danny(hyphen)shelton(hyphen)untruths(hyphen)car(hyphen)title(hyphen)1(dot)htm

here are robert's claims:

• danny repeatedly claims to have evidence of linda's affair that he will not show to gailon.
• he has "numerous witnesses" but doesn't name a one.
• whatever evidence he does describe in this letter he admits is not proof of adultery.
• danny claims his divorce and remarriage is the only issue anyone cares about, which of course is not true.
• danny says he has never publicly exposed linda, but what he has done would incline not a few to beg to differ.
• danny asserts that linda is a polished liar who doesn't wiggle or squirm, but we wonder if a different Shelton might appropriately be described this way.

now let’s look at each one . . .

1. danny, nor 3abn, has any obligation and in fact wisely has chosen not to share the evidence with gailon or robert . . . not that they won't share it with the right individuals, just they will not share it with these two . . . the quote from danny is:

quote: "i can tell you now that i will not make certain evidence about linda and the arild's affair available to you."

robert's seeming insinuation that because gailon asks for it, danny should turn it over is the MO of gailon (and bob as time has evolved) . . . they both feel as if they should have special privilege and access to any and all information about anyone.

2. again . . . why would anyone, who is the target of a concerted effort to destroy what they have worked so hard (with God) to establish . . . provide information to a couple of individuals who have made it clear by their words and actions that they desire to bring 3abn down . . . for robert to state this the way he does is an extreme arrogance on his part . . . he does indicate that three of his witnesses are private investigators . . . why would he, or anyone at 3abn, offer up these witnesses to these individuals to be harassed and tortured via phone and email . . .

3. this is an example of his hack and post approach to formulating the truth . . . there are obvious deletions before these comments which automatically calls into question any interpretation even further because one can not know if the email is being presented in context or not . . . anything after an edit or deletion becomes suspect . . . here are danny's quotes, again, they may very well be taken out of context because of robert's editing:

quote:"this is not my proof for adultery."

notice danny does not say he doesn't have proof of adultery, only that he does not consider the watch evidence of adultery . . . (as a side note, is adultery only the physical act of sex? or can giving one's emotional heart over to another - not their spouse - be adultery as well?) . . . next quote:

quote:"once again, i realize this alone does not prove adultery on their parts."

now . . . we do not know what the words "this alone" refer to because the email has been edited just prior to this sentence . . . the context is missing which makes it possible to spin it way in which robert desired . . . without context he can make it mean whatever he wants and he has removed context . . .

danny follows this a statement that clearly indicates that he does believe . . . even knows . . . that linda had an adulterous affair (and i question what qualifies as adulterous . . . can it be more than the physical act?):

quote:"i would not do something so stupid as you seem to think I've done to divorce linda without grounds and to re marry and expect my 3abn board and certain church leaders to support me . . ."

so in essence danny makes a truthful claim that the watch is not the evidence of an adulterous affair . . . in other words he is being honest and forthright in his statements and not lying as robert is attempting to portray it . . . as to the second instance, we don't know what is being referred to . . . and because it is presented out of context one has to wonder if context would give an entirely different meaning to the quote than the one robert attributes to it . . .

4. let's look at the section robert uses for this:

quote: ". . . i am going to keep focused on one main concern that many people have . . . . did danny have biblical grounds for divorce from linda and the the biblical grounds for re marriage?"

the first note must be that, here again robert has edited the email . . . what is the context? we don't know . . can't know . . . unless the entire email is published so we can see the context . . . this alone makes this a baseless claim because it could be as much a potential lie as the potential truth . . . robert is manipulating the email to serve his purpose . . . robert uses the word "claim" (claim being defined as, "to assert or maintain as a fact") and it is obvious that danny makes no claim here . . . but rather indicates he is going to give his personal direction and then via editing robert makes it look as if danny is "claiming" that the only thing people are interested in is his marriage/divorce/remarriage . . . this is a blatant manipulation of the email because of the edit prior to the clip and the one in the middle . . .

5. this one is laughable in that in number 1, robert claims that danny has not provided the incriminating evidence and here he says he has "exposed" linda . . . if he had exposed her then the evidence would be out there and we know that the evidence is still held by 3abn to be used in any up coming court cases . . . at this point, i can't imagine how robert or gailon could even think that they would have their questions answered as we know that legal recourse is pending.

6. isn't anything more than a weakly veiled shot at danny.

there are other examples of misappropriation such as this . . . all you have to do is look without looking for something to find fault with 3abn over . . .

and that is only part of that page . . .

just 2 cents from the bonedealer

Since the topic of this thread is 3ABN, it would be good to summarize from time to time the facts that have been brought out:

• On July 17, 2004, a month after his divorce, Danny was uncertain whether Linda had committed fornication or not.
• On Dec. 31, 2006, Danny launched an alleged pedophile off into a three-month-early retirement with a pretty nice, televised tribute.
• The alleged adulteress never got any such tribute before being replaced as production manager by the alleged pedophile. Her name disappeared. His name did not.

 

[tomatoe]

[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]I read your recent response letter to the church board dated October 31,2005, and I hope that the declaration that you made, ”Let it be known that I am innocent of the rumors and allegations made against me, ”is not written in stone. Linda, on this note you were correct, ”Man can remove job titles.” However let me caution you about the rest of your declaration, ”No man can take away my calling which I will continue to pursue.” Saul pursued a course that dishonored God and God removed him. On the other hand David repented and pursued a course that opened the way for God to restore him. The eternal question is one to deeply and prayerfully ponder. Which course will you pursue? David humbled himself under the Almighty Hand of God and was restored. In spite of the dark stain of David’s past the apostle Paul preached a message that recalls the fate of these two great men. He writes in Acts 13:21-22 (NKJV),”And afterward they asked for a king; so God gave them Saul the son of Kish, a man of the tribe of Benjamin, for forty years. (22) “And when He had removed him, He raised up for them David as king, to whom also He gave testimony and said, ’l have found David the son of Jesse, a man after My own heart, who will do all My will.” [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]Linda, from the first night that I sat before you in your living room I made a statement that has so far proven to be true. I said to you, ”Satan wants to destroy you, your ministry, your career, and your marriage. ”The results are evidence that to this day Satan has prevailed. I am hoping that he will not prevail in robbing you of your salvation. Just recently I read the chapter ”Why Was Sin and Suffering Permitted,” from the book, ”Patriarchs & Prophets.” I was deeply impressed again by what I read to further warn you that you are still on enchanted grounds and that the enemy is not done. Here are a few of the quotes that opened my eyes: [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]“The angels whom he could not bring fully to his side, he accused of indifference to the interests of heavenly beings. The very work which he himself was doing, he charged upon the loyal angels. It was his policy to perplex with subtle arguments concerning the purposes of God. Everything that was simple he shrouded in mystery, and by artful perversion cast doubt upon the plainest statements of Jehovah. And his high position, so closely connected with the divine government, gave greater force to his representation. [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]“He had artfully presented his side of the question, employing sophistry and fraud to secure his objects. His power to deceive was very great. By disguising himself in a cloak of falsehood, he had gained an advantage. All his acts were so clothed with mystery that it was difficult to disclose to the angels the true nature of his work. Until fully developed, it could not be made to appear the evil thing it was; his disaffection would not be seen to be rebellion. Even the loyal angels could not fully discern his character or see to what his work was leading.” [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]“Rejecting with disdain the arguments and entreaties of the loyal angels, he denounced them as deluded slaves. The preference shown to Christ he declared an act of injustice both to himself and to all the heavenly host, and announced that he would no longer submit to this invasion of his rights and theirs.” [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]Linda, I saw that because of your great influence Satan would come at you with great intensity. If you persist in holding to the self-deceiving position that you have done nothing wrong, you are preparing yourself for the completion of Satan’s plan, complete destruction. As long as you play the role of total innocence, you are a gullible prey. [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]That is why we prayed for you when you were in your post at 3ABN and we will still pray for you. Our deepest prayer is that you discover that greatness comes not from being served but serving. We pray for your supporters because they only know the side that you presented. Our prayer is that the Lord will bring softness to your heart to make you a servant. At the end of the day it must be seen that it is “Not by might nor by power, but by My Spirit,’ Says the LORD of hosts. ”Zechariah 4:6 (NKJV). Linda, God has not called us to be famous but to be faithful. I pray that you will respond to the Holy Spirit’s call to faithfulness. [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]We deeply regret that you have made the final decision to have your membership dropped from the church, but we do not have the right to refuse your written “formal request.” [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]The church chose censure rather than removal of membership because it was our desire to connect you with a Seventh-day Adventist church where you could find spiritual healing and recovery, not to cause you any further hardship. It is not our prayer that you pursue your calling; it is our prayer that you pursue the heart of God. [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]Your greatest blessing will come when you are restored to wholeness in the sight of God. God will richly bless you, not on account of whom you are, but on account of whom He is. Seek His kingdom and His righteousness and all that He has for you will be added. [/FONT]


[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]Yours in Christ, [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]Pastor John Lomacang [/FONT]

I do not want this very important letter to get lost in the shuffle.

 

[bonedealer]

and as another example:

www save3abn com / glenn - dryden - to - walt - thompson - may - 2003 . htm

it is interesting that dryden wants to control all communications between dr. thompson and any of the "victims" or their families . . . what would be the purpose or necessity of his calling the families first . . . dryden also follows this with a list of demands (blackmail anyone?) that have to be met, seemingly to satisfy no one in particular than dryden himself . . . the most curious of these demands is this one . . .

quote: "pastor glenn dryden of the ezra church of god (***-***-****) should be consulted as to the victims of whom he is aware and as to which of these may be contacted directly."

again the focus is on himself and his control of the situation . . . he also says that there should be contact with the franklin county police dept . . . is this the same department that was contacted by someone when the allegations where first made and the department found no substantial evidence to pursue an investigation or charges . . .

the final demand on the list is an effort by dryden to force tommy to disparage himself to all of the people he had ever worked with or for . . . does this give credence to the claim of jealousy - i would argue that even at the very least it circumstantially does . . . dryden is known to have strangely appeared behind tommy after every appointment he had and each and every time trying to disparage tommy . . .

In the email (dated: mon, 27 nov 2006 9:04 from: walt thompson) that robert has posted on maritime (post # 82149)
there are some obvious things that he conveniently ignores.

1. you will notice that dryden did not go to 3abn directly but instead went over them to brad thorp . . . robert seems to love to reference Matthew 18 and expects everyone else to abide by it . . . while at times it is more convenient to not hold his accomplices to the same expectations . . .

quote from dr. thompson's email: "as i recall the events of 2003, i received a call from brad thorp from the general conference telling me of pastor dryden's accusations. brad appropriately told me that it was not his concern, and that it was ours to handle."

2. dr. thompson was proactive in the situation . . . he called dryden . . . BEFORE receiving the letter . . . and after the call from brad thorp . . .

quote from dr. thompson's email: " i contacted pastor dryden and heard his side of the story following which i received the letter that is circulating."

3. if we are to interpret his words as literally as possible without reading too much into them . . . it would still seem as if he did his due diligence by hunting down someone with knowledge of the situation . . .

quote from dr. thompson's email: "i contacted the only person from the church of god that i could find that knew about the situation, and who had been present and witness to the events."

4. dr. thompson saw verified facts shared by danny in the conversation he had with the official from the c-o-g . . . specifically that there was a jealousy from dryden in regards to tommy . . .

quote from dr. thompson's email: "the picture that was painted by that leader of the church was exactly as portrayed earlier by danny. dryden was jealous of tommy and was out to get him - a jealousy that has continued to the present."

5. dr. thompson also found verification to the claim that though allegations seem to have been made the local authorities found nothing to pursue . . . again, this information coming from the c-o-g official . . .

quote from dr. thompson's email: "i was again informed that the da knew about the allegations and not finding a basis, refused to act against tommy."

just 2 cents from the bonedealer

then fact it is, so lets include the fact that emails have been significantly misrepresented, misappropriated, and edited in an effort to create false ideas and perceptions . . .

just 2 cents from the bonedealer

 

[tomatoe]

Now the final letter from JL To LS. Read carefully. It clears up a lot of things.

Thompsonville 7th Day Adventist Church 3577 Angel Lane P.O. Box 23 ‘Thompsonville, Illinois 62890
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]January 14, 2006 [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]Linda Shefton [/FONT]

[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]-. Dear Linda, [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]Thank you for your speedy response to the letter the Church Board sent to you. I, H- was also pleased to speak to you when you called me Sabbath afternoon. I thought [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]that our conversation went well and I listened to your observations hoping that [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]we would be able to help you. I was somewhat surprised how soon you had Derrell Mundall hand deliver your reply letter to me at my office As I read it I was a bit disappointed to see that you expressed so little confidence in the church board, the church members, and in me. To incessantly suggest that the church is made of [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]“compromised” members is quite short-sighted on your part. This board is not made of people bought by Danny Shelton. It is comprised of God-fearing Christians that understand all too well the great responsibility of making well informed decisions. [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]It is enlightening to see how you unceasingly, and relentlessly, attempted to dismiss your poor decision making by maligning others. [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]It was also quite manipulative on your part to imply that my “dreams of many years to be on TV” disqualified me as an objective pastor. Linda you may remember, it was at your urging that Danny called me to join the 3ABN family. At no time did I [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]even call or suggest that I was interested in being on TV. Years before I even knew of 3ABN, Doug Batchelor and I were already on television; not to mention countless [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]other times without Doug. It was on the heels of Net ‘99 in New York that I was invited to sing at 3ABN; prior to that I had not heard of 3ABN. The doors that opened at [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]3ABN were not opened by any dream on my part, of which there was none concerning 3ABN but by the hand of the Lord. As a matter of record you probably remember well when you said to me,”John, God brought you to St. Louis so that we could bring you the rest of the way.” To suggest that you will be not be able to receive fairness and impartiality is ludicrous. [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]Linda, as we look at the time-line of events you were the first one to call me [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]and ask for counsel about your friendship with the doctor. It was after I arrived at [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]your home that I heard the other side of the story. It was hearing both sides that [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]led me to give you counsel to sever the relationship with the doctor from Norway. I [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]made that decision as your pastor and as a marriage counselor with 16 years experience, not as a “back-pocket” servant of Danny Shelton. [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]It has been nearly two years since this escapade started and you will recall [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]that from the very outset, that Tuesday night in your living room, when you made [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]the decision not to sever your relationship with the doctor, you set the course that [/FONT][FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]led you to where you are today. Linda, the decision to hold on to someone other than your husband in spite of the months of counseling, was a critical decision in furthering your downfall. To further compound the matter, you still held firmly to your course after the relentless pleading from your friends, confidants, pastors, 3ABN board members, and non-Adventist counselors to sever the relationship. One has to be quite short-sighted and uninformed to come to the conclusion that all of those people were ”compromised.” [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]You also mentioned that no one made an attempt to visit you and minister to you. Speaking for Angie and I, you may remember that when you made the decision to move to out of your home and go to Marion for ”more privacy,” we called you and asked if we could come and visit with you. You refused by saying that you were not ready and that you would let us know when you were ready for our visits. You never contacted us so we can only assume that you did not want a visit from us. Even when we saw you in the mall with Danny, we asked again about visiting and you said I will tell you when.” [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]Many of the people that are still supporting your cause were not at ground zero. You continue to suggest that it was the subsequent decisions that other people made, rather than the initial one that you made that landed you where you are. One of the greatest evidences of hazardous decision-making on your part is the fact that you and the doctor are still in a relationship. [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]There was never a conspiracy to get rid of you and to refuse you a fair hearing. You were, and are greatly loved by many of the people at 3ABN and Thompsonville Seventh-day Adventist Church. However, love for someone and loyalty to them are not always the same. While we love you, we must be loyal to the truth and to the Lord. That is where we must be accountable. [/FONT]
[FONT=Helvetica, sans-serif]God placed within your hands the responsibility of carrying a message to the world. It is unfortunate that you came to the place where your desires became more important than the responsibility placed on you through the message. Linda, God called you and the Bible says in Romans 11:29”For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.” God called King Saul and God called David; both of these followers of God sinned. The difference between a ”king” and a ”shepherd boy” was clearly seen. Saul was too great to repent and turn to God and the record is clear concerning his fate. David, although his fall was great, turned to God with the heart of a repentant servant. For our admonition David’s prayer of repentance was preserved in Psalm 139:23,24 (KJV),”Search me, 0 God, and know my heart; Try me and know my thoughts and see if there be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting.” (continued)[/FONT]

Since this letter was too long it had to be posted in 2 parts.

 

[Pickle]

Since the topic of this thread is 3ABN, it would be good to summarize from time to time the facts that have been brought out:

• On July 17, 2004, a month after his divorce, Danny was uncertain whether Linda had committed fornication or not.
• On Dec. 31, 2006, Danny launched an alleged pedophile off into a three-month-early retirement with a pretty nice, televised tribute.
• The alleged adulteress never got any such tribute before being replaced as production manager by the alleged pedophile. Her name disappeared. His name did not.

Out of the above,

• The first is based on what Danny himself said, not on what one of his enemies said.
• The second is based on an actual broadcast by Danny which can be seen at http://www.save3abn.com/3abn-new-years-tribute-to-tommy.htm, and on the simple fact that there are such allegations.
• The third is based on the fact that Linda is an alleged adulteress, and that she never got such a televised tribute, and that Tommy's tribute does say that he became Production Manager.

Whether the allegations against Tommy and Linda are true or not is another matter. But they are allegations.