Why Did Linda Buy The Pregnancy Test Kit?, Spin off from the “Thompson Respond to Abrahamsen” thread. Options

[daylily]

The doctor didn't want to marry Linda but she had a wedding band on at the GC? You are not making any sense. Just what ARE your accusations?

[Grace]

The doctor didn't want to marry Linda but she had a wedding band on at the GC? You are not making any sense. Just what ARE your accusations?

Yes, please, clarify!... And I'd like to have a straight answer, if you're able to give it, which i doubt.

This post has been edited by Grace: Feb 14 2007, 06:25 AM

[Richard Sherwin]

All these questions for Glenetta. If she gets banned from here we'll never know the "truth".

[sister]

All these questions for Glenetta. If she gets banned from here we'll never know the "truth".

[Clay]

All these questions for Glenetta. If she gets banned from here we'll never know the "truth".

that would be an oxymoron.... glenetta and truth? Come on Richard.... its more like glenetta and smoke & mirrors.... she is unregistered so I guess we will never know what else would have come from that warped view.....

[SoulEspresso]

wwjd hasn't been on here in some hours but neither have I, so I'll reply to this.

wwjd, if you're still there, please read this carefully and be sure you understand it before you reply. I'm trying to be considerate.

charges of embezzlement? Right, Gailon would know...There has not been any evidence whatsoever of embezzlement. Maybe you are confusing Danny with Gailon. A man starts his own website. He is not a church leader, he is not an attorney and he is not a licensed investigator. But if it is there (the site) then it must be true. How, gullible & naive is that? Have you ever been to 3abn. Have you even met any of the people involved. Do you have a clue as to who all they have to account to? I doubt if you can answer yes to even one of those questions.

Lots of people here have been there and see it, firsthand, as Johann noted. His accounts are eyewitness--does that make him gullible? I want to believe the people at 3ABN are accountable to the same Person we're all accountable to--I'm writing this, because I'm accountable.

The truth is, unless you see something with your own eyes, or clear evidence to that something, it's hearsay. That's a legal term--it means, you told me, or I told you. None of us can possibly be eyewitness to everything we need to see or know in life--we have to rely on hearsay. A lot of what's in history books is old hearsay.

Some of what's on that save3abn.com website is hearsay. It's testimony of eyewitnesses, much of it, but it's hearsay to us until it's established in court.

Let's say that I say Danny is innocent and you say he's guilty. On what evidence? If I saw firsthand that Linda was having an affair (with a hidden camera or whatever), until I establish it with undoctored evidence, or my word is accepted in a court of law, all my words are hearsay to you. If you saw firsthand that Linda was not having an affair, until you establish it with undoctored evidence, your words are all hearsay to me.

For now, we have to rely on hearsay for our judgments. I have to rely on hearsay to help the people I'm spiritually responsible for through the upcoming crisis. I'm trying to weigh the hearsay--and although there are attitude problems on all sides, my own included, well ... I see evidence on one hand, and no evidence, or inadequate evidence on the other.

As for gullibility, that really depends on your point of view. If you happen to believe the wrong person's account of an event you did not see, does that make you gullible? I could accuse you of gullibility for believing something I don't, but unless you saw it yourself, my accusation means nothing.

Instead I accused you of lying because you took on Danny's tactic of saying, "See? She bought a pregnancy test! She's lying! She had an affair! So all these accusations that I swept child molestation allegations under the rug, and that I used 3ABN money for personal and family items--those are all lies too!" Danny has been using Linda's alleged affair for a smokescreen against all these other accusations. That doesn't mean any of them are true--it means Danny is either stupid or has something to hide--based on available evidence.

Maybe it was unkind to accuse you of lying--so I'm sorry if I was wrong and if I hurt your feelings. But at the very least , you have leaped to conclusions and said some unloving, unChristlike, un-WWJD things about some of these people here, without actually reading what they're saying. Let me demonstrate with one of my own posts.

As to your accusation of character assasination....I couldn't stop laughing...that was how many sentences after you just basically called Danny ,an embezzler, hiding sexual abuse, stonewalling, denial, dissembling and character assasination.

Now, either you're not paying attention, or you're deliberately distorting the facts (lying). Here's my post, edited for length (the rest is earlier in the thread):

So the truth about what really happened with the pregnancy test came from Linda. Does that mean she was colluding with Church of God members for two decades scaring up allegations against Tommy so that Danny would get in trouble for trying to cover for his brother? If not, maybe not all the stories came from Linda.

Have you even read save3abn.com? I don't know how anyone could go through that information, which is documented and firsthand, and still believe that Danny doesn't have something to hide. I would love to see evidence that would exonerate Danny and Co. from the charges of embezzlement, covering up sex abuse, and character assassination--not because I'm a fan of 3ABN, but because people I love are fans and I don't want to see them or my church, my spiritual home, hurt. All we get from anyone connected with 3ABN is stonewalling, dissembling and denial--lies, like yours.

If there's truth on 3ABN's side, let's have it, for God's sake. Don't you know what this is going to do to the church?

See? I was pointing to the fact that the evidence presented paints Danny in a terrible light. I don't want any of these things to be true! I don't want Danny to be a liar or a crook, I don't want Tommy to be a child molestor, I don't want Linda to be an adulteress, I don't want 3ABN to go down in flames, and most of all I DON'T WANT THE NAME OF CHRIST TO BE DRAGGED THROUGH THE MUD!

So if you've got evidence that is not based on what you read or what somebody told you, let's have it. If you're an eyewitness, identify yourself and start giving names and dates. (After all, we know who a lot of the people on this board are!) Otherwise, get thee ...

[erik]

wwjd hasn't been on here in some hours but neither have I, so I'll reply to this.

wwjd, if you're still there, please read this carefully and be sure you understand it before you reply. I'm trying to be considerate.
Lots of people here have been there and see it, firsthand, as Johann noted. His accounts are eyewitness--does that make him gullible? I want to believe the people at 3ABN are accountable to the same Person we're all accountable to--I'm writing this, because I'm accountable.

The truth is, unless you see something with your own eyes, or clear evidence to that something, it's hearsay. That's a legal term--it means, you told me, or I told you. None of us can possibly be eyewitness to everything we need to see or know in life--we have to rely on hearsay. A lot of what's in history books is old hearsay.

Some of what's on that save3abn.com website is hearsay. It's testimony of eyewitnesses, much of it, but it's hearsay to us until it's established in court.

Let's say that I say Danny is innocent and you say he's guilty. On what evidence? If I saw firsthand that Linda was having an affair (with a hidden camera or whatever), until I establish it with undoctored evidence, or my word is accepted in a court of law, all my words are hearsay to you. If you saw firsthand that Linda was not having an affair, until you establish it with undoctored evidence, your words are all hearsay to me.

For now, we have to rely on hearsay for our judgments. I have to rely on hearsay to help the people I'm spiritually responsible for through the upcoming crisis. I'm trying to weigh the hearsay--and although there are attitude problems on all sides, my own included, well ... I see evidence on one hand, and no evidence, or inadequate evidence on the other.

As for gullibility, that really depends on your point of view. If you happen to believe the wrong person's account of an event you did not see, does that make you gullible? I could accuse you of gullibility for believing something I don't, but unless you saw it yourself, my accusation means nothing.

Instead I accused you of lying because you took on Danny's tactic of saying, "See? She bought a pregnancy test! She's lying! She had an affair! So all these accusations that I swept child molestation allegations under the rug, and that I used 3ABN money for personal and family items--those are all lies too!" Danny has been using Linda's alleged affair for a smokescreen against all these other accusations. That doesn't mean any of them are true--it means Danny is either stupid or has something to hide--based on available evidence.

Maybe it was unkind to accuse you of lying--so I'm sorry if I was wrong and if I hurt your feelings. But at the very least , you have leaped to conclusions and said some unloving, unChristlike, un-WWJD things about some of these people here, without actually reading what they're saying. Let me demonstrate with one of my own posts.
Now, either you're not paying attention, or you're deliberately distorting the facts (lying). Here's my post, edited for length (the rest is earlier in the thread):
See? I was pointing to the fact that the evidence presented paints Danny in a terrible light. I don't want any of these things to be true! I don't want Danny to be a liar or a crook, I don't want Tommy to be a child molestor, I don't want Linda to be an adulteress, I don't want 3ABN to go down in flames, and most of all I DON'T WANT THE NAME OF CHRIST TO BE DRAGGED THROUGH THE MUD!

So if you've got evidence that is not based on what you read or what somebody told you, let's have it. If you're an eyewitness, identify yourself and start giving names and dates. (After all, we know who a lot of the people on this board are!) Otherwise, get thee ...

Amen, Amen, Amen


Erik

[Rosyroi]

Amen, Amen, Amen
Erik

AMEN AMEN AMEN

[Richard Sherwin]

Of course Clay I was kidding, why else would I put the word "truth" in quotes?

Richard

that would be an oxymoron.... glenetta and truth? Come on Richard.... its more like glenetta and smoke & mirrors.... she is unregistered so I guess we will never know what else would have come from that warped view.....

[Clay]

Of course Clay I was kidding, why else would I put the word "truth" in quotes?

Richard

yeah I figured as much.... just makin sure...lol

[Uncle Sam]

I have one other question...yes I know it has been talked about before. If Linda loved Danny as she claims, why the pregnancy test? I know it was said to be a practical joke, etc. But why would she not think it would set him off? On the other hand if she thought she was pregnant why would she not take the test somewhere else? The test just doesn't make sense for either side....



moved from another thread....

This post has been edited by Clay: Feb 15 2007, 03:11 PM

[Noahswife]

I have one other question...yes I know it has been talked about before. If Linda loved Danny as she claims, why the pregnancy test? I know it was said to be a practical joke, etc. But why would she not think it would set him off? On the other hand if she thought she was pregnant why would she not take the test somewhere else? The test just doesn't make sense for either side....

moved from another thread....

This post has been edited by Clay: Feb 15 2007, 03:11 PM

[Uncle Sam]

I am not off topic, Linda claimed in her letter that she was in love with Danny. And she was 100% faithful...so I would like to hear her explanation of the test.


moved from another thread....

[calvin]

I have one other question...yes I know it has been talked about before. If Linda loved Danny as she claims, why the pregnancy test? I know it was said to be a practical joke, etc. But why would she not think it would set him off? On the other hand if she thought she was pregnant why would she not take the test somewhere else? The test just doesn't make sense for either side....

Sam, you know we already have a pregnancy test thread going. So DON'T HIJACK THIS THREAD or anybody else hijack it either. Go over there and get your answer.



moved from another thread....

This post has been edited by Clay: Feb 15 2007, 03:15 PM

[watchbird]

I am not off topic, Linda claimed in her letter that she was in love with Danny. And she was 100% faithful...so I would like to hear her explanation of the test.

You have been given her explanation of the incident... several times. It is something that is covered in the Unauthorized History.... and it also has been discussed at length in at least two other threads that come to mind immediately... and there may be more. Use the search function. Don't forget to reset the parameters so the results will point to each individual post rather than to a thread. You can find it. It does not need to be brought up in yet another thread. If you read everything and still have questions, then ask them in one of the threads devoted to that topic. But keep in mind that "why" questions do not have answers that are satisfying.... especially when they involve why someone does whatever they do.

moved from another thread...

This post has been edited by Clay: Feb 15 2007, 03:15 PM