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

[fallible humanbe...]

Wait, wait, wait a minute. It's not your site? You haven't written anything for that site? You haven't been a party to, what was going to be put on that site? You don't have any input where that site is concerned? Please..............Your ethics and behavior have already been called into question over and over again and now you make a statement that is isn't your site?

Next question. Since, obviously by your answer, it is on that site, why were you and observer just trying to act like you didn't know who the culprit was for publishing it?

Bystander,

Of course he has written for the site. He has claimed more than once on a BBS or PM's or personal emails that he is working on a major "Internet project." All one has to do is read his posts here, on MSDAOL, and the Yahoo Groups Prophecy listserv and you can find common expression, similar syntax, sentence structure, etc. Of course he is writing for that site.

However, he is correct, it isn't his site because the domain belongs to Mr. G. A. Joy. So you may owe him a technical apology because he loves to be apologized to.

- FHB

[fallible humanbe...]

It's not my site.

You are right, it is Mr. G. A. Joy's site. But if I believed in betting, I would lay money you are the web master and main contributor to the site as it is probably your major "Internet project."

But this all does raise some interesting questions:

• What sort of husband would be talking about such things to someone who is not his spouse?
• Did Danny commit spiritual adultery by talking about such things to Pastor Thorvaldsson?
• If so, did Linda therefore have biblical grounds to divorce Danny?

Good questions Bob. Have you ever been divorced? Have you ever been betrayed by the person you have spent 20 years with building a life and a ministry? Have you felt the complete level of betrayal (and the argument isn't whether the claims of Linda's infidelity are accurately portrayed by 3ABN here don't confuse the issue).

I think that even the most dedicated of Christian men might fail in their pain to guard their words - especially when speaking to the man who could arguably be cast as having a role in facilitating the accused affair.

My guess is you have no clue what the pain of divorce does to an individual. You don't know how hard it can be. But, I would also guess that you hold those in roles such as Danny, the BoD, the NAD, the GC to a much higher standard than you do yourself. They are God's leaders so they have to be better than the rest of us . . . forgetting of course you would that God sees each of us as the leaders of His work.

Nice little spin on the spiritual adultery thing there. Seems that you are guilty of what Fran just loves to try and pin on me with each of my posts.

- FHB

[Pickle]

Fallible, I think you are indeed being true to your name.

You almost speak of the affair as being a fact, and that isn't right. At this point I would say that we have no evidence that there ever was an affair, pure and simple.

That being said, I have to admit that I cannot relate at all to the pain of falsely being accused of having an affair, and then having my spouse divorce me in consequence.

[fallible humanbe...]

That being said, I have to admit that I cannot relate at all to the pain of falsely being accused of having an affair, and then having my spouse divorce me in consequence.

Bob,

Oh so classic Bob Pickle. You can not answer the questions put to you. You dance and weave and twist out of their way hoping they will not stick. Instead you subtly phrase your response to serve your purpose, your set of "facts" which do not exist.

Try, just once, to step up to the plate and answer a question. Try it, you might be good at telling the truth once you try.

- FHB

[Bystander]

Fallible, I think you are indeed being true to your name.

QUOTE(Bystander @ Mar 4 2007, 05:11 PM) *

Wait, wait, wait a minute. It's not your site? You haven't written anything for that site? You haven't been a party to, what was going to be put on that site? You don't have any input where that site is concerned? Please..............Your ethics and behavior have already been called into question over and over again and now you make a statement that is isn't your site?

Next question. Since, obviously by your answer, it is on that site, why were you and observer just trying to act like you didn't know who the culprit was for publishing it?
You also failed to mention that Johann is the one that gave them to you to publish. Shouldn't he be embarrassed to put something so intimate about his "best friend" on the net for the whole world to see? At least DS was speaking strictly to Johann, not the global population.

Still waiting Pickle

[Lee]

Pickle, we can settle this issue once and for all if this "site" is yours as well as Joys, or not.

Just answer this one question! I'll make it very simple.

Can you put or post articles on this site? I can't. Neither can FHB or Bystander. But you can, can't you Pickle????

A simple YES or NO would be sufficient to answer this question. And to ignore this question would tell us the answer by default.

[lookin4truth]

Pickle, we can settle this issue once and for all if this "site" is yours as well as Joys, or not.

Just answer this one question! I'll make it very simple.

Can you put or post articles on this site? I can't. Neither can FHB or Bystander. But you can, can't you Pickle????

A simple YES or NO would be sufficient to answer this question. And to ignore this question would tell us the answer by default.

Lee,

By this logic, then you own BlackSDA, because you are allowed to post here. Pickle said it was not HIS site. Just because he can post there does not make it his site.

Just because you can post here does not make it YOUR site.

The administrators can take away your privileges any time they wish.

[Bystander]

Lee,

By this logic, then you own BlackSDA, because you are allowed to post here. Pickle said it was not HIS site. Just because he can post there does not make it his site.

Just because you can post here does not make it YOUR site.

The administrators can take away your privileges any time they wish.

lookin4truth, lets not play dumb here. You know what the point is. Pickle was insinuating that he has no control over the site or what is published. Who "owns" it is beside the point. Pickle has plenty to say and plenty to write there.

[Fran]

lookin4truth, lets not play dumb here. You know what the point is. Pickle was insinuating that he has no control over the site or what is published. Who "owns" it is beside the point. Pickle has plenty to say and plenty to write there.

I'm thinking! ~~~~~~ What was your argument about Linda's site? ~~~~~I guess I will have to go find that post. ~~~~~ Are you arguing this both ways? ~~~~~ I will have to find it and check that out.

[Johann]

QUOTE(Bystander @ Mar 4 2007, 05:11 PM) *

- - -
You also failed to mention that Johann is the one that gave them to you to publish. Shouldn't he be embarrassed to put something so intimate about his "best friend" on the net for the whole world to see? At least DS was speaking strictly to Johann, not the global population.

Still waiting Pickle

You are confirming that DS thought he could throw Linda over board without more that just a few ripples appearing on the surface from her disappearance - like he has succeeded with so many others before. From much of what has been said since on 3ABN I conclude that he had dreams of making the programs much better and himself more popular, and that the donations would greatly increase.

On both counts he failed. Why else would the donations to 3ABN be so low, according to statements made on TV?

[Aletheia]

I cannot immagine a more humiliating experience for a woman than to have someone publish on the Internet claimed information in regard to her haveing a vaginal yeast infection, and speculating in regard to how it was diagnosed, treated, by whom, and under what circumstances.

I suspect that the publication of the above did more to generate support for Linda than most anything else that has been published about her. I can only immagine an insensitve male who really did not understand the consequences of his post publishing such.

If it was posted by a female, I will leave it to the women here to comment on that, and their reaction.

--------------------------

Why then did her "best friend" Johann, humiliate her by giving the e-mails to Gailon and Joy to publish, and why were they so insensitive to make it all public????

Those "private" e-mails were published by the same sensitive "little group" and website owned and opperatd by Joy and Pickle who have posted many things of a sensitive, and questionable nature. (including, but not limited to, bloody testicles)

My reaction as a woman?

Linda "I demand that the proof of my adultery be made public" Shelton, and her defenders and supporters are asking that far more humiliating and insensitive things then a yeast infection be made public. So why be upset at this?

They have been attacking D.S. and 3ABN all along for claiming they did not want to humiliate or hurt L.S. by making this kind of thing, and more. public.


How would they feel if a website named "www.savelindashelton.org" was opened and all the evidence they asked for regarding Linda's actions, was published there to the world? -- including an exposure of her team's unscrupulous methods, tactics and deceptions in their slanderous campaign and agenda to destroy a ministry, while representing Linda Shelton??

It seems they can't handle the truth they ask for, as they are already reacting hypocritically by becoming outraged and offended at reading what Linda's defenders have published themselves. ---> that a Woman and her doctor were in a hotel room together and it is claimed that a medical exam and treatment was the reason.

Even in a worldly women's Clinic or Doctor's office, Doctors take care to make sure all is ethical and that his behavior is above reproach. He has to have documents, and safeguards and witnesses to avoid the appearance of anything unethical, in order to safeguard his medical liscence, and medical practice. Why? To avoid malpractice and or allegations of impropriety..

Wake up people! Christians are to have HIGHER standards then the world!

How many women here can honestly say, that they think it is perfectly ethical, moral and above reproach to meet your Doctor in a private Hotel room to get checked for a yeast infection, or even to discuss your symptoms with him in that situation?

How many Men here can honestly say, they would want their wife, daughter, sister or girlfriend meeting her Doctor in a private Hotel room to receive ANY kind of medical diagnosis or treatment?

At the very least, did Linda and the Doctor avoid the appearance of evil?

Rational Christians should at least be able to agree, that no, they did not!

And at least in this situation, the Linda defenders should be able to sympathise with the husband who appealed to Johann ( apparently to no avail): "One may never know how much really went on between the two including you. On the other hand, one might. But we know for sure, that the scripure that says to shun the appearance of evil sure went out the window with those two as the lady is still, very much, married"

and "My wife also told me the Dr. treated her in his hotel room. (Yes, that worries me)"

This post has been edited by Aletheia: Mar 5 2007, 07:40 AM

[Aletheia]

Gregory,

There is always the possibility that Danny just made that part up. I don't think we can take anything he says at face value.

How could Danny have just made that part up, when you forgot to publish Johann's reply telling him that, or denying that it happened,along with the other letters you published on the save3abn not, site?

How could Danny have just made that part up when Johann is now claiming (3 yrs later), that he was there in the hotel room with Linda and the Doctor when she was diagnosed and prescribed, or given treatment for her infection?? IOW: Johann, himself, confirms that Danny didn't make it up.

Question is, what do the picture's reveal as far as who went into the room and who came out, and how long they were there?

I guess if Linda get's her wish, we'll find out...

This post has been edited by Aletheia: Mar 5 2007, 07:57 AM

[Aletheia]

You are confirming that DS thought he could throw Linda over board without more that just a few ripples appearing on the surface from her disappearance - like he has succeeded with so many others before. From much of what has been said since on 3ABN I conclude that he had dreams of making the programs much better and himself more popular, and that the donations would greatly increase.

On both counts he failed. Why else would the donations to 3ABN be so low, according to statements made on TV?

Dude, why would he want to do so? you have yet to supply the e-mails or proof to support your claims about danny wanting to get rid of Linda, or anything else you claim he said. I personally have read I don't know how many different reasons that you have posted for why you claim Danny had Walt Thompson fire you, and not once have you quoted or cited anything to prove which one, if any, is correct.

It is really hard to take the things you say seriously.

You go to the campmeeting in 2004 with the Doctor and proceed to cause a public scene, both of you handing out fliers attacking 3ABN, which you are intending to try and publish in the local paper, put up your fists to fight one of the brethren, simply for asking you to stop, refuse to leave when asked, then grab and start shaking Walt Thompson, causing others to have to come to his aid, then despite all this happening in public in front of many witnesses, claim you don't know why the police were called and that you were persecuted.. And you only went there to defend Linda and save her job.

You met with members of the 3ABN board on that Sabbath,(may 29) but they had to approach you and ask you for a private meeting, not vice versa, ( The Doctor refused to come) you admit that Walt Thompson asked if you wanted to come to the board meeting (May 30) when that meeting concluded, you claim you sent a letter to the board for that meeting, then claim that you were not allowed to meet with the board or tell them your side of the story or defend Linda as you wanted to...

You claim Linda was still with Danny at the 3ABN campmeeting and not allowed to attend, act like she was the thrown aside wife and didn't want her marriage to end, and then explain how you went to see the mobile home she'd purchased (yet your time frame has this happening before they were separated, and before she claims it even became necessary to separate on June 1, 2004??)

Possibly you were just confused here when you posted that... When did she actually purchase the mobile home?

You flat out lied about the Watch the Doctor gave Linda, and what Danny told you about it, as you yourself posted the e-mail from him to you showing what he did say... More about this in the post where this was brought up...

You even claim Brandi moved to Thompsonville in June of 2004. and keep implying it was Danny rather then Linda who commited adultery, of course this is false (also explaining why there is zero evidence or proof to even cause a shadow of a doubt here... ) Yet you consistantly defend every questionable thing Linda has done, as if there is no shadow of a doubt about it, and then demand evidence, as if you don't have any...


You were right in the middle of it, how can you be so blind?

This post has been edited by Aletheia: Mar 5 2007, 10:57 AM

[sister]

Johann, don't bite into the fruit that Aletheia is holding out to you. She is just another deceiver attempting to lead you down the garden path and find out the extent of what you have for evidence. She is only trying to entangle you in her web. Let Aletheia talk, her own words shed light upon her character. The same can be said of WWJD, Lee and Bystander. It is obvious to every thinking person how they attempt to hijack the threads through betting others involved in petty arguments with them.

Sister

[Lee]

No sister, we are just looking for forthright answers--truthful ones--plain and to the point. Nothing more and nothing less.