The Investigator Of 3abn Options

[watchbird]

I had said:

Seems to me the third is the most applicable to the present situation. The first will have application in some instances, but in context it seems to be speaking specifically of those who have been called to be a witness in a legal court situation. The second, in context is focused more on how one handles things between himself and another individual. But the third clearly states that the watchman who doesn't sound the warning when he sees danger will be held responsible for whoever gets harmed by the danger that he did not expose.

What about the New Testament? Are there similar principles expressed there? Or is the New Testament only sweetness and light ... love your brother and don't expose his sins?.......

To which you responded...

I know you must be using irony here. Certainly you don’t seriously intend to characterize the New Testament as “only sweetness and light”.

Excuse me for cutting to this one sentence of your post..... but by separating the "sweetness and light" sentence from its original context, you applied it in ways I had not intended it to apply... which then caused you to give texts that did not relate to my question.

So I have put it back into my original context in order to respond to what you said about "irony". For no... I was not being ironic. Obviously, however, I was unclear, so I'll attempt to clear up the misunderstanding.

The context (antecedent even) for the question about the New Testament is the specific teaching of the Old Testament that had been mentioned ... that of warning of dangers... including the sins of others.... in such a public fashion as illustrated by watchmen on the city walls blowing a trumpet. It did NOT ask for the whole Old Testament and New Testament approach to the plan of salvation to be compared.

So what I was asking was ... is this responsibility to make public the sins of others as described in the Old Testament repeated in the New Testament. Or does the New Testament focus ONLY on the "sweetness and light" attitude of "love your brother" "love covers a multitude of sins", etc.?

The background for my question was a very specific and recent personal experience.... which of course you would have known nothing about.... in which someone to whom I had recommended coming to BSDA to learn what is being said about 3abn, wrote me in critical fashion within an hour of receiving the recommendation (which shows how long she could have examined the site). Then a few days later wrote to tell me that she had been "praying about it", and was impressed to send me a list of texts which showed how Christ would handle such information.... all of which were from the New Testament and all of which were examples of "covering" ( hiding), sins of others from public view.... all very much what I would describe as "sweetness and light".

Now I don't deny that those "sweet" texts are there.... and doubtless they could be found in the Old Testament as well. My question is ... what about the "other side".... the ones that give the responsibility of revealing sins... of being witnesses against someone's sins.... even going so far as witnessing in a formal court of law? Do we find THAT in the New Testament as well as the Old... and if so, how explicit is it? And what texts do others see that in?

Returning now to some of your comments:

Matthew 18 is one such passage that deals with how to handle sin. You invoked this one recently.

Matthew 18:15-17" If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. 16 But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.' 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector. (I would imagine that this means praying diligently for him. Isn’t that what we are supposed to do for pagans?)

Yes, I would consider this as one passage that gives the pattern for how to handle our knowledge of another's sin. However, I would have a little different view of what "treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector" would mean than you have described.

While it is true that a Christian will always pray for "those who dispitefully use you", I think that has to do with salvation... which I don't think is the focus of this particular passage.

So I think that this text should be seen in relation to the text in which Paul advises brethren to not take brethren to the law court... and in view of that, here he is saying that when you have gone through the process of trying to straighten things out within the church, and he still does not "listen" (with the implication being that he would not only listen but would change his ways, making restitution and all that goes along with that), then it is time to "treat him as" though he were NOT a fellow church member.... which would be to take him to the civil court and allow it to exercise its power over him.

So yes, both in the "tell it to the church" and the "treat him as a pagan" clauses, I find this text echoing the Old Testament statements of the responsibility of believers to inform other believers.... and even unbelievers.... of the sins of those among them who have not been willing to change their ways after private confrontation.

Are there other texts that make this same point?

[PeacefulBe]

This is a little bit deep, but for all those who are able to understand some legalese, consider this for a moment. The two "covenants" and the two "testaments" are one and the same, essentially. The word "testament" is a legal term, and represents a will, as in "will and testament." A will or testament does not take effect until the death of the testator. At that point, the testament becomes legally binding, and unchangeable. Figuratively speaking, it has been "signed" by the blood of the testator and can NO LONGER be changed.

Jesus' death on the cross sealed the old testament as truly as with any legal will. That we have a "New Testament" does not in any way remove that which was binding from the "Old Testament." It is IN ADDITION TO the old covenant law, which has now become binding through the death of the testator.
The Old Covenant, or "Old Testament", was never to be "replaced" by the new. However, the symbolic blood of the animals which were a type of Christ, met their fulfillment in Christ's death. The faith-building exercise pointing toward a future event was no longer required, "future" having already been realized.

Thank you for this. I agree that the Old Testament was never replaced. What you wrote makes it clear.

So did the sacrificial system that was fulfilled at the Cross include the Mosaic law? We don't stone folks anymore, right?

[watchbird]

Thank you for this. I agree that the Old Testament was never replaced. What you wrote makes it clear.

So did the sacrificial system that was fulfilled at the Cross include the Mosaic law? We don't stone folks anymore, right?

The sacrificial system has to do with how God handles sin.... IOW ... it has to do with salvation process.

The Mosaic law.... that part which can be separated from the sacrificial system.... has to do with civil law..... how to handle the effects of sins on onesself and ones fellow man.

In Old Testament times, for all practical purposes the church and the state were the same. In New Testament times that was still true to a limited sense, because in the Jewish nation the religious and civil authorities were invested in the same persons. But there was also a division of religious and civil authority and power because Rome's authority and power was greater than that of the Jewish leaders. So we have the beginnings there of the division of "church and state" that we today see as the "ideal".

We will confuse things if we don't sort out in our minds the difference between looking to scripture for the way of salvation and looking to scripture for ethical guidance in our relation to each other and to the civil governments of our particular nation.

This post has been edited by watchbird: Oct 14 2006, 08:43 AM

[PeacefulBe]

Excuse me for cutting to this one sentence of your post..... but by separating the "sweetness and light" sentence from its original context, you applied it in ways I had not intended it to apply... which then caused you to give texts that did not relate to my question.

Sorry, Watchbird, my bad.

So I have put it back into my original context in order to respond to what you said about "irony". For no... I was not being ironic. Obviously, however, I was unclear, so I'll attempt to clear up the misunderstanding.

The context (antecedent even) for the question about the New Testament is the specific teaching of the Old Testament that had been mentioned ... that of warning of dangers... including the sins of others.... in such a public fashion as illustrated by watchmen on the city walls blowing a trumpet. It did NOT ask for the whole Old Testament and New Testament approach to the plan of salvation to be compared.

So what I was asking was ... is this responsibility to make public the sins of others as described in the Old Testament repeated in the New Testament. Or does the New Testament focus ONLY on the "sweetness and light" attitude of "love your brother" "love covers a multitude of sins", etc.?

Of course, when one repents of their sins and asks the Lord for forgiveness, His love covers that multitude. As far as the responsibility of making public the sins of others, perhaps we could look at the letters Paul wrote to various churches. Many of them contain messages of warnings about the sins some were commiting.

The background for my question was a very specific and recent personal experience.... which of course you would have known nothing about.... in which someone to whom I had recommended coming to BSDA to learn what is being said about 3abn, wrote me in critical fashion within an hour of receiving the recommendation (which shows how long she could have examined the site). Then a few days later wrote to tell me that she had been "praying about it", and was impressed to send me a list of texts which showed how Christ would handle such information.... all of which were from the New Testament and all of which were examples of "covering" ( hiding), sins of others from public view.... all very much what I would describe as "sweetness and light".

Now I don't deny that those "sweet" texts are there.... and doubtless they could be found in the Old Testament as well. My question is ... what about the "other side".... the ones that give the responsibility of revealing sins... of being witnesses against someone's sins.... even going so far as witnessing in a formal court of law? Do we find THAT in the New Testament as well as the Old... and if so, how explicit is it? And what texts do others see that in?

Dysfunctional systems need denial and the covering up of truth to survive. Some can even distort and misapply texts from the Bible to support this behavior. I guess it was your frustration over the situation with the person you referred here that I picked up on. As soon as I read your post, the image of Jesus in agony over the separation from His Father leapt to my mind. While filled with such hope for us, this image certainly isn't one of sweetness and light.

Returning now to some of your comments:
Yes, I would consider this as one passage that gives the pattern for how to handle our knowledge of another's sin. However, I would have a little different view of what "treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector" would mean than you have described.

While it is true that a Christian will always pray for "those who dispitefully use you", I think that has to do with salvation... which I don't think is the focus of this particular passage.

So I think that this text should be seen in relation to the text in which Paul advises brethren to not take brethren to the law court... and in view of that, here he is saying that when you have gone through the process of trying to straighten things out within the church, and he still does not "listen" (with the implication being that he would not only listen but would change his ways, making restitution and all that goes along with that), then it is time to "treat him as" though he were NOT a fellow church member.... which would be to take him to the civil court and allow it to exercise its power over him.

So yes, both in the "tell it to the church" and the "treat him as a pagan" clauses, I find this text echoing the Old Testament statements of the responsibility of believers to inform other believers.... and even unbelievers.... of the sins of those among them who have not been willing to change their ways after private confrontation.

Are there other texts that make this same point?

I agree with you that treating one who refuses to confront and change their sinful ways as a pagan or tax collector would be more appropriately interpreted be as you suggest. They have chosen to hold onto their sin and separate themselves from the bretheren in the process. This would open the way to biblically allow even civil proceedings.

However, 1John 5:16-20 says:
16 If anyone sees his brother commit a sin that does not lead to death, he should pray and God will give him life. I refer to those whose sin does not lead to death. There is a sin that leads to death. I am not saying that he should pray about that. 17 All wrongdoing is sin, and there is sin that does not lead to death.

18 We know that anyone born of God does not continue to sin; the one who was born of God keeps him safe, and the evil one cannot harm him. 19 We know that we are children of God, and that the whole world is under the control of the evil one. 20 We know also that the Son of God has come and has given us understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And we are in him who is true—even in his Son Jesus Christ. He is the true God and eternal life.

So, even when the person refuses to repent of his sin I believe we are to pray for him.

Of course there's Matthew 10:14 If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town.

While I don't have at my fingertips any other NT texts that harken to the OT examples you posted I will certainly search for some.

[Fran]

Found this from a blog about 3ABN and AToday. http://cafesda.blogspot.com/2006/08/atoday...bn-news_21.html

Atoday on Latest 3ABN News
From Adventist Today Website: Personal Lives and The Three Angels Broadcasting Network (3ABN): Statements by Adventist Today Editors, Dr. Arild Abrahamsen, Dr. Walter Thompson (Chair, 3ABN Board of Directors), and Mr. Danny Shelton

***********************************************
Please stop the repeat posting of these long letters here, I already have them pinned at the top for everyone to read.

Fran, you gave us the link, don't need to post every comment on their Blog here. Atoday may very well consider this copyrighted material.

Folks are really stretching to find something to talk with this story.

This post has been edited by calvin: Oct 15 2006, 08:03 AM

[Panama_Pete]

Folks are really stretching to find something to talk with this story.

I prefer the way that our friend, Calvin Eakins, characterized it on the Spectrum Blog.

Calvin called it "the most comprehensive discussion on the saga of 3ABN." Where is this Calvin fellow when we need him?

http://spectrummagazine.typepad.com/the_sp...eans_and_e.html

I also thought Clifford Goldstein's comment was interesting where he says: "whenever anything is built around a single personality, the potential for trouble is immense, especially in ministry."

There are other interesting comments posted there as well.

[PeacefulBe]

I prefer the way that our friend, Calvin Eakins, characterized it on the Spectrum Blog.

Calvin called it "the most comprehensive discussion on the saga of 3ABN." Where is this Calvin fellow when we need him?
SNIP
There are other interesting comments posted there as well.

I'll second that characterization, Calvin. It is so comprehensive that I've been here for almost two months and still have only touched the surface!!

PP, I briefly read the Spectrum link. Do you have a rundown of the doctrinal differences between 3abn and the SDA church? I have watched for several years and haven't seen any that were apparent to me. I have seen a guest say something quite questionable.
1. She learned in chaplain training that a vegetarian woman received the heart of a non-vegetarian, boozer biker. When she woke up she demanded beer and a big mac.
2. A young girl received the heart of a murdered young girl. When she woke up she was able to solve the crime by identifying the killer

The guest's biblical grounds...various texts refering to things being written on our hearts.

[Fran]

Please stop the repeat posting of these long letters here, I already have them pinned at the top for everyone to read.

OK

[calvin]

Thank you Fran

[Panama_Pete]

I'll second that characterization, Calvin. It is so comprehensive that I've been here for almost two months and still have only touched the surface!!

PP, I briefly read the Spectrum link. Do you have a rundown of the doctrinal differences between 3abn and the SDA church? I have watched for several years and haven't seen any that were apparent to me. I have seen a guest say something quite questionable.
1. She learned in chaplain training that a vegetarian woman received the heart of a non-vegetarian, boozer biker. When she woke up she demanded beer and a big mac.
2. A young girl received the heart of a murdered young girl. When she woke up she was able to solve the crime by identifying the killer

The guest's biblical grounds...various texts refering to things being written on our hearts.

I wish those comments at Spectrum had been a bit more complete so we could get a better sense of where they were going with those doctrinal comments.

However, speaking of those organ transplants you mentioned, if the body rejects the heart, it means there was something substantially different about the heart.

I understand that the Adventist Church has producing programming that has been rejected by 3ABN. If 3ABN rejects Adventist-produced programming, is there something different about the rejected programming?

I remember watching Dwight Nelson on 3ABN one evening. He offered "The Evidence" to Danny Shelton. To my knowledge, Danny thanked Dwight for the offer, but did not air the series. The series is now airing on the Hope Channel. Here's the schedule:

http://www.theevidence.org/schedule2.php

[watchbird]

Hmmm..... I'm seeing some rather confusing things here. Gonna give a try at sorting things out....

Found this from a blog about 3ABN and AToday. http://cafesda.blogspot.com/2006/08/atoday...bn-news_21.html

Atoday on Latest 3ABN News
From Adventist Today Website: Personal Lives and The Three Angels Broadcasting Network (3ABN): Statements by Adventist Today Editors, Dr. Arild Abrahamsen, Dr. Walter Thompson (Chair, 3ABN Board of Directors), and Mr. Danny Shelton

***********************************************
Please stop the repeat posting of these long letters here, I already have them pinned at the top for everyone to read.

Fran, you gave us the link, don't need to post every comment on their Blog here. Atoday may very well consider this copyrighted material.

Folks are really stretching to find something to talk with this story.

Not knowing what Fran's original post looked like, I can only guess at what was here before Calvin truncated it and substituted his comments.

But as it is now, the only link that is here is to the cafesda.blogsplot. This is NOT a link to the Adventist Today article which included the two letters from Arild Abrahamsen and Walt Thompson which are pinned at the top of the 3abn menu. This is a link to Ron Corson's blog, which just happened to comment on the Adventist Today article... and gave a link to it, which did not transfer to BSDA as a "hot link". (Ron Corson is a self-labeled "Progressinve Adventist" whose original home page (still available) was (and I quote from that page) "Dedicated to helping SDA's change the church for the better".... with Ron Corson, of course, being the one who defined both what the church "is".... and what "better" is.)

His comment on his blog was not primarily a comment on the Adventist Today article itself, although that is the backdrop against which Ron makes his comments, but the thing that Ron picks out to quote and comment upon is the letter which Danny Shelton wrote in response to AT's request for his comments.

BSDA previously published both Walt Thompson's and Danny Shelton's letters of comment, so we don't need to recopy them here either. They can be found at the beginning of the thread entitled "Adventist Today Write-up Of 3abn: Replies from Walt Thompson and Danny" at http://www.blacksda.com/forums/index.php?s...st&p=146981

The Adventist Today article itself was, so far as I can find, never directly published on BSDA. That can be found at http://www.atoday.com/6.0.html?&tx_ttn...Hash=b7534bfb09 where a short introductory article precedes the publication of all four letters.

I prefer the way that our friend, Calvin Eakins, characterized it on the Spectrum Blog.

Calvin called it "the most comprehensive discussion on the saga of 3ABN." Where is this Calvin fellow when we need him?

http://spectrummagazine.typepad.com/the_sp...eans_and_e.html

I also thought Clifford Goldstein's comment was interesting where he says: "whenever anything is built around a single personality, the potential for trouble is immense, especially in ministry."

There are other interesting comments posted there as well.

I'd like to point out that this is a completely different blog than the one above, though since Ron Corson's blog is also referenced in this one, it may look a bit confusing at first glance.

One of the more interesting ones that I noted there was this one:

"I reject the idea that 3ABN is a cultural signifier of the Adventist faith. It is not now and has never been officially embraced by the Church. It is an independent ministry that seems to have a different set of doctrines than those presented in the 28 Fundamentals and certainly a different agenda from the Tell the World agenda recently adopted by the General Conference. We should not assign it too much importance, and the current personal troubles of the proprietor certainly indicate why." Posted by: Monte Sahlin | 26 August 2006 at 07:06

[justme]

THE TIDE IS TURNING.....

As time passes, the hands of the clock move imperceptibly, .. the pendulum swings from one side to the other. On the face there are hands. As those hands, at any given moment, point in one direction, sooner or later, each hand will point in the opposite direction. At appointed times there will be a "sound" to alert us to take a look to see what time it is.

Now it is a time when thinking people are looking to see what time it is, again. The people, who were "alerted" when Danny "chimed" the lies about Linda, are now looking again. They are seeing that Danny has manufactured his own demise. The clock face has hands pointing at him this time. The same hands he tried to point at Linda with bad timing.

The chime is sounding again and it is chiming a new bright and sunny day for Linda. Those whom Danny told such convincing lies are now looking at Danny askance. The tide, the dial at the top of the dial, the moon dial, is beginning to moon Danny's tide and it getting deeper than he imagined.

There are those who actually are looking to this forum to reveal evidence and personal experiences with him. That's why there are such desperate people trying to attack with guilt. To make us feel guilty for telling truths. To discredit this forum.

Conferences, which, even a few months ago, were largely against Linda, are taking a new look at Danny! His credibility seriously is in question. When he rants and raves, talking loud and fast on his soapbox, he sounds more and more like a "used car salesman", or a "traveling medicine show".

"There's a New Day Dawning"

[September]

Yesterday we got the 3ABN magazine...we haven't received one of those in about a year I think, so I thought it was 'strange' that we received this one. Danny is on the cover and his is the first article--complete with another photo of him, the board and someone in a control room. My dh said that what he wrote about himself, 3ABN, the attacks from satan toward him and 3ABN are going to be part of what hangs him in the end. I was nauseated after I read it. I'm believing in prayer that God is working things out in the way that He sees fit.



This post has been edited by September: Oct 24 2006, 12:18 PM

[lurker]

This Sabbath there was an item in our church bulletin asking that if anyone had donations for 3ABN to send them direct to 3ABN and not put them in the tithe envelope as they will not be receipted through the church!

I don't know if this was our church/conference only but I thought maybe this was a good sign.

This post has been edited by lurker: Oct 24 2006, 01:55 PM

[calvin]

THE TIDE IS TURNING.....

As time passes, the hands of the clock move imperceptibly, .. the pendulum swings from one side to the other. On the face there are hands. As those hands, at any given moment, point in one direction, sooner or later, each hand will point in the opposite direction. At appointed times there will be a "sound" to alert us to take a look to see what time it is.

Now it is a time when thinking people are looking to see what time it is, again. The people, who were "alerted" when Danny "chimed" the lies about Linda, are now looking again. They are seeing that Danny has manufactured his own demise. The clock face has hands pointing at him this time. The same hands he tried to point at Linda with bad timing.

The chime is sounding again and it is chiming a new bright and sunny day for Linda. Those whom Danny told such convincing lies are now looking at Danny askance. The tide, the dial at the top of the dial, the moon dial, is beginning to moon Danny's tide and it getting deeper than he imagined.

There are those who actually are looking to this forum to reveal evidence and personal experiences with him. That's why there are such desperate people trying to attack with guilt. To make us feel guilty for telling truths. To discredit this forum.

Conferences, which, even a few months ago, were largely against Linda, are taking a new look at Danny! His credibility seriously is in question. When he rants and raves, talking loud and fast on his soapbox, he sounds more and more like a "used car salesman", or a "traveling medicine show".

"There's a New Day Dawning"

Very nice metaphor using the hands of the clock to describe Danny’s imminent demise as so many here would like to have us believe…just any day now right?

Is anyone here considering that Danny may have just weathered the worst of the storm? Has the worse of his misdeeds alright come to light? If so, Danny is still standing. They just finished Net 2006, the major independent ministry have not abandoned 3ABN, neither has the official church. After all folks his divorce and remarriage is really old news now. All these letters going back and forward that we have pinned are really not much more than hearsay, all with questionable motives by the authors.

For all of you hoping for Danny’s demise, that somehow this investigation will tip the scale and bring a quick end to this saga, well I suggest you pray that the investigator finds a smoking gun somewhere in there and not more of the same that we have here. Or else my prediction is that Danny will come of this a little beat up, but him and his ministry still intact. Oh, and whoever is doing this investigation better have a whole lot of creditability.