New Letters At Save3abn Options

[princessdi]

You know, it should not take all of that, though. We should truly be "a village" where the safety and welfare of children are concerned. Folks talking about being christian. WWJD if He was confronted with this situaion.

Dem folks don't want to see this....the exact same folks won't say the same thing if they find out their children were molested by Tommy. Same folks won't say the same thing if they find out that Danny covered up the molestation of their children.

We are quick to sacrifice others...but have yet to put our child up on the alter.

[Hawk]

Bystander, you are not a very nice person. I would hate to have you on my bad side. Now let me go back to my quiet corner and continue to read.

Jnana, Bystander is very representative of the Sheltons and 3ABN-behind the scenes. The attitude, christianity and demeanor of BS is that of the REAL 3ABN. Go back over the BS posts and you will see 3ABN as those who have experienced it know it. Many have wondered how they could possibly describe it and gave up, knowing that it could only be experienced. We are grateful that BS is out there demonstrating what we can't even find the words to describe. BS is the true reflection of Christ as shown by 3ABN. The Christian love that BS shows for all of you and for Linda is the love of Jesus as shown by 3ABN. What you see in BS is the Seventh-day Adventist Church shown by 3ABN to the world. What you see reflected in BS is what the donors are giving to when they donate to 3ABN. the BS that you see here on BSDA is truly reflective of 3ABN and the Sheltons. We are very grateful to BS for doing the thankless task that he/she is doing here!

[Fran]

Sam, you seem to be one of the few that are able to see things from both sides. All we have heard is how Linda just wants to minister and has kept her mouth shut through all of this. As you pointed out where are all these emails been coming from. The ones between The doc and DS, the doc or LS submitted. All of those between DS and Ls, of course, LS submitted. If LS was as trashed by 3abn as several claim, the "evidence" of a 3rd party relationship would have been made public when it all first happened. My opinion. they made a big mistake by not making it public in the beginning. If they had, all of us would not be here at the present time. Sure DS is human. He might have made a few subtle references in the beginning. Out of hurt, anger, humiliation, who wouldn't. But Trashing her? No way do a few remarks (if they were even made) fit into the category of trashing. As I said, If they wanted to truly "trash" her, they could have a long time ago.
On the other side LS has made some brudal accusations toward Ds and several others. Just because she accomplished her "trashing" through others, doesn't make it any less incriminating. She used those tactics then and she continues to use them now. She does have talent. She makes other people her gophers and makes them feel happy to do it. That is how we have heard the same old song and dance that she has taken the high road, she has kept silent, she is forgiving of those that have wronged her. When, in fact, she has done just the opposite. Maybe those of you who never actually knew her, should be forgiven for your Lindanite attitudes. After all, the "real" person" was almost beyond comprehension.

Wow is me, I am undone!

I was writing a post and decided I have nothing worthwhile to say, so I deleted it all! Then again I decided to ask a question. What is your definition of "TRASHING"? I am not a wordsmith, but I don't think I use your definition. Can you help us out with your definition?

Doggoned, I scratched my head a little too hard! You have me baffled and bewildered at your responses. Do you have mental problems too? Does it run in your family?

There I go again!

Just my thoughts. (IMO)

[Aletheia]

Wow is me, I am undone!

I was writing a post and decided I have nothing worthwhile to say, so I deleted it all! Then again I decided to ask a question. What is your definition of "TRASHING"? I am not a wordsmith, but I don't think I use your definition. Can you help us out with your definition?

Doggoned, I scratched my head a little too hard! You have me baffled and bewildered at your responses. Do you have mental problems too? Does it run in your family?

There I go again!

Just my thoughts. (IMO)

Bystander is someone I personally have come to love as one of the brethren, and over and over i have been impressed by his integrity and his concern for all. Granted you may see it differently, for it is not always easy to appear in the best light when you are in a minority as on this forum and under constant criticism and attack. But regardless of your opinion of him, can't you try and respond like someone who has natural affection? I often find your posted thoughts and insults far from the spirit of Christ, and just generally offensive.

In regards to your question Fran, take your definition of trashing which you have all used in regards to what Danny said on the air etc.. about Linda, or what you thought was about Linda, then apply that definition of trashing to what has been said on www.save3ABN.com and on this forum about Danny and all his family and so many at 3ABN, ASI and any and all who are associated with him, and then you'll have your answer.

Then, try, in a impartial and unnbiased manner, to compare all, using that same standard and definition. The difference is HUGE.


Next consider how many have made the claim here repeatedly, that EVEN IF Linda is guilty of all that is said about her, it doesn't justify how she was trashed, and ask yourself, EVEN IF Danny is guilty of all that is said about him does it justify how he is being trashed?

Those who can't use the same standards to judge both situations fit the definition of hypocricy, and being partial in judgment, (unrighteous judges)

And No, I am not naming names here, it's unnecessary. People know what they do and write here, as do the readers. They can stop or continue this behavior. Their choice.

This post has been edited by Aletheia: Mar 15 2007, 05:58 AM

[Uncle Sam]

I was talking to my spouse about this mess earlier. A different perspective, if Danny divorced Linda without biblical grounds, what happened after the divorce? Did Linda have an affair with the Dr? All I have heard is she was free to do what she wanted after the divorce. If she did than Danny was free to marry again. Now if she didn't than that is a problem for Danny. But let's say she didn't, what is he to do now? What if he thought she did, but now it is proven that she didn't? Should he divorce Brandi?

Also, it is said that all of this is bigger than Linda, and that she is just a small part of this. If they had not gotten divorced would all of this been posted on the web for the world to see?

[awesumtenor]

Bystander is someone I personally have come to love as one of the brethren, and over and over i have been impressed by his integrity and his concern for all. Granted you may see it differently, for it is not always easy to appear in the best light when you are in a minority as on this forum and under constant criticism and attack. But regardless of your opinion of him, can't you try and respond like someone who has natural affection? I often find your posted thoughts and insults far from the spirit of Christ, and just generally offensive.

In regards to your question Fran, take your definition of trashing which you have all used in regards to what Danny said on the air etc.. about Linda, or what you thought was about Linda, then apply that definition of trashing to what has been said on www.save3ABN.com and on this forum about Danny and all his family and so many at 3ABN, ASI and any and all who are associated with him, and then you'll have your answer.

Then, try, in a impartial and unnbiased manner, to compare all, using that same standard and definition. The difference is HUGE.
Next consider how many have made the claim here repeatedly, that EVEN IF Linda is guilty of all that is said about her, it doesn't justify how she was trashed, and ask yourself, EVEN IF Danny is guilty of all that is said about him does it justify how he is being trashed?

Those who can't use the same standards to judge both situations fit the definition of hypocricy, and being partial in judgment, (unrighteous judges)

And No, I am not naming names here, it's unnecessary. People know what they do and write here, as do the readers. They can stop or continue this behavior. Their choice.

And how exactly does this address your trying to paint Duane Clem and others as being willingly complicit in Tommy's acting out his sexual proclivities? Your attempts to say he is not a sexual predator despite the evidence? You have treated his victims worse than you boohoo about how you feel Danny has been treated...

but we'll come back to that...

Danny came to this forum and lied... lied about how he was trying to make his marriage work; lied about Linda and her alleged infidelity; etc.

He didn't have to come here and say a thing; he chose to do so. Bystander and others have come here similarly unsolicited and told untruths unprovoked. No one here forced any of them to do it; they did so of their own volition. After his lies were not swallowed by those here, then his next ploy was to send in the clones... or would that be clowns... prolly both... to disparage and discredit and dissuade people from continuing to discuss these things by any means necessary...and why not; it had worked on other forae in the past... and your camp had succeeded in shutting down discussion of all of this stuff in other places... but I guess we are made of sterner stuff... and we dont do the passive aggressive thing... and when you and others bark; we bark back...but I digress...

The bottom line is that neither they nor DS has any integrity, credibility or objectivity... and as one who blindly chooses to endorse them, neither do you. And from the day you came to this forum to today, you ( collectively ) have never had any of those things because if you did, you'd have come in here like Greg Matthews, admitting that you were aligned with a specific faction and that your efforts were in concert, rather than playing that role of "I'm just a concerned viewer of 3ABN who heard of this and wanted to seek the truth"

Danny lied... Bystander lied... You lied... all of you... liars... unsolicited and unprovoked. And the sad thing is none of you ever thought that folk would check behind you... would look to see if you were on other forums and what you said while there... you tried to play us... and got yourself played for your troubles

If you and they want to see the attitudes in this forum and in other places change towards them... how about laying their cards on the table and coming clean on all of this? How about your not re-victimizing people by saying they wanted Tommy to do what he does? How about checking that self-righteous holier than thou at the door that convicts you of the same offenses for which you browbeat others?

But that wont happen; indignation is all you have left and you are taking the Charlton Heston/NRA approach on that.


Oh well; c'est la vie.

In His service,
Mr. J

[Observer]

I was talking to my spouse about this mess earlier. A different perspective, if Danny divorced Linda without biblical grounds, what happened after the divorce? Did Linda have an affair with the Dr? All I have heard is she was free to do what she wanted after the divorce. If she did than Danny was free to marry again. Now if she didn't than that is a problem for Danny. But let's say she didn't, what is he to do now? What if he thought she did, but now it is proven that she didn't? Should he divorce Brandi?

Also, it is said that all of this is bigger than Linda, and that she is just a small part of this. If they had not gotten divorced would all of this been posted on the web for the world to see?

Your questions have some validity, and I will respond to them.

1) As a SDA minister, and a former congregational pastor, I, as have most SDA ministers, have struggled with the problems that we face in dealing with the imperfect humans in our congregations. We struggle with issues such as: "a)" How do we relate to people who have fallen short of the standard, have sinned, and yet show the redemptive love of the gospel? "b)" How do we proclaim the Christian standards that God expects us to uphold. Steming from those struggles, I have come to some personal decisions. They are my own, and probably reflect a more liberal perspective than some people reading these posts.

2) Once a new marriage has taken place, following a divorce, that is a marriage in the eyes of God, and God expects people to work to preserve it. Any sin that may have been committed is in the past. The may need to be repented of, but it is in the past. I as a pastor will work to preserve that new marriage. God does not expect that a marriage be broken up due to the fact of a prior sin. A new family has been established. The preservation of families is vital to God and our humanity. God does not tear families apart.

3) God accepts that new marriage. God, to my thinking, does not charge the participants in that marriage with adultery based upon the present marriage. Any adultery that may have occured happend prior to this new marriage. Or, perhaps, the establishment of this new marriage constituted sin. But, if that is true, its continunation does not constitute adultery. Any prior sin, or any sin committed in the establishement of this new marriage should be repented of. But, that does not require the this new family be torn apart.

4) In the case where one of the parties to this new marriage, is not a SDA, and has become one, any sins that this person may have committed prior to the marriage, or prior to the baptism shoud not be held to his/her account. The sacrament of baptism, and the death of Christ on the cross, errased those sins and this person should be welcomed and a new member of the faith and not charged with what may have been prior sins.

5) Wheather or not one had a Biblical basis to divorce and remarry depends upon the facts at the time of the remarriage. In other words, Whether "A" had a Biblical basis to Marry "C" depends on the facts regarding "B" at the time that A married C. If B engages in sexual immorality following A's marriage to C, that does not give A the Biblical grounds for a marriage that has already taken place. Once that new marriage has taken place, the actions of B are no longer a concern of A. B's actions may be of concern to the Church, but not to A. The divorce and remarriage is a ceaseation of the relationship between A and B.

6) Even when it is evident that sin (adultery) has been committed, and when action should be taken, it is up to the congregation to decide upon that action, and that action may not be required to be drastic. It may be redemptive.

Folks, I am more liberal than some. The above may be a more liberal position than some here hold. But, it is a postion that I have come to as a congregational pastor.

NOTE: I do not address here the issue of what to do in regard to the employment of a person in ministry who has marital problems. This issue is complex. In some cases I would have to say that such a person should be removed from a ministry position. But, I do not discuss that here.

NOTE: I am clearly considered to be one of "Linda's Team." My public position has been and remains: Linda has never given Danny any type of Biblical grounds for him to divorce her. I do not claim that she is perfect. She, as I have stated, may have burned his toast several mornings. But her imperfections do not rise to any kind of a conservative set of Biblical grounds for a divorce and remarriage.

This post has been edited by Observer: Mar 15 2007, 07:41 AM

[Lee]

Jnana, Bystander is very representative of the Sheltons and 3ABN-behind the scenes. The attitude, christianity and demeanor of BS is that of the REAL 3ABN. Go back over the BS posts and you will see 3ABN as those who have experienced it know it. Many have wondered how they could possibly describe it and gave up, knowing that it could only be experienced. We are grateful that BS is out there demonstrating what we can't even find the words to describe. BS is the true reflection of Christ as shown by 3ABN. The Christian love that BS shows for all of you and for Linda is the love of Jesus as shown by 3ABN. What you see in BS is the Seventh-day Adventist Church shown by 3ABN to the world. What you see reflected in BS is what the donors are giving to when they donate to 3ABN. the BS that you see here on BSDA is truly reflective of 3ABN and the Sheltons. We are very grateful to BS for doing the thankless task that he/she is doing here!

I know Bystander also and he is a Christian through and through. He knows so much first-hand at 3ABN and yet becomes frustrated as anyone would because of reading lies on this forum. He has personally known Linda and Danny for 20 years. Bystander would be the first to say he is not perfect--but I tell you, I would rather read his posts any day than many on this forum who are unreasonable, rude and unChristlike.

[Aletheia]

Hey, looks like the September 8, 2004 email is up at http://www.save3abn.com/danny-shelton-demi...-of-what-04.htm.

Linda Doll;

You made a statement late this evening that during Feb. and March you were innocent of being too invovled with the Dr. Linda the problem was everyone involved knew the Dr. was not innocent. He knew exactly where he was going with this relationship and was able to successfully mold you the way he wanted. Even to the point of him convincing you that it was ok for you to go on a vacation without your husband to his condo.

All pastors and counselors to this day will tell you that he was a snake in the grass all along. We could see it but you couldn't. That's why I fought so hard for you. The snake won round one. But the battle for you for marriage and ministry and your soul is not over. I believe the Lord will ultimately win out.

Your continued relationship with this man is living proof that his plan for you succeeded. These trips to Norway and his to the states so you guys can be together is not sanctioned by God and will be the death of your new ministry.

He's not and never has been a piece of chocolate cake to you. He's been a pile of poop that you ate because it had chocolate covering. But the chocolate coating is about to fall off. Too many people are praying for you to see the truth.

Love is Forever!

Danny/Bystander/WWJD/Lee/FHB, got some questions.

1. What do you personally thing of Danny repeatedly calling Dr. Abrahamsen a chocolate-covered pile of horse dung/manure/____? Do you think he should apologize for that?

Since you asked...

First, beam-eye then, mote- brother's eye
Do you think you should apologise for not including what Linda said about the Doctor, that led to his initial protest that "He's not and never has been a piece of chocolate cake to you" and comparing him rather to something which appeared delicious on the outside, and yet like dung, was stinky and unclean, and bad for her and her ministry? Which is what the whole context of the letter is about...

Seems to me like I've read somewhere that making a man a offender for a word, is just not right...

It also seems you might be also offended by God repeatedly warning us that the unrighteous and unjust will be dung upon the earth, (examples; jer 8:2, 9:22, 16:4, 25:33) and how that's gonna happen?

"They shall die of grievous deaths; they shall not be lamented; neither shall they be buried; but they shall be as dung upon the face of the earth: and they shall be consumed by the sword, and by famine; and their carcases shall be meat for the fowls of heaven, and for the beasts of the earth. "

"And the slain of the LORD shall be at that day from one end of the earth even unto the [other] end of the earth: they shall not be lamented, neither gathered, nor buried; they shall be dung upon the ground."

Rev 19:17 -21 And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God; That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all [men, both] free and bond, both small and great.
And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army. And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which [sword] proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh.


....after birds eat, bird's poop.

2. When was Danny first showing signs of interest in Brandi? He claims that he wasn't interested in anyone else on September 8, 2004. When is the first indication that he had changed his mind on that one?

Well considering it's my understanding she didn't even move to 3ABNville till November, it seems highly unlikely that he could have showed signs of interest, or have even started to develop any kind of relationship till after that time... but thanks once again Bob for demonstrating the new levels you'll sink to since becoming an accuser of the brethren.


Let me also say. I looked at the letters you are publishing and was appalled. Then I thought of how I'd feel if my personal and private diary, or my letters to my husband whether loving or angry were published to the world, and came to the conclusion that no matter who it it involves, that is just not right. That golden rule can answer so many questions.

It's an invasion of privacy, it's humiliating and no Christian should do such to another, the ends do not justify the means.

I know you think your rebuking sin, and calling for repentence, BUT there is a right and a wrong way to do all things, Bob.

Lev 19:15 Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment: thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honour the person of the mighty: but in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbour.
16 Thou shalt not go up and down as a talebearer among thy people: neither shalt thou stand against the blood of thy neighbour: I am the LORD.
17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart: thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him.
18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.


John 15:12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you.
Rev 3:19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.
Luk 17:3 Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him.


Heb 12: ... For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons...

edited font

This post has been edited by Aletheia: Mar 15 2007, 09:05 AM

[Pickle]

I know Bystander also and he is a Christian through and through. He knows so much first-hand at 3ABN and yet becomes frustrated as anyone would because of reading lies on this forum. He has personally known Linda and Danny for 20 years. Bystander would be the first to say he is not perfect--but I tell you, I would rather read his posts any day than many on this forum who are unreasonable, rude and unChristlike.

Lee,

I thought you wanted to discuss things like Christian men and women? Why then are you accusing people again of lying without getting specific as to the lies you are talking about? You're coming across as knowing that it isn't all lies, but calling it lies anyway.

Or are you calling it a lie that people have accused Linda of fornication based on the finding of the pregnancy test, when people can't get pregnant over the telephone, and people don't need pregnancy tests to tell them they are 15 weeks pregnant?

[Pickle]

I was talking to my spouse about this mess earlier. A different perspective, if Danny divorced Linda without biblical grounds, what happened after the divorce? Did Linda have an affair with the Dr? All I have heard is she was free to do what she wanted after the divorce. If she did than Danny was free to marry again. Now if she didn't than that is a problem for Danny. But let's say she didn't, what is he to do now? What if he thought she did, but now it is proven that she didn't? Should he divorce Brandi?

Also, it is said that all of this is bigger than Linda, and that she is just a small part of this. If they had not gotten divorced would all of this been posted on the web for the world to see?

If neither party had freedom to remarry after the divorce, that doesn't mean Danny can tell Linda where she can go and who she can talk to after the divorce. So she had freedom to travel wherever she wanted to, yes, but that's a different issue than either having freedom to remarry.

I think Gregory has made some good points. I think I agree with #2 and #3. Jesus said that whoever marries another commits adultery. He didn't say that whoever remains married commits adultery. So the act of getting married is adultery, but remaining true to one's new vows is not. And this agrees with counsel in the SoP not to break up second marriages that were entered into without biblical grounds.

I would disagree slightly with his #5. If a couple divorce without biblical grounds, then one doesn't have to wait until one remarries before administering church discipline. The proper course is to get a legal separation, not a divorce, unless the jurisdiction one lives in has no such provision.

Both Danny and Linda should be treated as innocent until proven guilty regarding alleged affairs before or after their divorce.

If Danny cannot prove that Linda had an affair, he should be disciplined. And that could be true even if he did not get remarried.

Regarding your last question, if it were not for Dryden's letter to Thompson about the Tommy Shelton child molestation allegations, and Riva's reply, I would not be involved, and neither would Gailon. As far as the pastor who got me to start asking questions goes, if it had not been for Melody showing too soon after her wedding, and Danny saying something like, "My you're getting fat," on the air, he would not have called me repeatedly and asked questions over a period of many months.

[Aletheia]

I was talking to my spouse about this mess earlier. A different perspective, if Danny divorced Linda without biblical grounds, what happened after the divorce?

IF THAT WAS THE CASE, then bottom line? In the eyes of God they were both still married, and both needed to live, even though apart and in separite domiciles, as if they were.

But I'd like to raise another question. It was a uncontested divorce (meaning both agreed to it and signed), and since Danny and Linda both knew what the biblical grounds for divorce was, and what Christ said about it, and she also knew that Danny was divorcing her for adultery, why did she agree to it???

IF she was innocent, isn't that a lie?

AFAIC- God comes first.

Also as the letters Pickle and Joy are publishing prove, Linda was moved out prior to the divorce. They also prove that even after the divorce--- when Danny was saying he wanted reconciliation, and was telling her he loved her, and concerned about both her and her ministry---she would have none of it...

Did Linda have an affair with the Dr? All I have heard is she was free to do what she wanted after the divorce. If she did than Danny was free to marry again.

IF THAT'S THE CASE? seems so to me...

Now if she didn't than that is a problem for Danny. But let's say she didn't, what is he to do now? What if he thought she did, but now it is proven that she didn't? Should he divorce Brandi?

Interesting question... and again, IF THAT WAS THE CASE, my answer at the moment is: ???

Also, it is said that all of this is bigger than Linda, and that she is just a small part of this. If they had not gotten divorced would all of this been posted on the web for the world to see?

In my opinion? NO

sigh-- edited for many typos as well as content

This post has been edited by Aletheia: Mar 15 2007, 10:11 AM

[Uncle Sam]

I have to wonder why Linda didn't contest the divorce either. I may be wrong but I don't think the divorce papers say she had an affair.

I am not surprised that Danny's emails have different tones to them. When you are going through something like this your emotions are all over the place. I am disappointed that regardless who was right or wrong, I don't believe such personal letters should be posted for all to see.

If Danny and Walt were to step down, what would that accomplish? People would still believe what they want about Linda. Did Danny cover for TS? Maybe. He is gone at least from employment. That was not enough for some. If he did something illegal, than take him to court. 3ABN cannot have him put in jail or make him confess. You are giving them to much power in this situation. If they let him work with children and he was a risk, that is wrong, but what can they do at this point? So, if Danny were to step down would that be enough? I doubt it.

Sometimes life isn't fair. You cannot make someone sorry, or make them do the right thing. Jesus says when people are like that shake the dust off of your shoes and move on. Maybe if Linda would lay low instead of helping stir the pot, than she could move on and have a ministry.....If there are illegal things going on contact a lawyer. If she did not get her fair share have her attorney handle it through the court system. I cannot see how any of this is helping her cause.

JMHO

[sister]

I know Bystander also and he is a Christian through and through. He knows so much first-hand at 3ABN and yet becomes frustrated as anyone would because of reading lies on this forum. He has personally known Linda and Danny for 20 years. Bystander would be the first to say he is not perfect--but I tell you, I would rather read his posts any day than many on this forum who are unreasonable, rude and unChristlike.

Lee, Bystander has stooped to the level of undeserved mud slinging against many of the members here, in an attempt to vindicate Danny Shelton and continually "trash" Linda or anyone else who appears to support her. He has addressed many of us in the most unChrist-like way possible. Others here also have long term personal knowledge of both Danny and Linda, but when their knowledge is in conflict to Bystanders, his response is to go on the defensive in the most vile way possible, character assassination, rather than providing evidence for his conclusions. Are these the actions of "a Christian through and through"?

As the Apostle James so wisely observed in James 3: 11, 12: “Out of the same mouth proceed blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be so. Does a spring send forth fresh water and bitter from the same opening? Can a fig tree, my brethren, bear olives, or a grape vine bear figs? Thus no spring yields both salt water and fresh.” If you are truly Bystander's friend, perhaps you might consider approaching him in the same way that Nathan approached David with his sin. Were any of the others posting here to approach Bystander with the same vile accusations that he has slung toward them, I am sure he would question their relationship with the Lord.

Sister

[Pickle]

Maybe if Linda would lay low instead of helping stir the pot, ....

You are either in extreme denial or out of touch regarding what is going on. She could disappear from the scene and nothing much would change.

If Danny wants to allow people to call him the Lord's anointed, then he at least has to reflect the character of the true Lord's Anointed, Jesus Christ. That means no lies, confession and apologies and restitution where needed, no blackballing, etc.

And he absolutely has to disclose all his assets in his ongoing civil case. If he doesn't, he just demonstrates that all his pretensions are a sham and a lie.