Things That Make You Go Hmmm..., --letters on save 3ABN not -- contradict earlier testimony here Options

[västergötland]

-He said
-no, she said
-did not
-did too
-did not
...
...
...

And all I heard was "blah blah blah"...

Dont you folks have something usefull to do?

[Clay]

No one is taking issue with you personally, all they have done is asked you to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that you have verifiable proof that Linda cheated...we have no proof, only what has been said, and as Clay pointed out, even if Linda did the things she has been accused of, in Christian Spirit, she should have never been treated in the manner that she was...What you are failing to understand is that it's not our business to make her look good and to make Danny look bad, as a ministry this should have been handled in a manner in which it was not...As for concrete evidence, Calvin said this long ago, none of us knows exactly what went on in their marriage, but as for spiritual adultery, that is not even close to coming to biblical grounds for divorce...Are you even married???

No need to question if Cindy has been married or not, your position is clear without that last question.... and even if someone is married you know that the marriage experiences vary greatly..... The main issue is simple... The bible that many say they believe tells us to love our enemies.... if Linda was an enemy, Danny should have loved her and followed the bible as far as his treatment of her.... if she was not an enemy, then his love should have compelled him to treat her according to his love....

His actions tell us how he viewed her and how he viewed the biblical advice on dealing with your enemies..... IMO....

-He said
-no, she said
-did not
-did too
-did not
...
...
...

And all I heard was "blah blah blah"...

Dont you folks have something usefull to do?

Of course Thomas.... however would you be so kind to define "useful?" I want to make sure we are on the same page....

[awesumtenor]

Let me correct that please, I am not trying to establish myself as credible or anything else. I personally am nobody.

In trying to indict others, you have to establish your own credibility to such a degree that your indictment is taken as fact... You continue to attack others while your own credibility is suspect due to your obvious lack of objectivity...

I simply came here with questions.

No, you didn't. You came here with an agenda which you had formed in other forae under the initial guise of having no knowledge of this situation or the discussions surrounding it and desiring to learn more... which was a lie.

I read what was posted, as so many kept telling me to do. I have tried on my own, whenever possible, to find out what was, or was not credible by making inquiries of others, and trying to verify things. Others can do the same.

And others have done the same... and you have been found less than credible.

But I am not a witness.

Which is the primary reason why you are not credible. Your entire position is based on what you heard from others... who themselves were not witnesses either. Johann speaks of what he himself has witnessed and experienced. Duane speaks of what he himself has witnessed and experienced. Pickle and Gailon are detailing actual conversations they have had with principles in this and putting their cards on the table face up.

And juxtaposed against that is the ad hominem game you continue to play and your demanding proof and then when it is given demanding more.

Yet you are supposed to be more credible? In the words of the immortal Dick Dastardly... wake up muttley; you're dreamin' again...


In His service,
Mr. J

[västergötland]

Of course Thomas.... however would you be so kind to define "useful?" I want to make sure we are on the same page....

Go to work, read a good book, cook a meal, take a long walk with someone you like to bond with, excercise, go to church, something useful.

This post has been edited by västergötland: Mar 22 2007, 09:31 AM

[HUGGINS130]

No need to question if Cindy has been married or not, your position is clear without that last question.... and even if someone is married you know that the marriage experiences vary greatly..... The main issue is simple... The bible that many say they believe tells us to love our enemies.... if Linda was an enemy, Danny should have loved her and followed the bible as far as his treatment of her.... if she was not an enemy, then his love should have compelled him to treat her according to his love....

His actions tell us how he viewed her and how he viewed the biblical advice on dealing with your enemies..... IMO....
Of course Thomas.... however would you be so kind to define "useful?" I want to make sure we are on the same page....

True, I just figured that her lack of compassion upon the female in question was because she has never experienced the married life, and if she has, I was going to say, that you have to be kidding if you don't believe that most of this is not about proving which side is correct, but the biblical basis of forgiveness to those that you claim to love in marriage...my bad

[Clay]

Go to work, read a good book, cook a meal, take a long walk with someone you like to bond with, excercise, go to church, something useful.

well in my opinion... this is useful.... and apparently to a degree you share my view, otherwise you would not be here reading these threads......

[västergötland]

[HUGGINS130]

that's neither useful nor smart, damaging the brain could keep you from reading...

[Clay]

True, I just figured that her lack of compassion upon the female in question was because she has never experienced the married life, and if she has, I was going to say, that you have to be kidding if you don't believe that most of this is not about proving which side is correct, but the biblical basis of forgiveness to those that you claim to love in marriage...my bad

well lack of compassion can be caused by many things, however we don't know Cindy other than her comments here, so we cannot suggest that she lacks compassion, only that she may not be able to empathize with this present situation... and that's a maybe.....

Forgiveness transcends marriage but I suspect if a person has not learned to forgive prior to marriage, then it might be a difficult lesson to learn during the course of marriage..... but that's just me...

gotcha....

[Aletheia]

Cindy,
We are in the 3abn subforum, in a thread you started.... so my statement is not as general as it appears....

I know what proof is, and I know what evidence.... my position is that whatever the evidence is, because you don't believe Danny and others have done anything, you will not believe any of it because it does not agree with your perception.

Likewise if there was evidence of wrongdoing on Linda's part it would have surfaced by now.

However, that is not the core issue, which some people who have defended Danny continue to ignore. The sinple fact is this, even if Linda did every thing she was accused of, even if she was a modern day Gomer, she should not have been treated as she was. That's it in a nutshell for me. It seems to me that those who support Danny have condoned his initial treatment of her. I do not. His treatment lacked compassion, justice and humility... it did however include humiliation...

First. Lying is wrongdoing, and that has surfaced.

Second, I have never condoned the words which Danny may or may not have spoke out of hurt or whatever. I say whatever, because I keep reading people making claims about what he said, but never heard him myself, and haven't seen anyone quote him???

I am quite sure that they both spoke hastily however, because people say things in a divorce that they don't normally do , and later regret, or wish they had phrased differently. Those things are wrong, but surely we can afford to have a little compassion and understanding and not judge either of them who were in a very emotional time in their lives.

third.

Linda chose another man over her ministry and her husband. The facts are her Doctor is not the only Doctor in Adventism or otherwise who could have helped Nathan, and after the beginning you don't even see Nathan being mentioned anyway.

I personally can't understand someone having this opinion:
"The sinple fact is this, even if Linda did every thing she was accused of, even if she was a modern day Gomer, she should not have been treated as she was. That's it in a nutshell for me. It seems to me that those who support Danny have condoned his initial treatment of her. I do not. His treatment lacked compassion, justice and humility... it did however include humiliation..."

who can't in all fairness after reading all here and on the Save3ABN website, make this same claim:

"The sinple fact is this, even if Danny did every thing he was accused of, even if he was a modern day __ he should not be treated as he is. That's it in a nutshell for me. It seems to me that those who support Linda have condoned her initial treatment of him, and their continuing treatment of him. I do not. Their treatment lacks compassion, justice and humility... it dioes however include humiliation..."

[HUGGINS130]

First. Lying is wrongdoing, and that has surfaced.

Second, I have never condoned the words which Danny may or may not have spoke out of hurt or whatever. I say whatever, because I keep reading people making claims about what he said, but never heard him myself, and haven't seen anyone quote him???

I am quite sure that they both spoke hastily however, because people say things in a divorce that they don't normally do , and later regret, or wish they had phrased differently. Those things are wrong, but surely we can afford to have a little compassion and understanding and not judge either of them who were in a very emotional time in their lives.

third.

Linda chose another man over her ministry and her husband. The facts are her Doctor is not the only Doctor in Adventism or otherwise who could have helped Nathan, and after the beginning you don't even see Nathan being mentioned anyway.

I personally can't understand someone having this opinion:
"The sinple fact is this, even if Linda did every thing she was accused of, even if she was a modern day Gomer, she should not have been treated as she was. That's it in a nutshell for me. It seems to me that those who support Danny have condoned his initial treatment of her. I do not. His treatment lacked compassion, justice and humility... it did however include humiliation..."

who can't in all fairness after reading all here and on the Save3ABN website, make this same claim:

"The sinple fact is this, even if Danny did every thing he was accused of, even if he was a modern day __ he should not be treated as he is. That's it in a nutshell for me. It seems to me that those who support Linda have condoned her initial treatment of him, and their continuing treatment of him. I do not. Their treatment lacks compassion, justice and humility... it dioes however include humiliation..."

I for one forgave him, and even prayed for both Danny and Linda, you know why, because Christ desires us to show mercy and compassion, but all in all, I still think he could have handled this better, and I keep trying to tell Clay that accusing her of lying is lack of compassion but Clay and I both know that OMMV...otoh, there seems to be more evidence against Danny...but frankly I am not into who is wrong or right at this point, there seems to be issues unresolved in their lives that only God can heal, the praying shall continue for all involved!

This post has been edited by HUGGINS130: Mar 22 2007, 09:47 AM

[Aletheia]

Cindy, your correction is problematic... you stated: so if you are writing for those who have a heart for the Lord, there must be some credibility. So how can you write for those, and yet not have a degree of credibility?

I have not made our discussion today personal, so I am assuming you are talking past tense?

I am not a witness either, I have only been following this story since it unfolded... and as I stated, even if Linda was the devil incarnate, she should not have been treated as she was..... do you not agree?

Actually, I wasn't talking about you at all.

It isn't me that needs to be credible afaic, either what is presented as evidence is credible or it is not...

[HUGGINS130]

Aletheia stated:

It isn't me that needs to be credible

Then why the rampage to call out Linda as a lie...

This post has been edited by HUGGINS130: Mar 22 2007, 09:50 AM

[Clay]

First. Lying is wrongdoing, and that has surfaced.

perhaps.... are you righteous enough to cast the first stone?

Second, I have never condoned the words which Danny may or may not have spoke out of hurt or whatever. I say whatever, because I keep reading people making claims about what he said, but never heard him myself, and haven't seen anyone quote him???

so your point is what? Because you did not hear them, it must not have happened? Again, other people have indicated they some things Danny said to them, yet you have chosen not to believe them. Which supports my point that you will not believe anything negative about Danny because it does not agree with your perception of him.

I am quite sure that they both spoke hastily however, because people say things in a divorce that they don't normally do , and later regret, or wish they had phrased differently. Those things are wrong, but surely we can afford to have a little compassion and understanding and not judge either of them who were in a very emotional time in their lives.

When relationships break down it is my experience that there is more than enough blame to go around.

third.

Linda chose another man over her ministry and her husband. The facts are her Doctor is not the only Doctor in Adventism or otherwise who could have helped Nathan, and after the beginning you don't even see Nathan being mentioned anyway.

You know this to be a fact how? You have stated that you were not a witness. So you don't know what happened behind closed doors or on the phone. In essence you have chosen to believe Danny's version of what happened. That is fine, just admit that as opposed to suggesting that Danny's version is the only version that exists.

I personally can't understand someone having this opinion:
"The simple fact is this, even if Linda did every thing she was accused of, even if she was a modern day Gomer, she should not have been treated as she was. That's it in a nutshell for me. It seems to me that those who support Danny have condoned his initial treatment of her. I do not. His treatment lacked compassion, justice and humility... it did however include humiliation..."

who can't in all fairness after reading all here and on the Save3ABN website, make this same claim:

"The simple fact is this, even if Danny did every thing he was accused of, even if he was a modern day __ he should not be treated as he is. That's it in a nutshell for me. It seems to me that those who support Linda have condoned her initial treatment of him, and their continuing treatment of him. I do not. Their treatment lacks compassion, justice and humility... it dioes however include humiliation..."

Then Cindy if that is the way you feel, perhaps you need to go to that other site and state just that.....

Actually, I wasn't talking about you at all.

It isn't me that needs to be credible afaic, either what is presented as evidence is credible or it is not...

indeed it is Cindy.... if the messenger is not credible then people tend not to believe the message.... People will evaluate the message based on the credibility of the messenger....

[Aletheia]

No one is taking issue with you personally

O.. kay. Guess you missed Mr J's usual accusations, and focus on the poster, rather then on what is posted??