10 Commandmants Weekend, (moved from Lawsuits Filed thread) Options

[mozart]

TY, MM- this is exactly what i wrote and told the 3ABN pastoral staff. my email was then directed to walt thompson for reply....and now it looks like danny is planning a slip away in the night, exit; without apology or repentence. that's his loss. pride is a mocker. now that's JMO. time will tell.

Althea,

You might find this a little difficult to except, but personally I don't have anything against Danny except that he is still on 3abn. I perceive that if he left that God would be glorified. It is way past wether Danny has been misquoted or is wronged or even whether he had the grounds for divorce. This has instead become a struggle of wills. I believe that this whole mess would calm down if he would simply relinquish the reigns and let 3abn continue.

I know you must love him to continue to support him and that is fine, but even you must realize that he is taking away from the very message that he reports to represent. And don't worry because if God is really in control of 3abn he will see that it is just fine. Why would he not just step down seeing all the controversy that it is calling?

[watchbird]

TY, MM- this is exactly what i wrote and told the 3ABN pastoral staff. my email was then directed to walt thompson for reply....and now it looks like danny is planning a slip away in the night, exit; without apology or repentence. that's his loss. pride is a mocker. now that's JMO. time will tell.

And where have you seen any evidence that Danny is planning to relinquish control of 3abn?

And if he were to plan a "slip away in the night, exit"..... is this God's way of doing things? Was Achan sneaked out of the camp at night and sent away in a posh chariot? Was Korah Dathan and Abiram quietly asked to move elsewhere? Did Sodom just mysteriously disappear in the night so no one would notice they were gone? Were Ananias and Sapphira ushered into a back room... after being accoladed in public... before they were told of the Holy Spirit's disapproval of their actions?

Or were these things all done publicly.... and not only that.... but their sins plainly identified and the record of how they were dealt with written as part of scripture for all of all ages to see?

Do our people... to say nothings of the victims of the Shelton regime... deserve anything less that for full disclosure, restitution, and safeguards against any of those involved ever holding positions of trust in our church to be publicly put in place?

[mozart]

no, no one deserves any less, what i meant was that it probably wouldn't be on 3abn.
i can't say i have seen evidence in the sense of documentation. it's just an observation. i said, JMO.

And where have you seen any evidence that Danny is planning to relinquish control of 3abn?

And if he were to plan a "slip away in the night, exit"..... is this God's way of doing things? Was Achan sneaked out of the camp at night and sent away in a posh chariot? Was Korah Dathan and Abiram quietly asked to move elsewhere? Did Sodom just mysteriously disappear in the night so no one would notice they were gone? Were Ananias and Sapphira ushered into a back room... after being accoladed in public... before they were told of the Holy Spirit's disapproval of their actions?

Or were these things all done publicly.... and not only that.... but their sins plainly identified and the record of how they were dealt with written as part of scripture for all of all ages to see?

Do our people... to say nothings of the victims of the Shelton regime... deserve anything less that for full disclosure, restitution, and safeguards against any of those involved ever holding positions of trust in our church to be publicly put in place?

This post has been edited by mozart: May 9 2007, 05:19 PM

[PeacefulBe]

PB,

EVERY single message given was like that, the holy spirit was present throughout the entire weekend, and in all the messages and songs of praise and worship.

Try and catch them all when they are rebroadcast on 3 ABN, you will be equally blessed by all I am sure.

Your judgmental reminders of precious souls Jesus died for, and prayers about 3ABN, Danny and the board, would be better applied to yourself first though is my thinking.

May we all have the ears to hear and the eyes to see what God is saying, and revealing to each of us.

Judgmental?

[SoulEspresso]

It's interesting that right after Jesus said, "Judge not," in just a few verses He says, "By their fruits you will recognize them."

The more I read from Danny's own lips, the more fruit I see ... and to use Our Lord's terminology from Matthew 7, I see a false prophet.

Based on the evidence from Danny his-own-self.

[awesumtenor]

It's interesting that right after Jesus said, "Judge not," in just a few verses He says, "By their fruits you will recognize them."

The more I read from Danny's own lips, the more fruit I see ... and to use Our Lord's terminology from Matthew 7, I see a false prophet.

Based on the evidence from Danny his-own-self.

Of course, Matt 7:1 is one of the most poorly applied verses in scripture... given more than a cursory glance and it quickly becomes evident that Jesus is railing against hypocrisy in Matt 7:1-6... not against judging. He is merely pointing out that if one judges, he will be weighed in the same balance he has weighed others... not to mention those who try to say that verse means not to judge have no answer for verse 7 of the same chapter which plainly says "Give not that which is holy unto dogs neither cast ye your pearls before swine..."

In His service,
Mr. J

[Jnana15]

Of course, Matt 7:1 is one of the most poorly applied verses in scripture... given more than a cursory glance and it quickly becomes evident that Jesus is railing against hypocrisy in Matt 7:1-6... not against judging. He is merely pointing out that if one judges, he will be weighed in the same balance he has weighed others... not to mention those who try to say that verse means not to judge have no answer for verse 7 of the same chapter which plainly says "Give not that which is holy unto dogs neither cast ye your pearls before swine..."

In His service,
Mr. J

Preach!! Mr. J

[SoulEspresso]

Of course, Matt 7:1 is one of the most poorly applied verses in scripture... given more than a cursory glance and it quickly becomes evident that Jesus is railing against hypocrisy in Matt 7:1-6... not against judging. He is merely pointing out that if one judges, he will be weighed in the same balance he has weighed others... not to mention those who try to say that verse means not to judge have no answer for verse 7 of the same chapter which plainly says "Give not that which is holy unto dogs neither cast ye your pearls before swine..."

Well, I would say that the opening verses of chapter 7 are about trying to control another person's behavior by condemning it. Anyone with experience supervising teenagers knows how well that works.

If it's about mere hypocrisy, is Jesus saying that once we give up gossiping we can then judge gossipers? Or once we quit looking at porn we can condemn porn addicts? I think the "log in my own eye" is my own attempt control others by telling them how wrong they are.

Of course the Dannyfingers ( for that term) will be all over me, and will immediately say we've judged Danny and are attempting to control his behavior. Or theirs for that matter. But there is a difference between the verbal manipulation Jesus condemns in this text, and calling out sin publicly when all private forums have failed.

I do think that those who defend Danny on these pages are doing a disservice to themselves and to their church--and even 3ABN. "They know not what they do." In the larger scheme (perhaps God's plan?), whether they realize it or not, their purpose is merely to show how indefensible his position has become.

This post has been edited by SoulEspresso: May 11 2007, 12:00 AM

[awesumtenor]

Well, I would say that the opening verses of chapter 7 are about trying to control another person's behavior by condemning it. Anyone with experience supervising teenagers knows how well that works.

True; but in essence the entire Sermon on the Mount was a rebuke of the practice of control via condemnation, particularly when that condemnation proceeded from a religous bent. From the beatitudes, where Jesus turned the perceived order of standing with God based on one's visible circumstances on it's head by declaring the situations where one was deemed afflicted of God if he was poor, or in mourning or reviled etc to be indications of being blessed of God, to His teaching on how one should render service to God to His teaching the letter and the spirit of the law and the need for one's "righteousness" to exceed that of the scribes and the pharisees up to and including this passage in chapter 7... it all addresses, ultimately, that Dimmesdalian bent men have to condemn and excoriate most stridently where they know themselves to come short...

If it's about mere hypocrisy, is Jesus saying that once we give up gossiping we can then judge gossipers? Or once we quit looking at porn we can condemn porn addicts? I think the "log in my own eye" is my own attempt control others by telling them how wrong they are.

It also encompasses John chapter 8... let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone...

Of course the Dannyfingers ( for that term) will be all over me, and will immediately say we've judged Danny and are attempting to control his behavior. Or theirs for that matter. But there is a difference between the verbal manipulation Jesus condemns in this text, and calling out sin publicly when all private forums have failed.

Absolutely... for all their railing and complaining, they ignore the fact that it was DS who put this into the court of public opinion... and now he's boo-hooing having to reap what he has sown.

I do think that those who defend Danny on these pages are doing a disservice to themselves and to their church--and even 3ABN. "They know not what they do." In the larger scheme (perhaps God's plan?), whether they realize it or not, their purpose is merely to show how indefensible his position has become.

Iwill only disagree with the "They know not what they do."; this collective of latter day Hamans knows exactly what they are doing; it is all premeditated with malice aforethought. What they are missing is how Haman, with what appeared to him to be victory within reach, ended up the biggest loser, hanged from the very gallows he had prepared for those he sought to destroy...

There be a lesson in that for the Dannyfingers, n'est-ce pas?

In His service,
Mr. J

[SoulEspresso]

True; but in essence the entire Sermon on the Mount was a rebuke of the practice of control via condemnation, particularly when that condemnation proceeded from a religous bent. From the beatitudes, where Jesus turned the perceived order of standing with God based on one's visible circumstances on it's head by declaring the situations where one was deemed afflicted of God if he was poor, or in mourning or reviled etc to be indications of being blessed of God, to His teaching on how one should render service to God to His teaching the letter and the spirit of the law and the need for one's "righteousness" to exceed that of the scribes and the pharisees up to and including this passage in chapter 7... it all addresses, ultimately, that Dimmesdalian bent men have to condemn and excoriate most stridently where they know themselves to come short...
It also encompasses John chapter 8... let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone...

Perhaps a "both-and" situation? If the opening verses of chapter 7 are specifically about condemnation-control, might not verse 6 be about a similar kind of control--forcing on people spiritual things they're not ready for? When my dog is hungry, I don't try to feed him the SS lesson--I give him dog food. My sister's drug-dealing ex-boyfriend is spiritually interested, but I've not really considered giving him a copy of The Great Controversy. Pigs don't eat pearls; they eat corn.

Absolutely... for all their railing and complaining, they ignore the fact that it was DS who put this into the court of public opinion... and now he's boo-hooing having to reap what he has sown.
Iwill only disagree with the "They know not what they do."; this collective of latter day Hamans knows exactly what they are doing; it is all premeditated with malice aforethought. What they are missing is how Haman, with what appeared to him to be victory within reach, ended up the biggest loser, hanged from the very gallows he had prepared for those he sought to destroy...

There be a lesson in that for the Dannyfingers, n'est-ce pas?

I sometimes picture a scene in which Aletheia and Eirene radio back to the mothership and tell them it's not working, this posting of Danny-defense-diatribes on BlackSDA, only to be ordered back ablaze into the fray...

I don't want to believe it's with malice aforethought, but if they're getting paid in dollars or quid pro quo, it's not even malice ... but the word which best describes it doesn't belong on a spiritual website. I prefer to believe they're sincerely misled, and if I am wrong, I will accept it.

[shinejoy]

True; but in essence the entire Sermon on the Mount was a rebuke of the practice of control via condemnation, particularly when that condemnation proceeded from a religous bent. From the beatitudes, where Jesus turned the perceived order of standing with God based on one's visible circumstances on it's head by declaring the situations where one was deemed afflicted of God if he was poor, or in mourning or reviled etc to be indications of being blessed of God, to His teaching on how one should render service to God to His teaching the letter and the spirit of the law and the need for one's "righteousness" to exceed that of the scribes and the pharisees up to and including this passage in chapter 7... it all addresses, ultimately, that Dimmesdalian bent men have to condemn and excoriate most stridently where they know themselves to come short...
It also encompasses John chapter 8... let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone...
Absolutely... for all their railing and complaining, they ignore the fact that it was DS who put this into the court of public opinion... and now he's boo-hooing having to reap what he has sown.
Iwill only disagree with the "They know not what they do."; this collective of latter day Hamans knows exactly what they are doing; it is all premeditated with malice aforethought. What they are missing is how Haman, with what appeared to him to be victory within reach, ended up the biggest loser, hanged from the very gallows he had prepared for those he sought to destroy...

There be a lesson in that for the Dannyfingers, n'est-ce pas?

In His service,
Mr. J

danny fingers i like that the info was wonderful mr. J thank you

[mozart]

Pigs don't eat pearls; they eat corn.

I may never eat corn again!

[SoulEspresso]

I may never eat corn again!

Pig farmers often feed them corn of lower quality than we eat. I'm told. They eat what they're fed--and if you try to feed them jewelry, they get hungry and eventually go after the farmer--because the farmer at least is edible!

[Jnana15]

I sometimes picture a scene in which Aletheia and Eirene radio back to the mothership and tell them it's not working, this posting of Danny-defense-diatribes on BlackSDA, only to be ordered back ablaze into the fray...

I don't want to believe it's with malice aforethought, but if they're getting paid in dollars or quid pro quo, it's not even malice ... but the word which best describes it doesn't belong on a spiritual website. I prefer to believe they're sincerely misled, and if I am wrong, I will accept it.

You have to give credit to Aletheia. She has managed not to get herself banned from this site as some of the others have. She just waits for the re-inforecements to register before loosing control again.

JMHO

[sonshineonme]

RECEIVED THIS IN EMAIL TODAY - JUST POSTING FOR ANY DESIRED DISCUSSION.


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Message: 19

Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 01:28:19 +0000

From: "Kevin Paulson"

Subject: Shelley Quinn


Dear Brothers and Sisters:


One further word on Shelley Quinn and the Ten Commandments

book. Many have rightly raised concern about this book's implied

support for organized prayer and the posting of the Ten Commandments

in public schools. The idea is clearly conveyed by Danny and Shelley

that the government should not have removed these elements, and thus

they come across as supporting the efforts of the Religious Right to

unite church and state.



Let's remember, folks: If the Ten Commandments are posted in

public schools, which version will be posted? Congressman Jerrold

Nadler of New York, who represents the West Side here in our City,

asked the right question when this issue was debated in Congress:



"Whose Ten Commandments? The Catholic version? The Protestant

version? They're different, you know."



That's just the trouble, however. Many DON'T know!



The whole point here is that by posting ANY version of the

commandments in public schools, the government is making a

theological statement. This is not the place of civil authority in a

society where those of all faiths and of none share equal status under the law.



The same is true of the issue of prayer in the same

context. Whose prayers will they be? Catholics pray to Mary and the

saints; Protestants don't. Christians pray in Jesus' name; Jews and

Muslims don't/ Again, the state should not be making theological

statements. And prayer is very much a theological statement, any way

you look at it.



The idea that God has been "thrown out" of public schools by the

exclusion of such activities from the curriculum, is absurd for the

simple reason that no one can stop anyone from praying, anytime,

anywhere. We can all pray silently any time we wish, and more

importantly, we can act like Christians wherever we find

ourselves. No law can possibly prevent this.



With this in mind, I and many others found the Shelton/Quinn Ten

Commandments book deficient and likely misleading. And others in

responsibile positions, including many in our religious liberty

department, expressed the same concerns.



God bless!



Kevin