News Release From Amazing Facts---4-25-07 Options

[lurker]

ALLEGED "prophecies" and "visions"
Yup, that's what I would call them.

Just to be on the safe side.

[Pickle]

His lawyers new that Laird did not have an active license to practice IL law which is the very reason that the court date was changed.

Steffan, I commend you. I may have missed something earlier, but I was under the impression that Danny's allies were claiming that Laird did not have a license, period, and that they didn't want to admit that he had an inactive license. I see that you are not so biased as to be unable to admit that the issue was whether his license was active or inactive, not whether he had a license or not.

Or has it occured to you there are things that could happen that might make 3abn have second thoughts about a merger.

I heard that Danny spoke to a large group at camp meeting and said a) that they were off the air, b ) something about the merger being in doubt, and c) that he wasn't sure that God wanted him to step down.

1. Do you know if he said these things?
2. If so, does that mean that the proposed merger would now require him to step aside entirely, contrary to what his allies previously said the merger would be like?

Now if Danny didn't really say these things, I want to know so that I can make a phone call and tell the person who was there and said that they heard this that they were possibly mistaken regarding what they heard.

This post has been edited by Pickle: May 28 2007, 02:34 PM

[PeacefulBe]

I dunno lurker, it may not be good PR for the ministry, but w/o suing, what if the ministry can't survive? You gotta remember, these are the same people who don't seem to understand legal issues. Case in point--the property in the tax lawsuit. By appealing, they don't seem to mind pouring more money into the system for a long shot. Maybe it's more naivety than vengence--or a combination of the two.

One thing some lawyers love is representing people with an endless supply of money. I can't tell you how many times I witnessed one particular law firm, comprised of 21 lawyers, reassure their client (a gov't agency) that they had a solid case. The client finally caught on, after losing a few times, and switched to another smaller firm comprised of 3 attorneys.

What appeared to be going on was that the larger firm would use certain cases to train and support their freshman attorneys and give them some valuable experience at the client's expense. It almost seems immoral to be offering professional legal advice that way, but some issues are not well understood, like personel issues, so even false hope can feel right with gray areas, and the deeper purpose can remain undetected.

One thing that strikes me is to hear bits and pieces about the divorce, then to think about other issues, like these recent decisions and developments. I sense a familiar spirit--do whatever it takes to maintain the appearance of innocence. This is the nature of a "fighter" at work, someone that can't handle losing, and probably can't admit wrong. So, maybe you're right that it's vengence.

LaurenceD,

All excellent points that really cause further reflection on all of these issues! Some are driven to protect their "image" no matter what the cost.

Beartrap, since the dannyscribes like us to have proof of everything before speaking, maybe we should say the ALLEGED "prophecies" and "visions".

Duane,

Seriously, I think all of us should view what we saw April 19th as alleged prophecies and visions. Too many fall unquestioningly in line without proof that God is truly behind these goose-bump moments.

well i guess some of us are just abstract thinkers johann. BTW......."Why is a Raven like a writing desk?"

Mo,

Why is a raven like a writing desk? Well, sometimes they both lay eggs, so to speak.

[lurker]

"Some are driven to protect their "image" no matter what the cost."

Isn't that called "pride"?

This post has been edited by lurker: May 28 2007, 09:39 AM

[Noahswife]

"Some are driven to protect their "image" no matter what the cost."

Isn't that called "pride"?

Scott Peck, MD gives some interesting insight into some who fall in this category in his book People of the Lie . Dr. Peck is known foremost for his NY Times Best Seller, The Road Less Traveled. However, I would recommend the former book for anyone interested......

This post has been edited by Noahswife: May 28 2007, 09:16 PM

[Voktar of Zargon]

Scott Peck, MD gives some interesting insight into some who fall in this category in his book People of the Lie . Dr. Peck is known foremost for his NY Times Best Seller, The Road Less Travelled. However, I would recommend the former book for anyone interested......

In this book Peck proposes a new psychiatric diagnosis he calls "evil." I agree with his categorization. These types of people are often found in church settings because they are desperately trying to maintain the appearance of righteousness and are unable to deal with their own shamefully evil nature. They often have terribly broken family of origin experiences. I have encountered people who exemplify this diagnosis perfectly. Peck (who also worked with convicted felons as I do) said that sociopaths were far easier to deal with than this personality type. I agree whole heartedly. Ellen White said that the devils best agents are in the church. Those with the diagnosis of "evil" are indeed some of his best agents.
"A predominant characteristic... of the behavior of those I call evil is scapegoating. Because in their hearts they consider themselves above reproach, they must lash out at anyone who does reproach them. They sacrifice others to preserve their self-image of perfection... Scapegoating works through a mechanism psychiatrists call projection. Since the evil, deep down, feel themselves to be faultless, it is inevitable that when they are in conflict with the world they will inevitably perceive the conflict as the world's fault. Since they must deny their own badness, they must perceive others as bad. They project their own evil onto the world. They never think of themselves as evil; on the other hand, they consequently see much evil in others.... Evil, then is most often commited in order to scapegoat, and the people I label as evil are chronic scapegoaters... Strangely enough, evil people are often destructive because they are attempting to destroy evil. The problem is that they misplace the locus of evil. Instead of destroying others they should be destroying the sickness within themselves." - People of the Lie p.73,74
The primary solution that Peck proposes for dealing with this problem is exorcism! Though I agree that in some of these cases there is a demonic element - I cannot endorse Peck's philosophy of, and methodology of exorcism. He presents a syncretistic view of exorcism as being predominately a therapeutic/psychological intervention as opposed to a primarily spiritual intervention. He also thinks it is unecessary for those involved in the exorcism to be Christians. Just my opinion.
I still recommend the book.

[Noahswife]

The primary solution that Peck proposes for dealing with this problem is exorcism! Though I agree that in some of these cases there is a demonic element - I cannot endorse Peck's philosophy of, and methodology of exorcism. He presents a syncretistic view of exorcism as being predominately a therapeutic/psychological intervention as opposed to a primarily spiritual intervention. He also thinks it is unecessary for those involved in the exorcism to be Christians. Just my opinion.
I still recommend the book.

VoZ.....

I agree totally with your comments regarding Peck's view regarding treatment. I have wondered if in the intervening years his opinion on that has changed at all.

Thanks for supporting my recommendation. Since I began posting here, I have made it several times behind the scenes but have yet had anyone come back and discuss with me whether they agreed or disagreed with the similarities I saw. The longer I am here and the more I have read at save3abn.com the more convinced I have become.

nw
C"i"

This post has been edited by Noahswife: May 28 2007, 12:07 PM

[Rosyroi]

Actually the above sentence is the only part of your post that makes any sense. Do you honestly think that AF, DB, GMc, DS and both boards ran to have an emergency merger because DS had a court appearance with LS over marital property? Oh man.....You are really falling off of the deep end with that one.
You state DS did not know the court date would be changed. His lawyers new that Laird did not have an active license to practice IL law which is the very reason that the court date was changed. If his lawyers knew it, one could assume that DS knew it.
Then we have your scenerio of trying to mix AF and 3abn into a marital property case. One has nothing to do with the other. I am quite sure AF and DB is not going to do anything rash because of Danny and Linda's property settlement.
As far as all your speculation here about the merger, how it was announced, what is going on and so on....Did it ever occur to any of you that both ministries have been too busy with their own meetings and events right now to work any further on details. Or has it occured to you there are things that could happen that might make 3abn have second thoughts about a merger. Your assumptions here are always that maybe AF has changed their mind. You might find out if for any reason the merge doesn't happen, it might be the other side to make that decision. Something to think about since a lot of the speculations by the members here, have been proven wrong time and time again.

I have a question Steffan. Since you are 'in the know' I am very much interested in WHY the quick emergency meeting in Colorado. What was the reason for it?

Rosyroi

[mozart]

As far as all your speculation here about the merger, how it was announced, what is going on and so on.... Or has it occured to you there are things that could happen that might make 3abn have second thoughts about a merger. Your assumptions here are always that maybe AF has changed their mind. You might find out if for any reason the merge doesn't happen, it might be the other side to make that decision.

I'd like to point out again that this is a convoluted statement steffan is making. I made no such assumptions or even the vaguest mention of what he is saying here.

Actually, I agree with Steffan on this point. Although it seems that AF could have some reasons to back away from this merger and may do so, ever since the merger was announced I have been of the opinion that 3ABN would be the most likely party to withdraw as I believe that 3ABN could have very strong reasons to avoid the likely complications for them that could result from a merger that would involve some of the changes spoken of on the announcement. I have been of the opinion that some of the administration at 3ABN were the party with the most to lose. However, I have wondered how they would accomplish gracefully backing out after the "prophecies" and "visions" that were used as a significant part of the 3ABN side of the announcement.

But then this is all just my opinion.

thanks BT. i needed that.

Hmmm... They have both often produced a feeling of dread in the hearts of the superstitious and uneducated? "Nevermore" quoth the Beartrap "nevermore."

[mozart]

if we are referring to narcissism, does anyone know if this is considered a born behavior or can it become a learned behavior?

VoZ.....

I agree totally with your comments regarding Peck's view regarding treatment. I have wondered if in the intervening years his opinion on that has changed at all.

Thanks for supporting my recommendation. Since I began posting here, I have made it several times behind the scenes but have yet had anyone come back and discuss with me whether they agreed or disagreed with the similarities I saw. The longer I am here and the more I have read at save3abn.com the more convinced I have become.

nw
C"i"

[Voktar of Zargon]

if we are referring to narcissism, does anyone know if this is considered a born behavior or can it become a learned behavior?

The great question of nature vs nurture. Inherited propensities or cultivated tendencies. Since self is the root of all evil, all sin is just a variation on that theme. We inherit a selfish nature and we reinforce it through our behavior.
Most convicted felons for instance just have a more exacerbated case of what afflicts us all - often because of bad heredity and environment. Peck describes the "evil" as having an exacerbated case of narcissism called 'malignant'(I believe that all of us are somewhat narcissistic by birth - some more than others according to their heredity). Narcissism can of course be further learned - especially in the formative years.
Peck characterizes "malignant narcissism" as an unsubmitted will.
"In summary, all mentally healthy individuals submit themselves to the demands of their own conscience. Not so with the evil, however. In the conflict between their guilt and their will, it is the guilt that must go and the will that must win. The reader will be struck with the extraordinay willfulness of evil people. They are men and women of obviously strong will, determined to have their own way. There is a remarkable power in the manner in which they attempt to control others." p.78
The great irony is that these types of people will often gravitate toward conservative religious environments that proclaim submission to God as of paramount importance. They present themselves as submitting to God, yet they often have very little if any submission to His will at all.

[LaurenceD]

Since self is the root of all evil, all sin is just a variation on that theme. We inherit a selfish nature and we reinforce it through our behavior.

Maybe we should define this confusing term, "self." While we are advised to rid the heart of self, and told self is the greatest enemy we'll have to face, EGW also writes to just be your simple natural self (4T 522). She goes on to warn against self-analysis...thinking too much about yourself, or petting yourself.

Maybe there's a better term since God doesn't touch the personality, only the character.

[Skyhook]

if we are referring to narcissism, does anyone know if this is considered a born behavior or can it become a learned behavior?

It does sound like Peck's description of the evil person is similar to a person with narcissistic personality disorder. It has been years since I read Peck's book but I think what he described was people who were worse that what is usually seen as personality disorder. Such as parents who actually hated thier children and meant them harm.

In general personality disorders are considered to be the result primarily of family pathology. Although there are very severe types that were formerly called "psychopaths," Ted Bundy may be a good example, who, on an interview, or a relatively brief encounter may seem perfectly normal, or even above average, but when a true longitudinal history is obtained, it is clear that they are extremely disturbed and have some behavior characteristics that even seem consistent with some kind of brain impairment. Although they know the difference between right and wrong, they see no need to let that influence thier behavior towards others. They can exploit and injure others with little or no feelings of guilt.
See "The Mask of Sanity" by Hervey Cleckley MD

People with narcissistic personality disorder can often function relatively normally. They can experience rage and depression at the loss of a love relationship. I'm not sure that they actually love in the way we usually define love. What they really want is to be worshipped by thier significant other. They can never get enough of admiration, attention and applause. When they get it they still feel empty.

BTW, narcissim was the sin that led to Satan's fall. "Your heart was lifted up because of your beauty; You corrupted your wisdom by reason of your splendor. I cast you to the ground; I put you before Kings that they may see you. " Ezekiel 28:5

This post has been edited by Skyhook: May 28 2007, 05:13 PM

[Observer]

It does sound like Peck's description of the evil person is similar to a person with narcissistic personality disorder. It has been years since I read Peck's book but I think what he described was people who were worse that what is usually seen as personality disorder. Such as parents who actually hated thier children and meant them harm.

In general personality disorders are considered to be the result primarily of family pathology. Although there are very severe types that were formerly called "psychopaths," Ted Bundy may be a good example, who, on an interview, or a relatively brief encounter may seem perfectly normal, or even above average, but when a true longitudinal history is obtained, it is clear that they are extremely disturbed and have some behavior characteristics that even seem consistent with some kind of brain impairment. Although they know the difference between right and wrong, they see no need to let that influence thier behavior towards others. They can exploit and injure others with little or no feelings of guilt.
See "The Mask of Sanity" by Hervey Cleckley MD

People with narcissistic personality disorder can often function relatively normally. They can experience rage and depression at the loss of a love relationship. I'm not sure that they actually love in the way we usually define love. What they really want is to be worshipped by thier significant other. They can never get enough of admiration, attention and applause. When they get it they still feel empty.

BTW, narcissim was the sin that led to Satan's fall. "Your heart was lifted up because of your beauty; You corrupted your wisdom by reason of your splendor. I cast you to the ground; I put you before Kings that they may see you. " Ezekiel 28:5

Personality Disorder: "A Personality Disorder is an enduring pattern of inner experience and behavior that deviates markedly from the expectation of the individual's culture, is pervasive and enflexible, and has an onset in adolescience or early adulthood, is stable over time, and leads to distress or impairment." DSM IV, page 629. For a slightly expended defination please see page 630.

In the DSM IV, the personality disorderss are: Paranoid, Schizoid, Schizotypal, Anitisocial, Borderline, Histrionic, Narcissistic, Avoidant, Dependent, Obsessive-Complusive and NOS. (To each of the preceding "Personality Disorder" is attached to the nomenclature.

NOTE: Paranoid Personality Disorder is not the same as Parnoia, or as it is called in the DSM-IV, Delusional Disorder.

The generalized defination of Narcissistic Personality Disorder is: " . . . a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, need for admiration, and lack of empathy that begins by early adulthood and is present in a bariety of contexts." SM-IV, page 658

NOTE: My comments are not intended to diagnose, and they are not intended to apply to anyone. I am simply making generalized statement for your edification. In addition, to diagnose Narcissistic Personality Disorder, one would need to apply the criteria listed on page 661 if using the DSM-IV. I have not listed that criteria. For this diagnosis, nine (9) criteria are listed, and it is stated that five (5) are required to be present for a diagnosis. So, one or two criteria is not enough for a diagnosis.

[steffan]

Steffan, I commend you. I may have missed something earlier, but I was under the impression that Danny's allies were claiming that Laird did not have a license, period, and that they didn't want to admit that he had an inactive license. I see that you are not so biased as to be unable to admit that the issue was whether his license was active or inactive, not whether he had a license or not.
I heard that Danny spoke to a large group at camp meeting and said a) that they were off the air, b ) something about the merger being in doubt, and c) that he wasn't sure that God wanted him to step down.

1. Do you know if he said these things?
2. If so, does that mean that the proposed merger would now require him to step aside entirely, contrary to what his allies previously said the merger would be like?

Now if Danny didn't really say these things, I want to know so that I can make a phone call and tell the person who was there and said that they heard this that they were possibly mistaken regarding what they heard.

Better make the call. Where do you get your sources. In looking back through the months at your many many posts it is amazing how many times your "sources" have steered you wrong.
I as well as 1000+ people were there to witness what was said. It wasn't the above.
He said: There are still many details to be worked out as far as the merger.
Even if he gives Doug the president title, He has no intention or desire to step aside IN ANY KIND OF WAY. His comment was simply that he wants to follow whatever the Lord has in store for 3abn.
NO HOW, NO WAY does the merger require him to step aside. There has not been a merge yet nor has the combined board been chosen. Therefore, how could anything be required?
Even though beartrap, in agreeing with me, is trying to insinuate 3abn might not merge because they couldn't control things they way they want to, that also is fantasy. There could be other circumstances come into play that have nothing to do with Doug, AF, Linda, You or Joy. I know it will probably come as a shock but 3abn does not base it's ministry decisions on you or your little group. They will base their decisions on what is best to reach a world wide mission field.
And please, get some new sources.