General Conference Suspends 3abn's Status, Supportive Ministry Status suspended by GC announcement Options

[PeacefulBe]

Getting back to the opening post and questions of verification.....

I have now seen emails from persons of rank in various levels in the South Pacific Division which confirm the authenticity and legitimacy of the letter posted here. I do not have permission to give their names or to directly quote their letters, but I will say that they are from church leaders in that area, and do make it clear that the directive comes from the GC, with the action being taken by the Division.

I also have word from within the NAD that the same directive and action is being taken in NAD, and this is in process of being communicated to all Conference levels in the NAD, who will then communicate with their pastors. This has been further clarified as having to do with programming... that is to say that church leaders are now banned from doing any new appearances or programming on 3abn or in their studios. It does not extend to re-runs of previously made programming. It will eventually reach down to include other church employees such as pastors.

And no... I cannot reveal the source of my information.

And btw... I cannot identify with those who are reporting such "mixed emotions" over this action. I have identified much too strongly with the victims... and those who live in fear of becoming victimized... I have for too long prayed the prayer of the "souls under the altar", "How long, O Lord, How long?!" to have any emotions over these recent actions other than a fervent, "Thank God".

WB,

When the email was posted by SSOM yesterday morning, it looked like a big deal - a real turn of the tide. Now, with your further information as well as added corroboration, it is becoming quite clear that this is a major step towards unmasking the "alleged" foul works by some in leadership. Will we finally see the carpet thrown aside and the many lumps being hidden there duly analyzed? For the sake of each victim, I truly hope so.

What remains to be seen is if someone of great wealth and influence will find a way to countermand this progress. This is a time for fervent prayer, IMO.

I understand your perspective on the mixed emotions some have on this issue. From what I have read of your posts here, you seem to have been aware of this situation far longer than many of us and I believe you have a greater grasp of the overall picture and on the effect it has/is having on our denomination. Those of us who have had a connection with 3abn in the past, as I have, and who have been dismayed to find the image so contrary to the actual actions of those we thought we "knew" will have those mixed emotions - some to a greater degree than others.

To those who are having those mixed emotions I would say, focus on the hope that finally the victims of this out-of-whack threshing machine called the leadership of 3abn may be vindicated and find healing and that any further victimization in the name of the image of Danny Shelton will be stopped!

[Observer]

Gentle people:

I have been in contact today, with the person in the General Conference whom I asked to respond to Elder Hankinson's comment published at the beginning of this thread.

As a result of that conversation, I will make the following statement, which is one that I have written:

"The comment by Elder Hankinson, as published at the beginning of this thread, as posted here, and as it is being understood by people reading it, is not totally accurate as it applies to the situation today."

I have been asked not to post the name of the person with whom I have spoken.

NOTE: There is no implication that Elder Hankinson intended to decieve anyone. My comment is a simple statemenet that the brevity of his statement, and how people are understanding it, leads to potential misunderstandings that are not 100 % correct, today.

The question that many people may ask is: "Will the General Conference make a statement that clairfies the relatlionship between the General Conference and 3-ABN?"

That is a valid question that thinking people would be expected to ask.

I will respond to that question:

We shall have to wait and see. I cannot say that the General Conference either will make such a statement, or that it will not make such. This whole situation is developing. The announcement of the proposed merger between Amazing Facts and 3-ABN has elevated this to the attention of people who had not previously been informed. With the passage of time we shall see how this develops.

Sorry, that is all that I can say today.

[mikell]

One would think that Db is in conference right now with the board members of AF, discussing a polite way out, do you think?

[Artiste]

One would think that Db is in conference right now with the board members of AF, discussing a polite way out, do you think?

I notice that the promotion of the September series by DB with a link to the various churches in different states that would host the meetings through 3ABN has suddenly disappeared from the Amazing Facts web site.

WB,

When the email was posted by SSOM yesterday morning, it looked like a big deal - a real turn of the tide. Now, with your further information as well as added corroboration, it is becoming quite clear that this is a major step towards unmasking the "alleged" foul works by some in leadership. Will we finally see the carpet thrown aside and the many lumps being hidden there duly analyzed? For the sake of each victim, I truly hope so.

What remains to be seen is if someone of great wealth and influence will find a way to countermand this progress. This is a time for fervent prayer, IMO.

I understand your perspective on the mixed emotions some have on this issue. From what I have read of your posts here, you seem to have been aware of this situation far longer than many of us and I believe you have a greater grasp of the overall picture and on the effect it has/is having on our denomination. Those of us who have had a connection with 3abn in the past, as I have, and who have been dismayed to find the image so contrary to the actual actions of those we thought we "knew" will have those mixed emotions - some to a greater degree than others.

To those who are having those mixed emotions I would say, focus on the hope that finally the victims of this out-of-whack threshing machine called the leadership of 3abn may be vindicated and find healing and that any further victimization in the name of the image of Danny Shelton will be stopped!

Thank you, PB, for your astute observations.

And as was mentioned in the Shoutbox, yes, there is grieving going on.

This post has been edited by Artiste: Jun 5 2007, 12:31 PM

[mikell]

About the grieving going on, to who does 3ABN belongs to, the Lord or to a man? Could what is going on through the GC announcement be the Lord’s way to purge out the old leaven of the leadership of His 3ABN for 3ABN so they can once again to proclaim His Everlasting Gospel to go throughout the world through a holy people?

Is it not true, only a holy people can do a holy work? If a fruit tree has a large decaying limb, does not mean the whole tree is bad and should be cut down thrown into the fire. God forbid! GC is God’s vinedresser who seem are about to prune away the limb so the fruit tree to survive, thus will give better fruit then ever done before.

Be of good cheer. The Glory of God will shine that much more through 3ABN for all to behold the Everlasting Gospel the world over, let us say if someone like Doug Bachelor takes total control to become the new CEO of 3ABN. Does not our God always win?


PS, anyone who would be interested, the writer of rescue3abn.blog.com posted at the end of the blog, what he or she got from 3ABN, a copy of a "Cease and Desist" order of Gailon Joy's. In the wrter recieving that, it appears to be a imply threat.

[mozart]

what you say here SE is SO important. i hope those who are so anxious to see the fall of some will remember the crowd, many times multiplied, who will be hurting for lack of understanding. the majority of those people will be hearing these things for the first time. we need to be mindful of and sensitive to their feelings, confusion and grief.

I misunderstood you. Sorry about that. And sorry to hear you were victimized.

One of our members said something in the shoutbox today (don't have their permission so I'm not putting up the name) that I thought was worth commenting on. They said they were in a grieving process over the 3ABN mess.

I thought, of course. Someone who felt close to these people after seeing them on TV a lot would definitely go through that.

I bring it up because it's on us to find ways to minister to fellow members when this starts getting bigger. A lot of people are going to go through a lot of grief.

[Daryl Fawcett]

Well, Observer's post, now brings an element of confusion into the picture.

Was that Conference President off the track when he said what he said to all of his pastors about the Update on 3ABN?

It is obvious to me that in light of this posted email, the General Conference will need to make some kind of a statement.

[Observer]

Well, Observer's post, now brings an element of confusion into the picture.

Was that Conference President off the track when he said what he said to all of his pastors about the Update on 3ABN?

It is obvious to me that in light of this posted email, the General Conference will need to make some kind of a statement.

We may jsut have to wait to see how they develop.

[Ozzie]

Gentle people:

I have been in contact today, with the person in the General Conference whom I asked to respond to Elder Hankinson's comment published at the beginning of this thread.

As a result of that conversation, I will make the following statement, which is one that I have written:

"The comment by Elder Hankinson, as published at the beginning of this thread, as posted here, and as it is being understood by people reading it, is not totally accurate as it applies to the situation today."

I have been asked not to post the name of the person with whom I have spoken.

NOTE: There is no implication that Elder Hankinson intended to decieve anyone. My comment is a simple statemenet that the brevity of his statement, and how people are understanding it, leads to potential misunderstandings that are not 100 % correct, today.

The question that many people may ask is: "Will the General Conference make a statement that clairfies the relatlionship between the General Conference and 3-ABN?"

That is a valid question that thinking people would be expected to ask.

I will respond to that question:

We shall have to wait and see. I cannot say that the General Conference either will make such a statement, or that it will not make such. This whole situation is developing. The announcement of the proposed merger between Amazing Facts and 3-ABN has elevated this to the attention of people who had not previously been informed. With the passage of time we shall see how this develops.

Sorry, that is all that I can say today.

I have communicated with two of our leaders here is Australia yesterday, and they verified what Denis was quoted as saying in the initial email that was posted here. Like you Observer, I do not have permission to name my sources. Those people confirmed to me (in part) that:

"The operation of 3 ABN has been a source of concern to the General Conference for quite some time due to allegations that surfaced publicly in respect to some governance issues as well as in some other areas. The position that the General Conference has taken is simply to state that until such allegations have been worked through in a proper manner they are suspending any further direct involvement with them when it comes to their programs etc.
I understand that this matter is being addressed by 3 ABN Board and so hopefully the air will be cleared before too long. The effect of this action is that the processing of service requests for 3ABN personnel as a consequence have been temporarily suspended."

We need to prayerfully watch and wait. I cannot say more.

[Skyhook]

I have communicated with two of our leaders here is Australia yesterday, and they verified what Denis was quoted as saying in the initial email that was posted here. Like you Observer, I do not have permission to name my sources. Those people confirmed to me (in part) that:

"The operation of 3 ABN has been a source of concern to the General Conference for quite some time due to allegations that surfaced publicly in respect to some governance issues as well as in some other areas. The position that the General Conference has taken is simply to state that until such allegations have been worked through in a proper manner they are suspending any further direct involvement with them when it comes to their programs etc.
I understand that this matter is being addressed by 3 ABN Board and so hopefully the air will be cleared before too long. The effect of this action is that the processing of service requests for 3ABN personnel as a consequence have been temporarily suspended."

We need to prayerfully watch and wait. I cannot say more.

What is a "service request for 3abn persomell"?

[sonshineonme]

What is a "service request for 3abn persomell"?

That might be saying there are no invitations being extended to 3abn staff/admin/ceo to come/go to an area/church/event, etc. Just guessing.

This post has been edited by sonshineonme: Jun 5 2007, 04:00 PM

[Ozzie]

What is a "service request for 3abn persomell"?

A 'service request' means that any church who wishes to have a speaker, other than the Credentialed Minister from that Church (particularly that Conference), must apply for such permission through their Conference Ministerial Director/President, then through the Australian Union Conference.

I understand that this requirement has been authorised quite some time ago, to prevent speakers who 'have an axe to grind', coming into the church and causing havoc, as has been the case in the past. I see it as a very sensible requirement.

[watchbird]

What is a "service request for 3abn persomell"?

That might be saying there are no invitations being extended to 3abn staff/admin/ceo to come/go to an area/church/event, etc. Just guessing.

Since the information I received from Australia several weeks ago indicated that the Division had "banned anyone from 3ABN coming to the SPD at the present time"(a quote from an email whichreported a verbal communication)... sonshineonme's statement would seem to me to be a pretty good "guess".... though the wording "service request for 3abn personnel" does seem a little strange.

Time, I think, to return to our standard BSDA ending.....

Stay tuned.......

................................

A 'service request' means that any church who wishes to have a speaker, other than the Credentialed Minister from that Church (particularly that Conference), must apply for such permission through their Conference Ministerial Director/President, then through the Australian Union Conference.

I understand that this requirement has been authorised quite some time ago, to prevent speakers who 'have an axe to grind', coming into the church and causing havoc, as has been the case in the past. I see it as a very sensible requirement.

Ah... .... you answered while I was writing....

Yes, this does seem like a very sensible requirement.

[summertime]

Gentle people:

I have been in contact today, with the person in the General Conference whom I asked to respond to Elder Hankinson's comment published at the beginning of this thread.

As a result of that conversation, I will make the following statement, which is one that I have written:

"The comment by Elder Hankinson, as published at the beginning of this thread, as posted here, and as it is being understood by people reading it, is not totally accurate as it applies to the situation today."

I have been asked not to post the name of the person with whom I have spoken.

NOTE: There is no implication that Elder Hankinson intended to decieve anyone. My comment is a simple statemenet that the brevity of his statement, and how people are understanding it, leads to potential misunderstandings that are not 100 % correct, today.

The question that many people may ask is: "Will the General Conference make a statement that clairfies the relatlionship between the General Conference and 3-ABN?"

That is a valid question that thinking people would be expected to ask.

I will respond to that question:

We shall have to wait and see. I cannot say that the General Conference either will make such a statement, or that it will not make such. This whole situation is developing. The announcement of the proposed merger between Amazing Facts and 3-ABN has elevated this to the attention of people who had not previously been informed. With the passage of time we shall see how this develops.

Sorry, that is all that I can say today.

Gregory: In quotes you mentioned that the posted statement is not 'totally accurate' as it applies to the situation today.and that it leads to potential misunderstandings that are not 100 percent correct today. This leads to a lot of room for accuracy ---anything less than 100% or or anything less than 'totally accurate'. Some room to doubt---but not 100% accurate either. Confusing, isn't it?

[watchbird]

Gregory: In quotes you mentioned that the posted statement is not 'totally accurate' as it applies to the situation today.and that it leads to potential misunderstandings that are not 100 percent correct today. This leads to a lot of room for accuracy ---anything less than 100% or or anything less than 'totally accurate'. Some room to doubt---but not 100% accurate either. Confusing, isn't it?

It was probably the intent of the person talking with Gregory to be as vague as possible.

I agree that the sentence "The comment by Elder Hankinson, as published at the beginning of this thread, as posted here, and as it is being understood by people reading it, is not totally accurate as it applies to the situation today." is vague and confusing... and in more ways than what you point out.

Notice the phrases "as posted here, and as it is being understood by people reading it"... which could mean that "as posted here" was accurate... but "as it is being understood" is not accurate.

Also "is not totally accurate as it applies to the situation today" can meant that it is incomplete... thus not "totally accurate"... or that the situation today might be changing enough from when it was written so it is no longer "totally accurate".

What I think we can safely conclude from this is that the GC person (or persons) who gave Gregory the information from which he constructed this sentence so not WANT us to have information that is "totally accurate". Thus they are concealing rather than revealing when they make this statement about a letter that went out to a whole conference in the South Pacific Division. I would think that were there serious error in the letter that was sent out, then there would not be the kind of verifying comments about it from within that Division that I have seen and that Ozzie has posted here.

Stay tuned......... ............