Latest On 3abn - Round 3, Kay Kuzma Response to L Shelton Story Options

[Clay]

Upon further reflection, since this pastor spoke directly to the Chairman of the 3ABN board, I consider this first hand information from this pastor as it came directly to him from the Chairman of the 3ABN board, and he passed it on to me, which is in accordance to our "fact" or "first hand experience" policy over at MSDAOL. The only difference is that I posted it there myself instead of him. I also started a new topic over there titled, Corruption of Leadership at 3ABN? in which we will be discussing this there beginning with the basic question, "Should any known corruption of leadership in the church, or any entity that reflects the image or message of the church be exposed?" You may also wish to discuss this basic question here, which I think has already been brought up by some of you somewhere here at BSDA.

That issue is moot to a degree... you deal with the corruption as it comes to light... now just because corruption has not come to light doesn't mean it is nonexistent.... should we go looking for it? depends on one's motivation....

My issue.... Mr. Shelton did NOT treat Linda in a christian manner... he shafted her, then trashed her reputation.... Is he corrupt? He may or may not be, then again 3abn is his personal, private .org so he can do what he wants for the most part....

I suspect that some are attempting to "protect" the image of the church.... God doesn't ask us to defend his name, though some think they must.... If the church belongs to God, then He can defend it....

[Daryl Fawcett]

Darius,

Over at MSDAOL, what the leadership of MSDAOL decides is our business, not your's, just as what the leadership of BSDA decides here is their business, and not our's.

I will try to make this my only response here regarding your complaints of what we do over at MSDAOL.

[Clay]

Darius,

Over at MSDAOL, what the leadership of MSDAOL decides is our business, not your's, just as what the leadership of BSDA decides here is their business, and not our's.

I will try to make this my only response here regarding your complaints of what we do over at MSDAOL.

how is the above comment a response to this:

One day you will realize the danger in your approach. You cannot afford to surrender your mind to others. Your actions reflect a number of false assumptions. You assume that the pastor did speak to the Chairman, but he could have heard it from someone else. You assumed that the Chairman spoke the truth. More importantly, you seem to believe that only you can have reliable sources. If anyone else had tried to post what you posted you would have said it did not fit your fact policy. In the end it is not about the truth but about what you believe. This is obvious from all your posts. All your investigations of doctrine are designed to support the conclusions you have already made. That is a sad place to be.

or have I missed something? Darius questioned the method by which truth is determined by you, and your response deals with leadership decisions? Interesting....

[Guest_statrei_*]

Darius,

Over at MSDAOL, what the leadership of MSDAOL decides is our business, not your's, just as what the leadership of BSDA decides here is their business, and not our's.

I will try to make this my only response here regarding your complaints of what we do over at MSDAOL.

I am not complaining so don't take this as a complaint. Every man has a right to run his ship as he thinks is best. Whether what he thinks is best is what is best is another question. All I have done is demonstrate the flaw in the approach you follow. It is your right to reject sound counsel.

[LadyTenor]

Secondly as more info came out, regarding how Linda was treated, that was the second red flag. As christians we are to love compassion, do the right thing, and walk humbly with God. Mr. Shelton in my opinion did NONE of those things. A good christian man would NOT (even if he chose the divorce option) publicly trash his soon to be ex's reputation. He would be compassionate. He would NOT "gag" her so she could not speak about what had happened.....Like I also said before, even IF she did everything he accused her of (and I doubt that she did), she did NOT and should NOT have been treated in that manner....

Exactly!! For example, in Matthew, we are told that when Joseph discovered Mary was with child, which he didn't father, he was going to "divorce her quietly", until the angel of the Lord explained to him what was happening. He didn't trash her name to neighborhood!

When my husband decided after a few years to divorce his now ex-wife, he didn't broadcast it. Folks in church were wondering where she was (me included) because she started attending another church. I and my friends and many other well meaning (and not so well meaning) members whould ask for her and tell him to say hello to her...finally after he became better friends with my sister, some mutual friends and myself, he explained to us privately that he was seeking a divorce. He didn't walk around saying, my wife did X, Y and Z, I am tired of this so I want a divorce.....he didn't trash her name...and even now he won't...

...Danny Shelton's behavior, in this situation, leaves a lot to be desired...

[LadyTenor]

Upon further reflection, since this pastor spoke directly to the Chairman of the 3ABN board, I consider this first hand information from this pastor as it came directly to him from the Chairman of the 3ABN board, and he passed it on to me, which is in accordance to our "fact" or "first hand experience" policy over at MSDAOL. The only difference is that I posted it there myself instead of him.

That is what we in the legal world call double hearsay...he said that she said that they said....the information of which you speak is NOT first hand. First hand would be the conversation between 3ABN Chairman and the pastor whose name you won't reveal, and THAT is only first hand IF AND ONLY IF that conversation didn't contain any statements that someone else said besides the two holding the conversation. For example, if I admit to Princessdi that I am having an affair and she then tells Clay, then Clay is getting second hand information. It is first hand to Princessdi and second hand to Clay. If I were to tell Princessdi that I heard my husband tell his sister he is having an affair and then I tell Princessdi what I overheard, that is first hand information to me and second hand information to her and then third hand information to whomever she tells next.

We don't know what Danny Shelton or Linda Shelton or any of the other "witnesses" may have told the 3ABN Board. If what was told to the 3ABN board was told to your pastor friend and then to you, it is now 4th hand information you are receiving. If the Chairman of the 3ABN board witnessed certain things, and then told your pastor friend who then told you, you are still at best getting 2nd hand information...

...incidentally, if this situation was playing out in a court of law, you would not be permitted to testify as to what your pastor friend told you, because it is considered double hearsay, at best, and would be inadmissible...

[princessdi]

Daryl, that was one too many hands to be first hand. First hand would have been you talking directly the COB.

Upon further reflection, since this pastor spoke directly to the Chairman of the 3ABN board, I consider this first hand information from this pastor as it came directly to him from the Chairman of the 3ABN board, and he passed it on to me, which is in accordance to our "fact" or "first hand experience" policy over at MSDAOL. The only difference is that I posted it there myself instead of him. I also started a new topic over there titled, Corruption of Leadership at 3ABN? in which we will be discussing this there beginning with the basic question, "Should any known corruption of leadership in the church, or any entity that reflects the image or message of the church be exposed?" You may also wish to discuss this basic question here, which I think has already been brought up by some of you somewhere here at BSDA.

[Daryl Fawcett]

That is what we in the legal world call double hearsay...he said that she said that they said....the information of which you speak is NOT first hand. First hand would be the conversation between 3ABN Chairman and the pastor whose name you won't reveal, and THAT is only first hand IF AND ONLY IF that conversation didn't contain any statements that someone else said besides the two holding the conversation. For example, if I admit to Princessdi that I am having an affair and she then tells Clay, then Clay is getting second hand information. It is first hand to Princessdi and second hand to Clay. If I were to tell Princessdi that I heard my husband tell his sister he is having an affair and then I tell Princessdi what I overheard, that is first hand information to me and second hand information to her and then third hand information to whomever she tells next.

We don't know what Danny Shelton or Linda Shelton or any of the other "witnesses" may have told the 3ABN Board. If what was told to the 3ABN board was told to your pastor friend and then to you, it is now 4th hand information you are receiving. If the Chairman of the 3ABN board witnessed certain things, and then told your pastor friend who then told you, you are still at best getting 2nd hand information...

...incidentally, if this situation was playing out in a court of law, you would not be permitted to testify as to what your pastor friend told you, because it is considered double hearsay, at best, and would be inadmissible...

I could have asked the pastor to post that himself, however, if he had done that, it would have given away his identity, therefore, I chose to post it myself. If that is considered second hand information based on the fact that I posted it, then, so be it. The exception that I made in that case would still stand.

[LadyTenor]

I could have asked the pastor to post that himself, however, if he had done that, it would have given away his identity, therefore, I chose to post it myself. If that is considered second hand information based on the fact that I posted it, then, so be it. The exception that I made in that case would still stand.

What exception??

[Johann]

I could have asked the pastor to post that himself, however, if he had done that, it would have given away his identity, therefore, I chose to post it myself. If that is considered second hand information based on the fact that I posted it, then, so be it. The exception that I made in that case would still stand.

I received some news by phone from a pastor friend of mine that doesn't look good for Linda Shelton.

This pastor spoke to the Chairman of the 3ABN Board who told him that:

Linda had an opportunity to appear before the 3ABN Board but refused to do so.
Linda was seen in various places with the person in question.
This same person also had an opportunity to appear before the 3ABN Board but refused.
Danny unsuccessfully tried to keep the marriage with Linda intact.
This goes contrary to what is written on Linda's website, therefore, who are we to believe?

I think all we can do is to leave it in the hands of the Lord who knows the truth of the matter and will judge accordingly. Nothing can be hidden from God

In some instances God gives us eyes and ears to see and hear. I was staying with Linda together with another friend at her daughter's place in Springfield at the time the Board met at Thompsonville. We came earlier to Thomsonville for the purpose of telling the Board what we had personally seen, observed and heard, but Danny had his "bodyguards", including Dr. Walt Thompson, come to us and ask us the leave the premises. Danny himself came around and threatened that if we appeared again on the 3ABN premises he would have the police arrest us for trespassiing private property. This happened on Thursday evening, May 27, 2004.

A staff member at 3ABN was hoping for a reconciliation and he tried to arrange a meeting on Friday, May 28. Some of us wanted Mark Finlay to be there, but 3ABN did not want to involve him at that stage. So it was arranged that I should meet with the 3ABN group on behalf of Linda and Dr. Arild Abrahamsen. We had to meet in West Frankfort because Danny had forbidden me to appear anywhere near the presmises of 3ABN. There I met with Dr. Walt Thompson, attorney Nick Miller, and pastor John Lomacang.

Having served in varous capacities within the Seventh-day Adventist Church for about 50 years I have been a member of many boards, but I have never in my life met a more hostile group than these men. They were so downright biased in favor of Danny and hostile towards Linda that I have never experienced anything like it, and never in a group of professing Christians. They wanted no reconciliation except on Danny's premises.

I tried to tell these men that my wife and I had been together with Dr. Arild Abrahamsen - the man Linda was accused of having had an affair with - during the whole period that they were supposed to have been together in Florida. And we were together with him in Norway where my wife received daily treatments from him for her cancer, making it impossible for him to be in Florida at the same time.

But these men had heard Danny's testimony, and that was all that they seemed to care about.

There was no possibility of any kind of reconciliation. All they seemed to care about was that Danny could get Linda off his back to get a Biblical mandate to marry someone else.

Walt Thompson finally stated a few weeks ago that I could have come to that Board meeting if I had asked him to let me speak there. I'd say he should not have waited to make that statement until two year later. Then he should have made that clear when I met with him two days before the Board meeting.

Walt Thompson was the one who said the least at that meeting. I had a feeling he was hesitating. So when I met with him alone after the others were gone, I laid out a plan of reconciliation and hopefully a restoration of the marriage between Danny and Linda, his response was,

- "Danny would never accept that. You know how Danny is."

I recognize the statements that your pastor friend claims Walt Thompson made to him. There is a truth in them. This is not how it really happened, but how Danny Shelton and the 3ABN Adminnistration would like the financial supporters of 3ABN should think it really happened.

Danny has made it clear to me in writing that God is not making him accountable for his actions since God needs him to run a TV station. He states that since God could use Moses and David and others who were murderers and adulterers, then he can also use Danny Shelton without him having to account for his sins.

If Danny had merely committed the sins of Moses and David and confessed his sins, it would be terrible of me to go against him. The only reason I participate in this discussion is because I have experienced how he has lied and humiliated his now former wife, Linda, and that he has used his wealth and influence to convince his friends and board members he is telling the truth, and that Linda deserves such utter humiliation.

I have not yet clarified all the questions that are raised, but let me stop here. But you are free to ask for more information on what I have experienced first hand iin this case.

Johann Thorvaldsson

[Jvat]

Thank you Johann, for continuing to want to see truth prevail.

[Daryl Fawcett]

Is it safe to ask how many people here, and elsewhere, have first hand knowledge of this corruption at 3ABN?

[Nuggie]

In some instances God gives us eyes and ears to see and hear. I was staying with Linda together with another friend at her daughter's place in Springfield at the time the Board met at Thompsonville. We came earlier to Thomsonville for the purpose of telling the Board what we had personally seen, observed and heard, but Danny had his "bodyguards", including Dr. Walt Thompson, come to us and ask us the leave the premises. Danny himself came around and threatened that if we appeared again on the 3ABN premises he would have the police arrest us for trespassiing private property. This happened on Thursday evening, May 27, 2004.

A staff member at 3ABN was hoping for a reconciliation and he tried to arrange a meeting on Friday, May 28. Some of us wanted Mark Finlay to be there, but 3ABN did not want to involve him at that stage. So it was arranged that I should meet with the 3ABN group on behalf of Linda and Dr. Arild Abrahamsen. We had to meet in West Frankfort because Danny had forbidden me to appear anywhere near the presmises of 3ABN. There I met with Dr. Walt Thompson, attorney Nick Miller, and pastor John Lomacang.

Having served in varous capacities within the Seventh-day Adventist Church for about 50 years I have been a member of many boards, but I have never in my life met a more hostile group than these men. They were so downright biased in favor of Danny and hostile towards Linda that I have never experienced anything like it, and never in a group of professing Christians. They wanted no reconciliation except on Danny's premises.

I tried to tell these men that my wife and I had been together with Dr. Arild Abrahamsen - the man Linda was accused of having had an affair with - during the whole period that they were supposed to have been together in Florida. And we were together with him in Norway where my wife received daily treatments from him for her cancer, making it impossible for him to be in Florida at the same time.

But these men had heard Danny's testimony, and that was all that they seemed to care about.

There was no possibility of any kind of reconciliation. All they seemed to care about was that Danny could get Linda off his back to get a Biblical mandate to marry someone else.

Walt Thompson finally stated a few weeks ago that I could have come to that Board meeting if I had asked him to let me speak there. I'd say he should not have waited to make that statement until two year later. Then he should have made that clear when I met with him two days before the Board meeting.

Walt Thompson was the one who said the least at that meeting. I had a feeling he was hesitating. So when I met with him alone after the others were gone, I laid out a plan of reconciliation and hopefully a restoration of the marriage between Danny and Linda, his response was,

- "Danny would never accept that. You know how Danny is."

I recognize the statements that your pastor friend claims Walt Thompson made to him. There is a truth in them. This is not how it really happened, but how Danny Shelton and the 3ABN Adminnistration would like the financial supporters of 3ABN should think it really happened.

Danny has made it clear to me in writing that God is not making him accountable for his actions since God needs him to run a TV station. He states that since God could use Moses and David and others who were murderers and adulterers, then he can also use Danny Shelton without him having to account for his sins.

If Danny had merely committed the sins of Moses and David and confessed his sins, it would be terrible of me to go against him. The only reason I participate in this discussion is because I have experienced how he has lied and humiliated his now former wife, Linda, and that he has used his wealth and influence to convince his friends and board members he is telling the truth, and that Linda deserves such utter humiliation.

I have not yet clarified all the questions that are raised, but let me stop here. But you are free to ask for more information on what I have experienced first hand iin this case.

Johann Thorvaldsson

This has got to be one of the most troubling posts I've read on this topic. For some reason this cuts through the "tabloid-esque" nature of the saga (for me) so far and really hits home to me that there may well be demonic forces at work here with the intent of distracting us from focusing on Christ.

[Clay]

Is it safe to ask how many people here, and elsewhere, have first hand knowledge of this corruption at 3ABN?

and that is important because?

[Johann]

Is it safe to ask how many people here, and elsewhere, have first hand knowledge of this corruption at 3ABN?

Looking for a majority vote to determine the truth?