Danny Shelton, Please Come Home!, It's time to stop running Options

[justice4jesus]

Ian, how it it that you think it's not a long distance call?

And, how is it you think DS would EVER reply to an email or phone call honestly? Why would he?
The day he is repentant (in any honest fashion) it will be a miracle day, and if he had the least bit of humility or conscience, it would have shown long long ago.

I think it's interesting how you look at J4J plea - as a "public demand for confession". That alone tells volumes. Apparently, to someone who is never wrong, can't be wrong, and won't be wrong, there would never be a reason for any kind of confession, right? I mean, even Swaggart publicly confessed, because he had a public to confess to! Like it or not, real or not, at least he understood that principal.

It's too bad that DS is so busy being 'right' no matter the means, the people he drags into it, the manner of which he degrades and minipulates others to attempt a particular outcome, that he can't even see that people do still care about his soul. He should stop and appreciate that - but then, I tend to wonder if he is not capable of even understanding that kind of love and compassion in the truest sense, that he can't even see the "chistian" in real christians who have the love of Jesus for all mankind, no matter what their sins. Isn't that what Jesus wants from us? Maybe you can explain it to him.

As for the question about the long distance call, Ian either is referring to the toll-free number or he thinks he knows (and may actually know) who I am and where I live, neither of which bothers me. My true identity will be revealed here when the time is right. Right now, in my own heart and mind, I am not ready to do that.

I can tell by the tone of their comments that the apologists themselves have doubts about Danny, Tommy and the others involved. Why they will not face these doubts, I have no clue.

[sonshineonme]

Well, "elder" refers to church leaders. Doesn't Danny fall into that category?

IMO, at the very least he fits as an elder/leader, and in some ways even higher as he has a larger audience and continuous ( or at least he did) appearance and image he is "portraying" as a leader and speaker for a church (yes, the sda church). He has a larger accountability (to me) because he affects more people. Maybe I see it wrong, but, I think that that fits what we have been told in the bible regarding those who teach/preach and lead, they have a higher accountability not just to those they teach/preach and lead, but also to God for representing Him in such a way.

[sonshineonme]

As for the question about the long distance call, Ian either is referring to the toll-free number or he thinks he knows (and may actually know) who I am and where I live, neither of which bothers me. My true identity will be revealed here when the time is right. Right now, in my own heart and mind, I am not ready to do that.

I can tell by the tone of their comments that the apologists themselves have doubts about Danny, Tommy and the others involved. Why they will not face these doubts, I have no clue.

Ok, so call the toll free number and ask for DS. See what happens.

[justice4jesus]

Ok, so call the toll free number and ask for DS. See what happens.

If I were to call and ask to speak to Danny, I would have to lie about who I am. If Danny knew who I was, he wouldn't talk to me.

[sonshineonme]

If I were to call and ask to speak to Danny, I would have to lie about who I am. If Danny knew who I was, he wouldn't talk to me.

Ohhhhhh , I see said the blind man, you're on THAT loooonnnng list of folk.

[PeacefulBe]

Well, "elder" refers to church leaders. Doesn't Danny fall into that category?

I understand what you are saying, SE, but no, not really, IMO. Not any more than, say, Agatha Thrash would be as leader of her Uchee Pines ministry, or Hans Diehl for the CHIP program, or any other ASI business owner. If so, whose job would it be to rebuke him publically? 3abn is not the church. It is a ministry, a business. Some may have elevated Danny to a position of a church leader in their opinion, but as co-founder of 3abn he isn't. Is he an elder of the Thompsonville church? I have no clue.

Don't mistake my intent here. I am not saying that we close our eyes to the problems that have been alleged at 3abn. We have clear counsel in the Scriptures for how to handle the unrepentant sinner within the church congregation for some specific situations. Troubling documentation has been shared that indicates there may be some horrible things that have been swept under the 3abn rug instead of being handled properly. Yes, we need to get to the bottom of some of these allegations and find the truth. The record needs to be set straight for the good of all parties concerned. What I take exception to is Bob's apparent use of this text as license to publically expose anyone who he perceives to have sinned. We have all sinned and i would hate to have the world know about some of the things I have done in my past simply because I have been a church leader (Community Services Director for a whole year...).

We, in the U.S., have First Amendment rights to freedom of speech. But as Christians we need to filter that freedom through the template of our Savior's will.

[SoulEspresso]

I think what we disagree on is the application of 1 Timothy text; we agree that 3ABN has some issues that need clearing up. (How's that last for understatement?)

Some may have elevated Danny to a position of a church leader in their opinion, but as co-founder of 3abn he isn't. Is he an elder of the Thompsonville church? I have no clue.

James 3:1 might apply, because while I'm not sure Danny would consider himself a teacher, he does put himself forward as a church leader -- and since he decides what goes on the air (at least in a general sense), he is a gatekeeper of teaching.

Let me say part of that again: it isn't just that certain people have elevated Danny to a leadership position. He wants to be a church leader. I wouldn't be able to state that so categorically if he'd kept himself off the screen once 3ABN was up and running, but I don't think anyone here can say Danny doesn't like being on television. He does like being on television.

This crisis has given him plenty of reasons to remove himself, if not from the 3ABN organization, at least from the broadcast signal. (Hey, at least he isn't at the top of the web page anymore!) He could have done what Bob Folkenberg Sr. did and withdrawn from his position, re-entering ministry in another way, but what I see tells me it isn't about ministry. It's about Danny.

[PeacefulBe]

I think what we disagree on is the application of 1 Timothy text; we agree that 3ABN has some issues that need clearing up. (How's that last for understatement?)
James 3:1 might apply, because while I'm not sure Danny would consider himself a teacher, he does put himself forward as a church leader -- and since he decides what goes on the air (at least in a general sense), he is a gatekeeper of teaching.

Let me say part of that again: it isn't just that certain people have elevated Danny to a leadership position. He wants to be a church leader. I wouldn't be able to state that so categorically if he'd kept himself off the screen once 3ABN was up and running, but I don't think anyone here can say Danny doesn't like being on television. He does like being on television.

This crisis has given him plenty of reasons to remove himself, if not from the 3ABN organization, at least from the broadcast signal. (Hey, at least he isn't at the top of the web page anymore!) He could have done what Bob Folkenberg Sr. did and withdrawn from his position, re-entering ministry in another way, but what I see tells me it isn't about ministry. It's about Danny.

I have to defer to your application of the text because I firmly believe and respect that you have a far superior grasp of the scriptures than I do. I'm being totally straightforward here, not TIC.

What I would then ask is, how does one fulfill this public rebuke of a leader's sins? Who is responsible to lead out in this public rebuke? Does this person carefully make certain that all of the ducks are in a row (the 2 - 3 witnesses) before progressing with the rebuke? What sins are acceptable fodder for this public rebuke? Who is fair game for inclusion into this public rebuke? Do we stop with major players or branch off into the families of anyone involved? What is the proper public venue for such a rebuke.

I think these are important questions to ask ourselves, for those who lead out in such things to ask themselves, before launching into a rebuke.

[Pickle]

Well, "elder" refers to church leaders. Doesn't Danny fall into that category?

One of the stories out there is that an elder wondered if Danny should be an elder since he didn't regularly attend church. He then lost his job at 3ABN for wondering that, as the story goes.

That tells me that he has served as a local church elder, unless that story is garbled.

[Richard Sherwin]

Bob it seems to me that this story crosses the line into rumors and I fully expect that the defenders of Danny to jump on you for it. If they do they will have a valid point. Why post a story that you even concede might not be true?

One of the stories out there is that an elder wondered if Danny should be an elder since he didn't regularly attend church. He then lost his job at 3ABN for wondering that, as the story goes.

That tells me that he has served as a local church elder, unless that story is garbled.

[SoulEspresso]

One of the stories out there is that an elder wondered if Danny should be an elder since he didn't regularly attend church. He then lost his job at 3ABN for wondering that, as the story goes.

That tells me that he has served as a local church elder, unless that story is garbled.

Well, all it is at this point is a story. If I were running a full-time parachurch ministry, I might be tempted not to attend church regularly myself. But then I wouldn't be serving as elder either, I guess.

Some of the most die-hard ministry people I know very rarely are ever at church because of the nature of their supporting ministry. Danny would fall into that category, IMO.

There are plenty of sticks he gives to his detractors which they can fairly beat him with, but this isn't one of them.

[Johann]

Bob it seems to me that this story crosses the line into rumors and I fully expect that the defenders of Danny to jump on you for it. If they do they will have a valid point. Why post a story that you even concede might not be true?

I decided to erase my comment.

This post has been edited by Johann: Jan 13 2008, 03:59 PM

[SoulEspresso]

I have to defer to your application of the text because I firmly believe and respect that you have a far superior grasp of the scriptures than I do. I'm being totally straightforward here, not TIC.

Well, I don't do a lot of original scholarship these days, so I have to rely on others as well.

What I would then ask is, how does one fulfill this public rebuke of a leader's sins? Who is responsible to lead out in this public rebuke? Does this person carefully make certain that all of the ducks are in a row (the 2 - 3 witnesses) before progressing with the rebuke? What sins are acceptable fodder for this public rebuke? Who is fair game for inclusion into this public rebuke? Do we stop with major players or branch off into the families of anyone involved? What is the proper public venue for such a rebuke.

The people who are closest to the individual have the biggest responsibility. Unfortunately, it's a lot harder when you're close to a person. It's becoming apparent that Linda seems to have known about some underhanded things some time back (or should have known). She should have been the first. I would have said the Board should have been next. ASI would follow that, I guess. After that it falls to the supporters and donors. Once they work behind the scenes and fail, then they can go public.

When they do so, however, they have to work hard to keep the moral high ground in every respect, and avoid every appearance of evil. Of course, if the behind-the-scenes work has failed, they're going to get opposition from the leader; but criticism that is constructive they need to consider carefully.

What sins? Sins the public knows about, and sins against the public. Who? People involved in complicity. Some of Danny's supporters on these boards, I think, know of malfeasance -- and to keep supporting him is shame. Other supporters, even some relatively close to the action, don't have the full picture even if they think they do. This is what I want to believe, at least. I would rather impart good motives to people rather than bad.

[Pickle]

Bob it seems to me that this story crosses the line into rumors and I fully expect that the defenders of Danny to jump on you for it. If they do they will have a valid point. Why post a story that you even concede might not be true?

Because that story is the only thing I know of that has a bearing on whether he is an elder or not. And that story also illustrates the conflict of interest that the church has in dealing with Danny.

That being said, if you know another reason why the guy was fired and why he was fired when he was fired, let me know.

[Johann]

Because that story is the only thing I know of that has a bearing on whether he is an elder or not. And that story also illustrates the conflict of interest that the church has in dealing with Danny.

That being said, if you know another reason why the guy was fired and why he was fired when he was fired, let me know.

Bob worded it carefully, possibly because certain minor details of the story could be difficult to verify at this time.