Where Is Brenda?, Will Brenda not be the main witness against Linda? Options

[Pickle]

I certainly wouldn't object to your statement that the wages of sin is death, since that is the absolute truth.

The second death does appear to have degrees of punishment. One reference on that is Lk. 12:47, 48. So while all sin, whether major or minor, leads to death if unrepented of, some will receive greater punishment than others.

Sodom and Gomorrah will apparently get off easier than the folks who rejected Christ 2000 years ago.

[Green Cochoa]

if that were the case you all would not have vigorously objected to my comment that the wages of sin is death.... no degrees.... sin = death.... however from your comments it's clear you are interpreting the text... no problem though, we can move on as we aren't going to agree....

Clay, you are right about sin carrying the death penalty, no matter how small or great the sin is. You are right that death has no degrees (I think I first suggested that here, though it certainly is obvious). However, I do not quite understand why you are digging in so much here to defend your position, against all odds--and against the Bible--about the equality of sins. You cannot equate death with equality of sins. There is no more equality among sins than there is among poisons. All poisons are bad. Some poisons are more potent than others.

Jesus clearly put a difference between some sins and others. We are ALL sinners. ANY amount of sin, according to the law, demands the death penalty. However, not everyone will die! And those who do, apparently will not all be judged equally.

For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. (Matthew 7:2, KJV)

Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city. (Matthew 10:15, KJV)

But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you. (Matthew 11:22, KJV)

But I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee. (Matthew 11:24, KJV)

But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. (Matthew 12:36, KJV)

Now, not every person judges his or her fellows in the same way--some are highly judgmental, while others never say an unkind criticism. So from that first text I gather that not everyone will be judged the same way--some have sinned more with their lips than have others.

The next three clearly state that some sins will be more tolerable in the judgment. Why is that?

The last verse there addresses idle words. Again, not everyone speaks after the same manner. I would not expect everyone to receive equally on this point.

Paul claimed to be the "chief of sinners." This clearly implies a greater degree of sinfulness than those to whom he was speaking.

But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea. (Matthew 18:6, KJV)

Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 5:19, KJV)

Jesus is abruptly clear in these verses that not all sin will be treated equally in God's sight. Even in Heaven, the degree of faithfulness will be rewarded in kind.

Blessings,

Greenie.

[Clay]

Greenie...... ummmmm sure, whatever you say..... Pickle your logic escapes me... then again that is not surprising....

you all can continue discussing it, I have moved on......

[Johann]

Let me address a few more of your accusations that you have been throwing around.
There was a birthday party for Danny in may of 04. He and Linda were already on the "outs" and Melody did not want him to spend his birthday alone. She hosted the party at her house and the Mitcheff SISTER'S did all the cooking. All 3 of them. The house was full of family and friends. There was absolutely nothing inappropriate or out of place in any form or fashion. I know, I was there. Can you say the same Johann? Of course you can't. As usual you are repeating gossip that is untrue.

You refer to Brenda as Danny's golfing buddy. Danny himself hasn't golfed over a handful of times in his entire life, but when he has, it wasn't with Brenda. They have NEVER golfed together.
Yet, another lie.

I believe Johann that you have started all these sites and all these lies because you have been fed wrong information. You believe since you are outside the US that you are exempt from charges. WRONG. I will admit it would be an ordeal. The consulate would have to be involved as well as, several other agencies, but, it can be done. You, like all the rest, can be taken to court where you will be ask to prove that your accusations are true. Gossip and heresay won't count in Federal Court. You say that Danny and 3abn are spending thousands of dollars to cover up evil deeds...honestly, use some common sense. If that were true why sue in the first place? A suit is only going to bring out the truth. The suit is about Pickle ,Joy and others having to prove their public accusations. Knowing that, would 3abn have entered into it if they were afraid of their "evil" being exposed?

Since you were there, there are a number of things you could make clear, if you wanted to.

The information about the birthday party did not come from me. From my correspondance with Danny Shelton at the time I concluded that he and Linda were still living together at the house, so why should he have to spend his birthday alone? Why should he then go elsewhere to celebrate his birthday leaving Linda behind alone? Since you know everything, didn't Linda even ask Danny if she wasn't supposed to come along to the birthday party - and what was his response?

Was it proper of a married man to celebrate his birthday party elsewhere and leaving his wife behind?

I was not the one who brought up the idea of Brenda as Danny's golfing buddy. I commented on someone else's suggestion. You'd have to sue the source of this information. Is Danny now attempting to conceal the fact that he was a member of the country club of West Frankfort? Why should that be hidden? Was it too expensive? Is it worth all the trouble? Didn't he take Linda there too?

Even if Danny Shelton had golfed a hundred times with Brenda, that would mean nothing in comparison with what he has done - and you keep on doing

Gailon claims that a notarized statement of Brenda has been deposited as evidense in the present hearing. I do not know what it says. Can you inform us of its contents?

[Johann]

Appletree, as you know I arranged for a visit to Iceland of Danny, Linda, and Tommy Shelton back in 2003. This visit increased the awareness of 3ABN in this area. A court case initiated by the founder will create further interest, but will also reveal a number of his fallacies. Do you really think it is worth the effort? It will not keep me from telling the truth, and in cases like this a son of the local area is often regarded as a hero by the local media, which will give me the opportunity for several interviews. So I will not keep you from making an attempt. It might make the Seventh-day Adventist church look bad for having supported such a foreign intruder.

This post has been edited by Johann: Feb 12 2008, 05:54 AM

[Ian]

Appletree, as you know I arranged for a visit to Iceland of Danny, Linda, and Tommy Shelton back in 2003. This visit increased the awareness of 3ABN in this area. A court case initiated by the founder will create further interest, but will also reveal a number of his fallacies. Do you really think it is worth the effort? It will not keep me from telling the truth, and in cases like this a son of the local area is often regarded as a hero by the local media, which will give me the opportunity for several interviews. So I will not keep you from making an attempt. It might make the Seventh-day Adventist church look bad for having supported such a foreign intruder.

And yet you will help in that? It almost sounds like you are threatening to do so. I hope not.

You maybe need to consider whether you need to refocus, and get your priorities straight Johann. The Seventh-day Adventist Church and brethren do not rise or fall, nor should their true witness, and gospel be besmirched, because of issues you or other individuals may have with 3abn.

My humble opinion.

This post has been edited by Ian: Feb 12 2008, 08:26 AM

[Ian]

Since you were there, there are a number of things you could make clear, if you wanted to.

The information about the birthday party did not come from me. From my correspondance with Danny Shelton at the time I concluded that he and Linda were still living together at the house, so why should he have to spend his birthday alone? Why should he then go elsewhere to celebrate his birthday leaving Linda behind alone? Since you know everything, didn't Linda even ask Danny if she wasn't supposed to come along to the birthday party - and what was his response?

Was it proper of a married man to celebrate his birthday party elsewhere and leaving his wife behind?

I was not the one who brought up the idea of Brenda as Danny's golfing buddy. I commented on someone else's suggestion. You'd have to sue the source of this information. Is Danny now attempting to conceal the fact that he was a member of the country club of West Frankfort? Why should that be hidden? Was it too expensive? Is it worth all the trouble? Didn't he take Linda there too?

Even if Danny Shelton had golfed a hundred times with Brenda, that would mean nothing in comparison with what he has done - and you keep on doing

Gailon claims that a notarized statement of Brenda has been deposited as evidense in the present hearing. I do not know what it says. Can you inform us of its contents?

Johann,

You know the answer here, if you just think.

Linda was not living there, she left. she purchased a mobile home, she was suspended and on leave of absense from 3ABN when Danny's brithday came up. You know that, as you and the Doctor came to visit her. You did not do so at Danny and Linda's house.

Why would a woman who just separated from her husband ask if she should come to his birthday party, does that even make sense?

As appletree said, Melody didn't want her Father to be alone.

You really need to question what you've been fed, and not all the others which disagree with that.

again, just my opinion.

This post has been edited by Ian: Feb 12 2008, 08:41 AM

[princessdi]

Ok, so dont' be tryna fix things now. There are just waaaaay too many explanations about this party. Taht means aint' nobody tellin't he truth. It was tacky and done to show all of your support in Danny's dirty deeds, and to alienate Linda even further. Simple. Iffn ya big enough to do shady stuff like this then you outta be big enough to own up to them. Somehow, they never are.........

Threason I know this when I see it because, Ian, your explanation sounds a lot like this one: "I, personally, don't mind black people living in my neighbor hood, but why would they want to be somewhere they are not wanted?" Once you have experience those subtle sslights, you know them no matter what form they take.

Just one more question.......was Brandy at the party?......I jes askin'.............

Johann,

You know the answer here, if you just think.

Linda was not living there, she left. she purchased a mobile home, she was suspended and on leave of absense from 3ABN when Danny's brithday came up. You know that, as you and the Doctor came to visit her. You did not do so at Danny and Linda's house.

Why would a woman who just separated from her husband ask if she should come to his birthday party, does that even make sense?

As appletree said, Melody didn't want her Father to be alone.

You really need to question what you've been fed, and not all the others which disagree with that.

again, just my opinion.

[Johann]

Ok, so dont' be tryna fix things now. There are just waaaaay too many explanations about this party. Taht means aint' nobody tellin't he truth. It was tacky and done to show all of your support in Danny's dirty deeds, and to alienate Linda even further. Simple. Iffn ya big enough to do shady stuff like this then you outta be big enough to own up to them. Somehow, they never are.........

Threason I know this when I see it because, Ian, your explanation sounds a lot like this one: "I, personally, don't mind black people living in my neighbor hood, but why would they want to be somewhere they are not wanted?" Once you have experience those subtle sslights, you know them no matter what form they take.

Just one more question.......was Brandy at the party?......I jes askin'.............

Thanks, princess. It's good seeing somone is thinking. If its true what they also are claiming, that Danny really loved Linda and wanted her back, would it not have been a good gesture to invite her to the family birthday party?

I'm thinkinng too, and praying too. That aint hurting nobody. I'll be checking those dates on my calendar . . . and I just thought of some very good witnesses I had not thought of before. They will verify I'm telling the truth where Ian is bugging.

[lurker]

May 19 2004?

[Fran]

May 19 2004?

[Pickle]

May 19 would be a whopping 22 days after April 27, when Danny declared the marriage over because Linda had hidden his gun.

And it would be 20 days after April 29, when Danny sent Linda a proposal for his buying her half of the house.

[Ian]

May 19 would be a whopping 22 days after April 27, when Danny declared the marriage over because Linda had hidden his gun.

And it would be 20 days after April 29, when Danny sent Linda a proposal for his buying her half of the house.

so you say... it also makes it appear they were separated before June 1 as Linda claims on her website.

which might possibly explain the purchase of a trailer by her in Carbondale, and the May 4th leave of absence email facsimile from WT (on behalf of the 3abn board) being sent to her daughter's house in which he states the board wants to help restore her to both her home and ministry, as well as why she wasn't there for Danny's party as Johann claims? ( all before she was fired at the end of May following campmeeting, or before June 1st)

This post has been edited by Ian: Feb 16 2008, 10:28 AM

[sister]

so you say... it also makes it appear they were separated before June 1 as Linda claims on her website.

which might possibly explain the purchase of a trailer by her in Carbondale, and the May 4th leave of absence email facsimile from WT (on behalf of the 3abn board) being sent to her daughter's house in which he states the board wants to help restore her to both her home and ministry, as well as why she wasn't there for Danny's party as Johann claims? ( all before she was fired at the end of May following campmeeting, or before June 1st)

Ian,

Johann continues to reply that he did not post about Danny’s birthday party and you continue to ignore that fact. What other facts are you ignoring because they do not fit your depiction of the “truth” according to Appletree? Please supply a link to the post where Johann reports about Danny Shelton’s birthday party. If you are unable to supply that simple fact, your credibility is shoot down to zero. It becomes obvious that your posts are only based upon information from Appletree and no investigation of your own through reading here.

I posted about the birthday party. It was not here, but at Advent Talk:

An interesting note:

Danny's birthday is in May. In May of 2004 Brenda had a birthday party for Danny, to which Linda was not invited and had no prior knowledge of Brenda's plans. Although it was held in the home of Danny's daughter, Melody Shelton Mundall Firestone, it was hosted and all arrangements were made by Brenda. It was apparent to those in attendeance that Brenda had more than a casual relationship with Linda's husband. Neither Danny's wife or Brenda's husband were present at the celebration. A female member of the Shelton family, who was present, considered it her responsibility to inform Linda that Brenda's behavior with Danny at the party was not appropriate between two individuals of the opposite sex who both had other spouses.

I do agree with Appletree that Brenda and her sister's cooked all the food for the party, but that is where our accounts diverge. The party was thrown by Brenda for Danny and held at Melody's home. Linda was still living in the martial home at the time and was surprised when Danny arrived home with all his presents. Although during that time Linda periodically went to stay with her daughter when she became afraid of Danny, she was there the day of his birthday party. It was Danny who was having an inappropriate relationship with Brenda, not Linda who was violating her martial vows. Linda still loved her husband. Brenda was all over Danny at the party, continually brushing up against him, an obvious sign that she considered them to be more than just “friends”. If Appletree says otherwise, he wasn’t at the same party as everyone else in attendance. To be certain of my facts and not rely upon memory alone, I did some checking.

So, Ian, where did you get your facts? Was it from an apple that fell out of a tree? You might want to be more careful when picking up apples that have from the tree and are rotting on the ground, you may get a surprise and bite into the worm hiding inside.

Sister

[princeMK]

Is it possible for Calvin or any of the Administrators to stop this uninspiring thread?