An Unauthorized History Of 3abn, Chapter 10 (in the midst of the garden continued) Options

[sonshineonme]

Daryl, you are ONLY on page 10? And you are back asking questions again already? We are now on page 69. You don't know enough yet to ask intelligent questions. Back to reading mode!

Excuse you, but it is extremely unkind, uncouth, and ingenious at best to ask this kind of questions when you have not even yet taken the time to read all that Sister (and many others) have already written. Your last question is especially repugnant since it asks Sister to make a judgemental statement about Finley and Lomacang that is not only inappropriate and unChristlike, but ITFA is impossible for anyone to make. Only God knows what Finley and Lomacang know or don't know and what their reasons are for continuing to support Danny Shelton given all that we are learning about him.

Daryl,
I am guessing you might like to just get to the "meat and potatoes" part of this situation, thinking you have it all summed up with facts you have had previously, but honestly, you need to read it all FIRST, then ask. As for Lomacang and Finley, God is not the only one that knows, but THEY know what they have done, and NOT done with the information they have. Linda knows too. There are "facts" that can speak for themselves when it comes to both of them, and their "reasons" for their actions at this point. There are MANY "leaders" or "up front" people who keep quiet for personal gain and also to "let others deal with it", and they take no action because it may hurt them. They are among the ones that think the ends justify the means (keep the gospel going at whatever cost to someone on a personal level). This whole situation really should be an eye opener and WARNING to especially SDA's, that things are not always what they seem, that we can not hold ANY person up thinking that what looks like a chicken must be a chicken, that is an unsafe assumption to make, especially as this world falls apart. IT is to each individual to know where they stand with Christ, so they can be as wise as possible and not deceived by those who take the appearance of "christian" on the outside. I'm sure you know this too. Things will shock us, shake us and even rock our christian experience, but let that not destroy us, because God wants us to take heart in HIS power to bring us still closer to Him in spite of others and their leadership (or lack there of). We can't have loyalty to an organization, but only to our God. I make choices every day, hopefully responsible ones, to support those and that which I can respect. Search and seek, you will find.

[Daryl Fawcett]

I agree with you completely in that we should never elevate any human being, however, we must respect the position, but not necessarily the person, in the same way Paul respected the High Priest's position, although not the person himself.

I am very concerned about the person holding the position. If what is being said about this person is even remotely true, then that person needs to be exposed and removed, hoever, I am not sure if this the the proper way to do it, however, if I couldn't find any other way to do it, I would probably resort to this myself.

By the way, I am going to ignore any accusative posts, so don't waste your breath.

This post has been edited by Daryl Fawcett: Jul 2 2006, 02:51 PM

[sister]

Sister,

I can understand your caution, therefore, let me go into another direction.

I am only on page 10 of this topic as far as reading it goes.

Are you saying anywhere that Pastor Mark Finley and Pastor John Lomacang know the truth about Danny & Linda, but are spouting the lie?

Daryl,

I will answer any questions that I can concerning what I have written, but I do suggest that you limit your questions in regard to what you have already read. It will make the process much easier for both of us.

You do have the option to go to my profile and read everything that I have posted on BSDA. But I do believe that you would benefit from reading it within the context of the thread.

Sister

[watchbird]

I agree with you completely in that we should never elevate any human being, however, we must respect the position, but not necessarily the person, in the same way Paul respected the High Priest's position, although not the person himself.

I am very concerned about the person holding the position. If what is being said about this person is even remotely true, then that person needs to be exposed and removed, hoever, I am not sure if this the the proper way to do it, however, if I couldn't find any other way to do it, I would probably resort to this myself.

I would hope that you are not equating the owner of a TV uplink facility with the High Priest's position. That seems to be stretching things considerably far.

As for "exposed and removed", it sounds as though we are in agreement on this part. However, BSDA is not a legal body and has no power to remove anyone (other then from their own forum), so that part of the remedy has to be left to others. What BSDA does have, however, is the public "bulletin board" where things can be posted for all who wish to come and read. IOW, BSDA is a very important part of the "expose" part of what needs to be done. And it also provides a place where things of an "exposure" nature may be either confirmed by others with similar knowledge, or challenged by those who disagree with what is said. It seems a rather important point that so far there has been a lot more confirming going on that there has been challenging.

Daryl,

I will answer any questions that I can concerning what I have written, but I do suggest that you limit your questions in regard to what you have already read. It will make the process much easier for both of us.

You do have the option to go to my profile and read everything that I have posted on BSDA. But I do believe that you would benefit from reading it within the context of the thread.

Sister

Yes indeed, as Sister says, "within the context of the thread" is extremely important. For it is there that you will find people posing some of the same questions that you are wrestling with, and thus you will be able to read the answers as you go along. And also you will find people who will be adding details to her telling of the story, and thus not only confirming, but expanding upon it.

Enjoy the journey.

[Daryl Fawcett]

I just read the following from one of Sister's posts:

"The truth of the matter is that this $100,000.00 worth of equipment actually came from Joe Crews, the founder of Amazing Facts, in exchange for air time."

Isn't there a way to confirm this either way from the records of Amazing Facts?

[Guest_statrei_*]

I just read the following from one of Sister's posts:

"The truth of the matter is that this $100,000.00 worth of equipment actually came from Joe Crews, the founder of Amazing Facts, in exchange for air time."

Isn't there a way to confirm this either way from the records of Amazing Facts?

Apparently she has. Anyone who doubts her facts can call Amazing Facts.

[Fran]

Sister,

I can understand your caution, therefore, let me go into another direction.

I am only on page 10 of this topic as far as reading it goes.

Are you saying anywhere that Pastor Mark Finley and Pastor John Lomacang know the truth about Danny & Linda, but are spouting the lie?

From my point of view, I'd say that John and Mark both knew the problem Danny had. Linda's only problem was that she was in the dark about the problem until right before the end of the marriage. Then, I'd say she was in such shock she dove under cover to catch her breath and take time to reason out what had just happened. The wife is always the last to know. Wifes will believe their husband lies before they will believe anyone else telling her the truth, but when it comes from the husband, it is like getting shot in the gut and bleeding for a very, very long time.

John and Mark came in about 5-6 years too late. The damage had already been done. There was no way to take his action back! It was a done deal and it was there right in his face. John and Mark were unable to change the past. All that they could do was deal with the problem right in their face with 3ABN at stake. The only choice Danny had was to get rid of Linda or be found out! They backed him for "The greater Good". Oops! Guess they decided wrong. It has NOT been for the greater good! It could be the perception of apparent death of him and 3ABN.

That is only my opinion. I understand that doesn't mean much anymore.

I have posted post after post showing documentation about how he is deceitful in his financial dealings. I have backed it up with public documentation. AToday wrote and article about their questionable practices. Then, Danny protested AToday's statement about a piano, and AToday wrote about that piano statement. It was published, but the statement didn't clear him by any means. It only brought MORE questions to mind.

Daryl, don't worry because no one cares about him misusing the Donors money. You see, he shares! He is not the only benefactor!

Does anyone care? Obviously not, because no one ever commented about the financial parts anyway. So, see, Danny could care less about any of this. He continues with the "God told me " line to this day. He begs for people to send 3ABN money. I would suggest he continues to believe he is too close to God to be harmed or have to pay the penalty for any of his earthly sins.

Who knows? He could be right, or terribly WRONG! Sister, keep posting. We are all waiting.

To everyone,

Can someone help me find the documetation that states the Linda can't talk for 2 years? I guess I missed that in the contract. Is that 2 years after the contract was signed, or 2 years after the divorce? Is she ever going to be released? I believe she signed under duress.

So Daryl, read the complete thread, every post and every thought. Then come back and ask your questions. In the mean time, those that are 1st hand witnesses should try to get this back on topic by post some more information.

[sonshineonme]

From my point of view, I'd say that John and Mark both knew the problem Danny had. Linda's only problem was that she was in the dark about the problem until right before the end of the marriage. Then, I'd say she was in such shock she dove under cover to catch her breath and take time to reason out what had just happened. The wife is always the last to know. Wifes will believe their husband lies before they will believe anyone else telling her the truth, but when it comes from the husband, it is like getting shot in the gut and bleeding for a very, very long time.

John and Mark came in about 5-6 years too late. The damage had already been done. There was no way to take his action back! It was a done deal and it was there right in his face. John and Mark were unable to change the past. All that they could do was deal with the problem right in their face with 3ABN at stake. The only choice Danny had was to get rid of Linda or be found out! They backed him for "The greater Good". Oops! Guess they decided wrong. It has NOT been for the greater good! It could be the perception of apparent death of him and 3ABN.

That is only my opinion. I understand that doesn't mean much anymore.

I have posted post after post showing documentation about how he is deceitful in his financial dealings. I have backed it up with public documentation. AToday wrote and article about their questionable practices. Then, Danny protested AToday's statement about a piano, and AToday wrote about that piano statement. It was published, but the statement didn't clear him by any means. It only brought MORE questions to mind.

Daryl, don't worry because no one cares about him misusing the Donors money. You see, he shares! He is not the only benefactor!

Does anyone care? Obviously not, because no one ever commented about the financial parts anyway. So, see, Danny could care less about any of this. He continues with the "God told me " line to this day. He begs for people to send 3ABN money. I would suggest he continues to believe he is too close to God to be harmed or have to pay the penalty for any of his earthly sins.

Who knows? He could be right, or terribly WRONG! Sister, keep posting. We are all waiting.

To everyone,

Can someone help me find the documetation that states the Linda can't talk for 2 years? I guess I missed that in the contract. Is that 2 years after the contract was signed, or 2 years after the divorce? Is she ever going to be released? I believe she signed under duress.

So Daryl, read the complete thread, every post and every thought. Then come back and ask your questions. In the mean time, those that are 1st hand witnesses should try to get this back on topic by post some more information.

Fran, did you go to her website (www.lindashelton.org) and see the attached document she has there that was was forced to sign? It states it there. She can not speak about this till Dec of this year, or her severence is cut off (gagged). Personally, I think this was a mixed blessing, as Danny is bringing himself down, and she can't be blamed for it. It also caused people to watch Danny's actions carefully, and notice his bashing of her while he knew she could say nothing in her own defense. That hurt him. Made people very suspicious. Yes, she did sign this under complete duress. I know this to be a fact.

This post has been edited by sonshineonme: Jul 2 2006, 04:57 PM

[Fran]

Fran, did you go to her website (www.lindashelton.org) and see the attached document she has there that was was forced to sign? It states it there. She can not speak about this till Dec of this year, or her severence is cut off (gagged). Personally, I think this was a mixed blessing, as Danny is bringing himself down, and she can't be blamed for it. It also caused people to watch Danny's actions carefully, and notice his bashing of her while he knew she could say nothing in her own defense. That hurt him. Made people very suspicious. Yes, she did sign this under complete duress. I know this to be a fact.

Thank you! Now everyone knows where it is.

[watchbird]

To everyone,

Can someone help me find the documetation that states the Linda can't talk for 2 years? I guess I missed that in the contract. Is that 2 years after the contract was signed, or 2 years after the divorce? Is she ever going to be released? I believe she signed under duress.

I agree. And the exact url is http://www.lindashelton.org/contract.html. It is not listed on one of her menus, but is to be found embedded in one of the "answers" in the Q&A page. It actually gives dates as well as length of time. Here is the exact wording of that section:

3. Three Angels also agrees to pay Linda Shelton $75,000 for each of the years 2005 and
2006. This money will be paid out in 24 equal installments ($6,250.00) beginning the first
Monday of January, 2005, and continuing to be paid on the first Monday of each month for the
next 23 months, ending with the payment on the first Monday of December 2006. These
payments shall continue to be made only insofar as Mrs. Shelton complies with the conditions
specified below.

I suppose the whole document could be posted here since it is already displayed in a public place. It is a facsimile, so it will either have to be posted as an image file or else typed by someone.

[Fran]

Thank you! Now everyone knows where it is.

Can anyone explain #7 where it saYs, "during the period of payments to Mrs. Shelton or afterwards" means?

http://www.lindashelton.org/

Select the Question Tab and read #3, "Why is it that you are not able to defend yourself from the accusations in a frank and open manner?" With in the Answer you will see red letters "Click here to view this contract" Click on those word. You are there.

Or go to: http://www.lindashelton.org/contract.html.

I suggest the longer way so you can read all the questions and devotionals....

I suppose the whole document could be posted here since it is already displayed in a public place. It is a facsimile, so it will either have to be posted as an image file or else typed by someone.

I was going to do that before I asked for the 2 year question, but someone complained about long posts, so I refrained. If someone else would like to do that, I would be more than happy to read the 4 page contract again for another refresher.

[HUGGINS130]

actually, if we're really lucky, the topic will flat out die.

IN THE MEAN TIME STILL LURKIN

[Clay]

I agree with you completely in that we should never elevate any human being, however, we must respect the position, but not necessarily the person, in the same way Paul respected the High Priest's position, although not the person himself.

I am very concerned about the person holding the position. If what is being said about this person is even remotely true, then that person needs to be exposed and removed, hoever, I am not sure if this the the proper way to do it, however, if I couldn't find any other way to do it, I would probably resort to this myself.

By the way, I am going to ignore any accusative posts, so don't waste your breath.

naw Daryl I don't think you would... while I don't know you, it seems that you would probably support the status quo until it was proven beyond a doubt that it was time for a change.... I say that based on my observation of your running of your forum, which IMO tends to steer clear of controversy be it theological or otherwise.... your questions suggest this approach, i.e. avoid controversy, make sure its factual before you make it public, respect the position unless there is proof to the contrary.....

This post has been edited by Clay: Jul 3 2006, 12:21 AM

[Daryl Fawcett]

You are probably right, Clay.

You may know me better than I know myself, however, according to the Bible, a thing is established, if I remember correctly, by two or more witnesses.

[Clay]

You are probably right, Clay.

You may know me better than I know myself, however, according to the Bible, a thing is established, if I remember correctly, by two or more witnesses.

well as you will read in this particular thread, two or more witnesses have shared the same testimony...... and as I stated previously, I don't really know you, I have observed how your forum is run and base my perceptions on that observation.... let me add... I could be totally wrong....