3ABN crucial documents, some context Options

[sister]

This is the most recent letter that is circulating attributed to Dr. Walter Thompson:

From Walter Thompson
Chairman, 3ABN board of Directors

Regarding Danny's marriage

Dear Family and Friends of 3ABN,

Two years ago 3ABN was challenged by the most difficult battle the ministry has ever faced. It was a battle that threatened the very existence of the ministry and the work of preaching the end time message of the Three Angel's to the world. It is only because of the grace and power of God Almighty, and the faithful support of you, the 3ABN family, that the ministry has survived to preach another day. Today, the ministry is stronger than it has ever been and its reach into the world even broader and more powerful for the cause of truth.

As is always the case when in the public eye, questions arise,stories abound, and rumors spread. We thank God that you have trusted the leadership and board of 3ABN during this time and have stayed with us in ministry. More recently some of you have heard that Danny has found one to comfort him in his loneliness and sorrow. You may have also heard rumors about an allegedly illegal divorce occurring without Biblical grounds. This letter is an attempt to fill you in with the facts.

As chairman of the board I have been in the midst of this long and drawn out ordeal from the beginning. I was there when we counseled with Linda over and over again. I was present during the pleas and prayers, seeking to get her to give up her relationship with the doctor. I have seen and heard the evidence upon which the board has taken the action that it has taken. I have been one that has plead with Linda to keep her marriage and her ministry and offered to provide counseling for them. I have known Danny and Linda almost from the beginning of the ministry and have been in their home many times. They had a good marriage. It was not until this third party got in the middle did things begin to fall apart. It is also true that Danny really did want to get back together again, but when it became obvious that couldn't happen, he correctly had to close the door on that part of his history lest it destroy him and the ministry.

The divorce was a mutually agreed thing, even the choice to get it from Guam where there would be no long wait. Linda had originally planned to move to Las Vegas long enough to become a resident there so as to get a divorce there. They then discovered the possibility of a divorce from Guam, checked it out and found it to be legal, and decided to go that route. Though I believe Guam has now stopped the program, the legality of a Guam divorce had previously been taken to the U.S. Supreme Court where it was ruled legitimate. As chairman of the board, I did not try to influence the decision, but I will say that had they not obtained a quick divorce, the ministry would have been placed at much greater risk since the situation was causing so much dysfunction with leadership and staff. I believe time has verified the correctness of what was done then, both by Danny and by the board for the ministry.

Linda's web site recently stated that she and Danny were not divorced. She wrote this after the judge made the decision in Danny's favor. She claims she did not know this when she wrote it. Her web site referred to an e mail I sent to Johann Thorvaldson a year earlier saying that I had never accused her of adultery. I believe that exchange with him was in response to an accusation by him that we had fired her because of adultery. I was merely saying that she was not fired for adultery, but because she had defied the board in not discontinuing a relationship that was threatening to destroy the ministry. (I might add that the doctor also told me he would not break off the relationship, even though I pled with him to do so.) That letter to Johann was correct, and it is true that I have never directly accused her of adultery. That does not mean that I believe Linda is innocent. If by adultery one must be caught in bed with another person, I cannot prove Linda has committed adultery. If, on the other hand, hard evidence indicates that Linda was involved in an unacceptable relationship with another man qualifies for adultery, then there is no question about Danny's moral right to marry again. As a board, we have chosen not to make the details of the evidence available to the public. I believe Satan is the accuser of the brethern. We have chosen to take the "high road" in this whole situation and say nothing more than we have been forced to say to try to quell rumors. We care about Linda and have tried not to do anything to hurt her more than she has already been hurt. I can tell you that I personally spent a great deal of time at 3ABN during those months when this was all happening. I spoke with Linda and Danny on numerous occasions. A sub committee of the board met and prayed with Danny and Linda and pled with Linda to call off the relationship. Danny and Linda spent an 8 hour session with a pair of Christian counselors (non-Adventist in an attempt to avoid bias) who had no doubts about the nature of Linda's conduct. We offered to provide Linda with the opportunity to go away for counseling with a counselor agreeable to both she and us. She did not respond to that offer or request. Finally, the full board met, reviewed Linda's letter of explanation, and voted unanimously to remove her from the ministry and her seat on the board. Other church leaders who have been privy to some of the evidence we have are in full agreement with our decision.

The relationship Linda had with the Norwegian Dr. was not a normal doctor-patient relationship as she claims. It is true. Linda was very concerned about her son Nathan. He was the vehicle through which the Dr. reached Linda. Our evidence leaves no question that this became much more than a doctor-patient relationship. We know that the long hours on the phone together were not about Nathan and have hard evidence to support this knowledge - nor were times spent together on both sides of the Atlantic. Furthermore, she refused to break it off, even after weeks of pleading with her to do so. We, the board believe the evidence we have clearly justifies the divorce and gives Danny the moral and legal right to remarry. Those in church leadership with whom we have shared some of this evidence agree with us. Out of concern for Linda we have been reluctant to make details public.

No, Danny is not to blame for what has happened here. On the contrary, he has bent over backwards trying to make things work and meeting her requests. Yet, she has never acknowledged that it was wrong for her to have another "friend". The things I have stated here are accurate and correct. As far as the lady Danny has married is concerned, I can only say I believe his new wife is a very good person and will be a real asset to him as he carries on his heavy responsibilities. Just to clarify any rumor you may have heard, this relationship began long after the divorce. I was at 3ABN when this lady came from Florida looking for work. There was nothing going on before that time, and Danny definitely was not trying to "dump" Linda. I was with him during much of the time he agonized and mourned her loss. It is one thing to lose a loved one in death. It is much different to lose one to another lover - like cutting a dog's tail off one inch at a time! As to the matter of age difference, I will say that I do not believe that is any of my business. I find nothing in the Bible, and I don't remember any thing in the SOP indicating age differences for married couples. If it is legal, and morally correct, and if entered into with honesty, sincerity and earnest prayer for God's guidance, as I know happened here, it is not for me to criticize. In my own musings about this, I have concluded that it was no accident that brought Brandy to 3ABN. Either the devil was behind it, or God was. There is no question in my mind which one it was.

(Archo Dart was for many years a family and marriage counselor in the Adventist church. When in his 80's, he married one of my patients, who was then in her 50's. She loved and admired him till death many years later.)

I have had an interesting thought this week that I will share with you. It is this. God lost one of his closest companions when Lucifer went astray. More than that, myriads more angels left with him when he left heaven. Talk about grief or emotional pain. Experiences such as this with Linda, I think, help us to understand the pain of loss, and the reality of the war between God and Satan. Some have claimed it takes two to divorce. I don't think that is categorically true!

This has been a terrible injury that has hit 3abn and Danny, and yes, Linda too, but it is one that I believe God understands - and He continues to bless his servants.

We recognize that we live in a world at war, and are working with a ministry that the devil would like to see destroyed. The war is real, and as in any other war there are real casualties. War is never pleasant, and spiritual battles maybe some of the worst. Our hearts still ache for those who have been wounded. Our prayers continue to ascend on their behalf. Should acknowledgement of wrongdoing and penitence ever occur, we would be the first to forgive and forget. Unfortunately,
that has not happened, and we must move on.

Some who have been aware of the growing relationship and the possibility of marriage have thought they should wait for a longer period of time before marrying. In discussions before the event, the 3ABN board reviewed the events of the past couple years and have agreed that there was no moral or legal reason precluding marriage. Realizing the heavy burdens resting on Danny and of his need for companionship, we, the board did not see any reason not to give our blessing to their union. We hope you, our 3ABN family, will agree too, and with us, welcome Brandy with open arms.

Should you have any questions that I might answer, please feel free to send them to me at 3ABN and I will do my best to try to answer them.

Sincerely in the precious name of Jesus,

Walter Thompson
Chairman, 3ABN Board of Directors.
Walter Thompson MD

This is the letter you were looking for from Dr. Walter Thompson, I posted it about a week ago.
Sister

[NormF]

This is the letter you were looking for from Dr. Walter Thompson, I posted it about a week ago.
Sister

Dear Sister,

Thank you for posting the Thompson Letter again, here where it's close at hand. Immediacy is always helpful.

However, for those interested in knowing more and willing to surf a bit, check out the thread on the same subject, C/A's Thompson Letter thread, found at Club Adventist. Moderator Gregory Matthews appended some thoughtful comments under it that I'd recommend reading. And of course, many additional posts follow up on that.

Regards,
Norm

[Clay]

They may not be able to access it if they are not members of that forum (Club Adventist).....

Another thought is this.... since it is said that Mr. Shelton believes God speaks to him, I wonder why God didn't tell Mr. Shelton to do as he told Hosea to do with Gomer?

Hosea 3:1
Then GOD ordered me, "Start all over: Love your wife again,

your wife who's in bed with her latest boyfriend, your

cheating wife.

Love her the way I, GOD, love the Israelite people,

even as they flirt and party with every god that takes their fancy."

[summertime]

They may not be able to access it if they are not members of that forum (Club Adventist).....

Another thought is this.... since it is said that Mr. Shelton believes God speaks to him, I wonder why God didn't tell Mr. Shelton to do as he told Hosea to do with Gomer?

Because both God and Mr. Shelton knew that she had never been in bed with the doctor.

[sister]

They may not be able to access it if they are not members of that forum (Club Adventist).....

Another thought is this.... since it is said that Mr. Shelton believes God speaks to him, I wonder why God didn't tell Mr. Shelton to do as he told Hosea to do with Gomer?

Clay, the problem may be that Mr. Shelton has not read his Bible enough to know that we are supposed to "test the Spirits" and if the voice he hears does not agree with the Word of God, he best pick up his feet and compense to start a runnin'. That he attributes this voice to God, don't make it rightly so. And comparing the "good book" with the actions of Mr. Danny, they are not even in the same ballpark. Just a thought...

[Clay]

More info for inquiring minds... This article ran in the February 2006 issue of AToday and speaks on financial irregularities discovered at 3ABN during their recent tax case against the state of Illinois... thanks goes to Fran for getting it into .pdf format for upload.

Just click the link and your browser should load it; most browsers should be able to load and display the file but you may need to install Adobe Acrobat Reader which you can do here



In His service,
Mr. J

thanks Kevin and thanks Fran for the heads up....

[Hersheys99]

Thanks for sharing that with us. Very enlightening indeed.

[Fran]

Thanks for sharing that with us. Very enlightening indeed.

Documented stuff:

The 2001 Form 990 has 5 pages of notes attached to the return. (You can request copies of these Form 990 returns from the IRS. They are available for the requesting)



Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Page 1; Statement 2
Form 990, Part I, Line 20
Other Changes in net Assets or Fund Balances



Record Split Interest Agreements previously
unrecorded------------------------------------------------------------------- $2,451,034


Reclassification of amounts due to Other Ministries previously classified as
Temporarily Restricted-------------------------------------------------------$(14,282)


Net Unrealized Gains on Marketable Securities---------------- ---------$13.862



Total Changes in Net Assets or Fund Balance-------------------------$2,450,614



I have capitalized some words; I added the Total line words; I have added emphasis and highlighting. The wording from the statement are copied (and) exactly the numbers (that are) the same unless my fingers did a bad typo.



I am interested in the line about money due to other ministries that did not get sent to the other ministries. That is why it is a negative figure. The money was recorded as Income and was reversed by reducing the 3ABN's Income (by sending the money to those ministries hopefully).



Money Received for other ministries is NEVER INCOME!



It is a Liability because it is Income for someone else and is to only be held until forwarded to the other ministries. Once that is done, the Liability is cleared.


This is exactly what I felt would happen to donations that were sent to 3ABN for ADRA. Funds are posted incorrectly and get lost in 3ABN's funds. The other ministry has no idea a donation has been made. That $14, 282 belonged to someone else. This is the amount that maybe the audit found or the Treasurer of 3ABN found. This is why I suggest you always make your donations directly to the ministry you desire.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Does everyone understand what this means? “Other Changes in net Assets or Fund Balances” is where the auditors have made correction entries for the Balance Sheet.

It is where the auditors have to take what is and get it onto the 990 form as what it was supposed to be. The above are from the final numbers submitted to the IRS Form 990 for 2001. This Form is a Non-Profit Organizations Financial Statement in the form of a Tax Return that must be filed on a yearly basis. These are audited figures. These are supposed to audited by independent auditors.



Many would be quick to say that no auditor is independent if they are paid by the entity. I would say that there are times where that is questioned, but proving that is hard unless there is a large amount paid to the Auditing entity or someone blows the whistle as in many cases. I cannot say if it was an independent audit or not. I do not have enough information, so I am assuming it was a good/fair audit because of the very damaging findings.

Now that we all know what the $14,282 dollars was; move on to the $2,451,034. Follow the IL vs. 3ABN tax Lawsuit and the answer is there. The Lawsuit can be found at http://www.revenue.state.il.us/legalinformation/hearings/pt/pt04-1.pdf

The auditors cited what the $2,451,034 was in the IL Property Lawsuit; it has been there from the filing for the lawsuit. I will try to explain exactly what it was/is. Read page 17 of the IL vs. 3ABN Tax Lawsuit. Read the following comments and footnotes.


Before you read, let us talk about Financial Statements and Account Classifications.



Financial Statements are prepared to benefit end users. That would be for the Finance Committee, Donors, and since 3ABN is Global, the financial Statements have an effect on thousands of concerned people globally and would include donors, anyone that is a Seventh-day Adventist or watches 3ABN.



The Income Statement or the Profit/(Loss) Statement are in basically the same report. They are reports for over a specific period of time. (Weekly, Monthly, Quarterly, Yearly) Corporations that do well, look at these financial statements daily to stay on top of changes to fix anything that appears to be broken before it becomes a disaster.



This Income Statement should tell if a project is draining funds that could be used elsewhere to make sure there is wise use of funds.



The chart of accounts should be set up to provide the best understanding of what that account is for. It is illegal to hide expenses. Falsifying Income or expenses is a lie to the end users of Financial Statements, thus making the Financial Statements of no use to anyone.



The Balance Sheet is somewhat different. This report is for a given moment in time. The headers will probably say something like “As of December 31, 2005”. This date will be the day the report is generated. Banks use Balance Sheets and Income Statements to be able to evaluate the standing of a given entity. When they are not accurate, and used to provide an entities financial position, it is considered fraud. Accuracy is imperative to the banker that is making decisions.


The balance Sheet lists all Current Assets; these are cash like items that can be liquidated into cash very quickly. Long Term Assets are assets that can become cash, but it takes longer to liquidate. It also lists Liabilities and Equity. If truthfully stated, any end user can clearly see the financial position of the entity.


Wise accountants run Income and Expense frequently and always benchmark their growth by comparing the current period to the same period over in the past few months/years. When this is done, there will be better control over expenses and tweaking of the budget to better follow the mission of the Corporation.



[b]The Chart of Accounts is vital. The account names should clearly describe what the account is in terms understood by all end user whoever they may be. Some entities hide things by using strange account names.[/b]

I have over simplified the meaning of Financial Statements. There are many more reports such as the Statement of Cash Flow and others. These are only the most basic required statements.



Back to the report from the form 990. What are “Split Interest Agreements”? I have never heard of an account under this title. However, the auditors clearly said this is in the IL vs. 3ABN Tax Lawsuit.



Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Sorry, this is 46 pages. To read it in its entirety you will have to follow the link. It is a pdf file at:

http://www.revenue.state.il.us/legalinformation/hearings/pt/pt04-1.pdf<br />
<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

Footnotes 14 & 15 on page 17



Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


14 The financial report for 2000 contains additional concerns found by the independent auditors.



15 Applicant’s financial reports raise additional questions and concerns. For example, [/color[the unrecorded contribution revenue related to charitable gift annuity agreements were not recorded in conformance with generally accepted accounting principles. The “related party transactions” were acknowledged without identifying the parties.

The notes refer to “split interest agreements,” where applicant received the assets funding the trusts and applicant is to pay certain amounts for specified periods of time to the donors. There is nothing in the record to identify the donors or the assets. None of the trust agreements were supplied. (Applicant’s Ex. Nos. 14, 15)--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Proof is within the Tax property lawsuit on page 19.




Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


61. The Independent Auditor’s Reports for 2000 and 2001 state:



Downlink equipment acquired by gift is not recorded in the
financial statements. In our opinion, Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles require that such donated property
be recorded at its fair value at the date of receipt. It was
not practicable to determine the effects of the unrecorded
equipment on the financial statements.


In connection with the recording of real estate revocable
trusts, the fair values of the trusts were based on internal
estimates performed by the organization. We were unable
to obtain sufficient evidential matter in connection with
the estimates of fair value . 14 (Applicant’s Ex. Nos. 14, 15)15
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------





Now you can see that the $2,451,034 are Split Interest Agreements. (Form 990 Notes)



Split Interest Agreements are:


Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The notes refer to “split interest agreements,” where applicant received the assets funding the trusts and applicant is to pay certain amounts for specified periods of time to the donors. There is nothing in the record to identify the donors or the assets. None of the trust agreements were supplied.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



These facts stated in the Lawsuit and the Form 990 clearly tell us the financial Statements are not presented accurately. How can I, as an end user, use these reports and have confidence when auditors clearly state that the most basic Generally Accepted Accounting Practices are not being followed by 3ABN.



In elementary accounting, the importance and the meaning of GAAP is taught. Accountants with an Associates Degree should understand the importance of the Chart of Accounts and they should understand Income Statements and Balance Sheets. They also know the importance of listing assets and depreciation.



3ABN has been in business over 20 years. This, in itself should say that they have a CFO and more than one accountant. They should have policies and procedures to know what to do when things happen. They should understand the valuation of assets and they should KNOW that the TRUSTS are required to be available. Why did they refuse to give a list of the people on these TRUSTS?


Please reread the comments on the Form 990 and then read the comments from the IL vs. 3ABN Tax Lawsuit.

.
This problem repeats itself.

There is a correction on the 990 for 2002 in the amount of $1,705,916 as Split Interests (TRUSTS) well as an Adjustment of Cash Revocable Trusts in the amount of (- $25,000 negative) .

The 2003 Form 990 reports the there was a Change in the value of Split Interest Agreements in the amount of (-$775,816 negative).


It is clear to see the problem is not what IS on the statements, but what is NOT on the statements. Discrepancies are usually found by honest auditors that are truly independent. However, how can auditors find things if all the source documents are hidden from the auditors?

This brings the Lake Region Conference to mind. It is clearly apparent that 3ABN needs some oversight and direction to establish accountability.



My apologies to anyone currently having Trust Funds with 3ABN

[Fran]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Post #196692 - Tue Nov 29 2005 02:54 PM (From a player, at the mostly Whitesda forum)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Retirees are bigger, more consistent donors. A higher percentage of them have more disposable finances. They have reached an age when they are often thinking more seriously about life and death, and they are often eager to make their remaining time and assets count for Christ in a bigger way. It is not difficult to make them believe that their assets will do more for Christ, when put to use by another organization, than they would in the Church. One can play on the perception that the church is continuously misusing money for extravagance and make them believe that every dollar will go directly to God's work when it is in another's hands.



Furthermore, they are at the age when estate planning is appropriate. Many of the trusts give the holder immediate access to 40% of the principle and 60% is held for annual payout to the donor at rates that vary by age.


In interesting side note on that topic is that the percentage-to-age ratio of return is generally set to national statistics on longevity. Seventh-day Adventists live about ten years longer. [b]Where this can be a problem is that during that extra ten years enjoyed by an Adventist donor, the 60% principle held for the donor can be used up as their percentage of return increases, potentially leaving the trust holder owing the donor money that isn't there.

What happens to all those trusts that never got posted? I have supplied font colors and bolding.

[Clay]

Fran,
Thanks for the crash course in accounting. It is clear that 3abn is a hot mess from a financial standpoint also... again I am reminded of Robert Tilton, Pat Robertson, and other televangelists who have done some shaky financial things......

It is unfortunate that some people will not be convinced even with this evidence...

[NormF]

Clay said of my post several pages back providing an outside link on some relevant comments:

They may not be able to access it if they are not members of that forum (Club Adventist).....

Dear Steve,

You are right; the link I provided only works if you are a C/A member and logged in. For the sake of non-members, let me reprise here. First, Dr. Thompson's letter with footnoting marks inserted, then Gregory Matthews' footnotes following that.

From Walter Thompson
Chairman, 3ABN board of Directors

Regarding Danny's marriage

Dear Family and Friends of 3ABN,

Two years ago 3ABN was challenged by the most difficult battle the ministry has ever faced. It was a battle that threatened the very existence of the ministry and the work of preaching the end time message of the Three Angel's to the world. It is only because of the grace and power of God Almighty, and the faithful support of you, the 3ABN family, that the ministry has survived to preach another day. Today, the ministry is stronger than it has ever been and its reach into the world even broader and more powerful for the cause of truth Note 1.

As is always the case when in the public eye, questions arise,stories abound, and rumors spread. We thank God that you have trusted the leadership and board of 3ABN during this time and have stayed with us in ministry. More recently some of you have heard that Danny has found one to comfort him in his loneliness and sorrow. You may have also heard rumors about an allegedly illegal divorce occurring without Biblical grounds. This letter is an attempt to fill you in with the facts Note 2.

As chairman of the board I have been in the midst of this long and drawn out ordeal from the beginning. I was there when we counseled with Linda over and over again. I was present during the pleas and prayers, seeking to get her to give up her relationship with the doctor. I have seen and heard the evidence upon which the board has taken the action that it has taken. I have been one that has plead with Linda to keep her marriage and her ministry and offered to provide counseling for them. I have known Danny and Linda almost from the beginning of the ministry and have been in their home many times. They had a good marriage. It was not until this third party got in the middle did things begin to fall apart. It is also true that Danny really did want to get back together again, but when it became obvious that couldn't happen, he correctly had to close the door on that part of his history lest it destroy him and the ministry Note 3.

The divorce was a mutually agreed thing, even the choice to get it from Guam where there would be no long wait. Linda had originally planned to move to Las Vegas long enough to become a resident there so as to get a divorce there. They then discovered the possibility of a divorce from Guam, checked it out and found it to be legal, and decided to go that route. Though I believe Guam has now stopped the program, the legality of a Guam divorce had previously been taken to the U.S. Supreme Court where it was ruled legitimate. As chairman of the board, I did not try to influence the decision, but I will say that had they not obtained a quick divorce, the ministry would have been placed at much greater risk since the situation was causing so much dysfunction with leadership and staff. I believe time has verified the correctness of what was done then, both by Danny and by the board for the ministry Note 4.

Linda's web site recently stated that she and Danny were not divorced. She wrote this after the judge made the decision in Danny's favor. She claims she did not know this when she wrote it. Her web site referred to an e mail I sent to Johann Thorvaldson a year earlier saying that I had never accused her of adultery. I believe that exchange with him was in response to an accusation by him that we had fired her because of adultery. I was merely saying that she was not fired for adultery, but because she had defied the board in not discontinuing a relationship that was threatening to destroy the ministry. (I might add that the doctor also told me he would not break off the relationship, even though I pled with him to do so.) That letter to Johann was correct, and it is true that I have never directly accused her of adultery. That does not mean that I believe Linda is innocent. If by adultery one must be caught in bed with another person, I cannot prove Linda has committed adultery. If, on the other hand, hard evidence indicates that Linda was involved in an unacceptable relationship with another man qualifies for adultery, then there is no question about Danny's moral right to marry again. As a board, we have chosen not to make the details of the evidence available to the public. I believe Satan is the accuser of the brethern. We have chosen to take the "high road" in this whole situation and say nothing more than we have been forced to say to try to quell rumors. We care about Linda and have tried not to do anything to hurt her more than she has already been hurt. I can tell you that I personally spent a great deal of time at 3ABN during those months when this was all happening. I spoke with Linda and Danny on numerous occasions. A sub committee of the board met and prayed with Danny and Linda and pled with Linda to call off the relationship. Danny and Linda spent an 8 hour session with a pair of Christian counselors (non-Adventist in an attempt to avoid bias) who had no doubts about the nature of Linda's conduct. We offered to provide Linda with the opportunity to go away for counseling with a counselor agreeable to both she and us. She did not respond to that offer or request. Finally, the full board met, reviewed Linda's letter of explanation, and voted unanimously to remove her from the ministry and her seat on the board. Other church leaders who have been privy to some of the evidence we have are in full agreement with our decision Note 5.

The relationship Linda had with the Norwegian Dr. was not a normal doctor-patient relationship as she claims. It is true. Linda was very concerned about her son Nathan. He was the vehicle through which the Dr. reached Linda. Our evidence leaves no question that this became much more than a doctor-patient relationship. We know that the long hours on the phone together were not about Nathan and have hard evidence to support this knowledge - nor were times spent together on both sides of the Atlantic. Furthermore, she refused to break it off, even after weeks of pleading with her to do so. We, the board believe the evidence we have clearly justifies the divorce and gives Danny the moral and legal right to remarry. Those in church leadership with whom we have shared some of this evidence agree with us. Out of concern for Linda we have been reluctant to make details public Note 6.

No, Danny is not to blame for what has happened here. On the contrary, he has bent over backwards trying to make things work and meeting her requests. Yet, she has never acknowledged that it was wrong for her to have another "friend" Note 7. The things I have stated here are accurate and correct. As far as the lady Danny has married is concerned, I can only say I believe his new wife is a very good person and will be a real asset to him as he carries on his heavy responsibilities. Just to clarify any rumor you may have heard, this relationship began long after the divorce. I was at 3ABN when this lady came from Florida looking for work. There was nothing going on before that time, and Danny definitely was not trying to "dump" Linda. I was with him during much of the time he agonized and mourned her loss. It is one thing to lose a loved one in death. It is much different to lose one to another lover - like cutting a dog's tail off one inch at a time! As to the matter of age difference, I will say that I do not believe that is any of my business. I find nothing in the Bible, and I don't remember any thing in the SOP indicating age differences for married couples. If it is legal, and morally correct, and if entered into with honesty, sincerity and earnest prayer for God's guidance, as I know happened here, it is not for me to criticize. In my own musings about this, I have concluded that it was no accident that brought Brandy to 3ABN. Either the devil was behind it, or God was. There is no question in my mind which one it was Note 8.

(Archo Dart was for many years a family and marriage counselor in the Adventist church. When in his 80's, he married one of my patients, who was then in her 50's. She loved and admired him till death many years later.)

I have had an interesting thought this week that I will share with you. It is this. God lost one of his closest companions when Lucifer went astray. More than that, myriads more angels left with him when he left heaven. Talk about grief or emotional pain. Experiences such as this with Linda, I think, help us to understand the pain of loss, and the reality of the war between God and Satan. Some have claimed it takes two to divorce. I don't think that is categorically true!

This has been a terrible injury that has hit 3abn and Danny, and yes, Linda too, but it is one that I believe God understands - and He continues to bless his servants.

We recognize that we live in a world at war, and are working with a ministry that the devil would like to see destroyed. The war is real, and as in any other war there are real casualties. War is never pleasant, and spiritual battles maybe some of the worst. Our hearts still ache for those who have been wounded. Our prayers continue to ascend on their behalf. Should acknowledgement of wrongdoing and penitence ever occur, we would be the first to forgive and forget. Unfortunately, that has not happened, and we must move on.

Some who have been aware of the growing relationship and the possibility of marriage have thought they should wait for a longer period of time before marrying. In discussions before the event, the 3ABN board reviewed the events of the past couple years and have agreed that there was no moral or legal reason precluding marriage. Realizing the heavy burdens resting on Danny and of his need for companionship, we, the board did not see any reason not to give our blessing to their union. We hope you, our 3ABN family, will agree too, and with us, welcome Brandy with open arms Note 9.

Should you have any questions that I might answer, please feel free to send them to me at 3ABN and I will do my best to try to answer them.

Sincerely in the precious name of Jesus,

Walter Thompson
Chairman, 3ABN Board of Directors.
Walter Thompson MD

Now here are the footnoted comments of Gregory Matthews (an SDA chaplain by the way) to Thompson's public letter above:

Note 1: Those of us who may be considered critics are loyal supporters of the Seventh-day Adventist Church and of the work of God on planet Earth. We acknowledge that God led Danny and Linda Shelton to establish 3-ABN, a ministry that for many years has been led by God. We are thankful for what God has accomplished in the ministry of 3-ABN. To many people, 3-ABN is the face of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Now a scandal has tarred the face of that ministry. People are asking if God is still leading in the ministry of 3-ABN, and/or if God is using present leadership of 3-ABN to guide it in its ministry. These questions are sincere, and valid. Those who have supported 3-ABN in the past, have honest questions. We believe that God is still leading, not only in human life on this planet, but in the ministry of those whom God has called to leadership. But, we are reminded of times in the history of our denomination when human leaders made mistakes. God intervened, and in some cases, but not all, removed those leaders, and allowed old ministries to be replaced by new ones that were more receptive to the leading of the Holy Spirit.

We are waiting to see how God leads in the ministry of 3-ABN. We do not know what God has in mind for 3-ABN. But, we do know that if its leadership fails to follow the leading of the Holy Spirit, God will act in whatever manner God knows is best.

Note 2: None of us who know the law, have ever challenged the right of Guam to issue a divorce to citizens of the United States. We were aware that the U.S. Supreme Court had previously ruled on that question. However, even when divorces are obtained in one of the States of the United States, they may be subject to challenge. Some felt that the Guam divorce was subject to challenge. An [Illinois] State Court has dismissed that challenge. The Guam divorce is legal.

As to the issue of Biblical grounds for Danny to divorce Linda, and then to remarry another, that is a much more complex question. Some of the more liberal SDAs believe in multiple grounds for divorce and remarriage. But, in general, those who are the strongest supporters of 3-ABN believe that divorce followed by remarriage is only Biblical when the other has committed physical adultery. When those people hear ([or] read) 3-ABN say[ing] that Danny had Biblical grounds, they understand that to mean that Linda physically committed adultery. They simply do not understand “Biblical grounds” for divorce and remarriage in any other way.

Note 3: I find the last sentence very interesting. Here it is said that Danny faced a decision between his marriage and his ministry and he chose his ministry. No ministry is dependent upon one person. The ministry of 3-ABN could go on without it present leadership. God is involved, and God will both remove and provide.

Note 4: One might say that the divorce was mutually agreed upon. That does not mean that both parties wanted the divorce. Often in a divorce, one party wants the divorce, the other agrees to it due to the fact that that party sees no option for reconciliation. I have found that one can often understand some of the dynamics that are going on in a divorce by looking at who it is that filed the action to divorce.

Note 5: Court rulings are complex. Sometimes non-lawyers misunderstand what a court has decided. There was a period of time where Linda and others were misinformed as to the ruling of the [Illinois] Court. All who did so regret that misunderstanding.

I am not aware of any time in which anyone has officially accused Linda of physical adultery. But when one talks about Biblical grounds, moral rights, and inappropriate relationships, many of the 3-ABN supporters will hear adultery. From the practical standpoint, 3-ABN might just as well have claimed that Linda committed such. In many ways, I believe that such [a] lack of focus as to what Linda did has hurt her more than an actual charge of adultery would have damaged her. One can rebut a specific charge. It is very hard to rebut a non-specific charge.

Note 6: Again, words and terms are used that communicate physical adultery to 3-ABN supporters. It is implied the Linda and the M.D. had a relationship that was more than professional. There is a clear implication that the 3-ABN Board has evidence that cannot be questioned. One of my questions regarding this is: to what extent was Linda allowed to present a defense? Accusations were made, and people testified before the Board. Was Linda allowed to present a defense in person? Was she allowed to bring witnesses to the Board to testify? If she was not granted all of the above, and more, the Board cannot say that they have evidence that cannot be questioned.

I raise these questions because of what has been circulated by others, to include supporters of 3-ABN. It has been said that the Board once heard evidence that the previous night Linda had spent the night with an adult male, not a relative that was married to another woman. It is also said that because Linda was not allowed to be present, and to present witnesses, that the Board never heard that the previous night the referenced male, and his wife[**], had spent the night with Linda, with both helping her to prepare her written defense, as she was not going to be allowed to be personally present.

Note 7: This entire situation is a tragedy. I have not, and do not intend to criticize Danny for his remarriage. But, that is probably because I may be more liberal than are many of the 3-ABN supporters. If the Board is wrong about the relationship that Linda had with that Dr., then the Board is wrong to tell people that Danny had Biblical grounds.

Note 8: I agree, so what if there is an age difference[?] Nothing should be made of that. Your second from the last sentence is interesting.

Note 9: Brandy should not be the focus of this. Regardless of right or wrong, the issues do not lie with her. The rights or wrongs lie with others. I join you in hoping that people on all sides of this issue will welcome her and the children that she brings to this marriage with both open arms, and with the love of the Lord Jesus Christ.

**Let me insert this clarification in Gregory's comment above: Elder Johann Thorvaldsson, the former European liason for 3ABN, has publicly identified himself as this person, stating that he and his late wife were in fact the very persons in question here. -- Norm

I find Gregory's comments eye-opening. It is easy to get lost within a long document and lose one's overall perspective. Comments like these help one regain that perspective. If ever there were a need for seeing the big picture, this is such an instance.

Regards,
Norm

This post has been edited by NormF: May 3 2006, 05:54 PM

[watchbird]

What will probably happen is what usually happens. If this 3ABN mess blows up and gets national attention, the official church position will be to distance itself, saying that 3ABN was an independent ministry without church oversight, thus it cannot be held responsible for what happened there.

And an examination of historical documents, as well as of the observations of persons who observed and/or discussed them at the time, will show that this is not only the correct, but the only legitimate position that they CAN take. For not only was 3ABN an "independent ministry" in the sense of not being owned, directly operated by, or financed at least in part by the official Church entity, but they will show that 3ABN was also an "independent" ministry in the sense of refusing to sign an agreement which would have given the GC even a voice in the administration and program selection of 3ABN.

We saw the reaction of the 3ABN board to this document earlier in one of sister's history vignettes. But unless I missed something (and I do try to pay attention) the substance of this agreement has neither been posted or discussed. But seeing the documents for ouselves might give us more comprehension as to what is meant by "contol" in the 3ABN context.

While it is true that specific church leaders can be faulted for continuing to support and utilize 3ABN after they had ample opportunity to learn of the perfidous things that were going on there, that does not mean that the church as a legal entity had any legal ability to intervene in 3ABN affairs. So, with their hands securely tied not only legally but also by knowledge of the kinds of tactics that had been and were being used on those who did not bow at the Danny altar (as Beartrap and others have described), if they make every attempt to deny complicity that will be fairly close to being factual. (One can only hope that they will take this position rather than entering any legal battle that is involved on the side of support for 3ABN.)

That does not mean that I think they should not have made greater attempts that they did. But the history of the relationship between independent ministries (which used to be called "self-supporting" ministries) and what they call disparagingly the "organized work" is long and contorted and has resulted in the situations that we see today, of which 3ABN is only one example.

[beartrap]

And an examination of historical documents, as well as of the observations of persons who observed and/or discussed them at the time, will show that this is not only the correct, but the only legitimate position that they CAN take. For not only was 3ABN an "independent ministry" in the sense of not being owned, directly operated by, or financed at least in part by the official Church entity, but they will show that 3ABN was also an "independent" ministry in the sense of refusing to sign an agreement which would have given the GC even a voice in the administration and program selection of 3ABN.

From the G.C. President
April 28, 1997 Robert S. Folkenberg

3ABN Board Rejects Agreement: I am deeply
disappointed to report that the Board of Directors of Three
Angels Broadcasting Network voted not to sign an
agreement with the General Conference for a mutually
supportive global distribution of satellite programming.
The April 7 edition of "From the G.C. President"
reported that the General Conference has been in dialogue
with Three Angels Broadcasting Network attempting to
document a working relationship. The draft agreement
(recommended for approval by almost all of the 3ABN
Board members on March 20), neither presumed or
proposed change in 3ABNs governance or programming
and it specifically excluded General Conference "control."
But it did provide the members in each country a voice if
they felt the programming distributed by 3ABN in their
territory was detrimental to the work of the church. Even
that "voice" was not unilateral. It proposed a five-step
issues-resolution process which culminated with a three-person binding arbitration panel (one from 3ABN and one
from the division involved plus a third party agreed upon by
those two).
In addition to utilizing satellite technology to fulfill the
task our Lord assigned to His church and to do so without
duplicating expenses, another reason to reach an agreement
with 3ABN was that several divisions voted that an
agreement was vital to building a long-term relationship
with 3ABN.
One division appealed "to the General Conference to
facilitate future initiatives that will help each congregation
fulfill their soul-winning and soul-retaining responsibility.
Given the willingness and interest of Three Angels
Broadcasting Network to support and expand a television
ministry within the territory of the ___ Division, ... we
request the General Conference to take such steps as may
be necessary leading to formalizing and documenting the
relationship between the General Conference (and) Three
Angels Broadcasting Network ... in order to ensure that
through the normal denominational representative process,
the voice, interests, and ultimately the authority, of the
members of our respective ... constituencies are protected,
for of course, absent an approved record of such
understandings we must reluctantly decline to accept, or
otherwise participate in ..., the generous offers which have
been or may be extended."
In addition to disappointment, I admit to some confusion.
The tone of the 3ABN Board action was gracious and
affirmed its support for "the work of the church" and
"continued loyalty to the cause of the church" yet the stated
reason for the rejection was that "3ABN, its staff, its board,
and many of its viewers and supporters perceive a serious
potential threat to the continuing effectiveness and
operation of the ministry of 3ABN by entering into any type
of contractual agreement with the church."
While denying the constituent authority of members in
each country the right to be heard in an activity which
directly affects their ability to fulfill the mission for which
they are responsible, 3ABN affirms the "authority of its
president," yet expresses its concern about the exercise of
"kingly power" in the church.
While I am a confirmed optimist and pray the 3ABN
Board may reconsider their decision, there are so many
major evangelistic events already scheduled and we are
committed to moving rapidly toward the objective of global
coverage, that the General Conference has no option but to
proceed to establish a global satellite delivery system and
pray that 3ABN will subsequently agree to join the church
in this initiative.

###########################################

Official 3ABN Board Action


April 22, 1997






Elder Robert Folkenberg
President, General Conference SDA
12501 Old Columbia Pike
Silver Spring, MD 20904-6600





Dear Elder Folkenberg,


For many months the 3ABN board has struggled with the issues involved in coordinating our
efforts with those of the organized church. We have prayed, consulted, studied, and discussed at
length your invitation to work together in touching the world for Jesus. This Statement of
Commitment is the final culmination of our work. Please accept it as our sincere expression of
desire to support the work of the church around the world.


I recognize, as do each of the members of our board, that this is not the document that you had
requested. I am sorry. Please do not interpret our statement to be anything but supportive of you as
a person and as the president of God's special instrument, the church.


I am most appreciative of your initiative and of the time and energy that you have invested in this
supportive ministry of the church. More than that , I am grateful for your active support of the
concept of lay ministries and for the encouragement that you have given to them. I pray that this
action will not in any way interfere with your efforts along this line.


I thank you too for your personal phone call to me recently and for your words of friendship and
understanding. They were most appreciated.


Sincerely in the precious name of Jesus,


Walter Thompson


P.S. I am enclosing a copy of a recently letter from Bill Hulsey to our board. In it he expresses so
clearly the sentiments of each one of us.

##################################

Statement of Commitment of 3ABN to the Work of the SDA Church





April 23, 1997


Whereas the 3ABN board desires to support the work of the church in spreading the everlasting
gospel to the whole world


And


Whereas 3ABN has already demonstrated the sincerity of its desire by its positive actions in
support of the work of the church in the past


And


Whereas 3ABN, its staff, its board, and many of its viewers and supporters perceive a serious
potential threat to the continuing effectiveness and operation of the ministry of 3ABN by entering
into any type of contractual agreement with the church,


Therefore


The 3ABN board reiterates its continued loyalty to the cause of the church as described in the
Word of God and as formulated in the 27 fundamental beliefs and doctrines of the SDA Church


And


Offers its resources in accordance with 3ABN's operational policies to work with the SDA church
organization in the proclamation of the everlasting gospel to the whole world.


Accordingly,


3ABN stands ready and available to dream, to discuss and to work with the church in such
cooperative endeavors as the Spirit of God might inspire


And


3ABN seeks the counsel of church constituency and leadership regarding all matters of common
interest, whether of technical, theological or of some other nature that impacts upon our common
objectives and goals


And


3ABN seeks inspirational programming produced in keeping with commonly accepted traditional
SDA standards by church supported entities for its viewing audience


And


3ABN reiterates its support in integrating new members into the body of Christ, which is the
church, all around the world.


Therefore


In keeping with this statement of intent, the 3ABN board reaffirms the authority of its president,
Danny Shelton, to work with the representatives of the church in planning, coordinating and
executing our common objectives.





Walter Thompson, Chairman, 3ABN Board of Trustees






This post has been edited by beartrap: May 6 2006, 08:10 PM

[beartrap]

The above statement is the first in a back and forth mess that went on for another year. I am digging through my files for my copy of the final Agreement that was signed.

[watchbird]

The above statement is the first in a back and forth mess that went on for another year. I am digging through my files for my copy of the final Agreement that was signed.

Well maybe the first that 3ABN sent to Folkenberg. But this still is not the original document which was sent to 3ABN and was presumably the one which caused the reaction described by sister.

These that you posted was the public announcement that Folkenberg sent out after he received 3ABN's letter of rejection, that letter of rejection and their counter proposal.

What I thought we should have a look at was that original document so we could form our own opinion as to whether it deserved this type of histronics.

I'll post the version that I have, and possibly you can confirm whether this was the one that was referred to by both sister and the documents that you posted.

I also have the letter from Hulsey that is mentioned. That too, I think gives a revealing look at the independent attitude that was prevailing even then. I'll post them separately.