A New Sda Face For 3abn...., ....well our wishlist Options

[Guest_statrei_*]

lol

[LadyTenor]

I would rather repond to this in another thread....so let's do it.....

Just pointing out that I edited my post to include another relevant comment and then removed my apology for hijacking the thread because as I read further along, I realized the thread had moved in another direction before my comment. Apparently I was editing while Sarah was simultaneously quoting me so I just wanted to clarify for anyone who might notice the discrepancy...

...also after re-reading my thread, I also wanted to point out that there are many instances of this territorial behavior that I described all over BSDA...my post appears that I have singled out Sarah and I want to clarify and point out that that is NOT the case...after I re-read my post, I realized that it might be construed that way. My apologizes if that is how it was taken, by Sarah or by anyone else...

[watchbird]

. . . .
What I am challenging people to do is accept the fact that God has allowed 3ABN to have the influence world-wide that it has...

OK ... let's take your challenge and examine it carefully. First of all, for what purpose does God "allow" things to happen--particularly, for what purpose does God allow a person to have prosperity, success, and influence? We can extrapolate from some scriptural examples, but Ellen White tells us the answer directly. According to her, it is for the purpose of testing them to see how they will handle wealth and influence. There is a very interesting little "testimony" back in one of the early books in which Ellen starts out by praising a certain woman for her strength and steadfastness through a number of serious and trying circumstances. Then she goes on to describe how her circumstances have now changed and as the result of the change in circumstances her temptations will be of a different nature than before. And somewhere along there she says something like, God tested you with adversity and you passed the test wonderfully well. Now He will test you with prosperity to see how you will handle that.

As we have seen from the stories of Danny's early life, Danny had actually not done very well in the tests that God had given him up until the time of the founding of 3ABN. And yet, seemingly, God took Danny at his word (that this was something he was doing for God) and tested him by allowing great success to come and great wealth to pass through his hands. Did Danny "pass the test"? Did he handle that success, influence, and wealth in way that would bring honor to God's name? Either you do not believe the testimonies of those who have posted what they have seen, or you know that he did not.

more so than (keeping it real) Hope TV may ever be able to reach---an independent ministry has the ability to do things (good and bad) that cannot be done in an direct organizational relationship (i.e. BSDA is a perfect example).

I am not good at number recall, so I don't remember the statistics given regarding the growth of HOPETV as compared with the growth rate of 3ABN. But I suspect that if you did a projected rate of growth that you would find HOPETV well ahead of the curve in playing "catch-up" in ability and world-wide coverage.

Howver, that is not the real question. There is still the fact that "power corrupts", which in this case means that all TV programming should not be funneled through just one channel. Never again should Adventists have only one choice of TV stations. In truth, we already have a variety. When one buys the dish which gets HOPE TV, at least in the US, one also has access to Loma Linda Broadcasting Net (an independent organization though closely linked to a denominational entity). We also have SAFE TV, which is a sole proprietership owned by an Adventist layman. And there are others "in the wings", which are currently only broadcasting locally, but will doubtless become better known as time goes by. So as to your questions:

In "replacing 3ABN", one would still have to address the following concerns:

1. Who do you replace it with, that will carry the weight and influence and yet still not directly under the guise of the church.

2. What does the structure look like?

We will not replace it with any one thing. It will be replaced by many entities which will have various degrees of weight and influence and have different degrees of linkage to the church. While no one of them may ever come to match the power and influence of 3ABN, taken together, they will be more influential, for their aggragate programming can be at the same time more diverse and more speciallized than can any one entity. These will most likely start out as small part time and local efforts--churches, for example, will develop facilities for broadcasting their sermons to their local viewing area, and once the have the facilities they will add other programming besides the local church service. Some of these will find wider distribution to nation or world wide entities such as LLBN, HOPE, or BlueMountain, and some will develop their own facilities so as to extend their broadcast range.

There will be a lot more emphasis on "programming on demand" as contrasted with scheduled programming. Programs will be stored on web to be available for viewing at the viewers' convenience--either by computer or on TV. Once these entities become more secure in the marketplace, they will doubtless offer their archived programs for downloading, much as we can download MP3 files for listening from our own computer whether connected to the net or not.

There is the start of this now, in fact, and finding the sources might be a function that someone on BSDA might want to undertake and post on BSDA--that is, the urls where such archived programming can be viewed. Perhaps you might even want to make a list of such programming with direct clickable links from BSDA. The same could be done for MP3 files, which are at this point, much more numerous, and in which one can find not only music but sermon and seminar presentations. There are also video seminar presentations which can be accessed on-line. So this concept is not something far-fetched and way in the future. It is already here. It will grow. And as it does, each interest group will be able to pick their own programming, rather than needing to influence some central programming committee so as to include the things that they want somewhere in their lineup.

3. Back to the OP, what does the direct shows, programming, and focus need to look like to better minister to the SDA's in the U.S. (adding for clarity) as a viable alternative to other Christian channels such as TBN?[/color]

Perhaps I answered this to some extent above. But there will still be TV Networks which minister not only to SDAs but which reach out to those of all faiths and of no (Christian) faith at all. Our church has a really active group which is studying how to reach the "post-modern" mind, for example. I think we can expect programming to come from this group which will be attempting to reach this segment of our society. I'm not sure that we really want to have any channel which is directly comparable to TBN--or most of the other Christian stations, from Catholic to Pentecostal. I would hope that we would have what I would call "light watching" segments, comparable to the nature/music videos of the Worship Channel, for those who live with their TV on, but mostly want it for background. But when you get into music, whose style do you play? And making a mixture of all styles doesn't "work"--for that only increases the number that don't like what they hear. On one channel, the best one could do would be to have different hours for different styles. That would certainly be an improvement over a steady diet of bland bluegrass. But with multiple channels, one channel could speciallize in one style--or range of styles--while another took another segment of the range.

Once we break out of the mold of thinking of only one channel to do it all, then the possibilities widen exponentially with the addition of more channels. But while it may be nice to dream about what kind of things we would want to see, in reality, we seldom know what we want till after we see it. And it is, as others have pointed out here, quite a fruitless effort to make remodeling suggestions for a house that has shown that it is built on a termite ridden foundation.

[calvin]

3abn is more than Danny Shelton. Could not God use 3abn despite Danny? I see many are being blessed by the ministry, It is Written, the Net series, etc. Are we so intend on riding Danny from 3abn that we see only 3aqbn producing evil? That is taking a rather myopic view IMO.

[Panama_Pete]

3abn is more than Danny Shelton. Could not God use 3abn despite Danny? I see many are being blessed by the ministry, It is Written, the Net series, etc. Are we so intend on riding Danny from 3abn that we see only 3aqbn producing evil? That is taking a rather myopic view IMO.

And every six-pack of Coors could come with a complimentary copy of Steps to Christ. Then we could all say, "Thank you, Joseph Coors, for your blessed ministry."

[calvin]

And every six-pack of Coors could come with a complimentary copy of Steps to Christ. Then we could all say, "Thank you, Joseph Coors, for your blessed ministry."

...and your point is?

[beartrap]

3abn is more than Danny Shelton. Could not God use 3abn despite Danny? I see many are being blessed by the ministry, It is Written, the Net series, etc. Are we so intend on riding Danny from 3abn that we see only 3aqbn producing evil? That is taking a rather myopic view IMO.

Adolph Hitler did wonderful things for the average German citizen. Did the good things that the Nazi party did somehow justify the atrocities that they performed under Hitler? Could you somehow seperate Hitler from his party, vilify the man, and sanctify the party?

How about Saddam Hussein and the Baath party. Could you seperate the two, damning Hussein and canonizing the party? They ran a secular government (an anomoly in the middle east), and had the third largest standing army in the world (providing many jobs), and they also had a tremendous educational system. They did many good things.

Hitler founded and ran the Nazi party. Saddam established the fundamental oeration of the Baath party and ran it. Danny Shelton founded and runs 3ABN. Under the facade of the things that Adventists want to see and support financially, 3ABN is Danny Shelton, and Danny Shelton is 3ABN. Many times he has told me and others that 3ABN is Danny Shelton and Danny Shelton is 3ABN. This is his words. If he is evil, then it is evil. If he has maliciously sought to hurt and destroy people, then it has maliciously sought to hurt and destroy people. If He needs to be replaced, then it needs to be replaced.

This post has been edited by beartrap: Jul 11 2006, 11:54 PM

[Guest_statrei_*]

3abn is more than Danny Shelton. Could not God use 3abn despite Danny? I see many are being blessed by the ministry, It is Written, the Net series, etc. Are we so intend on riding Danny from 3abn that we see only 3aqbn producing evil? That is taking a rather myopic view IMO.

OK, let's broaden the view, Calvin. Do you believe that Danny would allow anyone to take 3ABN from him?

[awesumtenor]

OK, let's broaden the view, Calvin. Do you believe that Danny would allow anyone to take 3ABN from him?

About as quickly as that Dr in NYC who blew up his home rather than let it be sold in a divorce settlement... spite and megalomania would not allow him to let it exist without him.

In His service,
Mr. J

[simplysaved]

3abn is more than Danny Shelton. Could not God use 3abn despite Danny? I see many are being blessed by the ministry, It is Written, the Net series, etc. Are we so intend on riding Danny from 3abn that we see only 3aqbn producing evil? That is taking a rather myopic view IMO.

Exactly! God uses things and us--in spite of us...and I would agree that it is a very myopic view.

[Guest_statrei_*]

Let me see if I understand this. No one on this forum has ever seen the Creator nor the devil yet we have a lot of folk claiming to know whta the devil is doing and what the Creator is doing. Is that presumption or what? All you have done is decide in your mind what you think God will do and what you think the devil will do then you proclaim with a loud voice your great discovery.

This post has been edited by statrei: Jul 12 2006, 12:41 PM

[simplysaved]

I agree...on both sides of the paradigm...which is precisely why focusing on possible to improve the line-up makes more sense.

Let me see if I understand this. No one on this forum has ever seen the Creator nor the devil yet we have a lot of folk claiming to know whta the devil is doing and what the Creator is doing. Is that presumption or what. All you have done is decide in your mind what you think God will do and what you think the devil will do then you proclaim with a loud voice your great discovery.

[Guest_statrei_*]

I agree...on both sides of the paradigm...which is precisely why focusing on possible to improve the line-up makes more sense.

The reason your suggestion does not make more sense is because Danny is the owner of 3ABN. You cannot change it without him -- unless you are planning on taking Brandy's place.

[Hersheys99]

I agree...on both sides of the paradigm...which is precisely why focusing on possible to improve the line-up makes more sense.

I understand what you are saying but in the case of 3ABN its isn't just the line up that makes it bad. It is the person behind it all & like Bear has stated Danny is 3ABN & 3ABN is Danny so in order to keep 3ABN you keep Danny cause I think he would let it completely crumble before he stepped down. IF he really wanted to keep it for the right reasons he would have stepped down instead of sacrificing Linda.

This post has been edited by Hersheys99: Jul 12 2006, 12:44 PM

[Clay]

bottomline.... things don't change at 3abn unless Mr. Shelton gives a green light to those changes..... one does not have to be "visionary" to "see" that...







This post has been edited by Clay: Jul 12 2006, 01:16 PM