Why some Adventist can't let go of 3ABN saga...?

[reddogs]

The news out of 3ABN seems so familiar, it kind of reminds me of Jim and Tammy Faye Baker and their Praise the Lord minitries. Yes that Jim Baker, American televangelist, a former Assemblies of God minister, and a former host (with his then-wife Tammy Faye Bakker) of The PTL Club, a popular evangelical Christian television program. A sex scandal led to his resignation from the ministry. Subsequent revelations of accounting fraud brought about his imprisonment and divorce and effectively ended his time in the larger public eye. My aunt watched and loved them and stood by them no matter what, she would not allow that anything they did could possibly be illegal or that Jim could betray Tammy Faye in any way. Then you have Jimmy Swaggart, tremoundous speaker, oh he was the best preacher this side of the Mississippi and no one could say anything bad about him in my aunts house, until his downfall, again with adultery. Then there was Oral Roberts, a neo-Pentecostal televangelist who started out as a traveling faith healer. He was also a leader in the charismatic movement and a powerful orator. My grandmother never missed a show, until he threathened to go up in his tower at the University and  announced to a television audience that unless he raised $8 million by that March, God would "call him home" (a euphemism for death)....it was all too much to believe....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oral_Roberts

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Bakker

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Swaggart

They became like a god to many people who followed their every word and declaration, more important than anything else in their lives, and they couldnt let them go no matter what they did or said, and these are good Christians that were watching the shows or sending in donations and going to their crusades and big events. Are Adventist doing the same thing with 3ABN and Danny and Linda, I wonder.........

[Johann]

Might there be a good reason to wonder?

[Daryl Fawcett]

Is there also a wikipedia on Danny Shelton?

[reddogs]

Is there also a wikipedia on Danny Shelton?

Not under his name yet, but the saga is there.......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3ABN

[Bob Pickle]

Will someone be starting one on Danny?

[Snoopy]

WOW!  Linda gets billing as a co-founder there.  Wonder how long that will last?

Is there also a wikipedia on Danny Shelton?

Not under his name yet, but the saga is there.......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3ABN

[Donna]

one GREAT BIG difference here. Oral Roberts, Jim Baker and Jimmy Swaggert did not sue their accusers because they were guilty of the accusations made against them. Danny Shelton and 3ABN did sue because their accusers have made false and defamitory accusations.

[Bob Pickle]

If you can't name one such false accusation, you just lied.

By your reasoning, if they had have sued, that would prove that the allegations against them were lies even when they weren't.

[scratsmom]

one GREAT BIG difference here. Oral Roberts, Jim Baker and Jimmy Swaggert did not sue their accusers because they were guilty of the accusations made against them. Danny Shelton and 3ABN did sue because their accusers have made false and defamitory accusations.  

A little early to be making that claim, huh, Donna? If I remember correctly, the above televangelists claimed that their accusers were false at first; until the revealed facts made that impossible. Maybe they didn't sue because they had better legal advice--or didn't have someone who would foot the bill for them??  :scratch:

In this case, the accusers have been accused of making false accusations, just as 3abn has been accused of the various things that Pickle and Joy have accused them of. Being accused nor being sued "proves" anything. Making public all the facts will tell whether the accusations are false or not.  

Scratsmom
:hamster:

[Mary Sue Smith]

Everyone can talk about this until they are blue in the face, puffing smoke everywhere because they are all huffed up. It won't change the FACTS.

Donna is correct.   :goodpost:  If you were being accused and it was true information, would you go to court over it and sue the person accusing you?  It makes perfect sense that Danny would go to court because folks--what Mr. Pickle and Mr. Joy say ISN'T TRUE. It is a plain and simple fact.  You can accuse Danny and 3ABN all you want but you will get nowhere with it--because the truth doesn't change. 

So what folks will want to do who are reading these forums is check PACER documents as they become available. They will tell the truth of what is happening in court.  Don't rely on what mere people are saying but check it out for yourself.  And when you do see what is said to be "documents" make sure you are seeing the full and complete document and not just part of it. 

Or folks can just wait until the verdict arrives from the Judge.  It shouldn't be too much longer.

[ex3abnemployee]

Everyone can talk about this until they are blue in the face, puffing smoke everywhere because they are all huffed up. It won't change the FACTS.

Donna is correct.   :goodpost:  If you were being accused and it was true information, would you go to court over it and sue the person accusing you?  It makes perfect sense that Danny would go to court because folks--what Mr. Pickle and Mr. Joy say ISN'T TRUE. It is a plain and simple fact.  You can accuse Danny and 3ABN all you want but you will get nowhere with it--because the truth doesn't change. 

So what folks will want to do who are reading these forums is check PACER documents as they become available. They will tell the truth of what is happening in court.  Don't rely on what mere people are saying but check it out for yourself.  And when you do see what is said to be "documents" make sure you are seeing the full and complete document and not just part of it. 

Or folks can just wait until the verdict arrives from the Judge.  It shouldn't be too much longer.

How do you know that what Bob and Gailon are saying isn't true, Junebug? I can tell you that at least some of what they're saying IS true, and I know from personal experience.

You are correct when you say truth and facts don't change. The question is: Will you be willing to accept the truth when it is finally revealed without room for excuse or rebuttal? Time will tell.

[Habanero]

Interesting notion Donna. So if a person is sued for defamation you maintain that they must be assumed guilty? What if I sue you? Should the world assume you are guilty because I sued? I could be some malicious jerk with lots of money who wants to drive you into bancruptcy by keeping you in court for years when you can't afford it.

one GREAT BIG difference here. Oral Roberts, Jim Baker and Jimmy Swaggert did not sue their accusers because they were guilty of the accusations made against them. Danny Shelton and 3ABN did sue because their accusers have made false and defamitory accusations.

[Donna]

What I said has nothing to do with how you chose to take it............to each his own.

Interesting notion Donna. So if a person is sued for defamation you maintain that they must be assumed guilty? What if I sue you? Should the world assume you are guilty because I sued? I could be some malicious jerk with lots of money who wants to drive you into bancruptcy by keeping you in court for years when you can't afford it.

one GREAT BIG difference here. Oral Roberts, Jim Baker and Jimmy Swaggert did not sue their accusers because they were guilty of the accusations made against them. Danny Shelton and 3ABN did sue because their accusers have made false and defamitory accusations.

[Ozzie]

Everyone can talk about this until they are blue in the face, puffing smoke everywhere because they are all huffed up. It won't change the FACTS.

Junebug/Donna/Ian, I'm glad that you've finally noted that one can't change the facts. :TY:  Some people are just slow learners, when it comes to this point.

[Donna]

When did any one of us say different?