Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[GrandmaNettie]

I read somewhere that Doug Batchelor, Kenneth Cox, Wintley Phipps and several others, said they would never open their books to these 2 men [Joy and Pickle] under the same circumstances.

Sam, interesting that you would bring up Doug Batchelor to bolster your case, who has been mentioned in another thread as being highly endorsed by Ernie Knolls, false prophet extraordinaire.

Interesting that you would bring up "highly endorsed by Ernie Knolls, false prophet extraordinaire" in such a way as to suggest that Doug Batchelor would not bolster Sam's case.  I called Amazing Facts to inquire about what relationship existed between Ernie Knolls and Doug Batchelor.  Doug Batchelor's secretary/MIL just informed me that Doug has never spoken with Ernie Knolls.  

A self-proclaimed prophet's uninvited endorsement does not necessarily sully a person's value or reputation, IMO.  What other thread discusses this?  I've searched Adventtalk and your post is the only one that mentions Ernie Knolls.

[Bob Pickle]

Also I do think it worth mentioning the letter was from ASI and only drafted by Harold lance as their representative and with their vote and approval, so not his viewpoint alone.

Problem is that I am told that the ASI Executive Committee relied on Harold Lance for their information. So if they took his word for the accuracy of his statement, then their vote and approval doesn't mean much.

Church councils voted that the Sabbath was changed. Their votes didn't make it so or true.

[Artiste]

Thank you for publishing the viewpoint of HAROLD LANCE, Ian.

No problem, but right or wrong I immediately edited it to include quotes of relevant posts from this thread, not realizing so many were already replying....



Also I do think it worth mentioning the letter was from ASI and only drafted by Harold lance as their representative and with their vote and approval, so not his viewpoint alone.

It is well known that organizations often leave it to their legal counsel (Harold Lance, Atty.) to produce their answers in difficult situations.

[bonnie]

I read somewhere that Doug Batchelor, Kenneth Cox, Wintley Phipps and several others, said they would never open their books to these 2 men [Joy and Pickle] under the same circumstances.

Sam, interesting that you would bring up Doug Batchelor to bolster your case, who has been mentioned in another thread as being highly endorsed by Ernie Knolls, false prophet extraordinaire.

Interesting that you would bring up "highly endorsed by Ernie Knolls, false prophet extraordinaire" in such a way as to suggest that Doug Batchelor would not bolster Sam's case.  I called Amazing Facts to inquire about what relationship existed between Ernie Knolls and Doug Batchelor.  Doug Batchelor's secretary/MIL just informed me that Doug has never spoken with Ernie Knolls.  

A self-proclaimed prophet's uninvited endorsement does not necessarily sully a person's value or reputation, IMO.  What other thread discusses this?  I've searched Adventtalk and your post is the only one that mentions Ernie Knolls.

http://www.adventtalk.com/forums/index.php?topic=329.0

[Cindy]

I read somewhere that Doug Batchelor, Kenneth Cox, Wintley Phipps and several others, said they would never open their books to these 2 men [Joy and Pickle] under the same circumstances.

Sam, interesting that you would bring up Doug Batchelor to bolster your case, who has been mentioned in another thread as being highly endorsed by Ernie Knolls, false prophet extraordinaire.

Interesting that you would bring up "highly endorsed by Ernie Knolls, false prophet extraordinaire" in such a way as to suggest that Doug Batchelor would not bolster Sam's case.  I called Amazing Facts to inquire about what relationship existed between Ernie Knolls and Doug Batchelor.  Doug Batchelor's secretary/MIL just informed me that Doug has never spoken with Ernie Knolls.  

A self-proclaimed prophet's uninvited endorsement does not necessarily sully a person's value or reputation, IMO.  What other thread discusses this?  I've searched Adventtalk and your post is the only one that mentions Ernie Knolls.

To bolded text above:

True.

We hope and pray all will endorse truth but agreement with that does not mean vice versa--agreement with the teachings or proclamations of those who do the endorsings...

We all need to "Prove all things and hold fast that which is good"

[reddogs]

Now this is what is considered hard information, not just hearsay...

But what parts of it are true, reddogs? There are parts of it that are demonstrably false and slanted.

Whatever the circumstances, am I correct to say the basic information is true....

1)Danny and 3ABN had accepted the process as proposed by ASI.

2)ASI and Linda's team could not come to a agreement on the process.

3)ASI dropped the effort to proceed with the process.

[Bob Pickle]

Again I want to say that I was not part of Linda's team.

We more or less did agree on limiting the investigation, but then Harold complained about our handling the other issues in other ways. I think he was out of line in such a prohibition if he was going to refuse to deal with the issues.

I had a problem with going along with Danny's stated objective of using the ASI process as a sort of smokescreen, and I could not understand why Harold was willing to go along with that.

What we did not agree on was Harold's intended prohibition against either side asking questions during the tribunal process. We also did not agree with Harold's intended prohibition against any evidence being released. Without the release of any evidence, the rumors would not cease, since ASI was already under suspicion by the disenchanted.

Whether Harold's having these parameters in concrete represented his will, ASI's will, Danny's will, or Garwin's will, I can't say. So I really don't know whose proposal such parameters were, or whether our objections to these two points were ever presented to ASI leadership.

[scratsmom]

Thank you Sam for your posts. You have helped to make this issue more transparent and clear. Others try to muddy up the waters but your post was honest and transparent, full of truthful facts.  

Those in the pews value your input and find it credible.

Junebug, you have a right to speak for yourself and maybe your close friends, but isn't it somewhat presumptious to give a stamp of approval for the rest of us? 

[Bob Pickle]

We also did not agree with Harold's intended prohibition against any evidence being released. Without the release of any evidence, the rumors would not cease, since ASI was already under suspicion by the disenchanted.

I'll explain more. Gailon and I were both optimistic that ASI could oversee a fair and unbiased process, but there were others that didn't think so. In that environment the release of only findings without evidence, such as the publication of a statement like that of Harold Lance of January 24, 2007, would only raise more questions and tarnish the reputation of ASI, UNLESS the party declared guilty by ASI confessed to that effect.

Without a confession, it was necessary, in my view, to release enough evidence to convince everyone that the ASI panel had made the right decision. Then the rumors would cease.

[GRAT]

Thank you Sam for your posts. You have helped to make this issue more transparent and clear. Others try to muddy up the waters but your post was honest and transparent, full of truthful facts. 

Those in the pews value your input and find it credible.

Junebug, you have a right to speak for yourself and maybe your close friends, but isn't it somewhat presumptious to give a stamp of approval for the rest of us? 

Amen! Amen! and Amen!!!   

[bonnie]

Thank you Sam for your posts. You have helped to make this issue more transparent and clear. Others try to muddy up the waters but your post was honest and transparent, full of truthful facts. 

Those in the pews value your input and find it credible.


Junebug, you have a right to speak for yourself and maybe your close friends, but isn't it somewhat presumptious to give a stamp of approval for the rest of us? 

Boy, that was simple. Post something by Harold Lance and all is explained and right with the world.
How much time could have been saved if someone had done that early on. None of us would have questioned after that

[Sam]

No I don't remember. I remember that Danny/3abn were quite willing to allow ASI to mediate but low and behold ASI put out a public statement that Mrs. Shelton's side were not willing to follow all the rules and guidelines.  Surely you have read that statement as that is one of the many things that Mr. Pickle and Joy have published.  To read that statement and then declare that Danny/3abn didn't want to go through ASI is incomprehensible to me.

Now Sam, your statement above comes across as if you are a bald face liar. How can you say such a thing?

Harold Lance was quite clear to us that both sides were to have input into the rules. Here you make it sound as if the rules were predetermined, and that we weren't to have any input into the rules.

You should have said that both sides could not agree as to what the rules were to be. That would have been accurate.

Another thing you say above that makes you look like a liar is that you refer to me as part of "Mrs. Shelton's side." I made it quite clear that that was an inappropriate label.

It was not known what his interest was in the matter until Linda later identified Joy as her representative. Joy then introduced Pickle and Matthews as part of Linda's team. Since that time Joy, Pickle and Matthews always were included in any correspondence sent to Linda.
                                         

[Bob Pickle]

Sam, got a quote from Gailon to Harold which says that I was part of Linda's team? There might be one.

[Bob Pickle]

It became clear that Joy, Pickle and Matthews had interests far beyond the issues that ASI had agreed to consider.

What does "ASI" mean? The membership or only the nine members of the executive committee?

[Snoopy]

I was thinking the same thing, scratsmom!  Although I am currently disenchanted with the pews, when I am in one I prefer to speak for myself!!!

Thank you Sam for your posts. You have helped to make this issue more transparent and clear. Others try to muddy up the waters but your post was honest and transparent, full of truthful facts.  

Those in the pews value your input and find it credible.

Junebug, you have a right to speak for yourself and maybe your close friends, but isn't it somewhat presumptious to give a stamp of approval for the rest of us?