Print

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

[Nosir Myzing]

Good point, princessdi. Even atheists can't be faulted for looking at Christians who claim the bible as the authority and don't follow it. If more did, we'd have less atheists as we want them to see that as their authority too being God's written word. A good example is the best witnessing tool there is.

I recently read in the desire of ages that the Pharisee with their self righteous attitudes were just as guided by demons as the Demoniac, but that the Demoniac was better off, as he knew he needed help and a Savior whereas the Pharisee didn't. That made me think...

I know, I meant to answer this the other day.  

Now, I know that the SDA church makes plenty money from the writings of EGW.  However, if they go around handing out the books and selling them to anyone who will take them, why do you think that only supporting SDA members can look to EGW as a spiritual authority?  The two can be mutually exclusive.  Isn't that the point to get as many people as possible to see her as a spiritual authority, and just just the decased founder of a cult?  Let's make up our minds here.....

I'm always amazed when persons, who don't support the SDA church, still try to use Ellen White as an authority figure to bash those who do. If they believe in her, why not follow her teachings, come back into the fold, and be a real Seventh-day Adventist?

[Sister]

Chapter 2
An Inconvenient Truth
Concluded.

When Jesus related the story of the “Good Samaritan”, He did not ask who wanted to be the injured man’s neighbor, but who, with a heart overflowing with Christian compassion was unable to turn aside from a victim of violence, and in doing so became his neighbor.

Three men passed by a battered and naked victim who lay there, half dead, bleeding in the dust on the road to Jericho. It was hot and dusty as the travelers scurried quickly in their haste to make it to their destination. It was essential that they reach it before the darkness of night would blanket the road in silence, supplying evil men with a cloak to cover their crimes. The road that went down from Jerusalem to Jericho had a reputation for violent activity, it was actually called in those days “the bloody road”. A lone traveler often found himself at the mercy of unscrupulous gangs of thieves who were willing to separate him, not only from his possessions, but also from his life. It is against this well known backdrop that Jesus relates His story.

Three men were to come upon the evidence of pain and suffering. The first, a priest. Upon seeing the victim, he gathered up his robes and passed quickly by on the other side of the road. The second, a Levite, stopped. He came and looked, but he too, passed by on the other side of the road. A third man, a Samaritan, when he came upon the scene of the crime had compassion upon the victim. With no concern for himself or his personal safety, he knelt in the dust, cleaned the wounds of the victim and took care of him. After attending to this victim’s immediate needs, the Good Samaritan brought him to a haven of refuge ,where he could recover from his injuries. And when the Samaritan departed the next day he arranged for further care of the victim at his own expense.

At the end of the parable Jesus asks the following question, “So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him who fell among the thieves?” And he said, “He who showed mercy on him.” Then Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.”

There were three good Samaritans who stopped on Linda’s “road to Jericho” and had compassion upon her, tended to her wounds and provided nurturing for her soul. In this minority of three, only two now remain. One is no longer here to share in Linda’s journey. Although she was struck down with cancer, Irmgard Thorvaldsson, brave and courageous woman of God, leaves a legacy of love in the hearts of those who survived her. Numbered among these is her “adopted daughter” Linda Shelton. The other two Samaritans, Irmgard’s husband, Johann and Dr.Arild Abrahamsen remain at Linda’s side. True friendships that will last through eternity, their fellowship is based upon a common faith in Jesus Christ and a desire to share His love and help other victims who have fallen as prey on their “road to Jericho”.

[Pat Williams]

Chapter 2
An Inconvenient Truth
Concluded.

When Jesus related the story of the “Good Samaritan”, He did not ask who wanted to be the injured man’s neighbor, but who, with a heart overflowing with Christian compassion was unable to turn aside from a victim of violence, and in doing so became his neighbor.

Three men passed by a battered and naked victim who lay there, half dead, bleeding in the dust on the road to Jericho. It was hot and dusty as the travelers scurried quickly in their haste to make it to their destination. It was essential that they reach it before the darkness of night would blanket the road in silence, supplying evil men with a cloak to cover their crimes. The road that went down from Jerusalem to Jericho had a reputation for violent activity, it was actually called in those days “the bloody road”. A lone traveler often found himself at the mercy of unscrupulous gangs of thieves who were willing to separate him, not only from his possessions, but also from his life. It is against this well known backdrop that Jesus relates His story.

Three men were to come upon the evidence of pain and suffering. The first, a priest. Upon seeing the victim, he gathered up his robes and passed quickly by on the other side of the road. The second, a Levite, stopped. He came and looked, but he too, passed by on the other side of the road. A third man, a Samaritan, when he came upon the scene of the crime had compassion upon the victim. With no concern for himself or his personal safety, he knelt in the dust, cleaned the wounds of the victim and took care of him. After attending to this victim’s immediate needs, the Good Samaritan brought him to a haven of refuge ,where he could recover from his injuries. And when the Samaritan departed the next day he arranged for further care of the victim at his own expense.

At the end of the parable Jesus asks the following question, “So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him who fell among the thieves?” And he said, “He who showed mercy on him.” Then Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.”

There were three good Samaritans who stopped on Linda’s “road to Jericho” and had compassion upon her, tended to her wounds and provided nurturing for her soul. In this minority of three, only two now remain. One is no longer here to share in Linda’s journey. Although she was struck down with cancer, Irmgard Thorvaldsson, brave and courageous woman of God, leaves a legacy of love in the hearts of those who survived her. Numbered among these is her “adopted daughter” Linda Shelton. The other two Samaritans, Irmgard’s husband, Johann and Dr.Arild Abrahamsen remain at Linda’s side. True friendships that will last through eternity, their fellowship is based upon a common faith in Jesus Christ and a desire to share His love and help other victims who have fallen as prey on their “road to Jericho”.

Just a thought. The Thorvaldssons weren't on Linda's road, they weren't even on her continent. True, they got letters from her for the most part describing herself as bloody and battered and abused, and Johann interpreted all that any one else tried to say to him or explain to him according to Linda's version, and has decided all are liars except for her.

That is his right, but I wonder what the odds are that everyone involved or who was an actual witness in her church, job, home etc , (those who were  really there) are all liars except for Linda?

[Nosir Myzing]

Chapter 2
An Inconvenient Truth
Concluded.

When Jesus related the story of the “Good Samaritan”, He did not ask who wanted to be the injured man’s neighbor, but who, with a heart overflowing with Christian compassion was unable to turn aside from a victim of violence, and in doing so became his neighbor.

Three men passed by a battered and naked victim who lay there, half dead, bleeding in the dust on the road to Jericho. It was hot and dusty as the travelers scurried quickly in their haste to make it to their destination. It was essential that they reach it before the darkness of night would blanket the road in silence, supplying evil men with a cloak to cover their crimes. The road that went down from Jerusalem to Jericho had a reputation for violent activity, it was actually called in those days “the bloody road”. A lone traveler often found himself at the mercy of unscrupulous gangs of thieves who were willing to separate him, not only from his possessions, but also from his life. It is against this well known backdrop that Jesus relates His story.

Three men were to come upon the evidence of pain and suffering. The first, a priest. Upon seeing the victim, he gathered up his robes and passed quickly by on the other side of the road. The second, a Levite, stopped. He came and looked, but he too, passed by on the other side of the road. A third man, a Samaritan, when he came upon the scene of the crime had compassion upon the victim. With no concern for himself or his personal safety, he knelt in the dust, cleaned the wounds of the victim and took care of him. After attending to this victim’s immediate needs, the Good Samaritan brought him to a haven of refuge ,where he could recover from his injuries. And when the Samaritan departed the next day he arranged for further care of the victim at his own expense.

At the end of the parable Jesus asks the following question, “So which of these three do you think was neighbor to him who fell among the thieves?” And he said, “He who showed mercy on him.” Then Jesus said to him, “Go and do likewise.”

There were three good Samaritans who stopped on Linda’s “road to Jericho” and had compassion upon her, tended to her wounds and provided nurturing for her soul. In this minority of three, only two now remain. One is no longer here to share in Linda’s journey. Although she was struck down with cancer, Irmgard Thorvaldsson, brave and courageous woman of God, leaves a legacy of love in the hearts of those who survived her. Numbered among these is her “adopted daughter” Linda Shelton. The other two Samaritans, Irmgard’s husband, Johann and Dr.Arild Abrahamsen remain at Linda’s side. True friendships that will last through eternity, their fellowship is based upon a common faith in Jesus Christ and a desire to share His love and help other victims who have fallen as prey on their “road to Jericho”.

Just a thought. The Thorvaldssons weren't on Linda's road, they weren't even on her continent. True, they got letters from her for the most part describing herself as bloody and battered and abused, and Johann interpreted all that any one else tried to say to him or explain to him according to Linda's version, and has decided all are liars except for her.

That is his right, but I wonder what the odds are that everyone involved or who was an actual witness in her church, job, home etc , (those who were  really there) are all liars except for Linda?

That reminds me. Johann's constant argument has always been that he knows Danny and all were lying because he and Irmgard were with Dr.Arild Abrahamsen, Easter of 2004, when Linda and Brenda were supposed to meet Dr Abrahamsen in his Florida Condo. The part that always has me confused about this is that all parties agree the trip was planned for that time, Linda herself says the Doctor invited her, and that she accepted, Linda herself said that Brenda came to her and said, Danny isn't happy, we should cancel the trip, Danny agrees it was cancelled when he found out, all parties agree it was cancelled for that time. So how does this prove to Johann that any one lied? Why should any of us take this as proof of anything as Johann presents it?

[tinka]

Where you been Defender, The claim is that Linda did go by DS and Brenda bought the ticket. What's wrong with your perception. They argue all the ways she went without anyone knowing.
Here is the double talk again. You can't keep up with yourself.

[tinka]

That is his right, but I wonder what the odds are that everyone involved or who was an actual witness in her church, job, home etc , (those who were  really there) are all liars except for Linda?

Isn't this an amazing statement. Now you got the proof, where are they, how come you don't get them on here and give statements and their witness of your details. That should not be hard since your all in the local loco. All truth is waiting. Can you comply...I doubt it. Your not over the hump with TS!

[tinka]

Johann,
Did you see I finally got it right this time on the quotes. I hope I can do it the next time too. (laugh)

[Pat Williams]

Where you been Defender, The claim is that Linda did go by DS and Brenda bought the ticket. What's wrong with your perception. They argue all the ways she went without anyone knowing.
Here is the double talk again. You can't keep up with yourself.

Tinka is confused and replying to the wrong person.

According to my understanding though, the claim was always that Linda took the trip at a later time as the first one planned with Brenda and the Doctor (easter week/spring vacation) had to be canceled when Danny found out.( Thus the Doctor was with Johann and his wife instead). The further claim was that Linda went later (that she was gone without explanation to Danny and job) but that while she was gone her mother called and left a message on the answering machine referring to a conversation she had with her, and to Linda being in Florida.

Do I have evidence to support this? No. My purpose in writing this is just to correct what Tinka wrote as it is incorrect.

[tinka]

3d actually I am writing to you as I am counter acting your point with bringing that subject up. So now you bring in another point. so Linda went at a later date but the fact remains that the Dr. has proof that he was not there at that time as DS claims he was. right?

added correction, Yes your right as nosir myzing did post about that and I did not click on the right thing so very sorry for the mistake but the point still stands.

[Pat Williams]

3d actually I am writing to you as I am counter acting your point with bringing that subject up. So now you bring in another point. so Linda went at a later date but the fact remains that the Dr. has proof that he was not there at that time as DS claims he was. right?

No, you are mistaken. The Doctor never offered proof he didn't meet Linda when Danny claimed he did. Arild Abrahamsen in his published letter does say he was with Johann and wife easter week 2004, so does Johann. It is Johann who offers that as an alibi, and proof of lying by Danny Shelton, but as both parties agree that the trip was planned but that no trip took place then, no alibi was, or is needed.

The issue really is, is it proper?

Tinka how do you think your husband would react if he found out you were going to Florida to spend time with your Doctor at his condo, after telling him you and a girlfriend were going for a working holiday there without mentioning that part?

edited to add in response to:
"added correction, Yes your right as nosir myzing did post about that and I did not click on the right thing so very sorry for the mistake but the point still stands."

Thank you, and No problem

[Pat Williams]

Chapter 2
An Inconvenient Truth
Continued...

For Linda events eventually escalate from emotional and mental abuse to physical abuse. Although physical abuse is often thought of as an enraged husband beating his wife, there is one form of abuse that is far more devastating for its victim physically, emotionally and spiritually: when what was once the joys of the marriage bed become an abusive act. What was once an expression of mutual love between a devoted married couple becomes a forced act of non-mutual consent for the animal gratification of one partner forced upon an unwilling spouse.  When a husband who has told his wife he wants to get rid of her and she refuses his sexual advances, he then forces himself on her physically and states that it is his “right” until they are divorced, an act that was once consider a joy becomes little more than the most vile crime that can be committed against a woman. In the midst of all this harassment, built entirely upon fabricated “evidence”, Linda asks Danny the one question she can not answer for herself, “Why are you treating me like this?” He answers, “Because I want you to get out!” Shattered by the brutality of her husbands response, she turns and walks away, barely able to discern her direction, as the tears stream from her eyes.

Dr. Abrahamsen explains that despite a request from the 3ABN Board Chairman, Walt Thompson, for all contact between he and Linda to terminate immediately. After a few weeks he allows it to continue: “At one point I had a conversation with Walt Thompson, Chairman of the Board of 3ABN. He asked me to stop all communication with Linda. This had also been communicated to Johann and Irmgard Thorvaldsson and others. I told him that it was obviously Danny’s plan to isolate Linda from everyone at a time when she needed help. To me it was the Christian thing to answer her phone calls and the only humane thing to do for someone who was in crisis.”

“Considering the urgency of the situation I allowed the conversations to resume. Linda knew, with her high profile status, that confiding with local people regarding these issues would be very bad for the ministry. I had given counsel to people in difficulty in the past and felt I could be helpful from a distance in this situation. I encouraged Linda to fight for her marriage and ministry many times. This she really did, but she often had to leave her home to find refuge at her daughter's apartment in Springfield, even in the middle of the night because of Danny's behavior. At times like these she was afraid of him. She always returned to her home after a couple of days seeking to try to mend the marriage, but Danny would not allow this.”

Some of you people with human feelings and intelligence will understand what Linda had to suffer when Walt and Danny did all they could to cut off any communication between Linda and her friends, and this did not only apply to friends in Norway but just as much to friends in the United States of America. In spite of what false claims and rumors say about her travels, Linda did not go to Norway until after the divorce.Then my wife, Irmgard, and Linda went blueberry picking in the woods. I think most of that time was spent on a woman to woman talk rather than searching for berries.

I made a call to Walt and asked him if he'd make sure Danny would not hurt Linda physically. At that time the 3ABN staff was attending the ASI convention. Walt was so taken by the exaltation of 3ABN by the ASI people that he could easily dismiss the idea that Linda would be in any danger. When I drove Linda to the airport she was still in fear of what would happen on her return. Not without a reason.

Linda lived all her life in the U.S. Johann, as that is the case she had or should have had many friends here... She should have been able to get help here, so your post here causes questions.

You wrote:"When I drove Linda to the airport she was still in fear of what would happen on her return. Not without a reason."

What reason? and how do you know she had reason? And when was this, Johann? And you drove Linda to the airport? Why, where were she and you at? As you live in differnt parts of the world this is strange to me and new and causes questions.

[Johann]

The interesting thing is that Danny had me fired from 3ABN (it was all right with me because I was retired already) because my testimony did not agree with his claims that the trip to Florida had not been canceled, but that Linda and Arild had gone there secretly.

This was also the claim even Nick Miller was trying to get me to admit when I had a meeting with him, Walt Thompson, and John Lomacang in West Frankfort the last Friday in May, 2004. So now that is being twisted like so many other things since then.

[Sister]

Chapter 1
The Dream

A light breeze gently rustles the curtain at the open window, allowing a beam of moonlight to penetrate the darkness, illuminating a child asleep in her bed. What at first glance appears a peaceful sight, upon closer inspection reveals a vastly different situation. In the moonlight’s glow it is apparent the child’s sleep is restless. Her copper curls are matted with sweat and a slight moan escapes from her delicate lips. A dream is troubling her sleep. A dream that twice before has snatched away the innocent rest of childhood. Her brow furrows as if pained by the images that are being indelibly etched upon her mind. Her body stiffens with terror and the sound of her own scream awakens her. Frightened and uncertain what is happening, she instinctively raises her arm to protect herself. This movement brings her hand into contact with a soft object. She clutches the stuffed animal that lay at her side, seeking comfort and protection from its familiar presence. Her pulse is still racing as she tries to catch her breath, her eyes searching for any available light.

Softly and gently, in sharp contrast to the pounding rhythm of her own heartbeats, a sweet melody begins to take shape in her mind. As it grows stronger, the furrows in her tiny brow relax and her breathing regains regularity. Soon her brave little voice is lifted up in challenge to the overwhelming images which had held her mind captive within the dream: “Jesus loves me this I know, for the Bible tells me so. Little ones to Him belong, they are weak, but He is strong. Yes, Jesus loves me. Yes, Jesus loves me...” Comforted by the love of her Savior, six year old Linda falls into a deep and peaceful sleep, but the dream that woke her would never be forgotten. It would remain permanently engraved upon her memory. Although its significance would not become apparent for nearly forty years, the truth embedded within its imagery would drastically change Linda Shelton’s life.



Exhausted by the emotional strain of nearly four hours of verbal bombardment Linda covers her face with her hands, as if in doing so she could protect herself from the barrage of accusations her husband is hurling at her. Even with her eyes closed, she can feel the nearness of his presence as he moves in closer, just inches from her face. Suddenly the barrage begins again.  Dan’s words are firing off like rounds from a machine gun, “Admit it Linda, just admit that you committed adultery with the doctor!”“I know he mesmerized you!”  “Admit he is a devil.”“If you don’t, I’ll make sure you’ll loose your job!” For what seemed like an eternity, Danny continues his denunciations against Linda. Weary of the accusations, she looks up at him, shakes her head and says, “No, Dan. It’s not true.” “Believe me, nothing is happening between me and the Doctor, he only wants to help our son and help us.”

Seated quietly as a witness to this event is John Lomacang, their church pastor. In addition to his pastoral duties John is an employee of Three Angels Broadcasting Network. John, like a number of other witnesses/participants in this saga, holds a prominent position at 3ABN, which makes it impossible to be objective and remain an employee. Those, like John Lomacang,  who were willing to do what was requested of them found themselves rewarded for their “loyalty to the ministry”. Others who believed Linda and supported her testimony soon discovered,   refusing to compromise their integrity and fall in line with Danny would become a fast track for separation from the ministry.  Johann Thorvaldsson, director of European Development for 3ABN, would experience an aspect of Danny Shelton’s character that was carefully hidden from the viewers of 3ABN, but has been exposed to those who questioned his misrepresentations of  the “facts” about Linda and the reason for her separation from the ministry she co-founded.

[Johann]

According to my understanding though, the claim was always that Linda took the trip at a later time as the first one planned with Brenda and the Doctor (easter week/spring vacation) had to be canceled when Danny found out.( Thus the Doctor was with Johann and his wife instead). The further claim was that Linda went later (that she was gone without explanation to Danny and job) but that while she was gone her mother called and left a message on the answering machine referring to a conversation she had with her, and to Linda being in Florida.

Do I have evidence to support this? No. My purpose in writing this is just to correct what Tinka wrote as it is incorrect.

Your understanding is very limited to say the least. Since you were not there I cannot expect more from you. I have tried to explain this so often, and yet the same twisted and false version is repeated again and again, as if by the repetition a falsehood becomes a reality.

It seems like the whole 3ABN gang multiply trivialities that have nothing to do with reality and shoot them like bullets at a concrete wall hoping to make a dent in people's understanding.

Formatting edited

[Johann]

Linda lived all her life in the U.S. Johann, as that is the case she had or should have had many friends here... She should have been able to get help here, so your post here causes questions.

Yes, she should have, and she had friends. 3ABN was the place. People there were threatened they'd be fired if they even talked to Linda.

You wrote:"When I drove Linda to the airport she was still in fear of what would happen on her return. Not without a reason."

What reason? and how do you know she had reason? And when was this, Johann? And you drove Linda to the airport? Why, where were she and you at? As you live in differnt parts of the world this is strange to me and new and causes questions.

This all happened after the divorce when Danny was still haunting Linda. I took her to an airport in Norway as she was going back to USA. What is so strange about that.

Linda came to see us in Norway after the divorce. That is no secret. The trouble with you people is that someone has been telling you all this time that the visit took place before the divorce as if she was not free to travel at that time.