I don't know if you have ever been a conservative, or whether you have ever been an Adventist, anyman, . . .
Wouldn't a more accurate question or statement on your part be a "conservative according to my definition of such"? If you had stated it that way it would be far more honest - the same with your question about my membership (or not) in the Adventist church.
Your recent posting in this regard reminds me of a joke I once heard:
"A certain man arrived at the gates of heaven and was met by Peter who welcomed him home and offered to take him on a tour of the beautiful city. The man of course was desirous and they set out. Every few blocks they came upon a church, distinctive worship characteristics were evident from each, joyous music, powerful preaching, and many others. Each time the new arrival asked what faith occupied the church and Peter gladly filled him in. As they approached a bend in the road Peter stopped, turned, and told the man that in the next block he would need to be completely silent - not a word and he needed to walk as softly as possible.
They proceeded and passed a church along the next block. The man abiding by Peter's request was silent, even through the block following that church. However, the curiosity was too create and he finally blurted out - 'Why did we have to be so quiet as we passed that church?' Peter, with a rather sad look told him, "That was the Adventist church and they think they are the only ones up here.'"
Now, we know from the SoP that that just isn't going to be the case - yet your attitude carries all the earmarks of that kind of triumphalist attitude. Is there no place in your heaven for people who do not adhere to your self declared "right" brand of conservatism?
. . . but I invite you to take your stand upon Bible truth and cease defending those who have tried to cover up child molestation allegations, those who hire lawyers to bully those concerned about child molestation, and those who prevaricate regarding this subject, as I assume you just did when you said that Duane is the only identifiable alleged victim of the bunch.
I stand by my statement in regards to your "list of victims":
(and the only one that can reasonably be identified as such because of their own claims is Duane)
I haven't noticed any of your other so-called victims coming forward and making their claims public. Duane has come forward and made added his voice. While it is entirely possibly that Duane is truly a victim, we also have numerous examples on the American legal landscape where accusations were later proven false (and Duane I am making NO JUDGMENT on your situation - merely presenting a salient point as part of the discussion) He has also put one of your main sources of information on the record as having very sketchy reasons for being involved - he has made it clear that the veracity of Mr. Glenn Drydan is suspect at best, yet you continue to hang your hat on Mr. Glenn Dryden's coat rack. (Its is intriguing that rather than indicating that he would provide contact information, Mr. Glenn Dryden instead makes sure to insert himself into the process as the middle man who will contact the families and make the arrangements for a conversation between Dr. Thompson and said "victims")
This section of your post is nothing more than an opportunity to restate your allegation du jour. Since it is obvious that you can no longer harp on the false allegations you laid out in regards to the finances of 3ABN and Danny Shelton you have returned to this one. Let's be clear here . . . "you" are the one who has claimed there was a cover-up, "you" have manufactured the "evidence" by piecing little bits from here and little bits from there together to construct what you claim indicts and then presented it to the public.
Furthermore, since I am not the one who has covered up these hideous allegations, since I am not the one who has hired attorneys to bully people over this matter, since I am not the one who refused to contact the alleged victims or who blamed it all on the jealousy of a man who lived 800 miles away until 8 years after Tommy's license was suspended, it is readily apparent that Ps. 64 is something I can invoke rather than 3ABN or Danny Shelton.
No, Mr. Robert Pickle, as much as you might want to claim Psalm 64, it doesn't apply to you - the evidence of the past almost two years (the length of time you admit to being involved) does not play out that way. Psalm 64 is the salve for the soul of those you have attacked and treated in some of the most unchristian ways. Your penchant for the "end justifying the means" is light years from the Christian heart of how to relate to our other fellow travelers on this planet.
Your comments indicate that you are seeking justification for not following your own demands. "YOU" claim that Dr. Thompson and the board of 3ABN should have contacted the "victims" but yet you rationalize away your responsibility as a member of the clergy to notify the appropriate authorities when you became aware of the accusations. At that very point you were responsible and you didn't follow through on it - there are no two ways about it. Why didn't you? Why did you instead decide to turn your vengeance against 3ABN? Why at the point you became aware that there were accusations of that nature, did you not go to the authorities in defense of said "victims"? Why did you instead turn your heart to vilify a fellow Christian publicly? Why even now, after all that has passed these two years do you still remain silent unless you can use it to bring down 3ABN and Danny Shelton? Why are you not in the DA's office even now advocating for your list of "victims" instead of attending today's hearing in Mass. by phone?
If the accusations had substance, and you believed they were substantial, why didn't you go directly to advocate for these individuals rather than turning all your attentions and energies toward brining down a ministry of the Gospel?
Again, these questions are asked - but not answered.