Welcome to De-Commissioned, a place for former members of the Great Commission movement (aka GCM, GCC, GCAC, GCI, the Blitz) to discuss problems they've experienced in the association's practices and theology.

You may read and post, but some features are restricted to registered members. Please consider registering to gain full access! Registration is free and only takes a few moments to complete.
De-Commissioned Forum
June 20, 2019, 07:15:23 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: A note to Gary Miller, John Van Dyck, Natalie Hoffman, and the rest you  (Read 26542 times)
G_Prince
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 417



« Reply #60 on: May 07, 2018, 11:50:42 am »

Staying opinions as facts... I am now supposed to be appalled by Jeremy trying to defend his dad who is innocent until proven guilty though???

"Innocent until proven guilty" is a legal assumption used in a court of law, to protect citizens from government overreach and malicious prosecution. The legal assumption is unrelated to whether or not the accused person actually did what he was accused of.

Now as far as "sharing opinions as facts" is concerned... Jeromy claimed absolutely and without reservation that there were no other accusers besides Suzanne, until the Fox News investigation and the ECC investigation revealed that there were at least three other accusers. Jeromy said that under no circumstances did his dad ever meet with women in the basement, until someone found the tape where Mark talks about going to the basement with a woman counselee. When his assumed "facts" blew up in his face, Jeromy didn't (as far as we know) go to his parents to demand answers. He just switched tactics, apparently without ever stopping to ask himself whether his new defense strategy might be just as wrong as his previous strategy.

Just a quick reminder that the best channel 9 could do in terms of bringing in other "victims" was Natalie. When asked if she considered what happened to her abuse, she said...and I quote, "no." Not very convincing.

We've been over this in another thread. She actually called it "spiritual abuse with sexual undertones."
Logged

Here's an easy way to find out if you're in a cult. If you find yourself asking the question, "am I in a cult?" the answer is yes. -Stephen Colbert
Digital Lynch Mob
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 238



« Reply #61 on: May 07, 2018, 12:02:39 pm »

My point is simply that I keep hearing that there are other victims, but all I've heard from, and all Fox 9 aired was someone who did NOT claim sexual abuse. As Prince points out, she called it "spiritual abuse with sexual overtones." And when she was asked if she felt like she was abused at the time she said no.
Logged
G_Prince
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 417



« Reply #62 on: May 07, 2018, 12:14:14 pm »

My point is simply that I keep hearing that there are other victims, but all I've heard from, and all Fox 9 aired was someone who did NOT claim sexual abuse. As Prince points out, she called it "spiritual abuse with sexual overtones." And when she was asked if she felt like she was abused at the time she said no.

How many survivors would need to come forward in order to convince you? 3? 5? 100?
Logged

Here's an easy way to find out if you're in a cult. If you find yourself asking the question, "am I in a cult?" the answer is yes. -Stephen Colbert
Digital Lynch Mob
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 238



« Reply #63 on: May 07, 2018, 12:50:26 pm »

It would depend on the charge and the credibility of the accuser. But I tell you this, if a man's life and reputation can just simply be destroyed by unnamed people via social media, then we are all in a world of trouble. If these women do exist, I would hope they would have the honor and decency to at least own up to their accusations.
Logged
searching
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56



« Reply #64 on: May 07, 2018, 01:17:20 pm »

It would depend on the charge and the credibility of the accuser. But I tell you this, if a man's life and reputation can just simply be destroyed by unnamed people via social media, then we are all in a world of trouble. If these women do exist, I would hope they would have the honor and decency to at least own up to their accusations.

Why would anyone come forward? Look at what has been said about Suzanne and Natalie. You people seriously have no clue.
Logged
Digital Lynch Mob
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 238



« Reply #65 on: May 07, 2018, 01:25:04 pm »

Why would anyone come forward? Look at what has been said about Suzanne and Natalie. You people seriously have no clue.

So just to be clear Searching, you believe it is fair and good (and Christian) that a man's reputation and life can be destroyed by anonymous people making accusations about things that allegedly happened 25 years ago? And further, any man so accused is presumed guilty and must prove his innocence without even knowing his accusers?
Logged
HughHoney
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 30



« Reply #66 on: May 07, 2018, 01:29:12 pm »

DLM you are slipping all over the slopes

Fox 9 had 3 women, not 1

ECC said they did hear Suzanne fully in the matter (boner hugs) 20 years ago not 25.



Logged
Digital Lynch Mob
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 238



« Reply #67 on: May 07, 2018, 01:50:14 pm »

DLM you are slipping all over the slopes

Fox 9 had 3 women, not 1

ECC said they did hear Suzanne fully in the matter (boner hugs) 20 years ago not 25.

Fox 9 interviewed Suzanne and Natalie. They did say they confirmed the identity of another woman. But what does that do to allow the accused to face his accusers in order to defend himself?

EC rushed out a statement that did them a disservice. The context for which they were referring were accusations of spiritual abuse 20 years ago, not sexual abuse.

So since we're slipping all over the slopes, can you give me a coherent answer as to how Suzanne met Mark in 87, was married in 89 and said the abuse went on for 5 years and yet ended when she married John?

Logged
Rebel in a Good Way
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 451



« Reply #68 on: May 07, 2018, 01:53:55 pm »

That there were 3 women represented on Fox 9 has already been addressed.  

Spiritual abuse with sexual overtones isn't much better.  Many on this forum have said their GCC church was spiritually abusive, and someone claimed on record that there pastor specifically spiritually abused and manipulated them.  I don't understand how this is a defense...
  

My point is simply that I keep hearing that there are other victims, but all I've heard from, and all Fox 9 aired was someone who did NOT claim sexual abuse. As Prince points out, she called it "spiritual abuse with sexual overtones." And when she was asked if she felt like she was abused at the time she said no.
Logged
Digital Lynch Mob
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 238



« Reply #69 on: May 07, 2018, 02:00:23 pm »

Many on this forum have said their GCC church was spiritually abusive, and someone claimed on record that there pastor specifically spiritually abused and manipulated them.  I don't understand how this is a defense...

So you believe "spiritual abuse" = sexual abuse?

Can you tell me if the Bible acknowledges or addresses spiritual abuse and, if so, where?
Logged
HughHoney
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 30



« Reply #70 on: May 07, 2018, 02:04:07 pm »

The label doesn’t matter. Are boner hugs and titillating convos disqualifying actions of a Pastor or not?
Logged
Digital Lynch Mob
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 238



« Reply #71 on: May 07, 2018, 02:08:00 pm »

The label doesn’t matter. Are boner hugs and titillating convos disqualifying actions of a Pastor or not?

A hug with your keys in your pocket would not be disqualifying. The context of said conversations is everything. We don't have it.

Back to my question: Can you give me a coherent answer as to how Suzanne met Mark in 87, was married in 89 and said the abuse went on for 5 years and yet ended when she married John?
Logged
AgathaL'Orange
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1181



« Reply #72 on: May 07, 2018, 02:20:45 pm »

That would be quite the keychain.
Logged

Glad to be free.
HughHoney
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 30



« Reply #73 on: May 07, 2018, 02:21:52 pm »

The label doesn’t matter. Are boner hugs and titillating convos disqualifying actions of a Pastor or not?

A hug with your keys in your pocket would not be disqualifying. The context of said conversations is everything. We don't have it.

Back to my question: Can you give me a coherent answer as to how Suzanne met Mark in 87, was married in 89 and said the abuse went on for 5 years and yet ended when she married John?

Keys!!? Very creative. I think the context was long walks in the park talking about sex and orgasms.

Did the news guy say 5 years or Suzanne? Seems like a rounding error.

Logged
Digital Lynch Mob
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 238



« Reply #74 on: May 07, 2018, 02:32:50 pm »

We don't have that context for any of these supposed anonymous accusers.

And here is the quote: She alleges there were about 20 such episodes over the next five years. It stopped, she said, when she married her husband, John.

So again, Suzanne met Mark in 87, was married in 89 and said the abuse went on for 5 years and yet ended when she married John. Seems like quite a "rounding error."
« Last Edit: May 07, 2018, 02:43:43 pm by Digital Lynch Mob » Logged
HughHoney
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 30



« Reply #75 on: May 07, 2018, 02:48:25 pm »

We have the context from both Suzanne and Natalie: long walks in the woods.

Sounds like the news guy rounded it to 5 years. Are you thinking that 3 years is ok but 5 years is too much? Or is your point that if the news missed the exact timing than all accusations are false?
Logged
Digital Lynch Mob
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 238



« Reply #76 on: May 07, 2018, 02:55:57 pm »

Long walks in the woods. Yes, I saw the washed out and tinted images of barren trees and scary melodramatic music. Well done Fox 9.

If you read my post "10 Reason I don't Believe Suzanne," then you know this is just another in a long litany of inconsistencies and holes in her story. That is my point.
Logged
HughHoney
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 30



« Reply #77 on: May 07, 2018, 03:09:56 pm »

Long walks in the woods. Yes, I saw the washed out and tinted images of barren trees and scary melodramatic music. Well done Fox 9.

If you read my post "10 Reason I don't Believe Suzanne," then you know this is just another in a long litany of inconsistencies and holes in her story. That is my point.
Wait, I thought you said you didn’t have the context? Your boy GT called them “erroneous woods.” I get it you guys are having a hard time believing because you are personally invested with years of your lives and don’t want to feel like you made a mistake.

Logged
searching
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 56



« Reply #78 on: May 07, 2018, 03:21:25 pm »

Why would anyone come forward? Look at what has been said about Suzanne and Natalie. You people seriously have no clue.

So just to be clear Searching, you believe it is fair and good (and Christian) that a man's reputation and life can be destroyed by anonymous people making accusations about things that allegedly happened 25 years ago? And further, any man so accused is presumed guilty and must prove his innocence without even knowing his accusers?

Yes, DLM, I do believe these women. I do believe it is fair, just and Christian for light to shine on the darkness and for the truth to be revealed. I know 4 of them personally. Let me go back to what I said, why would anyone come forward with their name...YOU PEOPLE ARE RUTHLESS!

There are pastors at ECC who know the truth. Ask them. Oh wait, they will just tell you they have been asked not to say anything...convenient.

And what an utterly stupid comment on spiritual abuse in the bible. I will leave it at that because there is no reasoning with you.
Logged
Digital Lynch Mob
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 238



« Reply #79 on: May 07, 2018, 03:24:46 pm »

Hugh,
I said we don't have context for the others. And I saw your  “erroneous woods" post and it made me laugh. You've got a good sarcastic wit. I admit I don't want to believe this. I know the man and believe in him. We all have our biases, and it seems pretty clear that several here would very much like it to be true. But I'm making my judgments on the facts as I know them, not on blind faith.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC
SimplePortal 2.1.1