Gofundme support

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.

[Boggs]

Well, there's a lot for me to respond to here. Where to start. The theme for tonight's post is "WE MAY DISAGREE"

JEROMY -

1. My mother, wife and sisters would never accuse someone, exclusively on social media, with vague accusations, no evidence and no eyewitnesses 18 years after it happened. If GOD FORBID, anything every happened to them, they would tell their husbands and friends (and police if applicable) immediately and I would vocally, loudly and publicly defend them (unlike John).

OK.

2. If you weren't planning to continue your donations, you never said so until just now. Until you officially express the end of this offensive silence tactic, yes I'll keep a tally.

Honestly I didn't expect this to be so offensive to you. I started the donation thing as a change of pace and it really seems to strike a nerve in you. Like I said before, I realized last night that I don't want current GC members to feel silenced or unwelcome on this forum, I just want the discussion to be respectful and kind. I think you're probably going to keep bullying so I might make another donation in the future as a little personal therapy. The contest is over, though.

3. I'm not stirring the pot. I'm trying to take my dad out of the pot he's being boiled in. The irony of someone who dared me to be silent lest he contribute money to my dad's accuser turning around and telling me I'm stirring the pot seems to be lost only on you.

Yep, just me.
I actually don't see it as donating money to Suzanne, I see it as enabling the truth to come out from 3+ alleged victims. WHATEVER THE TRUTH IS. You seem to have a firm grasp on reality so surely your truth will be told at the end of all this.

4. Suzanne and most people on this board have made it very clear they won't respect the investigation on any conceivable level, and want to start a brand new one on their own terms, without revealing their names to anyone publicly. That has no Biblical precedent and you continue to ignore all of this.

Tell me about the biblical preference for the lawyer hired by ECC to investigate Suzanne and/or your dad? I'm not seeing how the bible has a strong preference for who does the investigating so I say, do it in the most transparent and fair way. You should be fine with an independent party.

5. It's still offensive and backwards that someone who actually knows me but is hiding his name from me is giving me advice on how to deal with this.

Sorry, I didn't mean to mislead you. I don't know you, I said we talked about a decade ago. I had an idea of your personality from that conversation a decade ago. I have a much clearer picture now that you've posted 90+ times here. If I knew you we'd be having this conversation in private.

GODTRUMPSALL -

1.  If Suzanne would have handled this situation in a rational way...contacting the church with her allegations, vs. public pages on social media spurred on by the #metoo movement, maybe the hiring of a lawyer together would have been an option during communications.  She claims she has no one's addresses to contact....she can launch a social media campaign but cannot go to a website to find an email address? 

I think we agree that sometimes clearly false allegations are made against a person and can be safely dismissed without further investigation. In fact I've seen a Darling enthusiast make false allegations against Suzanne on Facebook, only to retract them claiming they were "making a point". You and I probably disagree here, but I think Suzanne's allegations are serious enough that they must be investigated properly to find the truth and/or completely clear Mark's name. We probably differ in our judgement of this particular situation but agree in principle. WE MAY DISAGREE
You seem dismissive of the #metoo movement but maybe I'm reading into your comment. Do you think it's legit?

2.  ECC board has hired, which by ALL industry standards is considered a "3rd party independent investigator".  Mark Darling does not have an attorney.  The ECC board has an attorney.

I'm genuinely curious, what's your area of expertise that you claim ALL industry standards? I don't have a legal background so I can only offer a lay opinion which of course I have to share with you. I think it's appropriate for a publicly traded corporation's board to hire a lawyer to investigate a CEO because the CEO works for the board. However, based on my knowledge of GC boards - and two of my family members have served on two different church boards - they are purely for financial accountability and nominated by the pastors themselves. The two boards I'm familiar with had absolutely no power to investigate, discipline, or remove a pastor. Since GC boards are appointed by pastors, I believe they are not independent or at least do not appear independent enough to a critical eye. I'm open to correction if the ECC board is substantially different than the two GC boards I've described. I'm actually curious how they are selected and what power they have to keep the pastors accountable.

3.  This investigation has been underway for weeks, and the board should not waste more money to appease a person that has displayed poor lack insight in the manner she has gone about this whole situation.

This comes back to your first point - you're saying that Suzanne is not credible enough to warrant a better investigation. WE MAY DISAGREE

MICAH -

We're not trying to stir the pot. And one only has to look back about 5 days ago--before any of us family members ever commented--on this forum to see that many here, and on Facebook, were not peacefully remaining quiet and waiting for results. Many on this forum have been very vocally not respecting the integrity of the investigation from the moment it was announced. They continue to encourage the public posting of false allegations while making a mockery of the investigation that is currently underway and completely undermining the integrity of the investigative process.

Yeah, I understand that we have very different perspectives on the discussion that was here before this week. I'd be sensitive to any stranger mentioning my dad's name on a forum. Do you feel like you're making any progress or doing any good defending your dad here? Personally, I feel like most of this discussion is at a standstill and we're not accomplishing much. We're probably all eager for this to be over. I don't feel that I am making a mockery of the current ECC investigation when I point out its shortcomings. WE MAY DISAGREE

REBEL IN A GOOD WAY -

I really appreciate what you said about having compassion and still seeking justice. I truly do have compassion for every one of the Darlings in this time, and I have compassion for Suzanne and the other alleged victims. I don't need to be believed for that to be true. Though I am adding TWO FACED to my resume from here on out.

[HughHoney]

Is the GCC board also going to do an investigation?

[HughHoney]

Doesn't someone on that board have a Juris Doctorate? if so they could save a bundle of tithes and go full pro bono

[jeromydaviddarling]

Just when I thought I could go to bed

1. My mother, wife and sisters would never accuse someone, exclusively on social media, with vague accusations, no evidence and no eyewitnesses 18 years after it happened. If GOD FORBID, anything every happened to them, they would tell their husbands and friends (and police if applicable) immediately and I would vocally, loudly and publicly defend them (unlike John).

OK.
Ok? It's bad enough that both my mother and wife were victims of sexual violence (my mother multiple times) but you see no issue in asking me to "imagine" it happened again (you didn't know the answer to that question?). Then I RESPOND to that question and you're only answer is "Ok"?

2. If you weren't planning to continue your donations, you never said so until just now. Until you officially express the end of this offensive silence tactic, yes I'll keep a tally.

Honestly I didn't expect this to be so offensive to you. I started the donation thing as a change of pace and it really seems to strike a nerve in you. Like I said before, I realized last night that I don't want current GC members to feel silenced or unwelcome on this forum, I just want the discussion to be respectful and kind. I think you're probably going to keep bullying so I might make another donation in the future as a little personal therapy. The contest is over, though.
Boggs, you didn't think that making a donation every time someone that supports my dad makes a post would offend me? And in the same sentence you call me a bully? I'm still waiting for you to stop making jokes about this when my whole family is in utter and complete agony and upheaval.

3. I'm not stirring the pot. I'm trying to take my dad out of the pot he's being boiled in. The irony of someone who dared me to be silent lest he contribute money to my dad's accuser turning around and telling me I'm stirring the pot seems to be lost only on you.

Yep, just me.
I actually don't see it as donating money to Suzanne, I see it as enabling the truth to come out from 3+ alleged victims. WHATEVER THE TRUTH IS. You seem to have a firm grasp on reality so surely your truth will be told at the end of all this.
Seeing as how you don't know Suzanne or my dad, can I ask why in the world any of this even matters to you anyway? And you've read the victims statements right? So far 3 women claim to have had some kind of emotional affair with my dad that included long talks in the car, at parks, in the basement (apparently either in my room or Micah's room) and late at night over the phone. One of these alleged relationships alone would have been caught by my mother in a few weeks - but 3? Did he ever even sleep? And if all 7 stories come out with the exact same "stories" then the only logical assumption is that my dad has a mutant power akin to Multiple Man. So I'm struggling to understand exactly why you're pretending to care about the truth on a level even resembling the passion that me and my family care about it.

4. Suzanne and most people on this board have made it very clear they won't respect the investigation on any conceivable level, and want to start a brand new one on their own terms, without revealing their names to anyone publicly. That has no Biblical precedent and you continue to ignore all of this.

Tell me about the biblical preference for the lawyer hired by ECC to investigate Suzanne and/or your dad? I'm not seeing how the bible has a strong preference for who does the investigating so I say, do it in the most transparent and fair way. You should be fine with an independent party.
I had no say in the investigation. No vote and no voice and I expressed my concerns to Evergreen about all of that. I'm sure you'd say "do it in the most transparent way" but again, I'm not taking advice from nameless strangers on a message board, so when you say things like that, they fall right out of my ear.

5. It's still offensive and backwards that someone who actually knows me but is hiding his name from me is giving me advice on how to deal with this.

Sorry, I didn't mean to mislead you. I don't know you, I said we talked about a decade ago. I had an idea of your personality from that conversation a decade ago. I have a much clearer picture now that you've posted 90+ times here. If I knew you we'd be having this conversation in private.
I'd hope that after my father being falsely accused of being a sexual abuser, my mother having to relive her abuse, my wife having to relive (and publicly declare) her abuse and this website continually pounding my father (even before the accusations came out) that the whole world would know more about me and find out exactly what kind of son and husband I am. People are coming after my entire family Boggs, our entire way our life, our history, our heritage, our love and our memories. So yes, in this fire - THIS is my personality.

[Faith]

Hi Jeremy,

So you're saying that the board did not take your voice into consideration but that you were allowed to express your concerns to them? Was Suzanne or any of the other accusers allowed that same option? Please clarify if you can.

Also, I am so sorry that your wife and mother have to relieve their abuse. Would it be better if Gretchen refrained from posting on social media? I would not want her to be re-victimized or have to continually retell that story.

[jeromydaviddarling]

So you're saying that the board did not take your voice into consideration but that you were allowed to express your concerns to them? Was Suzanne or any of the other accusers allowed that same option? Please clarify if you can.
The board did not consult our family and was not obligated to do so - they made the decision, started the process and informed us when it began. They believed that in the current toxic climate surrounding #metoo that an investigation was the best way to show the world that the church was listening AND simultaneously exonerate my father. I disagreed but still love all those men. There were NO other "accusers" when this all began, or even a hint of accusers. Suzanne has refused all attempts to contact her (and has blocked my entire family from her FB page)

Also, I am so sorry that your wife and mother have to relieve their abuse. Would it be better if Gretchen refrained from posting on social media? I would not want her to be re-victimized or have to continually retell that story.
She has a voice, she can use it however she feels is best to defend her father-in-law (the man who lead her to Christ). She has no issue discussing her past and the great healing that she found in Christ, but imagine writing about it would cause one to THINK about it and I doubt that's very much fun.

[Digital Lynch Mob]

Faith your sarcasm is noted. And for the record, Mark had no say in this process. Despite what Suzanne and her supporters have said, the investigation is completely unbiased and above board.

[blonde]

Maybe the $100 million dollar marker should be talked about with regard to Evergreen's financial scope? Mark Darling alluded to that in his sermon in the month of January that Evergreen has that amount now in their  profilio. Or what about the 10 ACRE farm Jeromy Darling alluded to in his sermon? "Lakeville and Prior Lake." Jeromy Darling owns a 10 ACRE lot in Lakeville/Prior Lake. That is not worth that much, right?

Susan's few thousands she might get is nothing like the $100 million that Evergreen has and the Jeromy Darling farm of 10 ACRE's in Lakeville and Prior Lake. Wow. Pointing the finger again at a woman that did nothing but live and was possibly sexually assaulted. Money money money.

Why not liquidated the the Jeromy farm or cash out the $100 million? That is *nothing* as much as what Susan is getting on her FundMe. Geeze.

~Mark talking about the many millions Evergreen has now ($100M) near the beginning of the sermon: http://strongdisciple.com/wp-content/uploads/A-life-that-honors-god-part-2.mp3  (go to 18:36 and listen a few minutes)
~Jeromy talking about his modest farm in Lakeville/Prior Lake of 10 acre at the beginning of the sermon: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/ambition-to-win-the-lost-to-christ-jeremy-darling-apr-9-2017/id1223772124?i=1000384594432&mt=2

In the first part of the sermon, Jeromy talks about the 10+ acres he owns. Not much value with 10 acres in Lakeville. That too is in the millions with value. But Susan is BAD BAD BAD for getting FundMe money.

Wow. All I can say is wow. What the audacity of the Darling's.

-Blonde

[Rypick]

Godtrumpsall, stop with the facts. You're ruining the narrative!

[FYI]

Blonde- Great points!!!!  Can you decipher any interesting facts in this link?

http://www.startribune.com/business-bankruptcies/11981511/

[GodisFaithful]

I already knew about this juicy little tidbit. Is that all you've got?  Are you holding anything back now?

It does not mean that Scout was not sexually exploited by Mark Darling.

We still need an investigation. 

[Linda]

Thanks. This sets the record straight because anyone who has ever has a bankruptcy in their past clearly has never been abused by a pastor. This makes perfect sense.

Ad hominem. Attack the messenger.

Wow. That is lower than giving out Chris’s name, email, and Linkedin info.

[FYI]

Since you asked, yes!  I can now understand why 3rd party investigations should remain private.

[Shamednomore]

iamnotafraid and FYI are obviously Darlings .... they threatened they had her "criminal record" .... disgusting

[Rebel in a Good Way]

More businesses fail than succeed, that's why it's so risky.  Sometimes business owners incur debt trying to try through difficult times in their business but don't end up making it.

I don't understand what this has to do with anything?

Linda, we can just add this to the list of the rules on how to be the ideal victim.  Thou shalt have no business bankruptcies.  It's okay for the POTUS, but not a victim of abuse.

[FYI]

You have your points and this investigation is needed. I think the Darlings have been scared off this Forum, at least the past couple of days- THANK GOODNESS.  I missed the "criminal record" part for Suzanne.  That is news to me and if you want to bring that to light you can Shamednomore. I am now curious?

[GodisFaithful]

We all need to just be patient and prayerful,

and watch and see how God Trumps All.

Because it certainly isn't about who has the most money.

[Shamednomore]

"Maybe Suzanne cut ties with Evergreen because she has some of her own sin issues she's hiding behind.  I smell a rat, just saying.  You can search by peoples names for their own criminal records.  No one thought to do that?"

That was a quote by "Iamnotafraid" .... gross

[Huldah]

"Maybe Suzanne cut ties with Evergreen because she has some of her own sin issues she's hiding behind.  I smell a rat, just saying. You can search by peoples names for their own criminal records.  No one thought to do that?"

That was a quote by "Iamnotafraid" .... gross

Bankruptcies. Criminal records. False memory syndrome. Psychological disturbances. Sin issues. And that's just one accuser. Is it any wonder the other victims don't want to be named?

[Linda]

I think you forgot to mention that someone who was a good friend of hers told someone else that she once told her friend that she really likes to tell lies.

This is really unbelievable.

I wonder why ECC doesn’t want an investigation that is transparent?