Update From Suzanne

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.

[G_Prince]

Hey all,

Well, it continues. I mistakenly gave ECC credit for putting an end to the public attacks on potential victims by people who lead ministry areas at the church.  This along with our still secret (except for the ones that were outed) Board mostly appointed by pastors under investigation are two reasons why I question if justice will be coming or not, despite what seems to be a very thorough investigation by Joan.

If you find these attacks wrong, here are some contacts for people you could share your feelings with if you feel led - note - all contacts come from public websites.

karl@rockthechurch.com  - Karl Quickert - pastor (I suppose acting sr. pastor) - The Rock
Lynn Newman - acting Chairman, ECC BOT - lnewman@evergreenchurch.com, on full time staff
Jim Bird, finance director, BOT member -  jbird@evergreenchurch.com, on full time staff

And if you are concerned that these attacks could be impacting the integrity of the investigation:  joan.harris@ogletree.com

Shine the Light, I realize that these email addresses are public, but you are encouraging doxing, which is not allowed on this site. Please stop posting this information. Thank you.

[Rebel in a Good Way]

For my own edification, isn't doxxing revealing information that the person wishes to remain confidential? Like when jeromy wrote my real name on here even though I wanted I protect GCCs victims of excommunication (since I have known connections to them) by remaining anonymous?

Hey all,

Well, it continues. I mistakenly gave ECC credit for putting an end to the public attacks on potential victims by people who lead ministry areas at the church.  This along with our still secret (except for the ones that were outed) Board mostly appointed by pastors under investigation are two reasons why I question if justice will be coming or not, despite what seems to be a very thorough investigation by Joan.

If you find these attacks wrong, here are some contacts for people you could share your feelings with if you feel led - note - all contacts come from public websites.

karl@rockthechurch.com  - Karl Quickert - pastor (I suppose acting sr. pastor) - The Rock
Lynn Newman - acting Chairman, ECC BOT - lnewman@evergreenchurch.com, on full time staff
Jim Bird, finance director, BOT member -  jbird@evergreenchurch.com, on full time staff

And if you are concerned that these attacks could be impacting the integrity of the investigation:  joan.harris@ogletree.com

Shine the Light, I realize that these email addresses are public, but you are encouraging doxing, which is not allowed on this site. Please stop posting this information. Thank you.

[KnowingGod]

Thank you Jeromy for confirming why we left GCC, by only assuming the worst of my heart by assuming that because I’m not “like mind” with you I want the destruction of your father which is a lie. I only asked questions. And to echo a few yes Jesus defended His Father because any blasphemy against His Father was an attack against God. Your Father is not God. And yes to answer Jessica I did know all the darling children at some point like I said I attended your church for many years. And to clarify In case it was ever assumed by current GCC memebrs on here... we are still servents of Jesus Christ, I know it’s shocking.

[G_Prince]

For my own edification, isn't doxxing revealing information that the person wishes to remain confidential? Like when jeromy wrote my real name on here even though I wanted I protect GCCs victims of excommunication (since I have known connections to them) by remaining anonymous?

Yes, that is also a serious violation of the forum rules. Has that post been removed yet? I know the mods went back and edited a number of his post a while ago.

[GodisFaithful]

Just looked it up. Doxing (or doxxing) is illegal.

[Shamednomore]

Suzanne wanted to use a truly independent investigator agreed upon by both parties for the very purpose of having the results be released publicly.  So Jeromy is lying and manipulating. 

[jeromydaviddarling]

Suzanne wanted to use a truly independent investigator agreed upon by both parties for the very purpose of having the results be released publicly.  So Jeromy is lying and manipulating. 

Suzanne was at Evergreen long enough to know that screaming from Facebook for a new investigation to start and letting her be a part of the choosing process would never happen in a million years. It was all part of the show. Manipulating the public into thinking that she somehow wanted a fair process. We do not live in a society where women can just point a finger at a man and then demand to choose the people that investigate him. I think we can all agree nobody wants that Society right? Also I never doxxed anybody. Calling someone by their name isn't illegal

[G_Prince]

Suzanne wanted to use a truly independent investigator agreed upon by both parties for the very purpose of having the results be released publicly.  So Jeromy is lying and manipulating. 

Suzanne was at Evergreen long enough to know that screaming from Facebook for a new investigation to start and letting her be a part of the choosing process would never happen in a million years. It was all part of the show. Manipulating the public into thinking that she somehow wanted a fair process. We do not live in a society where women can just point a finger at a man and then demand to choose the people that investigate him. I think we can all agree nobody wants that Society right? Also I never doxxed anybody. Calling someone by their name isn't illegal

It's against the rules of this forum. You've done it now several times. If you continue to post names of people who wish to remain anonymous your account will be suspended.

[Barb]

Jeromy, if, after her thorough investigation, Joan deems  that the allegations made against your father are true, will you accept the results?

[jeromydaviddarling]

Suzanne wanted to use a truly independent investigator agreed upon by both parties for the very purpose of having the results be released publicly.  So Jeromy is lying and manipulating. 

Suzanne was at Evergreen long enough to know that screaming from Facebook for a new investigation to start and letting her be a part of the choosing process would never happen in a million years. It was all part of the show. Manipulating the public into thinking that she somehow wanted a fair process. We do not live in a society where women can just point a finger at a man and then demand to choose the people that investigate him. I think we can all agree nobody wants that Society right? Also I never doxxed anybody. Calling someone by their name isn't illegal

It's against the rules of this forum. You've done it now several times. If you continue to post names of people who wish to remain anonymous your account will be suspended.

Respectfully your forum "rules" permit the daily psychological abuse of my family but restrict me calling people by their first name. Perhaps it's time to update your rules.

[jeromydaviddarling]

Jeromy, if, after her thorough investigation, Joan deems  that the allegations made against your father are true, will you accept the results?

What would you do if you woke up tomorrow on another planet surrounded by little green men? There is no logical point in imagining an impossibility. And how in the world is it relevant to any of this?

[Barb]

Jeromy, if, after her thorough investigation, Joan deems  that the allegations made against your father are true, will you accept the results?

What would you do if you woke up tomorrow on another planet surrounded by little green men? There is no logical point in imagining an impossibility. And how in the world is it relevant to any of this?

I disagree. I believe there is great benefit in letting our minds imagine something we deem impossible. As to the relevancy, you have repeatedly accused Suzanne of manipulating the narrative so that when it’s all over she will have a face-saving way to respond, no matter what the outcome. You have repeatedly expressed that you feel Joan is a qualified “investigator” As such, will you accept her findings if they differ from what you believe to be true?

[G_Prince]

Respectfully your forum "rules" permit the daily psychological abuse of my family but restrict me calling people by their first name. Perhaps it's time to update your rules.

Both your dad and Suzanne are mentioned by name because they have been publicly identified in a legal case. Your family is not being discussed otherwise.

[jeromydaviddarling]

Respectfully your forum "rules" permit the daily psychological abuse of my family but restrict me calling people by their first name. Perhaps it's time to update your rules.

Both your dad and Suzanne are mentioned by name because they have been publicly identified in a legal case. Your family is not being discussed otherwise.

You understand you don't have to mention my family's name to psychologically abuse us everyday right?

[jeromydaviddarling]

Jeromy, if, after her thorough investigation, Joan deems  that the allegations made against your father are true, will you accept the results?

What would you do if you woke up tomorrow on another planet surrounded by little green men? There is no logical point in imagining an impossibility. And how in the world is it relevant to any of this?

I disagree. I believe there is great benefit in letting our minds imagine something we deem impossible. As to the relevancy, you have repeatedly accused Suzanne of manipulating the narrative so that when it’s all over she will have a face-saving way to respond, no matter what the outcome. You have repeatedly expressed that you feel Joan is a qualified “investigator” As such, will you accept her findings if they differ from what you believe to be true?

You just asked me the same question but worded it differently. I clearly have a different view on imagining a possible circumstances

[OneOfMany]

Respectfully your forum "rules" permit the daily psychological abuse of my family but restrict me calling people by their first name. Perhaps it's time to update your rules.

You understand you don't have to mention my family's name to psychologically abuse us everyday right?

Jeromy you are not being psychologically abused by people posting on this forum. You do not have to read this forum. This forum is for those who have experienced abuse or harm through their participation in a GCM church. WE were often psychologically abused by the church that you claim belongs to you and your dad. I am willing to accept that you both own this church because in my opinion it is not the Church, that is God's people. It is an abusive controlling organization that you call a church, that seeks to control people and silence dissenters. You keep saying you are here to silence us. Your words show that your mind and beliefs are those of a very sick organization that puts the organization before the human beings that God created and loves. This is all that I am going to say to you. May God have mercy on you Jeremy for your words reveal a violent man who has no idea of proper boundaries nor a proper sense of who you are and your place in the world. Nor the place your human father occupies in this world. May you seek out the help you need so you can heal your mind and your heart.

[Barb]

Jeromy, if, after her thorough investigation, Joan deems  that the allegations made against your father are true, will you accept the results?

What would you do if you woke up tomorrow on another planet surrounded by little green men? There is no logical point in imagining an impossibility. And how in the world is it relevant to any of this?

I disagree. I believe there is great benefit in letting our minds imagine something we deem impossible. As to the relevancy, you have repeatedly accused Suzanne of manipulating the narrative so that when it’s all over she will have a face-saving way to respond, no matter what the outcome. You have repeatedly expressed that you feel Joan is a qualified “investigator” As such, will you accept her findings if they differ from what you believe to be true?

You just asked me the same question but worded it differently. I clearly have a different view on imagining a possible circumstances

Correct. I reworded the question looking for a yes or no answer. Is your answer then, “I will not answer your question”?

[Rebel in a Good Way]

Yes, it was removed. I'm active about GCC/ECC under my own name on social media but I've written much more on this forum and wished to remain anonymous, although it wouldn't take a rocket scientist to make the connection.  I just wasn't sure if including public email addresses on this forum is doxxing?  Or is it because those people aren't on here themselves? (i.e. the ECC representatives listed in comments on this thread).  Or is it just not allowed to suggest that people contact them? I guess I'm not sure all the definitionsof doxxing which is not what this thread is about but I like to be on the up and up.

Suzanne wanted to use a truly independent investigator agreed upon by both parties for the very purpose of having the results be released publicly.  So Jeromy is lying and manipulating. 

Suzanne was at Evergreen long enough to know that screaming from Facebook for a new investigation to start and letting her be a part of the choosing process would never happen in a million years. It was all part of the show. Manipulating the public into thinking that she somehow wanted a fair process. We do not live in a society where women can just point a finger at a man and then demand to choose the people that investigate him. I think we can all agree nobody wants that Society right? Also I never doxxed anybody. Calling someone by their name isn't illegal

It's against the rules of this forum. You've done it now several times. If you continue to post names of people who wish to remain anonymous your account will be suspended.

[G_Prince]

Yes, it was removed. I'm active about GCC/ECC under my own name on social media but I've written much more on this forum and wished to remain anonymous, although it wouldn't take a rocket scientist to make the connection.  I just wasn't sure if including public email addresses on this forum is doxxing?  Or is it because those people aren't on here themselves? (i.e. the ECC representatives listed in comments on this thread).  Or is it just not allowed to suggest that people contact them? I guess I'm not sure all the definitionsof doxxing which is not what this thread is about but I like to be on the up and up.

Its a good question. Wikipedia defines it as: "the Internet-based practice of researching and broadcasting private or identifiable information (especially personally identifiable information) about an individual or organization...Doxing may be carried out for various reasons, including to aid law enforcement, business analysis, risk analytics, extortion, coercion, harassment, online shaming, and vigilante justice."

I'm not sure what Shine the Light's intent was in posting the email addresses of the ECC board, but it seems to be an attempt to funnel angry messages, etc., to these individuals. That's crossing a red line by this Forum's guidelines, and it's only going to make the situation worse.

I'm not a mod so I can't edit posts, but I just ask that people here please refrain from angry emails they will regret sending.

[ShineTheLight]

I modified the post to remove the email addresses.  I'm not sure this meets the definition, given all information is public, but if it makes you happy