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
November 29, 2021, 08:46:54 pm *
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   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: The Hypocritical Actions of Mark Bowen  (Read 38466 times)
Barb
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 65



« Reply #80 on: July 18, 2018, 07:46:39 pm »

PietWowo, you continually refer to Suzanneís allegations as being just allegations when the investigator hired by Evergreen to investigate the claims has found that at least some of the claims are true. The investigator spoke to Mark Darling and she spoke to other victims. Anyone who wishes to speak to her could have. After speaking to all of these people (and you have spoken to none of them), I struggle to I understand why you continue to cast doubt on her findings. Evergreens own Board if Trustees (the only people to see the full report) found it credible enough to rescind Markís ordination. Donít you think itís rather presumptuous of you to question the conclusion that they have come to considering your lack of first hand information.

For the record, not that this information matters in the least. The boyfriend that Suzanne is referring to in her conversations with Mark Darling was probably before she was saved. You see, while you have only met Mark, I know him, his children and Suzanne and the other victims. I am not merely going by second hand information.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2018, 08:55:04 pm by Barb » Logged
looking4answers
Obscure Poster (1-14 Posts)
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 13



« Reply #81 on: July 18, 2018, 08:50:22 pm »

PietWowo, you continually refer to Suzanneís allegations as being just allegations when the investigator hired by Evergreen to investigate the claims has found that at least some of the claims are true. The investigator spoke to Mark Darling, she spoke to members of his family and she spoke to other victims. After speaking to all of these people (and you have spoken to none of them), I struggle to I understand why you continue to cast doubt on her findings. Evergreens own Board if Trustees (the only people to see the full report) found it credible enough to rescind Markís ordination. Donít you think itís rather presumptuous of you to question the conclusion that they have come to considering your lack of first hand information.

For the record, not that this information matters in the least. The boyfriend that Suzanne is referring to in her conversations with Mark Darling was probably before she was saved. You see, while you have only met Mark, I know him, his children and Suzanne and the other victims. I am not merely going by second hand information.

I am fairly certain that Joan did not interview any members of MD's family.  Unless you know something otherwise, which I am not sure how you would even know if any family members were interviewed or not, but I recommend you correct your post to reflect that you don't know who all was interviewed.   
Logged
Barb
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 65



« Reply #82 on: July 18, 2018, 08:53:36 pm »

PietWowo, you continually refer to Suzanneís allegations as being just allegations when the investigator hired by Evergreen to investigate the claims has found that at least some of the claims are true. The investigator spoke to Mark Darling, she spoke to members of his family and she spoke to other victims. After speaking to all of these people (and you have spoken to none of them), I struggle to I understand why you continue to cast doubt on her findings. Evergreens own Board if Trustees (the only people to see the full report) found it credible enough to rescind Markís ordination. Donít you think itís rather presumptuous of you to question the conclusion that they have come to considering your lack of first hand information.

For the record, not that this information matters in the least. The boyfriend that Suzanne is referring to in her conversations with Mark Darling was probably before she was saved. You see, while you have only met Mark, I know him, his children and Suzanne and the other victims. I am not merely going by second hand information.

I am fairly certain that Joan did not interview any members of MD's family.  Unless you know something otherwise, which I am not sure how you would even know if any family members were interviewed or not, but I recommend you correct your post to reflect that you don't know who all was interviewed.   

Will do.
Logged
PietWowo
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 263



« Reply #83 on: July 18, 2018, 08:53:57 pm »

PietWowo, you continually refer to Suzanne’s allegations as being just allegations when the investigator hired by Evergreen to investigate the claims has found that at least some of the claims are true. The investigator spoke to Mark Darling, she spoke to members of his family and she spoke to other victims. After speaking to all of these people (and you have spoken to none of them), I struggle to I understand why you continue to cast doubt on her findings. Evergreens own Board if Trustees (the only people to see the full report) found it credible enough to rescind Mark’s ordination. Don’t you think it’s rather presumptuous of you to question the conclusion that they have come to considering your lack of first hand information.

For the record, not that this information matters in the least. The boyfriend that Suzanne is referring to in her conversations with Mark Darling was probably before she was saved. You see, while you have only met Mark, I know him, his children and Suzanne and the other victims. I am not merely going by second hand information.

Barb, the thing in the report is that I haven't seen what parts are true. So in your own words, it seems that you imply that not everything that Suzanne said is true. If that's the case, I have a hard time believing her. Or am I misunderstanding you?

Ok, well, that's good to know, so you are saying that Suzanne was not talking about a current boyfriend situation, but one in the past. I agree with you, that it doesn't make a difference when she was saved. It would all be covered by the blood of Christ. But it would have made it difference if during the conversation, she was living in that lifestyle. But that's good to know that they were talking about something in the past. Now if what she said is true, then I would be in agreement that it would not have been proper to ask the questions that she alleges that Mark asked. But again that proof hasn't been presented yet. And you yourself indicated that some of what she said is not true.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2018, 08:58:46 pm by PietWowo » Logged
Barb
Regular (15-99 Posts)
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 65



« Reply #84 on: July 18, 2018, 08:57:19 pm »

Yes, you are misunderstanding. I am simply saying that according to the investigator, some of the allegations are true. Those proven allegations are disturbing and certainly disqualify Mark Darling from being a pastor.

The failure of the investigation to substantiate the other allegations does not make them false.
« Last Edit: July 18, 2018, 08:58:50 pm by Barb » Logged
Ghost
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 303



« Reply #85 on: July 18, 2018, 09:08:17 pm »

The decision has been rendered..judgement made..may not be the decision most wanted one way or the other..live with it..deal with it..move on..but to be a ongoing instigator..stirring the pot only convinces people you are a pathetic low life loser..so leave this place..let people heal not keeping their wounds open..no this is not a two way street..so just head on out of here...you wore out your welcome..have a nice life.......you know you are like a  splinter in the finger or a pesky mosquito.....go trolling elsewhere....
Logged
Huldah
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 955



« Reply #86 on: July 18, 2018, 09:46:53 pm »

Also, who uses terms like meloncholics or phlegmatics other than Brent Knox and Mark Bowen?  That was one of their flimsy excuses for not standing up to Mark Darling. Must be a "thing" in GCC.  You should try the enneagram or Meyers Briggs instead Wink  

So, Rebel, are you suggesting that PWW is actually someone very close to Brent and Mark, close enough to have adopted their eccentricities of speech? That makes sense. It seemed odd all along that someone who hasn't spoken to Mark in fifteen years and didn't even know him that well would suddenly show up on this forum, rehashing all the main speaking points of Mark's followers, and expressing particular hostility toward Suzanne.

Logged
GodisFaithful
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 328



« Reply #87 on: July 19, 2018, 05:29:34 am »

Hulda,

PWW's story about how he/she is a foreigner but then PWW happens to know oodles of GC pastors and their character, knows Jim McCotter and what he teaches and means about apostles, knows what John  Hopler would do in any given situation, and has super insight into the truth about Mark Darling is not adding up. PWW is on here to discredit Suzanne in any way possible and give Mark Darling any benefit of the doubt, exonerating him as if the investigation did not count for anything. I mean, PWW seems to know the minutia of the situation. It's just weird. Especially since PWW seems to think that Suzanne's sex life at any given time is PWW's business. Just like Mark Darling thought that, too. PWW is sick, Hulda, and I believe PWW  is lying about being a foreigner. It's a play act in my opinion.

I talked to a friend who was interviewed by the investigator hired by Evergreen and my friend told me that the investigator said she would interview Mark Darling at the end. Now there is a possibility that Mark Darling refused to meet with her. If that happened, that is weird. And the investigator also said she had interviewed Jeromy, if I remember right. People who were interviewed can talk about what the investigator said. They don't have a gag order on them.

Hulda, PWW is a fake totally all in Mark Darling supporter who is trying to play a part and not doing a very convincing job of it.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2018, 07:32:38 am by GodisFaithful » Logged
GodisFaithful
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 328



« Reply #88 on: July 19, 2018, 06:19:03 am »

I looked back and saw that it was Looking 4 Answers that is quite certain that Mark Darling's family was not interviewed.

Looking 4 Answers is the one who also was looking for answers about details of Suzanne's sex life, too, like as if that is appropriate to be asking about. Maybe PWW and Looking4Answers could team up and start a thread about the questions and opinions they have about Suzanne's sex life. I guess there are some people out there who think this is perfectly appropriate. That is exactly what Mark Darling did, among other things, that got him in this mess. Asking about people's sex life and thinking it is his business. And here are people just like him. It would be nice if they could keep it to one thread, so we could avoid it. They could start any rumors and slander that they wanted on there, and come up with verses to support their behavior. It seems that Mark Darling's behavior has rubbed off on some of his followers.
Logged
Huldah
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 955



« Reply #89 on: July 19, 2018, 06:27:26 am »

It seems that Mark Darling's behavior has rubbed off on some of his followers.

With a heavy helping of Mark Bowen's cruelty.
Logged
Huldah
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 955



« Reply #90 on: July 19, 2018, 06:38:27 am »

Hulda, PWW is a fake totally all in Mark Darling supporter who is trying to play a part and not doing a very convincing job of it.

Well, let them post long enough, and eventually they give themselves away. Kind of like RickTRoll did, pretending at first to be all neutral and caring about Suzanne, and just looking for answers, and then when he was exposed, the fangs came out.

To me, PWW gave himself away as a troll long before he gave himself away as an insider. When someone can't stay on the topic and engage directly with your main points, when he seizes minor details of your post to go off on a tangent, and when he keeps throwing out zingers to keep you engaged and enraged, then that's a troll.
Logged
GodisFaithful
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 328



« Reply #91 on: July 19, 2018, 07:42:39 am »

I know, Hulda. Why do some of Mark Darling supporters come on here pretending? It's the same as lying. Why do they feel the need to pretend? Just come out and be truthful. If you have an agenda against Suzanne and are trying to support Mark Darling as a great wonderful godly man then just come on here and be honest about where you are coming from and why. I don't think that Looking4Answers is looking for answers that we have, but trying to be sneaky. Only it isn't very sneaky, it's obvious. It's like a toddler hiding behind a small plant and thinking no one can see him.
Logged
Huldah
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 955



« Reply #92 on: July 19, 2018, 08:14:33 am »

One positive thing we can hope for is that people who are sincerely looking for the truth will be led to this forum, so they can find the record of disturbing things that have happened in GCx circles. That's why it's so important for us to keep on documenting things like Mark Bowen's hypocrisy.  If there had been a forum like this back in our younger days, we both might have been spared a lot of heartache.
Logged
GodisFaithful
Private Forum Access
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 328



« Reply #93 on: July 19, 2018, 08:54:41 am »

That is the positive thing, Huldah. I found this after being in my second cult, the Bill Gothard one. That was being exposed online, and at the time I was reading about that, I stumbled on this one and it was so healing and helpful to know that we were not the only ones who were ostracized from a GC church because we were questioning some things.

Most people, in an abusive church, have some little red flags that go up in their minds, but then they squelch those red flags, and think, naw, but the people are so nice and the pastor always remembers my name, and it seem *pretty* normal, and all my friends seem so nice and they are happy here. Easy to talk yourself out of the red flags. My husband and I were just talking about some of those. We didn't even share some of our doubts with each other, just little nagging doubts, like, "these sermons are really dry, do I really have to put up with this the rest of my life, and if the GC pastors hung the moon like they say then why is this stuff that they preach over and over so stale?" The first red flag that I remember is when Brent Knox told us insider core people that he was basicly Moses, leading us around just like Moses, and we all know what happened to the people who questioned Moses. What arrogance it that!! 

A couple days ago one of my sons heard about the Mark Darling fiasco, not from me. He called me  up. He said that he remembered when he was little that my husband and I talked about how weird it was that Mark Darling would hang around these pretty single girls and how we thought something was off about that. He remembers that. Crazy! A lot of people saw it. But it is weird how you get sucked into a church like this and let things pass.

Case in point: Mark Bowen's hypocritical actions. Just given a pass. After all, he is large and in charge.
Logged
PietWowo
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 263



« Reply #94 on: July 19, 2018, 09:58:24 am »

Yes, you are misunderstanding. I am simply saying that according to the investigator, some of the allegations are true. Those proven allegations are disturbing and certainly disqualify Mark Darling from being a pastor.

The failure of the investigation to substantiate the other allegations does not make them false.

Barb, since you seem to know this girl Suzanne, are you still in touch with her? If so, how is Suzanne doing? How is her family doing with all of this?
Logged
PietWowo
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 263



« Reply #95 on: July 19, 2018, 10:02:01 am »

Also, who uses terms like meloncholics or phlegmatics other than Brent Knox and Mark Bowen?  That was one of their flimsy excuses for not standing up to Mark Darling. Must be a "thing" in GCC.  You should try the enneagram or Meyers Briggs instead Wink  

So, Rebel, are you suggesting that PWW is actually someone very close to Brent and Mark, close enough to have adopted their eccentricities of speech? That makes sense. It seemed odd all along that someone who hasn't spoken to Mark in fifteen years and didn't even know him that well would suddenly show up on this forum, rehashing all the main speaking points of Mark's followers, and expressing particular hostility toward Suzanne.



You guys have no earthly idea, who I am. You don't even know where I'm located. You would be very surprised. I just read the two testimonies and know GCx and have to a conclusion. It's pretty clear if you read the testimonies and the BOT report with a logical mind.  Besides that, who is the person Joan? Is she a believer?
Logged
Ghost
Household Name (300+ Posts)
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 303



« Reply #96 on: July 19, 2018, 10:03:15 am »

All these fake Mark Darling people...REPRESENT...just showing their true self...the real them..how sad...they have been called out..why have they not left on their own accord...just like the super defender of Mark Darling..Greentruth...only came here with his big words and infinite wisdom..once the truth known to all..he left his empire and reputation mostly intact...live to preach another day one must assume...but these other fools..man oh man..the depravity of their twisted thoughts and sick little brains..you been called out again fools..why not just leave,,what do you hope to accomplish..whats your agenda..that's right you still REPRESENT..the cult..almost text book Scientology 101..go away..simple minded pathetic losers...get a life...your only fooling yourself and making more a sick joke of the ideology you REPRESENT.....Losers...all...The Tree is no more..you have been brought down.....go away..the people have spoken...
Logged
PietWowo
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 263



« Reply #97 on: July 19, 2018, 10:12:28 am »

Hulda,

PWW's story about how he/she is a foreigner but then PWW happens to know oodles of GC pastors and their character, knows Jim McCotter and what he teaches and means about apostles, knows what John  Hopler would do in any given situation, and has super insight into the truth about Mark Darling is not adding up. PWW is on here to discredit Suzanne in any way possible and give Mark Darling any benefit of the doubt, exonerating him as if the investigation did not count for anything. I mean, PWW seems to know the minutia of the situation. It's just weird. Especially since PWW seems to think that Suzanne's sex life at any given time is PWW's business. Just like Mark Darling thought that, too. PWW is sick, Hulda, and I believe PWW  is lying about being a foreigner. It's a play act in my opinion.

I talked to a friend who was interviewed by the investigator hired by Evergreen and my friend told me that the investigator said she would interview Mark Darling at the end. Now there is a possibility that Mark Darling refused to meet with her. If that happened, that is weird. And the investigator also said she had interviewed Jeromy, if I remember right. People who were interviewed can talk about what the investigator said. They don't have a gag order on them.

Hulda, PWW is a fake totally all in Mark Darling supporter who is trying to play a part and not doing a very convincing job of it.

Well, I've been in the USA since 1977. But was not born in the USA.
Logged
PietWowo
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 263



« Reply #98 on: July 19, 2018, 10:13:47 am »

Yes, you are misunderstanding. I am simply saying that according to the investigator, some of the allegations are true. Those proven allegations are disturbing and certainly disqualify Mark Darling from being a pastor.

The failure of the investigation to substantiate the other allegations does not make them false.

No, but it doesn't substantiate them either. So, don't just blatantly use them as being true.
Logged
PietWowo
Veteran (100-299 Posts)
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 263



« Reply #99 on: July 19, 2018, 10:18:44 am »

I looked back and saw that it was Looking 4 Answers that is quite certain that Mark Darling's family was not interviewed.

Looking 4 Answers is the one who also was looking for answers about details of Suzanne's sex life, too, like as if that is appropriate to be asking about. Maybe PWW and Looking4Answers could team up and start a thread about the questions and opinions they have about Suzanne's sex life. I guess there are some people out there who think this is perfectly appropriate. That is exactly what Mark Darling did, among other things, that got him in this mess. Asking about people's sex life and thinking it is his business. And here are people just like him. It would be nice if they could keep it to one thread, so we could avoid it. They could start any rumors and slander that they wanted on there, and come up with verses to support their behavior. It seems that Mark Darling's behavior has rubbed off on some of his followers.

Well, I would not be considered one of Mark Darling's followers. I don't believe asking very private questions about someone's sexlife is appropriate to be done in a private setting, unless the person might be a sex therapist.  But Mark Darling isn't. But I have yet to see any proof that Mark Darling has done what you all are saying he has done. Suzanne might have said that story, but I question the sanity of her and her story doesn't add up. For me to believe it, Suzanne would have to come up with a more convincing story, but her story is fake news in my mind. And the whole thing seems to be a witch hunt.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


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