Whistleblower

[Steel]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Sounds all too familiar.

Yep... For sure when looking at the entirety of folly Christianity.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Steel

Yep... For sure when looking at the entirety of folly Christianity.

Huh?

But God sees no iniquity in Israel?

[Steel]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Huh?
But God sees no iniquity in Israel?

God knows the source of iniquity in the creature he determine was very good.

[Koinonia]

Originally Posted by Steel

Yep... For sure when looking at the entirety of folly Christianity.

Is the LC included? Or is this one of those "three fingers pointing back at you" deals?

[Steel]

Originally Posted by Koinonia

Is the LC included? Or is this one of those "three fingers pointing back at you" deals?

Absolutely... In both cases.

Any "Christian" can be found in, and express... All that is related to the "...ity..." suffix.

And this reality is even confirmed in the writings of published LSM resources... In fact, it was just a few months ago that we were reading ministry that spoke about religion being in every human... Including those of us reading the ministry.

[Nell]

I'm bringing this "Whistleblower" thread to the top because of Drake's comments on the "Self Serving Doctrine of Lee" thread. Specifically:

Originally Posted by Drake

Trapped,

In general you are describing a contrarian and indeed I may be just that in this forum. Not purposely, but rather my minority view will seem to be deliberately contrarian simply because it is a minority view.

But I can acknowledge the characterizations in your post no further than that. Reason is because your examples are very personal and extreme. Were someone to describe such an awful experience happening to them I would not respond as you suggest. First, no one can argue with ones personal experience for it is theirs. That is why I don’t and only offer a comparison with my own. Yet, I would not be so callous as to draw a personal comparison to sexual assault or the death of a loved one in the way you describe..... unless I had such an experience myself and sharing said experience would be supportive.

I know you meant well in hopes to offer me sound advice. I accept it in that spirit but you missed the mark in your chosen examples making further dialogue about it impossible for in so doing I would lend credibility to the extreme examples which I cannot.

Drake

If you look at Drakes comments on this thread, you can compare for yourself what Drake SAYS he would do, and what he SAYS in responding to actual victims of sexual abuse in the Local Churches as these women have testified, in writing, on this forum.

Then you can decide for yourself the veracity of Drake's comments above.

Nell

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Nell

I'm bringing this "Whistleblower" thread to the top because of Drake's comments on the "Self Serving Doctrine of Lee" thread. Specifically:
If you look at Drakes comments on this thread, you can compare for yourself what Drake SAYS he would do, and what he SAYS in responding to actual victims of sexual abuse in the Local Churches as these women have testified, in writing, on this forum.
Then you can decide for yourself the veracity of Drake's comments above.
Nell

I don't understand what you are saying. The quote of Drake you provide is not a response to actual victims but rather to hypothetical scenarios. Can you also provide the quotes to actual victims testimonies.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I don't understand what you are saying. The quote of Drake you provide is not a response to actual victims but rather to hypothetical scenarios. Can you also provide the quotes to actual victims testimonies.

Should a response to a hypothetical (Trapped's hypothetical) have a different response than a real but similar situation (the Whistleblower thread)?

The entire Whistleblower thread is about sexual abuse by the Local Church leadership and is based on testimonies of posters on this forum and documentation from John Ingall's book. If you're interested, review this topic.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Nell

Should a response to a hypothetical (Trapped's hypothetical) have a different response than a real but similar situation (the Whistleblower thread)?

The entire Whistleblower thread is about sexual abuse by the Local Church leadership and is based on testimonies of posters on this forum and documentation from John Ingall's book. If you're interested, review this topic.

Thanks Nell. I am interested but don't have time to read over 290 posts. I don't doubt the stories at all.

After leaving the LC I talked to many others that left, and found out lots of immoral and unethical things that were going on, while I had my head in the clouds.

What's sad is, prolly these stories are just the tip of the iceberg. It's especially sad that believers can act no different than unbelievers.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Nell

The entire Whistleblower thread is about sexual abuse by the Local Church leadership and is based on testimonies of posters on this forum and documentation from John Ingall's book. If you're interested, review this topic.

I have looked at the posts you say are direct testimonies of sexual abuse.

#27 — Ben McPherson's divorce. The complaint in this account is not about the response of the elders involved but in the advice that was given by WL and then followed which required them to lie when asked about Ben. There is no allegation of sexual abuse (the term refers to molestation, or unwanted sexual behavior, usually by force). Since Ben had an affair with a married woman she was not a minor. Since they both subsequently were married there is no evidence in this testimony of sexual abuse. Adultery, yes. Sexual abuse, no.

#31 — This post simply asks this question: The church allows sexual predators to flourish. I have experienced this first hand. Does anyone else have experience with this? I never experienced this and would certainly not respond to a vague claim of this without specific evidence.

#32 — abuse? I am not clear what the sexual abuse is that this post is referring to.

#112 — vague (PL). Everyone on this forum has condemned PL to the uttermost, myself included. However, this post is vague. However, it is clearly a testimony of sexual abuse. But I would never consider PL as "Local Church Leadership". You can say he was LSM leadership, but to my knowledge he did not actively participate in the Local Church.

#120 — I will make it clear that nobody within the LC had molested me personally but I do know some who were by LC members. This post is a second hand account. It is not a direct testimony, it is considered hearsay. Second, even as hearsay it does not allege sexual abuse by LC leadership.

In conclusion, I have looked at every single post you have referenced and there is not one about "sexual abuse by Local church leadership". What you have is an adulterous elder, and sexual abuse by LSM leader. You also have hearsay that someone knows someone who was molested by someone in the Local church (but no allegation that the abuser was part of the Local church leadership).

[leastofthese]

Originally Posted by Nell

I'm bringing this "Whistleblower" thread to the top because of Drake's comments on the "Self Serving Doctrine of Lee" thread. Specifically:



If you look at Drakes comments on this thread, you can compare for yourself what Drake SAYS he would do, and what he SAYS in responding to actual victims of sexual abuse in the Local Churches as these women have testified, in writing, on this forum.

Then you can decide for yourself the veracity of Drake's comments above.

Nell

I’m not sure about others, but I’ve read posts on this forum for a couple years - comments like those you’ve quoted don’t go unnoticed.

[Nell]

Originally Posted by leastofthese

I’m not sure about others, but I’ve read posts on this forum for a couple years - comments like those you’ve quoted don’t go unnoticed.

What does that mean?

[Drake]

Originally Posted by Nell

I'm bringing this "Whistleblower" thread to the top because of Drake's comments on the "Self Serving Doctrine of Lee" thread. Specifically:



If you look at Drakes comments on this thread, you can compare for yourself what Drake SAYS he would do, and what he SAYS in responding to actual victims of sexual abuse in the Local Churches as these women have testified, in writing, on this forum.

Then you can decide for yourself the veracity of Drake's comments above.

Nell

In a rare moment of agreement with Nell I too encourage anyone interested in what Drake thinks to read the posts with the duck avatar straight through.... they are easy to spot starting with #44.

You will also notice that Nells assertion about actual victims.....

“actual victims of sexual abuse in the Local Churches as these women have testified, in writing, on this forum “....

.... are nonexistent. No actual victims of sexual abuse will be found herein, none have testified or written here, ...... and I, Drake, have never corresponded with an actual victim of sexual abuse in this thread or this forum as Nell claims... they simply do not exist.

Nell has asked you to compare what I have said and I join her in the request.....asking for your due diligence I challenge anyone who thinks I have spoken to actual victims then show us the post. Just follow the duck in this thread and tell us what you find.

Drake

[Nell]

Originally Posted by Drake

In a rare moment of agreement with Nell I too encourage anyone interested in what Drake thinks to read the posts with the duck avatar straight through.... they are easy to spot starting with #44.

You will also notice that Nells assertion about actual victims.....

“actual victims of sexual abuse in the Local Churches as these women have testified, in writing, on this forum “....

.... are nonexistent. No actual victims of sexual abuse will be found herein, none have written here, ...... and I, Drake, have never corresponded with an actual victim of sexual abuse in this thread or this forum as Nell claims... they simply do not exist.

Nell has asked you to compare what I have said and I join her in the request.....asking for your due diligence I challenge anyone who thinks I have to show us the post. Just follow the duck in this thread and tell us what you find.

Drake

OK. Duly noted. Let me rephrase. Take a look at the posts of those who experienced sexual abuse, including those documented by John Ingalls, and how "the duck" responded (quacked?).

If you only "follow the duck", you will have a one-sided view of the topic. I did a quick read of the entire thread...it doesn't take long. Mostly I noted that the Duck, in his #44 (above) tried to change the subject and make it about how he would handle the reports of abuse. But please don't take my word for it. Read BOTH SIDES for yourself and then you decide. Never take someone else's "interpretation" of what was said. Go to the source.

The posts of those who experienced abuse (including the John Ingalls book) are: #27, #31, #32, #112 and #120. These posts contain links to the source posts.

Nell

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Nell

The posts of those who experienced abuse (including the John Ingalls book) are: #27, #31, #32, #112 and #120. These posts contain links to the source posts.

Nell

Thank you Nell. I read every one of them. And I call foul on my deleted post. It was not off topic, and it wasn't foul.

I still say I don't doubt the stories. I could tell ones that I know of.