Hi Linda,

You said on your website that you and Danny are divorced.

Rumours are going around as to who divorced who, therefore, did you ask Danny for a divorce, or did Danny ask you for a divorce?

Hi Darryl,

I did not ask for a divorce. But really, I think in the case of marriage and divorce it takes two to make it or break it.

Divorce in the sight of God, and consequently the church, is supposed to be on biblical grounds, therefore, what was the biblical ground for this divorce?

Daryl, do you really feel she should answer that? What if it is something someone else has done?

It is not like you to try and embarrass someone in public. If I were Linda I would ignore this.

Right or wrong, we generally do not examine lifes here, but take people as they are.

My opinion is that we need to uplife Danny, Linda, 3ABN, the crew, and the whole ministry, I appreciate the way Linda has promoted 3ABN on here, very few people would do that after experiencing personal trauma...

I see Christ in Linda, and a high level of integrity. Ifor one am not interested in what happened in the past, am more concerned with where someone is headed than where they have been, and by that I am NOT saying she has been anywhere..

Yes, I agree with Stan -- that's really a private matter between Linda and Danny, and it is none of our business.

Dear Stan,


You sensitivity on Linda's behalf is well-meant, but I think I understand a bit of where Daryl is coming from just the same. The question is there in people's minds, and it's a significant one. Perhaps it's just misdirected. Danny is the one who should be having to answer it, not Linda. As for the factual data, I believe the record shows Danny is the one who filed for divorce, and it was uncontested. But there's a good deal more behind that.

Most Adventists believe physical adultery is the only acceptable basis for divorce, and even then, if reconciliation can be effected later, by all means, do so and stay married. Now comes Danny, and he publicly claims he is justified in obtaining a divorce from Linda by created a novel piece of theology he calls "spiritual adultery." What he's done flies in the face of all known Christian theology and dogma to take something that the Bible uses only in discussions about true and apostatized churches, and try to equivocate that to mean that which destroys the marital relationship of two people.

It flies in the face of accepted use of Scripture by most logical, responsible, believing adults in this church. Linda is the victim of this travesty, and we should most certainly give her a break.

So yes, Linda should not have to answer further. But Danny has a lot of answering to do. And to my knowledge, the kind of answering I have in mind, he hasn't even started to do.

I'm sorry, Linda, to butt in here so. It's not a very welcoming way to treat a guest. Yet I strongly believe this needs to be said. I don't mean to prevent you from speaking if you're so inclined, but to my way of thinking this is one of the big issues that's comes out of this mess. This is one of those things that needs Almighty power applied to it. Better probably I should say, let's just back off (me first) and give Him room to work. (I'll get off my high horse now.)

Regards,
Norm Finch