MK forum

Hmmm another salvation experience fortuitously coming right around the time one is "punished" for wrong-doing. According to the earlier post, it was not long after this "confession of faith", that Frank was removed from the dorm, and placed in maintenance, I think it was. However, he remained on the field, at Vianopolis.

Here's what I don't understand: if he really was newly saved, then he needed to return home, and get tutored all over again. There was a lot of twisted theology within that needed massive reworking. I mean, even Saul, when newly converted, needed some one-on-one time with the Holy Spirit prior to beginning the next phase of his life in Christ. And, I suspect, he knew God's Word just a little bit better than Frank did.

I know of one other person, personally, who was in an abusive relationship and the person they were with after many years "suddenly" had a salvation experience. While I will say that only God knows the heart, the truly repentant heart evidences change, a radically new manner of living/seeing/behaving/and being. I know, from the mouths of the victims themselves, Frank did not evidence repentance, at least not to them. It was all, somehow, a "misunderstanding" on the part of the victim, not the molester. This does not comport with the bearing of outward fruit of inner change. Similarly, in the example I used of the other person I know and their situation with a "suddenly saved" abuser . . .some things changed, for a season. Much remained (and remains), especially the tendency to be manipulative, deceitful, and, in short, "same old, same old".

Again, Ted Bundy's interview with James Dobson, depicts, to my mind, the truly repentant man, willing to take the consequences of his behavior, acknowledging what he did was sinful, wrong, and abhorrent . . . .

Ted Bundy v. Frank Parker v. others of the same ilk . . .the proof is in the life lived AFTER the injustice has been uncovered.

It does sound like NTM old theology though. If you are living in sin at all then you are clearly not saved. SO my question would be, who decided that he was not saved in the first place? Was it him, trying to clean his slate and not have to be accountable to what he did as a "sinner" or was it the field committee who informed him, after learning of his crimes, that he was a heathen and needed to accept Jesus? That washes you white as snow, don't you know, no need for him to look back at his sinful past once he had Jesus in his heart.

@ OT: good one!! I hear the people that produce the USCA calling for reference materials!

You hit that sorry nail on the head, OT! Smash! Ouch!

I wonder if Red Barren has seen the NTM Criminal Code posted here. I'm sure he'd approve of it 100%!

I believe I also heard the "salvation story" or similar to it concerning the same person, but several years earlier. I was (am?) confused by this.

thenumber7 - you asked "but what should Steve Armour do now?"

He should do what he has been expected to do every since he was denounced to the mission in 1998. You see the part of our family that "thinks he is OK and it was a long time ago, and nothing else since, etc., etc., etc." are those with one exception who had no children as victims of his abuse. The rest were very adamant that yes, he should get extensive counseling (not just a few with someone who knows NOTHING about him), and that all of his family as well should get counseling. Why did we want that? They all needed to heal and be able to handle this devastation in a Christian and constructive environment. This was what the church also wanted them to do, and not just wanted them to do, was willing to help them in every way possible. They had already drawn a very good plan that would take probably up to two years, but had a lot of accountability, mentoring and counseling for all the family. That is what he should have done, and that is what he still should do. Again in 2007 our family presented to them that unless this was their next step there would be no advances on our part toward reconciliation or restoration to our family. So what he should have done the first time he was confronted about abuse, and then again in 1998 and then in 2007 and now is the same prescription.

A well known Bible teacher of women, herself a childhood victim of abuse says, that sometimes "they just never get it." And that is so true. A friend of ours who is also a family counselor wrote the following in a letter to us recently and has given me permission to copy part of it here: "One of the thoughts that keeps coming to my mind is that the correct term to describe him should be "predator" - or even "serial predator" not perpetrator. I would also add that the possibility of there being other victims is extremely high - and the danger/risk of future victims is also extremely high.

Reconciliation is such a difficult and often abused word/concept - especially in the more conservative christian world. To often it is forced to happen simply based on the fact that the predator has said he is sorry and has asked for forgiveness. There is a total and complete difference in "giving" forgiveness - and the person being trust worthy. Many times when dealing with a predator - they might not ever become "trust worthy" which would limit or prevent any reconciliation. It takes time (a long time) and close observation to learn/know if there really has been change at the core of the individual - not just accepting the word of the person that they have changed. It also is very important to listen very carefully to hear/learn how the predator talks about the abuse - is it being minimised, dismissed, covered up, or is it fully acknowledged and admitted. Unfortunately predators are very good at convincing others that they are "healed" and also very good at miss using scripture for their own personal gain."
Bert A. Overholt MA. Marriage & Family Therapist

So, do I think he still needs counseling. Yes, I sure do!

I noticed on one of the threads people were discussing books on the subject. This is one that was recommended to all our extended family and we have had a number of professionals comment on it as well. It is [i][b]Restoring the Fallen [i][b] but I can't remember the author. (help me out auntiebear). The approach laid out in this book was pretty much what the church in Tennessee wanted to use in this case. Another good book for victims is [b][i]Door of Hope by Jan Frank.

I wanted to address some of the other lies from Cynthia's letter.
1) Steve said he never struggled with pornography. One of the times that he was molesting me, when we were playing a computer game, he suddenly pulled up a picture on the computer. It was a head-shot of a woman who appeared to be naked. The picture only showed her head and bare shoulders but it was suggestive. The picture slowly scrolled down. I was asking him "What is this? Why are you showing me this?" but he just laughed and continued to very slowly scroll down. I was getting very uncomfortable with the whole thing. He finally stopped the scrolling right before it would have shown her nipples. Then he clicked out of the picture. Steve knew where to find that website. He had that web address memorized because it popped up while we were playing the computer game. He didn't have to spend time searching for it. What else was on that site? What did that site really show? Even if we give him the benefit of the doubt and say that the woman was clothed and it wasn't a porn site, still...considering that he was molesting his niece at the time and the picture was suggestive, what does this say about him?
2) Steve says that when he sent me an apology letter that he said I could share it with my parents. That isn't true. He never said that in the letter. If he had, I think I would have felt free to show it to my parents but instead I still felt like I needed to hide what had happened.
3) Steve says that after the 3rd victim that he was so repentant and ashamed. This was the victim he told "not to tell anyone" about what had happened. If he was really repenant about it, he could have still come clean at any time. he could have told someone else about the abuse. Yet, he kept it hidden for 7 years. During which time he claims to have "lived in victory." How can you live in victory when you haven't dealt with sin? And if this victim had never come out with the truth, it would still be hidden today.
4) In Cynthia's letter when they talk about coming back to the USA to meet with counselor and family and that the first victim refused to come, well, let me explain the situation. I had just gotten married in Dec that year. I lived in WI and this meeting was taking place in TN. In order for me to make it to the meeting (which came about very suddenly. I don't remember having much time to think about it at all) I would have had to drive 12 hrs during winter. My husband had work at the time. I did not want him to have to take off work and I didn't want to come alone. Plus, I wasn't sure if I was ready to be in the same room with Steve. I felt this pressure like I had to be there because Steve wanted there to be reconciliation. Why does that need to happen on the abuser's time schedule? And why didn't steve try to seek me out? Why did I need to be the one to go to TN? I understand it was more convenient. But my point is that if he really wanted to make things right, couldn't he have traveled 12 hrs to see me?
5) Just a minor detail but in the description of my abuse in Cynthia's letter, Steve touched my left nipple, not my right. My point is that a victim, unless they have had suppressed memories, can usually remember every detail. I even remember the bathing suit I wore one of the times the abuse happened. I even remember the video game we were playing. So many details.
6) I also wanted to point out that I never did get a letter back from Joel. Both Steve and Arlen wrote me back in 2007 but not Joel. Or at least I never recieved a letter if in fact he mailed one.
7) The reason why I contacted Joel and Arlen in 2007 is because I kept thinking about their babies. With all the information I had and knew, I did not believe and still don't believe that Steve is a "safe" man. If you see someone driving towards a cliff, wouldn't you warn them? Cynthia says they were surprised that this came on "all of a sudden." That is another statement that shows that you all don't understand abuse. It wasn't like I "all of a sudden" started thinking about it. All of this stuff is never far from my thoughts. But during that time period, it was on my thoughts a lot more because I knew you both were pregnant and having babies.
8) I cut off contact with you all not because you wouldn't leave your ministry and break away from your dad, but because it simply was too painful to remain in contact with you. Knowing you believed your dad after all I had told you. From your letters I could tell that you guys thought I was at fault. That I was only bitter, angry, trying to hurt you and so on. Anyone who would believe that about me doesn't know me at all. Why would I want to stay in contact with anyone who would believe that about me? I didn't want your prayers or pity.
I think that's it for the corrections anyway.