‘Cult’: Pastor Sues Family for $500,000 for Posting Negative Internet Reviews of His Church
- Posted on May 15, 2012 at 7:20am by
Billy Hallowell
- Print »
- Email »
There’s a holy war erupting in Beaverton, Oregon, after a mother and daughter gave a local church negative reviews on the Internet. Now, Pastor Charles O’Neal of Beaverton Grace Bible Church is reportedly suing the duo, among a few other commenters, for $500,000 as a result of their posted assessments of the church.
Julie Ann Smith (Image Credit: KATU)
According to Julie Ann Smith, the mother, her family exited the church a few years ago after she claims that they were inexplicably shunned. Then, she says church members were told not to associate with her or her family.
“If I went to Costco or any place in town, if I ran into somebody, they would turn their heads and walk the other way,” she told KATU.com. “All we did was asked questions. We just raised concerns. There’s no sin in that.”
So, following these negative experiences, she took to the Internet to voice her opinions on both Google and DEX — forums that allow for free expression and honest reviews. Her online comments were quickly met with counter praises from current church members who railed against her claims.
To take more control over the situation, Smith decided to launch a subsequent blog called, ”Beaverton Grace Bible Church Survivors.” According to Smith’s web site, this is the original Google review that started all of the drama:
Although this church touts to be “Beaverton Grace Bible”, the “grace” word is lacking. This is more of a legalistic church where if you don’t do things their way (which is the “only” way), you will have challenges. Beaverton Grace is famous for shunning former members/attendees without giving an explanation or following Biblical principles on disagreements. You will be fine in this church if you never question the elders or pastor. Their emphasis is heavy on evangelism to the extent that you get the feeling if you do not regularly evangelize “their way”, you are not a true Christian. Be wary of churches that broadcast that they are one of the only few remaining churches that preach the Word. There are true Bible-believing churches who preach the Word, don’t mince the hard teachings, yet also have a balance of truth and grace and humble leaders. Do not be deceived.
A screen shot from the blog's front page
“I thought, I’m just going to post a review,” Smith told KATU.com. “We do it with restaurants and hotels and whatnot, and I thought, why not do it with this church?”
On the site, she explains her experience with the church in the following words:
I began this blog in Feb. 2012 after noticing that the Google reviews I had posted of my former church were being removed. Days after the commencement of this blog, I received a legal summons suing me and three others for defamation to the tune of $500,000. The story of spiritual abuse needs to be told. People are being hurt emotionally and spiritually by pastors who use bully tactics and we need a place to learn, to talk freely, and to heal. I will not be silenced
Little did Smith know that the church wouldn’t take her online activities lightly. The stay-at-home mom is dumbfounded by the large sum of money being sought out by the church and claims that this is simply not an amount of cash that she to dole out.
In his lawsuit, the pastor claims that Smith’s use of the words “creepy,“ ”cult,“ ”control tactics“ and ”spiritual abuse,” among others, constitute as defamation. In addition to Smith, the lawsuit targets her daughter and three other commenters.
Beaverton Grace Bible Church (Image Credit: KATU)
“What somebody does in the church is one thing, but when you get out into society we have the right to free speech, and it may not be what people want to hear, but we absolutely have that right,” Smith said, doubling down on her stance. ”He can say what he wants in the church and say, don‘t talk about this or don’t talk about that, or don’t talk to this person, but when you’re out in the civil world, you don’t do that anymore.”
According to KATU.com, the pastor and his family have declined thus far to give their side of the story. The Smith family has filed a free-speech motion in an effort to dismiss the lawsuit. A judge will examine the case later this month.
(H/T: KATU)
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 678 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 530 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 420 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 373 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 329 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 273 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 280 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 161 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 147 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 273 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (153)
Top Hat
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:57amThis controlling pastor has already proven he has not intention of honoring the bible, only himself.
I Corinthians 6: 1-6 says: If any of you has a dispute with another, do you dare to take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the Lord’s people? 2 Or do you not know that the Lord’s people will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! 4 Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, do you ask for a ruling from those whose way of life is scorned in the church? 5 I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? 6 But instead, one brother takes another to court—and this in front of unbelievers!
7 The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? 8 Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers and sisters.
Report Post »Landon410
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 9:23amI was going to post the same thing.
The comments left alone would have been nothing, I have never found a reviews of anything where at least 1 person didn’t like it. So it would not have been strange for 1 or 2 of 3 comments to be negative, this suit though, wow church…. hidin’ it under a bush? oh no, you need to let it shine, but you’re not.
am I going to get added to the suit now too?
Report Post »grudgywoof
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 10:05amWe are supposed to reflect the life lived by Christ…….I never read where he sued the sanhedrin for calling him a blasphemer and a false profit. This church is dangerious and should be avoided. CULT!
Report Post »FromSeaToSea
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 10:10amThis should be kept in the Church if both are Christians. However, if the Defendant is not believed to be a Christian by the Pastor or Plaintiff, then there would be no Biblical issue suing them in my opinion. The Pastor may take the position the Defendant is not a Christian therefore the common courts apply as the Chruch has no authority over a non believer. This is why no one can really comment on this until we hear the Pastor or Plaintiffs side.
Report Post »Glynrd Skynrd
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 10:12amThe scriptures tell us as believersw to “turn the other cheek.” It’s a red flag to me when I see a church sueing a person for saying something negative about them. Whether what this lady has said was right or wrong the church should have trusted God to deal w/ this. I’m afraid it only makes them look defensive, guilty as charged.
Report Post »JRook
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 10:23amThey seem to talk like a cult, worship like a cult and circle the wagons like a cult. Yea there a cult.
Report Post »turkey13
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 10:40am“Those who supress freedom always do so in the name of law and order.” John V. Lindsey
“God grants liberty only to those who love it, and are always ready to guard and defend it.” Daniel Webster
Report Post »Ironmen
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 11:12amThis woman is no longer a member of his church. Consequently, I do not believe that verse is applicable.
Report Post »tdtresrch
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 12:25pmOf course this church can sue.
Individuals cannot flaunt 1 Cor. 6:1 and expect to be protected, see 1 Kings 2:28-29.
She has written words of inflamatory defamation such as “cult” and “creepy”, setting up a web site in front of unbelievers (hypocrisy), and she expects then to run for cover using 1 Cor. 6:1? Think again folks.
This woman has gone about spreading slander with meaningless words and so has endangered these individuals. Would not the church be allowed to call the police if someone were breaking into the church? Of course, because such are not disputs but crimes.
” ‘Do not go about spreading slander among your people. ”
‘Do not do anything that endangers your neighbor’s life. I am the LORD . Leviticus 19:16, niv
Now, whether the church gets justice from the legal system, we can only hope so.
Report Post »Until then we all hope this woman admits her wrongs in time, Matt. 5:25.
terriergal
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 12:40pm“This woman is no longer a member of his church. Consequently, I do not believe that verse is applicable.”
Since Phil Johnson (of John Macarthur’s Grace Community Church) has responded on this issue, because pastor Chuckie has said John Macarthur’s ministry advised them to sue, you should read his official statement, which says that we should also not sue unbelievers. I will quote the last part of his statement:
“Second, Jesus was very clear about what Christians should do even when we are vilified by unbelievers: “Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. Rejoice and be glad” (Matthew 5:11-12). “Do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat also” (vv. 39-40).’
That is our official position, and it is not merely theoretical. Having been at times targets of malicious slander in various gossip-forums on the Internet, we do appreciate the frustration of dealing with relentless character assassination.
But the example we were given to follow by Christ Himself deals with exactly such situations: “While being reviled, He did not revile in return; while suffering, He uttered no threats, but kept entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously” (1 Peter 2:23).”
You should actually be familiar with Scripture before you pontificate, Ironmen.
Report Post »Twisted Mind
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 10:32pmSo, Christians shouldn’t sue any other Christians. What about damage to propery? What about car accidents. What about personal damage. There is not ONE person on this site that would’t sue if given a reason. Remember “judge not lest ye be judged by the same judgement ye mete.“ You can say ”no, I wouldn’t” but if you did you would be a liar.
Report Post »uptownguy
Posted on May 17, 2012 at 3:55pmwell she should be careful or the lord will pioss on her tombstone and no one likes soggy pizza .lol
Report Post »hi
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:55amI’ve been telling everyone to try a Bible church. However, this one has a false prophet. The Bible says not to sue! That’s a big red flag to me.
Report Post »Ironmen
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 11:53amTHis woman is of the world. Biblical law does not apply to her.
Report Post »terriergal
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 12:41pmyeah Ironmen, because Jesus told us to sue people who falsely accuse us. What happened to turn the other cheek? What Bible are you reading anyway?
Report Post »Dr Vel
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 4:34pmIronmen “This woman is of the world. Biblical law does not apply to her.”
Who are you to judge this woman’s heart and standing with Christ? You just made yourself God and judge of her salvation therefore you will answer for it. To proclaim she is of the world is to judge her as unsaved. Say the pastor is the leader of a cult. Easy to do in light of his actions which we can see. To put fear of being expelled from their ‘family’ if you dare to speak out is evil. GOD GAVE US FREE WILL! The command to members to shun this woman is an atrocity to the spirit of free will and free thinking on the part of members. To sue is to try to destroy her ability to live and to care for her family. For speaking her mind over her experiences there? If you destroy those who comment against you then few will stand up to the real cults, which have and still do destroy lives. Jim Jones. Children forced to drink cyanide. If one member had not been put in fear of speaking out innocent lives would still live. God said these evil liars would come. Therefore He would not create conditions in His law which would suppress speaking out against these people, or the evil would be firmly set in place with no recourse for His children. Simple logic condemns suing this woman and no entity has greater Logic and wisdom than God. He is smart enough to realize for His children’s sake they must be allowed to make their own judgments, not submit to oppression in His house nor be destroyed for speaking their
Report Post »loneindividual
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:49amReligion is the cause of the Individual
Spiritualism (entertainment) is the opiate of the masses
X-ianity, Idiotzlam, n’ *JEW*Daism are becoming just as pitiful as Atheism….oh wait…it’z cuz the people who “profess” to follow those religions DO SO FOR ENTERTAINMENT
Religion is something that should UNITE people…that people serve a common CAUSE
We stopped worshipping the CONCEPT of THE INDIVIDUAL (GOD…whoever the hell he is) and now worship mortal!
It‘d be funny if it weren’t so horrific watching the soul die.
Report Post »Highland
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:41amI suspect she may have engaged in behavior considered sinful, the church confronted her on it (pursuant to Scripture) and she refused to acknowledge or repent of her sin. In that instance, some churches believe they are obligated to wash their hands of the unrepentant person (what she calls shunning). It’s not cultish, it’s a particular interpretation of Scripture that some very conservative Christian churches hold.
gsplgtr
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:56amHighland, after reading her remarks about the shunning members/attendees that used to attend is one of the hallmarks of a cult. It also sounds like she knows her “Word” as well. there are churches that depend on scripturally ignorant people to maintain their leadership.
Report Post »hi
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:57amChurches without love hold that concept, not “conservative” ones.
Report Post »Jinglebob
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 9:28amYou suspect Highland? Suspect what? Based on What? Woe and shame on you for casting stones.
Report Post »JRook
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 10:27amOr perhaps the pastor couldn’t get rich fast enough off the congregation so he is looking for a quick buck. Look at the crap this blog and others present and promote about the President, cabinet members, members of congress, etc. So clearly embellishment is a necessary aspect of attracting eye balls for the cheap ads and pop up BS.
Report Post »Ironmen
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 11:30amHighland is correct. I went on her site. She seemed to disagree with the direction of the church and became a pain in the rear. What did Paul say? Oh, yes. 1 Timothy 2:12
New International Version
Report Post »“I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.”
terriergal
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 12:46pmIronmen is incorrect. Her blog doesn’t say anything about women teaching in church or being silent. Is her blog the church? Get a clue guys.
Report Post »Dr Vel
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 1:38pmShe should counter sue for two million. And the comments here are pathetic beyond words supporting this rat hole of a cult. She stated she did not know why she was shunned meaning they did not even give her the God given right to self defense of any charges against her. If you have wisdom read into this the church had no right to shun her. This is a land of free speech all you idiots in favor of this cult, taking away her association in the community is an act outside the church. The community is part of a nation called America, where no religion takes precedent over society and free speech is the law. Her relationships in the community are not subject to the whims of a pathetic excuse for a worm claiming to speak for Christ. The definition of cult is first and foremost telling you what to think while refusing you the right to think for yourselves. The very act of telling members to shun this woman proves beyond all doubt it was a cult and the grace of God removed her from this hell hole of a bethevin. She should be happy and thank God she is no longer subject to the Jim Jones of Oregon before they started serving the purple cool aid. All you fools against her in these posts go ahead become a member of this rat infested blight on the principles of America, I am sure they have plenty of free cool aid for you all.
Report Post »mdeputy7
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:41amIf this church were truly Bible-believing, they would know that the Scripture condemns Christians suing other Christians. This is sad, but there is no way that the church will win.
Report Post »Dr Vel
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 2:32pmI seem to remember Jesus saying those who are well do not need Me, I am here for the sick. This concept beyond all others proves no church can claim to represent Christ and tell members to shun another member. This violates first principles, the mission of Christ. Therefore even if they were right about her they were wrong in their actions and compounded this wrong by suing her in the secular world of law and finances. As I stated previously only a cult tells you what to think. The members are being put in fear of being removed from this cult if they associate with her. Little do they know they would be better off but this is not the point. They each have the God given right to think for themselves and make their own judgment call without fear of repercussion, both in terms of Godly principles and in terms of the land of the free, the home of the brave, i.e., America. She should be allowed to face her accuser not be ostracized without recourse. Suing her for her valid opinion of the way she was treated in an amount large enough to destroy her life is the act of satan against a child of God. Doing so in the name of God greatly increases the level of the offense. The pigster of this cult will answer. No I did not misspell pastor. I meant what I said. To sue her for money shows his fear of losing money in the collection plate, proving what he and his cult is really all about. He cares not for souls he cares only for his bank balance and power over his victims. Period.
Report Post »1WhoQuestions
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:39amAnd you shall know them by their fruits.
IMO, let the lady speak out all she wants. If what you are doing is Biblical her actions will eventually go for naught and she will be exposed for the liar she may be. Conversly, if what the church is doing is not Biblical they will be exposed for that. As they are currently being exposed I would venture to say what they are doing is not Biblical.
Report Post »loneindividual
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:38amMormons had far worse crap said about them….and violence was even inflicted upon them…FOR THE DUMBEST CRAP….but people decided to keep on bothering them.
That’s not the case with this Cult (Church). And I define CULT as in * ANTI-SOCIAL CHURCH *
The Mormon Church is different cuz they were *EXILED* by RACISTS/SEXISTS/& BIGOTS. (The very same Democrats who invented the Confederate Flag)
I think the woman will obviously win and politically speaking she absolutely should.
HOWEVER….she created a blog….doesn’t she have better things to do? Nevermind, I suppose it might be prudent especially if your former “friends” were ignoring you at the behest of a SELF-PROCLAIMED SOMEBODY which I think most pastors are….which is why I flipped the bird off at X-ianity (I’d rather stay dead)….but I flip BOTH BIRDS OFF at ISLAM & ATHEISM
I would love to hear what she thinks is “spiritual abuse”….seriously….what the hell is that cept smoke n’ mirrors.
I’m tired of people using different words….it’s like the Tower of Babyl ffs!….are we in Babylon?
More and more I think Zion is impossible
ps: I don’t hate Jews/Christians/Muslims for fighting against Babylon….I’m annoyed the upcoming generations are not fighting harder…and without the self-righteous bs of their progenitors. It’s all a pose (lie).
Religion = Cause of the Individual
Entertainment = Opiate of the Masses
Karl Marx was a LIAR & A MURDERER IN HIS HEART
Report Post »gsplgtr
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 9:01amLone, what you call the “Confederate” flag (Stars and Bars)was the battle banner for the Army of Northern Virginia, not the Confederacy. The “Bonnie Blue” was the Confederate flag.
Report Post »rickbob
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 10:02amConfederate Veterans used the “Battle Flag” for honorific and memorial purposes. It WAS the Democrats who co-opted the flag for racially divisive purposes; NOT Southern soldiers. . .
Report Post »terriergal
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 12:50pmShe has links to spiritual abuse surveys, if you really want to know. It’s typical of all groups that control and coerce, not necessarily religious groups. But when it’s connected with a church (which should be the one place this kind of technique ought NOT to be used) they call it spiritual abuse.
Report Post »Fiddlesoup
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 1:11pmActually, gsplgtr, that’s wrong on a number of levels. First, Bonnie Blue was never the official confederate flag. It was unnofficial, used mainly in battle. Second, “The Stars and Bars” actually was the official title of the first Confederate flag (in all 4 of its forms). Third, the flag you’re mistakenly referring to as “Stars and Bars,” the battle flag is actually the second Confederate Navy Jack, as well as the battle flag of the army of Northern Virginia.. Fourth, I don’t recall the person you were replying to stating which flag he was referring to.
The first four flags used by the Confederacy were called “The Stars and Bars.” These flags strongly resembled the US flag. They consisted of a blue field of stars in the upper left hand corner, with the rest of the flag consisting of red and white bars. The main differences were that the stars were arranged in a circle as in the Betsy Ross flag, and there were only 3 “bars” as opposed to 13 stripes. Additionally, the number of stars on each version reflected the number of states they had (7, 9, 11, and 13).
In 1863, they adopted “The Stainless Banner,” which consisted of the (well-known) X shaped battle flag on the upper left corner of a completely white field.
In 1865, they adopted “The Blood-Stained Banner,” which was the same as the last, but with a single vertical red stripe across the right side.
All of this can be learned just by researching for a few minutes.
Report Post »edmundburk
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 11:44pmmormen VS bible church
Mormen VS bible church. cult = pot/kettle.
Report Post »roncouch
Posted on May 16, 2012 at 9:16pmMost of the time, I don’t reply to persons with who I disagree. Therefore, let me make clear the
Report Post »fact that I do not disagree with with everything that Loneindividual has written. His comment has to be the new world champion of non-sequitor. Nothing he says has much to do with anything else
that he says. What in the hell does Karl Marx’s heart have to do with this lady, or, the church which she has come to dislike?
DesertPaine
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:36amHmmmm. Pastors are usually pretty noisy about protecting first amendment rights. Whoops….their commitment is to freedom of religion, not freedom of speech. Rights, apparently, are a smorgasbord from which people can choose some and ignore others. Isn‘t that the pastors’ lament that people do with the ten commandments?
Report Post »gunslingerpatriot
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:33amBased on her orignal blog post, I thought she was talking about a local International Church of Christ (ICOC) congregation from Bethesda, MD.
Report Post »troymac20
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:30amReally sounds like this church doesn’t have much of a case. If Three people have had the same experience it sounds like she probably posted a pretty accurate review.
Report Post »terriergal
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:40amI agree, this woman is within her rights. Churches are getting ridiculous these days. Who would have thought there was a meaner church than Westboro Baptist out there? Even THEY don’t sue their critics.
Perry Noble’s (NewSpring) church henchmen at least had the sense to know they couldn’t legally attack an online critic, so instead they did it illegally (including harassment and identity theft and impersonation and interfering with an adoption). They got fired from the church eventually, but Perry’s response was essentially “I didn’t know anything about it but sounds like he (the critic) deserved it.”
The Christian world is going insane. Rick Warren gave pastors carte blanche to get the bit in their teeth with “Purpose Driven Church” and now the fruits are being brought forth.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:49am@Terriergal
“Even THEY don’t sue their critics.”
They sue anyone who tries to stop them; their leader, Phelps, used to be a lawyer and his daughter still is the legal force behind their group. They’re so good at winning cases that most of their activities are funded by legal victories against people so ticked off by them that they break the law and get sued.
It might not be all their critics, but it’s hard to sue the entire world.
Report Post »terriergal
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 12:47pmOk Locked, I stand corrected. But we don‘t’ hear about it as much. So they’re “as nice as” Westboro. Still doesn’t sound too good. ;-)
Report Post »hardiepiper
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:30amIt seems like she is throwing a lot of loose commentary around. What exactly was her specific grievance with the church? Did she ever meet with the pastor or elders to discuss them? If she disagrees with the way specific people are treating her, than she should name those people, not generalize an entire church community. It sounds like she went to this church and did not like what she heard and thought that they should change what they believe to what she thought they should believe. When this did not happen she got mad. Get over it, find another church. Don’t be a baby about it and start an internet blog attacking them, that is being vindictive.
Report Post »terriergal
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:41amNo, it’s not vindictive, it’s warning people not to get involved. People ought to be thanking her.
Report Post »Ironmen
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 11:35amalso, her husband did not attend. I see all sorts of red flags here. I went to her blog site and i think she stated she was abused as a child and had serious trust issues( with men) . So lets connect the dots……..
Report Post »terriergal
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 12:36pmIronmen, so women married to unbelievers should not be able to find a church where they can fellowship? Serious trust issues with men? So an abused woman should be all healed before she can find fellowship she can trust? You are twisted, buddy. Go back to westboro.
Report Post »silverhalo
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:27amSounds like some of the church members have become little trolls on here….
Report Post »MittensKittens
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:23amCheck out the google review page, it’s funny…funny how things online go viral.
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Beaverton+Grace+Bible+Church,+Northwest+180th+Avenue,+Beaverton,+OR&hl=en&oq=Beaverton+Grace+Bible+Church,+Northwest+180th+Avenue,+Beaverton,+OR&t=h&hq=Beaverton+Grace+Bible+Church,+Northwest+180th+Avenue,+Beaverton,+OR&z=14
Report Post »Locked
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:45amThe Pastor himself put a review up saying:
” It is our prayer that there will be no more wood thrown upon the fire of contentiousness, strife, discord, and division. It is our prayer that the fire will go out and that the body of Christ at BGBC will be able to press on “in one spirit, with one mind striving together for the faith of the gospel” (Phil. 1:27). It is our prayer that those who started the fire and have cut, stacked, and stoked much wood upon it, will repent, for God’s glory and their blessing. If you have any questions, please contact the pastor and elders. ”
Odd that he didn’t mention the part about “Oh, and we’re suing them for half a million.”
Report Post »terriergal
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:49amHmmm one of the comments on the google reviews says the pastor violated the “no soliciting” ordinance…. HMMMMM….
Report Post »RightPolitically
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:14amSounds like “mind-control” to me. And, if her Costco experience, running into church members, is true, it’s working. This is the kind of stuff that happens to people with weak or no sense of themselves, people who look to others for their own moral code. That church has descended into cultism in my opinion. The Left constantly makes fun of evangelicals and this is a great example why!
Report Post »mdeputy7
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:40amIf this church were truly Bible-following, they would know that the Scripture condemns Christians suing other Christians. This is sad, but there is no way that the church will win.
Report Post »kentuckypatriot
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:08amChurches like these really give Christianity a bad name.
Report Post »reggiebyrum
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:03amThis pastor needs to remove the words, “grace” and “Bible” from his church name, as he is representing neither.
Report Post »ASE
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 7:53amSounds like the ‘church’ (term used very loosely in this context) by its very actions is justifying some of what was said about them – bullying and intimidation. The ‘church’ seems to be supplying the family with the ammo they need to defend themselves. The family should counter sue to recoup any legal costs.
Report Post »normbal
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 7:52amCultwatch.com
I went to med school with the woman who started this organizatione back in the 1980′s. Her father was a California congressman who met and untimely end at the hands of Rev. Jim Jones’ goons in Guyana a generation ago. I was baptized at a local mega-church that seemed too controlling, too much the “cult of personality.” When the pastor fired the elders, I interviewed most of them and remembered things I’d heard Patricia say about cults. It was worse than I suspected.
Cultwatch.com
Report Post »davecorkery
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 10:13amWatch for the church members to drink the Koolade soon. Sounds like they’re half way there. This is the reason christianity (and all religiosity) is waning worldwide. People are getting educated. About time.
Report Post »Baddoggy
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 7:50amControl freak, Legalism or cult…all the very same thing. Legalism has NOTHING to do with GRACE. At the very least someone should sue him for false advertising. I hate legalism worse than anything. It has caused more people to walk away from Church than anything ever. It is the Devils tool….
Report Post »mandmsgirl
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:50pmWell said, I have gone to churches like this and I am on Ms Smith’s side, no one knows the extent of damage done emotionally to the person by these “churches”
Report Post »welloddyfriggindah
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 7:50am(NET) 1 Corinthians 6:1 When any of you has a legal dispute with another, does he dare go to court before the unrighteous rather than before the saints?
(NET) 1 Corinthians 6:2 Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world is to be judged by you, are you not competent to settle trivial suits?
(NET) 1 Corinthians 6:4 So if you have ordinary lawsuits, do you appoint as judges those who have no standing in the church?
(NET) 1 Corinthians 6:5 I say this to your shame! Is there no one among you wise enough to settle disputes between fellow Christians?
(NET) 1 Corinthians 6:6 Instead, does a Christian sue a Christian, and do this before unbelievers?
Report Post »ENDTIMES2220
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 7:46amEverything that is hidden, shall be revealed. Look up, repent and prepare. For the Holy God of Israel is going to shake your foundation. Maranatha.
Report Post »novemberelection
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 7:43amNegative internet reviews? She created an entire website. She claims “I will not be silenced”. Oh yes she will.
She probably has about 30 days to file an answer to the complaint and give her defenses. THEN, the judge will give her the option to settle with prejudice, removing the site and never speaking about them again. OR continue to pay a lawyer to go forward so she has her moment in the spotlight to complain about being abused as a child and being abused by the church blah blah blah…then the judge will say, shut up and take the freaking thing down, you aren’t making your case. We all have free speech. But you can‘t sling around defamatory words without knowing what you’re doing.
You CANNOT SAY “Beaverton Grace is famous for shunning former members/attendees without giving an explanation or following Biblical principles”. She should have said. “The Beaverton Grace members shunned me without any …..”.. PROVE THEY‘RE FAMOUS FOR THAT OR IT’S DEFAMATION.
Report Post »circleDwagons
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:08amShe was not under oath when she blogged. She was giving her opinion. It is obvious that the church and pastor have problems or they would not sue. The judge should throw the case out and tell the “pastor” to “sin NO more”
Report Post »Locked
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:10am“You CANNOT SAY “Beaverton Grace is famous for shunning former members/attendees without giving an explanation or following Biblical principles”. She should have said. “The Beaverton Grace members shunned me without any …..”.. PROVE THEY‘RE FAMOUS FOR THAT OR IT’S DEFAMATION.”
Then all she has to do is find others who have been shunned. As three other people outside her family are also being sued, I think that fits your arbitrary criteria.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:12amAlso, the article mentions that the reviews she posted prior to creating a website were brought down without explanation.
And claiming that “SHE MADE AN ENTIRE WEBSITE!!!” like it’s so difficult is ridiculous. It’s a blogspot site. It takes 5 minutes to set up an account, a site, and a background.
This doesn’t happen to be your church, does it?
Report Post »novemberelection
Posted on May 16, 2012 at 9:46am@circledwagons You cannot make up your own law. If you say or write or blog something as FACT, you get to PROVE it in court or it’s defamation. She will settle when she finally understands that in discovery she will be forced to show how they are “famous for shunning” and remove it. Mark my words. And LOL how all the religious people are saying the church should have turned the other cheek, but she shouldn’t have? And I’m not even a religious person but LOL on that logic.
Report Post »novemberelection
Posted on May 16, 2012 at 9:50am@locked. Making an entire website shows much more intent to damage than merely stating something on a message board for example. And LOL at you calling my statements arbitrary and calling me part of the church.
I am a successful pro se defendant in EXACTLY this type of law suit. I kicked the butts of my 13 co-claimants, and adversaries 2 big law firms and 1 pitt butt personal injury attorney. So before you people who sit around making up your own law, simple GOOGLE DEFAMATION. Then google affirmative defenses. She’s gonna have LOTS OF FUN spending the next year of her life with proving her affirmative defenses.
Report Post »Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 7:41amSounds like the pastor is out for a fast buck, maintain control over his followers, and fails to understand that people are entitled to their opinions on matters. May his lawsuit fail completely across the board.
Report Post »huey6367
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 7:36amWhat is wrong with someone having an opinion whether anyone agrees with it or not?
Report Post »novemberelection
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 7:45amShe didn’t state an opinion. She made claims that are legally defamation. Such as “The church is famous for shunning people….”. NOW she gets to prove that they’re FAMOUS for that. She opened up her big mouth and created an entire website to trash them without knowing the consequences of doing so. She WAS trying to hurt the church so she got her wish. And it’ll cost her plenty unless she agrees to take it down.
Report Post »thop1960
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 8:37amSomeone sounds like the church’s pastor? Taking it a little personal, hum…
Report Post »dietrdeb
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 9:00amThank goodness Mr novemberelection’s version of the law is a fairy tale!
Report Post »Mustangrider
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 9:50amGood point novemberelection, she could have just walked away if she didn’t like the church, which is what most of us would do, but she chose to launch a vendetta against this church with the intent to do harm to the churches reputation, I call that a clear case of defamation. whether the church can prove it is another story.
Report Post »Ironmen
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 11:42amThis is what scripture says about the issue:Romans 16:17
New International Version (©1984)
“I urge you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them.”
The pastor determined she was causing “division” and she is being shunned as scripture directs.
Report Post »Ironmen
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 12:01pmThe Body of Christ is not a democracy. IT IS A THEOCRACY. Definition: “Theocracy is a form of government in which the official policy is to be governed by immediate divine guidance or by officials who are regarded as divinely guided, or simply pursuant to the doctrine of a particular religious group or religion”
Report Post »terriergal
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 12:34pmIronmen, what if it’s the pastor who is causing the division and preaching untruth and behaving hypocritically?
You wouldn’t know how to judge that, since you make your racism plain in all your other posts. Why should we listen to you? You have no authority here outside of your hateful racist church.
Report Post »novemberelection
Posted on May 16, 2012 at 10:01amLOL not only am I NOT a religious person or affiliated with this place in any way, but I’m a successful pro se defendant in EXACTLY this type of lawsuit. It took me a year to kick the butts of 2 lawfirms, a pitt bull personal injury attorney, my 13 co-defendants and cross claimants and have the judge finally threaten my adversary with fines and dismissal during discovery.
Instead of dreaming up YOUR version of law, maybe know what you’re talking about. Google Rules of Court for her state and defamation: slander, slander per se, libel, libel per se and all the other elements of defamation.
Bring it. Find a lawyer to prove my SIMPLE overview of the process wrong. You don’t know the HALF of what the misguided woman is about to embark on. Unless she finds a sympathetic yokel judge to dismiss the complaint, she will have to file her answer and defend herself with facts not your version of biblical law. Google Affirmative Defenses. Biblical Law is not an affirmative defense in this type of complaint.Unless the judge considers God a responsible 3rd party who can also get sued LOL.
Oh that’s right. You guys don’t even know what an affirmative defense even is.
Report Post »SpankDaMonkey
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 7:35am.
Report Post »Well isnt that special……
SwordAndShield_ofTruth
Posted on May 15, 2012 at 3:36pmDoes this mean Mormons get to sue Protestants?
Report Post »