A church pastor is suing a mother and daughter for $500,000 because they gave the church bad reviews online.
The family being sued left the church a few years ago and Julie Anne Smith says she and her family were shunned and couldn't understand why. So she went online and wrote Google and DEX reviews of the church and then started a blog.
"I thought, I'm just going to post a review," Smith said. "We do it with restaurants and hotels and whatnot, and I thought, why not do it with this church?"...
Satanic or Luciferian would describe the hidden agenda of Michael W. Smith. It's no wonder he is being promoted by Julie Anne on her blog. Roman Catholic and demonic go hand in hand. There are many instances and ties to covert occultism and demonic doctrines on her blog.
Clicking advertisements at her blog will put more money in her pocket, use a script blocker like "no script" or "ghostery" on your browser if you want to prevent helping fund her attack, by just visiting her blog.
This stuff is acceptable to Julie Anne, but "repent and believe" By faith alone in Christ alone are repulsive to her. I guess she wants to save you from the cult of evangelism and pastor Chuck, and introduce you to Occultism. That just ain't right.
Grounded Reader wrote: Agreed. This thread is media. Media contains a lot of mininformation. I don't believe what I read in the media either. Which is why I hardly ever read john Uk and certainly don't believe him.
Good on yer. That is a good comment.
It is important to "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ" because then, "thou shalt be saved". Acts 16:31.
John UK wrote: whereas in the media (this thread is media), there can be a lot of misinformation, which is why I stand aloof from topics like this. And I don't believe what I read in the papers neither. Which is why I never read newspapers.
Agreed. This thread is media. Media contains a lot of mininformation. I don't believe what I read in the media either. Which is why I hardly ever read john Uk and certainly don't believe him.
Considering more, Julie Anne calls ONeal a Cult leader, using Jim Jones for an example. How is it that no one cries foul on this? Jim Jones was a Jesuit fulfilling his oath, this is documented by Alberto Rivera an ex-Jesuit priest in his testimony “Double-Cross”. Jones even made them call him “father”. chick.com has a revealing Alberto Series that reads just like this case here.
She claims O’Neal’s abuse was preaching too much about sexual sin. Her blog explains she wanted to show “cleavage” and “thigh” and wear dark colors and dress her boys in pink. These activities were frowned on by this church according to her. Spiritual abuse? ...this is what she means. She claims “cult leader Pastor Chuck’s” evangelism was too authoritarian and she prefers “friendship evangelism” instead of door to door evangelism.
Here is a link to the kind of Cult leader Pastor Chuck appears to be, This mans name is Jim Jones too. He happened to be killed by car “accident” in almost the same month they started escalating Pastor O’Neal, in the same state doing the same kind of evangelism the Devil and the Jesuits hate. Jim Jones Evangelist from Oregon Strange eh?
not so fast wrote: John UK Sorry about that, I should choose better words. I'm just trying to see things from eyes not blurry with the media tinting. (get closer to the truth)
No need to apologise bro. I made my point about the Lord knowing all things and judging all situations, whereas in the media (this thread is media), there can be a lot of misinformation, which is why I stand aloof from topics like this. And I don't believe what I read in the papers neither. Which is why I never read newspapers.
John UK Sorry about that, I should choose better words. I'm just trying to see things from eyes not blurry with the media tinting. (get closer to the truth)
not so fast wrote: Could it be that his lawyer had him remove evidence that could be used in court against his attacker? Maybe could it be something like that?
Attacker implies a victim. Are you prepared to say that O'Neal is a faultless victim in this mess?
O'Neal is a pastor ~~supposedly~~ ordained by God. Yet he needs advise and assistance from a lawyer (before the unbelievers.... 1 Cor 6:6) in a church matter that escaped his control? This is what can happen when someone sets themselves up as a pope accountable to no one and butts heads with a strong willed person who will not submit to the role of a lemming. Reminds me of Jim Jones, David Koresh, Fred Phelps and even another militant IFB pastor who used to be a member of SA and posted on this comment board; who I will not name.
not so fast wrote: Could it be that his lawyer had him remove evidence that could be used in court against his attacker? Maybe could it be something like that?
Could it be.....
Maybe.....
Maybe could it be something.....
Speculation is fraught with danger, bro.
But THE LORD knows all things, and HE will deal with it at some point. And he is no respector of persons. Whoever has the guilt ought to know that God still pronounces judgment, and they should come clean and save themselves a whole lot of bother. "God is not mocked....."
Observer wrote: Lurker - those are only the blog comments that Chuck did not delete. There's more.
I see.
Apparently O'Neal wasn't as proud of his comments as he was when he first posted them. Whatever the case, I doubt they will ever be seen again. Makes one wonder what he didn't want his blog archive to reveal.
Lurker wrote: Chuck O'Neal SA blog comments Based on past experience, I'd suggest that both parties have fault in this mess. Regardless of what is said in defense of either party's individual actions; neither party can appeal to the bible to justify the cumulative result of what has been going on between professing Christians. Both parties need to grow up, get over yourselves and seek to glorify God.
Lurker - those are only the blog comments that Chuck did not delete. There's more.
wolf in sheeps wrote: The Jesuit Oath. "heretofore you have been taught to act the dissembler: among Roman Catholics to be a Roman Catholic, and to be a spy even among your own brethren; to believe no man, to trust no man. Among the Reformers, to be a Reformer; among the Huguenots, to be a Huguenot; among the Calvinists, to be a Calvinist; among other Protestants, generally to be a Protestant; and obtaining their confidence, to seek even to preach from their pulpits, and to denounce with all the vehemence in your nature our Holy Religion and the Pope; and even to descend so low as to become a Jew among Jews, that you might be enabled to gather together all information for the benefit of your Order as a faithful soldier of the Pope. "Jesuit Oath.
Wow! This is something every Christian needs to read and understand. "Wiles of the devil"? We don't know the half of it.
"heretofore you have been taught to act the dissembler: among Roman Catholics to be a Roman Catholic, and to be a spy even among your own brethren; to believe no man, to trust no man. Among the Reformers, to be a Reformer; among the Huguenots, to be a Huguenot; among the Calvinists, to be a Calvinist; among other Protestants, generally to be a Protestant; and obtaining their confidence, to seek even to preach from their pulpits, and to denounce with all the vehemence in your nature our Holy Religion and the Pope; and even to descend so low as to become a Jew among Jews, that you might be enabled to gather together all information for the benefit of your Order as a faithful soldier of the Pope. You have been taught to plant insidiously the seeds of jealousy and hatred between communities, provinces, states that were at peace, and to incite them to deeds of blood, involving them in war with each other, and to create revolutions and civil wars in countries that were independent and prosperous, cultivating the arts and the sciences and enjoying the blessings of peace; to take sides with.... "Jesuit Oath.
Suppose: A Jesuit infiltration of GCC, GTY, Masters College is ongoing. Easy evidence is the CS. Lewis (anti-Christian denied Blood Atonement, Pro Anglican Catholic) quotes plastered in the halls of Masters College.
How is that real evidence of Jesuit infiltration? It might be evidence of many things, but....?
There are plenty of mixed up brethren and churches, but that doesn't mean a Jesuit is in the pulpit or in the pew.
You need some better evidential 'proof' rather than a jesuit conspiracy based on flimsy speculative thoughts.
You could write a book on your suppositions, there will be a few on here who have itchy ears for any jesuit inspired conspiracy!
Suppose: Julie Anne and/or her band are truly Jesuit, with a stated goal of attacking their enemies ,which is any Protestant Christian leader opposing the Roman Catholic Cult. Pastor Chuck ONeal Certainly is outspoken against the RCC and Ecumenism.
The Jesuit will seek to. 1. Discredit 2. Isolate 3. Eliminate
Suppose: A Jesuit infiltration of GCC, GTY, Masters College is ongoing. Easy evidence is the CS. Lewis (anti-Christian denied Blood Atonement, Pro Anglican Catholic) quotes plastered in the halls of Masters College.
Pastor Chuck RSVP’s the 2012 Pastors Conference at GCC, Jesuit Infiltrator at GCC (in contact with Julie Anne) advises Pastor Chuck to sue her, and gaining acceptance passes information on to Julie Anne and up goes her blog to seal the deal. ... NOTICE THE TIMING
Either extra damage can be done to GCC for “advising” ONeal to sue, or extra damage can be done to ONeal for “lying”, Either way extra damage can be done to the Protestant Christian reputation with the lawsuit and Pastor Chuck gets isolated.
This thing has “Jesuit” written all over it, “the end justifies the means”.
Observer wrote: Judging by Chuck O'Neal's own intemperate comments on his own sermonaudio blog which he deleted a long time ago, he has problems with a lot more than just Julie Anne. I'm sure they are in sermonaudio's data archive. Put them back up and let the evidence speak.
Based on past experience, I'd suggest that both parties have fault in this mess. Regardless of what is said in defense of either party's individual actions; neither party can appeal to the bible to justify the cumulative result of what has been going on between professing Christians.
Both parties need to grow up, get over yourselves and seek to glorify God.
Judging by Chuck O'Neal's own intemperate comments on his own sermonaudio blog which he deleted a long time ago, he has problems with a lot more than just Julie Anne.
I'm sure they are in sermonaudio's data archive. Put them back up and let the evidence speak.
Julie Anne wrote: ...truth that has been covered up...
I heard from a member of your former church (the one before BGBC) you caused quite a bit of trouble there too Julie Anne.
You also promote "pastors" on your blog who make the HOLY GOD of the Bible out to be a trans-gender god, a "mother-father-god”. That is demonic plain and simple.
Your attacks of Pastor Chuck appear exactly premeditated and purposed. You were not even a MEMBER of this church and you demand rights of a member? I hope those on your blog see right through your phony commitment to them which is only a ploy for money. Click tracking. “Donate” to poor mom... schemes to use the name of Christ to make more money.
Your blog is definitely feminist and anti-authoritarian. The more of your blog I read, the more it makes it clear, you are a vicious attacker and you continue on here. You have proven yourself guilty- again.
May you repent of your sin! May God have Mercy on your soul and this Pastor Chuck and the rest of us.
32
There are a total of 51 user comments displayed | add new comment |
Dr. Alan Cairns | 5/11/2009
Dr. Joel Beeke | 1/3/2010
COMMENTS | 
