doggies
New Member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2009
- Messages
- 394
- Reaction score
- 0
Am chiming in here, with virtually nothing to add, but want to get something out of my mind before I GO out of my mind. We have so many more questions than answers, so many more rumors than reports, but I seem to remember something, and would love to have it cleared up-I'm thinking I can't be the only one who is unclear on this concept...
So-someone mentioned that the church had been 'chosen' to hold the memorial service. IIRC, the church OFFERED to hold the service, just as the funeral home OFFERED to donate its services.
Which leads me to the question, how did the preacher know that DT had recently been 'saved'? I just can't get out of my head that DT and family did not belong to a particular church or follow a specific religious doctrine. I wish I knew why I think this, and no, it doesn't help us prove who killed Somer, but I do think it's important due to all the discussion of how the preacher acted/reacted, etc.
In other words, I was led to believe by the early reports that this preacher did not know the family.
DT, et al, would have been, in that case, his only source of information. No wonder he was surprised at ST's appearance there. The pastor was probably getting his information (who were wrong, as we know) just like everyone else-through the media. Remember-this was in the early days, and the conflicts were many.
Am I totally off base with what I think I remember?
So-someone mentioned that the church had been 'chosen' to hold the memorial service. IIRC, the church OFFERED to hold the service, just as the funeral home OFFERED to donate its services.
Which leads me to the question, how did the preacher know that DT had recently been 'saved'? I just can't get out of my head that DT and family did not belong to a particular church or follow a specific religious doctrine. I wish I knew why I think this, and no, it doesn't help us prove who killed Somer, but I do think it's important due to all the discussion of how the preacher acted/reacted, etc.
In other words, I was led to believe by the early reports that this preacher did not know the family.
DT, et al, would have been, in that case, his only source of information. No wonder he was surprised at ST's appearance there. The pastor was probably getting his information (who were wrong, as we know) just like everyone else-through the media. Remember-this was in the early days, and the conflicts were many.
Am I totally off base with what I think I remember?