The disfellowship of James Scott Trimm
Bill Carlson
due to his recent BBS posts, it seems that the entire matter now needs
to be clarified:
James S. Trimm had a ruling issued against him from a Congregation
he attended in Texas. Later upon moving to Denver Colo., he was put
on a probation for his sinful conduct. He never kept the requirements
of this probation, and left Denver Colo. in a worse state than he
arrived, and a judgement was issued against him from the UMJC
leadership about his sinful lifestyle, and he was disfellowshipped from
the Denver Congregation of Roeh Israel, and the UMJC in general. Many
Congregational leaders were notified of this decision at that time.
Later, James Scott Trimm again showed up in Denver, and gave the
impression, through falsehood, that his life was completely
straightened up, - far from the truth!
Do to testimony, (written & oral / past & present), from a variety
of sources, (including his former and current wife), a Beit-Din was
held here in Denver Colo., (myself being one of the Beit-din members).
This was the "THIRD" injunction against Mr. Trimm. When presented with
the evidence, he admitted his guilt; and at the time appeared to accept
the requirement of the Beit-Din that he would refrain from teaching
until such a time as all members of the Beit-Din agreed that he was to
resume.
While the nature of SOME of the "sinS" that James Scott Trimm did,
does fall in line with his post on this net of his admitted "adultery";
- this in and of itself was SECONDARY, (in both the number and in the
SEVERITY of the types of sinS, committed by this man!) This ain't
Peyton place, and I don't feel compelled to enter into more specifics
here, but we are talking about a situation FAR worse than a mere case
of adultery!
It's a common occurrence that the non-Believers of this world, will
through one side of their mouth accuse Believers of letting the Jimmy
Swaggart and Jim Baker types off scott-free. I have little doubt
though that some of the non-Believers will find something adverse to
say on this, through the other side of their mouth. (As for myself, I
would rather speak and be called "fuddie", than refrain from speaking &
be labeled a "white-washer".) The members of the Beit-Din, and of the
UMJC branch and it's leadership, and of the Messianic community in
general, are responsible to HaShem for any ruling we make/have-made, &
no further defense by me of it will be made. No further revealing as
to the specific Torah-violations will be made in public, without the
members of the Beit-Din being in agreement that it is called for.
As Believers, we are called to a life-style that is "above
reproach", especially if we are in the lime-light as teachers and those
that represent the Body of Messiah. While I haven't enjoyed giving this
post, I have a responsibility, - not just as a member of the Beit-Din,
but as a Believer, - to warn those that the person "teaching" them, and
presenting himself as spokes-person and teacher for Natzratim-Judaism,
is in fact a disfellowshipped man because of his sinful nature.
While the first two rulings were not as gracious in their making
allowances for repentance, (due to the serious nature of the sins), the
third "Beit-Din" did make room for such an allowance - should all the
Beit-Din parties agree. So far, - we DO NOT!
For those Rabbinic-Jews who may not be familiar with the meaning
of "disfellowship", think of it 'somewhat' along the lines of a person
being placed: "under the ban".
TO THE NON-BELIEVING COMMUNITY:
You said the Gentile-Christian Community did not rebuke Jimmy Swaggart
strongly enough; you said it again with James Baker. At least, (in the
same vein), you can't say it about the Messianic-Believing-community!
B'Shem Y'shua HaMashiach - Amaine!
--
Bill Carlson - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Bill.C...@p0.f18.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG
Bryan Shane
being comprised of members whose tenets, as mine, basically conflict with
certain norms and practises of that version of Judaism that is responsible
for maintaining the actual "biet-din" responsible to G-d according to
tradition. Although I consider myself a beleiver, I consider it totally
against the principles set forth by Saul of Tarsus according to his
understanding of the Messiah that you should drag an "alleged
fellow-believer" through a mock open court. You are truly the descendents
of that alleged false Sanhedrin which, convening illegally (by the failure
of the body to adhere to halakhic norms and standards of procedure; c.f.
Archko) and under circumstances not meriting the support of the community
or G-d's laws, condemned the Messiah to death, not following either the
law of the land or the will of the people. While your actions make no
impact upon non-believers, it serves to drive others away as proof of your
apostasy to the truth of the purpose of Messiah. If it were an internal
matter, it should have remained so. If you seek to warn others about the
evil of one of your fallen ones, rest assured that your false beit-din
lends no creedance to your actions, but serves to underscore the true
purpose of the organized MJ movement -- i.e. to follow in the footsteps of
mainstream Christianity in their actions and procedures. Your "beit-din"
has revealed your true position. I will no longer ever refer to myself as
an MJ because of this abomination. (maybe that is the REAL reason you held
the mock trial; you've rid yourself of the association of an ardent historical
detractor). Never again in eternity. I remain a believer in Messiah who
is Jewish, but not an MJ. (So much for my convenient categorization of
myself -- now I am truly a renegade in all aspects)
--
The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
internet: laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
James Trimm
In Message #9619 "Shalom" Bill Carlson wrote:
> James S. Trimm had a ruling issued against him from a Congregation
>he attended in Texas. Later upon moving to Denver Colo., he was put
>on a probation for his sinful conduct. He never kept the requirements
>of this probation, and left Denver Colo. in a worse state than he
>arrived, and a judgement was issued against him from the UMJC
>leadership about his sinful lifestyle, and he was disfellowshipped from
>the Denver Congregation of Roeh Israel, and the UMJC in general. Many
>Congregational leaders were notified of this decision at that time.
Mr Carlson's facts here are somewhat correct. I was
disfellowshiped from Beth Yeshua in Texas in Mormon like fashion for
having left the congregation for another (I can document this). No
Beit-din was held, and I was never on probation. Sometime later I
attended Roeh Israel in Denver but never became a member. I was
disfellowshiped from Roeh Israel at a time when I was no longer
attending their meetings. I had not been to a meeting in a month or
two and then moved back to Texas. I was disfellowshiped after this
time. Again there was no Beit-din and I have never been a member of
either Roeh Israel or the UMJC. I do not know what the alleged
charge was though Bert Yellin had accused me of kidnapping my current
wife who was at the time an emancipated minor. My wife states that I
did not kidnap her.
> Later, James Scott Trimm again showed up in Denver, and gave the
>impression, through falsehood, that his life was completely
>straightened up, - far from the truth!
> Do to testimony, (written & oral / past & present), from a variety
>of sources, (including his former and current wife), a Beit-Din was
>held here in Denver Colo., (myself being one of the Beit-din members).
>This was the "THIRD" injunction against Mr. Trimm. When presented with
>the evidence, he admitted his guilt; and at the time appeared to accept
>the requirement of the Beit-Din that he would refrain from teaching
>until such a time as all members of the Beit-Din agreed that he was to
>resume.
> While the nature of SOME of the "sinS" that James Scott Trimm did,
>does fall in line with his post on this net of his admitted "adultery";
>- this in and of itself was SECONDARY, (in both the number and in the
>SEVERITY of the types of sinS, committed by this man!) This ain't
>Peyton place, and I don't feel compelled to enter into more specifics
>here, but we are talking about a situation FAR worse than a mere case
>of adultery!
As I stated earlier, this was intensley personal matter between
my wife and myself who are now seeing marriage counselor. All that
needs to be said is that my wife and I are working through this
together and neither of us wish to make this a public discussion.
Only four things need to be said,
1) My former wife has already admitted faracating many of her
claims. She is now on probation for felony injury to a child and
prohibted by protective order from bothering us or the daughter from
that marriage, who is now in my custody,.
2) I was not a member of Yeshuat Tzion, and never had been at the
time the Beit-din was held.
3) As I recall, the Beit-din left the matter of how long I should
abstain from teaching in my hands.
4) What Mr Carlson discribes is a meeting of 3 people not a Beit-din
which requires 12 judges.
(Continue next message.) James Scott Trimm
James Trimm
I cannot quit teaching the Word of G-d simply because some
people don't want me to. My trust is in G-d not man (Jer. 17:5-7).
And I have to do His will not man's. All of the messages I have
received since my inital posting on this matter Sunday night have
encouraged me to continue posting and teaching regardless. As long
as there are people who want to read my post and I feel G-d has
called me to teach I will continue to post.
The following are a few of the messages I have gotten
encouraging me to continue posting:
article 8029 28-JUN-1993 16:38:34.30
From: Bryan...@launchpad.unc.edu (Bryan Shane)
Subject: Re: clearing the air
Date: 28 Jun 1993 11:18:26 GMT
Don't even bother with those who would "blackmail" you. Expose their
juvenile tactics by name and ignore them as the rest of us will. Just
because we don't agree is no cause to clam up. b"h
article 8050 28-JUN-1993 16:38:44.37
From: li...@kepler.cc.bellcore.com (romanov,elisabeth)
Subject: Re: clearing the air
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 93 17:21:32 GMT
In article <28JUN199...@utarlg.uta.edu> b64...@utarlg.uta.edu (James
Trim
|m) writes:
[a brave personal statement]
Mr Trimm,
I don't agree with much of what you post. I am however appalled that
anyone would go to the length of trying to silence you with personal
blackmail. Carry on, and don't let such people discourage you.
From: sche...@ms.uky.edu (Richard Schennberg)
Subject: Re: clearing the air
Summary: Don't stop posting!
Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1993 18:31:46 GMT
I often agree and disagree with different posting by the same person.
I often learn more from the ones I initially disagree with. At the very
least, it makes me think. If someone is going to assassinate character,
just put on the full armor of God as described in Ephesesians 6:13-18.
As to the premeditated flaming, I wonder if the culprit wants us to
identify
him with "the fiery darts of the wicked" (Eph. 6:16).
Shalom,
Richard
Jack Love
>As an "MJ" I personally denounce your "beit-din" as invalid due to its
>being comprised of members whose tenets, as mine, basically conflict with
>certain norms and practises of that version of Judaism that is responsible
>for maintaining the actual "biet-din" responsible to G-d according to
>tradition.
Hey, would someone pass the popcorn?
--
________________________________________
Jack F. Love | Opinions expressed are mine alone.
| (Unless you happen to agree.)
Jack Love
>You said the Gentile-Christian Community did not rebuke Jimmy Swaggart
>strongly enough; you said it again with James Baker. At least, (in the
>same vein), you can't say it about the Messianic-Believing-community!
My goodness, the guy suffered enough when Reagan go the boot. Give
it a rest.
Jack Love
>In article <4135.2...@paranet.FIDONET.ORG> Bill.C...@p0.f18.n104.z1.FIDONET.ORG (Bill Carlson) writes:
>>You said the Gentile-Christian Community did not rebuke Jimmy Swaggart
>>strongly enough; you said it again with James Baker. At least, (in the
> ^^^^^^^^^^^
>>same vein), you can't say it about the Messianic-Believing-community!
>
>My goodness, the guy suffered enough when Reagan go the boot. Give
>it a rest.
Oh shoot, I messed up my own joke. It was supposed to say when
Bush got the boot. Sic transit...
Andrew Solovay
It is said that Lashon Harah is an especially grave sin because each
occurence hurts three people: The one about whom it is spoken; the one
who speaks it; and the one who hears it.
Gratifying as a (real) Jew might find this controversy, we're still
all playing with fire just by reading it. Be advised.
Messianic Jews, who have been freed from the burden of the Law, may
ignore this and continue to slander one another as much as their
little hearts desire.
--
Andrew Solovay
"But that was in another country;
and besides, the wench is dead." ---Marlowe
Stephen Tice
>As an "MJ" I personally denounce your "beit-din" as invalid due to its
>being comprised of members whose tenets, as mine, basically conflict with
>certain norms and practises of that version of Judaism that is responsible
>for maintaining the actual "biet-din" responsible to G-d according to
>tradition. Although I consider myself a beleiver, I consider it totally
>against the principles set forth by Saul of Tarsus according to his
>understanding of the Messiah that you should drag an "alleged
>fellow-believer" through a mock open court. You are truly the descendents
>of that alleged false Sanhedrin which, convening illegally (by the failure
It is of course well known that the Beit-din which convicted Yeshua met
illegally, after dark. It is, of course, against Jewish Law to hold a
Beit-din after dark. By a strange coincidence the Beit-din which Bill
speaks of was also held after dark in violation of Jewish Law, and also
consisted of three judges rather than twelve, again in violation of Jewish
Law. Hmmmm....
Joe Slater
>It is said that Lashon Harah is an especially grave sin because each
>occurence hurts three people: The one about whom it is spoken; the one
>who speaks it; and the one who hears it.
>Gratifying as a (real) Jew might find this controversy, we're still
>all playing with fire just by reading it. Be advised.
Are you sure that we're forbidden to read slander which involves at least
one non-Jew? I mean, I don't think non-Jews are forbidden to slander
eachother. I can see a problem if Bill were to slander Harvey, both of
whom claim to be Jewish by birth.
jds
Bill Hamilton
Without saying anything at all about the individuals involved in this
public squabble, I have to ask: Is this the place to air it? True, some
may say that Christians in general didn't sufficiently discipline Jim
Bakker and Jimmie Swaggart (although their denomination (AOG) did
discipline them), but a newsgroup hardly seems like the right place to
air the charges and countercharges and be fair to all the parties.
I'm not particularly comfortable about even posting this, but I'v never
been successful in sending private email to fidonet, and several of the
people who should see this use fidonet.
Bill Hamilton | Vehicle Systems Research
GM NAO R&D Center | Warren, MI 48090-9055
hami...@predator.cs.gmr.com | (313) 986 1474
-----------------------------------------------
If God is for us, *who* is against us? Romans 8:31
Warren Burstein
> 4) What Mr Carlson discribes is a meeting of 3 people not a Beit-din
>which requires 12 judges.
A question to Mr. Carlson and to Mr. Trimm: what are the requirements
for a Beit-Din, and what is the scriptual source for these
requirements?
--
/|/-\/-\ The entire *** Jerusalem
|__/__/_/ is a very Czarish ***.
|warren@ But the weeder
/ nysernet.org is not all that hungry.
James Trimm
>In <1JUL1993...@utarlg.uta.edu> b64...@utarlg.uta.edu (James Trimm) writes:
>
>> 4) What Mr Carlson discribes is a meeting of 3 people not a Beit-din
>>which requires 12 judges.
>
>A question to Mr. Carlson and to Mr. Trimm: what are the requirements
>for a Beit-Din, and what is the scriptual source for these
>requirements?
They are found in Deut. 19:15-21; Mt. 18:15-20 Beyond Scripture the Jewish Law
on the matter is outlined in m.San.; t.San.; j.San. and b.San
According to m.San 1:4 any sin for which the Torah prescribes death requires
23 Judges. The aleged sin of being a false teacher/prophet put forward by
Donna and Harvey requires 71 (San. 1:5). Also a Bei-din may not be held at
night (I am unsure of the referance on this)
In accordance with Mt. 18:15-20 a confessed sinner never faces a Beit din.
Richard Schennberg
That they love the lord thy God.
That they love their neighbors as themselves.
That their hearts are filled with faith, hope and love.
That they trust in the one almighty God, and obey his will.
But anyone that flames his brother without cause will risk Gehena...
Shalom,
Richard
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Richard P. Schennberg E-mail: sche...@ms.uky.edu
Department of Mathematics Office: 606 257 6807
University of Kentucky FAX: 606 273 6196
Warren Burstein
consisted of three judges rather than twelve, again in violation of Jewish
Law.
Once again - where did you find this requirement?
--
/|/-\/-\ The entire auditorium Jerusalem
|__/__/_/ is a very three-sided signature virus.
|warren@ But the farmer
/ nysernet.org is worried.
STEPHEN TICE
>In <1JUL1993...@utarlg.uta.edu> b64...@utarlg.uta.edu (Stephen Tice) writes:
>
> consisted of three judges rather than twelve, again in violation of Jewish
> Law.
>
>Once again - where did you find this requirement?
Mishna m.San. 1:4 requires 23 (not 12) judges.
Warren Burstein
jt: 4) What Mr Carlson discribes is a meeting of 3 people not a Beit-din
jt: which requires 12 judges.
me: A question to Mr. Carlson and to Mr. Trimm: what are the requirements
me: for a Beit-Din, and what is the scriptual source for these
me: requirements?
jt: They are found in Deut. 19:15-21; Mt. 18:15-20 Beyond Scripture the
jt: Jewish Law on the matter is outlined in m.San.; t.San.; j.San. and
jt: b.San According to m.San 1:4 any sin for which the Torah prescribes
jt: death requires 23 Judges. The aleged sin of being a false
jt: teacher/prophet put forward by Donna and Harvey requires 71
jt: (San. 1:5). Also a Bei-din may not be held at night (I am unsure of
jt: the referance on this)
Neither Deut. nor Matt. mention a requirement for twelve judges. I am
afraid that I don't have time to read the entire text of Tractate
Sanhedrin, including the Tosefta and both Talmuds - please try to cite
in conventional fashion.
Note that your mention of 23 and 71 judges is irrelevant, as neither
of these numbers equals 12.
Additionally, I am delighted to know that the Talmud is a source of
authority for you. How do you deal with b.San 43a which states that
Jesus was duly executed by hanging by a Jewish court rather than
crucified by the Romans?
--
/|/-\/-\ The entire hall Jerusalem
|__/__/_/ is a very narrow ***.
|warren@ But the okra
/ nysernet.org is ***.
Tom Albrecht
>
>They are found in Deut. 19:15-21; Mt. 18:15-20 Beyond Scripture the Jewish Law
So, in other words there is no Scriptural mandate for x number of members
of this convocation? Is that correct? It sounds like you guys are
squabbling over something based entirely on non-biblical tradition,
at least as far as the number of participants in the convocation is
concerned.
This appears to be the sort of difficulty one gets into when one elevates
their tradition to the level of the Word of God. I guess "gentile Christians"
aren't the only ones who suffer from this defect. :-)
Warren Burstein
st: consisted of three judges rather than twelve, again in violation of Jewish
st: Law.
me: Once again - where did you find this requirement?
st: Mishna m.San. 1:4 requires 23 (not 12) judges.
Well who made up 12?
--
/|/-\/-\ The entire auditorium Jerusalem
|__/__/_/ is a very three-sided gauze pad.
|warren@ But the Kibo
/ nysernet.org is not all that ***.
Harvey Smith
BH> Without saying anything at all about the
BH> individuals involved in this public
BH> squabble, I have to ask: Is this
BH> the place to air it?
However, this personal matter was made public because the individual concerned
opted to lay his life open, making himself of some reputation in the echo as an
MJ leader.
Because of this, and his attacks against the MJ movement in general, we opted
to reveal his problems, so he could not deceive others.
Any Spiritual leaders life is open for scrutiny. While i opted for
generalities, some did not..
Shalom Bill
--
Harvey Smith - via ParaNet node 1:104/422
UUCP: !scicom!paranet!User_Name
INTERNET: Harvey...@f519.n100.z1.FIDONET.ORG
Joe Slater
>However, this personal matter was made public because the individual concerned
>opted to lay his life open, making himself of some reputation in the echo as an
>MJ leader.
>Because of this, and his attacks against the MJ movement in general, we opted
>to reveal his problems, so he could not deceive others.
Perhaps the most famous story about Jesus is the one where he finds a
bunch of people about to stone a woman for adultery. The phrase has
entered the popular culture so deeply that even I'm aware of it: "Let he
who is without sin cast the first stone."
Now, I have deep moral and theological problems with this attitude, but
I'm not Christian. I'm *supposed* to be that way. I find it enormously
amusing that Bill Carlson and Harvey Smith feel the need to publicly
harass and condemn James Trimm. And among the allegations are what? Sexual
misconduct, possibly adultery (I didn't read the allegations in detail).
I'm sure that Bill and Harvey have an answer for this. They may say
something like "We acted with divine authority which is infallible," or
"James shouldn't claim to be a teacher."
You know what? There's *another* phrase from popular culture which comes
to mind. "Whited Sepulchres".
jds
--
j...@zikzak.apana.org.au | "A sick feeling of repugnance and
Fax: +61-3-562-0756 | apprehension grows in me as I near
Tel: +61-3-525-8728 | Australia."
If all else fails try Fidonet: | Diary of Sir Robert Menzies, Prime
joe_s...@f351.n632.z3.fidonet.org | Minister of Australia, May 23 1941
D. C. Sessions
Protestant sects which "disfellowship," but the term doesn't
correlate to anything Jewish. I thought that the idea behind
MJ was to give right-wing Xtianity a Jewish gloss, and this
seems to be a breach of cover.
--- D. C. Sessions Speaking for myself ---
--- Note new network address: d...@witsend.stat.com ---
--- Author (and everything else!) of TMail (DOS mail/news shell) ---
Warren Burstein
Could someone please enlighten me? I've heard of lots of
Protestant sects which "disfellowship," but the term doesn't
correlate to anything Jewish. I thought that the idea behind
MJ was to give right-wing Xtianity a Jewish gloss, and this
seems to be a breach of cover.
On the other hand, answers to my question about why a "beit din" of
three was invalid came up with all sorts of Oral Law references,
something which MJ's normally don't seem to be very positive about.
Perhaps this is as compensation.
--
/|/-\/-\ The entire kitchen Jerusalem
|__/__/_/ is a very cold carrot.
James Trimm
Actually I perfer to consider myself a Nazarene Jew. From what I read in the
Scriptures the oral law is valid so long it does not conflict with the written
law or Scriptures (see Matt. 23:1-3,23; Acts 21:17-26;27:18). The New scripture
make constant reference to Jewish oral traditions not found in the written law
(II Cor.12:2/b.Hag. 12b-13a; ICor. 10:4/B'midbar Parshat Chukkat (Num. 20:16-2a)
Heb. 11:4/Targum Gen. 4:8)
James Trimm
Warren Burstein
>Actually I perfer to consider myself a Nazarene Jew. From what I read in the
>Scriptures the oral law is valid so long it does not conflict with the written
>law or Scriptures (see Matt. 23:1-3,23; Acts 21:17-26;27:18).
Who today sits, in your view, in the seat of Moses? Which parts of
the oral law do you reject on the basis of conflicts? What does
Acts 27:18, "We took such a violent battering from the storm that the
next day the began to throw the cargo overboard" have to do with this?
And where in the oral law do you find a requirement for *twelve* judges?
--
/|/-\/-\ The entire world Jerusalem
|__/__/_/ is a very bitter ***.
|warren@ But the cabbie
/ nysernet.org is ***.