Crossroad Junction has a post which is dated June 20, 2009, but for which there is no hard evidence it ever existed prior to May 18, 2013.
Jim Wright, placed this post on Crossroad Junction when he became aware through Facebook Posts before this date that his excommunication from his last known local church had been discovered and confirmed through a personal interview with a representative of that church. I was involved in that interview and met face to face with that Church’s representative and was briefed on the history that led up to the excommunication, the activities of Mr. Wright upon which he was excommunicated and his frantic behavior online prior to this and after his formal excommunication in June of 2009 which I was told was 1 vote short of unanimity at a congregational meeting.
Thankfully it’s a pretty easy thing to check on when something actually appears on the internet. There is a near exhaustive internet archive that can be referenced which shows when an article first appears in that backup.
In this case, I received notice of the post’s first appearance on May 18, 2013 by means of this notice that was emailed to me on that date.
New post on Crossroad Junction
Confessions of an Excommunicant
by Jim Wright
Jim Wright| June 20, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Notice it says it’s a new post, but it’s dated as 2009 at 3:35 pm.
So, I went to the “Wayback Machine” which is an internet capture machine and searched for Jim’s link to determine when it first appeared in the archives. It doesn’t appear until the day of the initial notice on May 18, 2013.
When confronted with this on Jim Wright claimed that this was posted on his old blog which he subsequently imported to his current blog in 2011, a claim he repeats in the post through an edit he added again, after the fact of the initial post. However, this link doesn’t appear at that time either. When asked to provide the link to his old blog to search in the archives, he claimed he would, but to date, such a link is not known to have been provided and so all Jim Wright is offering as evidence of this claim is his own representation, without evidence.
Even if this claim were true, then by his own admission, he chose to remove this post while continuing to attack his former church in other posts, and then bringing additional attacks against others all the while hiding the fact from others that he was indeed excommunicated from this church. That’s an odd action from someone who then later claims that he’s proud of this event and considers it an honor, isn’t it?
Why would someone with an extensive history of church conflict (this last local church is not the only one with whom Wright has had past conflicts) attempt to hide that past while claiming standing to bring accusations against others by far older and weaker evidence which does not represent formal or collective church action? That looks to me like a double standard at best or outright deception at worst.
Evidence that this article did not appear until May 18, 2013 can be found by clicking on this LINK. All that is necessary to prove that this article was posted in 2009 on his former blog at the time claimed is the former link which even if the site does not exist today can be searched using the Wayback Machine Archives and should Jim Wright give that link, it would be a very easy matter to resolve. As it stands now however, there is no evidence to support the claim.
If you look at the date and times too of some of the comments you’ll find that some of the comments were posted BEFORE the main post in terms of the time stamps present. How could that be?
Isn’t it interesting that a man who claims that there is unfinished church discipline in the lives of others has his own more recent history which he attempted to hide and only disclosed or removed from hiding when he became aware that it was already known and was going to be revealed?
Jim Wright, please give any evidence you have other than your unsubstantiated claims and I will be happy to update this information. In addition, I once again, extend the offer to meet with you personally with witnesses to check your claims, ask you to answer the questions that continue to exist with regard to your claimed organizations, and address any other issues you wish to raise at that time in terms of the accusations that you have leveled against me publicly without ever meeting with me, or attempting to meet with me all while refusing repeated requests on my part to discuss these issues.