The Demise of VF & Doug Phillips is a Tool - Part 5

[ShesCrafty]

Normally patriarchal asshats like TW infuriate me, but he's so pathetic in his responses that I can't help but laugh at him. Keep those ridiculous comments coming, Eston. I'm quite enjoying the show. :popcorn2:

[Marian the Librarian]

I'm not sure if this has been noted here yet - there is a new message on Peter Bradrick!'s (public) Facebook page from someone named Sarah Long Munn:

Due to the continuing escalation, speculation, and confusion regarding the Doug Phillips scandal I think it is very important that an official statement be released to the public from the Men who were aware of and involved in dealing with the situation. Due to the fact that Doug Phillips was a public figure and his ministry was funded by the public the public does in fact deserve a clear explanation from someone beside Doug. Below there is a post on how silence enables abuse. I suggest that the silence ends. The silence at this point is doing more harm then good! It's time to end all the gossip and speculation and start giving the public the facts.

[NotALoserLikeYou]

I'm not sure if this has been noted here yet - there is a new message on Peter Bradrick!'s (public) Facebook page from someone named Sarah Long Munn:

Oh myyy.

[WonderingInWA]

I'm not sure if this has been noted here yet - there is a new message on Peter Bradrick!'s (public) Facebook page from someone named Sarah Long Munn:

Yeah, with some asshat named Matthew Copp who comments with "Let it go".

[Patsy]

UGH. Jen going on about how Julie Anne should have contacted her privately because it's a private matter. The second it involves a third party (much less many, many vulnerable third parties) it isn't a private tete-a-tete issue. How hard is that?

And JA wasn't doing it to call Jen and Eston out, she was doing it to warn those third parties. If it isn't an issue (as Eston explicitly claims, "It seems self-evident to me that when someone leaves their real email address they don’t have a problem with being contacted", and Jen implies, "You have posted this HUGE warning to people that, what? We know how to use email when we want to communicate with people who comment on our blog? If that is my biggest sin, excommunicate me now!") then the proper response is "I don't actually think what was done is an issue, but if it is then the third parties can let us know". If it is an issue then guess what? People should be warned publicly. Again, NOT HARD.

The most beautiful part is that Eston does acknowledge it could be an issue straight after his precious little "self-evident" comment by saying "But I could be wrong about that, and some of the comments here have given me food for thought." Golly! So you mean this blog post was, in fact, warranted and worthwhile? Gee whillikers Eston! That wasn't hard, was it?

Ending with a quote from hendersonfamily4 because I liked it:

Eston are you a former pastor? Really I feel like I am witnessing a classic case of spiritual abuse happen right before my eyes. You use the same lingo that abusive pastors use, bullying, threats strong authoritative language.

When you did that to me on Jen’s blog I had several who know me contact me via email suggesting that perhaps you were a kinist upset that I had mentioned race but after watching closely it was clear you spoke to anyone who irritated you that way although to this day I am not sure what about my comment irritated you. I can say this I copied my comment word for word and posted here at Julie’s blog and even though she did not know me at all she responded in a caring gracious manner as did all the commenters here. I was new to this blog but I was not new to Jen’s I had been reading it for years during the time she was being excommunicated. I always found her to be kind and gracious and was shocked that she allowed you the latitude she did.

Jen if you are reading this I have seen you be nothing but kind and gracious to your readers but you need to reign in Mr. “Eston†in, he is displaying the same kind of abusive tactics to some, not all, of your long time readers that DP did to you. Meanwhile you continue to treat everyone with kindness even when they call you names. It made me wonder if Mr. “Eston†was brought on to be your alter ego, lol. I sincerely hope not but at this point I believe he is hurting not helping your blog and causing many to question your creditability. What you are doing is admirable but the way it is being done with “Eston†in charge turns the stomach of many of us.

[hoipolloi]

Was glad to see Julie Anne's warning - Eston & Jen deserve it. T.W. Eston is a chickenshit jerk, too much of a cowardly bully to ever come here & debate us. Although she behaves better, I've about decided that Jen is a Beall-wannabe. Sad really, except it's also hilarious that Jen then goes all "Matthew 18:15" on Julie Anne:

Jen

JANUARY 8, 2014 @ 11:31 AM

Dear Julie Anne,

I am simply flabbergasted at this post. If I have done something privately that has offended you, I would expect that you would contact me privately. If someone from my blog has done something privately that has offended you, I would expect that you would contact both me and them privately. If one of MY commenters is offended by something TW or I have done, and they come to YOU to tattle, I would expect that you would send them back to talk to TW and me. I would expect that you would ask them if they have done EVERYTHING possible to resolve their problem with those who offended them.

:popcorn:

[MyName]

Julie Anne article still there. Nevermind my prior post.

[Arete]

Was glad to see Julie Anne's warning - Eston & Jen deserve it. T.W. Eston is a chickenshit jerk, too much of a cowardly bully to ever come here & debate us. Although she behaves better, I've about decided that Jen is a Beall-wannabe. Sad really, except it's also hilarious that Jen then goes all "Matthew 18:15" on Julie Anne:

:popcorn:

Jen loooves the rules of eclessiastical patriarchy as long as she can use them to control OTHER women. Fuck her.

[lilith]

Someone called Bradrick! out on Facebook about it. No response yet.

[Palimpsest]

UGH. Jen going on about how Julie Anne should have contacted her privately because it's a private matter. The second it involves a third party (much less many, many vulnerable third parties) it isn't a private tete-a-tete issue. How hard is that?

And JA wasn't doing it to call Jen and Eston out, she was doing it to warn those third parties. If it isn't an issue (as Eston explicitly claims, "It seems self-evident to me that when someone leaves their real email address they don’t have a problem with being contacted", and Jen implies, "You have posted this HUGE warning to people that, what? We know how to use email when we want to communicate with people who comment on our blog? If that is my biggest sin, excommunicate me now!") then the proper response is "I don't actually think what was done is an issue, but if it is then the third parties can let us know". If it is an issue then guess what? People should be warned publicly. Again, NOT HARD.

The most beautiful part is that Eston does acknowledge it could be an issue straight after his precious little "self-evident" comment by saying "But I could be wrong about that, and some of the comments here have given me food for thought." Golly! So you mean this blog post was, in fact, warranted and worthwhile? Gee whillikers Eston! That wasn't hard, was it?

Ending with a quote from hendersonfamily4 because I liked it:

ITA, on Jen and Eston. Asshat is too good a term for TW, but Tool is already taken.

Hendersonfamily4 is our old friend Taunya. Well done, Taunya!

Eston gave her the nastiest smackdown on JensGems, and I am among those who believe it is because TW has Kinist leanings, although I did not contact her to say so. I can't be bothered to look up the exact quote, but he pretty much told her to shut up about race and fuck off. There was nothing else in her comment that should have annoyed him.

Taunya, if you are reading here now, I know you sometimes do, I am so glad you and your family have made your way out of the Patriarchy and are recovering. I can't remember snarking on your old blog here personally, but if I did I now regret it. Anyway, thanks for taking FJ snark in your stride and being good-natured about it. All the best for the future!

[Arete]

If Doug Phillips is a Tool, then TW Eston is a Testicle. What I am trying to pin down is what his motivation may be. I was so sure he was M Epstein at first because his fixation on Doug seems so...personal. Yet everything he has is second hand gossip he can't be assed to keep consistent from one post to the next. He gets called out for these inconsistencies and then attacks the messenger. Seriously, what is it about Doug and VF that has this guy emailing and harassing people for dirt?

As for Jen, even after all she has suffered at the hands of ecclesiastical tyrants, she stop has the discernment of a hamburger. The free reign she has given TW destroys her credibility by degrees every time he posts. It has become embarrassing.

[debrand]

I'm not sure if this has been noted here yet - there is a new message on Peter Bradrick!'s (public) Facebook page from someone named Sarah Long Munn:

Many of these crazy rumors are fueled by the silence. If Bradrick and Scott Brown are sincere in wanting to change things then they need to start by being very honest. They need to just come out and say exactly what happened and how Doug was caught.

[debrand]

Perry Coghlan III played Oliver Cromwell at the Reformation 500 event. His son Parker Cromwell Coghlan is named after Oliver Cromwell.

I am pretty sure Thomas Cromwell was not featured at the Reformation 500 event, although I could be wrong.

The Bradricks and Coglans are not very subtle, are they? Bradrick could have named his son Oliver Thomas or Thomas Oliver and covered all his bases but by giving him his hero's last name, Bradrick made certain that everyone knew who he admired. Cromwell is a name with some historical baggage and even if I admired either Thomas or Oliver, I don't think that I'd want my kids saddled with that for a first name.

[DomWackTroll]

If Doug Phillips is a Tool, then TW Eston is a Testicle. What I am trying to pin down is what his motivation may be. I was so sure he was M Epstein at first because his fixation on Doug seems so...personal. Yet everything he has is second hand gossip he can't be assed to keep consistent from one post to the next. He gets called out for these inconsistencies and then attacks the messenger. Seriously, what is it about Doug and VF that has this guy emailing and harassing people for dirt?

As for Jen, even after all she has suffered at the hands of ecclesiastical tyrants, she stop has the discernment of a hamburger. The free reign she has given TW destroys her credibility by degrees every time he posts. It has become embarrassing.

I still think it's Mark for the simple reason that Eston began posting right when Mark stopped posting and Mark has never once come back and denied that it's him.

[Palimpsest]

OK, I just fried my brain so you don't have to. You are welcome.

I just scrolled through all the comments on the latest JensGems post.

JensGems: AKA "the blog that doesn't gossip but does disseminate unsubstantiated rumors, claim that they are verified fact, get pissy when challenged, and then retracts many of the stories." When will TW Eston and Jen realize that doing this casts doubt on all of their writing?

The story of the 17 year old girl who was impregnated by an older married BCA member is bunk. Any polygamy stories are suspect. God knows whether Sproul is into wife spanking -- although I don't find that accusation terribly far-fetched.

WaryBerean Says:

January 5, 2014 at 6:59 pm

We attended BCA. Granted, it was several years ago and we left over concerns we had at the time and heard many more things down the road. I know most of the people you have spoken of here, some of them quite well. Much of this I knew. We are also very close to a VF employee. But we have never heard a whisper about polygamy/arranged marriages, the accusations against Sproul Jr., or the 17 year old getting prgnant by a married member of the congregation. There was only one pregnant, unmarried young girl there as far as I know, and I had many conversations with her and her parents. That wasn’t the story I was told at all. And there was an ongoing custody dispute with the father at the time. Another teen. Not a Christian.

T.W. Eston Says:

January 5, 2014 at 7:41 pm

I believe you when you say you haven’t heard these things. But that’s exactly why I refer to BCA and “the community†as a religious sociological cult. Tight information control is one of the indicia of a cult. Believe me, I get it. I used to be in a religious sociological cult myself. Problems are routinely concealed, ignored, or swept under the rug rather than being dealt with honestly and forthrightly, as they should be.

The 17 year old girl was, in fact, at BCA, and not one of the other churches in “the communityâ€. It’s now being disputed whether or not the father was also a BCA member. Previously it was thought by my sources that the father was a BCA member, but now there’s some doubt. There is conflicting information on that point, so I’m going to concede that the father may have not been at BCA. [big of you TW.]

Doug Phillips and his elders are entirely responsible for causing such confusion in the first place by all the hush hush over who the father was. The entire time the girl was a member it was kept a virtual secret. This only served to confirm in many people’s minds that the father was probably a BCA member and that some powerful man was being protected by the elders, if it wasn’t an elder himself. Again, that’s not behavior consistent with a church but of a cult. They could have easily prevented all that by just announcing that the father wasn’t a BCA member. [They could have stopped the Gossip!]

Jen Says:

January 5, 2014 at 8:37 pm

WaryBerean, the arranged marriage(s) and polygamy took place after we both left BCA apparently. However, I can verify that they are indeed true. I also am very good friends with someone from RC Jr’s church who also verifies that RC Jr. did indeed spank his wife and use blanket training on his babies, as well as numerous other despicable others unfitting for a believer.

[but Jen? You think that Pearl methods and blanket training are OK, No? You just defended TTUAC and Michael Pearl last week!]

[snipped leg-humper comment]

Notsurprised says:

TW: don’t you think you need to delete your commentary regarding this in the body of the blog OR make a correction concerning this? Either that or make a separate blog post regarding the error. The comment is lost here in so many comments and very very few people are going to see it. Even honest reporters, will correct their mistakes…..I think this needs to be done for the sake of the 17 year old and others involved.

[i agree, Notsurprised. Don't hold your breath waiting for TW to make a correction. TW is never wrong!, he just concedes that he might perhaps be not quite right.]

In other news:

1. The fact we had already noticed - Nolan's sister is married to Mrs Robinson's son - is discussed.

2. There is a long and boring discussion about Biblical definitions of "gossip" and someone called MYCL is torn limb from limb.

3. A couple of people list everyone that should apologise for Doug Phillips. That list might be useful but I couldn't be bothered to read it closely.

I think that is it.

Doug Phillips is a Tool and TW Eston is a Testicle.

[mnwnwmwmn]

Oh, for the love of Dog, Jen and TW Eston are having epic melt-downs on SSB! :cracking-up:

I'm on Julie Anne's team for this one and she is holding her own.

In other news, a poster there thinks that TW is Don Veinot. Could well be.

:popcorn2: :popcorn2:

I love Jen's demanding that Matthew 18 be applied to her, while she has every excuse imaginable for dismissing it in regards to others who have drawn her ire.

[Palimpsest]

I still think it's Mark for the simple reason that Eston began posting right when Mark stopped posting and Mark has never once come back and denied that it's him.[/quote]

I completely lost track of Mark and when or where he posted. I certainly don't remember his style of writing. All I vaguely remember about Mark is that Kathryn Joyce in Quiverfull describes how he and Jen parted ways, he seemed to become more irrational (although getting some ink isn't necessarily a sign of irrationality!) and Jen finally kicked him off JensGems sometime around the time they divorced. Also that he wanted custody of their son but not their special needs daughter. Or something. Jen recently implied on JensGems that she did not have much of a relationship with either her son or her youngest daughter any more, just with her oldest daughter and her child. I don't know and it is probably irrelevant, anyway.

However, "TW Eston" is so freaking coy about his identity that it is certainly intriguing. Why do his knickers get into such a twist about even his silly pseudonym getting "outed?" Why is it so super-sekret if he was never a member of BCA or VF. Why does he so fear exposure?

TW dribbles out information about being a "survivor of spiritual abuse," his previous "sociological religious cult church" and its "narcissistic Pastor" but refuses to identify them. All this while berating Bradrick!s of this world for not speaking out openly and earlier, and declaring that his mission in exposing DP the Tool is to protect people.

So why isn't he identifying himself and naming the church and pastor who spiritually abused him? Shouldn't he expose them too to protect the vulnerable? It seems so hypocritical.

FWIW, Don Veinot has a similarly pompous writing style but isn't nearly as salacious or gossipy as TW. Don has been up against VF before and has known connections with Jen. Here is one example of his writing style, but he is easily googled for more.

midwestoutreach.org/2007/09/20/answering-vision-forum/

I'm not convinced that TW is Don, mind you. I don't see why Don would need to conceal his identity. :shrug:

Edit: too many darn riffles

[ILoveJellybeans]

Jen defended Michael Pearl? Please link to this.

So beating babies is okay, but an attractive older woman who is going through emotional problems having consensual sex and being flirty with men younger than her is awful and deserves shaming enough that her sex life was dragged into a story about the shady, cheating, abusive Tool. Someones got her priorities wrong.

[Arete]

DomWackTroll and Palimpsest,

TW was really throwing off a "Mark" vibe to me with the personal axes he was grinding. The implication that Doug had plans to murder Beall, the entire "engagement ring" expose...that was mud he was slinging independent of Jen, and dare I say he was relishing doing it. I don't buy his line that he empathizes because he is just another survivor of SA. So is JA, but she doesn't come off as irrational and doesn't get busted for lies in every post.

Where my Mark theory went out of focus was the business with the 17 year old single mother. If he were a first hand observer like Mark, how could he have messed up the particulars? He knows there are ex BCA people on that forum. They could easily refute him and did, which made me start to suspect he is just printing every rumor someone online drops in his inbox and that he doesn't have first person knowledge.

I am completely confused now, because I don't have a good handle on his motivation. Whatever it is, his credibility is zero. Something really nasty seems to be hiding under that rock.

[Palimpsest]

Jen defended Michael Pearl? Please link to this.

So beating babies is okay, but an attractive older woman who is going through emotional problems having consensual sex and being flirty with men younger than her is awful and deserves shaming enough that her sex life was dragged into a story about the shady, cheating, abusive Tool. Someones got her priorities wrong.

I can probably find the exact quote and link to it but puleeze don't ask me to do it now! I can only take so much scrolling through JensGems comments in one day and I've already fried my brain once today!

It is somewhere in the comments in the Doug Phillips Spiritual Father post. Someone brings up Ezzo and Pearl and Jen snottily says that she used Pearl methods with her own family and that if used with "discernment" they work well. Or something like that. :disgust: A couple of leg-humpers jump in to agree.

[DomWackTroll]

OK, I just fried my brain so you don't have to. You are welcome.

I just scrolled through all the comments on the latest JensGems post.

JensGems: AKA "the blog that doesn't gossip but does disseminate unsubstantiated rumors, claim that they are verified fact, get pissy when challenged, and then retracts many of the stories." When will TW Eston and Jen realize that doing this casts doubt on all of their writing?

The story of the 17 year old girl who was impregnated by an older married BCA member is bunk. Any polygamy stories are suspect. God knows whether Sproul is into wife spanking -- although I don't find that accusation terribly far-fetched.

In other news:

1. The fact we had already noticed - Nolan's sister is married to Mrs Robinson's son - is discussed.

2. There is a long and boring discussion about Biblical definitions of "gossip" and someone called MYCL is torn limb from limb.

3. A couple of people list everyone that should apologise for Doug Phillips. That list might be useful but I couldn't be bothered to read it closely.

I think that is it.

Doug Phillips is a Tool and TW Eston is a Testicle.

Ah, somehow I missed that; explains why Mr. G. commented on Nolan's FB post. Thank you.

ETA: Sarah Long Munn is repeatedly asking Nolan why he is not calling out the elders of BCA and whether Nolan himself knew of Doug's double life before Doug's confession, but he refuses to give any kind of coherent answer. To me, this is looking more and more like an attack on Scott and the Bradricks to make Doug look "not any worse than anyone else."

[DomWackTroll]

Can't edit my last post for some reason, but now Nolan has posted an article by Jason Dohm calling Doug a wolf and a deceiver. I freakin' give up.

jasondohm.com/has-doug-phillips-repented/

[MamaJunebug]

OH, no, DWT, my most precious troll, don't give up!

The fact that Jason Dohm is calling out Doug Phillips is a tool is simply and incredibly significant.

Jason was Scott T. Brown's right-hand patriarch in trying to co-opt an established Baptist church and when they couldn't, the broke off and began their patriarchal nonsense at a congregation they founded.

That Jason is accusing Doug of being unrepentant and dangerous is not only wise, but a hoot - and it's also a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Ephesians511.wordpress.com details the debacle of the Scott-Dohm attempted takeover of Trinity Baptist; the page even has a counter for 'days since the men were rebuked and have chosen not to repent.'

There's a link to why thinking, reasonable Baptists reject patriarchy ( wadeburleson.org/2008/04/and-what-is-it-about-patriarchy-that.html ) as well as other links that would be of interest to us.

Basically, Jason's pointing one finger - very aptly - at Doug, but three fingers are pointing back at him.

The good news about this is that anybody who was fond of both Doug Phillips is a tool and Scott/Jason is listening to Jason/Scott, looking to them for leadership, answers, consolation.

So Jason ragging on Doug is excellent.

The meh news is that Jason and Scott are basically just as dressed in sheep's clothing as Doug ever was.

The good news is that we have the two of them to continue to snark on, since it does seem to do some good! I mean, I really don't know that FJ was in any way directly involved in somebody walking in on Doug and his partner, but the resistance and opposition we present HAS to be a thorn in the patriarchs' side.

I don't know if this makes any sense. The Arctic Vortex is causing me to want to nap. A lot.

There hasn't been such entertaining reading for a long time on the ole 'webs. I'm enjoying this immensely.

[JellyHope]

Don't you just love the Bible-speak? :lol:

I think the immediate drama is over. They may have decided to take the spat to email or phones, the party poopers. :evil-eye:

Interesting that Gill (who seems to be supportive of Nolan) quite recently friended the brother of the person we suspect to be Hero if that person is, in fact, female and also significantly younger than Doug the Tool so not a cougar. How is that for a convoluted sentence?

I'm late to the party, but,

"Do you bite your thumb at us, sir?! I do bite my thumb, sir!"

[DomWackTroll]

OH, no, DWT, my most precious troll, don't give up!

The fact that Jason Dohm is calling out Doug Phillips is a tool is simply and incredibly significant.

Jason was Scott T. Brown's right-hand patriarch in trying to co-opt an established Baptist church and when they couldn't, the broke off and began their patriarchal nonsense at a congregation they founded.

That Jason is accusing Doug of being unrepentant and dangerous is not only wise, but a hoot - and it's also a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Ephesians511.wordpress.com details the debacle of the Scott-Dohm attempted takeover of Trinity Baptist; the page even has a counter for 'days since the men were rebuked and have chosen not to repent.'

There's a link to why thinking, reasonable Baptists reject patriarchy ( wadeburleson.org/2008/04/and-what-is-it-about-patriarchy-that.html ) as well as other links that would be of interest to us.

Basically, Jason's pointing one finger - very aptly - at Doug, but three fingers are pointing back at him.

The good news about this is that anybody who was fond of both Doug Phillips is a tool and Scott/Jason is listening to Jason/Scott, looking to them for leadership, answers, consolation.

So Jason ragging on Doug is excellent.

The meh news is that Jason and Scott are basically just as dressed in sheep's clothing as Doug ever was.

The good news is that we have the two of them to continue to snark on, since it does seem to do some good! I mean, I really don't know that FJ was in any way directly involved in somebody walking in on Doug and his partner, but the resistance and opposition we present HAS to be a thorn in the patriarchs' side.

I don't know if this makes any sense. The Arctic Vortex is causing me to want to nap. A lot.

There hasn't been such entertaining reading for a long time on the ole 'webs. I'm enjoying this immensely.

MJ, what I meant is that I'm giving up on trying to figure out what point Nolan is trying to make. Why can't these people just plainly state what they mean?