Doug Phillips is a Tool and Vision Forum is Dead - Part 6

[Evil Feminist]

:wtf: What a waste of a Psych degree! Did she learn anything?!

I knew a family who did that with their kids. They 'practiced' church with them at home. At the fundie home church my parents dragged me to, they sat like little robots with their hands perfectly folded. Only once did the mom take one out of the service....

[nokidsmom]

I do agree that going back to WA for Bradrick! and Kelly is just going back to the same fundie craziness they are coming from. But that aside, it is his family and can't help but think, given Petey's reaction to DPIAT's fall, that the manly man is needing some recovery time, emotional support, etc. Than again, it might be something else entirely. But it was interesting to see him move at this time. Gotta wonder :think:

But back to the Tool.....

[Laurabelle]

Newbie here...been lurking for a while after reading up on the DP "scandal"...growing up, my dad was pretty impressed with this guy and always reading his books and such. We weren't fundie or near as conservative as the Phillips (in fact, I'm pretty sure DP would have thought we were straight up heathen with our tight jeans and heels, haha!), and my dad never got crazy and tried to implement VF's way of life, but I vaguely remember him having us watch the Return of the Daughters (I believe that's what it is called), and I can remember thinking how awful those girls' lives must be. Looking forward to showing my dad what's going to with ole' Doug these days! Glad we didn't fall into his trap completely! What.a.tool.

[nokidsmom]

Newbie here...been lurking for a while after reading up on the DP "scandal"...growing up, my dad was pretty impressed with this guy and always reading his books and such. We weren't fundie or near as conservative as the Phillips (in fact, I'm pretty sure DP would have thought we were straight up heathen with our tight jeans and heels, haha!), and my dad never got crazy and tried to implement VF's way of life, but I vaguely remember him having us watch the Return of the Daughters (I believe that's what it is called), and I can remember thinking how awful those girls' lives must be. Looking forward to showing my dad what's going to with ole' Doug these days! Glad we didn't fall into his trap completely! What.a.tool.

Welcome! Interesting your thoughts on watching the Return of the Daughters. Glad to hear that you guys didn't completely go over to the dark side :lol:. Would love to hear what your dad thinks when he's updated about Dougie's shenanigans.

[Othello]

Re: bolded. When was this? Oct - Dec 2013? Earlier this year (2014)? Earlier in 2013 (when DPIAT had "confessed" to the "elders" at BAC and had been put under "church discipline")?

I'm unsure; I could only get a very basic idea of what had happened, as he cited the "no-gossip" principle despite my gentle probings. :( between 2012 and current – broad range, I know!

Are you saying that this is something after this: ephesians511.wordpress.com ?

I'm actually shocked at the amount of church leadership controversies that seem to engulf the NCFIC movement.

Long after – The Trinity Baptist (as described by Dan Horn) "debacle" is ancient history now ;-) As mentioned above, I know no particulars other than what I posted, except that some families that had been members and very active in the church (and related by marriage to NCFIC/VF royalty) are no longer attending as a result of said occurrence, families with whom I interacted a lot during my short time attending Hope Baptist in 2011. (Yes, I did attend for a while; and yes, it's bad, and yes, I am glad I'm a different person than I was a few years ago!)

Regarding the number of leadership controversies, it's to be expected. Human nature isn't pretty, especially when leadership/power is involved (in any demographic, not just fundamentalism), and since these people want to micromanage their church's constituents to a ridiculous degree, conflict between leadership, or between leadership and congregation, is very common.

Looking forward to showing my dad what's going to with ole' Doug these days! Glad we didn't fall into his trap completely!

Welcome Laurabelle! You wear jeans? You're probably destined for a fiery destruction. ;-) Seriously, though, my sisters still at home all wear exclusively skirts/dresses (among many other Doug-style criteria); I agree heartily with your hope that DPIAT's fall will help people (including my family) get out of the trap. It's bad.

[Laurabelle]

@Othello: Yes, jeans, shorts, two pieces swim suits, etc. like I said, not fundie at all, LOL. Yep, pretty sure that DP would not have approved of us at all. Yes, glad people are realizing that DP's lifestyle is NOT the only way, or the right way for that matter. Ugh. I always got the impression he was a bit of a know-it-all (saw him speak once at a conference long, long ago) and a prude (not to mention he gave me the creeps--still does of course!), so I can't say I'm shocked at the truth now that it's coming out. That's what happens when you put yourself on a pedestal...

[RosyDaisy]

Poor Peter. He was disillusioned and blasted by his idol. How ever shall he recover? Boo hoo. Cry me a fucking river. I have no sympathy for him at all. Nope. None at all. He needs to get off his ass and support his wife and kids.

[Palimpsest]

I agree that the Christian Post's using Hero's name was tacky, but to be honest, I'm amazed that it hasn't been made public before now. It is to the credit of the people who know her that it was kept quiet for so long. It is also the opposite of the sort of woman shaming that I would have expected in this environment.

BCA does not have their Covenant posted on their website. I've always wondered WTF is in it to apparently terrorize their members. I had a pretty good idea of what it said, but still.

After all the discussion here about Hope Baptist Church and Scott Brown, I wandered over there. Lo and behold I found a Covenant! I wonder how close it is to BCA's.

I snipped a lot of declarations of faith, doctrinal stuff and promises to abstain from gluttony and booze, etc. but this is the last bit (my bolding):

hopebaptistchurch.info/membership

We will cultivate Christian sympathy in feeling and courtesy in speech; strive to avoid all scriptural prohibitions, such as tattling, backbiting and unrighteous anger; to refrain from speaking evil of one another; to be slow to take offense; to think the best of one another; and always ready for biblical reconciliation and mindful of the rules of our Savior to secure it without delay so far as it depends upon us. Psalm 19:14 Psalm 34:13-14, Eph. 4:29, I Peter 3:8-12, Matt 5:21-26, Titus 3:10, Prov 26:20-26

We will, if necessary, submit to biblically defined and regulated church discipline for the purpose of reconciliation with God and man and we accept that refusing to communicate or to flee is to usurp the power of the church and break this covenant. Matt. 18:15:20, Heb 12:11, 1 Cor 5:1-13, 1 John 2:19, 1 Timothy 1:20, 2 Cor 2:1-11, Luke 17:4

We will, when we move from this place, if possible, unite with a church which upholds the “Essential Doctrines†defined in the church constitution and where we can carry out the spirit of this covenant.

Nothing really surprising in there, but if I were shown that as a prospective Church member I'd run a mile. No make that 10 miles! I don't know why people agree to this.

And look at the way the likes of Doug and Scott et al, use this type of Covenant in practice. It is a deal with the devil!

[apple1]

Nothing really surprising in there, but if I were shown that as a prospective Church member I'd run a mile. No make that 10 miles! I don't know why people agree to this.

And look at the way the likes of Doug and Scott et al, use this type of Covenant in practice. It is a deal with the devil!

I agree with you 100%.

I am a Christian. At this stage in my life experience, I would never sign a membership "covenant" with any church. If my presence, participation, and the gifts that I choose to offer out of the graciousness and generosity of my heart are not sufficient, I will go elsewhere to worship where I am not asked for such. Or (as my husband would say), I can sit on the sofa in my living room a choose from the choices on the television.

I'm with you; I don't know why people agree to that kind of thing (I guess they have been "brainwashed").

(shaking head)

[Coconut Flan]

I don't think they understand the full implications of the covenant until something major happens in the church. That or they have limited reading comprehension skills or think these are nice people that's never going to be invoked.

[nokidsmom]

I don't think they understand the full implications of the covenant until something major happens in the church. That or they have limited reading comprehension skills or think these are nice people that's never going to be invoked.

You might be onto something there. I have read some of these covenants / membership agreements and can't imagine independent adults going for this. It treats them like they are kids. Personally, I would find it insulting.

Also, I think some folks join when they might be at a low point in their lives and are looking for answers. So they don't think think about what they are signing because they see being part of this group as being an answer to their problems and it's what they gotta do.

[Coconut Flan]

Also, I think some folks join when they might be at a low point in their lives and are looking for answers. So they don't think think about what they are signing because they see being part of this group as being an answer to their problems and it's what they gotta do.

There is a lot of that in it too I expect. If the person or family has spent quite a bit of time there and have friends they may reach a point of either join fully or leave.

I find any church that votes on accepting members too much like a country club. Signing myself up to accept church discipline would simply never happen. Agreeing on their definition of a biblical resolution is buying the pig in a poke.

We're looking at it from outside after having read about what various congregations have done with that kind of power trip. I don't think the average member takes that view.

[Escapefromfundiedom]

I don't think they understand the full implications of the covenant until something major happens in the church. That or they have limited reading comprehension skills or think these are nice people that's never going to be invoked.

The people who go into these churches do so because they are typically already convinced of a very narrow, strict set of theological points. They're enchanted by the prospect of a community of like-minded people who will welcome them with open arms and be an echo chamber for their beliefs. Almost by definition, those willing to sign on to such a covenant 1) NEVER imagine it would be used against them or their families and 2) are so blinded by idealism that they cannot envision a circumstance where they would fall far enough to warrant being the target of discipline and 3) are so blinded by the bright glow of the whole honeymoon phase of new church-y-ness that they cannot imagine their newly chosen leaders using those rules and covenants in any way that is not totally holy and above board.

It's sad...but I have been there and it's true.

[RachelB]

I agree with you 100%.

I am a Christian. At this stage in my life experience, I would never sign a membership "covenant" with any church. If my presence, participation, and the gifts that I choose to offer out of the graciousness and generosity of my heart are not sufficient, I will go elsewhere to worship where I am not asked for such. Or (as my husband would say), I can sit on the sofa in my living room a choose from the choices on the television.

I'm with you; I don't know why people agree to that kind of thing (I guess they have been "brainwashed").

(shaking head)

I think they are mistaking a commitment to a particular congregation for commitment to God.

[bumblebee]

This really is difficult for me to wrap my mind around. I'm Church of England where you're considered a full member of the congregation if you stay to coffee and biscuits (and toast for some reason) after the service and where the main political power struggles are between the flower ladies and vicar and choir and acolytes. I've signed the Electoral Roll which mean I'm elegible to vote for various church positions and actually is a government document since the CofE is the official state religion of England, but that was nowhere near as officially scary as the "selection process" described here. Even the more hard core evangelical organisations in my area seem happy to welcome those who are in the slightest bit interested (and turn up in tank tops and skinny jeans for "festivals of worship").

[CloakNDagger]

The logic is quite twisted really...

[snarkopolis]

Geez, to be a member of my parish I just had to go a couple of times to mass and get put on the list for envelopes. Wow! Church discipline? WTF?

[watchdog]

With all the recent revelations concerned DPIAT I can't believe no one has "resurrected" this!

viewtopic.php?t=24

Such awesomeness should be pinned to the front page!

[nokidsmom]

When I got married and moved away, my church still kept me on the membership roster even though it was pretty likely I wouldn't be attending in the future. It was their call and pretty nice of them, actually. So I was a member and didn't even show up. For years.

[skinch]

This really is difficult for me to wrap my mind around. I'm Church of England where you're considered a full member of the congregation if you stay to coffee and biscuits (and toast for some reason) after the service and where the main political power struggles are between the flower ladies and vicar and choir and acolytes. I've signed the Electoral Roll which mean I'm elegible to vote for various church positions and actually is a government document since the CofE is the official state religion of England, but that was nowhere near as officially scary as the "selection process" described here. Even the more hard core evangelical organisations in my area seem happy to welcome those who are in the slightest bit interested (and turn up in tank tops and skinny jeans for "festivals of worship").

This is my experience of the UK too. Until I began following links from FJ I never knew that churches had membership lists. I've seen various crazy criteria and multi-page documents on some US Baptist church websites.

About the UK though - do Baptist churches here have similar paperwork and rigmaroles? Or UK Christian churches of any other kind? I mean, I can ask the google, but does anyone on FJ know?

[Palimpsest]

The people who go into these churches do so because they are typically already convinced of a very narrow, strict set of theological points. They're enchanted by the prospect of a community of like-minded people who will welcome them with open arms and be an echo chamber for their beliefs. Almost by definition, those willing to sign on to such a covenant 1) NEVER imagine it would be used against them or their families and 2) are so blinded by idealism that they cannot envision a circumstance where they would fall far enough to warrant being the target of discipline and 3) are so blinded by the bright glow of the whole honeymoon phase of new church-y-ness that they cannot imagine their newly chosen leaders using those rules and covenants in any way that is not totally holy and above board.

It's sad...but I have been there and it's true.

I think you nailed it Escapefromfundiedom.

I'd also surmise that, while no one size fits all, for people vulnerable to this sort of agreement:

- some may feel alienated/wronged by other churches and are seeking safe haven.

- many are at a vulnerable stage in their lives and see only the pretty community not the cult-like tactics.

- some are authoritarian personality types for whom rules and regulations represent safety in and of themselves.

- and all are pretty much love-bombed before they actually sign on to the covenant.

I'm very interested in the ways the second generation - those who did not sign up for this in the first place but were raised in it - are reacting now to Doug's Fall.

On the one hand we have the Nolan Manteufels, who are in open revolt, and the CnD's who are seeing quite clearly, but both are desperate not to "throw the baby out with the bath water." On the other hand we have the Nathaniel Darnells who are angrily fighting every step of the way to keep the covenant agreement in place even when that ship has sailed.

[Othello]

I'm very interested in the ways the second generation - those who did not sign up for this in the first place but were raised in it - are reacting now to Doug's Fall.

On the one hand we have the Nolan Manteufels, who are in open revolt, and the CnD's who are seeing quite clearly, but both are desperate not to "throw the baby out with the bath water." On the other hand we have the Nathaniel Darnells who are angrily fighting every step of the way to keep the covenant agreement in place even when that ship has sailed.

I find this a very curious study as well; being a second-gen myself (i.e., my parents were inveigled into ATI/IBLP when I was probably ~5, making the natural segue into VF/NCFIC, as they provided a more attractive packaging of an essentially unchanged ideology, with the scary additions of Reconstructionism, hyperCalvinism etc.) and one who has repudiated the dangerous ideology but still a fairly theologically orthodox Christian, it baffles me to see those who are attempting to salvage bits of the shipwreck, and especially those who unreservedly tie themselves to the mast and go down with the ship. If DP or BG defined Christianity to you, you weren't a Christian, you were a Phillipsite or Gothardite. Swim for the shore, sailor! Whether you were on that ship willingly or placed there by your parents, your best course of action is to get your feet on the cold, hard ground of objectivity and figure sh*t out for yourself.

I apologize for the metaphor–laden post but it seems an appropriate comparison!

[MamaJunebug]

I find this a very curious study as well; being a second-gen myself (i.e., my parents were inveigled into ATI/IBLP when I was probably ~5, making the natural segue into VF/NCFIC, as they provided a more attractive packaging of an essentially unchanged ideology, with the scary additions of Reconstructionism, hyperCalvinism etc.) and one who has repudiated the dangerous ideology but still a fairly theologically orthodox Christian, it baffles me to see those who are attempting to salvage bits of the shipwreck, and especially those who unreservedly tie themselves to the mast and go down with the ship. If DP or BG defined Christianity to you, you weren't a Christian, you were a Phillipsite or Gothardite. Swim for the shore, sailor! Whether you were on that ship willingly or placed there by your parents, your best course of action is to get your feet on the cold, hard ground of objectivity and figure sh*t out for yourself.

I apologize for the metaphor–laden post but it seems an appropriate comparison!

More-or-less "still a fairly theologically orthodox Christian," myself (although never in an "-ite" system), I think all you metaphors are perfectly apt, and you've spoken very, very well. It's my hope that any former Golfside Dyke [siri's interpretation of "Gothardite") or Philipsite reading this will take your words to heart. The Spirit speaks through you. Thank you for sharing your experiences in this thread and elsewhere on the forums.

[Palimpsest]

More-or-less "still a fairly theologically orthodox Christian," myself (although never in an "-ite" system), I think all you metaphors are perfectly apt, and you've spoken very, very well. It's my hope that any former Golfside Dyke [siri's interpretation of "Gothardite") or Philipsite reading this will take your words to heart. The Spirit speaks through you. Thank you for sharing your experiences in this thread and elsewhere on the forums.

Othello: It is almost impossible to write about Doug Phillips without falling into nautical analogies! I agree with you.

MJB also put it very well from her Christian perspective.

As a card carrying atheist, but one who is not hostile to the "true" Christianity of others, I hope that the second-generation is able to sit down and carefully distinguish between a gentle Christianity modeled after the Historical Jesus and the hateful and perverted teachings of these false teachers -- the Gothards, Phillipses and Rushdooneys, etc.

[debrand]

1 Corinthians 1:12-15

12 Now I mean this, that each one of you is saying, "I am of Paul," and "I of Apollos," and "I of Cephas," and "I of Christ."

13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul?

14 I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius,

15 so no one can say that you were baptized in my name.

The bible speaks against putting leaders above Jesus. This verse has popped into my head several times when reading about loyalty to some of these leaders.