Doug Phillips is a Tool & Vision Forum is Dead - Part 7

[fiery redhead]

Not to be insensitive to whatever you have gone through, but if you have been "screwed by his teachings", is that on him, or is that on you for not holding whatever teachings you believe you got screwed by, up to the light of Scripture to see if they were indeed Biblical (if you had doubts)? What is the difference between people who feel they were screwed over by DP, and those who don't? World history is replete with examples of men who taught things that were not Biblical. So far as I know, the people who listened to those men and followed them, did so of their own free volition. I have never attended Doug's church, so I have no idea what he was preaching on Sunday's, and I'm not sure as to whether or not that is what you are referring to also. But if he was teaching things at church that were un-Biblical, wasn't it your responsibility to examine the Bible for reference? I think the bigger problem in the backlash to "patriarchy" is people who have taken it to excess. I have been reading and listening to Doug's writings and speeches for nearly 2 decades, and neither my wife nor I have ever felt "screwed over" by them, and if we ever had any doubts, we certainly would have felt it was our responsibility to compare them against what Scripture teaches. Are there some men who are proponents of "patriarchy" to don't treat their wives the best? Certainly, and there are plenty of men who are not proponents of "patriarchy" who have the same issues. I have never understood why it is so offensive to some women the idea that husbands and wives have complementary roles doing things in the arena in which they perform best. Most men are not naturally "nurturers". Most women are not naturally into building fences. My wife has a definite advantage over me in the domestic arts. I have a definite advantage over her in hard manual labor. Why do some women assume that means the wife is the "inferior" person in the relationship? We understand what we each do best, and attack those tasks with gusto. My wife and I love our arrangement. She loves that she doesn't have to go out in the work force to support us, and doesn't have to do the hard work outside the house. I love that I don't have to do the hard work inside the house. We are equal partners.

Just because an individual or family have implemented extra biblical practices in their lives because of Doug's teaching does not mean they were relying on Doug more than the actual Bible. Many things Doug said appealed to Bible believing Christians as he appeared to preach the full Gospel had very straightforward advice. He offered what many modern churches lack. But, as we all know now, he is basically a con man, so he interwove extra biblical teaching and legalism into everything. At some point, people who looked to God's Word saw the light, and chucked Doug - whether it be before or after the revelation of the affair.

I have great sympathy for his wife and children. As far as emotional and spiritual abuse go, his wife had a much greater disadvantage than his mistress. His wife would have nothing to her name if she took the kids and left and he has isolated her from her family. She also was most likely pressured to stay from their circle. As far as the mistress goes, (by the way I have been following this saga since Halloween last year) I am not sure if her family pressured her to keep doing it or what. From video I can tell she has the Doug complex where she is loves the camera, and based on other things I've seen (I am not relying on Jen's Gems, by the way) I would conclude this is a case of social climbing but vesseled in the uber fundy world.

[hoipolloi]

Not to be insensitive to whatever you have gone through, but if you have been "screwed by his teachings", is that on him, or is that on you for not holding whatever teachings you believe you got screwed by, up to the light of Scripture to see if they were indeed Biblical (if you had doubts)? What is the difference between people who feel they were screwed over by DP, and those who don't? World history is replete with examples of men who taught things that were not Biblical. So far as I know, the people who listened to those men and followed them, did so of their own free volition. I have never attended Doug's church, so I have no idea what he was preaching on Sunday's, and I'm not sure as to whether or not that is what you are referring to also. But if he was teaching things at church that were un-Biblical, wasn't it your responsibility to examine the Bible for reference? I think the bigger problem in the backlash to "patriarchy" is people who have taken it to excess. I have been reading and listening to Doug's writings and speeches for nearly 2 decades, and neither my wife nor I have ever felt "screwed over" by them, and if we ever had any doubts, we certainly would have felt it was our responsibility to compare them against what Scripture teaches. Are there some men who are proponents of "patriarchy" to don't treat their wives the best? Certainly, and there are plenty of men who are not proponents of "patriarchy" who have the same issues. I have never understood why it is so offensive to some women the idea that husbands and wives have complementary roles doing things in the arena in which they perform best. Most men are not naturally "nurturers". Most women are not naturally into building fences. My wife has a definite advantage over me in the domestic arts. I have a definite advantage over her in hard manual labor. Why do some women assume that means the wife is the "inferior" person in the relationship? We understand what we each do best, and attack those tasks with gusto. My wife and I love our arrangement. She loves that she doesn't have to go out in the work force to support us, and doesn't have to do the hard work outside the house. I love that I don't have to do the hard work inside the house. We are equal partners.

As for Doug's teachings being "anti-childrens-best-interests"....for starters, the very idea of what is in a particular child's best interest is extremely subjective. A public school administrator would almost certainly have a different idea about what is in my child's best interest than I do. My kids routinely test out multiple grade levels ahead of their same age public school peers, so I think I win that argument. You may have a completely different idea about what is in your child's best interest than what I think for mine. It is really ironic that you are trying to make this point because I have never seen any group that is more felicitous for the best interests of their children than fundamentalist Christians, particularly those who go to the trouble of home educating their children. We home educate our children and we spend copious amounts of time trying to make sure that we do everything possible to further both their education and their character. If you think that Doug teaches or was teaching something that was not in the best interests of your child, then certainly you bear the final responsibility for raising that child, not Doug Phillips. The whole nature of Vision Forum when it was started was all about the best interests of the Christian family, including children. Doug has betrayed those principles in his own family with regards to this affair, obviously, but that doesn't mean the principles and teachings no longer apply.

tl;dr - You did it wrong.

[ILoveJellybeans]

OMG Nolan dating Hero? That is adorable and awesome! And theyre kissing before marriage, how defrauding ;) Good for them, hope they are very happy together and can have a life free of cults :) Great to see that she has moved on, and is with a guy that isn't a douche like Doug is.

[Librul]

I think the bigger problem in the backlash to "patriarchy" is people who have taken it to excess.

This statement of Westchamps bolded above reminds me of Marge Schott, erstwhile owner of the Cincinnati Reds, who famously said, "The Nazis had the right idea. They just took it too far". See, Westchamps, many of us think there is no such thing as benign Patriarchy. It is rotten to the core and subject to all kinds of abuse whether is it good old fashioned "shut up you wimmens, you are inferior chattel" or whether it is the kinder, gentler, "women are such better nurturers" and "men build fences".

And, oh yea, just for the record, I believe that the nanny was culpable in her actions. I do feel sorry for Beall and the children, who are trapped in this ugly system of Patriarchy and have few choices and options. However, Doug as her spiritual leader is both culpable and according to law, criminal. There is a reason that therapists, educators, doctors and clergy are verboten by professional standards, and evidently by the laws of the State of Texas, from bedding their clients/sheep. It's a power imbalance.

[FJSharkJump]

YAY! I wish them all the best, a manageable number of babies if they so desire, and a life free of DPIAT.

That profile pic is just confirmation that they are in a romantic relationship, right? There's no engagement or pregnancy announcement is there?

I just don't want the lovebirds to feel any pressure. :lol: Normal, ordinary relationships -- where you get to know someone and fall in love and learn and grow both together and individually for a while so you can test out the idea of life-long partnership without anyone telling you that the relationship absolutely must result in marriage and kids for it to be good and valuable and worthwhile -- are cool. I like them. Everybody should get a chance to try them. :mrgreen:

[Marian the Librarian]

A clarification re: "the timeline:" Doug posted his blog entry about speaking at Hero's homeschool graduation in 2003. In that post, he says "Beall and I have known the graduate for more than three years." That puts their acquaintance back to 2000, if not earlier.

Just sayin.'

[Palimpsest]

A clarification re: "the timeline:" Doug posted his blog entry about speaking at Hero's homeschool graduation in 2003. In that post, he says "Beall and I have known the graduate for more than three years." That puts their acquaintance back to 2000, if not earlier.

Just sayin.'

Yes, there is that. Doug has known the family and the young woman for a long, long time.

Also, talking of Westchamps and his friendship with Doug Phillips, there is also the fact that Doug was making the fraudulent "documentary" Raising the Allosaur in 2002 and was suing the pants off fellow Christian Joe Taylor by 2004. helpajoe.blogspot.com/2008/01/urgent-need.html?m=1

Was Westie convinced Doug was a good guy then?

Westchamps seems to be ignoring my posts and questions. Perhaps because I said my foot itched to kick the adulterous husband and false Christian leader in the nuts :lol: or perhaps because they are too hard.

So I will ask a couple of my questions again:

Westchamps - how do you feel about Doug's threatening three of the men who confronted him over his behavior with legal action? Is threatening to sue the people who confronted you according to the Biblical principles you endorse indicative of true repentance?

[Hane]

Ooh! Ooh! My hand hath been slapped! *faints*

Thanks to all you wonderful FJers who stepped up to the plate here. I couldn't because I was too busy at my job--the thing that keeps me from having to bother with a headship--or, in this instance , a head case.

[MrsFoxx]

That profile pic is just confirmation that they are in a romantic relationship, right? There's no engagement or pregnancy announcement is there?

I just don't want the lovebirds to feel any pressure. :lol: Normal, ordinary relationships -- where you get to know someone and fall in love and learn and grow both together and individually for a while so you can test out the idea of life-long partnership without anyone telling you that the relationship absolutely must result in marriage and kids for it to be good and valuable and worthwhile -- are cool. I like them. Everybody should get a chance to try them. :mrgreen:

There's a [Hero] Manteufel on FB, same profile pic, says she's married to Nolan.

[nokidsmom]

This statement of Westchamps bolded above reminds me of Marge Schott, erstwhile owner of the Cincinnati Reds, who famously said, "The Nazis had the right idea. They just took it too far". See, Westchamps, many of us think there is no such thing as benign Patriarchy. It is rotten to the core and subject to all kinds of abuse whether is it good old fashioned "shut up you wimmens, you are inferior chattel" or whether it is the kinder, gentler, "women are such better nurturers" and "men build fences".

And, oh yea, just for the record, I believe that the nanny was culpable in her actions. I do feel sorry for Beall and the children, who are trapped in this ugly system of Patriarchy and have few choices and options. However, Doug as her spiritual leader is both culpable and according to law, criminal. There is a reason that therapists, educators, doctors and clergy are verboten by professional standards, and evidently by the laws of the State of Texas, from bedding their clients/sheep. It's a power imbalance.

Affairs often evolve without any deliberation so for that reason I am holding back on thinking how much culpability the nanny has in this. If she went into it willingly and with her eyes open to what she was doing that's one thing. However, this could have evolved very innocently on her part with no inkling of what it was leading her into. Add to the whole patriarchal culture and that Dougie was the top man o' God in that culture complicates it more. Hard to know culpability on her part without knowing further details that I don't want to know anyway, but the fact remains that Dougie had the responsibility as a spiritual leader not to get involved with a member of his flock, no matter what the circumstances.

[GenerationCedarchip]

There's a [Hero] Manteufel on FB, same profile pic, says she's married to Nolan.

The Coghlans are there in comments congratulating them on their wedding. I guess they just got married? Good luck to both of them! :D

[Coconut Flan]

There's a [Hero] Manteufel on FB, same profile pic, says she's married to Nolan.

I'm astounded. It seems she's moving right along with a new life. Good for her. I wish them well.

At least the most recent bloviating patriarchal defender can spell and seems to have an acquaintance with the concept that words have meaning. However, he is still well versed in the dance steps of avoiding the actual questions. The agenda stills seems the same though to correct the wimminz who just don't understand. Westchamps, I got it as a five year old - and rejected it. I've seen no reason in the decades since to change my mind.

[FJSharkJump]

There's a [Hero] Manteufel on FB, same profile pic, says she's married to Nolan.

Aw, well congrats and best wishes to the happy couple!! :clap: :mrgreen: :dance:

Btw, keeping Hero's name off the board, coupled with my memory/attention problems, means that I have no idea what her real first name actually is. :lol: So for some of us, the attempt to maintain her anonymity actually worked. Good job, FJ! :D

[ILoveJellybeans]

Congratulations to them both, they sure kept that one quiet!

[hoipolloi]

Yes, congrats to Nolan & [Hero] - may they have a happy life together, free of patriarses & legalism.

[Palimpsest]

There's a [Hero] Manteufel on FB, same profile pic, says she's married to Nolan.

There's a shiny new wedding ring on her finger too. I thought FJ's eagle eyes would have already spotted that. :)

Awwww. I am happy about this. I think Nolan is a very nice guy and I hope everything works out for them both.

I am getting so bored with discussion of the "culpability" question. We have heard from several reputable sources that she has already admitted responsibility for whatever part she played in Doug's straying from his marriage vows. Her responsibility is infinitely less than Doug's and her repentence is not my business.

Everyone makes mistakes. Haven't any of you who want to keep hashing her culpability out ever done something or things that you regret? I direct that question to our sanctimonious new member Westcamps too. :roll:

I am glad she has found a good person and hope they can move forward together in strength and love.

[nokidsmom]

There's a shiny new wedding ring on her finger too. I thought FJ's eagle eyes would have already spotted that. :)

Awwww. I am happy about this. I think Nolan is a very nice guy and I hope everything works out for them both.

I am getting so bored with discussion of the "culpability" question. We have heard from several reputable sources that she has already admitted responsibility for whatever part she played in Doug's straying from his marriage vows. Her responsibility is infinitely less than Doug's and her repentence is not my business.

Everyone makes mistakes. Haven't any of you who want to keep hashing her culpability out ever done something or things that you regret? I direct that question to our sanctimonious new member Westcamps too. :roll:

I am glad she has found a good person and hope they can move forward together in strength and love.

Glad to see that she has found happiness with a good guy.

Back in when whole Dougie saga came out there were serious concerns about how this would bode for her future but it seems that a lot of our fears haven't played out. Good to see.

[Talitha Cumi]

There's a [Hero] Manteufel on FB, same profile pic, says she's married to Nolan.

Look at that! Gorgeous cover photo-- I wonder if that's where they went on their honeymoon?

[hoipolloi]

I am getting so bored with discussion of the "culpability" question. We have heard from several reputable sources that she has already admitted responsibility for whatever part she played in Doug's straying from his marriage vows. Her responsibility is infinitely less than Doug's and her repentence is not my business.

Everyone makes mistakes. Haven't any of you who want to keep hashing her culpability out ever done something or things that you regret? I direct that question to our sanctimonious new member Westcamps too. :roll:

I am glad she has found a good person and hope they can move forward together in strength and love.

+1 on the "culpability" issue.

+eleventy!111! to the bolded.

[Maxwell]

Lists April 11, 2014 as their anniversay. Tried to send Nolan a Friend request on Facebook and shortly there after his FB page disappeared... :-( Maybe it's just me. Nolan, if you're reading here, congratulations! I've been confused by your cryptic messages but impressed by your resolve and clarity. I was pleased to see your recent photo and wish you both the best.

[WonderingInWA]

Awww, I'm happy for [Hero] and Nolan! They successfully flew under the radar and hopefully had a lovely wedding. Too bad we will probably never see wedding photos -- I wonder who of the "clan" attended?

Well done, newlyweds! Hope you are having a fabulous honeymoon! :)

[Palimpsest]

Lists April 11, 2014 as their anniversay. Tried to send Nolan a Friend request on Facebook and shortly there after his FB page disappeared... :-( Maybe it's just me. Nolan, if you're reading here, congratulations! I've been confused by your cryptic messages but impressed by your resolve and clarity. I was pleased to see your recent photo and wish you both the best.

His FB page is still there for me. You gave me a bad moment there - I thought they were OK with it being public knowledge. And I guess they are. :)

[Anise]

Didn't want to say anything in case they were keeping it on the dl, but I squeaked with joy when I saw it on my fb feed yesterday. I'm so happy for the two of them! :D

Months ago, I was concerned that life would be difficult for Hero after this, but clearly she has a supportive community and people who love her. And yay for green streaks and vf unapproved clothing. :D

[Maxwell]

His FB page is still there for me. You gave me a bad moment there - I thought they were OK with it being public knowledge. And I guess they are. :)

Curses!!! He blocked me! :evil-eye: :(

[Marian the Librarian]

Married??? Yaaay!!!

ETA: I didn't pick up on the marriage part before - a bit slow on the uptake here, sleep-deprived due to travel. Such nice news to come home to.