Quote

I don't think that was a straw man, I think that is my admitting that words are not enough, no matter how good they are. That has been one of your main points to me, that I do not know this man's true character even though his words may seem wise. I have no interest in defending a man who is abusive, deceitful, and manipulative. Believe me, if Ole really is this monster you say he is, I will join you in exposing it. On the same token I want to discern what is just here, and not be idle if a man who has done good things is being attacked unfairly. The truth in this matter is difficult to see.

You seem to take a very black and white view of things. I do not think I have tried to portray Ole as a monster, just a very flawed man who has created a dysfunctional group that has managed to hurt a number of people and then refused to honestly examine their own behavior. I think it is a false dichotomy you have set up, and this may be why you are having so much trouble. Could it be that Ole is someone has done [i:df32c8f22f]both[/i:df32c8f22f] good [i:df32c8f22f]and[/i:df32c8f22f] bad things? However, if he has done some good things that does not invalidate our critique of him and Trinity Foundation. They also need to take responsibility for the mistakes they have made.

Quote

How can you say Trinity is using me, and then expect me to be your go-to man with your list of questions Brian? Looks to me like you are doing the same thing you blame Trinity for. They have answered me all those questions you wrote, and more without protest. (the only specific one I don't remember asking directly was the first one).

If Trinity has already answered those questions, I would be curious to know what they said. I mean, it only seems fair for you to share their answers with us in this public forum, since you seem to be sharing what we say with them.

Quote

So what do you think of the idea of me posting Jackie Anon's comments here Doug with her permission? She is someone who has apparently known you as well as Trinity for some time.

She does not know us very well—she is certainly not as connected to us as she is with the folks at Trinity, for whom she has done contract work. I do not think it would be appropriate to post that here, as it is basically a doctrinal thing, and culteducation.com is not supposed to be a place to debate religious doctrine. In brief, she recounts all of Trinity’s talking points in saying that we did not follow the right procedures laid out in Matthew 18 for resolving disputes among brethren, and that we should pull all the copies of our book and go back to Trinity and work all this out.

We have discussed this interpretation of Matthew 18 with several ministers and mature Christians, and none of them say that Jackie’s is an appropriate interpretation of that Scripture. I would be happy to discuss all of this with you via email, but I do not think we should get into a discussion of how to interpret a passage in the Bible in this forum.

Leaving aside for the moment the interpretation of Matthew 18, I don’t think you could find any cult expert who would say that it is incumbent upon the person leaving a spiritually abusive group to have to go back to them and explain what all of the problems are and why you felt you had to leave. That would just be setting yourself up to be abused all over again. I would appreciate Rick’s thoughts on this if he wants to weigh in.

Increasingly I feel as if there are private issues here that need to be worked out between you and Trinity. I am not comfortable saying in public things that have been told to me in confidence. I have probably shared much of it with you privately already counselor.

As for the being too black and white thing, I realize it is not all one way or the other. It seems a little ironic that you are tooting this horn though, as you have used the more extreme labels of "narcississt and sociopath" :twisted: to decribe Ole.

Quote
NathanA
Increasingly I feel as if there are private issues here that need to be worked out between you and Trinity. I am not comfortable saying in public things that have been told to me in confidence. I have probably shared much of it with you privately already counselor.

Yes, Trinity has been conducting a whisper campaign against us. They will not come out and discuss things in a public forum, nor will they even respond to my emails when I try to contact them directly. They say they will talk to us as long as it is on their terms. Meanwhile, they continue to use [b:1f215b3186]slander and gossip[/b:1f215b3186] to try to discredit us with other people by talking about us behind our backs.

Disgusting.

Quote
NathanA
As for the being too black and white thing, I realize it is not all one way or the other. It seems a little ironic that you are tooting this horn though, as you have used the more extreme labels of "narcississt and sociopath" :twisted: to decribe Ole.

I stand 100% behind everything I have said. I just wanted you to understand that the fact that Ole has done some good things, whatever his motives, does not let him off the hook and excuse him from the need to take responsibility for the things he has done to hurt so many people.

Quote
NathanA
Brian, I won't talk to them for you. I have asked them several of questions you listed already.

So what were the answers? What'd they say?

Please, put these questions to Ole or Gary or Pete or somebody there and get back with us with the answers:

[b:ab8ab4b814]
1) Can you think of an instance in which you were in the wrong, or in which somebody's criticism of your behavior was valid?

2) Obviously The Trinity Foundation is a controversial group to some people. Please tell me in your own words why ex-members tend to be critical of your group, and what their main objections are?

3) How do you feel about former members of your group? Have you ever sat down to speak with a former member to find out why they left? If not, why not? Does your group impose restrictions on communicating with former members?

4) Do you think that there is anything valid about what any of your critics has to say? How do you account for all of the disgruntled ex-members?

5) Do you believe that in a given situation that the ends justify the means? Is deception allowed in certain circumstances?[/b:ab8ab4b814]

And I have a question for you directly, Nathan:

[b:ab8ab4b814]
Please tell us your three least favorite things about the Trinity Foundation and it's leader, Ole Anthony?[/b:ab8ab4b814]

Counselor47 said:

Quote

I stand 100% behind everything I have said. I just wanted you to understand that the fact that Ole has done some good things, whatever his motives, does not let him off the hook and excuse him from the need to take responsibility for the things he has done to hurt so many people.

I understand you, and I don't think that doing some good things should let someone off the hook for the bad either.

Zeuszor said:

Quote

Please, put these questions to Ole or Gary or Pete or somebody there and get back with us with the answers

If you are interested in their answers to those questions, you are free to ask them yourself. I am not interested in being a middle man for you or Trinity. I am not interested in an endless argument with you over this either. If there are new facts or information to be shared publicly, I will discuss these things with you.

Zeuszor said:

Quote

Please tell us your three least favorite things about the Trinity Foundation and it's leader, Ole Anthony?

That is not really my business here at this point. I will confront Ole about the issues I have before I share them here in public with you. I am only here to discover the truth, and if I have something I feel is valuable to say, then I will.

Quote
NathanA
Brian, I won't talk to them for you. I have asked them several of questions you listed already.

So, what did they say?

I am not going to answer questions on their behalf. They can give a public response, or you will have to go and ask them your questions privately to get the information first-hand. I am not acting as a middle-man. End of story.

So, you'll act as their middle-man when you want to come here to sling some insults or hearsay around, but not when somebody comes with reasonable, open-ended questions?