Quote

There are others who have visited who do not feel the same way you do. Robert Darden, Jackie Anon, and John Bloom are a few respectable examples.

Yes, but none of those people were there as disciples. I can talk in detail about each of them, but suffice it to say that you are comparing apples to oranges. I have already said that Trinity is quite good at charming their visitors.

To me, the most salient point is that most (in fact, dang nearly all) of the former members of Trinity Foundation who spent significant time there now say that it is a cult. That has nothing to do with Trinity saying we did not go through the Matthew 18 process correctly with them.

Oh, and as to the lie that Trinity Foundation is graciously avoiding comment on our situation in order to not hinder us from being reconciled with them, what about this? [frontburner.dmagazine.com]

They can't have it both ways. They [i:9049e940aa]have[/i:9049e940aa] responded to us, but when they realized they were not going to be able to control this story they came up with this baloney about not responding so as not to hinder the possibility of reconciliation. That just shows them for the liars and hypocrites that they are.

Quote
NathanA
I mispelled one name I mentioned there, it is Jackie [b:a743efd97e]Alnor[/b:a743efd97e] not Jackie Anon.

For another thing, when you're always getting people's names wrong ("Billiy Joe Briggs", or "Jackie Anon") it just goes to show further that you have injected yourself into something in which you do not know what you are talking about. Give it a rest, Nathan. You can't even get the names right.

And you never answered my question Nathan: what are your three least favorite things about TFI and its leader, Ole Anthony?

If I've done anything legitimately disrespectful to you Brian, then show me that. As it is we share different viewpoints about Trinity Foundation, and I am entitled to that right on this forum as are you. Part of possessing emotional maturity is being able to deal with people who do not share your point of view.(since you lecture me on that) Your expectation and demand that everyone agree with you seems like a sign that you would do well to practice what you preach.

And as for my 3 least favorite things about Ole Anthony. I guess I feel like you are looking for a door to try and get me to share in your slander, for that reason and the fact that I think it would be better for me to tell Ole those things first, I will not tell you these things.

I have seen a few ex-members here say it is a cult. Where did you get the number 50 from though? Does Wendy have that many documented interviews with former members who say that?

As for John's response on the frontburner, that was written quite a while back, likely before Trinity made the decision to not give an immediate public response. I would not be surprised if they do at some point release a full response though.

Here is a commentary to give consideration to regarding this whole affair:
[www.apostasyalert.org]

Nathan-

Anthony has been confronted in the past by Bill Alnor, Richard Fisher ( of Personal Freedom Outreach) and others. On some occasions he has ceased a particular practice or teaching, BUT , has still maintained other abberant teachings and practices, and later gone into even more aberrant things. This is NOT repentance. It is simply CHANGE.
Prov.24:21b says "....meddle not with them that are given to CHANGE."

Anthony's definition on forgiveness, from page 197 in Wendy's book is "Forgiveness means you defend the other persons right to have done what he or she did." If he is to be consistent with his own teaching, then he needs to publically forgive them by defending their right to do what they did. You need to encourage him to do this. But then again, maybe he's already CHANGEd his definition of forgiveness. ( After all, it is the most ludicrous definition of the word that I've ever heard. But that's what Anthony is all about: He uses the same vocabulary as a Christian but he changes all the meanings of the words! Classic cult-leader tactic.)

Wendy and others have proved irrefuteably that Anthony has lied about and embellished his past. I don't hear a peep out of any of Ole's defenders on that point.

What it all boils down to Nathan is this: Anthony has been used for years as a source of information by many within the Christian counter-cult/apologetics movement. Now that he's been "outed", many are left with egg on their face, so they resort to the arguement that "The Duncans didn't play fair! The Duncan's didn't play fair! " i.e. they didn't follow Matt. 18. These detractors are not interested in truth. They're interested in preserving their own precious reputations. Two things you'll find out eventually is that "Being a cult leader means never having to say you're sorry" and "Thou shalt not expose error in the Christian counter-cult/apologetics ministries."

It's not only sad that your being fooled by TFI, you're also being used by those who disagree with the Duncan's, view this forum, e-mail you privately, but are to gutless to post here. You're a pawn. When they're done with you, they'll spit you out.

Get into the Word. Find a good church and forget about this issue. You're being played and you don't even realize it.

Mark

Nathan -
Your post at 2:17 p.m. today contains a link that is no longer on Jackie Alnor's site because she retracted it.
Mark

Quote

Here is a commentary to give consideration to regarding this whole affair:
[www.apostasyalert.org]

Earlier in this thread, Nathan, you asked me if it would be okay if you posted a link to this thing that Jackie Alnor wrote. I told you that I did not think it would be appropriate, because that is just an extension of Trinity’s ad hominem attack on us. When a messenger comes to point out the problems in a cultic organization, they switch the subject and make the messenger the issue.

The topic of this thread is Trinity Foundation and the cultic nature of that group. You are welcome to disagree with our contention that Trinity is a cult, and to vigorously argue your position. However, when you get into these kinds of ad hominem attacks, that is not cricket. Whether or not we followed the right procedures in separating from this cult is not even relevant.

However, as I was considering all of this earlier today, I remembered a long meeting I had shortly after leaving Trinity with Gary B, who was the leader of the particular Bible study/subgroup of which I was a member (we called them “Seder groups”). I met him at a court hearing that was for one of the other members who had gotten into some trouble, and I was a witness for his defense. We had to wait a couple of hours (give or take a little—I cannot remember exactly how long), so he and I discussed what I felt the problems at Trinity were. We did not pull out the Scripture and pronounce, “This is a Matthew 18 meeting,” but it turned out to be a [i:e4bc75a85e]de facto[/i:e4bc75a85e] one, nonetheless. There have been other communications, but that was the longest face to face conversation I have had with leadership since leaving. The point is, we have clearly let Trinity know what we think the problems are in several forums. This thing about us not following Matthew 18 is a non-starter.