Wow! I go away for about a month and though the words are different, not much has changed..LOL.

I've had to read the past postings in order to catch up and personally, I think that Nathan is not out of line. It's funny really (and to be expected). After going through and reading the posts in one setting, it seems to be that when Nathan seems to swing the "anti-Trinity" way, he is embraced by all here (even Brian). Yet, when he defends or asks questions that are consider "pro-Trinity", he is labeled a troll and reviled.

Hmmm...if I didn't know better this particular forum exhibits quite a bit of the characteristics of a cult. Ex: You don't believe the way we do and we are right...you are wrong...therefore you are a troll and unworthy of being in this discussion UNLESS you agree with us.

But I understand though. This thread is "anti-Trinity". There is NO room for discussion. Even counselor has expressed that this is an anti-trinity forum.

Nathan...the best thing to do, is to just leave be. This thread is not open to discussion and though the viewpoints are different, this thread is not for that. There are too many temperments is play...UNLESS you are just having fun and then I would agree that is trolling and downright mean to those that have hurt feelings on this subject.

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

I'll answer these.

1. I'm not particularly fond of the notion of helping people that seem to have extreme mental or emotional problems and trying to help them so much. It's fine to give them a roof over their heads, meals everyday but Trinity seems to take this on much more then I personally care for. It's like bringing home strays then they bite the hand that feeds them (ex: steal, do drugs on Trinity property or just go bezerk at times.) This may be shallow on my part but it's my honest answer.

2. Everyone doing more of their own thing. Trinity use to be a closer knit community but since kids are grown, people getting older, it seems that everyone is more laid back and take the doctrine for granted. Of course, I am certainly not exempt in this arena. I rarely show up since my own kiddos keep me busy. With PTA, Mom's groups, homework, me getting into school and trying to clear off our land down south for building a new house...well...it's hard but I'm just justifying myself.

3. Ole...hmm. I haven't seen him around for quite awhile. I enjoy his teachings yet I still hold onto my own joy in the Lord. He could be nicer, granted, in his choice of words but it's like watching that show "House". He reminds of that doctor at times. Cut and dry. So yeah...I don't care for his way of getting things across that he believes in but I do believe in the basic principles of the doctrine.

Let's try this one.

Counselor, Zueszor, Seeking, cultaware and Mark Scheiderer: What are (were) the three things that you LIKED about Trinity and/or Ole.

I'll go first.

1. I like the way that if I have a serious problem that I can pick up the phone and call anyone for help or can open myself up to a group of people and let what I'm feeling out.

2. I appreciate the fact that if I can't seem to find the answers that I need, I can approach Ole and even if he's in his bed, seriously sick and racked with pain, he will get up and talk to me or just pray.

3. I like the fact that I can miss bible studies for a full month, not pay a single tithe for years yet can walk into a meeting, sit down and no one bat an eyelash except for them to say they missed me.

There's some more but I only stipulated three.

I have been involved in this discussion, not because I even want to be, but because I feel that these statements and interpretations regarding the Trinity Foundation are unfair. There are certainly points that I think are worth questioning about Trinity Foundation. I think though it is wise to not just be carried along with everything these ex-members are saying before all the issues are exposed. I believe TFI has suffered for Doug and Wendy's sake willingly by not yet giving a public response. While you RRmoderator have probably had many experiences with the deceit and harm cults do to people, I think it is valuable to question if that is truly the case here.

I really do not know anything when it comes down to it. But I have wanted to challenge a group that would otherwise be very one sided here, and who may give only one set of interpretations pertaining to the Trinity Foundation. I have brought up the Matthew 18 issue because I would like to see the Duncans and TFI talk. I believe it would be valuable for both sides. I think humility is valuable, and the willingness to acknowledge one's own faults. So I have challenged them. It is not an attack on behalf of Trinity as you say.

You are capable of making wrong judements too rrmoderator, as are all of us. In the end we hope the truth really does prevail. I believe it will, and has in fact prevailed.

Cherenuff1,
I agree with you on numbers one and two. I can't agree on number three. I guess they don't do first fruits tithes anymore ( it is a coercive tithe on all your earthly possessions i.e. a spiritual financial shake down). Let's see... number three? I enjoyed the way Ole exposed preacher's hypocrisies (though he hides his own with the help from his elders). No one ever said there was nothing to like about Ole. No one is arguing that. Let's stay on topic. Let Nathan answer his own questions. First Nathan defends a group he has never been involved with and then you defend Nathan (by answering for him) who you've never met. Go figure?
cultaware

NathanA:

Excuse me, but you are repeating yourself yet again.

And if you don't want to be here then stop posting on the board.

Quote
cultaware
Cherenuff1,
I agree with you on numbers one and two. I can't agree on number three. I guess they don't do first fruits tithes anymore ( it is a coercive tithe on all your earthly possessions i.e. a spiritual financial shake down). Let's see... number three? I enjoyed the way Ole exposed preacher's hypocrisies (though he hides his own with the help from his elders). No one ever said there was nothing to like about Ole. No one is arguing that. Let's stay on topic. Let Nathan answer his own questions. First Nathan defends a group he has never been involved with and then you defend Nathan (by answering for him) who you've never met. Go figure?
cultaware

Tithes are completely up to the individual. Ole once said that he doesn't give a damn if someone tithes or not. It's not about money. Tithing comes in all forms. As for defending Nathan? No. If ANY of you were a bit more open minded, you would have seen that I've urged Nathan to read Wendy's book. I've urged him to seek out answers and to not only take what Ole says as truth. I've told him over and over again that Ole is NOT the god that you ALL here think he is.

What it completely hypocritical in this thread and I wonder if the moderator sees this...is that though I urge Nathan to question ALL sides I have NOT seen you or Counselor doing the same to Seeking or the others that have NEVER HEARD of Trinity Foundation BEFORE the book. They read the book and have made a complete blanket judgment on Trinity.

NO...I see you fostering their questions without urging them to ask Trinity a question.

Of course...someone will reply to this with the tired phrase. "Why would I possibly want to deal with a cult?" If you ask this and never heard of Trinity before the book or done your own investigation to the background of the people in the book or read the numerous articles concerning Trinity...then you are complete...absolute...hypocrite.

I suggest this... ONLY those that have been involved with Trinity for [b:89a57f37b5]6 months [/b:89a57f37b5]or more should respond to this post. If you haven't, then why are you here? I even include Nathan on this.

This is your site Mr. Ross, and you set the rules. However, when you don't acknowledge fully what someone has said, and then accuse them of being repetitive, you yourself fail to show the respect you have asked others to exhibit. This is a tactic that a cult leader might use. No doubt you are a cult expert, but that does not make you incapable of doing the very same things the worst cult leaders do.

NathanA:

You are repetitive. And anyone can look back on this thread to establish that.

Attempting to attack me personally doesn't change that.

You don't seem to have any meaningful purpose here. Certainly not an open exchange of ideas or dialog.

It seems you are here as an apologist and nothing else.

And the use of personal attacks means you have run out of gas.

If I was repetitive and agreed with these people you probably wouldn't even notice. Also repitition happens in conversations sometimes when you are attempting to actually communicate with somebody.

As it is, I will back off here for a while, and if I do post, to make sure to say more than the same old things.

I am not attacking you personally. You told me I appeared to be just a "surrogate" for Trinity. I could say that you are attacking me personally on that point. Nonetheless I explained to you why that was not true.
You didn't even acknowledge the substance of what I said and just told me I was being repetitive again. That is the way a cult leader might respond to some unruly member. Is that not true?

I appreciated reading about your work in the Door Magazine interview. I respect what you have done in boldly dealing with some very powerful cult groups. You are not someone I wish to attack, you are actually someone I would tend to appreciate. I just don't put it past you make mistakes in judgement or in the way you deal with people. That is part of being human. :wink: