* * *
TW Eston blogs with Jen at Jen’s Gems blog who has been exposing Doug Phillips of Vision Forum. It’s been pretty obvious that he is a fan of Rushdoony, but he’s also Kinist?
* * *
This is going to be a quickie because it’s past my bedtime. My friend, R.L. Stollar, co-founder of Homeschoolers Anonymous blog was tweeting late last night and I got distracted when I should have been sleeping. Sometimes the self-control is lacking. Help me. But if you’ve been following the Doug Phillips story and Jen’s Gems, you’ll see why.
The topic is TW Eston, the person who was posting around the internet when Doug Phillips’ story broke. I featured a couple of his comments as articles on my blog, then out of the clear blue, he posted an article at Jen’s Gems blog and somehow jumped into the co-blogger/moderator seat and has remained there. Here were the tweets which beckoned me to stay up later than I should have:
**
Lana responded to Stollar’s tweet (the bottom tweet in the pile) and you can see our conversation that follows:
**
**
When TW Eston first came around, I started snooping around and had seen a Twitter account and Facebook page, under his name, but I do not remember any activity on either one.
Now I see that the Twitter profile has been filled out. Read the white print! I already knew Eston was a fan of Rushdoony from his comments on my blog, that he couldn’t stand Phillips, but he is publicly saying he’s a KINIST?!!! Here’s Wikipedia’s definition:
Kinism is the belief that the God-ordained social order for humanity is “tribal and ethnic,” and focuses on man’s duty to “love one’s own kind”. Kinists advocate the idea that extended families should live together in large groups. They believe the ideal and normative social order for families – and by extension communities, states and nations – is one defined by race and blood, not propositions or borders, and that this natural order forms the proper and lasting bonds of affection and loyalty for any legitimate society. It is considered an offshoot of Christian Reconstructionism that originated among anti-immigration traditionalists in the Southern United States.(Source)
**
Isn’t that a creepy quote by Phillips that he used for the background of his Twitter profile? And here’s a screen capture from Facebook in which he is friends with one friend, Jen. I can pretty much bet that TW Eston does not really look like that kid. Nice try, Eston.
**
***
Oh, and if that definition above wasn’t enough – – here’s a bit more from the same link:
“Kinism is a worldview embraced primary by some paleoconservatives and Christian Reconstructionists, who may subscribe to related views such as Neo-Calvinism, theonomy, postmillenialism, nationalism and protectionism, chivalry, patriarchy, courtship as a substitute for casual dating, “quiverfull” parenthood, homeschooling, agrarianism, distributism and Christian democracy, White separatism, or an exceptionally high view of Western civilization.”
Spiritual Sounding Board 
On the other hand criticizing how another deals with their own pain seems counterproductive to creating a safe space for all survivors. I hurt when I read about Leslie’s family situation. Again, I feel another poster was quite dismissive and told her to widen her scope. ”
I think there might be different standards as I thought the commenters here have been very irenic in explaining their reasons.
One problem is that there has been a history of sock puppets in that movement who try to “limit the scope” of inquiry through shaming, calling it gossip, using victim language, etc. It is hard to know what is real and what isn’t. The entire movement is smoke and mirrors. So the question boils down to why would someone want to limit the scope of inquiry concerning abuse? I can promise you the last thing I want to do is pick sides in the Patriarchy/Domionist/Reconstructionist movement. I would like for it all to be outed.
Why would someone who is concerned about the abuse of DP teachings in her own family be upset when the scope is also concern about Kinism, patriarchy, etc from the side going after DP that has a history of reconstructionism/dominionism? Color me confused.
LikeLike
Look, I can say this until the cows come home:
I care. I love. I’ve never experienced it. I am learning. I don’t know. I hate wrong & love right.
But if I repeatedly ask Julie Anne to stop bringing this Kinism topic up, tell her to focus on something else, tell her she’s snarky, telling her she’s infighting then…
Do my words add up?
LikeLike
A Mom and TIA:
I think I see what is going on and both of you have valid points because you both are coming from different places of understanding. I do think that TIA generally is trying to gain understanding, yet sometimes the way it is phrased, it seems to be challenging what I’m doing. I’m okay with that and it does not offend me in the least. I know where I’m going with my posts and it is for a purpose. I know it will rock some boats and I might lose some people. My challenge to TIA is to stick around, test the waters and look at the fruit.
I also want to try to have a balance and gently challenge those who may not see things the way we see them, yet be careful about not pushing too hard. Sometimes it takes time. That’s what makes this place very unique and sometimes difficult.
Please be patient with each other. I’d rather err on too much grace. 🙂
LikeLike
“So the question boils down to why would someone want to limit the scope of inquiry concerning abuse? I can promise you the last thing I want to do is pick sides in the Patriarchy/Domionist/Reconstructionist movement. I would like for it all to be outed.
Why would someone who is concerned about the abuse of DP teachings in her own family be upset when the scope is also concern about Kinism, patriarchy, etc from the side going after DP that has a history of reconstructionism/dominionism? Color me confused.”
Exactly! Something smells fishy here and it isn’t the sharks. Or is it? Is this a case of sharks swimming about here in dolphins’ clothing? I’m confused as well.
LikeLike
“Look, I can say this until the cows come home:
I care. I love. I’ve never experienced it. I am learning. I don’t know. I hate wrong & love right.
But if I repeatedly ask Julie Anne to stop bringing this Kinism topic up, tell her to focus on something else, tell her she’s snarky, telling her she’s infighting then…
Do my words add up?”
Exactly A Mom!!!!
As a black Christian woman it is disconcerting to hear other Christians dismiss kinism as something that should be ignored in favor of other things. Kinism is just as bad if not worse than patriarchy. I wonder if those saying this would feel different if the hatred in the name of Jesus was directed toward them?
If T.W. Eston is Peter Kershaw he is not better than Doug Phillips they are two sides of the same coin, and the infighting is really between Kerhsaw/Eston and Phillips with Spiritual Sounding Board being the Christian blog seeking to expose them both. Not an easy position to be in! Thank God for JA and her tireless commitment to truth!
LikeLike
” If people have evidence that support the title of this blog post, then I would like to know about it.”
It depends on what you call evidence. if you are waiting for TW to admit who he is, good luck. It could be the evidence that comes from connecting dots over many years which would mean people who are new to the subject matter would not see it.
There are people who think it is a sin to question or make those dots they connected public without specific hard evidence that TW is not about to make available.
I don’t agree with that because I know how the game is played. That game plays right into the hands of the abusers.
It is ok for people to hold different views. This is JA’s blog and she can decide how she proceeds. I am just grateful she lets me comment!
LikeLike
A Mom: We must have been commenting at the same time.
I’m not going to stop bringing up Kinism or Reconstructionism or Patriarchy or anything that I view as abusive and tears families apart. As long as I have this platform, I will use it. I’m so thankful for those of you who stand with me in this. Our voices can and should be powerful to knock this garbage down.
LikeLike
“Exactly! Something smells fishy here and it isn’t the sharks. Or is it? Is this a case of sharks swimming about here in dolphins’ clothing? I’m confused as well.”
A mom, one of the reasons I cannot even stand to out that movement is because years back it became obvious over time they are able to convince many to play sock puppet in order to plant seeds around. It is total mind games and brings chaos to both sides. The goal is to divide and conquer. As far as I am concerned, JA is not only brave but has her hands full.
On another note:
One can never be sure what is real or what is a strategic tactic. And this problem is all over the place from Ligonier to Sproul Jr to Doug Wilson to Doug Phillips to Scott Brown to Mohler,, etc, etc. Back when Ligonier sued “Frank Vance”, James Duncan was actually running the place as General Manager. He is Ligon Duncan’s brother. You know, of T4G fame with Mahaney/Mohler/Dever? Then Piper hooks up with Wilson and makes him a darling of the TGC crowd.
It is like the Kevin Bacon game when you get started. One dot connects to another and so on. Creepy. The whole Reformed enchilada has connections that are strange as they all have more in common with each other than not.
LikeLike
Taunya,
I am not a black woman. But I am a Christian woman. And homeschool mom. And I DO know what it means to follow Jesus. Moreover, you don’t have to follow Jesus to know racism is wrong. I have nonchristian friends who know better. Now that’s pathetic.
This word kinist. Sounds like a fancied-up acceptable christianese word for racist. We’ll it’s not acceptable to me, I don’t care what it’s called.
LikeLike
As someone who gave a lot of money to many of these organizations associated with Rushdoony, what they teach is of great importance. As I’ve stated before on this site, the learning curve is wicked, and these affiliations are not well known unless you read nearly everything and read the materials of the people with whom they are affiliated. For me, it all started with the then “tax payer’s party” (now Constitution Party) in the early ’90s, and we started supporting Gary DeMar’s American Vision at about the same time. Through these two groups, we started giving money to Chalcedon which I understood in the beginning as thoughtful Presbyterians who were interested in good Christian stewardship in terms of government from what I thought was a libertarian perspective. We also then learned of the League of the South which billed itself as a Christian organization. This appealed to my husband who studied history at Virginia Tech where he was indoctrinated with a lot of Confederate Ideology (which I also thought was more libertarian at the time). Through Ligonier, we started giving to Sproul, Jr, too.
Years later, after a lot of money was given to these groups, Doug Phillips comes on the scene, and the people who my husband and I supported started supporting him. Round about 2000, though my husband hung on, I stopped having anything to do with the Constitution Party because of what I’d learned about Doug when I attended Grace OPC in San Antonio which was his church of record at the time. (Many VF people in my own church were my peers who left when Doug started BCA. And I called them cultic then.) In 2002, my husband took me to a League of the South meeting to learn about the philosophy of history which turned out to be a discussion of Calhoon’s writings. It was odd because no one discussed the context and impetus for those writings which were entirely centered around slavery. There were just odd, pregnant silences when certain types of people (those unworthy of citizenship without delineating why). I had to backtrack to read more about Calhoon later to understand the context. We also had Sanders’ materials about our house, and some Einwechter’s as well. If you pick up a given Rushdoony book, printed before 2007, there’s a very good chance that my name is in the acknowledgement in the front, featured right there with Doug’s name. We also gave money to Steve Schlissel.
in 2004, Howard Phillips whom I’d met and talked with many times personally decided not to run on the Constitution Party ticket. He ran Michael Peroutka instead, and his platform read nearly exactly like Vision Forum’s website. This was enough to convince my husband to abandon the Constitution Party, in conjunction with other changes post Y2K. In 2007, I looked more closely at Perouka who at the time spoke nearly every year at the League of the South from which the Constitution Party drew significant support. I have a photo of him standing under the Confederate Flag in a speech wherein he referred and pointed to that flag many times, calling it our nation’s true flag. I then learned that the LoS officially went on record as being a kinist organization. I had to learn about Kinism, plus the fact that there were many churches and a few defacto denominations that were centered around homeschooling, sectors of which had become very abusive, spiritually and otherwise.
Gary Demar’s journal was no longer that — but a big advertisement for Phillips, and it couldn’t be saved by Joe Taylor’s fine artwork which was often featured in it as well. We then talked with Gary’s very young and fairly new VP when they came through our area, and he acted like 100% Vision Forum — even asking me to ask if my husband approved of my opinion about VF to which the guy took offense. (He assumed that I was not in submission which he promptly learned was not the case.) If you look back at their original mission statement online on the archive, it is entirely different from what appears there today. He got pulled into much of this homeschooling/family as a religion mess, too. I also had to do quite a bit of reading over time to figure out that he was a co-author on a book with Gary North.
If I had known in 1992 what I learned after years and years of reading, study, and giving a lot of money over time, I would have never given a dime to any of these people. The only group that I don’t feel too bad about was Ligonier, though we also stopped supporting them, too.
Indirectly, I helped create and support the organizations that created and supported Phillips. I indirectly and without informed consent helped to create the Quivering Daughter. I ended up going to a “racialist” meeting, and I learned after the fact that by that time, they had declared themselves a kinist organization — back when I didn’t even know what kinism was. I aided and abetted these folks — though I think kinism is perhaps one of the most repugnant things one could imagine. And a few months ago on this blog, I learned that Rushdoony himself would consider me to be a “new racist.” ???
I have also offered moral support and action to people mentioned here that, if I had known that they were remotely connected to anything like the family integrated church, VF’s “vision of family,” and particularly the racism/racialist issue, I would have had absolutely nothing to do with them, and I would have never given any of them a dime.
This information about kinism and who is affiliated with whom is vitally important to me. What people believe and what I gave money to promote is very important — and I believe that I will stand before God and will give account for it. That’s why I’ve endeavored so hard to expose the unpleasantries about it all. And it was also important for me to figure out my own political affiliations, as these things are all one big ball of the same for people in theonomy — the well-funded influence behind the religious right. And they are more interested today in a top down authoritarianism version of theocracy than they are in a conservative libertarian approach to good Christian stewardship in government.
Kinism is a repugnant, miserable thing.
LikeLike
“Moreover, you don’t have to follow Jesus to know racism is wrong. I have nonchristian friends who know better. Now that’s pathetic.”
To be clear, it’s not the nonchristian friends who are pathetic. It’s an indictment on those who call themselves christians but don’t do as the good Samaritan in Jesus’ parable.
LikeLike
Boy, we Christians really want everything to be nice and neat and tidy. So did Vision Forum, striving for the “normative.” Smiling children and photo shopped photo ops were constantly featured on everything, with girls always in pretty dresses and wives carting around a baby on their hip. And don’t forget pictures of Calvinism’s VIPs the statue of John Knox which used to be for sale on VF’s website. Christians like to think of themselves as nice people who don’t really make waves. Talk about only doctrinal problems, and don’t get personal.
This is black and white thinking, folks. We want it to be easy and neat and tidy. But like most things having to do with real people in real life, there is nothing messier.
Phillips basically took Rushdoony’s Theonomy and melded it with Bill Gothard’s ideology, and Botkin brought in some morsels from his years of following McCotter’s Great Commission group. Theonomy is focused on Christian Reconstruction and dominion, so we also have the flag waving and nationalism and worship of the traditional family which was all blended together to make an aberrant folk religion. It was definitely far from black and white. Add to that Phillips horrible business practices and hijacking of intellectual property Definitely not black and white. He caused a parting of the ranks among lovers of RL Dabney, his prophet, because of kinism, and kinists helped Jen find a platform.
Look back to just one of the elements of Phillips’ system to see how messy it is — far from neat and tidy. The VP came here, presumably, to lend support to Joe Taylor. That was definitely not a black and white matter. And when asked hard questions about the messy elements of racism, racialism, and things like a preoccupation with stoning and the like, I think that it’s crystal clear that Theonomy is quite messy on it’s own — a gross understatement, IMO.
We generally get caught up in spiritual abuse because we are looking for neat and clean and hope to avoid the messiness that comes along with being human. And some of us are very human. In many ways, the abuses discussed here on this site have come about because people ignored the messy underbelly for far too long. It is this very endeavor — looking at the world in terms of all or nothing/black or white that sets us up for spiritual abuse.
LikeLike
Thank you, Cindy. That’s exactly what I was alluding to earlier and what I’d like to challenge TIA and others to explore. Doug Phillips did not just come out of nowhere. We must look at the primary influencers of these people to get to the root. I’m not done talking Reconstructionism here. And I do not believe it was a mere coincidence that the VP of Chalcedon, Martin Selbrede, just happened upon my blog to inform us of an article on spiritual abuse. No way, José.
LikeLike
Julie Anne,
Thanks for your comment at January 28, 2014 @ 11:40 AM.
lydiasellerofpurple,
“It depends on what you call evidence. if you are waiting for TW to admit who he is, good luck. It could be the evidence that comes from connecting dots over many years which would mean people who are new to the subject matter would not see it.”
The second half of the last sentence is where I’m at. Some of you may be very familiar with all of this, but I’m new to it and still trying to sort everything out.
A Mom,
Sorry, maybe I’ll just sit back and “listen” for a while.
LikeLike
TIA – The first time I started researching Reconstructionism was after we went to a Reconstructionist church in 2001- – they didn’t call it “Reconstructionist”, though, but the materials they gave my husband to read (not me – – hmm, wonder why – – -but I snagged those books) were clearly Reconstructionist.
I had at that point labeled Gary North as Reconstructionist, the guy who created such a hype among Christians about Y2K. That Y2K gig left such a sour taste in my mouth – – that a “Christian” man could lead so many people by using fear. I heard of many who quit their jobs, sold their homes, and went to the hills to live in communities and live off the grid in preparation for the “end of life as we know it.”. This stuff is scary. The same thing has happened with Phillips – – – whole families have uprooted from all over the States to be with that guru.
We must look at what is beneath the surface. These are very powerful people.
Actually, if truth be known, they are really all weak men who use their assumed position of power to control, intimidate and abuse.
And as far as I’m concerned, Eston is part of this. He needs to come clean and quit being a wuss and hiding behind the ridiculous pseudonym. I am fed up with it.
LikeLike
I now know why this name sounded vaguely familiar. Thank you, whoever it was upthread that mentioned Sproul Jr.’s defrocking. I’d previously read the documents Kershaw posted at hushmoney (which were official, i.e. from the denomination and not written by Kershaw, if I recall correctly) about the defrocking, without any knowledge of who Kershaw was. So in light of the info presented upthread about Kershaw, I guess multiple parties involved in the defrocking were crooks, and not just Sproul Jr. Frankly I’m beginning to think that quite literally everyone in patriarchy is a crook somehow.
As for Kershaw being Eston, note that the phrase “ecclesiastical tyranny and spiritual abuse” appears on the hushmoney site in one of the section headers about halfway down the page. Almost identical wording to Jen’s Gems.
LikeLike
@ Julie Anne:
Kinda like Jim Jones and the People’s Temple (and that didn’t end well either). But I bet they’d resent that comparison big time.
LikeLike
More info on Peter Kershaw aka TW Eston aka Frank Vance:
http://bit.ly/1evCUW2 (Kinist duo Peter Kershaw / Harry Seabrook called out)
http://bit.ly/1hJWiSE (Kinist duo Peter Kershaw / Harry Seabrook called out)
http://bit.ly/1dLJabk (Peter Kershaw as Frank Vance skirting the kinism charge)
http://bit.ly/1neYy8E (Peter Kershaw defending kinist Harry Seabrook)
http://bit.ly/1aFI9qU (Anti-Defamation League Calling out racist Harry Seabrook)
http://bit.ly/1b5wSe9 (Sproul Jr. declaring Seabrook a racist)
http://bit.ly/1f9BcLN (Peter Kershaw attacking Sproul Jr.)
http://bit.ly/1f9knSt (Jen Fishburne promoting & defending Peter Kershaw)
This is an open and shut case here…
Jen could end this by telling us TW Eston is not Peter Kershaw.
TW Eston could end this by denouncing kinism and denying any involvement in the kinist movement.
LikeLike
TW Eston as a pseudonym could denounce and deny, but would the real Peter Kershaw?
LikeLike
Ok, as if my life was boring and I have nothing to read. It looks like Watchman has provided lots of reading material. Thanks, Watchman!
Just a heads up- – I’m just about to leave to my PT appt which is 1-1/2 hr drive away, so I’ll try to sneak a peak at my phone every now and then (when it’s safe) to make sure nothing is stuck in moderation.
LikeLike
JA, I have heard of some of the names mentioned (Gary North, Gary DeMar, etc.). Could you please point me to information that explains what the problems are with Reconstructionism, Theonomy, etc. I can see that Kinism is wrong from the little bit I’ve read, but I’m obviously not as familiar as some about some of these other topics. In the past I have experienced only hearing one side of a story and having that side misrepresent what the other side actually says. Thanks.
LikeLike
I’m learning all kinds of things here. I’ve known for a long time that there are men who want to be followed, who have some need to control other peoples’ lives. I just never knew the extent of it.
LikeLike
“The second half of the last sentence is where I’m at. Some of you may be very familiar with all of this, but I’m new to it and still trying to sort everything out.” TIA
Nope. I had not even heard of Jen’s blog until JA brought up DP & VF. I’m that new to it. We are in the same boat learning together, it appears. We seem to be paddling in opposite directions.
And thank God I’m new to it, without the regrets Cindy has shared (it was very helpful, thanks Cindy). Although I have also supported Ligonier in the past & stopped because I don’t believe in a puppet-master God. Being new to DP, VF, kinism, etc. is a blessing of sorts. But not an excuse to sit silent once we know about it.
LikeLike
Jen Epstein, now Fishburne, was married/divorced to Larry Siegle who is a Full Preterist:
http://preterist.wordpress.com/about/
“Full preterism differs from partial preterism in that full preterists believe that all eschatology or “end times” events were fulfilled with the destruction of Jerusalem, including the resurrection of the dead and Jesus’ Second Coming, or Parousia, and the Final Judgment.[46][page needed] Full preterism is also known by several other names: preterism (because the term itself means “past”), consistent preterism, true preterism, hyper-preterism (a pejorative term used by opponents of preterists) . . .”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preterism
Jen is saying that Patriarchy is a false teaching that she wants to expose, BUT she herself is into something that is in need of exposure as a false teaching as well. She looks like she went from the frying pan into the fire!
LikeLike
@ pamp09:
1. I knew about this doctrine before, but now I’m curious: how does this work out in practicality? Obviously full preterists themselves missed out on the resurrection (unless they think they’re all actually glorified resurrected saints). Where have all these glorified people been hiding for the past two millennia? And Jesus, for that matter? This fails the “duh” test on so many levels.
2. Do you have a citation/reference for Jen Epstein being a full preterist, other than her ex’s site? I’m curious where you got this as I never heard her mention anything like that, but then again I haven’t read much on her site beyond the BCA story and some of the initial posts after Doug’s affair went public.
LikeLike
I have it from the horse’s mouth in an email she sent me. Unless she makes it private in the future, you can go under her FB account to her Groups to see.
LikeLike
TIA,
Concerning problems with Theonomy and Reconstructionism, I think that the comments on this thread were quite revealing regarding the worst things about theonomy, though they exceed 400… https://spiritualsoundingboard.com/2013/11/21/chalcedon-foundation-privately-donated-funds-to-joe-taylor-to-help-his-legal-defense-against-doug-phillips/
Theonomy is basically a subdivision of Covenant Theology, usually followed by Presbyterians and Reformed Baptists. My grave mistake in the beginning was the assumption that theonomy was just about standard Presbyterianism which I thought could be summed up rather simply by Calvinism along with a pre-Darby view of eschatology/end times interpretation. It’s not.
By definition, theonomy is a theology that sees the Bible as sufficient for any human need or dilemma that we might face, and we don’t need any other source of this kind of wisdom. “Theo” is God and “nomos” is law, meaning “God’s Law.” Specifically, it’s goal is that of taking dominion over the earth for Christ from a grass roots evangelism approach, but the endpoint and specific interest of study is making our civil government’s laws consistent with the Bible. This became important to many in the 70s when Christians realized that the government was changing, and many people — both Covenant Theologians and Dispensationalists — joined together in the Christian Reconstruction effort. Jerry Falwell spearheaded the Moral Majority, and he was very much against Covenant Theology as a died in the wool dispensationalist.
Theonomy packaged up Rushdoony’s beliefs about both government and theology rather neatly into one discipline, sometimes deviating from Covenant Theology and your standard Presbyterian because of this civil government focus. Rushdoony said that he would be happy if we only had ten laws, but the long-term goal is that we would essentially end up living under an Old Testament system after the whole society became Christian when people decided to turn to God. That’s supposed to happen progressively, and part of our work as Christians is supposed to see this come to pass. Since Y2K and through other folks like Gary North, the whole movement has taken on a much more top-down takeover idea about government and the Christian’s role. It’s anything but a grass roots approach and interest. Rushdoony did not live on a compound and didn’t want to make this country a theocracy and was something of a conservative libertarian. The fellows in charge now or who are well known today since Rushdoony’s last years and death are definitely more theocracy minded and are far more aggressive. These are the types that went out and borrowed money and moved to the wilderness and bought guns and ammo, planning to take over the world. And don’t forget the wheat berries. That became a real sign of holiness.
Covenant Theology does not specifically identify the eventual establishment of a theocracy as a goal. Theonomy does which is why they talk about stoning different groups of people as capital punishment. Other specifics that are associated with it are some other ideas. Because they are so beholden to the Old Testament, there is what becomes a working their way back to Eden so that they can be the new Adams. I’ve explained by saying that Jesus is just a catalyst that gives them a chance to be better Adams. (Some of this is very evident in the Federal Vision writings.) There are some fine choice quotes from Greg Bahnsen that say as much. Bahnsen was a theonomist and a well-known presuppositional apologist who followed the school of Cornelius Van Til. He died in the mid-nineties after a heart attack at a pretty young age (40s? 45 years old?).
The ugly underbelly of theonomy, if you agree with covenant theology in general, includes this issue of race identification because of the strong ties to the Old Testament and who Israel is. By today’s standards and outside of a Presbyterian belief system, it does sound racist. Rushdoony was also born in 1915, and he had ideas that were rather antiquated. I think that influenced his ideas about interracial marriage when he was young. During his last 20 years of life, I don’t think that he cared about this. He did deny the Jewish Holocaust, but I think that had to do with his Armenian background and his family that withstood generations of genocide there that has gone formally unrecognized. But that, I suspect, is also partially tied to the replacement theology stuff, too.
Rush also encouraged people to draw arguments for the decentralization of government from the Confederate Presbyterian writings which also focused on gender (no voting, etc.) and advocated for homeschooling. What Phillips and many like him did was take these writings of these old Presby ministers, and they made their own religion out of them. They also focused on issues of the Confederacy, so though it happened 150 years ago, they still harp about how awful Lincoln was and how some type of slavery will fix our economy. Many of them are very racist and misogynous in my opinion. Dabney says that it’s sinful to teach a black man to read, for example. Palmer says that a woman’s personality is absorbed into her husband’s at marriage, as if Adam is taking back his rib.
What has come out of theonomy in recent years is what I call spiritual eugenics or survival of the spiritually fittest. The “elect” are seen as better than everyone else, so there is no duty to be kind or loving to people outside of their “new Israel.” If bad things befall others, it’s because God hates them and this is merited. You will find this in Rushdoony’s writings in theory, but I don’t believe that he ever made it personal. He still followed “love thy neighbor.” The people who are known for theonomy now are mostly known for benchmarking themselves against others and they are better. God loves to see the heathen die.
LikeLike
I thought Jen’s ex-husband was Mark Epstein? Was she also married/divorced from Larry Siegle? Is Siegle her new husband?
LikeLike
TIA,
Hester’s got a lot of really good stuff on her site about Phillips teachings which don’t represent what theonomy was originally, but it’s also a good place to get an idea about how Phillips and cadre lived out their version of theonomy.
LikeLike
TIA,
If you go to my blog and look at the tab about how to navigate, there’s a section called Specific Problems Assoc with the Patriarchy Movement. There’s a ton of stuff there.
Hester’s blog is here:
http://scarletlettersblog.wordpress.com/
LikeLike
Taunya, There used to be a video up on YouTube, not too long ago that showed her being married to Siegle. It’s gone now. They were married by Don Preston who is a Full Preterist.
There is still a caption present:
by MrDonPreston • 357 views
I was deeply honored to be asked to perform the wedding ceremony for Larry Siegle and Jen Fishburne. Larry asked that I post the video for all to share in their joy!
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:CWZQu1bnpeMJ:www.youtube.com/all_comments%3Fthreaded%3D1%26v%3DeBNRfbgrJho+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
Jen and Larry are now divorced. Yes, she was married to Mark E. prior to Larry.
LikeLike
Hester,
About that preterism business, it runs the gambit.
I was under the impression that most full on preterists were amillennial, seeing it as a more figurative thing. It’s been my experience that most partial-preterists are postmillennial. It’s the post-millennial Second Coming folks who tend to be the hard core dominionists.
Some believe that Christ will return after there is round about 1000 years of peace and Christian sociecy. Some believe that it’s just many years of good society and that it’s not a literal 1000 years or that formal of a thing. As many ways as you could splice it, there are probably that many different interpretations.
Jocelyn Andersen says that I’m a “pan-millennialist.” I’m waiting to see how it all pans out. 🙂
Considering that no one believed in a premil, pretrib rapture before Darby came on the scene in the 19th Century, I lean towards partial preterism. But I almost don’t care. I guess that I’ve just taken care of too many people who set out to have a normal day and ended up in the ICU, and it brings home the idea that we have no guarantees that we will live out the day. I’ve found that it made eschatology a whole lot less important to me, and personally, I have enough stuff to work on in the short term.
LikeLike
Cindy K wrote, “Because they are so beholden to the Old Testament, there is what becomes a working their way back to Eden so that they can be the new Adams. I’ve explained by saying that Jesus is just a catalyst that gives them a chance to be better Adams.”
A former pastor often referred to Jesus (in sermons) as the “second Adam”. This bothered me because he could have just as easily said “LAST (eschatos) Adam” as Paul did in I Cor 15. Maybe I’m picky, but I think there’s a difference between “second” and “last” and a difference between “man” and “Adam”.
This pastor follows Covenant Theology but not, that I know of, Federal Vision or Theonomy. Long story short– have you seen any of these latter fellows use this “second Adam” phrase?
LikeLike
Pamp09 thanks for the clarification. Keeping the relationships between all of these people straight is so difficult!
LikeLike
@Taunya @Hester – See the quote from Jen below – http://on.fb.me/1dMdyCs
“I am telling people that the Bible is ABOUT, TO, and FOR Israel. That it has nothing to do with US today.
The Second Coming was in AD70 and had to do with the Jews in Jerusalem.
There is no hell.
There is no Satan.
There is no salvation.
There is no sin.
There is no church.
The creation story was about the land of Israel.
The flood was local.
There is no faith.
There is no way to get into the kingdom today.
We are not the “bride” of Christ.
Jesus and Israel got married in AD70 and had millions of kids — us.
And plenty more, but I won’t bore you with the details.
I am just trying to get people to THINK!
God = LOVE. God is a spirit. That spirit IS LOVE.”
———————————————————————————-
Wikipedia description of Full or “Hyper” preterism – http://bit.ly/MrW3SL
Jen discussing preterism with Larry Siegle – http://on.fb.me/1fuDh5m
Article on full preterism by Jen and Larry Siegle – http://on.fb.me/1cs7Mdo
Why the view is considered outside Christian Orthodoxy – http://bit.ly/1bwL93b
I hope this helps you understand where Jen is coming from. I’m grateful that she is open and doesn’t try to hide her views like her partner TW Eston / Peter Kershaw.
LikeLike
Back to JA’s post title– I’m still not fully convinced by what I’ve seen that TW is (present tense) a kinist. He said this morning that some of his best friends are interracial couples. (Yeah, I know what y’all are thinkin.) A couple years ago he flatly denied ever having been Christian Identity, and explained that speaking at one of their gatherings in ’98 would not constitute an endorsement of their ideologies. So has anyone seen something I’ve missed? Some quote from him which uses the terminology of or promotes kinism? For example, if he said DP shouldn’t have hugged Haitian children, or that RC2 shouldn’t have adopted a child of a different race. Recent quotes would be better, since his views may have changed. Thanks.
(This comment is not to be understood as an endorsement of any of the views or personalities mentioned therein. Suffice it to say, do not trust anything Dave A A says on this blog 😉 😉 )
LikeLike
Dave since TW Eston is not his name it is really hard to find quotes from him. If he is Peter Kershaw than it is easy to show the tie with kinism but TW Eston is a pseudonym. How do you find quotes from some one who does not exist? He created “TW Eston” to out DP I doubt he wants that particular pseudonym to be associated with kinism. He is also thought to use the name Frank Vance. That name as well can easily be tied to kinism.
LikeLike
Cindy, Great comments! Thanks for taking us through your experience. I had a similar experience of long term connecting the dots in the seeker mega world. I wish someone would have warned me what it was really about.
It all goes back to what someone said earlier about following man instead of Christ. I came to the conclusion all true believers have anointing (1 John) and just because one has a Christianese title does not mean they automatically have more. :o)
LikeLike
@Dave A A – “A couple years ago he flatly denied ever having been Christian Identity, and explained that speaking at one of their gatherings in ’98 would not constitute an endorsement of their ideologies.”
Where is this quote from a couple of years ago?
LikeLike
Dave, I hear references all the time about “Second Adam” from the YRR crowd.
LikeLike
JA, This post has really educated me about all the behind the scenes action. I am learning from a lot of people who add to the conversation. I especially appreciate the posters who add to the debate and are helping others catch up to how secretive, yet widespread this movement is. One way people try to gain power and control is by demonizing the “other” (whether it is by race, gender or religious beliefs). This scapegoating others has been around for a long time, but thank God we live in a country that allows us to speak out. I have lived in countries (the former USSR and Cuba) where the people had no voice. I couldn’t find a private way to reach you JA, but I am struggling with how one of your regular posters continue to disregard the posters she doesn’t agree with and at times twists their words to set up a straw man to attack. I have not seen anyone disagree with how heinous this Kinist group is, I just see people trying to get up to speed. She continues to diminish the value others add to the discussion and then “corrects” their attitude. She may be a dear friend to you, but please, when you have time (not that you do :-)), review some of the responses and see the pattern that has been established. I wish I could have done this privately and if you see this before it is posted, you don’t have to make it public.
Your are one strong woman! Ann
LikeLike
Dave AA,
About the second Adam (which seems to rhetorically imply more, if you look at it that way) –
I don’t really remember if I heard or read any of these terms being used, It doesn’t stick out in my mind. What I do remember is that people rarely used the word “Jesus,” even when it seemed more appropriate to say instead of something else like “Christ” or “Lord.” (Like the didn’t even really want to say His Name which did always bother me. I never heard “savior” used much if at all, either.) The other issue is that during this time, I heard/read what I wanted to hear, so there were many things that I missed. I could read a document and have my idea about what it meant, but as was elucidated in that aformentioned thread here where Martin Selbrede appeared, what I thought was being conveyed was not often what was meant in light of their theology. I had to go back later to study the theology as a whole.
It’s an interesting question, though. It just always struck me about what I called the Uber Adam in these Theonomy focused circles — not directly in those terms but in the focus of how everyone wanted to get back to the pure heart of the faith (that which seemed to me to be more identified with Adam than with Jesus). They’re Abraham’s real seed, probably better than Isaac was. Weird stuff. Especially that James Jordan psychedelic stuff.
LikeLike
According to his FB profile “TW Eston” is named Tim Weston.
See his FB profile url – http://www.facebook.com/tim.weston.756
The strange thing is even though Jen says she and TW go way way back on FB, you can clearly see that Jen and “Tim Weston” have only been friends on FB since Nov. – http://bit.ly/1d6Rfav
LikeLike
Oh Lydia!
I went back and read what I’d written… In addition to this low grade fever I have, this stuff is still frustrating and somewhat painful to revisit for me. I wish now I had written it out and proofed it first. Glad that it made sense.
When I set out on my tour through all of this stuff, I had no idea of what to expect. I often tell people that as a Pentecostal, I learned little church history. I went from the close of the canon to John Hus, then Martin Luther, then Foxe’s Book of Martyrs. From there, I heard nothing about church history until Smith Wigglesworth came on the scene, basically. I was taught to focus on Scripture and exegesis, and from the Word studied using good hermeneutics, the Spirit would guide me into truth.
This Presby/Theonomy tour was very different. To really get a handle on a great deal of it, you have to stop and read their venerated theologians to understand all of the nuances. It was always about studying this person or that, or this document or that. I was once asked by a lovely couple that i would have liked to have spent social time with to study the Westminster Confession with them. Though I know that it is rich in Scripture, I declined out of the conviction that I needed to focus on the Word itself in its context.
Calvin and Knox are venerated, and you’re something of a heretic if you don’t agree with them or find their writings to be effectively canonical. This is far different for me from looking at an academic theologian to consider what they write. You have to read and understand and put into perspective Pink and Kuyper and Vos and Gill and a handful of others. Switching from Dispensationalism, I thought that I was just accommodating my change in ideas about human agency (and I was already half undecided about eschatology anyway). Even in understanding the basics, it is not just enough to understand the framework — and you can’t just read Calvin, either. It’s like some kind of club of people who are out to prove that they are erudite, and you have to pay your dues in time and effort. If you can’t offer a three sentence summary of Bavnick and Kuyper, or you’re not a student of John Gil, you aren’t worthy. And then, there is this love affair with systematic theology, above and beyond Scripture. God forbid that you don’t agree with these greats or if you don’t get into systematics! You’re instantly an antinomian and practically heretical!
LikeLike
Ann,
JA’s email is under the above menu tab: About Julie Anne. :o)
LikeLike
Cindy, All that sounds very familiar. I saw the same focus of reading the great dead guys and reverence of ST when reading the YRR debate the Trads on SBC pastor blogs. A black hole of misery and circular pseudo intellectualism. And besides that, church history is pretty much an evil bloody mess! (hanging head in shame)
Funny how names come up. Bavnick…now there is a name blog threads of comments concerning his views on Pelagius and the Council of Orange. :o) So then it becomes an argument of what really happened in history.
I started to think Pelagius got a bad rap.
LikeLike
“One way people try to gain power and control is by demonizing the “other” (whether it is by race, gender or religious beliefs). This scapegoating others has been around for a long time, but thank God we live in a country that allows us to speak out. I have lived in countries (the former USSR and Cuba) where the people had no voice. I couldn’t find a private way to reach you JA, but I am struggling with how one of your regular posters continue to disregard the posters she doesn’t agree with and at times twists their words to set up a straw man to attack.”
Ann, I am absolutely fine with being accused of demonizing racism. If your demonizing accusation is about something else, please be specific.
You say you’re thankful we all can speak out. Are you sure that’s your message to JA?
Please be specific on which words I have twisted so I can understand.
LikeLike
@ Watchman & pamp09:
Whoa.
Okay, we can argue about a local flood but the rest of that…truck, please back up. Waaaaaay up.
There is no sin? What does she think Doug was doing when he had a years-long affair, then? Why is she blogging about spiritual abuse and ecclesiastical tyranny if she thinks there’s no such thing as sin?
Once again, what are the practical, real-life, on-the-ground consequences of there being no salvation, no church, no faith, and no way to get into the kingdom? Forget Doug, why should I give a flying flip about Christianity at all? Were us poor Gentiles just screwed from the get-go and Paul wrote all the epistles for the lolz?
And I suppose she doesn’t realize that if she replaced Jesus with God the Father, and Israel with “Heavenly Mother,” that the idea of them having “millions of kids” would be textbook Mormonism.
This certainly gives a whole meaning to the phrase “Jen’s Gems.”
LikeLike
Cindy K,
Regarding your 6:34 comment, yes!
It made me laugh again to think about it. And wonder just how did the criminal on the cross next to Jesus enter into Paradise! 🙂
LikeLike
@ Cindy:
I did know that preterists were amillennial. I suppose I was thinking more along the lines of, what’s the practical usefulness of Christianity in full preterist theology if the Second Coming already happened?
Also, didn’t Sproul Sr. become a partial preterist a few years back? Or am I remembering someone else?
LikeLike
“Also, didn’t Sproul Sr. become a partial preterist a few years back? Or am I remembering someone else?”
I think I remember Wade Burleson saying he was a partial preterist.
LikeLike
I haven’t read every single comment, so hopefully this isn’t repetitive…http://whynottrainachild.com/articles/vision-forum/
(Scroll down about 75% of the way down to see a comment by Jen). I came across this quite by accident while looking around for other information…found it interesting because I had just seen some of the comments on this thread earlier in the day.
Mod ed: Here is direct link.
LikeLike
Hester,
Sproul used to be a standard amillennialist, but my husband went to his Orlando conference the year that he announced it, and Sproul Sr announced that he’d become a partial preterist after reading one of Ken Gentry’s books. Back in the late ’90s.
LikeLike
J.A. So, I might have had a knee jerk response to Ann when I responded to her comment this morning. I am willing to give her the benefit of doubt. Not 100% sure if she was referring to me when she said:”I think one of your posters misunderstood me, I do think people should be informed, I just didn’t understand the background dynamics of the situation.”
J.A. said:. I’m also very aware that some people who visit may have been through difficult church experiences and may be in different stages of recovery.
I understand J.A. that you are swamped, and cannot read all the comments, but I don’t just visit here, I have been here for a few years albeit very quietly.
Ann, (from Gail aka as scaredJanuary 27, 2014 @ 9:48 AM)
From my perspective J.A. is not being snarky. For goodness sakes after being fooled once by big celebrity men & their doctrines, I appreciate knowing where a person is coming from. If this is true and T.W. is a KINIST then, Ann, don’t you think those us who have been spiritually abused have the right to this information? I need to know who is safe, and to run quickly away from this twisted take on our Holy God.
All that to say, I am getting a mind blowing education. Thank-you, Lydia. J.A. & Gary W. and many others. Not going anywhere near Jens Gems.
LikeLike
Mod note: You guys have been busy. I took quite a few comments out of moderation, but haven’t read them. I’ll try to catch up now. 🙂
LikeLike
TIA: You can see other posts I have done on Reconstructionist Movement here: https://spiritualsoundingboard.com/category/organizations-movements/reconstructionist-dominion-movement/
It really is important to understand what this movement is about because it explains what fuels these guys. It makes sense why they want to infiltrate all sectors of society (politics, entertainment, etc).
LikeLike
I suspect this post is just the tip of the iceberg and that Julie Anne will have more to come in the days ahead. Already many people are contributing what they know & have been through to help the rest of us get up to speed on all the connections, entanglements, backbiting infighting, history, doctrine, etc.
Thank the Lord there are the kindhearted who will speak up to warn, protect, and defend.
I have never heard or seen anything like this. There will be detractors. It is very dark & troubling.
LikeLike
Bystander – Sometimes when I go researching I realize how little I know – it keeps going and going and going
LikeLike
Cindy, thanks much for your great comment.
This is just plain creepy.
Take note of this paragraph folks. It always sounds “more better” (ha) when Cindy writes it. This is exactly what I was talking to my friend, Michelle, about today. I think among this group is the common denominator of Reconstructionism, and then there are elite branches of ideology and men trying to get themselves into the most “pure” group which means dissing everyone else; hence, the one-upmanship and non-stop battles between the elite leaders. This group is a power hungry group, but not all can be at the top.
LikeLike
Now that’s interesting. I didn’t realize she married someone after Epstein.
LikeLike
@Watchman-Thanks for the info on Jen’s beliefs. Trying to nail down exactly who she and Kershaw/Eston are and what they believe is daunting. It is clear the Doug Phillips/patriarchy drivel is just a smokescreen. These people are trying to fry bigger fish and have been for awhile. The Doug issue is just a another battle in an ongoing war among the factions of this group. They are all sharks, wolves in sheep’s clothing hiding all kinds of infidelities, backbiting, warring, fraud and mistreatment. It really is sad that they stamp the name of Christ on all this sin. This is worse than a soap opera!
LikeLike
Hi Ann: Most likely all of us are adults here. I’m big on allowing those with voices to speak – even if it’s against me. Unless I see a direct personal attack, I try not to intervene, but let people work things out. If you find something personally offensive, go ahead and speak directly to that person here. If they are dishing it out, I’m sure they can take it 🙂
This blogging stuff is just like real life. There are going to be personalities that don’t mesh well. If you don’t want to deal with those directly, then just skip them. No biggie. There will be bigger battles. Here’s my e-mail if you need it: spiritualsb@gmail dot com
PS – I’m glad you’re learning stuff. That’s important.
LikeLike
Maybe she’s only been friends with pseudonym since November which is when it was created, but she’s friends with “Peter Kershaw” or someone else since “way back.”
LikeLike
Me thinks by the looks of the blog hits that people are enjoying it better than a soap opera. Popcorn, anyone?
LikeLike
I would like to thank all the commenters on this thread. I learned a lot. Thank you SO SO MUCH for sharing your experience, perspective, and advice.
LikeLike
LikeLike
Pass the popcorn please. 🙂
LikeLike
Thanks Cindy K and Julie Anne for the info and links. I’ll check out that information when I have some time.
Just another quick question now. R.C. Sproul Jr. has been mentioned here, and I have some friends who are part of a group where he is still invited to speak. I have heard him speak myself a couple times a while ago. Personally, he came cross as arrogant/obnoxious, but I thought he had some good things to say. Since I started checking into some of this stuff a couple months ago, I came across the attacks against him on the hushmoney website. Now I’m reading that Kershaw who is behind the hushmoney website is a kinist and attacked Sproul Jr. out of vengeance, and I’m not sure what to think. Are both Kershaw and Sproul Jr. trouble, or was Sproul Jr. just the innocent victim of a vicious attack? If Sproul Jr. is bad news, what is a good way to go about alerting my friends?
Sorry, I guess that isn’t really a quick question. Hopefully someone can come up with some quick answers. 😉
LikeLike
TW is over there gas lighting.
Here is one example:
http://jensgems.wordpress.com/2014/01/22/alone-yet-not-alone-the-tangled-web-of-the-academy-nomination/comment-page-1/#comment-32365
[Mod added text in case comment is edited]
Here is what he posted previously re: his use of pseudonym:
https://spiritualsoundingboard.com/2014/01/07/a-warning-to-commenters-be-aware-of-potential-blog-ownermoderator-intrusiveness/comment-page-1/#comment-75970
Why the need for secrecy over his name? Gas lighting is a very manipulative tactic. JA, you were right. He is bad news.
LikeLike
TIA,
Sproul was defrocked by the RPCGA on a couple of counts. He was found using someone else’s tax ID number, he was spiritually abusive to people in his congregation, and he tried to stack the RPCGA with enough ministers on his side so that he could get paedocommunion approved. He wanted to make communion available to all children as part of the covenant community, more in line with the love feasts. The argument is that church membership by being born into the covenant community supersedes one’s need for personal faith when it comes to communion.
He also participated with Phillips in creating the “Tenets of Biblical Patriarchy,” and the original version of it stated that sending your daughters to train or work outside of the home or training your kids using anything other than homeschooling was a sin.
He also wrote in one of his books that it’s okay if a 10 year old girl cannot read if she can follow her kingdom mandate: being proficient at household chores.
I don’t think he classifies as an innocent victim.
LikeLike
A Mom. Why do you keep twisting what I say? That is counterproductive and short sighted in your responses. If you don’t like a person’s comment you twist it to suit your view. I have never said it is bad to call out racism. I just made an observation about how cultures always have scapegoats and it is good we live in a country where we can call out evil. You have been preaching to Leslie, telling her she needs to widen her view when she spoke of personal pain. Many of us have come from places where we were constantly told how to think and act. We don’t need another voice to tell us what to do. Go back and look at your comments. When TIA says she is new to this topic, you jump in and personalize it and become divisive by claiming you are new to it too but you are “paddling” in opposite directions. Were did that come from? She never said that. Why do you interprete questions as trying to silence others? I said in my last post that it was great JA provides a post for people to speak out. Yet you even challenge that. You derail the conversation by taking people’s questions or comments, try to find some underlying negative motivation, then presenting these people as “other”. Your words indicate you are the arbitrator of who deserves to be heard and who doesn’t . Sadly, that is the same black and white world that many here have escaped from. JA allows for people to give and take and she does it with such grace. She allows people to struggle without condesention and criticism. She does however speak out about injustice yet does so without lecturing her readers. That takes a lot of restraint. When I first asked about what seemed to me some kind of infighting, she was gracious enough to answer my questions, no judgements. That in itself showed me that see where her heart is and that is a very good place. I also think she has a lot of love for her posters! And Lydia, thank you for pointing me in the right direction (and snark free!) I did look there, but didn’t see it! It must be one of my many brain farts. I want to be clear- I do not see anyone minimizing or supporting racism. That is obvious! JA treats everyone as guests in her house. I would like to be a good guest. She has given me permission to be direct with another guest. I am not comfortable doing that, but I thank her for letting me speak my mind. Ann
LikeLike
To the person who left a comment with a question to me:
In light of the fact that this group is highly litigious (and I’d really like to keep the number of lawsuits against me to one), I’m going to err on the side of caution and not post your comment. You may, however, summarize the conversation and that would be fine.
LikeLike
@Cindy K. once again I have learned out a lot from your comments here! Thanks so much for all you do. Whenever I find myself dealing with an issue that relates to the spiritual abuse my family has suffered I head to your blog! Please continue to visit here as well so many are confused about patriarchy and you have a wealth of info.
LikeLike
Ann and A Mom – – I did invite Ann to deal directly with her concerns. I would like to make a special request that we try to wrap it up quickly or . . . . another idea is I can make a SSB Conflict Resolution page to discuss. I don’t want to squelch working out a misunderstanding/disagreement here, but at the same time, it’s important to keep this comment thread generally on the primary topic of discussion – – – because this topic is very important – especially to those who are just learning of the groups/ideologies fueling Phillips, Christian Patriarchy, and the Homeschool Movement. Thanks much!
LikeLike
I agree, Taunya. Cindy is a wealth of information. And she has been researching this stuff for a long, long time. I find her comments all over the internet and even very old articles that can only be found on the Wayback Machine or archival cache sites.
LikeLike
In The Handmaid’s Tale, women were NOT permitted to learn to read.
LikeLike
JustMe commented above at January 29, 2014 @ 7:04 AM, and mentioned GAS LIGHTING. Here’s a summary definition from Wikipedia:
Gaslighting is a form of mental abuse in which false information is presented with the intent of making a victim doubt his or her own memory, perception and sanity. Instances may range simply from the denial by an abuser that previous abusive incidents ever occurred, up to the staging of bizarre events by the abuser with the intention of disorienting the victim.
This is a tactic that shows up in various kinds of abuse situations, as a form of “conditioning” the victim to live in self-doubt, self-blame, and fear. For more about where this term comes from and what it means, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting
LikeLike
Oh, thanks for adding that info, Brad. It’s good to keep in mind that there are terms we use here that may not be common knowledge.
LikeLike
Interesting turn of events on Jen’s blog as she continues to answer questions about she and TW/Kershaw? by telling the commenters to focus on all the bad that Doug Phillips has done and refusing to answer questions about herself and TW/Kershaw?.
It would seem that Jen is asking people to do the same thing Doug asked people to do. Don’t focus on me and my behavior look over “here” at “this.” Does she really think people are stupid enough to fall for that again? If she wants to hold Doug’s practices/behavior and beliefs up to the light and dissect them at length and ad nauseum shouldn’t she allow people do the same with she and TW/Kershaw’s?
I am really sick of the different factions in this movement jockeying for control and relevance by “exposing” one another. They are all guilty of the same things, Doug Phillips is not the only one who is constantly spouting off about his “Christian” beliefs while engaging in affairs. He is the most prominent, but those “outing” him are hiding their own secrets. They need to come clean!
I
LikeLike
Yes, I saw that and also this comment in which she is responding to Jackie’s concern about identifying sex abuse appropriately when it is done by clergy – someone in a position of trust.
Jen Says:
January 29, 2014 at 11:46 am (http://jensgems.wordpress.com/2014/01/22/alone-yet-not-alone-the-tangled-web-of-the-academy-nomination/#comment-32443)
Even in the secular world, people are fired for having a sexual relationship with someone if they were in a supervisory position over them.
LikeLike
“I am really sick of the different factions in this movement jockeying for control and relevance by “exposing” one another. They are all guilty of the same things”
Taunya, This is exactly it! There might be degrees of it but the condescension shown here by Jen and Eston early on shows they have the same control/arrogance issues they decry in Phillips. It was early on Jen came over here and warned commenters about speculating as if only they were allowed to do it. This continued with other “lectures” by Jen to JA and commenters concerning Matthew 18, what one would teach their children, etc, etc then saying she wants to work with her. And then Eston comes on claiming JA is jealous but lets just work together. The condescending lectures then claiming they are on the same side is laughable. This is control and arrogance 101 that comes from that movement.
Why should JA want to work “with” them?
This is the part where I think A mom is getting a bad rap here by Ann. Not to be a dead horse but this is NOT about sides. it is about abuse, kinism, patriarchy, reconstructionists, etc.
Ann comments early on in this thread:
” Why are you and Jen being snarky with each other? Is this how we are suppose to act? Again I am not pointing fingers, I just don’t understand and do not want to see you both get derailed. I wish you two could either keep it private or at least “tolerate” each other.”
Why should JA lay aside the insults, the prevarications, the attempt to control, the smoke and mirrors to “tolerate” those who might NOT really be on her side against patriarchy, dominionism, kinism? This is bigger than Doug Phillips. Why be derailed by following the instructions of Eston and Jen? That would not be wise.
But there are some want it to be only about DP instead of a larger picture of evil that has infected many areas of the church. There IS a blog for that.
LikeLike
“Even in the secular world, people are fired for having a sexual relationship with someone if they were in a supervisory position over them. ”
Unless they are the president. :o)
Anywhoo…the sexual harassment laws are very strict. Using your position for sexual favors can land the victim with a huge settlement. And there have been big ones
LikeLike
“This is the part where I think A mom is getting a bad rap here by Ann. Not to be a dead horse but this is NOT about sides. it is about abuse, kinism, patriarchy, reconstructionists, etc. ”
@Lydia I agree!!
LikeLike
Jen Epstien has banned any further questions about TW Eston’s true identity.
Jen Says:
January 29, 2014 at 11:46 am
SeeingtheLight, considering that the only reason you apparently came to the blog is to attack TW, I would like to let you know up front that that kind of behavior is not tolerated here. TW has given his position on his name multiple times. That is to be the end of it. I will not approve any more comments from you, or anyone else, about his name. You should just be grateful that I allow people like you to come here and use names like “SeeingtheLight” when you obviously do not see any light at all. There are plenty of well-known blogs out there that require full names AND blogger profiles before you can comment. This subject has been addressed in full and this is the last comment I will approve on this topic.
LikeLike
Talk about control…….pass the popcorn over this way, will ya?
LikeLike
“Even in the secular world, people are fired for having a sexual relationship with someone if they were in a supervisory position over them. ” -JA
Anywhoo…the sexual harassment laws are very strict. Using your position for sexual favors can land the victim with a huge settlement. And there have been big ones” -Lydia
@JA and Lydia
There are reasons why some may not want to define a sexual relationship between a “spiritual counselor and counselee as abuse, though it most definitely is. This type of behavior appears to be a reoccurring thing in the community of those that attend/attended Phillips’ church and sister churches. Even those “exposing” him may have engaged in these types of things. This behavior has been redefined in their circle, and is no longer classified as abuse, it has become somewhat the norm and is now accepted as simply “an affair.”
LikeLike
For clarification on my above comment read carefully some of the links and comments put up earlier in this thread that involve Jen/Kershaw/Vance, etc.
LikeLike
HAHAHA Oh, I must have been skimming and only saw the “let’s work together” part and missed that I was jealous. That’s funny.
I want to try to be careful about a situation here regarding Ann. Initially in this thread she did challenge me and others. However, she also has identified as one who has suffered due to spiritual abuse. She has been given some pushback and that’s fine. However, I want to make sure that this situation does not derail the important stuff – – especially as she seems to be willing to hang out and try to learn more. Let’s focus on the here and now. I don’t think the earlier comments on this thread by Ann define what she believes today – – I’ve seen some change of heart. Let’s continue to encourage that.
This stuff is difficult – like peeling layers of onion. The challenging part is we are all at different places. Sometimes it takes a while for the understanding to really click.
LikeLike
“I don’t think the earlier comments on this thread by Ann define what she believes today – – I’ve seen some change of heart. Let’s continue to encourage that.”
Glad to hear it, there is a lot to take in and I can understand how someone new to it all could easily become confused.
LikeLike
Some background on the origins of the kinist movement, Harry Seabrook: http://www.adl.org/assets/pdf/combating-hate/Kinism-Racist-and-Anti-Semitic-Religionfinal2.pdf
Seems “kinism” as a movement traces its origin to the League of the South in the late 1990s.
LikeLike
“And then Eston comes on claiming JA is jealous but lets just work together.
HAHAHA Oh, I must have been skimming and only saw the “let’s work together” part and missed that I was jealous. That’s funny.”
I noticed that comment when TW made it a few weeks ago. I think it supports the position that these folks see this “exposure of Doug” process as more of a way to gain their own following and prominence within their movement/community/cult. In his mind he is “ahead” in the game because his posts get more comments than JA’s and therefore JA must be jealous. He has no concept of doing this solely for the sake of exposing spiritual abuse.
LikeLike
I am glad to hear it, too, JA. What I hope she will know is that A mom would be a huge supporter of not only outing the abuse but helping her understand the roots of it and recognize red flags in the future.
Peeling back the layers of the onion is not only stinky and messy but makes you cry, too. :o)
LikeLike
There is a civil war going on amongst theonomists concerning kinism and the “true” interpretation of Rushdoony: http://theonomyresources.blogspot.com/2010/11/kinism-is-not-pro-theonomy-but-anti.html
Rushdoony himself made many statements in support of the views that kinists hold.
LikeLike
Phillips was on the non-kinist side of theonomy, and these kinists support him: http://theonomyresources.blogspot.com/2014/01/with-vision-forum-closing-where-can-i.html
Ditto for the Bayly bros.
LikeLike
Many of the kinists come from a group that lost a civil war in the PCA:
http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelligence-report/browse-all-issues/2010/summer/rooting-out-racism/a-denomination-con
http://bradley.chattablogs.com/archives/2010/07/why-didnt-they.html
LikeLike
Oh my, Lydia, I didn’t think of that. I’ve lost track of how many tears I have shed in the past few years. But I am comforted to know that God doesn’t lose track of any – – He sees each one. Good grief, a few more escaped my eyes as I’m typing this.
You keep track of all my sorrows.
You have collected all my tears in your bottle.
You have recorded each one in your book. Ps 56:8
LikeLike
In my whole life up until just a couple months ago, I had never even heard of “clergy sexual abuse”, and I suspect the vast majority of the general population is in the same boat. If a pastor had sexual relations with a member, it was simply called an “affair.” I don’t think this is anything specific to these groups. Even the mainstream press reports it that way (these are all in relation to Doug Phillips).
The Washington Post: “extramarital relationship”
San Antonio Express News: “extramarital relationship”
Huffington Post: “extramarital affair”
UK Daily Mail: “affair”
The Wire: “infidelity scandal”, “extramarital affair”
Christian Post: “inappropriate relationship”
Thanks to all those who are helping to educate others about these issues.
LikeLike
I generally see “pushback” as a good sign. It is a part of the process of changing your mind about something. When you believe one thing, part of you becomes invested in it. When you hear information that challenges your belief — even about how things should be done — the natural response is generally to protest. If people feel discomfort and voice it (bothered about it enough to say something and ask questions), it means that you have their attention and the information is at work. (This happens when we listen to a spiritual abuser and believe them when they twist things, but it happens when we come back out of the fog, too. It is a part of the process.)
The best of people fight for what they believe in and fight for defending good ideas about people. When we hear the negative, good people don’t want to believe the bad stuff — showing their goodness. It takes some time to process this difficult and painful information because it is generally threatening. No one wants to believe that they are doing the wrong thing, going about things in the wrong way, that they trusted the wrong people, or that they believed a lie. Getting through that takes time, honesty, and work. In Christian things, I think that it takes a lot of trust in God, too.
Pray for people who are going through this. Make the effort to love them by giving them some room, and cut them a lot of slack. Let them keep talking if you can. For many, you’re helping to lead them out of the dark.
LikeLike
Your whole comment was so good, Cindy. I hope people take a moment to let it soak in.
LikeLike
@Tia I can agree with you to a point on others not realizing what constitutes sexual abuse but the links for the news organizations that you provided don’t prove that. Remember the identity of the victim was not disclosed. It was not clear if the victim even knew Doug was a pastor. For all the news organizations knew he was having a random affair with a woman who did not even know what he did for a living. If that were so it would not be spiritual abuse.
The reason we can say it was abuse is because many of us know who the victim is and we are aware that his relationship to her was one of pastor to church member and therefore very much abuse.
LikeLike
Thank you for your kind comments, everybody. I don’t know how to respond to them, other than to say that I hope to help people avoid some of the trouble with which I’ve contended. I helped foster the problems by supporting these groups, and I have a duty to sound the alarm about them. And as stated, I’ve made the mistake of supporting some survivors who, in the end, did nothing to stop repeating the spiritual abuse tactics that they appear to have learned quite well. They just switch sides or come half way out of the heavy abuse, but don’t want to leave the things that they liked about their group or belief system behind. It’s often quite hard to know who is safe and who is not. Sometimes you just have to learn by experience. The “survivor” community can be just as rough as the formal abusers.
LikeLike