Vision Forum’s Jamestown 400: An Epic Week For Doug Phillips

Doug Phillips “Utterly Shatters The Nonsense” About Misrepresentations On Patriarchy

Last week was an epic week for Doug Phillips of Vision Forum Ministries. Mr. Phillips was at the center of what was touted to be the most significant event in Vision Forum’s history, the hosting of a 400th anniversary celebration of the founding of the Jamestown Virginia Colony. Doug Phillips promoted his event as a “celebration,” whereas the “official” government sanctioned event last month was called a “commemoration.” The most politically correct called it an “invasion.” Doug Phillips is correct to call it a “celebration” for there is indeed much to celebrate.

Speakers for the event included respected Christian historians and scholars such as Gary DeMar, Marshall Foster, John Eidsmoe, Joe Morecraft, Paul Jehle. And then there was Doug Phillips.

The Jameston Quadricentennial: A Celebration of Our Providential History was the most significant and far reaching event in the history of Vision Forum Ministries.”

A former Vision Forum intern by the name of C.S. Hayden was gracious enough to post a number of event photos and offer some personal commentary. Some of what Caleb Hayden shares, however, is significant in conveying the fact that Doug Phillips was faithfully checking certain blogs last week to see how he was faring in the court of public opinion. For example, here’s a portion of his account of Doug Phillips’ talk from Saturday, June 16:

Doug Phillips encouraged us throughout the day as he shared stories of God’s Providence in planting and sustaining the Jamestown settlement. At the end of the day, he implored all of us to raise up an army of many children for God’s glory, which aroused great cheers and applause from the crowd (including from yours truly). He also said that we must return to biblical manhood and womanhood, and at this point, he utterly shattered the nonsense that some people falsely propagate about the teachings of the “patriarchy” movement. He said that we need visionary daughters who are capable, intelligent, well-trained, and love being women. Doesn’t sound like Mr. Phillips thinks women are “doormats,” as some misguided souls have suggested. He also said we must have sons of honor who will be raised to become patriarchal leaders of their households, with love, sacrifice, a vision for discipleship, appreciation and honor for their wives, and willingness to lay down their own lives. Doesn’t sound like Mr. Phillips thinks men are exalted as tyrannical dictators over women, as some misguided souls have suggested.

Apparently, this was very significant, or at least it was significant to C.S. Hayden, because it’s one of the very first things he mentions in his article. This appears to be a clear reference to Jen Epstein’s three-part series, “Are The Biblical Tenets Of Patriarchy Biblical?“, and perhaps a lesser reference to my own article, “The Vision Forum: Patriarchy Weirdness Exposed.” Other blogs and forums too have picked up on Jen Epstein’s Patriarchy critiques and, no doubt, Doug Phillips is under some pressure to respond.

Vision Forum’s “The Tenets Of Biblical Patriarchy” appear to be a vital document — absolutely vital to Vision Forum’s “vision.” As Jen pointed out last week, Patriarchy is central to so many of Vision Forum’s events. Without Patriarchy Vision Forum’s “vision” is no more, and unless Vision Forum can continue to claim that Patriarchy is “biblical” they won’t have any basis to continue pushing it with any legitimate authority.

It’s remarkable that such a significant document could have been posted for several years on Vision Forum’s web site and, apparently, no one has ever publicly challenged it in any substantive way as being extra-biblical and unbiblical. Then along comes Jennifer Epstein, not a biblical scholar but just a simple Berean, and with relative ease she begins to cast serious doubt on “The Tenets.”

How will Vision Forum respond? According to C.S. Hayden, Doug Phillips has already “utterly shattered” Jen Epstein’s arguments. But the problem is that no one has seen any evidence of it. Furthermore, Jen Epstein isn’t arguing against “a return to biblical manhood and womanhood.” In fact it’s apparent that this is exactly what she is arguing in favor of. What she’s arguing against is calling The Tenets Of Biblical Patriarchy “biblical,” when so much of it appears to be so seriously lacking in biblical support. Worse yet it does appear that Doug Phillips has engaged in a great deal of prooftexting and taking Bible verses out of context to try and make his case. Rather than handling the Word of God with respect and treating it as sacred, Doug Phillips appears to have used God’s sacred Word in a self-serving manner to push his personal and very profitable agenda.

I assume that C.S. Hayden isn’t a Vision Forum employee. However, as a “former intern” he would have been personally trained by Doug Phillips in such things as debate and logic. Therefore, one would suppose that Caleb would have at least some abilities to defend statements that he makes on his own blog. Caleb did receive some comments on his blog. However, Caleb’s “response” was most disconcerting.

Tammy C said….
What a good ending.I am sure we will be reading about this celebration on many blogs for weeks to come.

Enjoy your visit with the family from Mountain Musings.
6/17/2007 7:09 AM

Nate E said…
What? No Jamestown 400 finalist pictures? -)

Thanks for covering the event. Looks like it was an excellent “building up” time.
6/17/2007 7:45 AM

Joshua said…
I really wish we could’ve gone. I’m jealous. Our family just couldn’t afford it. It sounds like it was awesome.

“He also said that we must return to biblical manhood and womanhood, and at this point, he utterly shattered the nonsense that some people falsely propagate about the teachings of the ‘patriarchy’ movement.”

We need to hear more on this! Patriarchy is definitely under attack, and not from the typical non-Christian feminists, but from Christians who claim that they’ve believed in Patriarchy and practiced it. This has got me worried.

I’ve been following the articles on Jen’s Gems this week critiquing The Biblical Tenets Of Patriarchy. I have to admit that I’ve been very bothered about it because it does appear that there may be some theological holes in some of the tenets. I haven’t seen anybody step up to the plate to defend it. At this point I’m not really sure what to think.

Do you know if Vision Forum will be responding? If Doug can “shatter the nonsense” then I hope he does it really soon where we can all see it, like on his blog. This is really important.
6/17/2007 4:33 PM

Spunky said…

I share your thoughts when you say, “it does appear that there may be some theological holes in some of the tenets.”.

We are a family that believes in Biblical patriarchy. Which at one time we believed was the same thing that men such as Doug Phillips believed. (We were very early supporters of Vision Forum.) However, having read the tenets shortly after they were first published and some recent writings by men within Vision Forum such as Mr. Abshire, we began to see that what they purport as biblical patriarchy isn’t exactly what we see in Scripture. There are places where their scriptural justification is not sufficient for the claims they are making.

Which in and of itself would be fine. This wouldn’t be the first time that disagreement occurs between believers over doctrine. What is troubling to us is that any disagreement is seen by those that ascribe to their viewpoint as an attack on THEM. Those who have supported and encouraged the various ministries over the years are surprised to see that those who disagree are viewed as “the enemy” simply for saying perhaps this isn’t quite right or supported in Scripture. Don’t misunderstand I’m not saying that must see it our way. But isn’t there something between total agreement and total enemy?

Can sensible bible-believing Christians disagree with the tenets of patriarchy as written by Doug Phillips and Phil Lancaster without being considered a effeminate or thwarting God’s restoration of Western Civilization?

The fact that you or others are looking to Doug Phillips for a response which will “shatter this nonsense” is also a troubling thought. Why must Doug Phillips respond? Rather, let each of us, study the Scripture and decide who is actually moving into nonsense. Relying on men such as Doug Phillips to do the work of the fathers only proves that possibly the men who have written the tenets have become more important than the Truth they seek to teach us.

Let each father become a Berean and see that if what is taught by Godly teachers is actually true.

Isn’t that what a true Patriarch would do to protect his family from possible heresy?
6/17/2007 7:33 PM

Joshua said…
“Why must Doug Phillips respond?” He needs to respond because The Tenets of Biblical Patriarchy are being accused of being unbiblical and extrabiblical.

We’ve shared The Tenets of Biblical Patriarchy with a lot of other families because we want to see a lot of Christian families doing patriarchy. Some have been open to becoming patriarchal too, especially when they see that it’s biblical. It’s hard to argue against something that’s biblical.

Until this week we’d never even heard anyone say that The Tenets of Biblical Patriarchy aren’t biblical. We really need some help with this. We believe that God has raised up Doug Phillips as a great teacher. He’s one of the smartest men we’ve ever heard. Even the people attacking patriarchy probably see that he’s really smart. So we’re looking to him to help us with this. He’s been so helpful to our family. Why is it wrong for us to look to him for help with this? We’re really grateful to Doug Phillips. He’s done more for the patriarchy movement than anyone.

6/17/2007 10:17 PM
Anonymous said…
As far as Doug P. not thinking women are doormats, I submit that actions speak louder than words. God bless him for proclaiming otherwise, but how does he behave? That’s far more telling.

I agree with Spunky – I am a women with a graduate professional education, raised in a patriarchy family. Why is it the patriarchy movement condemns me for living my calling, just because it includes higher education and doesn’t fit some kind of cookie cutter mold? Honestly, I’d have fewer problems with it if people would stop telling me I’m going to hell or can’t possibly be in God’s divine will because I think women should be allowed to go to college if it fits in their life plan.
6/18/2007 1:30 AM

Anonymous said…

Your sad comment is exactly why it is an awesome thing that people are starting to sit up and take notice of the heresies being promoted as “biblical truth” in patriocentric circles.

God hasn’t called you to wait around for Doug Phillips to tell you what to believe. Paul commended the Bereans for searching the Scriptures themselves. If all you have to offer your own children is what Doug Phillips thinks or believes, why should they follow you as their patriarch?

I offer this challenge to you….set aside any tapes, books, or writings of any kind written by someone in a patriocentric camp. Pick up your Bible and start reading the Gospels. Take notes as you read, paying particular attention to what Jesus says. Then, compare His writings with those of the patriarchs.

It will take a while to detox…believe me, I was there. But when your patriocentric delerium tremmens have passed, all you will have left is God’ precious grace and you can move on to a living relationship with the Lord, as can your family.
6/18/2007 4:25 AM

Spunky said…
Joshua, you said “Why must Doug Phillips respond?” He needs to respond because The Tenets of Biblical Patriarchy are being accused of being unbiblical and extrabiblical.

I understand that the Tenets are being accused of being unbiblical or extrabiblical. But the question for those of us who believe in Biblical patriarchy shouldn’t be “How does Doug Phillips respond to this?” Instead we should ask, “What does the Scripture say? Are the tenets Biblcial?”

If the Biblical Tenets are indeed bilbical they will hold up to the strongest scrutiny. We have heard from Doug Phillips and what he believes on Biblical Patriarchy, now is the time for every man to examine those tenets as a Berean and see if they are indeed true. Don’t let your supposition be that they are, but test them to see if they are indeed True. Scrutinizing the Tenets is not the same as challenging Doug Phillips personally. It’s obeying the Scriptural instruction to study to show ourselves approved unto God. Paul was scrutinized by the Bereans, surely we are permitted to scrutinize the Godly teachers of our day as well.

You asked, “Why is it wrong for us to look to him for help with this?”

I’m not saying it’s wrong, but troubling when a believer looks to a man FIRST to see what he thinks rather than looking to Scripture to see what God reveals. Doug Phillips is fallible, just like you and I. Yes, he is smart and gifted in many areas. But that doesn’t make him right in all areas. You are free to ask him what he thinks about the criticism. But that doesn’t excuse you from your first obligation which is to search the scriptures yourself to see if the things any teacher teaches are indeed true, that must be done independent of Doug Phillips.

Our focus as believers should be on Truth. Truth will stand up to the toughest scrutiny. It is we who must have the courage to accept what Truth reveals about us and what we believe. Clinging to an idea simply because the messenger has been right in other areas in the past, or his idea has personally helped you, is insufficient to believe the idea is Biblical or that the teacher is consistently right in all areas.

Don’t get me wrong, I am not saying Doug Phillip’s Biblical Tenets are wrong. He could very well be right, and those that critize need to adjust. But how will we know unless we ALL are studying for ourselves and not relying on someone to study it for us and telling us where the flaws are? Study the Truth of Scriptures and build your own defense for why these Tenets are true. Then when you have exhausted yourself in the effort, petition many great biblical scholars to examine what you have found. And then compare what you have found with the Tenets themselves. See where you agree and where you disagree. Then go back and study some more attempting to resolve the areas of difference.

But of course, that all takes work. It is so much easier to just have someone tell us what to believe. Following someone else who has studied and found what they believe is easier than doing the work ourselves. I’m not trying to be hard on you. It’s true of all of us. But a Christian man or woman will study the teachings of others for the greater good of themselves and their family. And in return, the great teachers will know that they are indeed accountable for the words they teach. And in the end the Body of Christ benefits.

Accountability isn’t to be feared it is to be embraced. For in true accountability, the purity of Truth shines forth. Truth cannot be hidden from view is inescapable. It is we who must have the courage to accept what Truth reveals. That is a harder task than even studying. But in the end it is the right choice.

George Grant wrote recently, “None of us like to hear that we are wrong, that we have to make changes in our lives, that we have to adjust our way of thinking, or that we have to admit our faults. We are loathe to confess that are in need of repentance, forgiveness, or forbearance. And we persist in our pride even when we know the truth.

The truth demands something of us. It may or may not demand something of us as dramatic as what it demanded of the passengers of Flight 93. Though the truth ultimately sets us free, it does so at some cost.”

And that cost is usually our pride. We don’t want to admit that we or someone we admire might be wrong. But the Truth will set us free. And I am glad I have freedom in Christ and not bound to the claims of any earthly teacher however smart or talented they appear to me at first.
6/18/2007 7:31 AM

Spunky said…
Lastly Joshua you said, “Even the people attacking patriarchy probably see that he’s really smart.”

Not all who are examining the tenets are attacking patriarchy. That gets back to my first comment. Joshua, why do you view those who question what Doug Phillips teaches as Biblical Patriarchy, as an attack on patriarchy itself?

Brian Abshire warned in the article Biblical Patriarchy and the Doctrine of Federal Representation, “There is also the danger that some men will over-react against the common emasculated concept of the modern “father” and will overcompensate by denying any authority other than their own; including lawful authority in the church and State. The simple fact is that ALL Men will sin; they will sin against God and they will sin against their families. However, the divinely required methodology of dealing with that sin is by meditating and applying the unchanging standards of God’s law, being humble before Him, recognizing and confessing that sin, and then through repentance, taking the appropriate course of action.”

I believe Mr. Abshire is correct in that regard. There is a danger for any man not correctly defining or applying what the Bible says about Patriarchy. That includes Doug Phillips. The remedy is each of us applying the unchanging standard of God’s Word to our lives and those we allow to teach us. This should not be viewed as an attack or threat by anyone truly seeking God’s Truth and His alone.
6/18/2007 8:38 AM

Spunky said…
Let me clarify, I am NOT accusing Doug Phillips of sin with his tenets of patriarchy. But that ALL men do sin in their lives. We cannot see the words of any man as infallible, the claim of perfect truth is for God’s Word alone. Sola Scriptura. Therefore the possibility exists that in writing his tenets he MAY have erred just as all men are capable of erring. The only way we will know for certainty is by doing what Mr. Abshire exhorts and that is comparing Doug Phillips words against the unchanging Truth of God’s Word.
6/18/2007 8:44 AM

How did Caleb Hayden respond? Caleb “responded” by deleting all but the first two comments. Thankfully, Spunky saved the comment thread and reposted them on Jen Epstein’s blog.

Caleb may or may not know know who Joshua is. Perhaps Joshua’s questions and concerns embarrassed Caleb. Perhaps Caleb just didn’t now what to say. But is that any cause to just delete his comments? Joshua’s comments do appear to be a sincere plea for assistance. Is this how Doug Phillips trains his interns to respond to people who are begging for help?

Spunky, on the other hand, is someone that, if Caleb doesn’t know who she is, he really should. “Spunky” is no obscure unknown figure in the home schooling sector of the blogosphere. Given that home school moms probably comprise at least 50 to 70% of Vision Forum’s business, that was a very foolish thing for Caleb to delete Spunky’s comments. Spunky is a very thoughtful and circumspect lady, and not one to quickly take sides in a controversy or dispute.

It troubles me to see the way that C.S. Hayden treated Joshua. It would be nice if we could all assume that just because Caleb Hayden isn’t a Vision Forum employee that his behavior isn’t a reflection on Vision Forum. But the fact is his behavior is a direct reflection of the culture that is Vision Forum, a culture of Doug Phillips’ creation. Caleb was trained by Doug Phillips. Caleb is just “responding” as he’s been taught, and by what Doug Phillips has personally modeled for him.

Joshua, keep pressing for answers. Contact Vision Forum directly. However, don’t be surprised if their response isn’t any different than Caleb Hayden’s “response.” That will tell you something: You’re permitted to agree with Doug Phillips. You’re not permitted to disagree, or to so much as even ask him questions that might embarrass him. That’s all part of the hyper-Patriarchy package.

Spunky had some very good insight and suggestions. I’d like to suggest, Joshua, that you carefully consider what she said. In fact I’d like to just recommend what she said to anyone who’s now looking for answers about this Patriarchy thing. I don’t believe we’re going to find any answers by looking to Doug Phillips and Vision Forum. I think they’re part of the problem.

19 Comments on “Vision Forum’s Jamestown 400: An Epic Week For Doug Phillips”

  1. Trinity says:

    Joshua and those who are waiting for Phillips to tell them what to think,

    If you’ve seen the film, The Matrix, consider that you’ve just received another phonecall from Morpheus. If you want to know what the matrix is, just pull the wool away and realize what has blinded you from the truth. You can’t be told what the matrix is, because you must see it for yourself. But there is no going back.

    You can live in VR, you can live in VF, or you can live and think like a free man in the real world. Swallow the red pill!

  2. Wondering says:

    Watchman, I was disappointed by your article, not that you wrote it (it’s a good article) but that it has exposed such a weak side of Mr. Hayden. I’ve read his blog before, and it has many thoughtful articles. I have also seen him reasonably engage those who disagree with him. Apparently though there is this blindness with respect to Doug Phillips, He Who May Not Be Questioned.

    Or maybe part of the problem is that Mr. Hayden has invested too much time, energy, and money in an educational and economic model that requires maintaining good relations with DP? Isn’t that kind of lock-in typical of cults?

  3. Lynn says:

    “He said that we need visionary daughters who are capable, intelligent, well-trained, and love being women.”

    “Doesn’t sound like Mr. Phillips thinks women are “doormats,” as some misguided souls have suggested.”

    Thanks for your assessment based on selective citation, Mr. Hayden, and not giving proper attention to the BCA documents Jen has posted, or to the concerns of Midwest Christian Outreach.

    This will mean I will love to know I cannot receive communion on my own as a child of God, but that a male must do it for me, and that I cannot request prayer in church. This will mean, that if my husband is physically violent toward me or my children, that I will love being counseled to wait until he has stopped whatever violence he has done, and appeal to him in private about the matter. And appeals can be denied. That if I complain to another about this kind of behavior I am being wicked. Because, Mr. Hayden, if you read everything and consider it, this is what I am being asked to love being and doing, as a woman, who is living with an abusive husband.

    Of COURSE what Doug says in public SOUNDS impressive, but READ the primary documents on the counsel Jen received. Read the breach of clergy privilege. If you read all of those, which is where the rubber hits the road, it sounds EXACTLY as though Phillips thinks women are “doormats.” And it SOUNDS as though he doesn’t give a rip about the legal and ethical boundaries of pastoral counseling to boot!

  4. Jen says:

    Watchman, thank you for focusing our attention on how different people respond to various controversies. I have noticed what seems to be a pattern by all those supporting Doug Phillips. First we had SFU quickly moderate and then refuse all comments. Then Mrs. Binoculars never had any comments. Both Doug’s church blog and his business blogs are not set up for comments, nor are his hidden secret web pages for those who might be interested in his point of view on certain subjects. I know several comments left on Nathaniel Darnell’s blog were deleted. He is also a former intern and certain comments related to Doug Phillips were deleted, as well as certain commenters (myself) threatened if we ever posted again. And now young Caleb Hayden is following suit.

    I wonder if they realize how much more they could actually accomplish if they each actively and honestly engaged those who commented, whether pro or con. Oh, maybe it’s that “honestly” part that troubles them.

    I thought you might be interested in some news from Jamestown. It appears that some local conservative churches were not very happy with the legalism they find at Vision Forum and one of the Baptist pastors wrote a letter to the editor of the Virginia Gazette in Williamsburg expressing his concern about Vision Forum’s Jamestown event. He wanted it to be known that as Christians, the local churches were not in favor of this particular event. The editor of the paper then did a little research and looked at Vision Forum’s website. They termed Vision Forum a “cult” and wrote up an article about this “cult” who was coming to Jamestown last week. It appears that we are not the only ones with some concerns about what’s going on in the Patriarchy circles.

  5. CynthiaGee says:

    “Or maybe part of the problem is that Mr. Hayden has invested too much time, energy, and money in an educational and economic model that requires maintaining good relations with DP? Isn’t that kind of lock-in typical of cults?”

    Wondering, you just said a mouthful!

    Take a trip to Utah (Mormon country), and you’ll see that scenario played out everywhere, right before your eyes.

  6. thatmom says:

    Doug Phillips’ views of “visionary daughters” a la Botkin sisters are being discussed at this blog:

    There is also a new thread discussing the upcoming movie The Monstrous Regiment of Women that has been promoted by Doug Phillips.

    The discussion has been great, I believe, because most of the comments have come from Godly women who seek to be “true women” rather than women who follow any man’s heretical patrocentric teachings. And this is yet one more blog with open comments!

  7. Alisa says:

    Caleb Hayden appears to be an intelligent, great young man, which is why it IS so disconcerting that he was not able to handle such reasonable discussions with Spunky and Anonymous. I’m sure he has had great experiences with Vision Forum and been well-treated by the Phillip’s and others, but apparently it will take a little more maturity and gumption to realize that NO friend or mentor can be perfect, and you know you have a true friend when you can disagree and STILL be friends. I feel for him, as he faces disillusionment or a blind denial of objective Truth.

  8. I’ve posted the “Letter to the Editor” forwarded to me by the Virginia Gazette on my website at

    It’s displayed there with some previously published articles countering patriarchy and my petitions to ministries (that I used to support financially) to dissociate themselves from Doug Phillips.

    For those who are interested in this issue, especially the growing trend of cultic activities within otherwise Biblically sound churches, please visit. Cultic dynamics present a very real threat to many unsuspecting Christians, extending far beyond those who are affectionate to Vision Forum.

  9. I thought that I had posted the full letter here, forwarded to me from the editor, but I guess that I didn’t. (Thought that it was waiting moderation)

    Anyway, here is the information if you don’t want to go to another website:

    Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 10:23:24 -0500
    From: “Carter, Rusty”
    To: “Cynthia Kunsman”

    Ms. Kunsman,
    Below is the letter that was published June 9.

    Rusty Carter
    The Virginia Gazette
    216 Ironbound Road
    Williamsburg, VA 23188
    Phone: (757) 220-1736 or (800) 944-6908
    Fax: (757) 220-1390


    We are the members of the Charles City Clergy Conference, an ecumenical association of ministers from the churches of Charles City. Recently, we learned that Charles City will be the site of an alternative Jamestown 400th celebration, to be held June 11-18 at Fort Pocahontas.

    This greatly concerns us. The alternative Jamestown Celebration is hosted by Vision Forum, a Texas-based organization. According to the Vision Forum website,, the festival is intended to highlight the role of the Jamestown settlers in bringing Christianity to North America, because Vision Forum feels that the official commemoration spent too much time apologizing for the treatment of African Americans and Native Americans, and not enough time celebrating God’s work at Jamestown.

    We applaud any attempt to give God glory. But we take a stand against Vision Forum’s attempt to tie its own political and social agenda to the Gospel. Its website shows that this organization associates the message of Jesus Christ with a blanket condemnation of all public schooling, women with careers, public assistance to the poor. Vision Forum also insists that the Native Americans of Jamestown were “happy” to turn over land to the settlers because they did not possess “Western and biblical concepts of property ownership.”

    It would be tragic if the media coverage of this event implied that the churches of Charles City were in agreement with this. In fact, our churches have not been involved at all in this celebration. It is not a Charles City festival, but a weeklong celebration by an out-of-state political organization, with its own particular political agenda.

    Rev. Peter Bauer, Secretary

    Charles City Clergy Conference
    New Vine Baptist Church
    5100 John Tyler Memorial Highway
    Charles City

  10. CynthiaGee says:

    “Vision Forum also insists that the Native Americans of Jamestown were “happy” to turn over land to the settlers because they did not possess “Western and biblical concepts of property ownership.””

    Now, that’s just plain irritating… Are these fellows at VF making up their propaganda as they go along?
    Sheesh… Next thing you know, they’ll be claiming that the Trail of Tears was a family friendly nature hike, and that the Tsalagi were eager to move to Oklahoma….

  11. Mark Epstein says:


    It appears Wondering has coined a new moniker for Phillips: “Doug Phillips, He Who May Not Be Questioned.”

    This identifier is spot on. Phillips may not be questioned, for questioning Phillips provides a motive for him to destroy you. Just ask Jen Epstein what the perception is concerning Phillips’ obvious “motive” for her excommunication – a point by point refutation of Phillips’ illogical POLITICAL piece submitted by a lowly woman (with her husband’s permission).

    Of course “politics” is exactly what Phillips is about, which is why the letter by the Charles City Clergy Conference that stated “…we take a stand against Vision Forum’s attempt to tie its own political and social agenda to the Gospel” is so encouraging.

    May the truth concerning Phillips become known far and wide.

  12. Grace Hendry says:


    Excuse me, but I personally know the entire Phillips family. They are NOT as you “claim”.
    I had the pleasure of going to the Jamestown Celibration, and had numberous conversions with Mr Phillips as well as the chance to observe him closely all week. Not only that, but I got to hang out with with his children constantly. (Josh and Justice are my age)
    Not ONCE did Mr. Phillips act proud or arrogant. He is one of the humblest men I know. I think you guys just want a chance to puke on Doug and his ministry. What are you guys doing? Backbiting and slandering while your ENEMY is out influencing thousands of lives for good and touching many hearts. He’s done more to help others, than you have in your little finger. I apoligize for the strong wording, but this is the way things are.

    By the way, Joshua:
    Thank you so much for your respect of the Phillips family.
    Keep up the good work.

  13. CynthiaGee says:

    Grace, I visited your family website, and it says that your mother is quite a well educated woman:
    “Shelley is a woman with a passion for Christian education. She received her Masters degree in secondary education from Pensacola Christian College where she also studied elementary education at the graduate level. She also completed post-graduate studies in speech and drama at Bob Jones University.”

    Yet Doug and many of the people associated with the HyperPatriarchal movement, such as Jennie Chancey and Crmen Friedrich, believe that college is not a good idea for women. Some HyperPs even preach that it is a sin.

    If you wished to go to college, would you be encouraged or allowed to attend your mother’s alma mater?

  14. Mark Epstein says:

    Miss Hendry,

    I am delighted you had the opportunity to attend “…the Jamestown Celibration (sic), and [have] numberous (sic) conversions (sic) with Mr Phillips as well as the chance to observe him closely all week.” My wife, my children, and I had approximately 260 Sundays (minus the numerous times he couldn’t make it to church), as well as a week or two myself with Doug (Theological Boot Camp, Faith and Freedom, Witherspoon, etc.) and, therefore, I can assure you that many of the claims made pertaining to Douglas Winston Phillips are factual.

    I have to agree with Cynthia’s comment above regarding Phillips’ hyper-patriarchy and the question she poses to you concerning PCC.

    BTW, I didn’t know PCC was now tolerating adherents to Reformed Theology. My understanding was the school took a hardline toward anyone professing Calvinism in any form. Has the school’s position changed recently?

  15. Kurt says:

    For those who are interested, a former long-time resident of Charles City, who now lives in Williamsburg, told me that “Charles City Clergy Conference” is made up of all of only two member churches. Not quite the imposing opposition to the “alternative” Jamestown 400th Celebration they’d like you to believe.

  16. Jen says:

    Mark, I don’t know if the Hendrys claim to be Reformed or not, but PCC does have a little leeway there. Although they are clearly dispensational, they allow some Reformed students, if they are not at all hyper. They also sell many Reformed books and allow the students to make their own choices regarding theology, after studying both sides of the issue.

  17. Charles City Native says:

    There are fifteen member churches of the Charles City Clergy Conference–in fact, all the ministers of Charles City Churches belong to it. The Conference is primarily African American and Chickahominy Indian. It represents a large segment of the Charles City population.

    Your “former long-time resident” is entirely mistaken.

  18. may justice prevail says:

    Doug Phillip’s friend and attorney of the DeRosa family, Ed Watts has contacted the sheriff of Crosbyton, TX to take possession of the contents of Joe Taylor’s Mt. Blanco Fossil Museum in Crobyton, Texas and auction them off. Joe has been trying to have his case heard in court to get the 2004 mediation and 2007 arbitration overturned. Phillips/DeRosas did not follow proper procedure. Joe was not allowed to bring witnesses nor was he allowed to present his evidence. He was given a take it or leave it offer.

    Several of the 7 points of objection in Joe’s filing are that the Mediator/Arbitrator should not have accepted or promoted the roles of both Mediator and Arbitrator in this case and the Mediator/Arbitrator did not avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest as he was involved in the subject matter of the Agreement and Decision.

    In 2004, Dana and Brenda Forbes sold their interest in the Allosaur to Joe in order to force Phillips/DeRosa into what Joe thought would be a christian mediation. Joe had to pay the Forbes $40,000 from the mediation money. Joe also had borrowed money from family and friends to stay afloat while he tried to resolve the conflict outisde of court. Joe did not make money on the allosaur for all his work excavating the dinosaur. He lost the money from casts, his film, and lost opportunities as well. He also had his credentials stolen and given to the DeRosas.

    At the 2007 aribitration Joe was fined over $100,000 for telling the truth about the Allosaur debacle including Doug’s film, “Raising the Allosaur.” One of the charges was for answering questions on this website and the now defunct Badonicus site.

    Doug’s assistant Bob Renaud told a group of us this May 2007, that he called in by phone to Joe’s arbitration proceeding as a witness that Joe Taylor is a racist based on his comments to these sites. Joe was also fined for writing other letters speaking the truth about the allosaur debacle.

    They are trying to seize Joe’s Lone Star Mastodon that is set to go up for auction in January. Joe has been bullied and brutalized, financially and emotionally devastated by these folks that call themselves christians.

    Joe’s lawyer had a chance to nail Doug on ethical violations in the spring of 2003 for unethical involvement in the case. Joe’s attorney, Shannon Norris agreed not file charges when Doug’s friend, VF board member and VF attorney Don Hart called Shannon and asked him not to, citing Doug’s remorse. (Shannon and Don had been friends in law school) Those of us that know the truth and have seen the evidence, want Joe to get a fair hearing.

    Please email the Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott’s Office ( and ask that this matter be investigated. Joe’s case should be heard in Lubbock, TX where he can present his evidence before an impartial judge.

  19. Two Sides says:

    When Joe Taylor made disparaging remarks almost a year ago, he was called in for another meeting, which was simply to determine whether or not he had broken the terms of his previous mediation agreement. Other people offered to help Joe pursue overturning the original mediation, which would have negated the purpose for this meeting, but he wanted to go ahead anyway. At the very last minute, hours before the meeting, Joe’s attorney quit. That is grounds for having the date changed, but against advice from others, Joe went to the meeting only with another friend. They ruled that Joe did indeed make disparaging comments when he had agreed in his mediation agreement not to do so.

    At first Joe attempted to not accept the penalty for this, but finally he agreed to hire a lawyer to try to get the original mediation overturned. He worked diligently with that lawyer for several months and they filed for a hearing to have the mediation overturned. The DeRosa’s attorney filed to have the location and the date of the hearing changed and it was granted. Joe did not like the new date and place but there was no legal reason for him not to attend so it was set for the early part of October, 2007.

    Joe realized that he didn’t have enough money to pay the witnesses he wanted to have on his behalf so, instead of asking for help, he simply refused to show up at his own hearing which he filed for. Obviously there was a default judgment in favor of the DeRosas. This means that Joe forfeited his opportunity to have the original mediation overturned, and it was highly likely that it would have been overturned, as there were seven legal violations, one of which was that Doug Phillips refused to sign the agreement.

    This now meant that the penalty assessed against Joe Taylor for making disparaging comments was now in effect and that Joe owed something like $130,000. Joe has no money and cannot pay, so the court has the right to seize his assets to pay his fines. Unfortunately, Joe Taylor forfeited his own rights in this matter.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s