Jason Gastrich vs. Stan Kohls - Debate
Jason Gastrich, B.A., M.A.
My debate with Stan is online. Unfortunately, my recorder ran out of juice
after 31 minutes. I really hope they send me the video of the entire debate
because it was quite exciting and got better toward the middle and end.
You can hear what I have here:
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sermonID=111303173856
God bless,
Jason Gastrich
--
Jesus Christ Saves Ministries
http://www.jcsm.org
Over 50,000 web pages!
John 8:36 reads, "Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free
indeed."
Galatians 5:1 reads, "Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ
has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage."
Jason Gastrich, B.A., M.A.
> Hey everybody,
>
> My debate with Stan is online. Unfortunately, my recorder ran out of
> juice after 31 minutes. I really hope they send me the video of the
> entire debate because it was quite exciting and got better toward the
> middle and end.
>
> You can hear what I have here:
> http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sermonID=111303173856
>
> God bless,
> Jason Gastrich
Right now, there is 15 seconds of dead air at the beginning of the MP3.
I've uploaded a new file that has no dead air, but it may take an hour or
two for Sermon Audio's server to resolve it.
God bless and enjoy,
Jason Gastrich
Routerider
"Jason Gastrich, B.A., M.A." <ne...@jcsm.org> wrote...
I've heard the first half hour so far...can't wait for the rest!
Don
<ne...@jcsm.org> wrote:
>Hey everybody,
>
>My debate with Stan is online.
Jason, the Lord has revealed to me that you are attempting to promote
yourself as much and as quickly possible. Like Benny Hinn followed
Katherine Kuhlman, with your calculated "Jason Debates An Atheist
Show," you are following the footsteps of twice-married, Bob
Harrington in his staged debates with Madalyn Murray O'Hair.
The Lord told me that your hyped-up routine is predictable and your
cliche-filled "show" is no surprise to anyone. Your often
condescending presentations are quickly becoming stale, your answers
trite and your style unoriginal at best. The Lord also revealed to me
that you are especially driven to boost your own name and so-called
"ministry" into the national spotlight, simply because your hungry ego
lusts after the acclaim of Christian super-stardom.
D*
Ariaan
Hi Don,
Your lord Satan has revealed you quite a lot. It's a pity he didn't reveal
to you how petty and envious you yourself are. Please shut your lying mouth
and go sit in the corner.
Take a good look at yourself and your responses to other people, and be very
ashamed of yourself. How dare you!
If you really hold an important position in your church, then you should
know how to behave yourself and how to behave towards other people. Go think
about that, instead of putting other people down, people who are doing good
things. Have you done anything good in your life, Don?
Ariaan
Uncle Davey
Użytkownik "Routerider" <onezn...@NOSPAMyahoo.com> napisał w wiadomości
news:vI2dnfhoH93...@comcast.com...
I've just downloaded the first bit. It's good you can get half an hour into
only 3.61 MB. Jason could put together a MP3 CD with 100 hours of sermons.
I'd definitely buy that, if it was properly produced.
Uncle Davey
Uncle Davey
Uzytkownik "Don" <calldon...@earthlink.net> napisal w wiadomosci
news:a5b9rv44ql1sfg759...@4ax.com...
God told you no such thing.
Now stop lying and get on with your work.
Uncle Davey
Don
wrote:
Funny how you can claim that God speaks to you in bizarre,
unscriptural ways. Yet you can't admit that God also speaks to
others also.
Hmmmm...
D*
Don
>Don wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 23:16:45 GMT, "Jason Gastrich, B.A., M.A."
>> <ne...@jcsm.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey everybody,
>>>
>>> My debate with Stan is online.
>>
>> Jason, the Lord has revealed to me that you are attempting to promote
>> yourself as much and as quickly possible. Like Benny Hinn followed
>> Katherine Kuhlman, with your calculated "Jason Debates An Atheist
>> Show," you are following the footsteps of twice-married, Bob
>> Harrington in his staged debates with Madalyn Murray O'Hair.
>>
>> The Lord told me that your hyped-up routine is predictable and your
>> cliche-filled "show" is no surprise to anyone. Your often
>> condescending presentations are quickly becoming stale, your answers
>> trite and your style unoriginal at best. The Lord also revealed to me
>> that you are especially driven to boost your own name and so-called
>> "ministry" into the national spotlight, simply because your hungry ego
>> lusts after the acclaim of Christian super-stardom.
>>
>> D*
>
>Hi Don,
>
>Your lord Satan has revealed you quite a lot.
Ok...that's one.
>It's a pity he didn't reveal
>to you how petty and envious you yourself are.
And THAT'S two.
> Please shut your lying mouth
>and go sit in the corner.
Three and four.
>Take a good look at yourself and your responses to other people, and be very
>ashamed of yourself. How dare you!
How dare I what? Point out the obvious that you are too enamoured to
see???
>If you really hold an important position in your church, then you should
>know how to behave yourself and how to behave towards other people.
How long have you walked through life with your eyes closed?
>Go think
>about that, instead of putting other people down, people who are doing good
>things.
So you are now saying that God did not speak to me? And you base your
conclusion upon what???
>Have you done anything good in your life, Don?
Have you?
D*
Ariaan
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 13:09:58 +0100, "Ariaan" <no...@SPAM.spam> wrote:
>
>> Don wrote:
>>> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 23:16:45 GMT, "Jason Gastrich, B.A., M.A."
>>> <ne...@jcsm.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hey everybody,
>>>>
>>>> My debate with Stan is online.
>>>
>>> Jason, the Lord has revealed to me that you are attempting to
>>> promote yourself as much and as quickly possible. Like Benny Hinn
>>> followed Katherine Kuhlman, with your calculated "Jason Debates An
>>> Atheist Show," you are following the footsteps of twice-married, Bob
>>> Harrington in his staged debates with Madalyn Murray O'Hair.
>>>
>>> The Lord told me that your hyped-up routine is predictable and your
>>> cliche-filled "show" is no surprise to anyone. Your often
>>> condescending presentations are quickly becoming stale, your answers
>>> trite and your style unoriginal at best. The Lord also revealed to
>>> me that you are especially driven to boost your own name and
>>> so-called "ministry" into the national spotlight, simply because
>>> your hungry ego lusts after the acclaim of Christian super-stardom.
>>>
>>> D*
>>
>> Hi Don,
>>
>> Your lord Satan has revealed you quite a lot.
>
> Ok...that's one.
That's right, Satan doesn't like to share power.
>> It's a pity he didn't reveal
>> to you how petty and envious you yourself are.
>
> And THAT'S two.
Yep, you are number two, his servant. You'll never be number one.
>> Please shut your lying mouth
>> and go sit in the corner.
>
> Three and four.
>
>> Take a good look at yourself and your responses to other people, and
>> be very ashamed of yourself. How dare you!
>
> How dare I what? Point out the obvious that you are too enamoured to
> see???
So now it's obvious? I thought your 'lord' told you?
Tell me, in detail, how did he manage that? How did he tell you?
>
>> If you really hold an important position in your church, then you
>> should know how to behave yourself and how to behave towards other
>> people.
>
> How long have you walked through life with your eyes closed?
I have my eyes wide open, thank you very much, but I strongly feel that we
have to be loving towards one another. Now I know that my response to you
isn't the prototype of Christian charity either, but your attitude really
bothers me, so I couldn't control myself. How do you get it in your head
that Jason's "hungry ego lusts after the acclaim of Christian
super-stardom"? How do you come by that? That is quite an unfounded but
severe accusation. Defend it, please...
>> Go think
>> about that, instead of putting other people down, people who are
>> doing good things.
>
> So you are now saying that God did not speak to me? And you base your
> conclusion upon what???
By the unfounded and very severe accusations you made, bordering on
character assassination.
Tell me how God spoke to you.
>> Have you done anything good in your life, Don?
>
> Have you?
Yes I have. One of them is trying to be nice and loving towards other
people, and trying to tell them *gently* and in a *loving* manner when I
think they err. I admit I'm not doing that to you, right now, but I should.
And you should too. Barging in here with a lot of unfounded accusations,
trying to *assassinate* Jason's character, those are not examples of how a
Christian should behave. Are they?
Don
Ever heard of tough love? You seem to be attempting to use it on me
but don't want ME to use it.
>Now I know that my response to you
>isn't the prototype of Christian charity either, but your attitude really
>bothers me, so I couldn't control myself.
What attitude?
> How do you get it in your head
>that Jason's "hungry ego lusts after the acclaim of Christian
>super-stardom"? How do you come by that? That is quite an unfounded but
>severe accusation. Defend it, please...
I have several decades in the vocational ministry, and have seen
people like Jason come and go. The ones who make a profession of it
do so based upon their business savvy more than anything else.
I have decades of observing arrogant, condescending, little
Type-A/choleric individuals like Jason, who become "saved" and claim
that THEY suddenly hold "the Truth" and that nobody else has it. They
also feel it is their divine calling to point-out that YOU are lost
and going to hell unless you embrace their interpretation of the Bible
in every way and their particular flavor of whatever they might call
Christianity.
I have observed the recent boom in pseudo-academic, non-accredited
"seminaries" and "Bible schools" that give out fake degrees like the
"M.A." that Jason tags onto his name every time and like the pseudo
"Ph.D." that he is going to add to his name-tag as soon as he finishes
writing his term paper for it. I have also observed when many of
these "schools" (diploma-mills) do claim accreditation by an
accreditation-mill that operates from a PO box or from someone's
bedroom, or has been forced by LAW to cease their illegal practices
and moves a few miles across state lines to operate under a new name.
Then I have had discussions with several holding or working-towards
advanced degrees from those diploma-mill schools, and listened to them
constantly defend their degree-mill "M.A" while ignoring the fact that
the degree is academically worthless.
He is pursuing a fake "Ph.D." from a unaccredited degree-mill so that
he can add "Ph.D" to his name tag to impress the unlearned. Funny
thing is that in the 2000-2001 catalog under 'Personnel', of the 19
profs listing docs from religious schools 15 of these listings have
unaccredited doctorates. The Dean of Biblical studies has two
doctoral degrees. Neither is accredited! The dean of the seminary has
two doctoral degrees. Neither is accredited! The director of
Curriculum development has two doctoral degrees. Neither is
accredited! The president of the school has two doctoral degrees.
Neither is accredited. Of the 10 names listed under "Academic
Administration", each with a doctorate, NOT ONE has an accredited doc!
No wonder accreditation seems so unimportant to Jason! But I
guarantee that he will proudly proclaim "Ph.D." as soon as he receives
it in the mail...or maybe sooner.
I know show business and Jason is in it! Ministry is what he calls it
so he can raise money. Everything he does, even his "Jason Debates An
Atheist Show" proclaims "Jason" as the star with the Lord being a side
product. He is no fool.
>By the unfounded and very severe accusations you made, bordering on
>character assassination.
>Tell me how God spoke to you.
So you are saying that God can not talk to me as well as he can talk
to you?
>>> Have you done anything good in your life, Don?
>>
>> Have you?
>
>Yes I have. One of them is trying to be nice and loving towards other
>people, and trying to tell them *gently* and in a *loving* manner when I
>think they err. I admit I'm not doing that to you, right now, but I should.
>And you should too. Barging in here with a lot of unfounded accusations,
>trying to *assassinate* Jason's character, those are not examples of how a
>Christian should behave. Are they?
HA HA HA HA!!!
"Barging in here?"
"Unfounded accusations?"
Don't make me laugh. You must be new here!!!
If a snake was going to bite you, would you want me to tell you or
not?
Qualem blennum!
Ariaan
> On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 19:34:08 +0100, "Ariaan" <no...@SPAM.spam> wrote:
>
>> Don wrote:
>>> On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 13:09:58 +0100, "Ariaan" <no...@SPAM.spam>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Don wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 23:16:45 GMT, "Jason Gastrich, B.A., M.A."
>>>>> <ne...@jcsm.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hey everybody,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My debate with Stan is online.
>>>>>
>>>>> Jason, the Lord has revealed to me that you are attempting to
>>>>> promote yourself as much and as quickly possible. Like Benny Hinn
>>>>> followed Katherine Kuhlman, with your calculated "Jason Debates An
>>>>> Atheist Show," you are following the footsteps of twice-married,
>>>>> Bob Harrington in his staged debates with Madalyn Murray O'Hair.
>>>>>
>>>>> The Lord told me that your hyped-up routine is predictable and
>>>>> your cliche-filled "show" is no surprise to anyone. Your often
>>>>> condescending presentations are quickly becoming stale, your
>>>>> answers trite and your style unoriginal at best. The Lord also
>>>>> revealed to me that you are especially driven to boost your own
>>>>> name and so-called "ministry" into the national spotlight, simply
>>>>> because your hungry ego lusts after the acclaim of Christian
>>>>> super-stardom.
>>>>>
>>>>> D*
>>>>
>>>
>>> How long have you walked through life with your eyes closed?
>>
>> I have my eyes wide open, thank you very much, but I strongly feel
>> that we have to be loving towards one another.
>
> Ever heard of tough love? You seem to be attempting to use it on me
> but don't want ME to use it.
Yes, I regret saying those things, but your foul attempt at discrediting
Jason really made my blood boil.
>> Now I know that my response to you
>> isn't the prototype of Christian charity either, but your attitude
>> really bothers me, so I couldn't control myself.
>
> What attitude?
Your attitude towards other people, who's views don't exactly line up with
yours. I'm thinking of the tongues thread, where you showed real 'love' for
your fellow brothers in Christ. And now this. You start accusing Jason of
certain things without backing them up with any reasoning whatsoever; you
only claim to know this because "the Lord told you". Now that's a really
weak argument to use when you're accusing someone of such serious things.
Provide proof.
>> How do you get it in your head
>> that Jason's "hungry ego lusts after the acclaim of Christian
>> super-stardom"? How do you come by that? That is quite an unfounded
>> but severe accusation. Defend it, please...
>
> I have several decades in the vocational ministry, and have seen
> people like Jason come and go. The ones who make a profession of it
> do so based upon their business savvy more than anything else.
>
> I have decades of observing arrogant, condescending, little
> Type-A/choleric individuals like Jason, who become "saved" and claim
You want to say that Jason is in fact not saved at all? You know this for a
fact?
> that THEY suddenly hold "the Truth" and that nobody else has it. They
> also feel it is their divine calling to point-out that YOU are lost
> and going to hell unless you embrace their interpretation of the Bible
> in every way and their particular flavor of whatever they might call
> Christianity.
He told you that, did he? He said you were lost?
Proof, please.
So in fact you have a problem with these schools, and now you're acting it
out on Jason? That's real mature of you. Once again, tell him in person,
confront him with what you think he does wrong, and don't start blabbering
all sorts of wild accusations on the internet, for everyone to read. Read
Mathew 18:16.
> I know show business and Jason is in it! Ministry is what he calls it
> so he can raise money. Everything he does, even his "Jason Debates An
> Atheist Show" proclaims "Jason" as the star with the Lord being a side
> product. He is no fool.
Confront him privately.
>> By the unfounded and very severe accusations you made, bordering on
>> character assassination.
>> Tell me how God spoke to you.
>
> So you are saying that God can not talk to me as well as he can talk
> to you?
How did He tell you all this? Don't beat about the bush, tell me how He told
you this.
>>>> Have you done anything good in your life, Don?
>>>
>>> Have you?
>>
>> Yes I have. One of them is trying to be nice and loving towards other
>> people, and trying to tell them *gently* and in a *loving* manner
>> when I think they err. I admit I'm not doing that to you, right now,
>> but I should. And you should too. Barging in here with a lot of
>> unfounded accusations, trying to *assassinate* Jason's character,
>> those are not examples of how a Christian should behave. Are they?
>
> HA HA HA HA!!!
>
> "Barging in here?"
> "Unfounded accusations?"
Yes, very much unfounded.
> Don't make me laugh. You must be new here!!!
Does posting things on usenet make it all right for you to behave so
terribly unChristian?
> If a snake was going to bite you, would you want me to tell you or
> not?
>
I'm very sure Jason is not going to bite me, nor anyone else. Confront him
privately.
> Qualem blennum!
You can tell me you think I'm a moron in English. That's more honest, don't
you think, Don?
Ariaan
Uncle Davey
I don't claim that God speaks to me in bizarre unscriptural ways.
Sola scrittura, Don Donaldo, sola scrittura .
Uncle Davey
Don
So you have a problem with what the Lord showed me? I think you might
want to step back a bit and make the entire situation a matter of deep
prayer. I have done that, perhaps you should try it.
>>> Now I know that my response to you
>>> isn't the prototype of Christian charity either, but your attitude
>>> really bothers me, so I couldn't control myself.
>>
>> What attitude?
>
>Your attitude towards other people, who's views don't exactly line up with
>yours.
How about those whose views don't exactly line-up with the Bible???
>I'm thinking of the tongues thread, where you showed real 'love' for
>your fellow brothers in Christ.
One of your "fellow brothers in Christ" claimed to have received a
"charisma" from God TEN YEARS BEFORE he became a Christian.
If the Scriptures are your "standard" for life, then his experience
was a FALSE experience and his belief system is in GREAT ERROR.
However, if "experience" is your standard, then he has nothing to
worry about. His bizarre and unscriptural claim bothered me greatly.
>And now this. You start accusing Jason of
>certain things without backing them up with any reasoning whatsoever;
You didn't really read what I just posted to you, did ya? I gave
plenty of reasons. Here is another reason. Using his own
SELF-published press releases, self-promoter/huckster, Jason
aggressively sells himself in his "Debate Shows" working with "Dr.
Kent Hovind." Now consider Hovine's own self promotion and publicity
stunts, such as his "$250,000 Challenge." Looks like Jason had some
good teachers in the art of promoting himself while avoiding the need
to hold a real job by deceiving the public.
"Dr. Kent Hovine" is so proud of his degree-mill diploma that he is
listed as such in the local phone book. Jason will surely likewise
promote his degree-mill "Ph.D." when he receives it. More
self-glorification, not Godly humility.
Dr. Hovine's degree comes from Patriot University, a degree mill which
is accredited only by the American Accrediting Association of
Theological Institutions, an accreditation mill that provides
accreditation for a $100 charge. Patriot University has moved to
Alamosa, Colorado and continues to offer correspondence courses for
$15 to $32 per credit. The school's catalog contains course
descriptions but no listing of the school's faculty or their
credentials. With an idol like that, no wonder Jason has no problem
embracing and promoting his degree-mill credentials.
Need another reason? Jason shamelessly promotes himself, always
mentioning that he "has obtained a Master of Arts in Bible and
Theology" and "He is currently working on a Ph.D. in biblical
studies." He always neglects to mention that these two degrees are
non-academic papers from a non-accredited degree-mill. He also used
to add, "Jason Gastrich is currently running for Governor of
California." Sure he is...and that glorifies Christ how??? None at
all..it glorifies Jason, alone.
How much more "Jason promotion" is really necessary?
Like many zealots, Jason is addicted to his beliefs, he identifies his
beliefs with his own ego and defends them like his own children. He
forgets that the mind of man is wonderfully versatile at inventing the
most imaginative excuses rather than admit things it doesn't want to
admit. Cholerics like things in order, and stable. Once they have
embraced, what they perceive is, a superior position, it is difficult
for them to objectively look at reality anymore. That is why Jason so
vehemently defends his diploma-mill degrees as if they are actually
worth something, rather than honestly admit what they are. That is
one reason Jason aggressively promotes himself under the guise of his
"ministry."
> you
>only claim to know this because "the Lord told you".
I did not claim what you just said. You REALLY can NOT read, can you?
>Now that's a really
>weak argument to use when you're accusing someone of such serious things.
So you don't believe that God reveals things to some people? Oh, ye
of little faith. You don't know the difference between an accusation
and an observation, do ya?
>Provide proof.
I did once and you ignored it. I provided more above and you will
probably ignore it also. Why can't you step back from your "Jason
worship" and try to look a bit more objectively?
>>> How do you get it in your head
>>> that Jason's "hungry ego lusts after the acclaim of Christian
>>> super-stardom"? How do you come by that? That is quite an unfounded
>>> but severe accusation. Defend it, please...
>>
>> I have several decades in the vocational ministry, and have seen
>> people like Jason come and go. The ones who make a profession of it
>> do so based upon their business savvy more than anything else.
>>
>> I have decades of observing arrogant, condescending, little
>> Type-A/choleric individuals like Jason, who become "saved" and claim
>
>You want to say that Jason is in fact not saved at all? You know this for a
>fact?
I did not say that. Do you also have a reading comprehension problem?
Please be more honest.
>> that THEY suddenly hold "the Truth" and that nobody else has it. They
>> also feel it is their divine calling to point-out that YOU are lost
>> and going to hell unless you embrace their interpretation of the Bible
>> in every way and their particular flavor of whatever they might call
>> Christianity.
>
>He told you that, did he? He said you were lost?
Again, please be honest. I did not say that.
Let me give you two facts that you are overlooking:
1) My problem is not with the schools.
2) I am not "acting out" anything on Jason.
His school is a degree-mill, distributing worthless "degrees" for a
few hundred bucks and a term paper. My problem is when someone adds
"M.A" or "Ph.D." to his name for the sole purpose of appearing more
intelligent, more educated, more "legitimate" because of those
letters, when in fact, the degree is worthless except to impress the
ignorant. Jason is using these pseudo-degrees to imply that his
educational level is on par with a legitimate Doctorate of
Philosophy...which he does not posses and WILL NOT posses even after
he receives his papers. THAT, sir, is simply DISHONEST and liars will
burn in the lake of fire.
Rev.21:8, 27.
>Once again, tell him in person,
>confront him with what you think he does wrong, and don't start blabbering
>all sorts of wild accusations on the internet, for everyone to read. Read
>Mathew 18:16.
Like I said before, you haven't been here very long.
>> I know show business and Jason is in it! Ministry is what he calls it
>> so he can raise money. Everything he does, even his "Jason Debates An
>> Atheist Show" proclaims "Jason" as the star with the Lord being a side
>> product. He is no fool.
>
>Confront him privately.
Do you believe in TRUTH? Do you?
>>> By the unfounded and very severe accusations you made, bordering on
>>> character assassination.
>>> Tell me how God spoke to you.
>>
>> So you are saying that God can not talk to me as well as he can talk
>> to you?
>
>How did He tell you all this? Don't beat about the bush, tell me how He told
>you this.
How does He tell you things? Or does He?
>>>>> Have you done anything good in your life, Don?
>>>>
>>>> Have you?
>>>
>>> Yes I have. One of them is trying to be nice and loving towards other
>>> people, and trying to tell them *gently* and in a *loving* manner
>>> when I think they err. I admit I'm not doing that to you, right now,
>>> but I should. And you should too. Barging in here with a lot of
>>> unfounded accusations, trying to *assassinate* Jason's character,
>>> those are not examples of how a Christian should behave. Are they?
>>
>> HA HA HA HA!!!
>>
>> "Barging in here?"
>> "Unfounded accusations?"
>
>Yes, very much unfounded.
Read again.
>> Don't make me laugh. You must be new here!!!
>
>Does posting things on usenet make it all right for you to behave so
>terribly unChristian?
Does accusing me falsely sound terribly unChristian?
>> If a snake was going to bite you, would you want me to tell you or
>> not?
>>
>I'm very sure Jason is not going to bite me, nor anyone else. Confront him
>privately.
>
>> Qualem blennum!
>
>You can tell me you think I'm a moron in English. That's more honest, don't
>you think, Don?
I think you are new here.
I think you are probably a younger person.
I think you probably do not often approach many things objectively.
I think you skimmed what I wrote instead of considering that it may
have contained TRUTH.
I think you do not know the difference between accusation and
observation..
I think you probably don't care what I think.
D*
My commitment is to truth, not consistency.
~ Mohandas K. Gandhi
Dr. Jason Gastrich
I could do this. Is this just hypothetical or do you have a 100 hours of
sermons somewhere for me to burn on a CD? I may have 10 hours of debates.
God bless,
Jason
Uncle Davey
Użytkownik "Dr. Jason Gastrich" <ne...@jcsm.org> napisał w wiadomości
news:A2Jtb.199934$ZH4....@twister.socal.rr.com...
I wonder if you could burn onto a CD 100 hours of the late John Marshall's
sermons?
He was one of the trustees of the Banner of Truth trust, and the minister of
Alexander Road Congregational Church in Hemel Hempstead.
Now there certainly is that volume of sermons, there is that much a year if
not ten times that much on cassettes there.
And he is the best preacher I have ever heard. I was converted under his
ministry.
He was an open air preacher too, in Hemel Hempstead market place on
Saturdays.
Every rotten tomato ever thrown at him for the truth could now be an orb of
golden treasure, in Heaven.
He could be one of heaven's richest Englishmen.
So if you could be interested in turning analogue cassettes into mp3s, then
let me know, we can contact the Church and also for that sort of project we
can discuss some cash support from me linked to the stages of the project.
There are some sermons on the site already. See this:
http://www.sermonaudio.com/source_detail.asp?sourceid=arcc
I would be interested to hear your comments.
Uncle Davey
Uncle Davey
Użytkownik "Uncle Davey" <no...@jose.com> napisał w wiadomości
news:bp845r$db8$1...@nemesis.news.tpi.pl...
I even found they've put his last words on there. His last Bible study
before he died, on Nehemiah 4.
http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sermonID=920353851
I haven't heard it myself yet, it's gonna take ma an hour to download, which
is happening as I type.
Best
Uncle Davey
Ariaan
You haven't followed His steps in dealing with it. See also below.
>>>> Now I know that my response to you
>>>> isn't the prototype of Christian charity either, but your attitude
>>>> really bothers me, so I couldn't control myself.
>>>
>>> What attitude?
>>
>> Your attitude towards other people, who's views don't exactly line
>> up with yours.
>
> How about those whose views don't exactly line-up with the Bible???
>
>> I'm thinking of the tongues thread, where you showed real 'love' for
>> your fellow brothers in Christ.
>
> One of your "fellow brothers in Christ" claimed to have received a
> "charisma" from God TEN YEARS BEFORE he became a Christian.
Your overall tone then was very accusing and denigratory. Not really a
suitable tone for a Christian to use against his brothers in Christ. See
also below for my main point.
> If the Scriptures are your "standard" for life, then his experience
> was a FALSE experience and his belief system is in GREAT ERROR.
>
> However, if "experience" is your standard, then he has nothing to
> worry about. His bizarre and unscriptural claim bothered me greatly.
>
>> And now this. You start accusing Jason of
>> certain things without backing them up with any reasoning whatsoever;
>
> You didn't really read what I just posted to you, did ya?
Yes, I did. But the fact is that you didn't present those in your first
post. That's what I meant. You just rambled about what God revealed to you,
without backing it up. See also below for my main point.
> I gave plenty of reasons. Here is another reason. Using his own
> SELF-published press releases, self-promoter/huckster, Jason
> aggressively sells himself in his "Debate Shows" working with "Dr.
> Kent Hovind." Now consider Hovine's own self promotion and publicity
> stunts, such as his "$250,000 Challenge." Looks like Jason had some
> good teachers in the art of promoting himself while avoiding the need
> to hold a real job by deceiving the public.
>
> "Dr. Kent Hovine" is so proud of his degree-mill diploma that he is
> listed as such in the local phone book. Jason will surely likewise
> promote his degree-mill "Ph.D." when he receives it. More
> self-glorification, not Godly humility.
What is wrong with placing your titles behind your name? Besides, I don't
really care whether they are valid or not. I can't judge that. My problem is
with your original post.
> Dr. Hovine's degree comes from Patriot University, a degree mill which
> is accredited only by the American Accrediting Association of
> Theological Institutions, an accreditation mill that provides
> accreditation for a $100 charge. Patriot University has moved to
> Alamosa, Colorado and continues to offer correspondence courses for
> $15 to $32 per credit. The school's catalog contains course
> descriptions but no listing of the school's faculty or their
> credentials. With an idol like that, no wonder Jason has no problem
> embracing and promoting his degree-mill credentials.
>
> Need another reason? Jason shamelessly promotes himself, always
> mentioning that he "has obtained a Master of Arts in Bible and
> Theology" and "He is currently working on a Ph.D. in biblical
> studies." He always neglects to mention that these two degrees are
> non-academic papers from a non-accredited degree-mill. He also used
> to add, "Jason Gastrich is currently running for Governor of
> California." Sure he is...and that glorifies Christ how??? None at
> all..it glorifies Jason, alone.
>
> How much more "Jason promotion" is really necessary?
You see it as Jason promoting himself, whereas I don't dare to draw that
conclusion so fast. Why can't a person be proud of having achieved something
and then show that by putting the titles behind their name? If you don't
think those are valid credentials, take it up with the institutes, or at
least point it out to Jason privately. Because that would be loving,
Christian behaviour, and publicly humiliating him certainly is not.
> Like many zealots, Jason is addicted to his beliefs, he identifies his
> beliefs with his own ego and defends them like his own children. He
> forgets that the mind of man is wonderfully versatile at inventing the
> most imaginative excuses rather than admit things it doesn't want to
And what makes your godly revalation any different from this? Seriously, I
like to know. How can you be sure that it really is God who put these
believes into your head, instead of your own mind having made up these
certainties?
> admit. Cholerics like things in order, and stable. Once they have
> embraced, what they perceive is, a superior position, it is difficult
> for them to objectively look at reality anymore. That is why Jason so
> vehemently defends his diploma-mill degrees as if they are actually
> worth something, rather than honestly admit what they are. That is
> one reason Jason aggressively promotes himself under the guise of his
> "ministry."
>
>> you
>> only claim to know this because "the Lord told you".
>
> I did not claim what you just said. You REALLY can NOT read, can you?
Is there really a difference between revealing and telling? In both cases
you claim God made you aware of the fact, which I doubt is true. Even if it
were true, you haven't acted upon it in a Christian way. See also below.
>> Now that's a really
>> weak argument to use when you're accusing someone of such serious
>> things.
>
> So you don't believe that God reveals things to some people? Oh, ye
> of little faith. You don't know the difference between an accusation
> and an observation, do ya?
Yes I do. And you *accused*, not *observed*. Had you merely observed it, you
would have provided some sort of logic to back it all up, and left some room
for doubt.
>> Provide proof.
>
> I did once and you ignored it. I provided more above and you will
> probably ignore it also. Why can't you step back from your "Jason
> worship" and try to look a bit more objectively?
I don't worship Jason. In fact there are many things he does that I disagree
with. So what. That happens. And I try to either ignore it, or tell him in a
normal manner and have a discussion about it. That is the normal way to
handle disagreements.
>>>> How do you get it in your head
>>>> that Jason's "hungry ego lusts after the acclaim of Christian
>>>> super-stardom"? How do you come by that? That is quite an unfounded
>>>> but severe accusation. Defend it, please...
>>>
>>> I have several decades in the vocational ministry, and have seen
>>> people like Jason come and go. The ones who make a profession of it
>>> do so based upon their business savvy more than anything else.
>>>
>>> I have decades of observing arrogant, condescending, little
>>> Type-A/choleric individuals like Jason, who become "saved" and claim
>>
>> You want to say that Jason is in fact not saved at all? You know
>> this for a fact?
>
> I did not say that. Do you also have a reading comprehension problem?
> Please be more honest.
Then why did you put the word saved in quotes? That is a bit ambiguous,
isn't it?
>>> that THEY suddenly hold "the Truth" and that nobody else has it.
>>> They also feel it is their divine calling to point-out that YOU are
>>> lost and going to hell unless you embrace their interpretation of
>>> the Bible in every way and their particular flavor of whatever they
>>> might call Christianity.
>>
>> He told you that, did he? He said you were lost?
>
> Again, please be honest. I did not say that.
You are implying this is what he tells people. I think you are
overexaggerating here.
But it is. You call it "a degree mill". You state that the tutors are not
accredited. You don't have a problem with that?
> 2) I am not "acting out" anything on Jason.
>
> His school is a degree-mill, distributing worthless "degrees" for a
> few hundred bucks and a term paper. My problem is when someone adds
> "M.A" or "Ph.D." to his name for the sole purpose of appearing more
> intelligent, more educated, more "legitimate" because of those
> letters, when in fact, the degree is worthless except to impress the
> ignorant. Jason is using these pseudo-degrees to imply that his
> educational level is on par with a legitimate Doctorate of
> Philosophy...which he does not posses and WILL NOT posses even after
> he receives his papers. THAT, sir, is simply DISHONEST and liars will
> burn in the lake of fire.
> Rev.21:8, 27.
>
>> Once again, tell him in person,
>> confront him with what you think he does wrong, and don't start
>> blabbering all sorts of wild accusations on the internet, for
>> everyone to read. Read Mathew 18:16.
>
> Like I said before, you haven't been here very long.
A Christian has to live by the same rules on usenet as he does in real life.
No difference.
>>> I know show business and Jason is in it! Ministry is what he calls
>>> it so he can raise money. Everything he does, even his "Jason
>>> Debates An Atheist Show" proclaims "Jason" as the star with the
>>> Lord being a side product. He is no fool.
>>
>> Confront him privately.
>
> Do you believe in TRUTH? Do you?
How would that clash confrontation in private? See also below.
>>>> By the unfounded and very severe accusations you made, bordering on
>>>> character assassination.
>>>> Tell me how God spoke to you.
>>>
>>> So you are saying that God can not talk to me as well as he can talk
>>> to you?
>>
>> How did He tell you all this? Don't beat about the bush, tell me how
>> He told you this.
>
> How does He tell you things? Or does He?
You just don't want to tell me, do you?
>>>>>> Have you done anything good in your life, Don?
>>>>>
>>>>> Have you?
>>>>
>>>> Yes I have. One of them is trying to be nice and loving towards
>>>> other people, and trying to tell them *gently* and in a *loving*
>>>> manner when I think they err. I admit I'm not doing that to you,
>>>> right now, but I should. And you should too. Barging in here with
>>>> a lot of unfounded accusations, trying to *assassinate* Jason's
>>>> character, those are not examples of how a Christian should
>>>> behave. Are they?
>>>
>>> HA HA HA HA!!!
>>>
>>> "Barging in here?"
>>> "Unfounded accusations?"
>>
>> Yes, very much unfounded.
>
> Read again.
>
>>> Don't make me laugh. You must be new here!!!
>>
>> Does posting things on usenet make it all right for you to behave so
>> terribly unChristian?
>
> Does accusing me falsely sound terribly unChristian?
Am I accusing you falsely? Of what?
Your first post is in fact terribly unChristian. You claim God has revealed
you all sorts of things about Jason, and you end the post with a final
severe and very personal accusation. Nothing of it is backed by any proof or
reasoning whatsoever. You leave no room for doubt, you leave no room for
Jason to defend himself, you just state these things as facts. That, sir, is
*very* unChristian. The first thing you should have done, was to contact him
privately and put your insights to him personally, leaving him the
possibility to defend himself and refute your believes. That is the first
action a Christian should undertake when they are under the opinion that
someone is doing wrong. Usenet is *not* the right place to do that, as
everyone can lurk in and take note of your accusations. Therefore e.g.
e-mail would have been an appropriate medium. It's private; usenet is not.
When this first attempt has failed, and you still strongly believe that he
is doing wrong, you can bring a few other people into it, who also believe
as you do. Should that not help, and you still strongly believe that he can
be harmful to others, THEN, and only then, may you put your accusations into
the open. That, sir, is the way our Lord and Saviour has told us to handle
these kinds of things. And that, I believe, is not what you did. Hence my
response to you.
>>> If a snake was going to bite you, would you want me to tell you or
>>> not?
>>>
>> I'm very sure Jason is not going to bite me, nor anyone else.
>> Confront him privately.
>>
>>> Qualem blennum!
>>
>> You can tell me you think I'm a moron in English. That's more
>> honest, don't you think, Don?
>
> I think you are new here.
That's beside the point I want to make. Usenet is no different from real
life. Christian behaviour should be the same anywhere. You should treat your
usenet neighbour the same as you treat your real life neighbour.
> I think you are probably a younger person.
That's also beside the point.
> I think you probably do not often approach many things objectively.
You're wrong about that. I'm very careful with my opinions of others. I try
to leave other people a lot of room, before I begin thinking they may be
totally screwed up. Though some harsh words have escaped from my mouth, for
which I apologise and ask your forgiveness, I have in fact still faith in
you, my neighbour and brother in Christ. That's why I still hope you will
see that your initial post was quite inappropriate.
> I think you skimmed what I wrote instead of considering that it may
> have contained TRUTH.
I have considered it. You clearly have a beef with these institutes. Which
is fine. But that doesn't reveal anything about the person Jason Gastrich.
> I think you do not know the difference between accusation and
> observation.
I do, actually. I think you may need to frase your observations differently,
next time. This does come across as a bunch of accusations.
> I think you probably don't care what I think.
That's a little negatively thought. I do care what you think, but the style
in which you have put it hampers my giving objective answers. I hope you
understand that. Once a thread turns to a negative tone, it's not easy to
reply positively.
regards,
Ariaan
Dr. Jason Gastrich
Hey Davey,
I see 8 of his sermons on that page. Will this CD be for you?
Converting analog tapes to MP3 does take awhile. Doing this for 92 tapes
could take a couple of months or so. Nonetheless, I will do it.
Do you want to email me about the details? I'll need someone to send me
these tapes.
Sincerely,
Jason
Don
>>> And now this. You start accusing Jason of
>>> certain things without backing them up with any reasoning whatsoever;
>>
>> You didn't really read what I just posted to you, did ya?
>
>Yes, I did. But the fact is that you didn't present those in your first
>post. That's what I meant. You just rambled about what God revealed to you,
>without backing it up. See also below for my main point.
Without backing WHAT up? Is truth truth? Is deception deception? Do
you believe in honesty? Would you rather follow a false, deceptive
teacher presenting himself as honest...or simply follow an honest
teacher?
>> "Dr. Kent Hovine" is so proud of his degree-mill diploma that he is
>> listed as such in the local phone book. Jason will surely likewise
>> promote his degree-mill "Ph.D." when he receives it. More
>> self-glorification, not Godly humility.
>
>What is wrong with placing your titles behind your name?
Nothing when the titles are honest.
However it is wrong in many ways...
1) ...when you deceive others by presenting false credentials as
legitimate credentials.
2) ...when you use false credentials to promote yourself by deceiving
others into thinking they are legitimate.
3) ...when you present yourself as a degree'd expert using false
credentials
4) ...when you use those false credentials for personal gain...which
is what most people who receive those kind of degrees do!!!
However, some allow their EGO to dictate they be called "Dr." so&so.
>Besides, I don't
>really care whether they are valid or not.
BINGO!! You just revealed your lack of personal standards and
questionable integrity, sure signs of one who follows blindly, without
question.
So you don't care of someone presents himself as having a legitimate,
accredited, academic degree when, in fact, is it hypocritical,
pretending to be something you are not??? That doesn't bother you?
> I can't judge that. My problem is
>with your original post.
You have a problem with the Lord revealing the obvious to someone yet
you have no truth with a lying teacher?!? How strange.
>> Dr. Hovine's degree comes from Patriot University, a degree mill which
>> is accredited only by the American Accrediting Association of
>> Theological Institutions, an accreditation mill that provides
>> accreditation for a $100 charge. Patriot University has moved to
>> Alamosa, Colorado and continues to offer correspondence courses for
>> $15 to $32 per credit. The school's catalog contains course
>> descriptions but no listing of the school's faculty or their
>> credentials. With an idol like that, no wonder Jason has no problem
>> embracing and promoting his degree-mill credentials.
>>
>> Need another reason? Jason shamelessly promotes himself, always
>> mentioning that he "has obtained a Master of Arts in Bible and
>> Theology" and "He is currently working on a Ph.D. in biblical
>> studies." He always neglects to mention that these two degrees are
>> non-academic papers from a non-accredited degree-mill. He also used
>> to add, "Jason Gastrich is currently running for Governor of
>> California." Sure he is...and that glorifies Christ how??? None at
>> all..it glorifies Jason, alone.
>>
>> How much more "Jason promotion" is really necessary?
>
>You see it as Jason promoting himself, whereas I don't dare to draw that
>conclusion so fast.
You obviously have not read Jason's web site. You obviously are not
familiar with the "Jason Debates An Atheist Show" which he promotes
around the country. You do not see the advantage of promoting
yourself with "Ph.D" rather than just plain "Jason." Can you say,
"publicity stunts?"
>Why can't a person be proud of having achieved something
>and then show that by putting the titles behind their name?
Would you be proud of a diploma mill "degree" that is not recognized
by any legitimate, accredited academics institution?
>If you don't
>think those are valid credentials, take it up with the institutes, or at
>least point it out to Jason privately. Because that would be loving,
>Christian behaviour, and publicly humiliating him certainly is not.
Jason is not humiliated. Jason will never be humiliated...his ego will
not allow it. Jason is focused on promoting Jason and "The Jason
Show" to worry about me...or anyone else with a valid issue that
does not fall in line with his belief pattern.
The thing that bothers me is the way his pride is presented. It can
make people uncomfortable when someone is so openly tooting their own
horn, especially when they eventually use those fake cridentials to
proclaim their spiritual superiority over others. "Dr." Kent Hovine
does this, even claims to be a scientist with a Ph.D. when it fact,
he had only three science courses at the most in his diploma-mill
graduate classes, mostly by cassette tape.
It is a bragging thing. It's all about "me me me." After awhile,
that is tiresome, especially considering the source. It is purely
self-serving. Many weeks ago, I told Jason that he would certainly
use "Dr." in front of his name as soon he received his "degree."
Well...his feigned humility went out the window. We now see "Dr."
Jason. How convenient!!! What a promotional stunt!
With smug pride, he claims, "I've read the Bible and I understand its
message." The implication is clear...if you disagree with him, then
you do NOT "understand its message."
He condescendingly asks, "Can you give us your credentials
because if you were highly educated and from a quality seminary, then
your new opinion may have some theological value."
"Quality seminary?"
"Theological value?"
What a JOKE for HIM to ask of someone else, considering his
diploma-mill degree.
But, demonstrating the LOVE OF CHRIST, Jason continues with a personal
attack in the next sentence when he attacks...
"However, if you are just a commentary-quoting pagan who has no
education in theology, then that would give us another picture of you
and your copy and paste job."
Can you not see the condescension and PRIDE shining brightly from his
words? If you disagree with Jason, then:
1) Jason will call you names...such as a "commentary-quoting pagan"
(PRIDE)
2) Jason will call you uneducated
(not as smart as HE thinks He is...PRIDE)
3) Jason will let you know HE is smarter than you, more qualified and
obviously, more spiritual.
(PRIDE)
This was followed by Jason quoting a commentary, claiming that HIS
interpretation is the correct interpretation and the poster's is
wrong.
(More condescension...his usual pattern)
>> Like many zealots, Jason is addicted to his beliefs, he identifies his
>> beliefs with his own ego and defends them like his own children. He
>> forgets that the mind of man is wonderfully versatile at inventing the
>> most imaginative excuses rather than admit things it doesn't want to
>
>And what makes your godly revalation any different from this? Seriously, I
>like to know. How can you be sure that it really is God who put these
>believes into your head, instead of your own mind having made up these
>certainties?
Why would I doubt it? I don't have to defend it to you.
WHY??? According to what you said above, you have no problem with a
person presenting himself as something he isn't, and doing it in the
name of Jesus, even as a minister of the Gospel. What does THAT say
about your approach to TRUTH? What does THAT say about YOUR personal
integrity???
>>> you
>>> only claim to know this because "the Lord told you".
>>
>> I did not claim what you just said. You REALLY can NOT read, can you?
>
>Is there really a difference between revealing and telling? In both cases
>you claim God made you aware of the fact, which I doubt is true. Even if it
>were true, you haven't acted upon it in a Christian way. See also below.
That is not for you to decide. You are not the one who revealed
anything to me. You already admitted that you would embrace error
from a false teacher with fake credentials.
NOTE: I did NOT say I "only claim to know this because 'the Lord told
[me]'".
Is the school legitimate? No.
Is the school a "diploma mill?" Yes, definitely.
Do the faculty member claim doctorates which are not legitimate? Yes.
Are the faculty members DECEIVING the student body? ABSOLUTELY!
Why would anyone want a "degree" from such a NON-academic "seminary"
with a staff who claim so many unaccredited, non-accedemic degrees?
I can tell you why...
1) EGO. The chance to use "Dr." in front and "Ph.D" behind the name.
2) To impress the ignorant.
3) To MISLEAD those same "ignorant" who are easily impressed.
4) To APPEAR to be something you are not!!! THAT is deception and
NOT a Christian thing to do.
5) To raise your income level.
Many folks will actually give more $ because the "Dr." label gives an
appearance of legitimacy, genuineness to the "ministry." Too bad the
"Dr." is not genuine.
>>> Now that's a really
>>> weak argument to use when you're accusing someone of such serious
>>> things.
>>
>> So you don't believe that God reveals things to some people? Oh, ye
>> of little faith. You don't know the difference between an accusation
>> and an observation, do ya?
>
>Yes I do. And you *accused*, not *observed*. Had you merely observed it, you
>would have provided some sort of logic to back it all up, and left some room
>for doubt.
I stated what God has shown me, most of it months ago. Rather than
consider that there might be truth in my first post, you have chosen
to rebuke ME, the messenger, rather than consider the truth in the
revelation. Why are you afraid to consider the TRUTH in what was in
the first post?
>>>>> How do you get it in your head
>>>>> that Jason's "hungry ego lusts after the acclaim of Christian
>>>>> super-stardom"? How do you come by that? That is quite an unfounded
>>>>> but severe accusation. Defend it, please...
>>>>
>>>> I have several decades in the vocational ministry, and have seen
>>>> people like Jason come and go. The ones who make a profession of it
>>>> do so based upon their business savvy more than anything else.
>>>>
>>>> I have decades of observing arrogant, condescending, little
>>>> Type-A/choleric individuals like Jason, who become "saved" and claim
>>>
>>> You want to say that Jason is in fact not saved at all? You know
>>> this for a fact?
>>
>> I did not say that. Do you also have a reading comprehension problem?
>> Please be more honest.
>
>Then why did you put the word saved in quotes? That is a bit ambiguous,
>isn't it?
Ambiguous? Ya mean, like presenting a diploma-mill doctorate as
legitimate? That is MORE than "ambiguous." Can you say, "LYING???"
>>> He told you that, did he? He said you were lost?
>>
>> Again, please be honest. I did not say that.
>
>You are implying this is what he tells people. I think you are
>overexaggerating here.
I think you don't know Jason or what he does to raise funds in order
to avoid working a real job, even a real ministry in a local church.
Do you know HOW MUCH GOLF "vocational Christians" like Jason have time
to play? An "evangelist" books meetings based upon the nearest golf
course.
>>> So in fact you have a problem with these schools, and now you're
>>> acting it out on Jason? That's real mature of you.
>>
>> Let me give you two facts that you are overlooking:
>>
>> 1) My problem is not with the schools.
>
>But it is. You call it "a degree mill". You state that the tutors are not
>accredited. You don't have a problem with that?
They AREN'T. Am I wrong?
>> 2) I am not "acting out" anything on Jason.
>>
>> His school is a degree-mill, distributing worthless "degrees" for a
>> few hundred bucks and a term paper. My problem is when someone adds
>> "M.A" or "Ph.D." to his name for the sole purpose of appearing more
>> intelligent, more educated, more "legitimate" because of those
>> letters, when in fact, the degree is worthless except to impress the
>> ignorant. Jason is using these pseudo-degrees to imply that his
>> educational level is on par with a legitimate Doctorate of
>> Philosophy...which he does not posses and WILL NOT posses even after
>> he receives his papers. THAT, sir, is simply DISHONEST and liars will
>> burn in the lake of fire.
>> Rev.21:8, 27.
>>>> I know show business and Jason is in it! Ministry is what he calls
>>>> it so he can raise money. Everything he does, even his "Jason
>>>> Debates An Atheist Show" proclaims "Jason" as the star with the
>>>> Lord being a side product. He is no fool.
>>>
>>> Confront him privately.
>>
>> Do you believe in TRUTH? Do you?
>
>How would that clash confrontation in private? See also below.
Let me repeat, you have not been here very long or you would stop
saying that same song. Jason and I hashed this out many weeks ago.
Read below for more of what happened regarding Jason's consistent
claim that his "seminary" is accredited.
>>>> So you are saying that God can not talk to me as well as he can talk
>>>> to you?
>>>
>>> How did He tell you all this? Don't beat about the bush, tell me how
>>> He told you this.
>>
>> How does He tell you things? Or does He?
>
>You just don't want to tell me, do you?
FIRST, let's look at your claims...
1) From your first post to me, you claimed that I attacked Jason.
I did not.
2) You called me a Satanist.
QUOTE: "Your lord Satan has revealed you quite a lot."
QUOTE: "Yep, you are number two, his servant."
3) You accused me of being "petty" because I seek truth.
QUOTE: " It's a pity he didn't reveal to you how petty...you yourself
are."
4) You accused me of being envious.
QUOTE: "It's a pity he didn't reveal to you how...envious you
yourself are."
5) You called me a liar
QUOTE: "Please shut your lying mouth"
6) You claim YOU may speak but I man NOT!
QUOTE: "Please shut your lying mouth and go sit in the corner."
7) You dare judge my "goodness" based upon YOUR EARTHLY CARNAL
standard.
QUOTE: "Have you done anything good in your life, Don?"
8) You assumed that God did not speak to me.
Somehow, YOU can judge THAT but you don't mind following teachers who
LIE about their credentials.
9) You assumed that *I* am making all of this up, that I am lying.
10) You claim that you "don't really care whether [a degree is] valid
or not." In other words, you are not bothered by lying teachers
pretending to be something they aren't.
We are to be discerning, as Christians. It is one of the
responsibilities as a Christian. So many times, if people are FALSE
in one area, they are false in another. There IS such a thing as
credibility. You have stated that you don't care about credibility,
but you keep asking ME to tell you how God revealed these things to
me...as if it would matter what I say.
You are the same person who asked me what I have done for God.
Obviously, YOU think that YOU have DONE much for God, thereby PROVING
how spiritual you are. Jason asked me the same thing, over and over
and over.
PRIDE says, "Look what I have done for God."
JASON says, "I will be judged by my deeds and what I do for my
Savior."
The BIBLE says, ""But we are all as an unclean [thing], and all our
righteousnesses [are] as filthy rags;
Isa64:6
The BIBLE says, "Everyone who is proud in heart is an abomination to
the LORD"
Prov16:5
JASON bragged, "my works aren't dung"
The BIBLE says, " Yet indeed I also count ALL THINGS loss...and count
them as rubbish/dung/manure/shit/excrement/offscourings/dregs that I
may gain Christ"
The BIBLE adds, "Everyone who is proud in heart is an abomination to
the LORD"
Phil3:8, Prov16:5
JASON bragged, "I spend every day sharing God's love and spreading the
good news."
THE BIBLE says, "I know I am rotten through and through so far as my
old sinful nature is concerned. No matter which way I turn, I can't
make myself do right. I want to, but I can't.
Rom7:18
Jason bragged, "I'm spreading the love of God in my sleep"
The BIBLE says, "'The way of a fool is right in his own eyes"
Prov12:15
Jason says, " What are you doing for the cause of Christ?"
The BIBLE says, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom
He has sent."
John6:29
While completely missing the point of being a Christian, JASON
condescendingly asked at various times,
1) "Would you care to reveal what you're doing?"
2) "I'm asking you for more information about what you are doing to
further the cause of Christ."
3) "What are you doing for the cause of Christ?"
4) "Which responsibilities has God given you as a minister of the
Word of God?"
5) "Whare (sic) you doing for the cause of Christ?"
Referring to Jason's inane questioning of my 'works" for God, JESUS
SAID:
"The scribes and the Pharisees (Kent Hovine and Jason) have seated
themselves in the chair of Moses;
1) They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men's shoulders,
(Legalism)
2) they do all their deeds to be noticed by men;
3) They love the place of honor at banquets and the chief seats in
the synagogues,
4) They love...being called Rabbi by men. (Being called "Dr.")
Jesus continued: "Do not be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher,
and you are all brothers...Do not be called leaders; for One is your
Leader, {that is,} Christ.
Matt23
Sound familiar? The BIBLE says, "When pride comes, then comes shame;
But with the humble is wisdom."
"Dr." JASON sarcastically said,
"Based on the way you've spoken and the way you've treated me, I'd be
shocked if God gave you 100 people to 'bless.'"
To Jason, NUMBERS are what matters. He counts numbers continually on
his web site. It's PRIDE and nothing more!
The BIBLE says, "For who regards you as superior? What do you have
that you did not receive?"
"For whoever exalteth himself shall be abased"
1Cor4:7, Luke 14:11
JASON judgementally proclaimed,
"I'm saying that you have offended God with your nonsense, so He has
given you VERY FEW to reach."
The BIBLE replies,
Ariaan, you asked me:
"Have you done anything good in your life, Don?"
To you, I would answer,
"I wouldn't dare say that I am as wonderful as these other men who
tell you how important they are! But they are only comparing
themselves with each other, and measuring themselves by themselves.
What foolishness! For if anyone thinks himself to be something, when
he is nothing, he deceives himself."
2Cor10:12, Gal6:3
>>> Does posting things on usenet make it all right for you to behave so
>>> terribly unChristian?
>>
>> Does accusing me falsely sound terribly unChristian?
>
>Am I accusing you falsely? Of what?
You FALSLY accused me of:
1) Being a Satanist
2) Being envious of an ego-filled deceiver
3) Doing nothing "good in [my] life"
4) "Barging in here with a lot of unfounded accusations,"
5) "Trying to *assassinate* Jason's character,"
6) "accusing Jason of certain things without backing them up with any
reasoning whatsoever;"
7) Saying "for a fact"..."that Jason is in fact not saved at all"
8) Claiming that Jason "said [I am] lost"
9) Lying about God showing me truth about Jason and his ministry
>Your first post is in fact terribly unChristian. You claim God has revealed
>you all sorts of things about Jason, and you end the post with a final
>severe and very personal accusation. Nothing of it is backed by any proof or
>reasoning whatsoever. You leave no room for doubt, you leave no room for
>Jason to defend himself, you just state these things as facts.
Jason said, "My Ph.D. isn't a matter or pride," yet he proudly
displays it by calling himself "Dr." Jason. If it is not pride, let
him quietly use the knowledge from it and remain humbled, not puffing
himself up higher than those around him. It is PRIDE!
Jason has already attempted to "defend" his diploma-mill degree. He
even claimed his school was accredited, eventually posted from EIGHT
PARAGRAPHS from Page 10 of the school catalog, NONE, of which, claimed
accreditation for the degree mill.
The problem? "Dr." Jason has a problem with REALITY. However, Jason
has no problem pridefully using "Dr." before his name. It's good
publicity for him.
> That, sir, is
>*very* unChristian. The first thing you should have done, was to contact him
>privately and put your insights to him personally, leaving him the
>possibility to defend himself and refute your believes. That is the first
>action a Christian should undertake when they are under the opinion that
>someone is doing wrong. Usenet is *not* the right place to do that, as
>everyone can lurk in and take note of your accusations. Therefore e.g.
>e-mail would have been an appropriate medium. It's private; usenet is not.
>When this first attempt has failed, and you still strongly believe that he
>is doing wrong, you can bring a few other people into it, who also believe
>as you do. Should that not help, and you still strongly believe that he can
>be harmful to others, THEN, and only then, may you put your accusations into
>the open. That, sir, is the way our Lord and Saviour has told us to handle
>these kinds of things. And that, I believe, is not what you did. Hence my
>response to you.
So you think "our Lord and Saviour has told" Jason to get a fake
degree so he can drum-up more speaking engagements falsely claiming to
be an expert with a legitimate "Ph.D???" I don't think so.
>> I think you are probably a younger person.
>
>That's also beside the point.
It is a very legitimate point. You have limited experience, you are
more impressed by the APPEARANCE of spirituality than by the humble
servant hood of true Christianity.
>> I think you probably do not often approach many things objectively.
>
>You're wrong about that. I'm very careful with my opinions of others. I try
>to leave other people a lot of room, before I begin thinking they may be
>totally screwed up.
I don't think so at all. You misquoted me NUMEROUS TIMES in your
comments! THAT tells much about you.
>Though some harsh words have escaped from my mouth, for
>which I apologise and ask your forgiveness, I have in fact still faith in
>you, my neighbour and brother in Christ. That's why I still hope you will
>see that your initial post was quite inappropriate.
I can hold no grudge against you. I do hope you eventually learn to
consider the MESSAGE rather than the delivery or the messenger.
>> I think you skimmed what I wrote instead of considering that it may
>> have contained TRUTH.
>
>I have considered it. You clearly have a beef with these institutes. Which
>is fine. But that doesn't reveal anything about the person Jason Gastrich.
Claiming and defending a diploma mill degree as legitimate is
deceptive, a lie. When Jason calles himself "Dr." based upon a fade
degree, presenting himself as an expert with a "Ph.D" as he is doing,
THAT DOES REVEAL PLENTY "about the person Jason Gastrich."
His comments of ignorance regarding medical issues, sociology and
culture have also revealed that he is nowhere NEAR what is required
for a Ph.D. in any subject.
Booking speaking engagements with fake "Dr." Kent Hovine, who presents
himself as a scientist, reveals plenty "about the person Jason
Gastrich."
If you hung out at strip-bars five days a-week, THAT would reveal
something about you, wouldn't it?
>> I think you do not know the difference between accusation and
>> observation.
>
>I do, actually. I think you may need to frase your observations differently,
>next time. This does come across as a bunch of accusations.
1) The word above should be 'PHRASE."
2) The other word you have misspelled several times is "BELIEFS," not
"believes."
3) The other word you have misspelled is "REVELATION," not
"revalation"
4) If God reveals something to me, should I just hide that fact?
>> I think you probably don't care what I think.
>
>That's a little negatively thought. I do care what you think, but the style
>in which you have put it hampers my giving objective answers. I hope you
>understand that. Once a thread turns to a negative tone, it's not easy to
>reply positively.
So, revealing deception is negative or positive? I am not a
follower of Mohandas Gandhi, but this quote seems appropriate.
"My commitment is to truth, not consistency."
I would recommend you get a copy of a book called:
"The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse"
by David Johnson, Jeff Vanvonderen.
Jason is described PERFECTLY in the very first chapter of this book.
Many weeks ago, I predicted that he would IMMEDIATELY use "Dr." in
front of his name or "Ph.D." behind it as soon as he could. Well, his
PRIDE won the battle (as if there were a battle) and we now have the
fake "Dr." Jason in our midst.
I asked you before,
-- try to clear your mind of the clutter of this thread,
-- decide if you want truth or if you want to fight.
-- Try to remain as objective as possible and
-- read the first post again.
Consider that the following quote describes "Dr." Jason as well as his
buddies like "Dr." Hovine.
When people see themselves as the "elect", they can easily conclude
that others are sinners. It is out of this sense of self righteousness
that true believers may feel chosen to do God's work. That's when
their will becomes God's will, their desires become God's desires,
their wars become God's wars.
cbianco
>
>I even found they've put his last words on there. His last Bible study
>before he died, on Nehemiah 4.
>
>http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?sermonID=920353851
>
>I haven't heard it myself yet, it's gonna take ma an hour to download, which
>is happening as I type.
hey uncledave. cb here.
i'd appreciate it if you mailed me your email address. -- i'm at
med...@newsguy.com. i'd like to talk with you. thanks.
cb1anco
Ariaan
> On Mon, 17 Nov 2003 01:21:42 +0100, "Ariaan" <no...@SPAM.spam> wrote:
>
>>>> And now this. You start accusing Jason of
>>>> certain things without backing them up with any reasoning
>>>> whatsoever;
>>>
>>> You didn't really read what I just posted to you, did ya?
>>
>> Yes, I did. But the fact is that you didn't present those in your
>> first post. That's what I meant. You just rambled about what God
>> revealed to you, without backing it up. See also below for my main
>> point.
>
> Without backing WHAT up? Is truth truth? Is deception deception? Do
> you believe in honesty? Would you rather follow a false, deceptive
> teacher presenting himself as honest...or simply follow an honest
> teacher?
You just don't get it, do you? If you want to proof a point, if you want
people to listen to you, if you want to possibly convert a stray brother in
Christ, you have to be careful how you put things.
>>> "Dr. Kent Hovine" is so proud of his degree-mill diploma that he is
>>> listed as such in the local phone book. Jason will surely likewise
>>> promote his degree-mill "Ph.D." when he receives it. More
>>> self-glorification, not Godly humility.
>>
>> What is wrong with placing your titles behind your name?
>
> Nothing when the titles are honest.
>
> However it is wrong in many ways...
> 1) ...when you deceive others by presenting false credentials as
> legitimate credentials.
> 2) ...when you use false credentials to promote yourself by deceiving
> others into thinking they are legitimate.
> 3) ...when you present yourself as a degree'd expert using false
> credentials
> 4) ...when you use those false credentials for personal gain...which
> is what most people who receive those kind of degrees do!!!
And 'most' includes Jason? You know for a fact that he uses them for his own
personal gain? Or are you just *assuming* that?
> However, some allow their EGO to dictate they be called "Dr." so&so.
>
>> Besides, I don't
>> really care whether they are valid or not.
>
> BINGO!! You just revealed your lack of personal standards and
> questionable integrity, sure signs of one who follows blindly, without
> question.
Yes, that makes you happy, doesn't it? You presume to know a lot about me,
Don. You derive this by cutting my words out of context. I added: (because)
I can't judge that. That is important here. I don't know anything about
Jason's education, or your American educational system, so it is not my
place to judge whether his credentials are valid or not. Hence I don't care
about that. Clear?
> So you don't care of someone presents himself as having a legitimate,
> accredited, academic degree when, in fact, is it hypocritical,
> pretending to be something you are not??? That doesn't bother you?
>
>> I can't judge that. My problem is
>> with your original post.
>
> You have a problem with the Lord revealing the obvious to someone yet
> you have no truth with a lying teacher?!? How strange.
I have a problem with your post, your wording. Get it?
Can you say: Scheveningen?
I think he does that just to spite you, because of your attack on him.
Nothing, because you don't know me at all, mister. You even misinterpret me.
You make a lot of assumptions.
>>>> you
>>>> only claim to know this because "the Lord told you".
>>>
>>> I did not claim what you just said. You REALLY can NOT read, can
>>> you?
>>
>> Is there really a difference between revealing and telling? In both
>> cases you claim God made you aware of the fact, which I doubt is
>> true. Even if it were true, you haven't acted upon it in a Christian
>> way. See also below.
>
> That is not for you to decide. You are not the one who revealed
> anything to me. You already admitted that you would embrace error
> from a false teacher with fake credentials.
I have said nothing of the sort. That is *your* interpretation.
> NOTE: I did NOT say I "only claim to know this because 'the Lord told
> [me]'".
You did not add anything that might enlighten us either. You should have.
> Is the school legitimate? No.
> Is the school a "diploma mill?" Yes, definitely.
> Do the faculty member claim doctorates which are not legitimate? Yes.
> Are the faculty members DECEIVING the student body? ABSOLUTELY!
Yet you say you don't have a problem with the schools. Who's lying now, Don?
Eh?
I am? Don't think so.
It was the overall tone of your post, that really did it for me. Think about
it. If you really had wanted to discuss this with Jason or anyone else, you
would have changed the wording of your post. You would have put your ideas
and reasons and proof in that first post, so that it would have been
possible for people to respond in a normal manner. You didn't; you didn't
even put them as observations, as you claim, but you put them as
accusations, you vented your gall and that was it.
>>>>>> How do you get it in your head
>>>>>> that Jason's "hungry ego lusts after the acclaim of Christian
>>>>>> super-stardom"? How do you come by that? That is quite an
>>>>>> unfounded but severe accusation. Defend it, please...
>>>>>
>>>>> I have several decades in the vocational ministry, and have seen
>>>>> people like Jason come and go. The ones who make a profession of
>>>>> it do so based upon their business savvy more than anything else.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have decades of observing arrogant, condescending, little
>>>>> Type-A/choleric individuals like Jason, who become "saved" and
>>>>> claim
>>>>
>>>> You want to say that Jason is in fact not saved at all? You know
>>>> this for a fact?
>>>
>>> I did not say that. Do you also have a reading comprehension
>>> problem? Please be more honest.
>>
>> Then why did you put the word saved in quotes? That is a bit
>> ambiguous, isn't it?
>
> Ambiguous? Ya mean, like presenting a diploma-mill doctorate as
> legitimate? That is MORE than "ambiguous." Can you say, "LYING???"
Beating about the bush again, are we?
You put the word saved in quotes, denoting that you thought it wasn't really
true.
>>>> He told you that, did he? He said you were lost?
>>>
>>> Again, please be honest. I did not say that.
>>
>> You are implying this is what he tells people. I think you are
>> overexaggerating here.
>
> I think you don't know Jason or what he does to raise funds in order
> to avoid working a real job, even a real ministry in a local church.
> Do you know HOW MUCH GOLF "vocational Christians" like Jason have time
> to play? An "evangelist" books meetings based upon the nearest golf
> course.
>
>>>> So in fact you have a problem with these schools, and now you're
>>>> acting it out on Jason? That's real mature of you.
>>>
>>> Let me give you two facts that you are overlooking:
>>>
>>> 1) My problem is not with the schools.
>>
>> But it is. You call it "a degree mill". You state that the tutors
>> are not accredited. You don't have a problem with that?
>
> They AREN'T. Am I wrong?
So you LIED??? I can refer you to that same lake of fire you mentioned
earlier.
Yes you did. And various people agree with me on this. OR your wording was
very unfortunate.
> 2) You called me a Satanist.
> QUOTE: "Your lord Satan has revealed you quite a lot."
> QUOTE: "Yep, you are number two, his servant."
True. I'm still ashamed of that. But it was in response to your equally
denigratory tone. Therefore, be careful how you put things, if you want
people to respond in a normal manner.
> 3) You accused me of being "petty" because I seek truth.
> QUOTE: " It's a pity he didn't reveal to you how petty...you yourself
> are."
> 4) You accused me of being envious.
> QUOTE: "It's a pity he didn't reveal to you how...envious you
> yourself are."
> 5) You called me a liar
> QUOTE: "Please shut your lying mouth"
> 6) You claim YOU may speak but I man NOT!
> QUOTE: "Please shut your lying mouth and go sit in the corner."
> 7) You dare judge my "goodness" based upon YOUR EARTHLY CARNAL
> standard.
> QUOTE: "Have you done anything good in your life, Don?"
> 8) You assumed that God did not speak to me.
> Somehow, YOU can judge THAT but you don't mind following teachers who
> LIE about their credentials.
I don't know how you've gotten it into your head that I'm a follower of
Jason's (I wouldn't even dare put my hand in the fire for the
appropriateness of the 's). I attacked you because of the way in which you
said those things. I've also read previous posts by you and their overall
tone was much the same. They didn't give your opinions much credibility as
far as I was concerned.
You see? MIND YOUR WORDING!!!!
> 9) You assumed that *I* am making all of this up, that I am lying.
> 10) You claim that you "don't really care whether [a degree is] valid
> or not." In other words, you are not bothered by lying teachers
> pretending to be something they aren't.
It's sad how you misinterpret things.
> We are to be discerning, as Christians. It is one of the
> responsibilities as a Christian. So many times, if people are FALSE
> in one area, they are false in another. There IS such a thing as
> credibility. You have stated that you don't care about credibility,
> but you keep asking ME to tell you how God revealed these things to
> me...as if it would matter what I say.
Well, yes. It could easily have been an empty statement from a big phony
bonehead. How would I know? People abuse God for all sorts of reasons and in
all sorts of situations. Besides the tone of your post didn't convince me
that you really were an honest person.
> You are the same person who asked me what I have done for God.
> Obviously, YOU think that YOU have DONE much for God, thereby PROVING
> how spiritual you are. Jason asked me the same thing, over and over
> and over.
There they are again; your assumptions. I wasn't referring to myself. I
referred to Jason having debated and told God's truth and having touched
people with that, so that God could work via Jason in other people. That is
a good thing. That is what I meant. You were harrassing Jason, attacking his
debate and hence my question whether you had done anything good in your
life. Okay?
It is nice of you to post all these things here for me, but they might have
had more effect had you placed them in your first post, and had you
rephrased it to make it fit for reading and debating by everyone. Now
they're just wasted.
> Ariaan, you asked me:
> "Have you done anything good in your life, Don?"
> To you, I would answer,
>
> "I wouldn't dare say that I am as wonderful as these other men who
> tell you how important they are! But they are only comparing
> themselves with each other, and measuring themselves by themselves.
> What foolishness! For if anyone thinks himself to be something, when
> he is nothing, he deceives himself."
> 2Cor10:12, Gal6:3
Very true. Had you said similar things in your first post, you might have
had different responses. As it is, we're at a dead end.
>>>> Does posting things on usenet make it all right for you to behave
>>>> so terribly unChristian?
>>>
>>> Does accusing me falsely sound terribly unChristian?
>>
>> Am I accusing you falsely? Of what?
>
> You FALSLY accused me of:
> 1) Being a Satanist
> 2) Being envious of an ego-filled deceiver
> 3) Doing nothing "good in [my] life"
> 4) "Barging in here with a lot of unfounded accusations,"
> 5) "Trying to *assassinate* Jason's character,"
> 6) "accusing Jason of certain things without backing them up with any
> reasoning whatsoever;"
> 7) Saying "for a fact"..."that Jason is in fact not saved at all"
> 8) Claiming that Jason "said [I am] lost"
> 9) Lying about God showing me truth about Jason and his ministry
And all that because of the terrible phrasing of your first post. Do you now
see how important it is to put your opinions in a nicer way, so people won't
be annoyed by your wording but can actually discuss your opinions?
>> Your first post is in fact terribly unChristian. You claim God has
>> revealed you all sorts of things about Jason, and you end the post
>> with a final severe and very personal accusation. Nothing of it is
>> backed by any proof or reasoning whatsoever. You leave no room for
>> doubt, you leave no room for Jason to defend himself, you just state
>> these things as facts.
>
> Jason said, "My Ph.D. isn't a matter or pride," yet he proudly
> displays it by calling himself "Dr." Jason. If it is not pride, let
> him quietly use the knowledge from it and remain humbled, not puffing
> himself up higher than those around him. It is PRIDE!
>
> Jason has already attempted to "defend" his diploma-mill degree. He
> even claimed his school was accredited, eventually posted from EIGHT
> PARAGRAPHS from Page 10 of the school catalog, NONE, of which, claimed
> accreditation for the degree mill.
>
> The problem? "Dr." Jason has a problem with REALITY. However, Jason
> has no problem pridefully using "Dr." before his name. It's good
> publicity for him.
After your post he put Dr. in front of his name. Just to spite you, I would
say.
>> That, sir, is
>> *very* unChristian. The first thing you should have done, was to
>> contact him privately and put your insights to him personally,
>> leaving him the possibility to defend himself and refute your
>> believes. That is the first action a Christian should undertake when
>> they are under the opinion that someone is doing wrong. Usenet is
>> *not* the right place to do that, as everyone can lurk in and take
>> note of your accusations. Therefore e.g. e-mail would have been an
>> appropriate medium. It's private; usenet is not. When this first
>> attempt has failed, and you still strongly believe that he is doing
>> wrong, you can bring a few other people into it, who also believe as
>> you do. Should that not help, and you still strongly believe that he
>> can be harmful to others, THEN, and only then, may you put your
>> accusations into the open. That, sir, is the way our Lord and
>> Saviour has told us to handle these kinds of things. And that, I
>> believe, is not what you did. Hence my response to you.
>
> So you think "our Lord and Saviour has told" Jason to get a fake
> degree so he can drum-up more speaking engagements falsely claiming to
> be an expert with a legitimate "Ph.D???" I don't think so.
You really don't want to respond to my points, do you? I assume that is
because you know I am right.
I said something, and you just completely ignore it and even twist it to put
words into my mouth that I have never said. Nice.
>>> I think you are probably a younger person.
>>
>> That's also beside the point.
>
> It is a very legitimate point. You have limited experience, you are
> more impressed by the APPEARANCE of spirituality than by the humble
> servant hood of true Christianity.
You assume that.
Your assumption is wrong.
You don't know me.
>>> I think you probably do not often approach many things objectively.
>>
>> You're wrong about that. I'm very careful with my opinions of
>> others. I try to leave other people a lot of room, before I begin
>> thinking they may be totally screwed up.
>
> I don't think so at all. You misquoted me NUMEROUS TIMES in your
> comments! THAT tells much about you.
I think I quoted you quite well.
Let me tell you, you twist my words and ignore my truths. THAT tells me much
about you.
>> Though some harsh words have escaped from my mouth, for
>> which I apologise and ask your forgiveness, I have in fact still
>> faith in you, my neighbour and brother in Christ. That's why I still
>> hope you will see that your initial post was quite inappropriate.
>
> I can hold no grudge against you. I do hope you eventually learn to
> consider the MESSAGE rather than the delivery or the messenger.
I think how the message is wrapped and delivered is quite important too. It
defines how people will respond. That is important in these situations.
>>> I think you skimmed what I wrote instead of considering that it may
>>> have contained TRUTH.
>>
>> I have considered it. You clearly have a beef with these institutes.
>> Which is fine. But that doesn't reveal anything about the person
>> Jason Gastrich.
>
> Claiming and defending a diploma mill degree as legitimate is
> deceptive, a lie. When Jason calles himself "Dr." based upon a fade
> degree, presenting himself as an expert with a "Ph.D" as he is doing,
> THAT DOES REVEAL PLENTY "about the person Jason Gastrich."
>
> His comments of ignorance regarding medical issues, sociology and
> culture have also revealed that he is nowhere NEAR what is required
> for a Ph.D. in any subject.
>
> Booking speaking engagements with fake "Dr." Kent Hovine, who presents
> himself as a scientist, reveals plenty "about the person Jason
> Gastrich."
>
> If you hung out at strip-bars five days a-week, THAT would reveal
> something about you, wouldn't it?
>
>>> I think you do not know the difference between accusation and
>>> observation.
>>
>> I do, actually. I think you may need to frase your observations
>> differently, next time. This does come across as a bunch of
>> accusations.
>
> 1) The word above should be 'PHRASE."
Thank you.
> 2) The other word you have misspelled several times is "BELIEFS," not
> "believes."
Thank you.
> 3) The other word you have misspelled is "REVELATION," not
> "revalation"
Thank you.
Now why would you make the following point number four in this row? Odd...
> 4) If God reveals something to me, should I just hide that fact?
No, but you should phrase it better. So people will consider your opinions,
discuss them and perhaps even see you could be right. But most importantly,
so Jason can defend himself in a normal manner.
>>> I think you probably don't care what I think.
>>
>> That's a little negatively thought. I do care what you think, but
>> the style in which you have put it hampers my giving objective
>> answers. I hope you understand that. Once a thread turns to a
>> negative tone, it's not easy to reply positively.
>
> So, revealing deception is negative or positive? I am not a
> follower of Mohandas Gandhi, but this quote seems appropriate.
> "My commitment is to truth, not consistency."
>
> I would recommend you get a copy of a book called:
> "The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse"
> by David Johnson, Jeff Vanvonderen.
>
> Jason is described PERFECTLY in the very first chapter of this book.
>
> Many weeks ago, I predicted that he would IMMEDIATELY use "Dr." in
> front of his name or "Ph.D." behind it as soon as he could. Well, his
> PRIDE won the battle (as if there were a battle) and we now have the
> fake "Dr." Jason in our midst.
But he is not even a Ph.D. yet. He does it just to spite you. Which is also
not a nice thing to do, of course.
> I asked you before,
> -- try to clear your mind of the clutter of this thread,
> -- decide if you want truth or if you want to fight.
> -- Try to remain as objective as possible and
> -- read the first post again.
>
> Consider that the following quote describes "Dr." Jason as well as his
> buddies like "Dr." Hovine.
> When people see themselves as the "elect", they can easily conclude
> that others are sinners. It is out of this sense of self
> righteousness that true believers may feel chosen to do God's work.
> That's when their will becomes God's will, their desires become God's
> desires, their wars become God's wars.
Don, I know people far better than you may think I do.
You assume a lot about me; you don't know me at all.
I have serious objections to your first and following posts.
I have stated my reasons for my responses.
I have said what you should have done.
I have said what you should do.
I am not going to judge people here.
I'm finished with this.
Goodbye, Don.
Ariaan
Dr. Jason Gastrich
Hi Ariaan,
I hope you're well.
I have nothing to say to Don. However, you did assume that I am using "Dr."
before my name to spite Don. This isn't true.
Recently, I was awarded a Th.D. (Theology Doctorate) from a small,
Christian, Bible college in Florida for my outstanding academic and ministry
achievements. Glory to Him. I'm still pursuing my Ph.D., but it will take
a couple of years to finish.
It's good to see you back. Don't get hung up on people like Don that like
to talk in circles and distract us from our work. The harvest is ripe and
there will always be people like Don. Best to ignore them and keep working.
We know we love God and put Him first. If others hate us, then so be it. I
suppose it only means that we are doing something right. If Don had any
sense, he'd be embarrassed, fearful of God's judgment, apologize, and
repent.
God bless,
Jason
Tiger
news:Bndub.26047$6V.705378@zonnet-reader-1:
> You just don't get it, do you? If you want to proof a point, if
> you want people to listen to you, if you want to possibly convert
> a stray brother in Christ, you have to be careful how you put
> things.
>
Coming from someone who's first post to Don was to "keep your lying
mouth shut," this doesn't sound very genuine.
--
Tiger
"In the devil's theology, the important thing is to be absolutely right
and prove everyone else is absolutely wrong." - Thomas Merton
Tiger
news:gxdub.86289$Ll5....@twister.socal.rr.com:
> Recently, I was awarded a Th.D. (Theology Doctorate) from a small,
> Christian, Bible college in Florida for my outstanding academic
> and ministry achievements.
What was your doctoral thesis?
Iconoclast
"Tiger" <Ti...@box.invalid> wrote in message
news:Xns9436CF17EB...@24.25.9.43...
> "Dr. Jason Gastrich" <ne...@jcsm.org> wrote in
> news:gxdub.86289$Ll5....@twister.socal.rr.com:
>
> > Recently, I was awarded a Th.D. (Theology Doctorate) from a small,
> > Christian, Bible college in Florida for my outstanding academic
> > and ministry achievements.
>
> What was your doctoral thesis?
>
> --
> Tiger
>
He said awarded, not earned.
Dr. Jason Gastrich
It took two tapes. I'm glad the video guy brought extras. Great foresight.
I just checked my old AOL account and found a bunch of messages from them.
They are public, but written about me, Gene, the debate, Stan, etc. You are
welcome to read them and write the people who wrote them. I'll paste them
below.
God bless,
Jason G
Jason:
Again, thank you so much for driving up to Camarillo last evening. You
provided
us with a most entertaining meeting.
If I had been "debating" you last night, I would have brought up politics.
As a
former candidate for governor, and Republican, I am puzzled that you would
share political ideals with Jesus -- a socialist at best, a communist at
worst.
Even if I believed that Jesus was indeed a real person, I would not choose
to
follow him. I am a Libertarian, and do not subscribe to socialist ideology.
The attached essay by Bertrand Russell may be of interest to you -- if you
have not already read it -- if only for something else with which to find
fault.
Best wishes to you in life. The only thing I have against "Born-again Xians"
is their lack of a sense of humor. Lighten up! You guys take yourselves
MUCH too seriously!
Charlotte Poe
–
I just saw the following license plate frame on a Forest Construction
Company truck in Somis: "Don't confuse Reality with the Truth" --
accompanied by a Jesus fish.
I called the company and advised them that if they wanted to solicit
business from people other than Christians, they may want to remove
the frame & Jesus fish. The woman informed me that they didn't have
a problem with that (not getting business from non-Christians). !!!
My thanks to everyone who attended our debate last night. Here's a
comment from our side, Stan Kohls:
CP
I'd be very interested in any observations, suggestions, comments on
Mon.'s performance.
It reminds me of the story about the elderly, pious Jew praying at the
Western ("Wailing") Wall in Jerusalem. After observing him mumbling for
several hours, a tourist asks him, "Reb, what have you been praying for?"
"I've been praying for world peace," answers the black clad worshiper.
"And how does that make you feel?" asks the tourist.
"Like I'm talking to a wall," is the answer.
Stan Kohls (stan...@dock.net)
–
A comment from Shlomo Kreitzer.
To answer Shlomo's question about a moderator:
Yes, Jason's Born-again Christian "friend" was supposed to be
the moderator.
CP
Okay, in response to your question, I'll do a bit of what George Carlin
calls a "Brain Dump." I don't like when one group acts like it and its
members are smart, and
the other group and its members are stupid. E.g., in my mind, theists are
not stupid or inferior, just have a different way of seeing the world (for
whatever reason), than I do. I think they need to be spoken to/of with
respect, even though some of the things they say are apparently illogical,
inconsistent, and unbelievable, etc. I left early last night when it
appeared that
a) the meeting was going toward a 'let's corner him.' (The mood went
from any kind of information-oriented discussion to clever or evasive
remarks.) and
b) When I asked a question [one you, Stan, intimated at before] (any
objective studies describing those who 'believe' vs. those who don't
believe)
and he [Jason] didn't grasp what I was asking, I lost hope that there was
going to be much useful exchange. Was I wrong? Would it have helped if there
had been a moderator? Shlomo Kreitzer (Krei...@aol.com) P.S.
Do you know anything, objective, about characteristics of believers
vs nonbelievers?
–
A comment from Nancy Mitchell:
CP
From where I was sitting, I don't recall Jason answering any questions
directly, or where they made any sense …… he did as most Christians do,
and talked around the subject. His "friend" seemed to be more informed.
His "commercials" advising everyone of his website were not needed, nor
were his references to buying his book or CD's. That might go over with a
Christian group, but I was really expecting more from him with his Master's
degree in theology.
Stan's explanations of some things prior to the arrival of Jason would have
been better had they been done after Jason's arrival, however, no one knew
if they were going to show up. I think Stan did very well with the
information, but could come across as a little "nicer," rather than
superior.
I agree with Shlomo that we would have enjoyed a debate, not a
confrontation. A lot of people seem to have a problem being objective and
polite, rather than confrontational. I find that in many places where folks
think that attack first is the way to go. I truthfully think that Jason was
ill
prepared, and didn't have any answers to anything other than his
qualifications. Perhaps he expected a room full of dummies, who knows?
Some of the questions were not answerable such as: "where did the
water go after the flood?" Who the hell knows?
The young man sitting in front of me with his wife, [Jeff Lowder] who left
early and proclaimed himself an atheist, was going head to head with
Jason and his friend, and I wish he had had more to say. Also, an aside,
but the man next to me said he was a Muslim, and I wondered why he
was there.
Nancy Mitchell (nand...@highstream.net)
–
A comment from Jeff Lowder:
CP
I was very disappointed with last night's meeting. It should have been
easy for Stan to decisively beat Jason Gastrich in last night's discussion,
but that didn't happen. Stan's comments were rambling and pointless; he
missed numerous opportunities to make strong objections to Jason's
arguments; and Stan didn't seem to view the event as something to "win."
I think Stan is a nice guy, and I don't question Stan's commitment to the
cause, but his performance last night was completely ineffective. He
should not be representing freethought in public debates. What *really*
bothered me, however, was the behavior of the members
of the group. Although the members of the group claim to be freethinkers,
it was obvious to my wife and I that virtually no one in the group cared to
listen to what Jason had to say. Moreover, I thought the group was
extremely rude to Jason; I agreed with the "moderator," Gene Cook, when
he pointed out that the group was being rude to Jason. There were several
points during the meeting when I wanted to crawl under my chair. Whereas
I patiently waited over 20 minutes with my hand up to ask a question,
everyone else treated the event as a free-for-all, interrupting Jason and
ganging up on him. There is no excuse for the way Jason was treated last
night. To make matters worse, when I tried to inject some reason into the
conversation by challenging Gene Cook's assertion that objective morality
requires God, one of the other members of the group actually said that
Gene and I should take our argument elsewhere. I was (and still am)
almost speechless. If that topic was off-limits last night, then what were
we supposed to be talking about? No one else was actually clashing with
Gene Cook's sweeping assertion that objective morality is possible without
God. I'm afraid last night's meeting made too much of a negative impression
on us, and we no longer want to be associated with the group. Please
remove me from your mailing list. Jeff Lowder (jlo...@adelphia.net)
–
So, Jeff Lowder is severing all ties to FTVC (after never having joined, and
attending only a few meetings). The argument Jeff has with me and the
group is one I've had before with Cliff Walker & "Positive Atheism."
These folks believe that the faith of religious people be "respected," and
should not be ridiculed.
After heading FTVC for almost six years, I will not presume to speak for
all its ~100 members, but if these members continue to renew their
membership, I think I can assume that they share my core beliefs about
freethought.
The debate on Monday night was for the purpose of entertainment. In
the past we have had other debates, including Dwayne Gish of the
Institute for Creation Research, one of his "goons," Joseph Mastropaolo,
who stealthily booked himself as a spokesman for "Evolution," and
a debate with a couple of Christian ministers. We have also been
educated by very intelligent members of FTVC on creationism, the
"Flood," and the physiological reasons why people think they are
communicating with God or the spirit world. We do not suffer fools
lightly.
Jason Gastrich is a lightweight. If former FTVC member, Gary Ogden
were still around, he would have questioned Jason as to whether he
once used drugs (I have been informed that he has) or has had any
brain injuries. This could have explained Jason's behavior & beliefs.
I thought that our members showed extreme restraint for the first
part of Monday's night's show. After a while, however, one had a
very difficult time stifling a chuckle.
As I told Jason in an e-mail, he and his friend suffer from a serious
lack of a sense of humor. They take themselves FAR too seriously.
The only reason why I accepted their offer to "debate" was for the
entertainment value. People who belittle reason do not deserve our
respect. When they gain respect from citizens, and achieve positions
of authority -- school boards & government -- they can be dangerous.
Here is a comment from Jack Howard:
CP
Unfortunately I missed it [Monday night's debate], but from your [Stan's]
comment re the wailing wall, I can guess how it went. Years ago I attended
a lecture by David Kelly on Objectivism. I asked him how can one discuss
ideas rationally with irrational people. His reply was "You can't." Ever
since
then, based on my experiences, gained knowledge, and Mr. Kelly's answer
to my question, I have come to the conclusion that debates are of very
limited benefit, and in terms of zealots, totally without benefit. As long
as we,
i.e., people of reason, atheists, humanists, brights, etc., hang much of our
hopes for a better world on debates, not much will happen. We will preach to
the converted, and the irrational majority will continue their attempts to
repeal
reality with 10,000 year old earths, creationism, opposition to the teaching
of
evolution, god, social and family based intimidation, and all the other
madness
that is part of religion.
Religion is not about reason and never will be. It is about people trying to
solve the problems that we all, religious or not, face: death, tragedy,
having a
joyful and abundant life, etc. The religious solution as posited by the
religious
leaders, is:
1. Do what I tell you to do.
2. Send a check.
The only way to end the religious lunacy and its destructive affects on all
people is thru political and social activism:
1. Support openly atheistic political candidates who also are the best
qualified for the job and who best support whatever social and political
agendas you deem as just and best for individuals and the community.
2. Get those supporters of the irrational off the school boards and include
classes on analytical thinking in every curriculum from kindergarten on.
In my opinion, the efforts by groups like CFI [Center for Inquiry], the
various on-campus secular movements by students, moveon.org, etc., are
on target for making significant social changes away from irrationality and
towards reason. I know that there are many other organizations working for
a better and more rational world -- FTVC certainly comes to mind -- but it
is
not practical to name them all.
Years ago I thought the battle lost. There were (and are) so many
religious people. But I see now that the times they are a'changin. Or to put
it another way, His truth is marching on, i.e., the truth of Robert
Ingersoll,
Gerald Larue, Charlotte Poe, Jim Underdown, Stan Kohls, Steve Allen, Paul
Kurtz, Woody Allen, Ayn Rand, Bertrand Russell, Edward Tabash, etc., etc.,
etc.
Jack Howard (person of reason, born again atheist, etc.)
PS
CP: Sorry about the "His" when referring to you, Ayn Rand, and all the
implied females deservedly, but not explicitly, on the above list. Call it
poetic license.
–
FTVC member, Brent Meeker chimes in:
CP
Shlomo Kreitzer wrote: "I'll do a bit of what George Carlin calls a 'Brain
Dump.' I don't like when one group acts like it and its members are smart,
and the other group and its members are stupid. E.g., in my mind, theists
are not stupid or inferior, just have a different way of seeing the world
(for whatever reason), than I do. I think they need to be spoken to/of with
respect, even though some of the things they say are apparently illogical,
inconsistent, and unbelievable, etc. I left early last night when it
appeared
that a) the meeting was going toward a 'let's corner him.' (The mood went
from any kind of information-oriented discussion to clever or evasive
remarks.) ... "
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------- Brent Meeker: I think that's because no arguments for belief were
put
forward by the two Xians. They essentially said, "I believe the bible is
inerrant. Now ask me questions." Shlomo Kreitzer wrote: " ... b) When I
asked a question [one you, Stan,
intimated at before] (any objective studies describing those who 'believe'
vs.
those who don't believe) and he [Jason] didn't grasp what I was asking, I
lost hope that there was going to be much useful exchange. Was I wrong? Do
you know anything, objective, about characteristics of believers vs
nonbelievers?"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------- Brent Meeker: Michael Shermer's book, "How We Believe," has a
chapter that discusses the five-factor personality traits of believers vs
nonbelievers. He concludes that there is a strong negative correlation
between openness (adventurous, imaginative, idealistic) and religious
belief.
He also presents the famous survey results in which people were asked
why they believe and why they think others believe. The top reasons
people say they believe are "good design of the universe" and "they've
experienced God." The top reasons they think *other* people believe are
"comfort and purpose in life" and "raised to believe." The top categories
break down like this: I believe because: Others believe because:
Good design of universe 28.6% 6% Experienced God 20.6% 16.2% Comfort and
purpose in life 10.3% 26.3% Raised that way 7.2% 22.4% Also I found this one
interesting: Fear of death 0% 9.1% Draw your own conclusions. Brent Meeker
(meek...@rain.org)
Belief: A theological term meaning "wishful thinking."
–
Brent Meeker's comment to Jeff Lowder:
CP
Brent Meeker: I'm sorry you feel that way, Jeff. I agree that the meeting
was not conducted well, and the group was unruly. But I was offended that
Jason came to make a pitch for his book and was completely unprepared to
offer any argument at all. He merely stated some credentials, asserted that
he believed the bible, and then sat back to field questions. His whole
strategy was, "Try to prove me wrong. As long as I can answer every
question (no matter how fallaciously), I win." His reply to radiometric
dating was completely ad hoc, and anyone with the slightest interest in the
subject would have known it was false. You
obviously wanted to pursue the point and "win" it, but almost everyone in
the
audience already knew that Jason's answer was B.S., and so were not very
interested in hearing him invent further evasions (like nuclear forces have
changed over time). With a straight face he said he believed that there was
a firmament that held up the waters of heaven, that serpents could talk, and
the Minonite women were not taken as wives. If a debater is going to simply
spout nonsense, what's the point? My wife and I left early. I actually think
Stan was quite effective while I was there; and I can assure
you that Stan very much views such debates as something to win. He
understands that they are more show-biz than rational discussion, and
anecdotes and humor are often more effective than complex argument. Stan
could have been much more effective if we'd had a real moderator. As it was,
Jason acted as his own moderator, and whenever his attempt to evade one
question was in danger of failing, he would quickly point to another
audience
member and take a new question, thus thwarting any follow-up. I thought the
questions were supposed to have been between Jason and Stan. That would
have worked much better. Brent Meeker (meek...@rain.org)
–
I will lump the following comments together:
CP
Jack Carlson: I was lead to believe that the debate would be between Stan
and Jason. Instead, what transpired was a free for all with questions
shouted
out by the most vocal members of the group. This resulted in a tension
filled,
often chaotic discussion that completely ignored the debate format. We were
deprived of a meaningful dialogue between Stan and Jason, both of whom were
capable of addressing the subject in depth. In retrospect, this topic in
particular was one in which a moderator was needed to preserve a modicum of
order. Questions from the audience should have been written on paper, then
read by the moderator who would invite responses from both candidates.
Jack Carlson (Kar...@vcnet.com)
Jason Gastrich: Thanks for having me come and debate Stan. I had an
enjoyable time, and so did Gene and my wife.
Could you send me a copy of the video? Did it turn out all right?
Unfortunately, my recording device failed because it ran out of batteries.
Here is my address:
Jesus Christ Saves Ministries
P.O. Box 711425
San Diego, CA 92171
Thanks again and have a good day.
Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich (JCSa...@aol.com)
Jesus Christ Saves Ministries http://www.jcsm.org Over 50,000 web pages!
John 8:36 reads, "Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free
indeed."
Galatians 5:1 reads, "Stand fast therefore in the liberty by which Christ
has made us free, and do not be entangled again with a yoke of bondage."
George Vye: To Jeff Lowder: Don't let the door hit you in the butt on the
way out.
I, too, was disappointed in the debate. Jason asserted that he was
convinced of the absolute literal truth of the bible, but when confronted
with
some of the obvious absurdities and contradictions, he weaseled out by
admitting that some of the stories were didactic or allegorical.
I wish that Stan had pressed him more on how he "knew" which parts
were true, and which allegorical, or what kind of tests he applied to
determine the "truth" of the propositions. And when anyone asked Jason
to explain the inconsistencies between the bible and modern scientific
findings, such as radiometric dating, he again weaseled out by saying that
he was not that knowledgeable scientifically, but that others had the
answers, and that someday he intended to study these issues in more
detail. Sure!
I think another point of attack that was ignored was that the authors of
the bible clearly believed, in common with the rest of humanity, that the
Earth was flat, and that the sun revolved around it. I don't think that even
the most die hard biblicists can maintain those positions today, so how
can they aver the truth of the rest of the authors' cosmology? But these
pale in comparison to the fundamental vulnerability of religionists, "The
Problem of Evil." These people believe that God does intervene in human
affairs (the efficacy of prayer), so how can God allow the slaughter of
children, etc., while permitting nonbelievers like me to prosper? Aha, as
Jason explained, it's simple, God has a reason for everything, but we are
not always privy to his explanations. We will all get our just desserts in
the
end, be it Heaven or Hell. I sure hope he's wrong, because if he is, I am
damned to a post-life of eternal torment. Somehow, though, I find it a
little
hard to believe in an afterlife. Has anyone come back from hell (except
Warren Beatty? http://www.allmovie.com/cg/avg.dll?p=avg&sql=1:21978~C)
to tell us about it?
I'd really have liked to hear a lot more about Jason's evidence for Heaven
or Hell. I'll tell you, though, I have a hard time believing anyone who
professes that they truly believe in the tenets of Christianity. Forget the
obvious, like the massive agglomeration of wealth by such professed
Christians like John Rigas. How long is eternity? If I truly thought that my
earthly actions would determine whether I spent an eternity of ecstasy in
Heaven or torture in Hell, you can be damned sure I would be the nicest
person that ever inhabited this planet. I would not harm a spider, or a fly,
much less signing laws for the benefit of my rich friends, or sending
innocent kids to foreign countries to kill people who never did anything
against us.
I wish that Ted [Drange] had confronted Jason with the argument from
nonbelief, which, as I understand it, is also powerful, but for me the
"Problem of Evil" tears it. To tell the truth, I wish it were not so. I
really
wish I could believe in Eternal Life, or that Great Golf Course in the Sky.
It must be extremely comforting to think that instead of feeding the worms,
as Shakespeare put it, I could sit on the right hand of God and enjoy
eternal
bliss, and make eagle or birdie on every hole. No, in Heaven I would ace
every hole. Wait a minute, if I were a Muslim, and blew up a few atheists
and/or Christians, I would not only ace every hole, I would sit on the right
hand of Allah and enjoy the sexual favors of umpteen virgins. Holy moly,
where do I sign up? Are there any mosques here in Ventura?
If this rant in any way suggests that I am less than convinced that God
is not almighty, all knowing, and omnipotent I apologize, I don't want to do
anything to jeopardize my entry into the Kingdom of Heaven. And God,
I want you to know that I am really, really sorry for taking your name in
vain when I fell in that bucket of slop while I was feeding the pigs.
To Shlomo Kreitzer:
Too bad what you like or don't like. Tough titty. I don't know about
inferior,
that's entirely too subjective, but stupid (I read ignorant) there is no
doubt in
my mind. Who are the smartest people in our civilization? I nominate the
members of the National Academy of Sciences. These are our "rocket
scientists," etc. And what proportion of them are theists? By all accounts,
5% or less. Yes, I'll admit it, I do feel intellectually superior to most
believers. George Vye (GM...@pacbell.net)
Phi Beta Kappa, Summa cum Laude, UCLA '63
Nancy Mitchell wrote: "Some of the questions were not answerable such
as: 'where did the water go after the flood?' Who the hell knows?"
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------- Alex Magdaleno: That's just the point! The question cannot be
answered in
a rational way because there is no scientific way for the water to have
disappeared. Thus, blowing a hole in the idea of the great flood, thus
blowing
a hole in the idea of an inerrant bible. It's a very good question to ask
any bible
thumper. Alex Magdaleno (En...@adelphia.net)
Ted Drange:
1. The debate was probably less structured than Jason wanted, but for our
bunch, it was about right. 2. It would be nice to get a theist debater who
knows a little about science. 3. I bought Jason's CD. It has quite a lot of
stuff on it, including 450
pictures of Israel. 4. A lot of good arguments both for and against God's
existence were
omitted. Of course, time was limited. 5. Having spent a good chunk of my
life disproving God's existence, I
absolutely deny that it can't be done.
Ted Drange (TMDr...@earthlink.net)
–
I would like to take this opportunity to publicly apologize to Jeff Lowder
for distributing his e-mail about the debate without his explicit
permission. I am under the impression that if one sends a message to
the FTVC "group," one means for that message to be sent to the FTVC
"group." Normally, if one does not want one's message made public,
one mentions specifically, "DO NOT MAKE THIS PUBLIC." Silly me ...
Here is a comment from Stan Kohls:
CP
To be a partisan of any position, an advocate for any cause, necessarily
implies thinking that others who take an opposing position are wrong. This
does not mean they should be treated with disrespect, or locked up or shot.I
think we treated Gastrich and his buddy with a fair amount of respect. They
knew what they were getting into, and in a sense were "asking for it," by
entering the lion's den. I think they deserve credit for this, and I
mentioned
that on a couple of occasions. But what do you say to an intelligent, (semi)
educated adult, who believes that the earth is 10,000 years old, and
continually states than "no one has pointed out any errors in the Bible,"
when
numerous errors have been pointed out to him? Does one have a right to get a
bit frustrated? Things were very amiable at the end [after 10:30 PM].
Everyone shook
hands when they left, people were chatting amicably, taking pictures, Jason
and I started talking about motorcycles, I chatted with his wife about the
kid,
and about her background. Jason invited me to do a replay in San Diego. I
don't think anyone's feelings were hurt. Debates of this sort can get a bit
heated, which is why people in polite society avoid talking about religion.
During the Grant Park cross furor, I was
advised not to attend public meetings, because of death threats. Nothing
like
this happened during our debate. As Freethinkers/rationalists/secularists,
we are members of a small
minority. If an advocate of one of the more extreme forms of irrational
religious
belief volunteers to debate in our forum, he can expect to generate some
heat.
No one called him an idiot or a fool (although some of us may have felt
this),
he was treated more kindly than you or I would have been, if we'd gone to
some fundamentalist church and debated one of their members. We gave Jason
every opportunity to state his position, didn't shout him down, he said what
he wanted to, again and again. People listened, rarely interrupted, and even
asked some intelligent questions. I asked for observations, and I appreciate
everyone's candor and honesty. What is interesting is the wide range of
reaction, which shows what a diverse
group we are. The most one can expect from such a group is civility, which
is, I think, given the circumstances, how Jason and his friend were treated.
There is nothing wrong with taking a stand, and making the best possiblecase
to support it. There may be some who will take offense, but we're all
grown-ups here, aren't we?
Stan Kohls (stan...@dock.net)
–
Some more comments:
CP
Stan Kohls: Lots of people think like Gastrich without taking drugs, and
have for centuries. I think, among other things, it's the need for some kind
of
certainty in an uncertain world, and some kind of discomfort with the
reality
that we're basically alone in this world, despite friends, family, lovers,
and TV.
I think Gastrich is a nice kid, pretty bright, who's found something that
meets his needs. My intention was to have something of a conversational
debate with him, but when he arrived after I'd been speaking to a bottle of
water for 40 min., I thought I needed to let him lay out his position, as I
had
mine. And then there were lots of questions. Perhaps that was a mistake.
In any case, I never thought there'd be any minds changed, and I thought
he was treated with a modicum of respect. Everyone seemed very chummy
at the end, maybe next time we'll all do better.
Persevere!
Brent Meeker wrote: "I thought the questions were supposed to have been
between Jason and Stan. That would have worked much better."
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Stan Kohls: This was, of course, my original intention. However, as the
guys from San Diego told us, it was God's will that they came 40 min. late,
and missed my opening.
Thanks,
Stan Kohls (stan...@dock.net)
Ken Bonnell: I was glad to see that a fairly large number of people were
there.
Outside of the glitch of Gastrich's showing up late, I was fairly impressed
by the
meeting. I had been wanting to see him in person. I was acquainted with him
through
e-mail correspondence in the ii_er...@tropica.com e-group, and when I
heard
about the "debate" I knew I had to give Stan what support I could and to
come.
Ken Bonnell (KHBo...@aol.com)
Berta Vittier: I enjoyed the meeting and could have stayed longer, but my
companions were restless. I would have preferred a "moderated" event, with
questions written in advance. I found their demeanor to be quite calm, all
things considered, and was amused when the "friend" pointed out how odd it
was to him that a bunch of people like us would assemble in order to agree
that there is no god. Yes, "they" would have been less respectful to an
atheist speaker than we were to a theist, but we are holding truth and
reason, while they are
hanging onto their "hereafter" and "purpose to their daily lives." They are
not
as free as we are, since we feel no threat to our beliefs. That was a lame
answer to my questioning why there is so much sorrow and sadness over the
crucifixion (and elation over the resurrection) when it
was a major plan and a done deal, so there would be a heaven ... Stan was
right when he said there should have been an easier way. Stan's talk prior
to their arrival was edifying and I was sorry it ended. Berta Vittier
(Bob...@webtv.net)
Nick Quidkwai: Shalom Stan!
What I/we have to fear is that we have free will and are accountable for our
actions, be they good or just; above all God is just. Guess we have NO
PROOF as to what happens when we die. Let us hope that you and your
Freethinkers are not wrong -- for then it will be too late.
Hope you do not think that this is preaching.
I was disappointed in the answers that Jason gave. I guess that comes
from Christian thinking which says that they are forgiven. The debate about
existence of a Creator has been going on for time immemorial -- rather than
get into that debate I like to tell the story that I did @ the saloon about
free
will, fall of Adam -- Satan free to deceive, etc.
The Quran says constantly that it is a guidance for those who believe. I
went on his web site and was disappointed in the section about Islam, other
faiths, etc. That is the problem with the "Born again types." They are
extremists and not only believe in THEIR way being infallible, but they
think
they have to knock everything that does not believe their way out of the
ball
park.
I believe that God's big quality is Mercy -- forgiveness and we are not to
judge -- we should try to follow the commandments and TRY to get our loved
ones to do the same. Let God give out judgment when & how He chooses.
Quoting scripture either way makes no sense. One has to look at the big
picture -- the complete story as much as we know it. Unfortunately we get
into shallow arguments many times forgetting the macro level.
Got to work.
Curious how come you teach @ the temple when you knock the teachings?
The elders think that is OK?
Salaam,
Ekbal [Nick Quidwai (iqui...@adelphia.net)
George Vye: Totally agree with, you, Brent [Meeker], except I don't think
the group was unruly. Jason did come to debate, and when he advanced
propositions that were utterly ludicrous, I don't know what other response
he
could have expected from intelligent adults other than laughter and
derision.
Actually, there wasn't enough derision.
George Vye (GM...@pacbell.net)
–
Jason:
I have the debate tapes (it took two). I will get some blank tapes & have
my son make you a copy.
Please resend your address.
Charlotte
Ariaan
> "Ariaan" <no...@SPAM.spam> wrote in
> news:Bndub.26047$6V.705378@zonnet-reader-1:
>
>> You just don't get it, do you? If you want to proof a point, if
>> you want people to listen to you, if you want to possibly convert
>> a stray brother in Christ, you have to be careful how you put
>> things.
>>
>
> Coming from someone who's first post to Don was to "keep your lying
> mouth shut," this doesn't sound very genuine.
I know. But that was because his words annoyed me so much. It was a heat of
the moment reaction. That doesn't make it right, of course, but it should
make him aware that he should be more careful of his wording. Do you believe
he was merely 'observing' these things?
Anyway, that's also why I'm not discussing this any further. By the way,
apart from this one comment, do you think my other points are not worth
considering either?
Ariaan
Ariaan
>snip<
>
> Hi Ariaan,
>
> I hope you're well.
>
> I have nothing to say to Don. However, you did assume that I am
> using "Dr." before my name to spite Don. This isn't true.
Oh, sorry about that, then. The fact that you did that after he said
something about it made me assume that.
But if people fall over this sort of thing, wouldn't it be better to omit
it, to prevent more aggravation etc. I mean, even Paul said we have to give
in on certain points to our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ, just for
the sake of peace, and he did so himself.
So, now that Don has raised this issue, and you know that certain people see
this as pride on your part, wouldn't it be wise to drop those titles? It
wouldn't hamper your ability to discuss things in any way, and it might make
people more receptive towards what you have to say. Think about it. It
wouldn't be admitting that Don was right, it would just be a wise decision
on your part.
> Recently, I was awarded a Th.D. (Theology Doctorate) from a small,
> Christian, Bible college in Florida for my outstanding academic and
> ministry achievements. Glory to Him. I'm still pursuing my Ph.D.,
> but it will take a couple of years to finish.
Good luck with it. I'm just glad that after next Saterday my studying days
are over, heh heh.
> It's good to see you back. Don't get hung up on people like Don that
> like to talk in circles and distract us from our work. The harvest
> is ripe and there will always be people like Don. Best to ignore
> them and keep working.
Actually I'm not back yet. I haven't even moved house yet. This was just
something I really fell over. Okay, my first response to him has indeed
undermined my own credibility, that is true. My blood's boiling point is
very low. That's a bit of a handicap.
Dr. Jason Gastrich
> Dr. Jason Gastrich wrote:
> >snip<
>>
>> Hi Ariaan,
>>
>> I hope you're well.
>>
>> I have nothing to say to Don. However, you did assume that I am
>> using "Dr." before my name to spite Don. This isn't true.
>
> Oh, sorry about that, then. The fact that you did that after he said
> something about it made me assume that.
> But if people fall over this sort of thing, wouldn't it be better to
> omit it, to prevent more aggravation etc. I mean, even Paul said we
> have to give in on certain points to our fellow brothers and sisters
> in Christ, just for the sake of peace, and he did so himself.
> So, now that Don has raised this issue, and you know that certain
> people see this as pride on your part, wouldn't it be wise to drop
> those titles? It wouldn't hamper your ability to discuss things in
> any way, and it might make people more receptive towards what you
> have to say. Think about it. It wouldn't be admitting that Don was
> right, it would just be a wise decision on your part.
Apology accepted.
Don has attacked me from the beginning. I'm convinced that Don would attack
me for the color of my t-shirt. Therefore, I'll have to think about your
suggestion and see if it would actually help someone. It is obvious that he
hates Christian, academic institutions that don't have secular, regional
accreditation. It isn't simply the "Dr." that offends him.
>> Recently, I was awarded a Th.D. (Theology Doctorate) from a small,
>> Christian, Bible college in Florida for my outstanding academic and
>> ministry achievements. Glory to Him. I'm still pursuing my Ph.D.,
>> but it will take a couple of years to finish.
>
> Good luck with it. I'm just glad that after next Saterday my studying
> days are over, heh heh.
>
>> It's good to see you back. Don't get hung up on people like Don that
>> like to talk in circles and distract us from our work. The harvest
>> is ripe and there will always be people like Don. Best to ignore
>> them and keep working.
>
> Actually I'm not back yet. I haven't even moved house yet. This was
> just something I really fell over. Okay, my first response to him has
> indeed undermined my own credibility, that is true. My blood's
> boiling point is very low. That's a bit of a handicap.
>
>> We know we love God and put Him first. If others hate us, then so be
>> it. I suppose it only means that we are doing something right. If
>> Don had any sense, he'd be embarrassed, fearful of God's judgment,
>> apologize, and repent.
>>
>> God bless,
>> Jason
Ok, brother. Enjoy the move.
JG
Ariaan
>snip<
>
>
> JG
Thank you. The first month I'll have to commute, which means travelling 4
hours a day. But it's worth it. Although that means I really don't have time
anymore to talk to you guys. And after that I may have to make do with my
old 56K modem and a free internet provider for the first month or two. I
don't know if that includes a free news server... We'll see.
Anyway, good luck with your studies etc.
regards,
Ariaan
Don
wrote:
>Recently, I was awarded a Th.D. (Theology Doctorate) from a small,
>Christian, Bible college in Florida for my outstanding academic and ministry
>achievements.
What was the school? I thought the Universal Life Church was based in
California? What was the name of that small, Christian Bible college
in Florida?
Ya know that when things get slow on the "Jason Debates An Atheist"
Circuit," you can always get another "PhD" in Professional Wrestling
from General Delivery University and write a truly professional
wrestling column for a newspaper or magazine.
Jason, For $350, you can get a Bachelor, Master and Doctorate: in one
order from Ellington University.
(*price includes 3 diplomas and 3 official transcripts with lifetime
verification services )
You can also get the same deal from some other school, same offer,
same price, same FAQ, same value.
You can also get a Ph.D. In Religion, Ph.D. In Theology & Doctor Of
Divinity for the small donation of $250 from the Progressive Universal
Life Church .
>It's good to see you back. Don't get hung up on people like Don that like
>to talk in circles and distract us from our work. The harvest is ripe and
>there will always be people like Don. Best to ignore them and keep working.
Yep, keep plugging your professional speaking career. There are lots
of folks out there who are impressed by "Dr." in front of a
name...even when it comes from a diploma mill like LBTS.
> If Don had any
>sense, he'd be embarrassed, fearful of God's judgment, apologize, and
>repent.
I would be embarrassed to deceive people into thinking my degre-mill
degree was legit! But I forgot...it is YOU who fell superior by
calling yourself"Dr."
BTW, how much did your "Th.D" cost ya?
D*
Don
>> It is a bragging thing. It's all about "me me me." After awhile,
>> that is tiresome, especially considering the source. It is purely
>> self-serving. Many weeks ago, I told Jason that he would certainly
>> use "Dr." in front of his name as soon he received his "degree."
>> Well...his feigned humility went out the window. We now see "Dr."
>> Jason. How convenient!!! What a promotional stunt!
>
>I think he does that just to spite you, because of your attack on him.
He does it so that folks will be impressed with him, mistakenly
thinking that he has a legitimate Ph.D...which it is NOT!
>> Is the school legitimate? No.
>> Is the school a "diploma mill?" Yes, definitely.
>> Do the faculty member claim doctorates which are not legitimate? Yes.
>> Are the faculty members DECEIVING the student body? ABSOLUTELY!
>
>Yet you say you don't have a problem with the schools. Who's lying now, Don?
>Eh?
My problem is when a person CLAIMS to be a minister, claiming the name
of Christ, THEN uses a fake-degree from a school like those in order
to promote their career. But it happens every day. Jason is doing it
just like most of the crowd he runs with. Jason's audience buys into
his "Dr. Jason" charade. I have seen it for over 30 years!!!
>> I stated what God has shown me, most of it months ago. Rather than
>> consider that there might be truth in my first post, you have chosen
>> to rebuke ME, the messenger, rather than consider the truth in the
>> revelation. Why are you afraid to consider the TRUTH in what was in
>> the first post?
>
>I am? Don't think so.
>It was the overall tone of your post, that really did it for me.
The tone was not mean, not angry. I merely stated what God has
revealed to me. You ignored that and accused me of attacking
Jason...which never happened.
> you vented your gall and that was it.
Here you accuse me of lying, assuming that YOU know if God revealed
those things to me or not. I don't think you are in a position to
know that.
>>>> 1) My problem is not with the schools.
>>>
>>> But it is. You call it "a degree mill". You state that the tutors
>>> are not accredited. You don't have a problem with that?
>>
>> They AREN'T. Am I wrong?
>
>So you LIED??? I can refer you to that same lake of fire you mentioned
>earlier.
As I have said, my problem is with those small-minded "ministers" who
buy a degree from those places, then proudly wear it around as a badge
of their superior walk with God. So-called "Dr." Jason is a perfect
example.
> FIRST, let's look at your claims...
>> 1) From your first post to me, you claimed that I attacked Jason.
>> I did not.
>
>Yes you did. And various people agree with me on this. OR your wording was
>very unfortunate.
When I spoke what God had revealed to me, YOU think THAT is attacking
Jason???
>> 2) You called me a Satanist.
>> QUOTE: "Your lord Satan has revealed you quite a lot."
>> QUOTE: "Yep, you are number two, his servant."
>
>True. I'm still ashamed of that. But it was in response to your equally
>denigratory tone.
Did I tell Jason that his lord was Satan? I don't think so.
>Therefore, be careful how you put things, if you want
>people to respond in a normal manner.
There goes my irony meter, pegging again.
>> We are to be discerning, as Christians. It is one of the
>> responsibilities as a Christian. So many times, if people are FALSE
>> in one area, they are false in another. There IS such a thing as
>> credibility. You have stated that you don't care about credibility,
>> but you keep asking ME to tell you how God revealed these things to
>> me...as if it would matter what I say.
>
>Well, yes. It could easily have been an empty statement from a big phony
>bonehead. How would I know?
Look at the situation. You have an ego-driven guy who shamelessly
promotes himself daily, calls himself "Dr." because he has a fake
degree and is getting a second,, etc. I did not attack Jason, I
pointed out truth that God had shown me. You did not like it...
>People abuse God for all sorts of reasons and in
>all sorts of situations. Besides the tone of your post didn't convince me
>that you really were an honest person.
Jason wears a fake degree on his name and you question MY honesty???
>You were harrassing Jason, attacking his
>debate and hence my question whether you had done anything good in your
>life. Okay?
Actually, I have done virtually nothing good in my life. When I was a
child I ran away from home and lived with a circus until I was
sixteen. At that point, I went to work at a Safeway and eventually
became an assistant manager. I also worked at three different 7-11
stores, thinking they might hire from within the company. But they
always overlooked me when handing out promotions. So I realized that
there was no God.
At that point, I joined a church and became so involved that they made
me the youth pastor. i was good at throwing Pizza-parties and
bull-sh*t to I eventually became the church administrator. At the
time, I was single so I had a couple of "little old lady" girlfriend.
THEY are the ones who have the most money.
I learned alot of scripture, was ordained through the mail, like
Jason, and also received a degree through the mail, like Jason. Since
most o the Baptist preachers I knew also got their degrees the same
way, I felt right at home with them. But they did not realize that my
motives were not pure. I hated them and I hated the people. The
teenagers were spoiled brats. You sound just like some of them with
your whining about MY attitude while you ignore what is right in front
of your face.
As an associate pastor, I was not going to be pastor because I was
single. Baptist REQUIRE a married man for pastor, even if his
marriage is on the rocks and his kids are on drugs, which many are.
I lived in that dreary world for many years never accomplishing a
single good thing, other then scaming two little old ladies into
writing me into their will. That is why I can afford to do nothing if
I don't want to. I can just sit at home all day and watch satellite
TV while munching Chee-tos.
So to answer your question, I have done very little good in my life.
Except for those two rich little old ladies, I would not have anything
to show for my life. Fortunately for me, the left me wealthy enough to
NOT be rich but just rich enough. Jason is working the same scam...I
have seen it for decades. He is only fooling himself. One day it
will catch-up with him if he ever decides to put himself UNDER the
umbrella of a church or governing board. I fear that his blind ego is
too puffed-up for that. I have seen little twerps like him come and
go, blabbing their big, self-rightous mouth all along the way.
> PRIDE says, "Look what I have done for God."
>It is nice of you to post all these things here for me, but they might have
>had more effect had you placed them in your first post, and had you
>rephrased it to make it fit for reading and debating by everyone. Now
>they're just wasted.
They are waster because you are idealistic, legalistic and as prideful
as he is. You can't be satisfied with anything, can you? I don't fit
into your little religious "box" so you rip me apart while ignoring
the fact that the house if burning down. It would not have mattered
WHERE or WHEN I posted it. You just judged me from the beginning,
telling me to shut-up and ignoring what was right in front of your
smug little face. Who do you think you are, anyway?
>Very true. Had you said similar things in your first post, you might have
>had different responses. As it is, we're at a dead end.
Yeah, because once your mind is made up, you are to rigid to adjust
your position...just like a legalist. You are too busy dotting and
crossing to be bothered with reality.
>And all that because of the terrible phrasing of your first post. Do you now
>see how important it is to put your opinions in a nicer way, so people won't
>be annoyed by your wording but can actually discuss your opinions?
Do you see how many times you have said that? Why are you still
focusing on the way I said it rather than WHAT was said?
>> The problem? "Dr." Jason has a problem with REALITY. However, Jason
>> has no problem pridefully using "Dr." before his name. It's good
>> publicity for him.
>
>After your post he put Dr. in front of his name. Just to spite you, I would
>say.
Nah...he did it for his EGO!
Remember what Jesus said about people who enjoy the praise of others.
"The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of
Moses...they do all their deeds (4) to be noticed by men; for...they
love the place of honor at banquets and the chief seats in the
synagogues, and respectful greetings in the market places, and being
called Rabbi by men."
Matt23
That describes some of our "Dr." friends.
>You really don't want to respond to my points, do you? I assume that is
>because you know I am right.
>I said something, and you just completely ignore it and even twist it to put
>words into my mouth that I have never said. Nice.
1) What specific points do you want me to respond to?
2) What words have I put into your mouth:?
3) To you think it is honest for a man to use a fake degree to expand
his career?
4) Do you believe in truth?
>> It is a very legitimate point. You have limited experience, you are
>> more impressed by the APPEARANCE of spirituality than by the humble
>> servant hood of true Christianity.
>
>You assume that.
>Your assumption is wrong.
>You don't know me.
You said you were younger. I assume that you have a limited
experience compared to a person 10 or 20 years older than you. Am I
correct???
>> I don't think so at all. You misquoted me NUMEROUS TIMES in your
>> comments! THAT tells much about you.
>
>I think I quoted you quite well.
>Let me tell you, you twist my words and ignore my truths. THAT tells me much
>about you.
I gave you the places where you mis-quoted me. Now please show where
I misquoted you. Please be specific so I will understand.
>I have said what you should have done.
>I have said what you should do.
>I am not going to judge people here.
My IRONY METER is pegging again!!!
>I'm finished with this.
>Goodbye, Don.
I am sorry that you are so bothered by the fact that God may reveal
something to someone that you ignore the truth.
You spend an entire post judging me and telling me exactly what I did
wrong and what I should do.
IRONICALLY, you then state, "I am not going to judge people here."
Do you not see the hypocrisy in what you just wrote? No wonder
people are leaving the "church" in droves... "church" is impractical
and the people who run it are dishonest, for the most part, and demand
conformity rather than spiritual growth!!!
And you can quote me.
D*
These comments are meant to offend everyone equally. If, for some reason you are not offended, please write me with a description of
yourself including your name, race, weight, religious views, political party, strong opinions, physical disabilities and anything else that you are
touchy about, and I will try to offend you in a future comment. Complaints should be emailed to: bit...@likeiactuallycare.com
Don
>"Dr. Jason Gastrich" <ne...@jcsm.org> wrote in
>news:gxdub.86289$Ll5....@twister.socal.rr.com:
>
>> Recently, I was awarded a Th.D. (Theology Doctorate) from a small,
>> Christian, Bible college in Florida for my outstanding academic
>> and ministry achievements.
>
>What was your doctoral thesis?
Don't expect an answer on that one. Fifty-bucks and instant
doctorate.
D*
(Overheard in court)
Q: Did you blow your horn or anything?
A: After the accident?
Q: Before the accident.
A: Sure, I played for 10 years. I even went to
school for it.
Don
wrote:
>Recently, I was awarded a Th.D. (Theology Doctorate) from a small,
>Christian, Bible college in Florida for my outstanding academic and ministry
>achievements.
""Beware of the scribes who like...the chief seats in the synagogues
and places of honor at banquets,"
Mark 12:39-39
Sound familiar DOCTOR Jason???
==============
Are All "Doctors" Really Doctors?
Preachers and the "Honorary Doctorate"
By Timothy S. Morton
One doesn't need to be a Christian very long before he realizes the
Christian world is flooded with ministers or other believers calling
themselves doctor." If one picks up a book in a Christian bookstore it
is more than likely written by a "doctor"—the obvious "Dr."
prominently associated with their name. Many speakers on Christian
radio sign off as "Dr. So and so", and many Christians often refer to
their favorite "Doctor" preacher when they want to quote an
"authoritative voice." What is the source of this doctor fixation? Are
all "doctors" really doctors? This article will reveal some facts
about doctorates, "preacher doctors" and pretense in Fundamentalism
your author has discovered since he became a Christian over 18 years
ago.
What do you mean, "Doctor"?
The term "doctor" in America has come to usually be associated with a
medical doctor. Most realize medical doctors are required to undergo
years of training before the advanced degree of MD or DO is conferred
upon them. Only after fulfilling the extensive academic requirements
of a doctorate in a university could the person rightly call
themselves (or allow others to call them) "doctor." The same is true
of other earned doctorate degrees (Ph.D, etc.). The person became a
doctor because he completed the extensive training and study required
to obtain the degree. As a general rule, to obtain a doctorate one
must complete high school (diploma), college (Bachelors. degree), two
years of post-graduate work at a university (Masters degree), and two
more years of post-graduate for a doctorate. Though some may earn the
degree in a shorter time, 20 years of total education is typical for
an earned doctorate.
An earned doctorate, for the relatively few who choose to put forth
the considerable time, effort and expense to obtain one, carries with
it a high degree of prestige and accomplishment. It is the highest
academic degree offered. Regardless of the persons beliefs, opinions,
sensibility or lack of it, he deserves the title "doctor" for a simple
but weighty reason—he (or she) earned it! Even though many Ph'D's,
etc. may be evolutionists, humanists, hedonists, etc., or even
insane, since they earned their degree, their doctorate cannot be
taken away.
Click here to see what Encyclopedia Britannic says on the subject.
Honorary Degrees
Around 250 years ago some universities began granting a "degree"
called an "honorary doctorate" to persons it wanted to honor or
recognize (usually a dignitary, benefactor, or notable alumni).
However, neither the university or the honoree were gullible enough to
believe the honor actually conferred a full doctorate. The purpose of
the honor was simply to recognize a person for whatever reason, not to
grant an instant education. Many times the honor was bestowed on
someone who already had an earned doctorate.
Probably the most obvious proof that honorary degrees are not true
doctorates is they are now granted by colleges rather than exclusively
by universities. Unlike a university a college by definition cannot
award an earned doctorate (or even a masters degree) because it
doesn't have the curriculum or accreditation to do so. How could an
institution grant an honorary degree when they can't even confer an
earned one! Sure they can give someone a piece of paper to honor them,
but only the most conceited, deceived or ignorant would actually
believe this made them a true "doctor." There is little confusion
about this in the secular world. Honorary doctorates are routinely
given to political figures, civic leaders, and others, but to our
knowledge none of the secular honorees refer to themselves as "doctor"
or allow others to seriously do so. Even Bill Clinton with all of his
moral weaknesses and deficiencies doesn't refer to himself as "doctor"
even after having an honorary doctorate granted to him by Oxford
University in England! He knows if he did he would not be taken
seriously and ridiculed behind his back (more than he already is!).
Vain and flamboyant country singer, Dolly Parton, was also given an
honorary doctorate by a Southern Baptist college, but does she refer
to herself as "doctor"? Hardly. But give one of these pieces of paper
to many Fundamentalist preachers and what do they do with it? To them
it is as serious as a heart attack. They treat it as if it actually
confers a college education and they are full fledged doctors!
"Preacher," "Doctor," or What?
It came as a shock to us early in our Christian life to discover that
many of the most highly regarded "doctors" in Fundamentalism held only
honorary doctorates. A few were granted by major Christian
universities, but many were from small Bible colleges or obscure Bible
institutes (which are usually an extension of a local church). A far
cry from a university. Once we became aware of the distinction between
honorary and earned doctorates we began to notice that most of the
"doctors" at high profile camp meetings, revivals, preacher's schools,
and soul winning conferences were doctors in name only. Some never
attended college (not to mention graduate school), and a few did not
even finish high school! Furthermore, the presidents of several
leading Fundamentalist colleges have only honorary degrees (usually
given by one of their cronies at another similar school.), but that
doesn't restrain them from linking "Dr." with their name at every turn
and encourage its use in their books, sermons and throughout their
ministry! To paraphrase another, "When a person goes to one of these
"Bible Conferences" he is confronted by so many professing themselves
to be doctors one would think God was sick!" This person also
apparently senses the doctor or (appearance of) education fixation
that permeates today's Fundamentalism. It seems everybody wants a
"degree" and when they simply get a piece of paper from one of their
buddies saying they have one they treat it as if it is an actual
doctorate. No wonder a young Christian is lead to believe the same
from their vain, self-serving rhetoric. As the Scriptures proclaim,
all are subject to pride and vainglory's diabolical stranglehold an
how preachers tout their phony doctorates as genuine is a clear
manifestation to its validity. "Let nothing be done through strife or
vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than
themselves." Phil 2:3.
What's The Cause?
What could possess a normally rational man who is born again, called
to preach Jesus Christ, and otherwise scripturally sound to parade
around with a phony doctorate, pretending to be "educated"? What power
could cause him to boast of an attainment he has not attained and
allow others to boast for him? The same universal vices that caused
Lucifer to fall, pride and envy. The Bible bluntly says this "pride of
life" is not of God, "...and the pride of life, is not of the Father,
but is of the world" (1 Jn. 2:16), and envy is clearly ungodly. But
this doesn't affect them. They apparently justify their indulgence in
their mind with self serving reasoning.
One of their reasonings is the institution which granted them the
"doctorate" must have felt them "qualified" or it would not have given
it, but this argument is forced. First, the only way to qualify for an
earned doctorate is to finish the requirements! Second, the
"doctorate" is honorary by its very name. It is called a "doctorate"
because it is given by an educational institution which confers true
doctorates, their highest earned degree. If honorary doctorates make a
person a true doctor, then an auctioneer who is given a certificate
calling him "colonel" must also be a true colonel; a commissioned
officer in the US military!
Another argument is, even though the person doesn't have the required
academic education for a doctorate they earned one through "life
experience," but this is still invalid and self indulgent. The person
may have a wealth of "life experience" that equips him for certain
aspects of Christ's ministry much better than most Ph.D's, but that
still ignores the fact he hasn't completed the required education for
a true doctorate. Would you want to have surgery performed on you or a
loved one by a true medical doctor who graduated from a university or
by someone who has "life experience" only and no degree?
Probably the most desperate argument is "A doctors degree will further
my ministry and open doors" implying it will help Christ's ministry.
But Christ's ministry when He was on earth was not tainted by
pretense, half-truths, and deception. Christ made no false claims to
"education" or position but said humbling things like, "For whosoever
exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall
be exalted" (Luke 14:11), and "Whosoever therefore shall humble
himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of
heaven" (Matt 18:4). Sayings that tear at the very root of the modern
unearned doctorate craze. When pressured some will admit their degree
is honorary (but that doesn't stop them from using it), others,
however, seem to actually believe they hold the advanced degree and
resent anyone who questions it.
What we are addressing here is academic attainment and not necessarily
spirituality, ability or consecration. Some preachers with Ph.D's are
so dry and lifeless in their manner and deficient in common sense and
sound doctrine that they are little help to anyone. On the other hand
a preacher with an eighth grade education can have more insight into
the Scriptures, a better understanding of God's will, and a superior
manner of preaching and presentation than some men with two earned
doctorates. Some of the best preaching I have ever heard came from men
with less than a high school education. Education is no substitute for
a humble heart, diligent study, or godly zeal.
Education—One Of The "gods"?
It has been said "The three greatest "gods" of America are money, sex,
and education in that order." We believe this observation to be
accurate. Notice the third god is not knowledge but education. Though
many treat the terms as synonymous, there is a distinction.
"Knowledge" refers more to what is known or can be known, "Education,"
though, refers more to going through a course of study with the
intention of learning something. However, it is possible (and even
common) one could go through many courses of study and yet have very
little useful knowledge (the proverbial "egghead") or one could have
little or no academic "education" and have considerable, useful
knowledge. The Lord, with full knowledge but no "education," is an
example of the latter. Upon hearing Christ's words the Jews (likely
the Scribes and Pharisees) said, "How knoweth this man letters, having
never learned?" (John 7:15). They saw He had knowledge, but no
accepted (accredited, etc.) education. Even in those days education in
itself was a "god." They considered their own Messiah (and his
disciples, Acts 4:13) unlearned.
That many Fundamentalists treat honorary degrees as true doctorates is
a result of a similar view on education as the Pharisees. They are
saying, in effect, one cannot have true knowledge without an approved,
recognized education. But some Fundamentalists take this farther. They
reason, if one cannot get a real education, the appearance of one is
the next best thing. Enter the vain, self-serving abuse of the
honorary doctorate.
Are All Earned Degrees Earned?
Another deceptive, tactic used by some "schools" and preachers is the
schools grant degrees that are usually considered earned with minimal
or almost no academic requirements. Dr. Ron Powell [who holds two
fully earned doctorates and whose works can be found on this site]
said more than once he has encountered preachers who have received
"doctorates" from one of these "diploma mills." One told him, "the
ONLY requirement was one book with a minimum of 100 pages and $600."
Another told him much the same. This is supposed to qualify the
candidate for a "Doctor of Theology" (Th.D) degree? Nonsense, pure
nonsense. There is a lot more to a true doctorate than a short book
and some money. Just ask someone who has really earned one!
Brother Powell also said, "As for myself having two earned Doctorates,
I feel very badly when being introduced at meeting as "Dr. Ron
Powell". I feel sick because when they say, "Dr. Powell", they are
innocently putting me into a class of vain, proud, and egotistical
preachers that I wish not to be associated with. I just tell the
Pastors to introduce me as "Brother Powell". I really do feel so bad
because everyone is a doctor these days. I do not want to be
catagorized with that bunch of prideful, self-righteous, pin-headed
preachers." Clearly, the lust for "doctorates" so common today has
tainted the whole concept of "higher education" even for those who
have truly earned them!
One would not normally think that supposedly honest, "godly," and
"blameless" ( Imagine one of these egotistical Pharisees saying one is
not qualified for the ministry if he has had more than one wife! The
Holy Spirit said "blameless" before he said "husband of one wife," 1
Tim. 3:2!) Bible Believing, Fundamental preachers would resort to such
deceitful measures as desiring honorary or phony "earned" doctorates,
but sadly, it is true. They deceive their churches, brethren, and most
of all, themselves! Not to mention they demean the entire concept of
doctorates for those who truly earned them. Want to cut through the
facade and see the true colors of one of these fellows? Just begin to
question his qualifications for his coveted, beloved "doctorate." What
you see may not be very pretty, but you will then realize why this
subject is a "Taboo Topic."
====================
"Fake degrees equal fake integrity."
-- Don Reasons
"Even Bill Clinton with all of his moral weaknesses and deficiencies
doesn't refer to himself as "doctor" even after having an honorary doctorate
granted to him by Oxford University in England! He knows if he did
he would not be taken seriously and ridiculed behind his back
(more than he already is!). Vain and flamboyant country singer,
Dolly Parton, was also given an honorary doctorate by a Southern
Baptist college, but does she refer to herself as "doctor"? Hardly.
But give one of these pieces of paper to many Fundamentalist preachers
and what do they do with it? To them it is as serious as a heart attack.
They treat it as if it actually confers a college education and they are
full fledged doctors!"
-- Timothy S. Morton
Tiger
news:g0mub.26681$6V.729532@zonnet-reader-1:
I'm not sure I should respond...you say you're not discussing this any
further and then ask a question in the very next sentence, presumably
looking for some response. Are you discussing it or not?
Tiger
news:EVmub.86495$Ll5....@twister.socal.rr.com:
>
>
<snipped>
Did you not see my post? What was the thesis of your doctoral
dissertation? I'm curious.
Phoenix
"Tiger" <Ti...@box.invalid> wrote in message
> "Dr. Jason Gastrich" <ne...@jcsm.org> wrote in
> news:EVmub.86495$Ll5....@twister.socal.rr.com:
>
> >
> >
> <snipped>
>
> Did you not see my post? What was the thesis of your doctoral
> dissertation? I'm curious.
If you look at his post you'll see he said "awarded". It's an honorary
Th.d., that they gave him for 'his good works'. There's no academic work
involved in this type of Th.d. and, in academic terms, it's worth about
as much as the paper it's printed on.. :-)
P
Ariaan
> "Ariaan" <no...@SPAM.spam> wrote in
> news:g0mub.26681$6V.729532@zonnet-reader-1:
>
>> Tiger wrote:
>>> "Ariaan" <no...@SPAM.spam> wrote in
>>> news:Bndub.26047$6V.705378@zonnet-reader-1:
>>>
>>>> You just don't get it, do you? If you want to proof a point, if
>>>> you want people to listen to you, if you want to possibly
>>>> convert a stray brother in Christ, you have to be careful how
>>>> you put things.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Coming from someone who's first post to Don was to "keep your
>>> lying mouth shut," this doesn't sound very genuine.
>>
>> I know. But that was because his words annoyed me so much. It was
>> a heat of the moment reaction. That doesn't make it right, of
>> course, but it should make him aware that he should be more
>> careful of his wording. Do you believe he was merely 'observing'
>> these things?
>>
>> Anyway, that's also why I'm not discussing this any further. By
>> the way, apart from this one comment, do you think my other points
>> are not worth considering either?
>>
> I'm not sure I should respond...you say you're not discussing this any
> further and then ask a question in the very next sentence, presumably
> looking for some response. Are you discussing it or not?
Not discussing, just wanting to hear your opinion.
Piorokrat
Uzytkownik "cbianco" <medusa2N/O/S/P/A/M...@newsguy.com> napisal w wiadomosci
news:e0eirv0071tner674...@4ax.com...
Okay.
Uncle Davey, you should have got it by now.
Dr. Jason Gastrich
> "Dr. Jason Gastrich" <ne...@jcsm.org> wrote in
> news:EVmub.86495$Ll5....@twister.socal.rr.com:
>
>>
>>
> <snipped>
>
> Did you not see my post? What was the thesis of your doctoral
> dissertation? I'm curious.
Hi Tiger and welcome to free.christians.
The degree I received was given because of my outstanding academic and
ministry achievements. It was virtually an honorary doctorate degree, so I
didn't have to write a dissertation.
Why do you ask?
My current, Ph.D. degree program requires a dissertation. I'll be writing
it on fasting. It should be an interesting paper and I may offer it as a
book.
Have you written a thesis or dissertation? If so, what was it on?
My Masters degree thesis was the New Testament part of "The Skeptic's
Annotated Bible: Corrected and Explained." My work was much longer than the
required page limit. In fact, the entire work of mine is over 800 pages.
You can see it here: http://sab.jcsm.org.
Sincerely,
Jason Gastrich
Don
wrote:
>Don has attacked me from the beginning. I'm convinced that Don would attack
>me for the color of my t-shirt.
Only if it bragged how smart you think you are on the front.
>Therefore, I'll have to think about your
>suggestion and see if it would actually help someone.
Why DO you add that term when you do not have a degree? What is the
purpose, other then to brag?
Please allow me to quote Tim Morton who said in another post, "Even
Bill Clinton with all of his moral weaknesses and deficiencies doesn't
refer to himself as "doctor" even after having an honorary doctorate
granted to him by Oxford University in England! He knows if he did
he would not be taken seriously and ridiculed behind his back
(more than he already is!). Vain and flamboyant country singer,
Dolly Parton, was also given an honorary doctorate by a Southern
Baptist college, but does she refer to herself as "doctor"? Hardly.
But give one of these pieces of paper to many Fundamentalist preachers
and what do they do with it? To them it is as serious as a heart
attack. They treat it as if it actually confers a college education
and they are full fledged doctors!"
>It is obvious that he
>hates Christian, academic institutions that don't have secular, regional
>accreditation. It isn't simply the "Dr." that offends him.
Even the "Dr." itself does not offend me. The FLAUNTING of a fake
degree as a badge of superiority is what offends me, and the deception
behind it.
Education is a wonderful thing. A wise person never stops learning.
Deception is a bad thing, especially when a Christian practices it as
a way of life...as so many "Baptist" ministers now seem to accept as
COMMON, even necessary if you want to retire with a good income!!!
Over the past 30 or 40 years, there has been a trend among
"Christians" to seek to give the "appearance" of having more education
than one actually has. A minister can simply be "Mr."Jones, or set
himself apart from the congregation by calling himself, "Rev." Jones.
If his ego is REALLY out front, he can use the title, "DR. JONES" just
to PROVE how much smarter he is than his congregation and imply that
he is REALLY (more spiritual than his congregation.
That is one reason for the rapid birth and growth of so many little
"Bible schools" that now give professional-sounding "degrees" for a
simple course of Bible study, sometimes the equivalent of what I
taught to high-school kids or younger.
A professional, legitimate Ph.D. is a serious degree program that
implies the holder has passed certain requirements, usually taking
YEARS to complete attending school Full-time. Just because your
little " Bible School" diploma has the term "Ph.D." or "Doctor of
Philosophy" written on it does not in any way mean that it actually IS
a "Ph.D."
When a Christian or a Christian minister attaches that "Dr." or
"Ph.D." to his name, it is ALWAYS a matter of pride...ALWAYS...with NO
exception. Being proud of a great accomplishment is not bad in
itself. Often the motivation behind that pride is the bad thing.
When I was still in high school and college, there was a local
minister who was known as "Dr. (so and so.) " He was a friendly older
fellow who became my friend even thought he was not my pastor. He ran
a Bible correspondent school based in my little home town. As our
friendship grew, he began to teach me about MARKETING, although at the
time I did not realize THAT was the focus. He ran small
advertisements in newspapers and magazines around the USA. People
would write and enroll in his Bible school. They were awarded several
different "degrees" such as BBS (Bachelor of Bible Study,) MBS
(Master of Bible Study) and even a Ph.D. in Bible study or theology.
JASON, ARE YA READING THIS???
When we discussed accreditation, he pointed out that his school IS
ACCREDITED. In fact, HE and HIS WIFE set-up the accreditation agency
that accredited HIS own school. So...he awarded ACCREDITED DEGREES
for completion of his Bible Study courses. Sounds similar to the
self-accreditation of schools like Louisiana Baptist "University" and
the Louisiana Baptist Theological Seminary where Jason is getting a
pseudo-Ph.D. or the Patriot University (Bedroom Bible College) where
Kent Having received his Ph.D.
This minister and Bible School showed me the diplomas which clearly
stated "Non-Accademic", in tiny print, on the front. But these
ministers would get them and add "Dr." to their name and "Ph.D." after
their name. And the congregation would never question them...since
they never had anyone THAT SMART as a pastor!!!
Many ministers look for the advanced "degree" title as a way to
advance their career. (secular motivation, pride) But, they claim
such things as "I feel 'the Lord" leading me to seek my Ph.D." Isn't
it funny that after "the Lord" allows them to receive that "title" and
add it to their moniker, suddenly "the Lord" leads them to a LARGER
church with a LARGER income and more status in their own eyes!!!
Isn't it AMAZING what "the Lord" did for them!!!
They are not seeking the education. They are seeking the ability to
CLAIM OWNERSHIP of a "Ph.D." It would not be bad IF they would just
TELL THE TRUTH about their motivation for seeking those initials to
add to their moniker. But they are dishonest.
Jason, even you have not yet given a reason for desiring to use the
term "Dr." to your moniker. We all noticed HOW QUICKLY you added it
to your name. Of course, you did not notice or realize two glaring
facts:
FACT ONE: You are the only person on this Baptist group who uses that
"Dr." in front of his name.
FACT TWO: There are SEVERAL of us here who have legitimate advanced
degrees or honorary titles, doctorates who do NOT feel the need to use
it, just to imply our superior education.
I see it all the time. I have seen it for thirty years of observing
Christian ministers. Add the title to the front of your name, add the
initials to the end of your name. It places you in such a
pseudo-superior position, above those little people in your audience.
But don't let your deception be discovered like Kent Having and his
fake doctoral dissertation. Kent has changed his story about that
several times since he first made the claim "Dr." after finishing his
"Bedroom Bible School" degree. How did his 150 page dissertation
suddenly GROW to 250 pages AFTER it was submitted??? I guess it was a
true miracle. Certainly HE would not lie...would he?
Then there is poor "Dr." Carl Ba ugh and the discovery of his multiple
fake degrees. IT is an embarrassment to the average Christian who is
honest and just trying to live his life, working, raising his family
and trying to live for God and be a good "witness' to those around
him. They see these nut-cases, masquerading as an authority with
their fake degrees...then they are put in a position to defend their
faith after the "Baugh/Hovind/Gastrich-Circus" sells their books,
takes their love-offering and leaves town.
Jason, I have been part of the circus AND I have been one of those
left behind to pick-up the theological pieces AFTER the "circus" had
gone. THAT is why I noticed your ego-driven ministry from the first
time I read your multi page "I have done EVERYTHING FOR GOD" pseudo-
resume.
Jason, it would do you and Having and Ba ugh a great deal of good if
you took a church-position and worked in the trenches for a few years
before to see how REAL Christians live. If you were wise, it would
change the entire direction of your focus and your personal ministry.
Then you would see the SHOW-BIZ aspect of what you really are doing
for what it really is. But I still don't think your EGO will ever
allow you to condescend to a "common" church ministry. It will never
happen to you. You simply will not give-up that much control.
Receive a college degree for what you already know!
"Don't risk buying a fake document. Low prices, fast delivery."
http://life-experience-degrees.com/
Earn a College Degree online within 30-days. Earn an Accredited
Degree Recognized by the United Nations Council and the United States
Distance Learning Association. Fast, Professional Affordable and
Confidential.
http://www.customdegrees.com/
Here's a page where you can get an "accredited" degree in only thirty
days.
http://www.mlm-business-pages.us/dir/correspondence_degree_college_honorary/index.shtml
You can "get your degree Legalized and Accepted in over 60-countries"
for only five hundred dollars!!! I think I may get one of these
degrees. It will come in handy when I move to the Caribbean and start
a scam...er...church outreach. Maybe I could also start a TV-Ministry
since THAT is where the real $$$ is...Paul and Jan and Jim and Tammy
and Oral Roberts have proven that for many years.
Dr. W. Donald Reasons
"Doctor Don"
Rev. Don Reasons
Mr. Don Reasons
Musical Genius and Spiritual Giant
Legend in my own mind!
"Even Bill Clinton with all of his moral weaknesses and deficiencies
doesn't refer to himself as "doctor" even after having an honorary doctorate
Don
<<nos...@noway.nohow.period>> wrote:
>On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 05:20:34 -0600, Don
><calldon...@earthlink.net> wrote the following funny stuff in
>Usenet News'Froups! :
>
>
>>"Preacher," "Doctor," or What?
>
>>
>
>
>Aw gee- I paid for the honorary title of 'pope' last week-- you mean
>I'm not REALLY the pope now? !!! I demand a refund!!!!! :o)
Well...now I have not seen the honorary pope thing. But you can get
plenty of other degrees for little or no money down. Please see my
other post regarding Jason and his fake degrees. I listed a few
locations where you can get an "accredited" degree for $100 bucks.
Might be worth it for a career move.
Might be even better to raise funds to start that Satellite TV
ministry!!!
Amen
Rev. Don
Dr. W.Don
Smarter than the average Christian because I claim to be!
(has nothing to do with reality)
Legend in my own mind.
Musical Genius
Blah, blah, blah.
Uncle Davey
Uzytkownik "Don" <calldon...@earthlink.net> napisal w wiadomosci
news:qrtkrvogsl8mfp7f5...@4ax.com...
I expect the reason he does it is to annoy small minded people like you.
Which is fair enough, I support that.
Uncle Davey
Uncle Davey
If he had a 'real' one would that make him brainier?
I've been the boss of three or four people with real ones and to be frank
they weren't the brightest and best of the sons of accountancy. I'd prefer
employing people with honorary ones, quite frankly. At least they don't have
to waste their precious time over it.
Uncle Davey
Don
wrote:
>I expect the reason he does it is to annoy small minded people like you.
>
>Which is fair enough, I support that.
>
>Uncle Davey
Thanks for the encouragement. To paraphrase an old saying:
The LOUD, OBNOXIOUS and PUSHY get the grease. They also steamroller
over those who get in their way.
Don
wrote:
>Uzytkownik "Don" <calldon...@earthlink.net> napisal w wiadomosci
They would probably be more honest. At least, they worked for it and
did not try to give the impression that they had something that they
did not have.
> I'd prefer employing people with honorary ones, quite frankly. At least they don't have
>to waste their precious time over it.
I'd prefer Christians who do not try to be something they are not, who
are more honest than to present a fake-degree to the world so that
the world can laugh at them. At least they could be honest about it,
more honest than most preachers who hold an honorary degree.
Tim Morton was right when he said:
"But give one of these pieces of paper to many Fundamentalist
preachers and what do they do with it? To them it is as serious as a
heart attack. They treat it as if it actually confers a college
education and they are full fledged doctors!"
Would you want your surgeon to be a guy who received his degree
because of his "life experiences" or because he passed a series of
test equal to high-school science tests?
Dr. Jason Gastrich
Quite interesting how that works. Isn't it?
Incidentally, there are a large number of pastors and Christian leaders with
honorary doctorates. Jerry Falwell is one of them. Chuck Missler and Grant
Jeffrey are two others.
JG
Rev. Dr. W.D.Reasons
wrote:
>Uncle Davey wrote:
>> I've been the boss of three or four people with real ones and to be
>> frank they weren't the brightest and best of the sons of accountancy.
>> I'd prefer employing people with honorary ones, quite frankly. At
>> least they don't have to waste their precious time over it.
>>
>> Uncle Davey
>
>Quite interesting how that works. Isn't it?
So you implication is that knowing "three or four people with real
ones" proves that people with honorary doctorates are smarter than
people with legitimate Ph.D.???
>Incidentally, there are a large number of pastors and Christian leaders with
>honorary doctorates. Jerry Falwell is one of them. Chuck Missler and Grant
>Jeffrey are two others.
Proves nothing.
I was serving on the youth ministry at a church where I was trying to
reach every kid in town. Unfortunately, the pastor spent absolutely
ZERO TIME with the youth group. His was TOO BUSY working on his
little "doctorate of ministries," a pseudo-doctorate conjured-up by
the seminaries so that every little baptist preacher could claim to be
"Dr." just like Jason claims.
I predicted that the pastor will finish his little D.M when (turn on
the trumpets) GOD will suddenly and miraculously "call him" to a
bigger church with a more influential position with a bigger
pay-check. That is where he will probably stay and retire.
Sure enough, he left that church only one year after receiving his
little D.M. and went to a larger church in a larger city where he was
billed as "Dr." so&so. He just retired there one year ago.
Jason, that pastor was as predictable as you are! And I was 23-years
younger at that time. Nothing has changed.
"Devout religionists are frequently attracted to and
bound to their piety largely because it presumably offers them
holier-than-thouness and oneupmanship over non-religionists."
--Dr. Albert Ellis
Tiger
news:ynBub.88803$Ll5....@twister.socal.rr.com:
> Incidentally, there are a large number of pastors and Christian
> leaders with honorary doctorates. Jerry Falwell is one of them.
> Chuck Missler and Grant Jeffrey are two others.
>
Are you going to answer my question? What was the thesis of your
doctoral dissertation?
BTW, I wouldn't hold up the pastors you mentioned above as particularly
good examples.
Dr. Jason Gastrich
> "Dr. Jason Gastrich" <ne...@jcsm.org> wrote in
> news:ynBub.88803$Ll5....@twister.socal.rr.com:
>
>> Incidentally, there are a large number of pastors and Christian
>> leaders with honorary doctorates. Jerry Falwell is one of them.
>> Chuck Missler and Grant Jeffrey are two others.
>>
>
> Are you going to answer my question? What was the thesis of your
> doctoral dissertation?
>
> BTW, I wouldn't hold up the pastors you mentioned above as
> particularly good examples.
Those three ministers are AWESOME. They have truly changed the world.
I've already responded to you. I'll paste it here.
Tiger wrote:
> "Dr. Jason Gastrich" <ne...@jcsm.org> wrote in
Rev. Dr. W.D.Reasons
<nos...@noway.nohow.period> wrote:
>On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:16:58 -0600, Don
>>Rev. Don
>>Dr. W.Don
>>Smarter than the average Christian because I claim to be!
>>(has nothing to do with reality)
>>Legend in my own mind.
>>Musical Genius
>>Blah, blah, blah.
>>
>
>Well there ya go , "Rev. Don" !!!!
>
>Whatcha gonna call yer new church?
Actually, I started my Internet Church web site a while back but
haven't had time to do much with it. We have added some staff but
they are not on the web site yet.
http://www.calldon.com/real/real.htm
Glory to Bob.
Pastuh.D*
"And the swine...he is unclean to you...and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you."
Leviticus 11:7-8
'But whatever is in the seas and in the rivers that does not have fins and scales...they shall be an abomination to you...Whatever in the water does not have fins and scales is an abomination to you.
Leviticus 11:10-12
Sorry...No more bacon, ham, shrimp, lobster or catfish...
Ms Voltaire
hucksters and profiteers are some of the most hate-filled, uneducated,
virulent liars I have ever had the misfortune of running across.
Faith Definition" An Unhappy mixture of ignorance and insanity".
Ms Voltaire
"The Christian god can easily be pictured as virtually the same god as the
many ancient gods of past civilizations. The Christian god is a three headed
monster; cruel, vengeful and capricious. If one wishes to know more of this
raging, three headed beast-like god, one only needs to look at the caliber
of people who say they serve him. They are always of two classes: fools and
hypocrites."- Thomas Jefferson
Dr. Jason Gastrich
Care to give a citation? Or did he tell you this, personally?
JG
Libertarius
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" wrote:
===>It has been quoted allegedly from a letter to Peter Carr.
I think it is a paraphrase of a lot of other statements. E.g.
he calls the Trinitarian deity a "Cerberus". -- L.
Weatherwax
"Libertarius" <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net> wrote in
message news:3FBC3D12.238FC455@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net...
I highly recommend Jefferson's Syllabus which can be found at
http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/jeffbsyl.html
It contains the most complete account of Thomas Jefferson's
religious views in Jefferson's own words. It also contains a
link to the Jefferson Bible which is a cut and paste composition
from the four gospels, but it omits all references to Jesus being
the son of God, miracles, and the resurrection.
--
Wax
Dr. Jason Gastrich
We were discussing this evangelistic tool in other thread. It was
apparently created to lead the indians to Christ. Contrary to the
assertions of some, it wasn't Jefferson's personal Bible or anything of that
nature. The cut and paste composition was merely a tract.
Sincerely,
Jason
Don
wrote:
> The cut and paste composition was merely a tract.
>
>Sincerely,
>Jason
Care to give a citation? Or did he tell you this, personally?
Dr. Don
386sx
> Care to give a citation? Or did he tell you this, personally?
Sir,
Anyone who thinks Thomas Paine was a Bible thumping Christian might indeed
have been told this personally by Mr. Jefferson, if you catch my drift.
> Dr. Don
Have a nice day, Doctor.
--
"There are thousands of such blatherskites about."
Libertarius
Weatherwax wrote:
===>Sure, but it does not include the above alleged statement. -- L.
Libertarius
"Dr. Jason Gastrich" wrote:
===>NONSENSE.
It is what Jefferson considered to be the "pure" Gospel,
with all the priest-inserted Pauline nonsense removed.
> Contrary to the
> assertions of some, it wasn't Jefferson's personal Bible or anything of that
> nature. The cut and paste composition was merely a tract.
===>MORE nonsense.
It is NOT a "tract". Why do fundamentalists always invent falsehoods
when they find the truth too difficult to accept? -- L.
Weatherwax
< CLIP >
> > I highly recommend Jefferson's Syllabus which can be found at
> > http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/jeffbsyl.html
> >
> > It contains the most complete account of Thomas Jefferson's
> > religious views in Jefferson's own words. It also contains a
> > link to the Jefferson Bible which is a cut and paste
composition
> > from the four gospels, but it omits all references to Jesus
being
> > the son of God, miracles, and the resurrection.
>
> We were discussing this evangelistic tool in other thread. It
> was apparently created to lead the indians to Christ.
> Contrary to the assertions of some, it wasn't Jefferson's
>personal Bible or anything of that nature. The cut and paste
> composition was merely a tract.
Obviously you have never looked at the "Jefferson Bible" (AKA:
"The Life and Morals of Jesus".)
The argument that he intended it as a tool "to lead the Indians
to Christ" is asinine and contradicted by the contents and nature
of the book itself.
Jefferson included side by side versions of the text in Greek,
Latin, French and English. Very few Indians of that time spoke
Greek, Latin or French.
.
As I stated, it omits any reference to Jesus being divine, or
being the son of God. It also omits any miracles. And was never
meant to be published. Yet it is a biography of Jesus and not
just a list of Jesus sayings.
The Jefferson Bible can be seen at:
http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/index.html
I still highly recommend that you examine Jefferson's "Syllabus"
at
http://www.angelfire.com/co/JeffersonBible/jeffbsyl.html
--
Wax
Dr. W.D. Reasons
The word is "rationalization." It is necessary to maintain our belief
system, even with its errors.
Since "we all know that America was founded as a Christian nation,"
everything we say and everything we believe must be twisted and
squeezed and colored until we can fit it perfectly into our belief
system. Truth is irrelavant...if you repeat it enough, everyone will
believe it and THAT is all that matters.
Remember, you can fool all of the people some of the time and some of
the people all of the time...and usually, THAT is sufficient.
Dr. D*
Libertarius
"Dr. W.D. Reasons" wrote:
===>NOT everyone. Fortunately. ;-)
386sx
> Libertarius wrote:
>
>> Jason Gastrich wrote:
[re: Jefferson Bible]
>> > We were discussing this evangelistic tool in other thread. It was
>> > apparently created to lead the indians to Christ.
>>
>> ===>NONSENSE. It is what Jefferson considered to be the "pure" Gospel,
>> with all the priest-inserted Pauline nonsense removed.
>>
>> > Contrary to the assertions of some, it wasn't Jefferson's personal
>> > Bible or anything of that nature. The cut and paste composition was
>> > merely a tract.
>>
>> ===>MORE nonsense. It is NOT a "tract". Why do fundamentalists always
>> invent falsehoods when they find the truth too difficult to accept? -- L.
>
> The word is "rationalization." It is necessary to maintain our belief
> system, even with its errors.
>
> Since "we all know that America was founded as a Christian nation,"
> everything we say and everything we believe must be twisted and squeezed
> and colored until we can fit it perfectly into our belief system. Truth
> is irrelavant...if you repeat it enough, everyone will believe it and THAT
> is all that matters.
>
> Remember, you can fool all of the people some of the time and some of
> the people all of the time...and usually, THAT is sufficient.
Subject: Gastrich's claim of "demon possessed people", "psychic readers",
"people calling people from the dead", "all kinds of supernatural things in
the world."
Dan Barker: As soon as you scratch under the surface you find exaggerations,
or outright fraud, or misinterpretations of natural events. You don't find
supernatural miracles. And if you did find one Jason, *you* should win the
Nobel prize for proving it to the world.
Jason Gastrich: There's a couple of reasons why I think that's a little
flawed. One is I don't think there's Christians that are really trying to
win the Nobel prize. And two, I think that a lot of times scientists aren't
present when miracles are done, when demons are cast out.
> Dr. D*
Thanks Doc.
Weatherwax
"Libertarius" <Libertarius@Nothing_But_The_Truth.net>
> ===>MORE nonsense.
> It is NOT a "tract". Why do fundamentalists always
> invent falsehoods when they find the truth too difficult
> to accept? -- L.
They take Romans 3:7 literally.
For if by my lie the truth of God enhances his glory,
why am I still actually being judged as a sinner?
The question is whether they actually believe their own lies.
--
Wax
Dr. Jason Gastrich
Yes, it was a tract. Looking at Jefferson's quotes, this theory makes
perfect sense, too. He didn't cut parts out of the Bible for his own,
personal reading.
If you think this was something he did and promoted for all Christians, then
prove it.
Jason
Dr. Jason Gastrich
You bet. Keep the tip.
JG
Dr. Jason Gastrich
Here are a few sites that concur with the notion that this was a tract and
not supposed to be an entire, authoritative Bible:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=28006
http://www.totallifenow.org/Archive/0601/Heartmindprt.htm
The title of Jefferson's book is, "The Life and Morals of Jesus of
Nazareth." If it were meant to be a Bible, then he would have called it the
Bible.
"By the way, the Jefferson Bible is another myth. There never was a
Jefferson Bible. No, years before this, he cut the miraculous out of the New
Testament (out of the Gospels), and from the Gospels he produced a book on
the ethics and morals of Jesus Christ for the purpose of evangelizing and
educating the American Indians. They were a great concern of his. He
approved money for building a church for the Indians while he was President.
He approved money for the support of a missionary to the Indians out of the
Federal Treasury. He also gave of his own money to help try to reach the
Indians. He believed that this simplified statement of the ethics of Jesus
Christ would help to civilize and educate these people."
http://www.reclaimamerica.org/PAGES/NEWS/newspage.asp?story=989
Sincerely,
Jason
386sx
> ===>He should have read Heraclitus before confusing politics with
> philosophy. Even in politics, majority rule can be dangerous, that is why
> the Bill of Rights was drafted.
>
> Heraclitus of Ephesus wrote some 25 centuries ago:
>
> "The many do not take heed of such things as those they meet with, nor do
> they mark them when they are taught, though they think they do."
>
> AND
>
> "For what thought or wisdom have they? They follow the poets and take the
> crowd as their teacher, knowing not that there are many bad and few good."
----
----
"Of this Word's being forever do men prove to be uncomprehending, both
before they hear and once they have heard it. For although all things
happen according to this Word they are like the unexperienced
experiencing words and deeds such as I explain when I distinguish each
thing according to its nature and declare how it is. Other men are
unaware of what they do when they are awake just as they are forgetful
of what they do when they are asleep."
"So we must follow the common, yet though my Word is common, the many
live as if they had a wisdom of their own."
"It is wise to hearken, not to me, but to my Word, and to confess that
all things are one."
The many should should live by Heraclitus's "Logos!"
----
----
"Homer was wrong in saying: 'Would that strife might perish from among
gods and men!' He did not see that he was praying for the destruction of
the universe; for, if his prayer were heard, all things would pass
away."
"It is the opposite which is good for us."
"Good and ill are one."
Can't have the good without the evil!
----
----
"Speaking with sense we must rely on a common sense of all things, as a
city relies on its wall, and much more reliably. For all human laws are
nourished by the one divine law. For it prevails as far as it will and
suffices for all and overflows."
"The way of man has no wisdom, but that of God has."
Morality is given to us by God!
----
----
"The lord whose is the oracle at Delphi neither utters nor hides his
meaning, but shows it by a sign. And the Sibyl, with raving lips
uttering things mirthless, unadorned, and unperfumed, reaches over a
thousand years with her voice, thanks to the god in her."
<shrug!>
----
--
"The sun is new every day." -- Heraclitus
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
news:EVmub.86495$Ll5....@twister.socal.rr.com...
> Ariaan wrote:
> > Dr. Jason Gastrich wrote:
> > >snip<
> > Oh, sorry about that, then. The fact that you did that after he said
> > something about it made me assume that.
> > But if people fall over this sort of thing, wouldn't it be better to
> > omit it, to prevent more aggravation etc. I mean, even Paul said we
> > have to give in on certain points to our fellow brothers and sisters
> > in Christ, just for the sake of peace, and he did so himself.
> > So, now that Don has raised this issue, and you know that certain
> > people see this as pride on your part, wouldn't it be wise to drop
> > those titles? It wouldn't hamper your ability to discuss things in
> > any way, and it might make people more receptive towards what you
> > have to say. Think about it. It wouldn't be admitting that Don was
> > right, it would just be a wise decision on your part.
>
> Apology accepted.
> Don has attacked me from the beginning. I'm convinced that Don would
attack
> me for the color of my t-shirt. Therefore, I'll have to think about your
> suggestion and see if it would actually help someone. It is obvious that
he
> hates Christian, academic institutions that don't have secular, regional
> accreditation. It isn't simply the "Dr." that offends him.
I had guessed as much, I had had the same experience (of being accused of
having a "paper mill" degree) while I was a minister
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
"Don" <calldon...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:6evjrvclln86tpsdk...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 00:16:12 GMT, "Dr. Jason Gastrich" <ne...@jcsm.org>
> wrote:
>
> >Recently, I was awarded a Th.D. (Theology Doctorate) from a small,
> >Christian, Bible college in Florida for my outstanding academic and
ministry
> >achievements.
>
> ""Beware of the scribes who like...the chief seats in the synagogues
> and places of honor at banquets,"
> Mark 12:39-39
>
> Sound familiar DOCTOR Jason???
You sound like one with SOUR GRAPES
<snip>
Glenn (Christian Mystic)
aren't hung up on UN-secularly-acredited BIBLE Colleges (Universities)
Too bad YOU are so CONFUSED
> ==============
>
> Are All "Doctors" Really Doctors?
> Preachers and the "Honorary Doctorate"
> By Timothy S. Morton
>
>
> One doesn't need to be a Christian very long before he realizes the
> Christian world is flooded with ministers or other believers calling
> themselves doctor." If one picks up a book in a Christian bookstore it
> is more than likely written by a "doctor"-the obvious "Dr."
> prominently associated with their name. Many speakers on Christian
> radio sign off as "Dr. So and so", and many Christians often refer to
> their favorite "Doctor" preacher when they want to quote an
> "authoritative voice." What is the source of this doctor fixation? Are
> all "doctors" really doctors? This article will reveal some facts
> about doctorates, "preacher doctors" and pretense in Fundamentalism
> your author has discovered since he became a Christian over 18 years
> ago.
>
> What do you mean, "Doctor"?
>
> The term "doctor" in America has come to usually be associated with a
> medical doctor. Most realize medical doctors are required to undergo
> years of training before the advanced degree of MD or DO is conferred
> upon them. Only after fulfilling the extensive academic requirements
> of a doctorate in a university could the person rightly call
> themselves (or allow others to call them) "doctor." The same is true
> of other earned doctorate degrees (Ph.D, etc.). The person became a
> doctor because he completed the extensive training and study required
> to obtain the degree. As a general rule, to obtain a doctorate one
> must complete high school (diploma), college (Bachelors. degree), two
> years of post-graduate work at a university (Masters degree), and two
> more years of post-graduate for a doctorate. Though some may earn the
> degree in a shorter time, 20 years of total education is typical for
> an earned doctorate.
>
> An earned doctorate, for the relatively few who choose to put forth
> the considerable time, effort and expense to obtain one, carries with
> it a high degree of prestige and accomplishment. It is the highest
> academic degree offered. Regardless of the persons beliefs, opinions,
> sensibility or lack of it, he deserves the title "doctor" for a simple
> but weighty reason-he (or she) earned it! Even though many Ph'D's,
> etc. may be evolutionists, humanists, hedonists, etc., or even
> insane, since they earned their degree, their doctorate cannot be
> taken away.
>
> Click here to see what Encyclopedia Britannic says on the subject.
>
> Honorary Degrees
>
> Around 250 years ago some universities began granting a "degree"
> called an "honorary doctorate" to persons it wanted to honor or
> recognize (usually a dignitary, benefactor, or notable alumni).
> However, neither the university or the honoree were gullible enough to
> believe the honor actually conferred a full doctorate. The purpose of
> the honor was simply to recognize a person for whatever reason, not to
> grant an instant education. Many times the honor was bestowed on
> someone who already had an earned doctorate.
>
> Probably the most obvious proof that honorary degrees are not true
> doctorates is they are now granted by colleges rather than exclusively
> by universities. Unlike a university a college by definition cannot
> award an earned doctorate (or even a masters degree) because it
> doesn't have the curriculum or accreditation to do so. How could an
> institution grant an honorary degree when they can't even confer an
> earned one! Sure they can give someone a piece of paper to honor them,
> but only the most conceited, deceived or ignorant would actually
> believe this made them a true "doctor." There is little confusion
> about this in the secular world. Honorary doctorates are routinely
> given to political figures, civic leaders, and others, but to our
> knowledge none of the secular honorees refer to themselves as "doctor"
> or allow others to seriously do so. Even Bill Clinton with all of his
> moral weaknesses and deficiencies doesn't refer to himself as "doctor"
> even after having an honorary doctorate granted to him by Oxford
> University in England! He knows if he did he would not be taken
> seriously and ridiculed behind his back (more than he already is!).
> Vain and flamboyant country singer, Dolly Parton, was also given an
> honorary doctorate by a Southern Baptist college, but does she refer
> to herself as "doctor"? Hardly. But give one of these pieces of paper
> to many Fundamentalist preachers and what do they do with it? To them
> it is as serious as a heart attack. They treat it as if it actually
> confers a college education and they are full fledged doctors!
>
> "Preacher," "Doctor," or What?
>
> It came as a shock to us early in our Christian life to discover that
> many of the most highly regarded "doctors" in Fundamentalism held only
> honorary doctorates. A few were granted by major Christian
> universities, but many were from small Bible colleges or obscure Bible
> institutes (which are usually an extension of a local church). A far
> cry from a university. Once we became aware of the distinction between
> honorary and earned doctorates we began to notice that most of the
> "doctors" at high profile camp meetings, revivals, preacher's schools,
> and soul winning conferences were doctors in name only. Some never
> attended college (not to mention graduate school), and a few did not
> even finish high school! Furthermore, the presidents of several
> leading Fundamentalist colleges have only honorary degrees (usually
> given by one of their cronies at another similar school.), but that
> doesn't restrain them from linking "Dr." with their name at every turn
> and encourage its use in their books, sermons and throughout their
> ministry! To paraphrase another, "When a person goes to one of these
> "Bible Conferences" he is confronted by so many professing themselves
> to be doctors one would think God was sick!" This person also
> apparently senses the doctor or (appearance of) education fixation
> that permeates today's Fundamentalism. It seems everybody wants a
> "degree" and when they simply get a piece of paper from one of their
> buddies saying they have one they treat it as if it is an actual
> doctorate. No wonder a young Christian is lead to believe the same
> from their vain, self-serving rhetoric. As the Scriptures proclaim,
> all are subject to pride and vainglory's diabolical stranglehold an
> how preachers tout their phony doctorates as genuine is a clear
> manifestation to its validity. "Let nothing be done through strife or
> vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than
> themselves." Phil 2:3.
>
> What's The Cause?
>
> What could possess a normally rational man who is born again, called
> to preach Jesus Christ, and otherwise scripturally sound to parade
> around with a phony doctorate, pretending to be "educated"? What power
> could cause him to boast of an attainment he has not attained and
> allow others to boast for him? The same universal vices that caused
> Lucifer to fall, pride and envy. The Bible bluntly says this "pride of
> life" is not of God, "...and the pride of life, is not of the Father,
> but is of the world" (1 Jn. 2:16), and envy is clearly ungodly. But
> this doesn't affect them. They apparently justify their indulgence in
> their mind with self serving reasoning.
>
> One of their reasonings is the institution which granted them the
> "doctorate" must have felt them "qualified" or it would not have given
> it, but this argument is forced. First, the only way to qualify for an
> earned doctorate is to finish the requirements! Second, the
> "doctorate" is honorary by its very name. It is called a "doctorate"
> because it is given by an educational institution which confers true
> doctorates, their highest earned degree. If honorary doctorates make a
> person a true doctor, then an auctioneer who is given a certificate
> calling him "colonel" must also be a true colonel; a commissioned
> officer in the US military!
>
> Another argument is, even though the person doesn't have the required
> academic education for a doctorate they earned one through "life
> experience," but this is still invalid and self indulgent. The person
> may have a wealth of "life experience" that equips him for certain
> aspects of Christ's ministry much better than most Ph.D's, but that
> still ignores the fact he hasn't completed the required education for
> a true doctorate. Would you want to have surgery performed on you or a
> loved one by a true medical doctor who graduated from a university or
> by someone who has "life experience" only and no degree?
>
> Probably the most desperate argument is "A doctors degree will further
> my ministry and open doors" implying it will help Christ's ministry.
> But Christ's ministry when He was on earth was not tainted by
> pretense, half-truths, and deception. Christ made no false claims to
> "education" or position but said humbling things like, "For whosoever
> exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall
> be exalted" (Luke 14:11), and "Whosoever therefore shall humble
> himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of
> heaven" (Matt 18:4). Sayings that tear at the very root of the modern
> unearned doctorate craze. When pressured some will admit their degree
> is honorary (but that doesn't stop them from using it), others,
> however, seem to actually believe they hold the advanced degree and
> resent anyone who questions it.
>
> What we are addressing here is academic attainment and not necessarily
> spirituality, ability or consecration. Some preachers with Ph.D's are
> so dry and lifeless in their manner and deficient in common sense and
> sound doctrine that they are little help to anyone. On the other hand
> a preacher with an eighth grade education can have more insight into
> the Scriptures, a better understanding of God's will, and a superior
> manner of preaching and presentation than some men with two earned
> doctorates. Some of the best preaching I have ever heard came from men
> with less than a high school education. Education is no substitute for
> a humble heart, diligent study, or godly zeal.
>
> Education-One Of The "gods"?
>
> It has been said "The three greatest "gods" of America are money, sex,
> and education in that order." We believe this observation to be
> accurate. Notice the third god is not knowledge but education. Though
> many treat the terms as synonymous, there is a distinction.
> "Knowledge" refers more to what is known or can be known, "Education,"
> though, refers more to going through a course of study with the
> intention of learning something. However, it is possible (and even
> common) one could go through many courses of study and yet have very
> little useful knowledge (the proverbial "egghead") or one could have
> little or no academic "education" and have considerable, useful
> knowledge. The Lord, with full knowledge but no "education," is an
> example of the latter. Upon hearing Christ's words the Jews (likely
> the Scribes and Pharisees) said, "How knoweth this man letters, having
> never learned?" (John 7:15). They saw He had knowledge, but no
> accepted (accredited, etc.) education. Even in those days education in
> itself was a "god." They considered their own Messiah (and his
> disciples, Acts 4:13) unlearned.
>
> That many Fundamentalists treat honorary degrees as true doctorates is
> a result of a similar view on education as the Pharisees. They are
> saying, in effect, one cannot have true knowledge without an approved,
> recognized education. But some Fundamentalists take this farther. They
> reason, if one cannot get a real education, the appearance of one is
> the next best thing. Enter the vain, self-serving abuse of the
> honorary doctorate.
>
> Are All Earned Degrees Earned?
>
> Another deceptive, tactic used by some "schools" and preachers is the
> schools grant degrees that are usually considered earned with minimal
> or almost no academic requirements. Dr. Ron Powell [who holds two
> fully earned doctorates and whose works can be found on this site]
> said more than once he has encountered preachers who have received
> "doctorates" from one of these "diploma mills." One told him, "the
> ONLY requirement was one book with a minimum of 100 pages and $600."
> Another told him much the same. This is supposed to qualify the
> candidate for a "Doctor of Theology" (Th.D) degree? Nonsense, pure
> nonsense. There is a lot more to a true doctorate than a short book
> and some money. Just ask someone who has really earned one!
>
> Brother Powell also said, "As for myself having two earned Doctorates,
> I feel very badly when being introduced at meeting as "Dr. Ron
> Powell". I feel sick because when they say, "Dr. Powell", they are
> innocently putting me into a class of vain, proud, and egotistical
> preachers that I wish not to be associated with. I just tell the
> Pastors to introduce me as "Brother Powell". I really do feel so bad
> because everyone is a doctor these days. I do not want to be
> catagorized with that bunch of prideful, self-righteous, pin-headed
> preachers." Clearly, the lust for "doctorates" so common today has
> tainted the whole concept of "higher education" even for those who
> have truly earned them!
>
> One would not normally think that supposedly honest, "godly," and
> "blameless" ( Imagine one of these egotistical Pharisees saying one is
> not qualified for the ministry if he has had more than one wife! The
> Holy Spirit said "blameless" before he said "husband of one wife," 1
> Tim. 3:2!) Bible Believing, Fundamental preachers would resort to such
> deceitful measures as desiring honorary or phony "earned" doctorates,
> but sadly, it is true. They deceive their churches, brethren, and most
> of all, themselves! Not to mention they demean the entire concept of
> doctorates for those who truly earned them. Want to cut through the
> facade and see the true colors of one of these fellows? Just begin to
> question his qualifications for his coveted, beloved "doctorate." What
> you see may not be very pretty, but you will then realize why this
> subject is a "Taboo Topic."
>
> ====================
>
> "Fake degrees equal fake integrity."
> -- Don Reasons
IT @something.net Don
Please tell WHAT specifically had you "guessed as much?"
> I had had the same experience (of being accused of
>having a "paper mill" degree) while I was a minister
Jason is STILL promoting himself as "Dr. Jason Gastrich, B.A., M.A.,
Th.D."
One either uses the term "Dr." OR one uses the initials after the
name. It is improper to use BOTH with a signature. You would think
"Dr. Jason" would know that.
His Bachelor of Arts is legit, from San Diego State University - San
Diego, CA.
Jason claims a "Doctorate of Religious Arts in Theology (Th.D.)
degree" from Shepherd Bible College and Seminary in Largo, FL.
Shepherd Bible College also claims one of Jason's "organization" as an
accreditation.
Shepherd's web site says: "Shepherd Bible College is fully-accredited
by the (World-Wide Accreditation Commission) of Christian Educational
Institutions."
THE TRUTH IS: the WWAC is a business run by Paul Richardson. "Dr."
Paul Richardson claims that Jesus appeared to him, smiled at him, and
even touched him. So, it appears that the Shepard degree mill is
actually accredited by one fundie minister and Jason's little
organization.
Someone who looked into this earlier noted that "Dr. Paul Richardson
(there goes that doctor again) has earned his degrees by attending the
Southern Bible College in Houston, Texas (a pentacostal school) for
over a year, and finally received his bachelors from International
Bible Institute and Seminary. And that school is a bit questionable,
as I can find one web page for it but and many bio's of people who
claim they went there. However the web page is of some apparent
diploma mill in Arkansas, while most of the Bio's mention Orlando. Of
course, Dr. Paul Richardson doesn't tell us where the school is
located. His masters is from the Northgate Graduate School in Edmonds,
Wa. Of which I can find no mention. And he got his doctorate from the
same school where he got his bachelor's degree. And just to make it
interesting, this ministry will ordain you for $15.00 and even
includes a ceremony. All in all, pretty sad excuse for a supposed
Doctor...Especially since he is accrediting colleges. Thus Jason
received an honorary doctor's degree from a diploma mill that is
accredited by someone else who has very questionable credentials. And
that is exactly how sad and sleazy the whole affair is.
The degree "Th.D. is a higher academic degree, NOT an honorary degree.
Jason's little Florida degree mill (which it is) should have known to
give him ther CORRECT honorary degree. But you get what you pay for
sometimes. Shepherd Bible college is considered a degree mill by
anyone who studies the false credentials and false accreditation of
the school. It is a Bible correspondence school at best. Shepard
Bible College as a member of On-line Christ Centered Ministries of
which Mr. Gastrich is Founder and President. As someone pointed out
earlier, I suppose the Shepard Bible College wouldn't want to be in a
organization headed by a mere Mr. Gastrich so they made him a doctor.
His "Master of Arts in Biblical Studies " is from a correspondence
school in Louisiana that now has a "campus."
Steve Levicoff and John Bear are considered the two leading experts in
distant education. Steve is a Jewish Christian, seminary and Bible
College teacher and author of a book called "NAME IT AND FRAME IT"
dealing with diploma mills.
In 2000, Steve commented that Louisiana Baptist University is "a
degree mill run out of a Baptist church and formerly called Baptist
Christian
University. LBU claims accreditation by ACI (everyone's accreditation
mill), although they managed to attain candidacy status with TRACS a
few years back (and, when TRACS began to clean up its own act, LBU was
dumped). They have operated under the umbrella name of Baptist
Christian Schools for many years. They also run a counseling
credential mill (the National Association of Marriage & Family
Counselors) and have an affiliation with the Louisiana Baptist
Theological Seminary (which, of course, is located at a P.O. box in .
. . Missouri). Therefore, is it a legitimate institution? Hardly.
This was about the time they moved into an office building. Steve
continued to describe Jason's alma mater: "LBU is still claiming a
mickey-mouse accreditation (not ACI, but a newer one shared, according
to a Yahoo search, by Tyndale Seminary in Texas, another degree mill).
Dr. John Bear said the following regarding LBU:
"According to NCAs "Overview of Accreditation General Institution
Regulations, under the rubric Faculty, referring to a regionally
accredited degree institution it states "It employs a faculty that has
earned from accredited institutions the degrees appropriate to the
level offered by the institution". Faculty who "earned" their
doctorate
degrees from the above listed schools do not appear to meet this
standard, regardless of their creative or intellectual endeavors or
accomplishments but based specifically on the level of acceptability
of their doctorates! Obviously a degree from Columbia Pacific or
Louisiana Baptist in no way measures up to NCA's standard and a SCUPS
degree is valid in California but not appropriate for a doctoral
program costing students an inordinate amount of money!
"Also there is the issue pertaining to image! Why should a student who
is expecting to enhance their career prospects and who is attempting
to avoid the criticisms, skepticism and stereotypes associated with
distance learning by attending an RA distance learning program rather
than a state approved or diploma mill, be placed in the uncomfortable
position of having to explain or defend why their faculty mentors have
such questionable credentials!"
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=louisiana+baptist+degree+mill&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&safe=off&selm=93l6s1%24psf%241%40nnrp1.deja.com&rnum=3
In a nutshell, Jason is calling himself "Dr." based upon an honorary
"degree" from a diploma mill in Florida, and claiming to be a
"candidate" for a Ph.D. from is an unaccredited school which, unlike
most legitimate seminaries, requires virtually NO language requirement
for the graduate programs. As far as I can tell, the Chancellor of
LBU has one or two accredited degrees, out of SIX.. And at least one
out of six of his graduate degrees come from THAT school.
In addition, virtually ALL of the staff claim to have one or more
UNACCREDITED graduate degrees.
Jason has said he will not call himself "Dr." until next year. But he
has it plastered all over his web site and other places. He has
created various aliases and posted "reviews" of his own materials on
various forums, hit and run. When he is cornered on an issue, he runs
again.
In addition, LBU has an alumni page. Jason created a "link" to that
LBU alumni page...with one twist. Jason's link was a FALSE LINK
leading to another page on HIS OWN WEBSITE. The truth is that JASON
IS NOT LISTED on the LBU alumni page. So Jason deceitfully created a
'mock'up of that LBU page (replete with their logo), through HIS own
web site, just in order to write HIS VERY OWN third-person 'bio' (and
top that off with HIS own picture), as though it should be considered,
by everyone here, that Jason is just like any of the other 'featured
alumni' at LBU? For those interested, here is the actual link to
LBU's alumni web page:
http://www.lbu.edu/featuredalumni.htm
Jason posts HIS link to the FAKE DECEPTIVE LBU alumni page on
alt.atheism as well as other forums. His posts the page as legit. A
premeditated fraud.
In a nutshell, LBU, like is an unaccredited school which, unlike most
legitimate seminaries, requires virtually NO language requirement for
the graduate programs. As far as I can tell, the Chancellor has one
or two accredited degrees, out of SIX.. at least one out of six of
his graduate degrees come from THAT school. Virtually all of the
staff have one or more UNACCREDITED graduate degrees.
Glenn, this thread was pretty dead and I don't really know why you
responded to it. But I have nothing against Jason per se. I DO HAVE
MUCH AGAINST any ego-driven opportunists who uses the Gospel to make a
buck, to promote their personal agenda while giving a bad name to the
cause of Christ with fake degrees paraded as legitimate. Jason has
continued to use ethically questionable tricks to promote himself,
then after getting caught, he would deny that he did it.
JESUS SPOKE OF PEOPLE LIKE THAT! He said,
"The scribes and the Pharisees have seated themselves in the chair of
Moses...they do all their deeds (4) to be noticed by men; for...they
love the place of honor at banquets and the chief seats in the
synagogues, and respectful greetings in the market places, and being
called 'Dr. Jason Gastrich' by men."
Matt23
My problem is with religious frauds. It makes life so much more
difficult for those who really have the right heart for ministry.
Jason is a perfect example for a non-believer to REMAIN a
non-believer.
D*
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
IT @something.net Don
<christi...@ev1.net> wrote:
>Secular and religion aren't the same thing, most Christians know this, and
>aren't hung up on UN-secularly-acredited BIBLE Colleges (Universities)
>
>Too bad YOU are so CONFUSED
Confused about WHAT specifically, Glenn? Please tell me WHAT I am
confused about.
Glenn...what's wrong with you today?
When a person overly promotes himself as having a "Th.D" which Jason
does NOT have, and calls himself "Dr." using his fake degree to
legitimize his "Christian" ministry or message, THAT is fraudulent.
That is deceptive. That is unethical and immoral. It is deceiving
the people of God.
If you were holding a position of authority and giving "eternal" and
supposedly life-changing advice using your "degrees" or your
"education" as PROOF of your qualifications to give such advice, one
would expect that your education and degrees would not be from a paper
diploma mill, as Jason's are. AND, If you were making a living
running a NON-PROFIT corporation and SOLICITING FUNDS FROM THE GENERAL
PUBLIC based upon the authority of your "degrees," then you should
expect to be held ACCOUNTABLE FOR THAT WHICH YOU CLAIM.
Jason is soliciting TAX-FREE FUNDS based while deceiving (lying) those
who support him.
Glenn, I have been on THAT side of the ministry and know how easy it
is to SCAM people in the name of Jesus. That is why I react strongly
to deceivers like Jason. I am sorry if you have a problem with the
light of truth being shown on a cock-roach. But that's the way it is.
I would be glad to discuss it more specifically if you are actually
interested. But I think you are just reacting to what I said
regarding Jason's lack of legitimacy.
If I am mistaken, then please accept my apology and feel free to
correct my error. But I can easily prove anything I claim in this
case.
D*
===================================
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as