Deb and Dee of Wartburg Watch .com: Gossip, Not Gospel; Hobby, Not Hope
There is a huge problem with the Christian blogosphere; it is very comfortable with hopelessness. In fact, hopelessness has become a hobby. The real world simply can’t function without solutions, but the Christian e-world seems to be exempt from that reality.
I started this blog when most blogs that address trends in Neo-Calvinism started, circa 2009. The goal was to find answers and an eventual solution to the New Calvinist movement that continues to turn the church upside down. Perhaps my solution-oriented bent comes from my entrepreneurial background; without solutions—you don’t make payroll. I never had to face any of my employees and say, “I can’t pay you this week” because the possibility was too terrifying. Trust me, it was all about solutions for many years.
The problem is simple: the recent and ongoing tsunami of spiritual abuse is due to a false gospel which shouldn’t surprise us. That was my first goal; to find the “why.” Then I found the solution.
What is more obvious than the fact that the institutional church which some call, “the evangelical industrial complex of celebrity pastors” makes the ongoing abuse possible? What is more obvious than the fact that institutions cannot function without money? Take ABWE of the missionary kids infamy. GARB churches could have brought ABWE to its knees inside of a week; yet, even in light of unspeakable atrocities against children, not one congregation pulled support. Hence, the situation dragged on and on for roughly twenty years with little or no justice brought to bear. Why? Where are the missionary kids today? Does anybody even remember them? Oh, I forgot, their situation isn’t trending right now; that would be the latest drama everyone is feeding on: Jordan Root and Matt Chandler’s Village Church.
The discernment blogosphere could stop spiritual abuse dead in its tracks. We are talking about huge numbers and people who have immense influence. Why would you continue to give any credence whatsoever to an institution that makes abuse possible? Churches are either directly involved in abuse, or turn a blind eye to it. Pastors who dwell in the institutional church could indeed put a stop to it as well. For example, a handful of IFB pastors could have stopped the Jack Hyles cartel from wreaking havoc on innocent lives, but they didn’t. Why?
Obviously, it’s a preservation issue of some sort at the expense of innocents who are attending church and trying to do what’s right. Instead, they fall prey to tyranny and pedophiles. There is a reason why the Protestant church now bears the same fruit of the Catholic Church while both continue to thrive. How can this be?
Let’s pause for clarification of points:
- The Protestant/Catholic/evangelical industrial complex of celebrity pastors is predicated on a false gospel, specifically, the false gospel of progressive justification. Protestants and Catholics merely disagree on man’s role in the progression. False gospels bear bad fruit—this should be evident.
- Catholic/Protestant hierarchies both claim God’s authority on earth to oversee the progression of salvation. The Catholics are more upfront about the idea, Protestants less so; nevertheless, this ministry has a cache of quotations from leading evangelicals that make the same claim. And they get that directly from Calvin and Luther.
- Participants of the evangelical industrial complex of celebrity pastors knowingly profess progressive justification, or unwittingly function by it.
- Progressive justification calls for an institution vested with God’s authority to oversee salvation. We hear all of the time that formal church membership is synonymous with being in the “body of Christ.”
- Progressive justification, theologically, allows for any and every kind of sin under the auspices of authority. We simply must not question God’s anointed who “stand in the gap” and “stand in our stead” before God. Our role is “humble submission” before God. If those who stand in the stead have wronged us—they will answer to God, not us. Our role is to “forgive the way we have been forgiven.”
Break point: most discernment blogs are pundits of this system. Their only hope is in the system itself. This is why they refuse to associate ideology with behavior. Regardless of what’s going on in the “church,” the goal is to somehow fix the church. Since 2009, they continue to whine, cry, and beg the institutional church to behave itself. They gather together, moaning and licking each other’s wounds, crying out to the institutional church as god rather than the Prince of Peace. Really, it’s pathetic.
The paramount example of this sad scene is Deb and Dee’s Wartburg Watch .com. In their attempt to save the institutional church, they have become a celebrity subculture that mediates between the hierarchy and Churchianity’s sheeple herd. They are also a model for most of the other discernment blogs.
Listen, when the focus of salvation is a system, people will cling to that system at all cost. It is NEVER the ideological foundations of the system; it is ALWAYS a few bad apples that are to blame. If you suggest that it is the system itself that is the problem, you better go to that conversation in full riot gear.
And yesterday was a good example. It’s an amazing scene. In the same way that celebrity pastors get a pass from their followers, Deb and Dee not only get a pass for their illogical ways and steroidal hypocrisy, but also, as I found out yesterday, a vibrant defense from their faithful followers. Dee, and probably Deb as well, stood by while I apparently got what was coming to me. And cursory observations of their comment streams reveal that they are selective in regard to who receives this verbal abuse.
There is no room here by any means to document the full brunt of their ideological disconnects and hypocrisy, but I will touch on the basics. Let me start with explaining their intolerance of me regardless of the following: the price I paid for asking New Calvinists too many questions rates near the top of the abuse scale, so why did Deb and Dee stand by while I received my verbal beating which included blatant false accusations and baseless name calling? Because like black conservatives who are not black because they are conservatives, I am not a fellow victim because I offer an articulation of the problem and a solution.
Besides the fact that Deb and Dee are not victims of the institutional church, an articulation of the abuse problem and a solution threatens their hobby; ie., gossip mongering. For years, they have held an endless recycling of trending drama in the institutional church with spotlighted victims coming and going. They have their own Top 40 hits of the trending victims that eventually drop down to number 200 or lower. The discussion held on their blog is the musical hit of the week until people get tired of it and wait at the doors of their Wartburg castle with bated breath for whatever is trending next.
But here is the bottom line: Karen Hinkley will not find justice any more than the missionary kids, and that’s NOT ok with me. Karen Hinkley is at the top of the chart right now, and the missionary kids are not even on the chart. Deb and Dee are comfortable with that because trending victims come and go feeding their hobby and celebrity status as hopeless gossip peddlers. Their gargantuan pooling of opinions has not solved anything and has actually enabled the institutional church to continue in tyranny and abuse. They are facilitators—not advocates. They only have talk and have no solutions. In other words, they offer no hope.
Let’s put feet on this a little more. Deb and Dee see no real power in the truth or a connection between ideology and behavior. The latter has been my primary problem with them for several months. In a venture to keep people connected with the institutional church in some way, shape, or form, they offer an e-church hosted by none other than Wade Burleson who is a consummate Neo-Calvinist.
Let that sink in a little. While supposedly taking up the cause of those abused by the New Calvinists, they endorse a New Calvinist, and make it a point to expose others to his teachings.
Really? Do I really have to expound on this further? Look, I could cite the lame excuse they present for doing this on their blog, but I can’t really muster up a mental incentive to do so. This comfort with metaphysical contradictions is post-modernesque in the extreme.
Now, regardless of the fact that I rarely, actually, VERY rarely visit other blogs, and the subsequent accusation by Dee’s minions yesterday that I am a “low grade troll,” I was beckoned to Wartburg yesterday in regard to a statement that she made which leads me to the next point. Since the obvious must be discussed in our day, it stands to reason that the obvious must also have need of being articulated. This speaks to the other problem I have with Wartburg: they do not see truth as efficacious to healing.
Let me be clear and make a statement that I fully intend to stand by: Deb and Dee believe a false gospel. How do I know this? Dee said so. The statement that was brought to my attention follows:
Remember, we are all positionally holy but we are all functional sinners.
This is clearly a false gospel that denies the new birth. In fact, it is a return to the same authentic Protestant gospel that New Calvinism is predicated on. Deb and Dee cannot help people victimized by New Calvinism because they are functioning New Calvinists and that’s exactly why they are hooked up with Wade Burleson which should be more than obvious, but anyway, it is what it is.
Sigh. Ok, let’s start with the fact that the biblical definition of a “sinner” is someone who is unregenerate. Really? Do I have to explain this? Do I have to point out that Dee called “believers” functioning unregenerates? Are evangelicals that far gone? This is the exact same gospel that John Piper et al hold to. He states it plainly all of the time: Christians still need ongoing salvation that can only be found in the institutional church. Furthermore, that also comes directly from Calvin and Luther both in no uncertain terms. Deb and Dee, as well as many of their minions, are well aware of this ministry’s numerous citations that establish this as fact, but…
…they simply don’t care about the truth nor do they see it as relevant, except for the fact that it threatens their hobby and celebrity status. Clearly, their problem with John Piper is primarily his tweets, not his gospel, and they have as much said so in the past. Why? Because they believe the same false gospel.
Christians, if they are really Christians, are not merely “positionally” righteous, they are in fact righteous beings because they have been literally born again of God. In the gospel according to Deb and Dee, there is no understanding of sin in regard to justification and sin under grace. UNDER LAW (the biblical definition of a lost person) and UNDER GRACE (the biblical definition of a saved person) are not separate—“Christians” remain under law and under grace is merely a covering supplied by a perpetual imputation of Christ’s righteousness. This is the New Calvinist false gospel that Deb and Dee buy into while claiming to be champions for those abused by the “Calvinistas.” It’s otherworldly ironic.
So in the final analysis, the Wartburg Watch offers no one hope—victims are only fodder for their hobby, regardless of their motives, and they offer no true good news, but rather replace the gospel with gossip.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
What? Now they are over there slamming John Immel? What’s the deal? Did I hit a nerve, or what?
LikeLike
Clockwork Angel,
Why don’t you come over here and let us substantiate our “credentials.” I would also like to discuss your view of orthodoxed authority. Instead of hiding over at WW, let’s see if you back up your words with substance.
LikeLike
John wrote a rather lengthy and comprehensive response to the gang over at TWW. At the moment, this comment seems to be “stuck” in moderation. So I have posted the content of his comment here for your consideration.
– Update: The comment has just passed moderation over at TWW. It will be interesting to see the response.
LikeLike
Oasis,
You are a champion in my book! Have a good weekend. This song is for you, me & all who are free!
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9dgng_ekbV0
LikeLike
Paul and everyone else, I’ve been busy all this week and didn’t get a chance to look in great detail at the big dust up over at TWW. From the bottom of my heart, I’m shocked at the treatment they gave you there. John, Argo, Andy, Sean. Susan and yourself have my full support, for whatever that is worth – and not becuase I beleive all of you to be my authority, but becuase you’ve been the only ones to dare to ask questions and provide some plausible answers to so many social problems and issues that have vexed American Christianity over the last 25 years or so.
My academic background is in applied Mathematics and Statistics, not theology, Chrisitan history, or philosophy. Howver, I’m very well read in Systematic Theology and Christian history, much less so in philosophy. I’ve read cover to cover every Baptist o Reformed systematic theology text, including Strong, Thiessen, Erickson, Chafer, Ryrie, Geisler, Shedd, Hodge, Lewis & Demarest, among others. I’m ashamed to say I’ve read and studied Grudem too. I’ve read all eight volumes of Shaff’s Christian history, and also the histories by D’Aubigne, Neander, Mosheim, Fisher and Wylie. (Before I was married to my beautiful wife, I didn’t get out much – LOL!) I’ve read Calvin’s Institutes TWICE and they put me to sleep quite a few times. Unlike John, I’m listing these because so many out there in the evangelical world dismiss the conclusion I’ve reached, specifically that Paul’s teaching is Biblical and dare I say orthodox. Sure, Paul diverges from the Cavinists on the issues of salvation, but from what I’ve read from history, many Christians in the past were not Calvinists. I know that Paul doesn’t like the word orthodox, but so far as I can tell Paul has a Biblical view or God, the Trinity, and the nature of who Jesus Christ is (Christology).
Within Christianity, we have many different thoughts about salvation and how it works. We have Pelagianism, semi-Pelagianism, Arminianism, and Calvinism, just to name a few. All of which have had advocates in the past. Paul Dohse’s views are not that far out there – it is not as if he is advocating Wicca or Satanism! So why the irrational and vicious reaction over at TWW? Why is salvation and its study (soteriology) such a raw nerve among evangelicals today? Why do some at TWW consider it wrong to question theories of salvation, especially Calvinist ones?
I have more to say in criticism of TWW, but in a later post.
LikeLike
In this next post, I’d like to respond to Eagle’s post from earlier.
Regarding what Eagle has listed that Dee Parsons has done, I think think that she was right to do all eight of the things that were listed. She has accomplished good in these actions.
But what some of us here don’t like about TWW is their refusal to deal with the bigger questions, the refusal to examine and analyze the specific philosophies and theologies that lead to spiritual abuse. Cyber-hugs and e-churches are great if you’re into that sort of thing, BUT THEY DON’T SOLVE ANY PROBLEMS!!!
As someone who works in the field of Mathematics, I would rightly be out of work if I chose to avoid vexing problems. A physician, a computer programmer, an engineer, or any other respectable professional would also be in the same position. So why do Neo-Calvinists and Neo-Evangelicals get a pass? Why are they not required to solve problems or else shove them under the carpet? Or to think rationally about thier faith? Why is it wrong for Paul Dohse or John Immel or anyone to question and analyze doctrines, and if necessary to test them and refine them?
LikeLike
John, excellent post at TWW! :o)
LikeLike
Hi Argo,
Thanks, I met her on the internet. She now makes sure I get out and get some sunshine!
LikeLike
Ryan,
Thank you for those comments. They were very kind and heartfelt as well as thorough and intelligently written. You have adeptly articulated the heart of the issue. I think I speak for Paul and everyone else when I say that we certainly aren’t looking for accolades and affirmations. We are all interested in truth. But it is still encouraging to know that you aren’t a lone voice in a noisy sea of irrationality.
Oh, and be sure to get out in the sun as often as you can! 😉
LikeLike
Argo,
Once again you have been able to put into the words so deftly the very thoughts I had myself. All the peer reviews in the world don’t make one bit of difference if I consider the premise behind them to be false. And that is why ANY kind of debate with the likes of those at TWW will result in futility, frustration, and name-calling; because we both have a different take on the root assumptions. No dialoge can occur unless the premises are addressed first. This is exactly what Paul was attempting to do, address the root assmption; the theology which drives the behavior. But the problem is that they either do not see any problem with the theology, OR they cannot or will not make the logical connections from one step to the next.
LikeLike
Ha! Thanks, A Mom. 😀
Very interesting thread, this is. (Mostly in the dark here, since I refuse to read TWW…)
LikeLike