Deb, Dee, and Wade; Partying Like It’s 1999
WadeWatch.com has become so indicative of what the Bible says to be aware of in the last days. Let me clarify how the Bible defines the “last days.” It is the last age among ages. It is a period of time marked by the death and resurrection of Christ in its beginning, and an ending that is marked by the imminent return of Christ to redeem all believers dead and alive who belong to this age.
The Bible is clear: this age or what the Bible calls the “last days” will be marked by deception and lust-driven ideology—mostly in the name of God. While Deb and Dee constantly present themselves as bastions of apostolic truth, what they believe is at times bizarre and often pontificated by their in-house prophet Wade Burleson.
Recently, a blogger asked me to review his research on WadeWatch.com and post it. That’s not going to happen, but on the other hand, I find some of his research to be…well, it is what it is. What said blogger writes about is just too far from the TANC/PPT theme, but again, a lot of his research speaks for itself and that’s what this post is about.
It’s about institutional authority as truth. It’s true because Wade Burleson is an ordained Southern Baptist philosopher king. I have said it before and frankly I remain resolute: if Al Mohler, Wade Burleson, or any other evangelical philosopher king proclaimed salvation by eating green frogs, the Protestant herd would buy it while Catholics would object to green frogs having preeminence over the Pope. Burleson can proclaim anything he wants to via Deb and Dee’s E-Church—the Kool-Aid drinking Wade-watchers will buy into it.
Burleson vigorously endorses a long list of eccentric Christian mystics including Jon Zens, Dallas Willard, and William Paul Young. Zens is one of the core-four that founded the present-day New Calvinist movement which WadeWatch.com purports to be its primary nemeses. This is but one example of the prevailing cognitive dissonance taking place at WadeWatch.com.
Burleson teaches that God is both male and female, and per his custom, takes liberties with the languages to make his point:
According to Wade Burleson, “In the Old Testament, El Shaddai is given as one of the names for God. El Shaddai means ‘The God with breasts’ or even more precisely ‘The God with many breasts.’ (L) El Shaddai actually means God Almighty.
“Pronounced el-shadY, this is the best-known of the “EL” compound names. It means The All-Sufficient One, and in English bibles as “God Almighy,” “the Almighty,” or “Almighty God.” (L)
Wade Burleson cites a perversion of Genesis 49:25 to make his case:
“God possesses all the wonderful and good attributes of men and women. For example:
“I am God, your father, who supports you, the Shaddai who blesses you with blessings from the skies above and from the deep sea below, blessings from breasts (shadayim) and the womb (Genesis 49:25).” (L)
Wade Burleson teaches that Jesus Christ Is Michael, the Archangel.
The following quotes have been taken from Wade Burleson’s post, “At That Time Michael … Shall Arise:” The Basis for Your Trust of the Gospel:
“Michael, the Son of God and Savior of the world, has come.” (L)
“Michael is the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Savior and Defender of His People.” (L)
The following quotes have been taken from Wade Burleson’s, Michael Is a Name for the Son of God Himself, Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ:
“‘Michael’ is another name for the Lord Jesus Christ, the eternal second Person of the Trinity…”
“We have thus a proof, drawn from Scripture, that Michael is a name for the Son of God himself.”
“From all this it is evident, that Michael is a name for our Lord himself…”
“We observe, further, that the very name, Michael, is an appropriate name for our Lord, and for him alone.”
Of course, this parallels the doctrines of the Jehovah Witnesses which are often aped by Jon Zens as well. And again, don’t let this escape you: Burleson claims Zens as his mentor while he is the Pastor of Deb and Dee’s E-Church who claim to be the number one apologists against New Calvinism; Zens is one of the founding fathers of New Calvinism.
Burleson holds to all of the fundamental Reformed doctrines from which spiritual abuse flows. While Deb and Dee fancy themselves as advocates for the spiritually abused, their pastor endorses every fundamental Reformed doctrine that creates abuse in the institutional church. His eccentric teachings are just the icing on the party cake.
Yet, the following at WadeWatch.com is pretty much off the chart; it is indicative of this age, and that party is just getting started. I predict things there in the future that one cannot even make up in their wildest imaginations.
When authority is truth, there is no end to the party favors.
paul
Fact: Protestant Orthodoxy Disavows Good Behavior
TV Shows have been dissing the integrity of church for years. I am not much of a TV watcher, but one of my clients enjoys watching “ME” TV which highlights TV shows of the past. One such show is “Reba” starring the country music legend Reba McEntire. In the plot, Reba has divorced her husband who was having an affair with “Barbara Jean” who Reba nicknamed “BJ.” Barbara Jean plays a dimwitted blonde who is totally unrepentant for destroying Reba’s marriage, and in the plot, is also a confessing Christian and faithful churchian. BJ offers up most of the punchlines in the sitcom through the character’s totally confused mindset and worldview.
Indicative of the confusion that defines churchianity, Christians wail and moan in regard to recent TV shows that continually denigrate the Christian faith. This is what makes Barbara Jean a truthful representation of Protestantism. While proudly espousing the truism that Protestants are just lowly “sinners saved by grace,” they object to being represented as…well, “sinners.” While proclaiming themselves “sinners,” they also insist on being recognized as civilization’s moral compass in regard to every category of life. While popular Protestants such a Tullian Tchividjian preached loosey-goosey grace for years dissing all things good as “moralism,” he and the many leaders like him are forced to resign when their sinful ways become public. These kinds of ridiculous contradictions highlighted the Barbara Jean motif in the “Reba” sitcom.
What’s up with all of this confusion? Well, a leading Protestant evangelical lauded by the who’s who of the evangelical community, Dr. Michael Horton, clarifies the problem in his book, “Christless Christianity.” He accurately makes the case in the book that Protestantism has never laid claim to good behavior, and in fact, rejects it. In many of his writings, he drives home the point that Protestant orthodoxy is solely a profession and not an action (this is why Martin Luther rejected the book of James as a “straw epistle”).
Salvation is defined as a mere ability to “see” the kingdom with no participation other than proclaiming it. In Horton’s book, pun intended, trying to do well is not preaching the gospel, but an attempt to “be the gospel.” In the book, he continually drives the point home that any attempt at promoting the gospel through good behavior is fruitless because on our best day we fall short of God’s perfection. This is also a favorite talking point of Dr. DA Carson lauded as one of the most “brilliant theological minds of our day.” Another evangelical, Dr. Albert Mohler, also touted as the premier intellectual theologian of our day has stated that the sole purpose of the Bible is to show us our sinful nature, not an instruction book for moralism. Horton, throughout the book, bemoans the fact that Christianity has projected a false precept of good behavior and has therefore misrepresented the true gospel. He even suggests that the idea of change from bad behavior to good behavior is just “more bad news,” not good news.
My friends, in fact, this is authentic Protestantism as stated in the founding doctrinal statements of the Reformation. This is why scandals in the church shouldn’t even be news or fodder for gossip-blogs like The Wartburg Watch. Church is fraught with scandals because the foundational precepts of the Reformation reject change as just, “more bad news.” This is why any attempt to address or confront scandal in the church or any “Cry for Justice” in the church is utterly unfounded—Protestant orthodoxy calls for a resignation to bad behavior lest we try to “be the gospel.”
Supposedly, we are to be judged solely by what we say, not what we do. And if it is God’s sovereign will, one will believe the message regardless of any behavior that goes along with it. In fact, Horton suggests in said book that if one is persuaded by our good behavior, that is what they falsely put their faith in; viz, “our doing rather than Jesus’ doing and dying” another popular refrain of the Neo-Protestant movement.
As stated by this ministry often, the catalyst for all of this is authority. The empowered individual who can really change for the better makes for a weak caste system. The issue becomes the protection of an institution at all cost that God has supposedly ordained to oversee salvation…
…versus the soundness of a body gathered together to spur one another unto “good works.”
paul
Dee Parsons of Wartburg Watch: Number of Comments Validates Your Blog
“But on the other hand, spiritual abuse bloggers should take note of how much Dee really values what they bring to the table.”
Really, I am telling the truth, I was minding my own business yesterday doing my usual stuff and not even thinking about Dee Parsons over at Wartburg Watch. But Dee and her minions are at it again over there bashing yours truly. For me, this is far from being anything new; normally, Dee would just be another hater in a long line, but Wartburg Watch should be different.
As ones claiming to be advocates for the spiritually abused, you would think Parsons would be intolerant of her blog being a place where people can throw presumptuous accusations around about others. I think grandma used to call intolerance of such…“integrity.” Per the usual, Parsons is giving her followers unmoderated permission to attack my character full-throttle in the Wartburg community crybaby thread. One accusation suggested that I had come to her blog as “Bob J” to get around the fact that I am banned there for defending others that she has ravaged. Of course, Dee could dispel the charge by simply checking IP addresses, but her reasons for letting such accusations stand on her blog are obvious. Yet another accused me of “adoring” John MacArthur Jr. Those who really know me should find that one particularly amusing.
My grandma also taught me that people who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw rocks; if that’s true, Dee lives in a glass mansion, but this post only addresses one room. Even in the midst of a power outage, and with limited battery life on her communicator, Dee couldn’t help herself when my name was posted in the crybaby thread. She reminded her faithful followers and others that I have been excommunicated from the Wartburg castle, and my new alias; that I am mentally ill; that my teachings have no validity because she doesn’t understand what I am saying (which apparently settles the issue), and the subject of this post: I have no validity because few people comment on my blog.
This is telling because it also reveals her opinion about other bloggers that are undisputed legitimate victims of spiritual abuse. In Dee’s mind, lack of comments on a blog equals… “fringe.” That’s her standard. So let’s now apply it as a way to examine how pathetic she is.
First, in regard to my article that prompted all of this posted on her blog by “Bob J” who they say is really me, the post received over 70 comments. Well, sort of, I have recently weeded out several hundred comments for reasons I will not state here, and several were on that post. Look, PPT has never been about numbers, but with that said, I am extremely happy with the response I get considering that I accuse Protestantism of being the biggest scam ever perpetrated on mankind. What is wrong with church? Church is wrong with church. That’s our message, and I should not expect long lines to see that show, and I don’t.
This is why I have NEVER invested in increasing traffic on my blog. Not my gig. And I know how to increase commenting. We have had our share of posts with a couple of hundred comments; it isn’t rocket science, just repeat what works. I have even received emails that went something like this: The post received that many comments because of this, that, or the other, so you need to stay with that format. Nope, being enslaved to numbers as a way to be validated is just not my gig.
Nevertheless, here is my point in illustrating the shallowness of Dee’s thinking: many, many blogs that have nowhere near the comment traffic that PPT does are written by spiritual abuse victims that I respect immensely. I refute the idea that these authors are, “fringe.” Words mean things; clearly, that is the standard Dee has set forth. This reveals her mindset; this reveals what she really thinks about others in her metaphysical pecking order.
It also illustrates her vast confusion. She donates money to a research foundation that has a blog. To say the foundation’s blog is lean on comments would be an understatement. So, because PPT lacks a large comment stream, we are “fringe.” On the one hand, she donates money to a blog that has far less commenting than PPT. Confused much? But on the other hand, spiritual abuse bloggers should take note of how much Dee really values what they bring to the table.
Oh and by the way, Dee’s advice on how to deal with me is to “ignore” me which she was unable to do with what little battery power she had left.
So much more could be discussed here, including her label for anyone who doesn’t deem the Barney Fife of pastors, Wade Burleson, a great preacher of the gospel: “weird.” Yes, Queen Dee has spoken, let it be written, let it be so. PPT has documented Burleson’s embarrassing ineptness in several posts, and his connection to the founders of the Neo-Calvinist movement that Dee claims to refute. It’s all steroidal cognitive dissonance.
But I will close with an example of Dee’s gospel prowess as one saved by watching an episode of Star Trek. I am still dying to know which episode it was so I can behold its gospel profoundness. Since my criticism of this caveat that she formally bragged about, it is my understanding that it has been scrubbed from her bio. Certainly that’s not the case I would assume. One of her followers defended her in this by testifying that he was saved by watching an episode of F Troop, and I had no right to criticize their experiences…
…and so it goes over at Wartburg, but if you will excuse me, I have things to do and will have to stop thinking about Dee until the next time she points her phaser at me. Unless she remembers to set it on, “ignore.”
paul
2 comments