What is Dave Pack afraid of?
Dear Dave...Debate Me
I'll make this short and
to the point. The day of the One Man show who appoints himself without
the vote, approval or even independent recognition of the man being a Prophet,
Apostle, Watcher, Witness or Self Appointed expert in the mind of all things
God/Jesus/Christ are over.
A couple of years ago I
had a great debate with Art Mokarow. It was very civil and far reaching,
well moderated and a lot of fun. We departed friends. Reg
Killingley was an outstanding moderator and very fair.
Dave....I'd like you to
invite me to debate you on all things Bible. We can chat about what you
think is prophecy and I don't. We can discuss Genesis as myth or
science. We can talk about Gospel Origins , the meaning of Paul as
founder of Christianity and how he and the gang just didn't get along all that
well. We can talk about just where does the Book of
Revelation really fit in out world today and should it be used to motivate
people about the things which back then must shortly come to pass.
We can discuss
failed prophecies of the New Testament characters including Jesus and how
everything from the Birth Stories to the Resurrection stories simply do not
agree with each other and can't all be correct. If you think they are
correct, coherent and inerrant, then you can tell us all just in what way this
is so.
I'll drive to Wadsworth
and sit before YOUR congregation in YOUR building at YOUR Sabbath Service and
we can chat. Can be formal or informal. Let me know as soon as
possible. I don't need many notes anymore, don't really have to bone up
anymore and can be there with simple time off request. I'll
probably be heading to Rochester to see my aging and fading parents soon and it
is not out of the way to swing by.
Perhaps Dixon Cartwright
can come along to report it all for the Journal and you can reach even a bigger
COG audience. I would like a fairly independent party to be there to
record the actual things said and by whom. That "he said, he
said," thing Prophet Bob Thiel and RCM are going through is enough of a reason
to be sure one does that properly.
I'd send the same offer
to Prophet Bob Thiel, but California is too far and I can't afford the plane
ticket.
But in this I am dead
serious so get back to me at DennisCDiehl@aol.com and we'll be good
to go. It can be an enriching and maturing experience for both of
us.
Warm regards
Dennis C Diehl
Non-Apostle. Non
Prophet. Nobody...but No More Non-Sense
32 comments:
Hm! A Challenge! Interesting!
Though I will guess the response is most likely a nonresponse, if you do get a response it will probably will go something like this, my guess: (of course, this is NOT his answer he has not answered yet, this is my guess as to what it might be something like.)
I appreciate your offer to debate, however, God has not called me to debate with those who are not called of God, or to answer those who accuse me. Therefore, I will pray for you that you will come to repent and know where God's Church is now and who is leading it, and return to God's Church. I pray your eyes will heal from the bitterness, and I hold no ill will to you, but debating you is not something I shall do as I will not be ensnared by the Devil's tactics. If you wish to know more about the Church and what God is doing today, I'll be happy to visit and counsel you.
...Or something along those lines! I'm almost certain that this offer will be rejected as how DARE someone challege the great and powerful Apostle..of... God... ahem... close those curtains. :)
:D
... and Pack would never, ever allow such "secularistic" non-Pack approved messages to infiltrate his Sabbath Services. They'd put thoughts into the members heads contrary to Pack's teachings. To Pack I think, it would be like broadcasting the devil's radio station right in the sabbath service. This isn't going to happen.
I agree that it won't happen, but congratulations on making the challenge.
I'd PAY to sit in an audience to watch THIS debate:
Podium 1: Robert Thiel
Podium 2: David Pack
Podium 3: Gerald Flurry
Podium 4: Ronald Weinland
Podium 5: Roderick Meredith
Podium 6: Dr. Charles Stanley, M. Div., Th.M, Th. D.
Just saying! :D
oh for sure :) whole new dimension, my perspective is that the literalism is not what one thinks, not justification, santification and stagnation
Dennis
Dennis,
I wouldn't hold your breathe on getting an acceptance to this challenge. It will be a cold day in the Lake of Fire before the Packatolla accepts a debate challenge....particularly from someone smarter than himself.
Richard
Debating COG people is like trying to be diplomatic with the Borg.
Actually, This entire COG bullcrap is so much like Star Trek it's hilarious. The recently discovered Fluritilians, Paculans, Thei-lons, Rodazoids, Roneggies and Kingons in different sectors of our galaxy. All of them staking their territories, all of them claiming to be the most powerful.
Think I'll call Dennis Diehl Jean-Luc Picard for his attempt at diplomatic conferences. Even in their territories beyond the Neutral Zone!! Earl Grey. Hot. :)
I would be happy to "telavize" the show-down at the Painful Truth.
I figure a no response. Dave wouldn't want anyone to know he reads this blog. He does, of course, 'cause everybody has to read what other people are saying about them.
That is, everybody except for Bart Ehrman, who claims he never reads any blogs about him. 'Cause, you see, busy people like Bart can't be bothered by people who don't know anything and is not 'educated' like heeeeeee is.
But Dennis...
Be warned! ...
Pack is a ...
MASTERDEBATER!!
Joe Moeller
Cody, WY
I know he won't accept. I just wished him to know someone was willing to question him in public over his prophetic views, Bible answers and WCG approach since I know it all so well.
Dave would never accept anyone from GCI/WCG as he has no concept of their concepts and sometimes I'm not sure they have the concept of their concepts. Only Ted Johnston knows for sure I guess.
Dave would want to bounce around within the Bible. I'd want to do the same but draw different conclusions and point out things he has never thought of or knows anything about at least publically.
My comments keep getting chewed up and spit out!
Let's try again. I'd like to debate Dave on his WCG prooftexting approach and bring him up to date on some realities of scripture and such. I'd not want to discuss the types of things CGI/Stanley/New WCG and Ted Johnston might come up with. My issues would be the ones listed and the difference between understanding the intent of scripture versus taking it literally.
The COG roam around within the text throwing proof texts at each other. I'd like to show that the texts, as Bart Ehrman who does it sooooo much better and has the credentials to do so, might. COG ministers have no clue on what may be literally true and what might be mythologically true . The politics of the New Testament is also something COGgers have no clue about and wouldn't recognize it though a man come back from the dead.
Whether it be Dennis, or Bert Ehrman, or Robert Price - Dave Pack wouldn't stand a chance against any of them simply because Dave doesn't use reason, evidence or clear logic. What's the point of them? There's no need for such superfluous things when God has opened one's mind to "the truth." And besides, those whose minds haven't been so enlightened are just glibly dismissed with a simple flick of the hand as carnel-minded. Ah, if only reality would be as simple as it's perceived within the wacky world of the COG's!
But I applaud your public challenge anyway, Dennis!
Q: How much is Davey's Wadsworth?
A: However much his minions will pay!
Norm
PS: Jesus was white, right?
Will this be the be the "Vanilla Thrilla"?
Understanding the contents of the Bible as historical documents within given historical contexts from a sophisticated multidisciplinary approach with COG ministers or members would be like trying to discuss advanced mathematics or theoretical physics with a dog. It's just not going to happen because they've been trained by decades of indoctrination to see the Bible in a very simple-minded kind of way as a document to be taken literally, much like one would a personal letter, or an instruction manual, as HWA often referred to it as. You would be on two totally different and incompatible wavelengths.
And this would be especially the case with someone whose public reputation and persona as a great man of God would be on the line - Dave Pack being one such ego-centric maniac. He just has too much to lose, and not enough intelligence to win.
Actually, i,d like to challenge the unending bluster and his literalist views by which he controls n misleads
Dennis
Perhaps it would be best to let his unending bluster and literalist views play themselves out slowly and in full public view. Most of us realize how they'll most likely end up. At the end of the day, I think we'll find that these COG guru's own antics and words are their own worst enemy. They're just too given to self-absorption and status-seeking to restrain themselves from making fools of themselves. Their ends will eventually be according to their folly.
You're both nothing but egocentric big bags of hot air. All you two clowns would do is contribute to global warming.
Charles Stanley? lol
Careful, Dennis. Big Dave had a globe on his credenza - so he must be really well educated.
I'll help with your expenses to Wadsworth Dennis. Let The Akron Beacon Journal know about the challenge, Dave thinks he has the woman reporter there fooled. Grow a pair Dave (I know that you read this). Are you for real or a phoney? We both know that you are a phoney, a kook, a lying decieving money sucking leach (in my opinion) You wont debate this man because you are a coward; a pussy. (in my opinion). You do best when wave your arms around and other theatrics in your little studio, when you can extract money from old men, divorced and seperated women, and weakling men. You got to be shittin me; a swoshing sound as the van passed through the ladies' car! What a total whack case you are (in my opinion). Anyhow, what does the C stand for... C--t. I dare you to debate this man Dave.
Dennis, you can't argue with ignorance. Nobody that arrogant would even pretend to learn something new about the bible.
Ryan Henson
IMHO and in personal experience, Dave is all about being known and the numbers. It's always about being the biggest, the best, the most and the mindblowing. He will deny it's about numbers, which seem to give him credibility in his mind, but it has always been about that.
Dave exaggerates his experiences. He tends to take credit for things he did not do or at least did not do without great help from others. He toys with minds. Awhile back he said he had amazing things to tell his church but then I don't really recall what they were. At the time he said he could not share them yet. This is a common ploy that even the Apostle Paul used at times to peek interest evidently but then let it fall flat and never spoke of it again.
You don't see Dave speaking with compassion, love or kindness . It's like Wineland and Flurry along with others in the COG's who only speak of law, prophecy (badly understood) judgment and "shortly."
Of course, building a college belies that any shortly Dave believes in is the same shortly HWA believed in so there were monuements to be built.
I have some associated with Dave's Church by a partner being in it who keep in touch and lament the rift it causes in their marriage and family and what to do. I don't know what to do as it takes the person actually involved with RCG to wake up, do their homework theologically, Biblically or whatever and realize there is a bigger world outside of Dave Pack and they don't have to buy into it at such a high cost to themselves and others. No God is angry if you don't discover Dave Pack.
I make the offer to just send the message that he is not as knowledgeable as he believes himself to be and that only works in an enclosed group that immunizes itself from the views of others, whoever they may be.
Pointless. Wouldn't even be close. As soon as Dave realized he couldn't rely only on his/HWA's theories as proof of anything, he'd be doomed.
Wait, he would never realize that. Never mind.
Dennis could be successful in raising questions for which Dave's Armstrongism has no answers. The problem is that when various apologists have indulged in debates on these forums, winners are not chosen based on the principles of forensic debate, but by partisan beliefs or politics. I mean, you could wipe up the floor with Dave's sorry excuse for a butt, and all of his followers would swear on HWA's grave that Dave was the winner.
One or two thinking persons might come away with some new nuggets and a fresh approach, but that would be about it. The brain washing runs way too deep. Dave's followers would presume that Dave has a solution, whereas they would see Dennis as basically offering up a vacuum.
To see how this might play out in actual life, probably the best example is the John Ankerberg/GTA debates on Youtube.
BB
I would pay to see that debate and come up a cheering squad for Dennis.
It may be helpful to remind you of my #1 law:
Never knowingly argue with a crazy person.
Didn't Elijah confront the prophets of Baal? Didn't Paul debate on Mars hill? Didn't Jesus debate with the Pharisees and Saducees? Dave the Paki is a gutless lying wimp. He has no Bible reason to get out of it so he will lie his way out of it or ignore the challenge completely. That is the way of the wigger.
It's also the way of the arrogant fundamentalist who truly is "wise in his own eyes." I always find it strange the way they typically claim to have so much historical and scientific evidence to prop up their outrageous assertions and truth claims (witness the Young Earth Creationists) - and yet when challenged, run the opposite direction almost every single time back into their fundamentalist cave of being the specially called and chosen of their god.
It's always about being the biggest, the best, the most and the mindblowing
Davie Pack is blowing something alright, and it's not anyone's mind. It's Mr. Armstrong's wiener.
Dave knows he will be made out to be a fool and that cannot happen. His already struggling cult is down to less than 2,000 members and the cash flow is not doing well. To be made out to be a jackass in front of his few followers would humiliate the guy. After all, how could the worlds greatest theologian be wrong?
"I'd not want to discuss the types of things CGI/Stanley/New WCG and Ted Johnston might come up with."
Are you kidding me? Dennis, Dennis, THESE are the very people you NEED to disassemble the deeply, deeply flawed "theologizings" of to their component parts for shipment!
The videos from Headquarters are an agony to sit through; if it's not "reformed" ministers spewing garbage like "you must be baptized ... into the trinitarian life ..." (well, at least God gave me the message that I'm not to be baptized by, for, or into, THIS "denomination" anyway), it is some bleating, babbling Protestant who was never in the Church in the first place; the most egregious one was the fat dude who spewed out Bible verses right, left, and centre, going "Look it up if you don't believe me!" ... and I just conveniently happened to have eSword open on the same computer that was playing the video on the overhead ... and when I dutifully looked up all of the verses he claimed to be quoting, ALL OF THE VERSES WERE WRONG.
Dennis, Dennis, you need to TAKE JUNIOR'S "THEOLOGY" APART. It would be COMEDY GOLD. The Evangelicals in the Church these days sadly couldn't find a Bible verse with both hands, in an illustrated Children's Bible, written in large print for the blind! They can't even argue the Bible with ME, and my memory is utterly, completely, and totally shot.
Post a Comment