Tuesday, May 1, 2012

The Last Word on Dee Dee Wah-Wah Warren

Okay, it's about time to move on from the school-girl drama that is Dee Dee Warren (not her real name by the way).  Dee Dee has always been about insinuation rather than hard, documented facts.  See example video here: http://unpreterist.blogspot.com/2012/04/helping-dee-dee-warren.html  She is like a gossipy school-girl that says a bunch of unrelated, unresearched junk and hope some of it sticks.

This post will address Dee Dee's last ditch effort to insinuate and revise history.  You can find the article in question here: http://www.preteristblog.com/?p=5768 (ironically on the same site where I have REPEATEDLY requested Dee Dee remove articles written by me but to this day she refuses.  I guess as bad as she thinks I am, she realizes how much content she would have to delete from her site if she complied)

Dee Dee's first false premise and insinuation starts here:

"When is Dr. Talbot a compromising sell-out? When he stand up to and opposes Roderick Edwards?"
She is insinuating that I didn't think Talbot was a compromising sell-out UNTIL some later time.  Um, that is so demonstratively wrong.  I obviously had questions about Talbot's credibility from the get go -- this is the reason I sent the ORIGINAL email AND continued to press Talbot to REALLY answer why he was allowing a known hyperpreterist develop materials for his "Christian" seminary.

Next, Dee Dee CONTINUES to claim I called people b*tches -- I never did.  I implied that in some circles that the behavior of some of these people would be considered b*tchY.  A person can be b*tchY without actually being a b*tch.  Right? Does Dee Dee understand the difference between identity and behavior???  This is how it was possible for Jesus to tell people to "Go and sin no more" yet it not be a ridiculous expectation.  Jesus obviously, fully knew people would continue to sin; however He was telling them by implication; "No longer be identified by your sin" (such as being a prostitute).  That I even have to justify this to Dee Dee after she keeps company with Sam Frost who has twice literally told me to F*ck-Off and has made repeated accusations that I (a 22-year long married man) have an "homosexual" obsession with him.  Dee Dee is waist deep into hypocrisy.

Dee Dee, the oft-medicated psychotherapist then dares to give her prognosis of me; and I only mention her admitted need for behavior altering drugs because it shows how unstable and hypocritical she is.

She says:

"The real issue is that [insert person or issue] have opposed or confronted Roderick Edwards."

Really????  How was Talbot "opposing" me when I am the one that approached him???  He didn't know me from Adam when I approached him about Sam Frost's constant claim that he was helping develop materials for Talbot's seminary.  Awwww, Dee Dee's little narrative is breaking down...just like the girl in the video.

The insinuation continues as Dee Dee insinuates I "squirrel" away emails to use against people in the future.  First off, MOST of the things I have brought up against these folks as they continue to LIE, comes not from emails I have, but from comments posted on THEIR OWN SITES, that is until they expunge them like Sharon tried to do with the "debate" Talbot and I had.  However, after dealing with these LIARS for many years; you'd better bet I would document everything they say to me.  They are notorious for lying and claiming they never said what they clearly said.  Sam Frost even took to placing a disclaimer at the end of his emails saying a person couldn't quote the email without his permission. This is because Sam is so contradictory and often says one thing in public and another thing in "private".

Anyhow, as Dee Dee tells us she has 3,000 emails of which I was "party" -- if that is true, I can assure you she is the one "squirreling" away emails, no matter how unorganized.  I don't have anywhere near that many in ALL of my email boxes.  Must be an OCD thing.

We get to the real hilarious part now.  Dee Dee having been caught in her own words; where she condemned Talbot/Whitefield for the possibility of having students "under the teaching" of hyperpreterists, she tries to REALLY REVISE HISTORY.

She first tries to insinuate I "cherry-picked" the quote out of its context.  Nope, read my article on the issue: http://unpreterist.blogspot.com/2012/04/former-wts-student-advises-against-it.html  I source link the entire quote.  It is not my problem that Dee Dee is now trying to claim she speaks without being fully informed.  Dee Dee then tries to tell us that she was under the impression Frost was TEACHING students.  Where did she get that impression?????  Not from me.  I have NEVER claimed Frost was a teacher at WTS.  I have CONSISTENTLY said that he was "developing student materials" for WTS.  And actually, in the article upon which Dee Dee was commenting, I didn't even make that claim (see here: http://www.preteristblog.com/?p=1163#comment-2760)  Dee Dee is telling EVERYONE she is like the gossipy girl in the video who goes on and on making "ignorant" statements.  Whose fault is that??? Not mine.  I never made the claims Dee Dee conclude or even implied them.

Further, if a person thinks a hyperpreterist developing a study guide for a course is not going to be influenced by his views, well I'd submit that is just MORE "ignorant" and uninformed "impressions".

Dee Dee continues her public downslide. She tries to use the  claim that she was "immature" at the time.  Again, whose fault is that??? Certainly not mine.

"I have matured a bit in my view on this, so if in the past I seemed inconsistent and made an even broader application, it was immature. Perhaps I have as I know I used to have a much more kneejerk, rather than reasoned, reaction. But in the sourced quote by Roderick, the one he is using as support, I was clear."
How do we know if Dee Dee isn't STILL immature and isn't STILL a "kneejerker" since she was at that time supposedly concluding something that was NEVER claimed in the first place and trying to blame it on me.

But the hilarity doesn't end.  Remember how I said most of the stuff against these people comes from their own postings and not emails?  Well, here's a perfect example.  In trying to weasel out of her "clear" words, Dee Dee tries to blame me as if it was me who changed what I was saying.  She says:

"Roderick followed up on my comment, restating it as “I understand what you mean about being upset as a student if you found out the seminary you were attending was using heretics to develop its programs.”

Um, yeah -- I said that BECAUSE that was ALWAYS my claim/contention against with WTS.  It was allowing Frost to DEVELOP ITS PROGRAMS.  If Dee Dee wasn't so "daft" she would have said at the time, "Wait Roderick, I thought Sam was actually a teacher at WTS".  Nope!  I never said that and this quote of me by Dee Dee PROVES IT.  I didn't RESTATE her contention, I restated MINE, in correction of her false conclusion.

Next insinutation, Dee Dee says:

"..let’s pretend that everything Roderick said in December 2008 and what I assumed was correct. Samuel Frost was a teacher. Well, hyperpreterism is a pretty obscure heresy. Everyone, including institutions make mistakes. Our goal as Christians is to come alongside and correct, which was always my goal. Dr. Talbot recognized this. I had no desire for a pound of flesh. Even IF what Roderick and I thought back then was accurate, WTS, corrected the issue."
Again, Roderick NEVER said that Sam Frost was teaching at WTS.  Dee Dee is running along with a false premise and then add an insinuation to it.  The insinuation is that "Roderick didn't want to help WTS/Talbot -- he just wanted a pound of flesh".  Again, I am the one that approached WTS/Talbot.  Dee Dee didn't even know what was going on as evidenced by her need to "investigate".

But it continues as Dee Dee LIES, she says:

"Here I was still sloppily referring to Samuel as a teacher. What the reader may not sense is what was going on behind the scenes. Roderick had fired off a very abrasive and accusatory email to WTS and its leadership."
Sorry to belabor, but as you can see it is Dee Dee who keeps telling us that she was "ignorant" and now "sloppy" -- because she was concluding things I NEVER claimed. But the LIE is the claim I "fired off a very abrasive and accusatory email to WTS and its leadership".  Really???  Keep in mind how much Dee Dee has told us what a poor researcher she is and how "kneejerk" she reacts.  Let's see the ACTUAL content of that email, as posted on Dee Dee's own site:


I wanted to ask you, your board & your staff, what you would think of someone who claimed these 3 things:

#1 That Jesus came back once & for all in the year AD70
#2 That the resurrection of the believers happened in the year AD70.
#3 That the judgment of the wicked & righteous happened in the year AD70.

Would you consider such doctrine within the realm of any kind of Christianity or do you think it is so beyond what Christianity has taught & that it is in fact a “contrary doctrine”? ()

And then what would you think if someone was going around telling people they came to these 3 “doctrines” by following the principles that Whitefield Theological Seminary taught them?

Further, would you allow a person who advocates the 3 beliefs listed above to basically design your seminary’s “Hebrew program”?

Thanks ahead of time for your reply.

Roderick   -- source: http://www.preteristblog.com/?p=1307#comment-2909
As you can see NOTHING accusatory or abrasive.  I never claim that Frost is "teaching" at WTS as Dee Dee continued to falsely conclude.  Now, if Dee Dee wants to insinuate something "behind the scenes", let us NOT insinutate and instead state the FACTS.  What happened AFTER I sent this email to WTS/Talbot???  Did he answer?  Nope.  Instead he sent my private email to Sam Frost (whom I never even mention by name in the email) and per Frost, gave him full authorization to answer on WTS' behalf.  Is that "protocol" of "Academia"??? Dee Dee is SOOOOOO CLEARLY trying to rewrite history in the FACE OF the documented FACTS on her own website even.  The nerve.

And the LIES continue as Dee Dee says:

"I approved of Roderick’s email at the time. Dr. Talbot confronted both me and Roderick on the way this was inappropriately handled on our end. I humbled myself and accepted the correction, and thus, our friendship began, and productive dialog with WTS commenced."

Really??? When did he "confront us" on a simple question being "inappropriately handled on our end"????  In reality, Talbot several times apologized to me for HIS inappropriate handling of the entire thing.  Dee Dee Warren who has repeatedly told us she is "ignorant", "kneejerk", "not having all the facts", and "sloppy" is now trying to tell us what happened.  She is either a LIAR or just continuing in her self-delusions and self-admitted ignorance.  It was Dee Dee perhaps that need to be "humbled" considering she was concluding things no one EVER claimed.

Dee Dee's LIES continue:

"It was at this point, and in this post that Dr. Talbot offered me a scholarship. He did it, because he saw the value of combating hyperpreterism, and because I was able to receive correction on inappropriateness of the initial onslaught. He liked my attitude, and I so appreciated his heart.

Did Roderick at that point quit the blog since he still had questions and since I was “obviously” being bought off? No. He affirmed that appropriateness and graciousness of the scholarship offer and rejoiced with me.

He was still demanding an apology and answers from Dr. Talbot, but learning nothing from what came before, and continuing in an abrasive and demanding manner. If all that Roderick has been saying was true, it would have been now, or soon thereafter, that he would have quit the blog. But he didn’t."
No, this is NOT the truth.  Talbot tells us why he gave the free tuition, and let me ACTUALLY quote and source unlike Dee Dee, not from 3,000 squirreled away emails, but from Talbot himself on Dee Dee's own site:

"Since you alone have taken the time to find out some things about myself and the 34 years of ministry and 29 years in the Seminary, I would like to make you a one time offer. I will offer you a ‘tuition free Presidential scholarship’ towards the Master of Arts in Christian Studies degree program." -- source: http://www.preteristblog.com/?p=1307#comment-2908
 Notice the word "SINCE", this tells us WHY the action happens and what does Talbot say? It is supposedly because Dee Dee ALONE got to know Talbot and what WTS was about.  HUH???  Does this "insinuation" mentality run in these circles???  Talbot is insinuating I didn't have any desire to know anything about WTS and Talbot although as you can see from the email I sent, that was my SPECIFIC purpose.  The difference is, Dee Dee allowed herself to be sweet-talked and flattered instead of Talbot/WTS answering some simple, non-emotive questions.  So, Talbot offers the tuition SINCE/BECAUSE of this personal interaction that Talbot and Dee Dee had.  And judging by Dee Dee's admitted ignorance, lack of research, false conclusions, kneejerking, and sloppy work -- what are we to think of the discussion she was having with Talbot?

But why would I have "quit the blog"?  At the time, I wanted to think the best of Talbot and Dee Dee.  I wanted to think their intentions were noble, even though their words were obviously flattering, pompous, elitist, and even arrogant; not to mention WRONG.  Of course I'm not going to yet make the public accusation that Dee Dee was bought off.  I didn't want to believe that is what was happening.  I like to think better of people; but I've become much more distrusting after the ordeal with Dee Dee and Talbot.

The constant in all this, even seen in Dee Dee's attempt to downplay is that I CONTINUED to press Talbot to actually explain why a Christian seminary was allowing a know heretic develop its student materials.  Something Talbot thought he was above answering obviously.

Next Dee Dee quotes a post where I attempt to be reconciliatory with Talbot.  Again, wanting to believe the best of people AND there was an element of peer pressure as Dee Dee and others were telling me to just let it go.

Dee Dee makes mention of Talbot offering me a scholarship as well at a later date.  At the time I was uncertain.  It seemed fishy, especially after seeing what he did with Dee Dee.  I felt like he was attempting to buy me off too.  I did not immediately accept and even later turned it down.

As Dee Dee wraps up her hit piece, she throws out one more insinuation:

"But finally, at the end of 8/09, with Roderick totally misreading something that Dr. T. said, he went off the rails. Dr. T. didn’t properly jump through his hoops, and then the accusations just keep getting worse and worse until we are where we are today. But there was a period of at least six months where Roderick was not upset that I was allegedly bought off or that Talbot was such a svengali."

Notice the lack of sourcing and the passing undefined references.  Again, remember this is Dee Dee; admitted "ignorance", unresearched, kneejerker, sloppy and yet she wants to drop something like this on the reader and just hope they accept it?  I have no idea what she is insinuating so I can't reply specifically.  However, Dee Dee seems to want the reader to think I just forgot about the original issue and went on happily for 6 months.  In reality, I CONTINUED to press Talbot, even while in cordial communication to explain why:

1) He and WTS allowed Sam Frost to develop student materials.
2) Why Talbot was publicly silent so long while Frost (his protege) foisted hyperpreterism.

Dee Dee in her hit piece simply showed us how uninformed/clueless she has been and how she accuses others for her own failure to understand what is going on.

Lastly, Dee Dee lies with this comment:

"There is much more that could be proffered. But I am weary of this nonsense, and this is enough for any reasonable person to see there is some serious spin-doctoring. Until Dr. T. opposed Roderick, things were peachy."

Really??  Which "narrative" does Dee Dee want the reader to believe??  That I was "continuing to be accusatory and abrasive" or that "things were peachy"???  Can you see how conflicted this woman is?  If anyone should be "weary of nonsense", it should be me and the readers that have to endure the uninformed, nonsource, insinuations and LIES of Dee Dee Warren and her minions.

Dee Dee concludes by trying to give WTS and Talbot a pass, especially on how Talbot is now in the process of bestowing a "ministers" degree on yet ANOTHER known hyperpreterist -- Larry Siegle.


No comments: