This is a rather unusual use of my bump list for me. I am pinging you because I want to show all of you how “the_doc” and others like him operate. I am specifically not asking you to hit abuse on him or anything like that, I just want to give others an understanding of how these people attack others in case you get the same from them some day.
It’s essentially a combination of a couple classical patterns of emotional abuse. In these freepermails you will see this self-proclaimed “saint” heap insult upon insult, both attacking Brian personally, professional, emotionally, and in his faith. I also note that he calls Brian a coward and claims he (the_doc) has the guts Brian lacks, right before his post on this thread refusing to stand behind his words publicly, preferring to hide in freepermails.
He follows three classic abuse patterns I am familiar with. First, he attacks in private. Now, he and many others he hangs out with here on FR do attack in public as well, but they often reserve the nastiest attacks for private freepermails. The funny thing is that Ward Smythe previously complained about such a freepermail – though from which Calvinist I don’t know. After Ward said that he wasn’t going to post it, the Calvinists vigorously demanded that he post it. Well, this time it’s going to get posted. Watch them attack that just as nastily. Regardless, should you get freeper mails from him or others like him, realize what they are trying to do, they are trying to beat you down emotionally in private, while maintaining some semblance of respectability in public.
Second, they seek to isolate you. You notice he refused to give permission to post it. That is exactly what I expected. In addition, notice the explicit language he used in his response: “Don't be stupid enough to seek reassurance and solace from the rest of the lying cowards in the RCC.” This is textbook. An abusive person doesn’t want others to see and discuss his actions. He doesn’t want his target to get any support from others. It is much easier to wear a person down when they can’t bounce things off others, when they stand alone subject to the assault. No man is an island, and the abuser knows that.
Third, the refusal to discuss the actions. Notice his response in post 41 of this thread, when asked to defend his actions. “all due respect, I have nothing further to say to either of you.” It is very common that when an abuser is challenged he will refuse to discuss the conduct, hoping the challenge will go away and be forgotten. I’m going to post a couple descriptions of emotional abuse. They are directed to the marital relationship, which is obviously different from what we have here, but the patterns are largely the same.
First the doc’s freeper mails:
And the response to Dr. Kopp’s request for permission to post it:
Subject: Re: The True Eucharist
The reason why I posted on the Eucharist thread was to address you in particular. I know that you are not a true Christian and that you are "trying" to be one.
Unfortunately, you are not going about it correctly. You are repeating the mistake I once made. The fact is, you are not even trying to be a **Christian.** You are trying to be a Papist. That really is different.
Today's Papacy is a fraud, Brian. You have been badly suckered. And yes, I say that you were before of old ordained to this condemnation (Jude 4). Augustine himself really **would** denounce you if he were alive in our day--and this despite the fact that he was devoted to the idea of the Papacy in his own day (even though Augustine specifically attacked the notion that the Church of Rome was founded on Peter).
Augustine never realized where his own wrongheaded endorsement of the Papacy was headed. But by the 16th century, it was obvious to spiritually sane people that the Papists had become a bunch of murdering, crooked swine, not Christians.
Your "church" is foul, Brian. It is one of the most morally corrupt entities in Christendom. Some Christians regard Romanism as profoundly embarrassing to Christianity. But I certainly don't. The fact is, Papism is obviously not Christian. It is antichristian.
In other words, you have chosen a false gospel. That's why I decided to make one last appeal to you based on your distinctive (and screwy) doctrine of "transubstantiation."
This is why I dare to tell you that I regard you as a silly cannibal, not a real Christian.
My point, Brian, is that your overall theology is making a fool out of you--i.e., revealing that you are anything **but** a Christian. You need to start noticing this. Being a stubbornly superstitious religious dork does not make you wonderfully spiritual. It just makes you a stubbornly superstitious religious dork.
You are a disgrace to your profession, of course.
Please don't assume that I get a kick out of saying this. Heck, our roles could easily have been reversed. I don't look down on you. You even seem like a bright, interesting fellow. But being bright and interesting count for nothing at all with the God of the Bible. You are hereby warned, Brian.
Unfortunately, you don’t like unctuous, clear warnings. I realize that. In fact, you lovely RCs got OP banned for stating **your own doctrine** of the Eucharist in completely **clear** terms. You RCs were profoundly **embarrassed** to hear it stated so clearly. You were speechless when he demonstrated that your supposedly sublime, supposedly lovely doctrine of the Eucharist is actually quite ABSURD and quite MONSTROUS. Ah, but your demonic controller will never let you be reasonable about this stuff. When you start to lose an argument with a Protestant, you try to **silence** him.
You spiritual idiots would rather go to hell than to admit that a Protestant is right in CONDEMNING your ASININE doctrine of the Eucharist. You would rather whine that we don't understand the Eucharist. But we do understand it. We understand from your doctrine that you are idiots and cannibals to boot. We understand that you are spiritually worthless cowards for failing to rise up against Rome and its filthy superstitions. We understand that you are spiritually worthless cowards by conspiring to suppress someone who has the guts which you lack.
What you are doing in your agitation, of course, is simply blaming us Protestants for your own RCC's stupidity. And you do this over and over and over. When we Protestants **point** out that your silly and flagrantly unscriptural priesthood is overrun with filthy little queers, you want to kill us for telling you the **Truth.** You can't stand the Truth. Rather than face the Truth, you try to kill the Truth-teller.
Hey, it has happened before. The Lord Jesus, the Truth Incarnate, was killed by reprobate religionists aligned with Rome, of course. And it is inarguably **true** that the RCC has murdered MILLIONS upon MILLIONS of Christians. What else should we expect from cannibals?
Do you see the pattern? Cannibals, cowards, liars, queers, murderers. It really is the stuff in the Book of Revelations. The RCC really is a Whore of Babylon, of Judaizing Apostasy, sitting on a City of Seven Hills.
And I happen to be a saint. Already. It is quite literally the greatest thing in the world. On the other hand, you are--to put it bluntly--Satanically screwed. The saddest thing about this is that it's your own fault.
If you will abandon Rome, I will joyfully receive you as a brother. Failing that, you will stumble and fall right into the hell from which there is no escape--**ever.** Take your choice. Either way, on Judgment Day, I win.
Sent 04/29/2002 1:16 AM by the_doc
Subject: Re: The True Eucharist
You guys already know where I am coming from. That's why you hate us Calvinists and want us banned as bigots.
We are not bigots. We are concerned about you. That's why I am bluntly **honest** with you **liars.**
So, you do **not** have my permission to post my private e-mail. You have only my permission to **live** with my words ringing in your **own** ears. Don't be stupid enough to seek reassurance and solace from the rest of the lying cowards in the RCC.
Gosh, your solidarity with those fools is your problem, Brian. They are spiritually **dead.** So are **you.** What you have is **not** faith, but a demonic counterfeit.
You need to LIVE.
Sent 04/29/2002 6:48 PM by the_doc
patent +AMDG
The following patterns are presented to diffuse confusion on the part of someone trying to clarify the events causing hurt, anger, and pain.
Lois was married to a successful executive. Everyone always told her how lucky she was to have such a wonderful husband. She always agreed with them and upheld Jim's good reputation. But when she was alone, she kept wondering why she didn't see him as a wonderful husband like everyone else did.
She began to realize that the reason for her different perspective was because Jim's behavior towards her was very different when they were in public gatherings together than he was when they were at home "in private."
"In private", Jim insulted her, called her derogatory names, ignored her, and in general, made her feel a great deal of humiliation. In public, however, he held her hand, called her sweetheart, listened attentively when she spoke, etc.
Her suspicions led her to begin to track the pattern that had caused her confusion. The pattern of "in private" abuse became evident after a short period of time.
Lois received very little support from her family who could not accept the reality of her experiences with Jim since they only witnessed the "in public" behaviors.
Glenda and Tom have been married for five years. Glenda is very concerned about their relationship. Tom insisted years ago that she stop working and tend to their home. They have no children, but Tom felt she should be a "homemaker" by cleaning, doing the laundry, and having supper ready at night. Though she didn't mind this arrangement, his demands left little time for her to socialize. She was lonely.
After being married only six months, Tom felt a move to Florida from New York would provide a more relaxing, healthier environment for them to start a family. She left her family and long-time friends to "make a new start." Money was tight since they were living on one paycheck so long distance calls to her family were few and far between. Just when Glenda was feeling like part of her church community, Tom announced he was ready for another move.
Glenda believed that moves were necessary for Tom's job improvement and salary increases. But Tom was increasingly becoming more and more controlling and demanding and she had church friends to "bounce" her feelings off of. Another move would mean a loss of those friends and a valuable support system for her.
Tom insisted on the third move. Glenda deferred to him.
In a period of five years, Glenda and Tom had moved three times. Glenda was not only lonely, but had no one to do a "reality check" regarding Tom's demanding behavior and his insistance that she stay home and be a dutiful wife instead of "wasting her time" socializing. She began to notice a pattern of isolation in their marriage. Every time she started to make friends in the community, Tom insisted they move.
It's sick to see it, but it needs to be exposed. I've had that sort of thing happen to me once only, but it is disturbing.
He regularly attacks us in this way, but I had no idea he would carry on this way against catholics too. I too am amazed that he would be afraid to have his private statements made public.
I am pinging some of his sychophantic Calvinist followers in the hope that they will see this behavior for what it is and join the Biblical Christians in renouncing it.
I believe the sound you hear when reading his posts is several loose screws.
I pray for his soul.
EODGUY
Ward left FR because he lied about the mail and it's intent Patent..He did not expect you to ask to report it. That is the reason that the men ask that it be posted..it is unfair of you to try link that with anything else...
As far as banishing anyone; I personally don't care if Jim R banishes them for whatever reason. Give 'em enough rope and they will hang themselves theologically anyway.
It don't matter 'cause they don't matter.
I hadn't realized how deep was his hatred of the Church.
Great line, doc. : )
I've known numerous Calvinists -- one of my best friends is an orthodox presbyterian, and I was the best man at his wedding. And of them, although they all have expressed their firm belief that the Catholic Church is decidedly in the wrong, and its beliefs are anti-Christian, never once have any of them treated me in such a manner as the_doc wrote in his e-mail. Not even close. I've debated with my aquaintances and friends who are Calvinists, going over various doctrines, church fathers, etc. And at the end of it, we basically agree to disagree; but it doesn't affect our friendship, or the fellowship we share in Christ, despite our very stark differences of belief. Although I was aware of Calvinists who believed as the_doc does, I would never, in a thousand years, fathom the depth of deep-seated hatred he expressed in that freepmail.
I honestly feel dirty for having read it. I feel spiritually soiled by witnessing it; the only thing I can compare it to is sitting through some awful movie, like Natural Born Killers (that is, the feeling I have).
This ping that you sent me has even been a cause for sin to me, because I allowed myself to relish in the thought of the_doc burning in hell. I am gravely repentant for allowing that thought to enter into my mind, and reveling in it for a moment before pushing it out, and will now have to confess it on Saturday.
It seems to me that by and large, most Christians on these threads, whatever the denomination, manage to at least keep their tones not too far embroiled in un-Christian manner. Certainly there are personal attacks from time to time: accusations of lying/deceiving, belittling of one another's particular tenets of faith, and even insults. But nothing have I ever read so far that is so bald-facedly full of hatred and venom.
I read some poster on these threads trying to come to the_doc's defense (which at first, I found laughable, but tried to suspend my disbelief to weight the merits of the case), and it seemed to hinge on the fact of "What if he's (the_doc) right?"
And so, I tried to imagine that the_doc was right, and then I re-read the letter, under the assumption that the RCC was in fact an evil institution. Never, in my wildest imaginations, could I imagine Christ saying those words, even though I imagined that the RCC was in fact wrong. Never could I imagine any of the apostles saying anything like that.
And we're supposed to believe, according to at least 2 Calvinists who are trying to defend the_doc here on this thread, that these words were spoken in some kind of "love"? Does anything in the_doc's freepmail resemble, even by the slightest of relations, St. Paul's description of the attributes of "love" that is so often repeated at wedding ceremonies?
When we take the_doc's freepmail and compare it against Scripture -- against the specific area in Scripture that deals with love -- then we are able to see just how much the_doc's freepmail was rather inspired by hatred instead.
It was encouraging to see a Bible-only Christian condemn the_doc's freepmail. I'm disgusted at the 2 Calvinist posters that I've read so far on these threads who somehow can condone this type of action by the_doc.
I can't even get to the end of writing this post before feeling the temptation of reveling in un-Christian thoughts about the_doc and now the 2 Calvinist posters, and so I'm going to stop participating in this thread because it is a near-occasion of sin for me.