Dr. Gene Scott: Classic or Dud

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Someone else provide a link to this bastion of tele-evangelical goodness. The ranch and the cigars are CLASSIC. Also CLASSIC is taking time out of his sermon to lecture one of the production toadies standing off-camera on how to not drop the ball.

David Raposa, Tuesday, 4 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Do you people not know who he is?

David Raposa, Tuesday, 4 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Yes, I know who he is. I used to see him on TV over 10 years ago... is he still on? Me and a friend used to gawk at this show in wonder; it was supposed to be religious? I never noticed any religious content. Then again, we never watched for more than a couple minutes.

Sean, Tuesday, 4 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Gene'll never die, he'll just keep pumping it all out. Needless to say, he's very much on line.

Ned Raggett, Tuesday, 4 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

The man's a modern day Marlon Brando. The glasses are bootyful.

David Raposa, Tuesday, 4 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Many moons ago (well, 1981 to be precise) me and a couple of friends decided that it was our civic responsibility to inform Dr. Scott that his phone number added up to 666. It really did, his number was 213-240-8151 which translates to 6 (2+1+3), 6 (2+4+0), 6 (8+1+5+1=15 -> 1+5=6). We called his number every day for a couple of months to warn him of this potential satanic corruption until the number was finally changed. Scott became CLASSIC the day he sat in his chair and just scowled into the camera without speaking for a couple of hours. Anyone out there see Werner Herzog's documentary about him (_God's Angry Man_)?

Chris Barrus, Tuesday, 4 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

There's a documentary!??!?!?! Hot damn!

David Raposa, Tuesday, 4 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

three weeks pass...
LOL i think he is classic, i love his honesty though many (who imo dont know where he is comin from at all) call him a cult LOL cause of the Lost Tribe Teachin, some of the Elite come from the LT, so whut so do many of us LOL Atlantis, Great Pyramid aint only for the Illuminati 2 camp out on same goes with the Gospel in the stars (now common knowledge but not when he was teachin it!) seems 2 me most dont hear a whole teachin and or listen when he is speakin 2 his congregation in LA or 2 his staff awww i think he is a nice guy, his personality is a bit gruff, 2 put it lightly LOL he aint afraid a no ghost LOL and like Paul, who was so in love with Gods word and cherished the Gospel above everything else, we ought 2 prefer truth 2 peace

;-) silk http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Original-Gangsta

Silk Roc, Friday, 28 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Forming conclusions after two minutes of watching tells us something. You either get it or you don't.

Johnnie Brown, Saturday, 29 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Yeah, you've cleared up everything there for me, thanks.

Ned Raggett, Saturday, 29 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I just tuned in again after years of being out of the viewing range. What is the deal with his wife? He looks happy with her, but who wouldn't, she looks like she is about 19! I say good for him. When did he marry her?

Christine Davis, Monday, 31 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I guess that I could say Oh! thanks, that was easy....any more questions? But, I am not going to say that. I realize that this is a place for people to exchange ideas and talk about things. My apologies. I reacted when I came across this discussion of Dr. Scott while searching. I have tried in times past to describe him to friends, relatives etc., with little success...the cigar or earlier pipe was an immediate "turn off" to traditional "church going" people. I come from the same Pentecostal background as Doc and somewhat identify....can't do this...can do that... He is not trying to reach the church crowd, but "sinners" which he considers us all too be...thus..."you either get it or you don't". I don't claim to know exactly what he is doing but I know that he has fancied himself as a reformer in the sense of Martin Luther. I was actually serching to find info about his marital status. I understand he married Christine, a long-time staff member. Does anyone know?

Johnnie Brown, Monday, 31 December 2001 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

two weeks pass...
Why do all his "live" tapes over the internet look like they are from the early seventies?

nun ya, Friday, 18 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

He transcends time. Hey, if Wally George can do it...

Ned Raggett, Friday, 18 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

You either get it or you don't, I get it!

Mark Barton, Sunday, 20 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

From his page: ABC's of faith

I'm sure the image some have had of the Great Reformer, Martin Luther, is shattered when he says that "harlots and tax collectors and sinners have a better chance of getting to heaven than legalists who rely on their works." There are some people that almost committed hara-kiri when they heard me say that, particularly when I demonstrated it by reading it out of Luther's sermons on Galatians.

The issue he is focusing on, is where you place your reliance for salvation: on your works, no matter how much they may surpass others in approximating or moving in the direction of the Law of God, or whether your reliance is totally apart from those works, on God's work of grace - which is a gift, charisma, unmerited favor - because of something else: FAITH.

Faith equals (how many times have I told you?) 90% courage, 9% tenacity or endurance (what the King James translates as patience) and 1% all that other super-spiritual stuff. Courage is 90%; raw guts. There are those who ignorantly say, "Scott preaches an easier Gospel."

God likes courage; He doesn't like cowards. Cowardice and fear are not synonyms. Cowards give way to fear; men of faith are like David, who said, "What time I am afraid, I will (that's guts; reach down and grab hold of your innards) - I WILL trust in the Lord."

This is the ABC of faith. Faith (pistis in the Greek) comes from pisteo which is a verb; it was never intended to be just a noun in the original language. Without the verb to undergird it, distortion happens. The English language has conveniently separated "believing" from the rest of faith, thereby confusing the entire stream of the Church.

"Faith" and "belief" are not synonyms. You cannot translate the derivatives of the verb pisteo simply with the word "belief;" faith is more than belief.

FAITH involves Action, based upon Belief, sustained by Confidence that that which is believed is true. By this definition, you have a subject, you have the act, you have an object.

Biblical FAITH is an Act based on a Belief and sustained by Confidence that God's Word is forever settled in heaven.

We ought to have a new word in our language; we ought to translate pisteo with the verb "faithe." Then we could have the noun "faithers." "Faithers" are the subject who are doing the "faithing" and they produce a result, which is "the faithed."

A lot of confusion would go out of the teaching on faith if we'd just bury the word "belief" and make it but a subordinate part of faith, and only refer to it when the meaning of the text has to do with only that mental activity which is belief. Belief involves the mind, and faith involves the mind plus the will and action. It also involves the emotions, confidence to sustain faith.

If I were a teacher on Mars Hill with a bunch of philosophers in front of me (as I've told you probably ten thousand times since I've been here), in the usual neutral and disengaged role of the teacher, I would teach my students in the Greek frame that pisteo defines an activity of mankind without which you cannot survive.

You cannot act without it being based subconsciously or consciously on some kind of belief, sustained by confidence, including getting out of bed in the morning. You don't think about it, but you expect your feet to hit the floor and not the ceiling which, thought about, is an action based upon a belief that came, probably, through experience rather than teaching of theories, and a confidence that gravity works.

I would have taught students in that day that nobody has a choice not to faithe; "not to faithe" doesn't exist. The only choice you have is on the objects to which you will attach your faithing action, what you decide is true enough that you can have enough confidence in it to hang your body on it in continuing action. And until Jesus came, that would define faith.

But God, in His rightful and preemptory way (and, I believe, as part of the fullness of time that existed when He sent forth His Son), reached into the stream of that language which dominated the world frame in that day (so much more precise than the Hebrew or the Aramaic) and He grabbed this word and made it His.

Whereas on Mars Hill, as a philosopher without the knowledge of God, I'd sit there as the teacher and say, "Okay, students, faith is an action based upon belief sustained by a confidence that you must maintain in order to live; and your choice in life is to pick the object of your faith that can satisfy the truth that you feel sufficiently to say, `I believe this;' then hang your body on it, sustain it with confidence, start acting on it, thus trying your theory.

"No matter what your object of faith is, it's still faith, equal in merit and value in the abstract. You prove it to yourself, and it will become valuable and meaningful to you to the degree that your continued action builds the confidence, sustains the belief, and strengthens the action by proven experience as you act on it."

By this definition, I could conveniently step back as a teacher and say, "Now, since your choice is among the objects, plan your life and carefully examine that which you are going to believe, have confidence in, and hang your body on, but that's still theory - you're not faithing until you attach your body in action to what you believe and what you have confidence in."

In the fullness of time, God sent forth His Son into a language frame providing the word pisteo and He made it His for His Word. Real FAITH, saving Faith, became Action, based upon a Belief in God's faithfulness to His Word, sustained by Confidence in God's own nature of faithfulness - that He's not a man to lie, nor the Son of Man to repent; what He says He'll do, what He speaks He'll make good; that God, as Jeremiah said, "will hasten His Word to perform it," as a magnifying glass grabs the rays of the sun and penetrates by focusing on the object, He'll bring every strength as Lord of Hosts to focus and cause His word to come to pass. That confidence in God's Word will cause you to act, hanging your body on a Promise made by God, forever settled in heaven, even though time has not yet adjusted to it.

At faith encounters with time/space conflicts, you have the choice of letting the stream of time and circumstance defy God's Promise, or reach up and grab God's Word and say to yourself, "I am that catalyst point which will reach through the stuff of time, and grab this Promise of God because forever, O Lord, Thy Word is settled. When God spoke, not-a-thing became everything; He will again speak on future time, and everything will rearrange. God's Word was, is and shall be, before and after the earth that now is. His Word, forever settled in heaven, is where I will put my grasp, and no matter what the circumstance says, I will hang on to it. If I die still hanging on, I'm translated instantly into the realm where there's no friction with, `Thus sayeth the Lord...Forever settled in heaven.'

"Until that time comes - with Luther - though the whole world be against the Word, a "faither" will be against the whole world, hanging on to God's Word."

That is what God chose to identify as FAITH. Action based upon Belief and Confidence, that "Forever, O Lord, Thy word is settled in heaven."

I repeat that God will hasten His Word to perform it. Any other action, no matter how meritorious the object, is not Biblical "faithe." Unlike the professor who can stand back and say "choose among many objects," the preacher of faith knows that only those acts of man based on a belief in God's Word, sustained by a confidence in God's nature to be faithful to His Word - that and that alone qualifies as "FAITHE."

Everything else is apistis. Greek has a nifty little verbal transmission: there is no neutral gear. Pistis or apistis. Pistis is going in faith, apistis is opposite, or wrong direction. That means your object of faith can be bad, or your object of faith can be good, in the human, horizontal, ethical evaluation frame. It'll be saving "Faithe" only if it is "faithe" focused on a Promise of God, sustained by confidence in God's nature to be faithful to His Word and to Himself. Every other act, no matter how bad, and how far down the spectrum in that direction, or how good, just qualifies as apistis (not faith - even "against faithe").

If I were to use adjectives, such "other-object-faith" would be "not- saving-faith" - but God doesn't use adjectives here. God saw the word "faith" and He made it His, just like the word logos. To those in the Greek world who believe in a personal being behind all reality, logos was the word they used to identify the mediator between man and that heretofore unknowable Ultimate Being of reality. God made the word logos His, and Christ became "the Logos." God took faith over, and everything else is a kind of apistis.

Now, our nature is such that we just really don't want to be lumped into a pot with an Adolph Hitler or a Saddam Hussein. And you don't have to be lumped in a pot with them in the horizontal sphere of relative ethics and good and badness, measured by the performance of men. But from God's view, there is that which saves eternally, and there is that which doesn't do anything, that has its rewards down here, and doesn't do a thing for you in terms of eternity and relationship with God.

Faith - action on God's Word - gets you eternal life, God's spirit in you, salvation. Everything else gets you things down here. It doesn't mean you say, "Then nothing matters, relative distinctions down here make it not worth pursuing any ends designed to help mankind." Go to that extreme and you become an Antinomian.

You know the Greek word for law, nomos; Antinomians were anti-law to the nihilation of grace as power to change. They were those who made the preaching of grace an excuse for sin, caused Paul, Jude and Peter to combat this heresy in the New Testament. This same heresy (the Antihuchisons) divided colonial Massachusetts, and includes the present-day people who believe that since works can gain nothing for you in eternity, then works are unimportant, and go sin all the more that grace may abound.

I am now approaching that place in the book of Galatians that many of you have been waiting for with bated breath. "What's he going to do with the phrase, `Faith working in love'?"

I'm going to tell you a little history about it for openers, and the fights during the Reformation where the Papists said, "See, even Paul finally had to concede that works of love save and undergird faith."

Sorry, that won't fly. But I'm not to that verse yet. Or, "I wonder what he's going to do when he gets to the lusts of the flesh?"

Well, there are about fifteen different lists. And going out the gate, adultery is not even in the list of the earliest manuscripts, and it leads the list in the King James. "Oh, goody!"

Fornication is pornea in the Greek. You don't have to stretch your brain too much, or become a semanticist to know the cognate of pornea do you? Porno? Now just maybe the good old King James that "Michael handed Moses on Mount Sinai" (whoa!) might need a little help.

Contrary to what a lot of you think, I'm going to scare the bejesus out of you. I'm going to scare your britches off. It's obvious that some of you need it. Every preacher of grace from Paul to Luther to Gene Scott, and anyone else on the current scene, has to deal with the problem of grace as a message producing license.

I've told you the story of Bond Bowman in Detroit, Michigan, who had prayed for four years and said to me when he called me, "Gene, God has only shown me one man and I know it's you that must succeed me in Detroit."

He told me all the reasons why, and I told him that he'd prayed for four years and I'd had four seconds to hear it, and I needed some more prayer; but I had enough respect for Bond that I went and filled in for two months while he took a leave of absence. God didn't want me to pastor there, but Bond was so sure he turned loose completely, which he hadn't done for forty years, and that enabled him to relax sufficient to get the strength to come back and have some of his best years.

But I shared with you the long discussions Bond and I used to have. He said, "Gene, the message of grace is the message, I know that. But when I preach it, my congregation takes advantage and it turns into license, and I have to get the Law out to whip them back in line."

I determined then, thinking I probably never would pastor, if I ever pastored, I would dare to give grace its full chance to work. I'd dare to give God the chance to do it without me creating a temporary corral to beat you into sufficient insensibility that I could start over with grace again, and hope that somehow God would show up before you wrecked yourselves this time around.

I want it clear, even before I get to the passages which follow (which is Paul's attempt to deal with Antinomianism - those that took the message of grace and abolished all moral restraint because the Law was dead); I want it clear that I am deliberately hammering the Law into the death insensibility that it should have, not to resurrect it again as the cure for Antinomianism, but to teach through these verses that follow, when Paul finally comes to that phrase and says, "You've been called unto liberty, brethren, only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, to understand the life in the spirit which is the antidote to Antinomianism.

Not once in the history of the Church has any church yet transitioned through this stage. Luther didn't. Paul didn't. And I'm camping out on the closing passages of the fourth chapter and the opening of the fifth chapter because I want the Law so dead that it can't resurrect, at least until I get through the next phase.

Now I've put this foundation up here because I want you to just recognize the only thing that will save is Faithe, period. That's all. Faithe in a Promise of God, like plugging a cord in a wall circuit, causes the current of God to flow from God. That current flows, and the faither, when he contacts a Promise of God, hangs his body on it with the guts to hang on no matter what; he is plugged in, if you will, to God's own life. The manifestation of God's presence may be different than the reality of God's presence in eternity.

But those manifestations of God's presence, that omnipresence of God and that born again presence in-dwelt which God implants in Faithers occurs the moment that the grip of faith kicks in and, at that instant, God gives the gift of salvation - seating you in Christ in heavenly places - and the judicial act of imputation is done; God puts on the spectacles of Jesus Christ and looks at you as though you were Jesus.

Instantly, when Faithe takes hold of God's promise, the kaporeth or covering (which is what `atonement' means) is there in place, and between you and God's Law is that fulfilled Law incarnate in Christ which died on Calvary; and we, our old man, died with Him. God now looks at you (the Faither) as though you were Christ. That's justification. You're taken as just like God, and imputed to you is the righteousness of Christ, and God views you as though you were Christ, with those spectacles he looks at you, and you are seen as seated in heavenly places with and in Christ, already there.

But beyond the judicial act is the born-again, life-changing experience. You don't have to vibrate, your hair doesn't have to stand on end. The reason the Resurrection is the basis of the faith is that if you can believe that Christ came through a locked door, through that rock (molecular displacement meaning nothing, or the putting them back together again); and if you can believe that the Life that raised up Jesus from the dead, took His regenerated body through a locked door, through the rock, and ascending off into the blue occurred, you aren't going to have any trouble taking the next step with your mind, that God can, through that same Word that raised up Christ from the dead, place a deposit of Himself in You.

Withdrawn when Adam sinned, barred by the barrier of our sins, walled away by the swords of the cherubim, God having no access to us without being inconsistent with Himself, by His own voluntary act broke the wall of partition between us that Ephesians talks about. He ripped it apart (symbolized by the veil torn from top to bottom when Christ died) that He might now, on the basis of Christ, send to us the deposit of His life.

And God places in you, the moment faith connects, a deposit of His life. And that Life in you makes you a dual creature; a new creation in Christ Jesus, placed in you, capable of affecting your whole being. You don't have to see radioactive material carried around to know your very cell structure will change. This is the reason I said earlier that I may be the only preacher on television (and now on shortwave radio world-wide) who really believes in the born-again experience.

God places a substance of Himself in you, and that new life in you comes as God's gift because of faith's connection - an act on the basis of God's Word, sustained with confidence that defies every circumstance, and wherever you're doing it, that keeps you in contact with God.

I cannot sever your relationship with God as long as faith is connecting. He places that unit of Himself in you, and left there long enough - more correctly said, maintained there long enough (because as the Hebrews letter said, you remain the house of God the same way you became the house of God, by continuing the faith connection), that spirit in you maintained will change you.

As the Bible says, that which is created of the spirit cannot sin; there is a new life in you incapable of sinning; there is an old life in you dominated by the desires of the flesh. Paul picks a wartime phrase, that these two are dug in like military trench warfare, for a fight to the finish. The outcome is pre-determined: let God's life stay in, the flesh will be displaced and the new life will bring forth fruit. You don't get the fruit of the spirit by will-power copying of the dead Law any more than you can get apples by shaking a tree. It comes from within; it is an out-growth.

Spirituality, by definition in the Greek, is the expression of the spirit. The spiritual person, by definition in the Greek, is the Spirit's person. When that power is in you, it will change you. You can't keep it from happening if it's there.

"Well, what if the surface portrayal of behavior shows that if it's there it ain't doing much?" You need to renew the connection. This is the tragedy of the Church (and I'm anticipating the teaching of the end of the fifth chapter and into the sixth chapter). The tragedy of the Church is, they do what's necessary as an act of faith to get the Spirit in, and then when they see the slow growth, particularly with the buzzards looking on, they panic and seek to pound it from the outside on, instead of reinvoking the steps that keep God's spirit there, renewed and outflowing.

How did you get the spirit in? A simple act. What did Paul say? "Christ is formed in your heart by faith." Christianity has always had a problem in the Grecian world over one thing, and that's Aristotle's logic: "A" cannot be "A" and "not A" at the same time, when the Christian faith starts out in defiance of Aristotle's logic by saying in Christ (in the incarnation) you have "A" and "not A" all the time, in every way. He's man and not man at the same time, He's God and not God at the same time, all the time, everywhere, in every way.

And the deepest truths that Jesus teaches are paradoxical truths: you go up by going down. You don't go up because you went down in order to go up, you go up by going down - concomitant, simultaneous, paradoxical happening. You don't even think about going up. You go down, God puts you up. You get by giving. You live by dying; you become first by being last; you become great by being least. Paradoxes. Aristotelian logic confuses it and tries to make it logical when it's a paradox.

Likewise, the confusion of the Church when it wedded itself to Greek philosophy is they have forgotten that you become righteous by not trying to be. You get righteousness by seeking something else, or more accurately, activating another track. You become righteous by faithing. God does the "righteousing," we do the "faithing." When righteousness wanes, instead of beating yourself to death, find an object of faith in God's Word, get out on that front line with courage, and go for it! Forget about your righteousness. The more righteous you become, the less you'll be aware of it.

How many of you came to this church, probably because I said to you, "You will never be told by me you have to change!"? How many of you in this congregation hadn't been to church in five years until you came to this one? How many of you hadn't been to church in ten years? Hallelujah! Thank God we're saving souls and not transplanting saints. How many were told you didn't have to change, that we don't make you change as a criteria for coming here? How many of you are surprised, you changed? How many of you didn't try to change? How many of you changed in spite of yourself? You're a success.

As we close the fourth chapter of Galatians, Paul compares those who go back to Sinai and pull the Law off that hill, and come to some new Jerusalem as the interpretive center, and from that new Jerusalem begin to lay the Law on you as an added necessity of being a Christian, Paul compares that to Abraham going into the tent and fornicating with Hagar. He says Hagar is Sinai, and Sinai is "new Jerusalems" which are now, and they produce children of bondage.

And he then says we are the "children of the free" as Isaac was, born of faith in the promise of God, a miracle that cannot be done by human effort, and then he draws that conclusion that no church has been able to live with to the present day: Then as now, the children of bondage, who have resurrected off Sinai new rules to add to your relationship to God, will persecute the children of the free. They cannot live in the same house together.

From the Textus Receptus to the present, every major accepted text in the Greek adds the first verse of the fifth chapter to the last of the fourth chapter, because it is the conclusion, saying, "What shall we do, then, to these persecutors of the free?"

Throw them out! Separate from them! Because those who rely on works will continue to persecute, they cannot live in the same house together with those who derive righteousness from FAITH and are the children of the free (Isaac's).

Then Paul says, as the closing verse of the fourth chapter in the original manuscripts rather than the opening of the fifth, "Stand fast therefore in the liberty - or freedom - wherewith Christ has set us free."

Mark Barton, Sunday, 20 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

You either get it or you don't, I get it!

*rant snipped*

Is it *that* hard to think for yourself? Bah.

Ned Raggett, Sunday, 20 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Ok Mark, I read your piece and I've heard Doc say it. Now, what to you think?

Johnnie Brown, Saturday, 26 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Is it *that* hard to think for yourself? Bah.

You have thought of all of that????

Johnnie Brown, Saturday, 26 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Is it *that* hard to think for yourself?

You have thought of all of that????

Johnnie Brown, Saturday, 26 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I think the old goon is totaly off his ROCKER! Is he tring to look like Moses With a cigar?

Guess Who, Tuesday, 29 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Interesting discussion... I`m Russian with a little knowledge of English, that`s why I`ve understood only 35 % of what you are talking... But I want to say something about Doc... I have been listened to Him for about 2 years on the shortwaves. (I`m not a King`s House yet) The most important thing (for me) in Scott is that having heard Him once (attentively) you can`t forget Him! You can admire Him, you can hate Him or love Him, but you can`t forget Him. It is a SHOCK, He is right! Now I`m not His devoted follower (I prefer to be God`s follower), but I turn to Him again & again every day. His teaching and not only teching but His Person is a "food" for my mind (have I said something wrong in English?). And I also think that His watchers and listehers are srecial people, not simple-minded. PS Have you all read "The shock jock of televangelism"? It`s really wonderful! PPS Excuses for my terrible English...

Valentin G., Thursday, 31 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Personally, I think Scott doesn't hold a candle to Dr. Bronner...

ALL ONE!

Brian MacDonald, Thursday, 31 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

gimme barry smith anyday

Menelaus Darcy, Thursday, 31 January 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Who is Bronner ALL ONE (red flag)? Or should I ask?

Johnnie Brown, Friday, 1 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Dr. Bronner and his ways.

Ned Raggett, Friday, 1 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I worked for Dr. Scott. Here is the story. There is much more that I cannot write that would absolutely blow your mind. I am afraid I might not live. http://4.62.40.246/DrGeneScott/DrGeneScott.html

Mark Kallio, Sunday, 10 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

"Blues Brothers" You must be kidding to use the words "indirectly responsible".

Johnnie Brown, Saturday, 23 February 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

one month passes...
I'd say totally classic. Though I can't fathom an iota of what he teaches, (What can I say? I slept all through High School.) he blows me away with all that formulaic chicken scratch he writes on his dry eraser board. You got to love those videos of him and those young chicks riding horses to Rod Stewarts, "Do ya think I'm sexy." Most of his stuff is abstract and hoplessly boring, but you just never know whats going to happen next.

jesse clifford, Sunday, 24 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Dr. Eugene has become a failure. That does not mean he has not been very helpful in showing and teaching spiritual truth. Lately he has been stuck in a rut, resting on his laurels. Gone is his courage to tackle unpopular ideas. The Internet has left him in his own dust, cigar and all. Yes, he challenged me to investigate Edgar Cayce. Yes, he proved the resurrection of Christ. No, the blood atonement does not make sense if you stop to think about it. More thoughts at:

http://www.spiritualwar.com

R Ding, Monday, 25 March 2002 01:00 (twenty-three years ago)

four weeks pass...
Here is some of the full story http://www.tvbn.org/DrGeneScott/TheSagaOfReverendDavidHill.shtml

John Mark Kallio, Wednesday, 24 April 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

WHAT LEVEL ARE YOU?

There are four phases in the evolution of religious philosophy: Such an experience may become merely conformative, resigned to submission to tradition and authority. Or it may be satisfied with slight attainments, just enough to stabilize the daily living, and therefore becomes early arrested on such an adventitious level. Such mortals believe in letting well enough alone. A third group progress to the level of logical intellectuality but there stagnate in consequence of cultural slavery. It is indeed pitiful to behold giant intellects held so securely within the cruel grasp of cultural bondage. It is equally pathetic to observe those who trade their cultural bondage for the materialistic fetters of a science, falsely so called. The fourth level of philosophy attains freedom from all conventional and traditional handicaps and dares to think, act, and live honestly, loyally, fearlessly, and truthfully.

Bob, Sunday, 28 April 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

i am fourth level obv

mark s, Sunday, 28 April 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Fourth? Cretin. I am fifth.

Ned Raggett, Sunday, 28 April 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

P.65 - §5 Worship is for its own sake; prayer embodies a self- or creature-interest element; that is the great difference between worship and prayer. There is absolutely no self-request or other element of personal interest in true worship; we simply worship God for what we comprehend him to be. Worship asks nothing and expects nothing for the worshiper. We do not worship the Father because of anything we may derive from such veneration; we render such devotion and engage in such worship as a natural and spontaneous reaction to the recognition of the Father's matchless personality and because of his lovable nature and adorable attributes. P.65 - §6 The moment the element of self-interest intrudes upon worship, that instant devotion translates from worship to prayer and more appropriately should be directed P.66 - §0 to the person of the Eternal Son or the Creator Son. But in practical religious experience there exists no reason why prayer should not be addressed to God the Father as a part of true worship.

Bob, Wednesday, 8 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

Then on P.67 there's a big drawing of a pineapple.

mark s, Wednesday, 8 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

I worked for Dr. Scott. Here is the story. There is much more that I cannot write that would absolutely blow your mind. I am afraid I might not live.

THAT IS PRECISELY WHY YOU MUST WRITE IT.

Death comes unto us all, so why be afraid?

Bob, Sunday, 19 May 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

one month passes...
While Dr. Scott indicates your giving to him is all important, here is an alternative view:

[Jesus said:] "I admonish you ever to remember that your mission among men is to proclaim the gospel of the kingdom--the reality of the fatherhood of God and the truth of the sonship of man. Proclaim the whole truth of the good news, not just a part of the saving gospel. Your message is not changed by my resurrection experience. Sonship with God, by faith, is still the saving truth of the gospel of the kingdom. You are to go forth preaching the love of God and the service of man. That which the world needs most to know is: Men are the sons of God, and through faith they can actually realize, and daily experience, this ennobling truth." The Urantia Book, page 2052

"Jesus swept away all of the ceremonials of sacrifice and atonement. He destroyed the basis of all this fictitious guilt and sense of isolation in the universe by declaring that man is a child of God; the creature-Creator relationship was placed on a child-parent basis. God becomes a loving Father to his mortal sons and daughters..."

"God the Father deals with man his child on the basis, not of actual virtue or worthiness, but in recognition of the child's motivation-- the creature purpose and intent. The relationship is one of parent- child association and is actuated by divine love." The Urantia Book, page 1133

Bob, Thursday, 27 June 2002 00:00 (twenty-three years ago)

five months pass...
odd how nobody has seen fit to contribute since the summer of 2002?

bob, Wednesday, 18 December 2002 04:49 (twenty-two years ago)

one month passes...
21 Jan 2003
Today we see Dr. Scott WHINING about the fact a person with a medical emergency was being ushered out a forbidden door. Furthermore, Eugene was slighted because he was not immediately informed about the nature of the problem. I would not be surprised to hear that Eugene has some rule forbidding his interruption during a sermon. So when you surround yourself with sheeple, people who cannot really think too much for themselves, do not be surprised if the response to an unexpected situation is genuinely human. Rather than smile and realize your usher was trying to function as a thinking, feeling, and caring person, Eugene launches into a completely hideous tirade about the fact these people did not do something perfectly right according to Dr. Scott. So what do want doc scott, Perfection or Trust? Looks like you demand perfection from those that are not...

Bob, Tuesday, 21 January 2003 17:34 (twenty-two years ago)

five months pass...

Dr Gene Scott, oh what can I say about the man. I've been in touch with the Doc for 23 years and probably could write his biography. I first discovered Gene Scott as a 15 year old boy flipping through the channels, little did I know the first time I saw the conservatively dressed white haired pastor, that my life would be forever changed.
I have been known as little Doc for 20 years and can preach verbatum many of Dr. Scotts annual messages. such as; The resurrection, balaams ass, The ABC's of faith ect ect. I have followed in Doc's footsteps as best I could, getting a doctorate, founding a ministry, exceling in business ventures, and broadcasting yhe gospel. I am forever in debt to Gene Scott for helping me see my calling and helping find the real way to salvation..FAITH!! If you would like to know more please feel free to contact me.
Dr. J.w. Scott
The Kings Center Of Faith
TheKingsCenterOfFaith@webtv.net

Forever O' Lord thy word is settled in heaven.

Thanks Doc.

J.wScott Ph.D

Johnny w. Scott, Thursday, 26 June 2003 21:23 (twenty-two years ago)

seven years pass...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJxKQ-WOFFE

diebro (buzza), Saturday, 5 March 2011 19:01 (fourteen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.