The Emperor Has No Clothes

For someone who is so adamant that we pursue wisdom and good judgment, Dave sure does not seem to highly regard the rules of logic. In this video, instead of actually addressing the arguments I’ve put forth, he misdirects by casting suspicion on me, misquoting me and misrepresenting me. Let’s take a closer look at the myriad of logical fallacies he has employed in this argument. He talks about my blog at 51:25: (2021 Update: video has since been taken down)

“Well, you guys down there at Teen Mania, you are such a bunch of legalists, you know you are always talking about integrity, you’ve got these checklists and its all legalism, legalism, legalism, legalism.”

I don’t know if you guys have heard any of this, but I’ve heard it. You can go read the slam sites – people that call me a heretic and a legalist and you know all these different things. Listen, people who are saying that, I personally believe just have a twisted theology that allows them to live a life that lacks integrity. When I read my Bible, integrity is pretty important. God is pretty concerned about it. Let’s not cheat ourselves. What legalism would be is if you fail the test and then you think God loves you less. This has nothing to do with the love of God.

“You can go read the slam sites – people that call me a heretic and a legalist and you know all these different things.”

I have never called Dave Hasz, Ron Luce or anyone at Teen Mania Ministries a heretic. Perhaps he is referring to another website, although I am unaware of any others that this would apply to.

Judgmental language is a fallacy that “employs insulative, compromising or pejorative language to influence the recipient’s judgment.” By calling my blog a “slam site” he is prejudicing his hearers.

Misdirection – He emphasizes the fact that he is being “called names” instead of actually addressing the contents of the argument. In fact, he acts like calling him names is the substance of my argument, which any cursory reading of my blog would indicate is patently untrue.

“Listen, people who are saying that, I personally believe, just have a twisted theology that allows them to live a life that lacks integrity”

This is an amazing statement since Dave has no idea how I live my life. Again, instead of ACTUALLY ADDRESSING THE SUBSTANCE OF MY ARGUMENTS, he questions my character. Again deflecting the attention from his teachings and putting on the supposed sins of someone else. If you stick around Teen Mania long enough, you’ll see this quite often.

Dave is also giving us a false dichotomy which “involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are other options.” Dave seems to be saying that if you say he is legalistic, you must lack integrity. I know I am not the first person to say that TM’s environment is legalistic. Even staff members express this opinion. Does Dave think that everyone who disagrees with him on this point lacks integrity?

Ad Hominem Argument is “an argument which links the validity of a premise to an irrelevant characteristic or belief of the person advocating the premise.” The basic form of this argument goes like this:

Person 1 makes claim X
There is something objectionable about Person 1
Therefore claim X is false

Even if I do lack integrity (which I do not concede), what does that have to do with the arguments I’ve made?

When I read my Bible, integrity is pretty important.

Here, Dave gives us an Irrelevant Conclusion which is “presenting an argument that may in itself be valid, but does not address the issue in question.” The question is not whether integrity is important, but whether the way they seek it is legalistic.

The Straw Man is a popular rhetorical fallacy. It is used “to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the “straw man”), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.” Dave employs the straw man here by asserting that my position is that integrity is unimportant. When he knocks down that argument, he thinks he has actually addressed the substance of my statements, which he has not. This argument is a straw man, because I NEVER said that integrity was not important. With this statement, he is implying that I place no value on integrity. This totally misrepresents my position.

What legalism would be is if you fail the test and then you think God loves you less.

Actually, that is not a full definition of legalism. Legalism is attempting to do good works or advance your sanctification in your own strength. As Paul said in Galatians 3, “After beginning with the Spirit are you now trying to attain your goal by human effort?”

So, in less than a minute, Dave has used no less than 5 logical fallacies! He fails to actually make one substantial statement with respect to my actual arguments and instead engages in misdirection by casting aspersion on my character and motives.

Dave would prefer that interns not actually review the information carefully or look further into what I and now many others are saying after graduating from TM. Using rhetorical sleight of hand, he does everything possible to keep from coming under legitimate scrutiny. If what I am saying is false, than engaging in actual critical thinking skills and appropriate research should prove that. So, what is he afraid of?

36 comments:

Ben said…

this is at least one thing i realized pretty early on: the potential danger of dave hasz is that he is a very eloquent speaker. he could convince most people of something he didn’t believe himself, just because of his rhetoric and chaining together arguments like that to people who can’t figure out what on earth he actually said before he’s long gone from the subject (i include myself in that category then. i could not for the life of me keep up with him most of the time).
December 14, 2009 8:31 PM

z said…

I love the way you are so gutsy, Recovering Alumni, and smart too! You make a lot of sense.

Where did you find this video?
December 14, 2009 10:59 PM

z said…

Funny Dave’s teaching in the video was about restitution. If he has wronged you, RA, he would on the basis of his own theology owe you restitution. Am I right?
December 14, 2009 11:08 PM

MDSF said…

You’re facing a tough problem here.

For whatever reason conservative Christianity tends to be fundamentally authoritarian, and by its nature authoritarianism requires that leaders defend their position as leaders first and foremost. This includes setting the narrative, which is what is happening here, and defending the organization (also happening here).

Unfortunately everything else is secondary, including any sort of “service leadership” or adherence to an external or objective truth.

In authoritarian systems the leaders are prisoners of the system as well for the reasons I’ve described above, which is why it’s important to keep discussing what is actually true (as opposed to stooping to name-calling, etc.) as honestly as lovingly as possible.

You will occasionally find people discussing troublesome Christian leaders in terms described by Martha Stout, author of The Sociopath Next Door; see e.g. here and links contained therein. These people need help, but it’s rarely helpful to say “you’re a sociopath.”

Good luck.
December 15, 2009 8:41 AM

MDSF said…

One more thing: I looked up “slam site” on the Web; it’s a rarely-used term (Google Search), and I really have no idea what it means.

When someone invents a term on the fly like this it’s an indication that they expect to be able to dictate terms.
December 15, 2009 8:44 AM

Anonymous said…

wow wow wow. so amazing (in a bad AND good way.)

well done…your rebuttal is responsible and logical, and you didn’t get drawn in or take anything personally. well done.
December 15, 2009 11:34 AM

h. said…

he also, in an indirect way, manages to make it personal for the interns as well as himself, and again brings in a subtle hint of persecution.

“Well, you guys down there at Teen Mania, you are such a bunch of legalists, you know you are always talking about integrity, you’ve got these checklists and its all legalism, legalism, legalism, legalism.”

“you guys down there at Teen Mania”–you’ll be hard-pressed to find an intern that doesn’t immediately find themselves in that statement; i know i would have when i was an intern. it’s just become personal now.

“you know you’re always talking about integrity, you’ve got these checklists, etc”–the implication here is that whoever is making these statements does NOT value integrity, and therefore is threatened by or looks down on the interns for their way of life. In essence, they are being informed of the alleged persecution they are facing for their lifestyle choices (that they wouldn’t have been aware of otherwise) by other people of the Christian faith–further driving home an “us vs. them” mentality.

a prime example of the effects of this would be the many comments the current interns leave on this blog–many of them take the subject matter here incredibly personally, even though nothing that is said calls out the interns directly as the knowing perpetrators of the spiritual abuse–more the victims of it, than anything else. by making the argument personal, Dave really doesn’t need to defend himself–he’s just persuaded hundreds of interns that they’re the ones that are being wronged, and that’s the real issue.

RA–your brilliant discussion of the many logical fallacies Dave employs throughout the course of this talk is eye-opening. he’s a smart man–and while i don’t doubt his love for the Lord, and i DID learn things while sitting under his teaching, it’s revealing how persuasive he can be without the interns even really realizing it [myself included].
December 15, 2009 1:08 PM

Stephanie said…

Eye-opening is right. Something that the HA professes is that it doesn’t tell you WHAT to think, but HOW to think.

Yeah, they teach you “how”, alright. Sobering.

h., you’re right; whenever Hasz went into an “us vs. them” explanation, I definitely took everything personally, even if the “attacker” in question (or “hater” haha) only took issue with ONE SPECIFIC PERSON IN THE MINISTRY.
December 15, 2009 1:39 PM

Recovering Alumni said…

Ben – yes, excellent point. interns really don’t even have a chance to dissect what he is saying -its like drinking from a firehose.

Z – the videos were uploaded to vimeo until the HA saw I was linking to them. Fortunately, I and several others, downloaded them before they were removed. As far as his restitution theory (which is problematic) he couldnt’ even give me restitution if he tried. How could he possibly return the years I (and others) have spent in depression, confusion and shame?

MDSF – Yes, I love Bill Kinnon and I saw that as well. The complex psychological impulses behind these behaviors are not easy to deal with…

h – great point! I did not even catch that. I have deleted many comments from interns that illustrate your point exactly. Just another master deflection – making the interns feel personally attacked so they won’t look at him. Brilliant deduction.
December 15, 2009 2:12 PM

Anonymous said…

Is your position so weak you can’t afford to allow detractors?
December 15, 2009 3:32 PM

Stephanie said…

Woo, look out ladies and gents, we got another one!

Dearest anonymous- please spend more than five minutes on this blog before blindly raging to Dave Hasz’s defense. Like, the comment policy or something ;]
December 15, 2009 4:15 PM

Recovering Alumni said…

Anonymous – It appears you’ve learned the art of misdirection and blame shifting from the best! Way to be a disciple of Dave Hasz!
December 15, 2009 4:32 PM

Recovering Alumni said…

Anonymous – Would you please pose that question to Dave Hasz? Thanks.
December 15, 2009 5:31 PM

Anonymous said…

Early in the DH diatribe he says that there are those down in Texas “talking about integrity saying you are a bunch of legalists”. David is a smart person, he is making it personal to the interns saying that this site is persecuting them for having integrity. That is patently false. David H either lacks integrity himself for lying OR lacks the basic memory skills to retain what many here are saying about him. What a kook. When TM finally falls down around him I wonder what he’ll do next without his hordes of stary-eyed teenagers drooling to comply with his next whim?
December 15, 2009 7:14 PM

Anonymous said…

Now I’m a fan R.A. of your site. but Mr. Hasz never actually mentioned YOUR SITE. He just said go read the “slam sites.”
I’m just saying. it sounds like you potentially took this one a LITTLE TOO personal.
I’d like your input on that. I’m not trying to judge you promise. just I’m a little confused why you took that statment so intensly.
December 15, 2009 9:12 PM

Recovering Alumni said…

Last Anonymous – Even though he didn’t say it, I do believe his comments were directed at me. As far as I know, there are no other bloggers speaking out specifically against the Honor Academy or Dave Hasz. There are several sites and bloggers that have commented negatively on Teen Mania as a whole – but most of these have to do with ATF and Battlecry and they rarely even mention the Honor Academy. Certainly, no one else is calling him out specifically for his legalism. If they are, please point me to their site. Dave has told me that he reads the site as well, so I know that I am at the very least included in this diatribe, if not the sole target.

I don’t think I am taking his statements personally and I’m sorry if it came across that way. I really don’t think there is much he can say that will bother me on a personal level. The point of my post was to show that he never actually answers legitimate criticisms and to show how he can so easily pull the wool over people’s eyes with his rhetorical skills. What makes me angry about Dave is not anything he has said or done to me – I’ve long forgiven and gotten over that – but I am angry that other people are being victimized. I hope that makes sense.
December 15, 2009 9:59 PM

Anonymous said…

At the 3:48 minute mark Mr. Hasz mentions a MAJOR judgement call on people who ring out of ESOAL. “Most people who say ESOAL isn’t hard enough they end up ringing out about Friday afternoon, saying, ‘ESOAL wasn’t hard enough’ whats up with that? I dont know.”
GAH! I could flip right now and scream and kick something. I heard that kind of stuff so much at the HA! And I believed it! He straight up made a judment call wanting to get everyone in the room to believe him and it sure sounds like he looks down on people who ring out of ESOAL on Friday afternoons.
December 16, 2009 12:14 PM

Anonymous said…

oh whoops. I wasn’t paying attention to what I was writing. I’m talking about the video on ESOAL not the video you have up here. I’m referencing your blog post from a week or so ago on ESOAL.
December 16, 2009 12:18 PM

Recovering Alumni said…

Agreed…and if WHAT he says isn’t bad enough, the TONE with which he says it makes it worse…generally speaking he doesn’t disguise is contempt or disgust very well….
December 16, 2009 3:13 PM

Anonymous said…

Wow. I didn’t used to think Mr. Hasz was crazy but now I really think he is. After watching that ESOAL video I kind of have compassion on him, he’s really off his rocker. I’m totally freaked out about a lot of the things he said in there. like dying to your emotions to the point of being very very very happy. FREAKY!!! ESOAL really is brainwashing! and he was talking about how the goal is to finish finish and if you dont then you did fail your goal. so they need to give the guy a hug who rings out so they dont feel like a total loser the rest of their life.
If anyone see’s this, it’s worth watching the ESOAL video. lol. I have to laugh. he’s so readable.
December 17, 2009 2:25 AM

h. said…

last anonymous, i thought that was an interesting point too–the fact that he talks about the goal being to finish finish, and giving hugs to the people who ring out so they don’t feel like failures.

interesting, considering he preaches to the interns that there is absolutely no difference between the folks who finish finish and the people who merely “finish”.
December 17, 2009 10:11 AM

Anonymous said…

No H. I think he’s changing his stance now, that that is the goal. I’m sure that’s what he preached to the interns. which doesn’t make ANY sense. If the goal of ESOAL is to Finish Finish why do they even have anything like, “Reaching Bar” (which I’m convinced now is DEMONIC. Really. Reaching ‘bar’ does not sound healthy at all.)
When I was an intern about 2 years ago he told us that the point was to reach ‘bar.’ And we could totally ring out at any time.
wow. This just clicked for me.
Serious light bulb.
So when he told us that it was ‘the standard.’ if you rang out of ESOAL before hitting what they consider ‘bar.’ you had failed.
now, there is a new ‘standard’ -finish finishing.
So they really DO set the ‘standard’ for what being a good Christian is. and it’s like, what ever they say is true, no matter if it was different the year before, is true.
December 17, 2009 11:06 AM

Recovering Alumni said…

Good point, last anonymous. I was disturbed to find out from a current intern that anyone who doesn’t finish ESOAL is now labeled a quitter.
December 17, 2009 11:08 AM

Nunquam Honorablus said…

Wait, seriously? Seeing him shift gears from “everyone’s a winner so long as you did your best!” to “WTF QUITTER” is unnerving.

What’s sad, is that the only way to avoid the shame of ringing out of ESOAL is to get a morbid injury/illness.

Like breaking your kneecap, going into hypothermia from the dry ice (yes, HYPOTHERMIA, in TEXAS SUMMER), or having a facilitator FORCE A DIABETIC TO EAT WITHOUT HIS INSULIN SHOTS– all things that friends of mine suffered.

ESOAL just isn’t worth it, Hasz. I am amazed that there has been no legal action taken.

(Also, I chose to label myself “never honorablus”, because “honorablus” is a made up word that embodies the Honor Academy’s definition of honor; something from which I’d like to depart.)
December 17, 2009 11:48 AM

Recovering Alumni said…

Nunquam – Wow…just, wow.

And honorablus isn’t even a real word? What??????? The insanity never ends!
December 17, 2009 12:02 PM

Anonymous said…

lol. No Honorablus ISNT a word.
I think it would be helpful for me to know what other years Mr. Hasz said was ‘the standard’ cause yeah, it always was changing now that i think about it.
It would also help interns who are there now beable to see what a jip it all is.
And my only question is, do the people who never partisipate in ESOAL get looked down on now? I mean, they always kind of did, but now is it an all out, “If you don’t do ESOAL than you’re a quitter before you start.” ? cause it would make since if you quit ESOAL that you are a ‘quitter’ that if you never started you are just weak. but it would take away the whole point of ESOAL. I think. I dont really get the point of ESOAL anymore.
December 17, 2009 4:07 PM

Recovering Alumni said…

Do you want me to answer your logical fallacy? Did you even read the post??
December 29, 2009 9:34 PM

z said…

Dec. 29th anonymous, I would hope that every 18 year old knows how to make their bed and wouldn’t need to dedicate a year of their life learning how to make it. Seriously, did you cheat and steal before you attended the HA?

Keep in mind that countless numbers of Christians have been dutifully reading their Bibles for thousands of years without ever setting foot on TM soil.

Not cheating or stealing and reading the Bible are very simple choices you don’t need to spend a year and thousands of dollars learning.

Please tell me you didn’t spend a year of your life learning to make your bed.
December 30, 2009 8:17 AM

Anonymous said…

After spending 8 months there I STILL don’t make my bed. Maybe if I’d held out the last 4 months it really would have stuck with me 😉
December 30, 2009 1:36 PM

Recovering Alumni said…

Last Anon – that is really too bad. Don’t you know you can’t be a great leader if you don’t make your bed?
December 30, 2009 1:45 PM

Nunquam Honorablus said…

I think that that one Anonymous had a point, guys. You also learn how to clean bathrooms and do dishes, and you learn how to work out!

And you learn not only a skewed Gospel, but how to PREACH it!

Who cares that we’re completely depraved sinners? A giraffe can stoop down to drink some water without dying of a head rush! That’s more important than allowing the Holy Spirit to do His work in man’s heart. I mean, like, duh.

There really isn’t any other place in the world that offers those services- the $7800 is completely worth it. You guys are just frugle cheapskates.
December 31, 2009 2:08 PM

Diane said…

Wow. $7800 now? The internship was “only” $4800 when I was there in 1999-2000.

So they’ve nearly doubled the price in only a decade? And they’re STILL $3.5 million in debt???
January 1, 2010 10:37 PM

Nunquam Honorablus said…

Oh gracious, were they in debt when you were there too?? Criminey.

I will say, though, that I guess I can see how prices have risen- I mean, how much was gas per gallon ten years ago? I remember when it was under a dollar. I’m sure that cost of living has gone up, with more modern introductions of technology, electricity’s probably gone up, and food. OH THE FOOD.

Granted, I’m just pulling this from the top of my head; I don’t really know where all the money’s going (oh wait, textbooks! Those actually are kinda pricey). So I can see how it could have completely legitimately risen. Does that constitute THAT much of a raise, though? Maybe not.

And I will say- I DO value some of the things I learned at TM, and I do value some of the friends I made.

But it sure as hades wasn’t worth throwing $7800 at a failing ministry, not to mention the heartbreak upon learning that a lot of what you believe is either embellished, dripping in legalism, or just a big lie.
January 2, 2010 10:17 AM

Anonymous said…

I was there in O4 and the cost was 6,000 clams. At a 3% national annual inflation rate they’re only overcharging $938.47 to be an intern in 09. Not bad. People always told me I was crazy to work for free. What does that make me if I pay to work? At least I changed the world though…
January 4, 2010 12:41 PM

Anonymous said…

The HA Ozarks class is hosted by a “Word of Faith” Church in Branson Missouri. random, but I wonder if they did there homework really before setting up a charter with that denomination? From the look of it, the original Class was 12 people and all but 4 have left it…
April 2, 2010 4:32 AM

Alien In Exile said…

I’ve just read MOST of the comments, in addition to the original blog … what an interesting array of feedback. I’m generally among the “frustrated, slightly resentful, and trying to get back on my feet, feeling like I was better off before the HA than after” crowd, but as I read the other responses, I’m realizing how ugly resentment and bitterness are, coming from other people. I mean, you can express disagreement, rebuke, and correct in a way that is honorable, tactful, loving, and Christ-like without compromising how you feel or what you experienced. But when I read the nasty, sarcastic comments, it’s hard to take them seriously. And it’s probably hard for TM leadership to take them seriously, and NOT write us off as a bunch of uptight overemotional losers.
June 29, 2010 11:23 PM