Paul's Passing Thoughts

A Blog for TANC Ministries


Comments Off on A Blog for TANC Ministries

On Furries and Good Works

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on January 23, 2020

Cover 2From chapter one draft:

As noted in the introduction of this book, the core ideology of a group should always define it because the ideology determines behavior that will always be present in some capacity. Even though the best example of this principle is Nazism, it is one of the few examples where the principle is consistently applied. That’s unfortunate. Nazism is universally condemned, not because every Nazi worked in a concentration camp, but because people realize that the core ideology is what drives the movement. Hitler invented the Volkswagen; many people love Volkswagens, but you will be hard pressed to find anyone who will use that fact to defend Hitler.

The Furry Fandom was conceived by an ideology several years ago that produced certain outcomes, and consequently, those same outcomes are prevalent in the movement today. Like a tree, ideology will always bear the same fruit to various degrees. If a movement survives, it remains predicated by the core ideology because the ideology is its life blood. Thankfully, we have labels that are quick references to ideologies. Ultimately, this book will make the case for keeping children away from the Fandom because the core ideology puts children at grave risk on several different levels psychologically, emotionally, and physically. The movement threatens a child’s total state of being.

Ironically, Furries will often refer to themselves as a “subculture,” while also referring to themselves as a “fandom” or “hobby.” Supposedly, this is merely a group of people who have an interest in anthropomorphic art. The idea that a subculture and anthropomorphic art are synonymous with the concept of “hobby” or fandom is an oxymoron. The Corvette club is hardly a subculture. An interest in Corvettes is not a lifestyle. A culture is obviously a lifestyle. A philosophy of life is not found in Corvette-ism. A Husky club centers on a love and interest for Huskies, not a desire to be one or an attempt to find one’s true identity in a Husky.

Furthermore, anthropomorphism itself has a historical religious foundation that goes back thousands of years. We would think it curious that a person has an interest in Hindu art while having no interest in Hinduism whatsoever. In short, the comfort level people have in the face of these illogical defenses is stunning.

Dr. Nicole Baldwin, Vaccines, and Medical Elitism

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on January 22, 2020

ppt-jpeg4“And I might mention the following: her video reeks of an adult putting a subject in cartoonish terms so the great unwashed children of the world can understand it. The motif of the video alone exposes her elitist mentality.”

Folks, the pro/anti-vax controversy is a brutal arena. In the arena of discussion, neither side is taking prisoners. Why is this issue so volatile? Answer: for the same reason present-day politics is volatile.

People in general, want to be free to exercise commonsense. Unfortunately, elitism has a strong tendency to dismiss commonsense based on a person’s cultural status. This goes past a person’s educational status and flirts with the idea that commoners are unable to discern reality itself. In other words, commonsense is rejected as an intrinsic ability within humanity to know things.

On the one hand, elitist presuppositions grounded in Platonist ideology underpinning much of Western thought has little patience with serfs not accepting elitist unction. How strongly do the elitists feel about this? Look at history; no pain of death has been spared those who dare question the ruling class. On the other hand, the common folks have little patience with freedom to apply commonsense being hindered, and the suggestion that intrinsic commonsense is not an epistemological reality.

If a peasant’s child goes into convulsions right after receiving vaccinations, and those peasants who know of it are getting their children taken away for refusing to get their children vaccinated, that’s when pitchforks are used for things other than throwing hay.

The internet is a potent tool for sharing the experiences of people worldwide, and when people see a recurring trend, they take note of it. The internet enables the public at large to connect dots.

Let’s talk about some commonsense stuff regarding medicine. Even though I am only a MAC (state tested medication aide), I can apply some commonsense to what I know about the administration of medicine in nursing facilities. It is evident, in my field, that one size doesn’t fit all. There are these things called, allergic reactions, intolerance, adverse effects, right dose, right time, right drug, right route, and I could state more. A lot of drugs are substitutes for other drugs that target the same medical problem because a medication for the same condition may, well, kill the resident. These standards apply to vitamins, minerals, antibiotics, OTC, and every other kind of drug.

But regarding vaccines, one size fits all? Sorry Doc, I may be a lowly MAC compared to your medical degree, but you are obviously full of it. And, if you and your elitist buddies are behind legislation that abducts children of people who question that logic, I might even state my opinion in stronger terms.

Locally,  a pediatrician  named Nicole Baldwin attempted to debunk concerns about vaccinations with a short video on Tik Tock. The blowback was significant enough to make her the latest martyr in efforts to calm the great unwashed herd of commoners. Her great struggle was reported on CBS This Morning, a bastion of liberal elitist wisdom. Curiously, the same kind of red herrings, straw men, and doublespeak are used in political venues against those who dare believe in man’s ability to self-rule.

For example, “There is no link between vaccines and Autism.” First, the so-called “antivaxx” crowd is not saying Autism is the only issue or it is Autism per se, but Autism-like symptoms and other symptoms such as convulsions. Secondly, there are no links between the two; so what? There are no direct biological or physiological links between allergic reactions to medications and unique physiology of the individual. For the most part, adverse and allergic reactions to medicines can only be determined by observation. This is why MACs are not allowed to give the first dose of a medication, but are responsible for observing the resident for a period of time after the administration of the drug by an RN or LPN.

Here is my point: the dialogue used by the medical community in this debate is disingenuous and endowed with truth as authority. It’s the same verbiage and deceptive forms of communication used by elitists in the political realm. And it’s like the police saying a traffic accident never occurred because there is no direct link between a cause for the accident and the mangled car with the injured driver inside. Furthermore, the injured person sitting in the car wasn’t necessarily injured by the accident. Really? Even though harm is taking place at the time of some vaccinations, the two are unrelated. A person begins choking while eating a sandwich, but the sandwich is dismissed as the cause. It’s nonsense.


I will summarize and conclude this post with the comment I left on her FaceBook page:

As a STNA and MAC attending nursing school I find the medical community’s collectivist attitude towards this problem very sad. The experience of many parents tells us that something is going wrong with a small percentage of children who get vaccinated. When parents experience their children suddenly becoming cognitively disabled or going into convulsions within hours of receiving vaccines, you can bet they are going to be skeptical of vaccines.

And by the way, 46% of parents are not skeptical of vaccines because they are uneducated serfs, they are skeptical because of what parents are experiencing, and that is what they are finding on the internet, NOT the mere beliefs of dumb hillbillies. I find the attitude that a few children are expendable for the collective good of most children detestable [viz, “The benefits outweigh the risks.” I suppose, if it isn’t your child!].

EVERY child matters. Again, the notion that the internet is a conduit for misinformation by the great unwashed and uneducated is an excuse for not addressing what is actually happening.

What people are experiencing is the issue, not superstition. I think it a little arrogant to tell people their experiences are invalid because of research. I am no doctor, but you only need to be an STNA to know doctors are wrong often and don’t know everything. Trust me, I have many firsthand testimonies.




Announcing Open Forum on Twitter for New Book

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on January 21, 2020

Fandom Cover 1I WAS dragging myself into this Furry Fandom project as sort of a public service to parents and child welfare professionals. Many readers of this ministry and its participants have been perplexed that I would wander into this venue, myself included. Have you ever been unsure about why you are doing something but also know you are going to do it anyway?

So, I have been very deep into the research the first half of my days and wrapping up the Potter’s House building project the second half of my days. And as a long lost friend from my Dallas, TX days used to say, “Boy Howdy!” am I glad I have gotten into this. As you know, world philosophy is our forte, and nothing has taught me more about world philosophy since my relationship to John Immel than where this research is taking me.

Also, if this ministry thinks it has learned something valuable, we like to get it out. That’s why I usually publish the progress of any book projects we do. It also serves as an open editors committee that refines the book. Comments reveal how people are perceiving the book and the question of perception is very valuable to the communication of ideas.

This time around I am using a Twitter account to do that. Here it is:


Weekend Furry Frenzy: Paul Dohse is a Bad Guy

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on January 13, 2020

Fandom Cover 1So, I got an email from some Furry guy (maybe a guy, who really knows?) over the weekend from Ireland (again, who really knows?). The Furry, as they proclaim themselves, “subculture” is fighting back against my “slander” and “he” pointed me to several links and even a video. Through all of this, and following the links to other online links, I am very surprised to find the degree of effort to discredit me.

Yes, I have been exposed. I am a “Calvinist pastor” with multiple criminal records. Who knew? I am also a religious Fundamentalist as well. Apparently, a Furry listed many of my articles on an anti-fundi website so I could be tagged with the label in their referencing. I have also been falsely identified with an online identity/handle/avatar that is featured in the video being assassinated at point blank range with an assault rifle. And, where I live was supplied in the video via google maps. Sweet bunch.

Nevertheless, like all of these correspondences, they are a treasure trove of information and data. I am being accused of characterizing Furries based on a “minority” that is aggressively excommunicated from the community, because, you know, they are really a good community that contributes to many good causes.  In article number twelve I outline the various bizarre fetishes that are commonplace in the Fandom (and even part of their official dictionary) and their outcry against those who criticize such behavior calling them “bigots.” It is the only video I have done in the series and discredited because I was apparently “drunk” when I did it. Don’t tell Susan I have been drinking. So, let’s sum up: I am a Calvinist fundamentalist pastor alcoholic with multiple criminal records. It hurts really bad to be judged by those who partake in fetishes like “crinkling.” What’s that? Well, animals don’t use a bathroom, so instead, since the animal is part human, wears a Depends and puts it to use. At one conference they disposed of the used Depends on car windshields.

However, they apparently draw the line somewhere. Interesting. It is also interesting that Furries can be excluded from the community when it is made up of those with factitious identities 100%. The so-called excommunicated can merely re-assimilate with a different identity and they do often. Furthermore, I have plenty of reasons to believe their only sin is getting caught.

The emailer also denied that the Fandom is a sex-driven cult. Then, per the normal, one of the fursuiters who contributed to the video is introduced in a sexually provocative manner. This is a fact: the sect is obsessed with sex in all varieties imaginable and then some.

You know my method of research. I collect the data, and build that data on the foundation of the definitive. What do I know definitively about this sect? First, I agree with them, it is a “subculture.” But please note; on the other hand, they claim to be a harmless fandom of the hobby sort. That’s clearly a contradiction. The Corvette Club is not a subculture.

Secondly, they are of a contra normative reality worldview based on anthropomorphism.

Thirdly, it is all but totally sex-driven.

Fourthly, the sect (another term for subculture) has demonstrable tendencies towards violence.

Fifth, participants are primarily narcissistic, and secondarily defined by bi-polar mental illnesses. The studies that concluded this will be cited in the book.

Sixth, the sect is dominated by the socially awkward.

Seventh, Peter Pan Syndrome is also prevalent within the sect.

Eighth, they zealously evangelize children.

Ninth, the sect is huge in regard to numbers and worldwide.

Tenth, criminal activity within the sect is disproportionate to the norm.

Eleventh, overall, little is known about the sect because of its laborious efforts towards secrecy.

And twelve, pedophilia is rampant and well documented.

lastly, what is the objective of the book? First, and foremost, to educate children advocates in all fields. Secondly, to educate parents.




The Wrong Justification Leads to The Wrong Sanctification: Church is NOT God’s Peculiar People

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on January 12, 2020

ppt-jpeg4Statistics show the following, and have for some time: there is no measurable difference between secular lifestyles and those who faithfully attend church. The attitude that answering God’s call is a commitment to be different carried some weight in the 50s, but overall, I am not sure it was ever realty.

Let’s talk about two different perspectives; from the secular to the church, and from the church to the secular. From the secular viewpoint, church is a place where you go to get the tools to be a better person in the eyes of God. Intuitively, because of being under condemnation and the conscience’s response to that, some people want to move away from condemnation to a clear conscience before God. They think church is the place to do that.

But it’s not; that has never been a tenet of church orthodoxy ever. However, the church allows this pretense as a form of false advertising. Those in the church who believe that being a Christian is about change have not yet been fully indoctrinated. In fact, in weekly church sermons, deliberate terminology is used to play on assumptions and use these assumptions to indoctrinate “converts” to a “confessional” soteriology. In essence, you are saved by NOT practicing what you preach. In contrast, you confess that you can do no good work and are saved by the imputation of Jesus’ loving works to your church account.

Those being gradually indoctrinated move from thinking behavior matters to realizing that salvation (supposedly) is determined by a “growing knowledge of grace.” Knowledge saves you, not behavior, according to the church. This idea, to begin with, implies that salvation is a process instead of behavior being the mere result of a changed state of being, while the idea of a changed state of being implies that salvation is a onetime finished work by God.

In other words, church discussion of the Christian life (sanctification) is grounded in the false premise of sanctification being a salvation process that can only be found in church authority. Yet, those who don’t get that are allowed to assume the former until they are assimilated into the latter. So, after hearing sanctification being spoken of in a justification way week after week, subjects are indoctrinated into the idea that the Christian life is a salvation process. Curiously, but understandably, this results in Churchians denying salvation by church sacraments intellectually, while functioning that way in life.

In more words yet, the secular understand more about salvation going into the church than they do going out. When it gets right down to it, the knowledge of new birth is intuitive. People who seek out the church know that salvation is a supernatural act of God that changes their state of being. For most people seeking God initially, they seek to be changed by God for the better; they want to be better people. To the church, this is an ignorant notion that offends God. The church seeks to lead such misguided individuals into the “true” knowledge that no person can do a work pleasing to God. Therefore, Christianity is all about confessing the inability of man whether before or after salvation as set against the “sufficiency of Christ.”  To confess that you can actually do something pleasing to God is to proclaim that Jesus needs your help in finishing your salvation. Of course, in reality, your salvation is already finished if you are really saved.

You should be able to plainly see why such a doctrine would lead to no ascertainable difference between secular lifestyle and church lifestyle. The goal is to have a deeper understanding of how far we are from God the Father, and thus increasing the gratitude for our salvation, instead of trying to become more like our Father.

And then there is the church cognitive dissonance that goes along with all of this reality. There is a great controversy presently trending in the church about the acceptance of LGBT while things like people living together out of wedlock, gluttony (and bragging about it at every Baptist potluck dinner), drunkenness, racism, and adultery have been commonplace in the evangelical church for years.

Furthermore, church uses its own decadence to wave a banner calling for a return to pure orthodoxy. The orthodoxy causes the bad fruit, and then the church claims that the cause is a departing from the orthodoxy. It has to be the only scam in human history that supplies its own supply and demand.

This is exactly what happened with the New Calvinism movement (1970 to present). The movement pointed to the failures of the church, and posed itself as the answer via the “gospel recovery movement” when authentic Protestant orthodoxy was the cause to begin with. In doing so, who did they make the enemy? Answer: the aforementioned who are in doctrinal transition and had some fuzzy idea of new birth. The blame was placed on them. One early mover and shaker in the New Calvinist movement even wrote an article bemoaning what evangelicalism had done to the church titled, “The False Gospel of the New Birth.” The article protested the idea that the righteousness of God is infused into the believer. In case you believe this guy represents the fringe element of the movement, you might note that he was invited to Southern Seminary in 2009 to lecture on the Protestant Reformation followed by John Piper extolling the lecture.

Some idea of radical transformation is going to be a belief walking into the church via new converts because it’s what they know intuitively though they wouldn’t know how to frame it theologically. Remember, even though unbelievers are under the condemnation of the law, they still have the works of the law written on their hearts with the conscience either accusing them or excusing them. They know what the crux of salvation is; they know that salvation equals a new life radically different from what they have. Protestant orthodoxy rejects this belief with extreme prejudice, and hostile covert takeovers of churches by the movement demonstrated such. New Calvinism peaked in 2009 resulting in a mass of upstart discernment blogs and “survivor” blogs.

1970 is a pivotal year in church history. It represents two movements that took two separate views of the church’s overt failure to be different. The New Calvinism movement bemoaned the efforts of the church to “be the gospel rather than preaching the gospel.” Too much sanctification that isn’t justification.

Enter in Dr. Jay Adams and his biblical counseling movement. Adams represents those who never transitioned from new birth soteriology to authentic Protestantism. His view of the problem? Not enough sanctification that is separate from justification (salvation). When Adams began to travel around the country promoting his aggressive sanctification expressed in a counseling construct, he was continually met with perplexity from those claiming that he was teaching a “strange new doctrine.” The way he explained it to me follows: “They were perplexed by the idea that Christians could actually do something.” This is telling. The only virtue in the church is what people know intuitively walking in; they do not understand what the church really stands for. Even Adams toes the line that justification is a mere “legal declaration” rather than a change in state of being, but that is not the functionality of his life and counseling construct. His intellectual version of justification is a contradiction to the intellectual statement of his biblical counseling program and individual behavior is strongly emphasized. That is, at least dating back to 2011; I assume it remains the same today.

The time has come. Those who truly follow Christ must now obey his mandate to make disciples that are truly a peculiar people in this twisted generation. We uphold God’s law because the new birth changed our relationship to it—it no longer condemns us but is our manual for loving God and others. It’s time to get busy. We are not merely declared righteous, we ARE righteous, and it is high time we act like it with all zeal.

Let that be our new year’s resolution in 2020.


%d bloggers like this: