Talk:Mike Warnke

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Christianity
Christianity Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.
Assessment comments
Kentucky Portal
Mike Warnke is within the scope of WikiProject Kentucky, an open collaborative effort to coordinate work for and sustain comprehensive coverage of Kentucky and related subjects in the Wikipedia.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the Project's importance scale.
Please explain ratings on the ratings summary page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

Contents

[edit] Name

I see the page was moved from Mike Warnke to Michael Warnke. I read his book and even heard the man speak back in the late 70's, and I've never heard him called anything other than "Mike Warnke". His website is at mikewarnke.org and google returns about 8,250 hits for "Mike Warnke" but only 938 for "Michael Warnke". Can we move this back, please? Jonathunder 21:44, 2005 Feb 21 (UTC)

Moved, per above, after hearing no objection. Jonathunder 00:55, 2005 Feb 26 (UTC)

[edit] Some notes

Even a cursory reading of The Satan Seller reveals it to be a ludicrous fraud to anyone with a drop of skepticism. The book reads likes a badly written pulp horror novel. He claims to ascend to the high priesthood of a massive satanic network in California, police complicity as the "coven" ritually rapes and slaughters its unwilling victims, satanic involvement in a massive drug ring, supernatural satanic spells (such as hexing a bar that later catches on fire) and demon invocations including a "wishing potion." Warnke also claims that the highest order of the priesthood is the Illuminati, that jokesters fooling around during rituals were crushed to death by demons, etc etc. In his book, women are "chicks" and people spout ridiculous lines like satanic Zaphod Beeblebrox-hipsters. An altar is made of "black marble granite"--I'm no geologist, but marble is a metamorphic rock and granite is igneous. Such a meaningless insertion could just be an ignorant mistake, but every page of the book is peppered with such crock.

I say all this because the book was indeed a huge seller in the '70s and '80s, mostly in the evangelical Christian community but also beyond, and played a huge role in fueling the Satanism panics of those decades. (Warnke even appeared on such shows such as Oprah to talk about his "experiences.") That it took until 1991 for a Christian magazine to discredit the man is outrageous. Also of note is that while Warnke did accept punishment for his affairs, he stuck by his story and never admitted to lying. Many evangelicals to this day believe in the allegations contained in this book and he is still respected by many--some of whom are unaware that Cornerstone has debunked him (as if it were necessary) and some of whom are simply unwilling to listen to the voice of reason. The article should also talk about his subsequent career as a "Christian comedian." See Mike Warnke Christian Comedy From Hell. NTK 14:16, 17 December 2005 (UTC)


[edit] The Current Article

I want to note that I was the original author of this piece back about 3-4 years ago. It was flagged NPOV, and I just want to note that I typed it under durress at a library on a timer and did not have time to go back and alter it. I concur with many of the changes that were initially made (and please note it was my first Wiki submission - I've gotten better). That said, the current article distresses me on a number of fronts. Much of it seems to be reworked plagiarism of the 1992 Cornerstone article. Yet there are a number of errors.

1) The article was in July 1992 NOT 1991 as the lead paragraph states.

2) The personal slam 'later proven to be a lie' regarding his conversion is NOT an article, it is PERSONAL OPINION and should be removed.

3) The book "Selling Satan," which came out of the Cornerstone article quotes Carolyn Alberty as saying their marriage ended as described here. However, there are numerous stories told in the book, and it seems to me a bit presumptuous to side with Carolyn. The bottom line is that they did in fact divorce whatever the circumstances.

4) The Halloween tape was not released until 1982 as anyone who read "Selling Satan" knows. It was TAPED in 1979 but it was not released until 1982 due to the aforementioned feud with Word.


5) Rose Warnke's book that told of Mike's affair was "The Great Pretender," released in 1985 (not 1984).

6) The claim that in 1982 Warnke began to exaggerate his achievements is somewhat misleading. He began to exaggerate his ACADEMIC achievements. The article should at least acknowledge that he received an HONORARY doctorate in 1988 although he did not have an earned Ph.D.

7) The claim that Warnke was a 'bishop' is based on hearsay evidence. Cornerstone says person X said that person Y (who was dead) ordained Warnke. This should at least be acknowledged.

8) Cornerstone never conclusively proved that Warnke was a member of Campus Crusade for Christ while in college. This was the testimony of only one witness 25 years after the fact, hardly proof.

9) "Where Warnke claims to have been converted" is NPOV.

The section 'Aftermath' is almost a verbatim plagarism of the Cornerstone article - even in the parts that are not acknowledged as such.

Furthermore, time has shown Cornerstone's article to be somewhat less than fair although they did conclusively prove Warnke's non-involvement in Satanism. Consider one of the claims of this article that is further developed in "Selling Satan." Trott and Hertenstein claim that in 1976, Gretchen Passantino was in charge of the late Walter Martin's speaking engagements. She claims that Martin told her that he had advised Warnke to leave the ministry. Set aside the conflict of interest (Passantino was one of the investigators) - how do we know this is true? She said he said way back then? (It is even more ironic in light of the fact that in 2003, Passantino herself was caught embellishing her own credentials with academic achievements she never attained by Christian journalist Bill Alnor). Although Warnke was indeed a fraud, the investigation failed a number of basic tests despite proving the case.

199.91.34.33 (talk) 13:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC)Maestroh


[edit] Were we more naive back then?

I read Warnke's book back then and was appalled by the purulence of it but I believed it, too. I think with all the work done on urban myths and the high profile evangelist scandals that many more of us read these things with skepticism. But I'll guess that, even today, people find his book somewhere and read it in full belief.

It was, after all, a pretty good story in a trashy sort of way... not unlike something Dan Brown might write!

[edit] Interesting by not Wiki style and not neutral!

This article is very interesting and probably accurate but it's not Wiki style. Lines like "Asked to respond, Warnke hid behind lawyers" needs to be re-written in a more neutral tone.

For example this -- On August 27, 1966, Warnke allegedly had a religious experience where he received Jesus into his life as his personal Savior. "allegedly"? C'mon! It would be better to put, "According to Warnke's account in The Satan Seller, he had a religious experience where..." --Calan 11:47, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I've cleaned up the NPOV writing, and added section headings. If no one objects, I'll remove the "not neutral" tag from the article in a few days (if I remember). :KarlBunker 21:06, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Good job. I'm the one who put the not-neutral tag and I think it is fair to remove it. I was thinking of taking a stab at "neutralizing" the entry but your revision is fine.
By the way, even though I flagged this article as biased, I think it is a pretty good article. I read his books/bought his albums and read the Cornerstone articles. For people like me, this is a great "Oh yeah... THAT guy. Whatever happened to him?" article. --Calan 06:15, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Well, you know... we should really consider the source either case. Dan Brown's book is known to be a complete lie by historians, and yet people still buy his book, go to the movie, and now they have a children's computer game on it. People believe whatever they want to believe, regardless of the truth.
I did some research on this last night and found that the ones who accused Mike of lying were the "Jesus People USA" and according to their website they are a group of 500 (450 depending on which pages you look at) who all live at the same address and live in a commune! How's that for sane? (Can we say Wako?) And, what a surprise, the Cornerstone magazine was published by them. Hmm. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Isaboe (talk • contribs)
oooh, an absolutely stellar usage of ad hominem argumentation. "No, I can't explain why photos of Warnke taken at the time he was supposedly emaciated from drug abuse and sporting waist-length white hair show him healthy and clean-cut instead. No, I can't explain how Warnke's claims that Charles Manson was a member of his coven fit with the fact that Manson was in federal prison then. But I can and will attack those who brought these facts to light! They live in a commune! I will fail to identify a connection between communal living and insanity but I will talk as if there is one anyways, and I will furthermore try to imply that the facts they brought to light are somehow less significant because of who brought them to light!" -- Antaeus Feldspar 23:15, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Not at all. I merely believe that if "you're going to point fingers at someone, you should look to yourself, first". And, I believe that one should look at an entire situation before placing someone up to be crucified for forever and a day. In this case, those that exposed Mike Warnke for his craziness and lies, should look to themselves and the way they live. Are they so righteous? Are you? Fact is, that - not a one - of us are so perfect. It's been, what, 15? 20? years since Mike Warnke wrote the book. He fully admits that he expounded on some parts to the story, and also a part of what he does is that he's an entertainer and didn't fully expect the book to be put under the microscope. People do that, writers do that, to make the story more interesting. That doesn't mean, however, that NONE of the story is true. It falls under the "Based on a life history", that's not so far fetched an idea. And, regardless, we weren't there, how can we pass judgment on any of the people involved? Those that DID pass judgment on him, legally, have reinstated his ministry. So...in other words...quit your complaining. Get over it. He's a minister, like it or not. And if you have so much hatred of him, 20 years after the fact, perhaps you need to look at yourself to see where you need improvement. (Isaboe)
Please be aware that an article talk page is for working with other editors on the associated article, not for general debate on the subject of the article. Jonathunder 06:39, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
Actually he does raise a point, or a nonpoint rather, saying that Warnke "fully admits that he expounded [sic] on some parts to the story." Firstly, the charges are not that the story was exaggerated in part but that it was nearly entirely a fabrication cut from whole cloth. Secondly, I have never seen an outright retraction or unqualified apology from Warnke. It seems to me that he has only tried to continue to profit from his "fame," which pretty much wholly comes from this book, and to reaffirm his prior "Satanic" involvement despite there not being a shred of evidence for any of it. His belated "apology" in 1993 started with a reaffirmation of his story confessing only to some nonliteralism, and his official website bio describes his "painful past history as a satanist high priest, hippie, drug addict, pusher," all of which have been debunked. NTK 21:58, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Removing OR

I've made quite some cuts to the article. If they are put back, you must add references and citations, or explain here that these are from existing references. Since Warnke is still living, we must carefully adhere to BLP.

Dislaimer: When I was younger, I was a big fan of Warnke. I owned several of his albums, including Hey Doc!, Coming Home, and listened to others. I read about him in Bible classes, and went to a liver performance of his when I was 13 or 14. Several years after my de/conversion from Christianity, I began investigating all the claims that had influence my spiritual beliefs. Someone on usenet notified me of the Cornerstone article. Several years later, by that time a skeptic and atheist, I actually read that article, and then later, the book published which further expounded and documented the claims made in the original article. I concluded that though their investigation had flaws and was replete with innuendo, they were essentially correct in pointing out that Warnke was a fabricator, and I agreed with their picture of him as a guy who sucked up the limelight and told people what they wanted to hear. Years later, I became a big fan of conservative talk radio. Guess some things never change :)

--Otheus 14:34, 21 March 2007 (UTC)