Talk:John Bradshaw (author)

message: Where is the evidence that John Bradshaw is a theologian? I recognize he often refers to himself as a theologian but promoting ones self as a theologian does not does not make one a theologian. For instance claiming I am a rocket scientist does not make me a rocket scientist. And having a divinity degree does not make one a theologian.
John Bradshaw has published in numerous thrological articles and taught and lectured in thousands of churches.
:Lecturing in a church does not make anybody a theologian.--Johnsoniensis (talk) 04:45, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: "theologian"?

message: I just tried to remove some of the glaring POV in this article. This is supposed to be an article about John Bradshaw and not a pamphlet promoting John Bradshaw yet the article read just the opposite in places. It could probably use some more fine tuning Mr Christopher 17:49, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good info and point. I saw that the Meadows also calls Bradshaw a theologian, but again other than self-promotion where is the evidence he is a theologian? If we are going to call him a licensed counselor I think we should include what specific counseling discipline he has a license for. For instance is he a Licensed Clinical Social Worker, a Marriage Family Child Counselor, a licensed psychologist, etc? I think asnwering who gave him what license should be answered prior to calling him a licensed counselor. Mr Christopher 18:48, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: POV/bias

message: As amazing as it might seem, Bradshaw was once a humble counselor with a typical private practice in Houston, Texas. Finding information about that era (pre PBS) has been an empty well for me so far. From original research I know he was a counselor with a masters in psychology who blended Ericksonian hypnotherapy with NLP (and A.A./12 steps) as his primary counseling approach. I cannot find anything to support this (other than positive remarks regarding Erickson/NLP and of course A.A. as a theraputic approach) but if anyone else comes accross something about his ealier years it might be noteworthy. He had been counseling people a very long time prior to his best selling author and lecturer status. And if anyone comes accross any licensing info (such as an LCSW, MFC, etc) that would probably make sense too.I think he was certified in NLP and maybe a few other disiplines. None of this is a big deal, but it might be noteworthy if anyone stumbles upon something that sheds some light on his earlier history. Mr Christopher 22:55, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Pre PBS John Bradshaw

message: Hi there. Do others agree with Christopher's decision to remove the reference to John Bradshaw as the inspiration for the "John Goodman" character on the classic Simpsons? I thought it was noteworthy, at least as an aside, though perhaps I should have listed it under trivia. I watched the PBS series and read the book Healing the Shame that Binds You and the Goodman character (voiced by Albert Brooks) is bang on. Just curious, Shawn Goldwater, Montreal.
:I think it would need a reference and a bit more elaboration as to its importance. --DanielCD 17:53, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Simpsons

message: Its plainly obvious to me that these people who discredit John have had a nerve hit when reading Johns books or listening to Johns tapes. They then react by defending their own parents by mystifying them. This is exactly what John brings to light. Sad isnt it? Never undersetimate the power of denial.....
Patty Haley
Grass Valley, CA
Never underestimate the power of willful ignorance either, missy. Clearly You should have taken the blue pill and not the red one, Patty H. Or simply refused to drink the kool-aid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.233.178.254 (talk) 22:28, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Its plainly obvious 

message: Not a single cite in the article? This "article" is nothing more than a promotional piece for a new age guru. One, who like all the rest of the psychobabbling frauds, broke all of his own rules, including ditching his wife for a younger model (a flight attendant, how cliche!). I'm astonished anyone takes anything he ever wrote with any seriousness. But how about citing some of the BS written in this "article"? PS; The comments right above my own almost made me throw up. Does that have to stay on the talk page? It's gross and has nothing to do with the article. Yes lots of people are very naive and they eat up new age psychobabble nonsense from people like john bradshaw, but must we be forced to read your gross fan mail to him here? the hero worship for new age gurus is simply gross to witness. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.233.178.254 (talk) 22:24, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The article needs serious attention as it has no citations, has a serious case of POV and needs copyediting (for instance, the Biography section claims he is the author of six books, but the Résumé section says five and the bibliography lists seven).Autarch (talk) 17:56, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: WTF?

message: no mention of cause of death  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.95.126.251 (talk) 08:19, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  His death 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:22, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: deleted as copyrights violation. Best regards -- Neozoon 19:34, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion