Talk:Jack Van Impe

message: rgowran  10:28p.m. EST 08/22/2009
* I am trying to add recent information coming directly from a Jack Van Impe program.  I am being tagged as being at edit war because my information continues to get deleted.  The information may not look positive to Van Impe's case, but it is what he is actually saying now.  The link to the video validates what is being submitted by me.  I feel the information is pertinent to those wishing to find information on this subject.  This is my submission:
On the August 5, 2009 program, Van Impe claimed that "they" are now building robots as army men to fight in wars. Van Impe continued by stating that they may turn on their creators, so they are  deciding whether to put on/off switches on them. Van Impe also said that men will have sex with these robots.  Van Impe claims some will be vegetarians and will eat grass as they travel down the road.  Van Impe continues by claiming these robots will also eat your furniture and wood.  The entire August 5, 2009 episode is available for viewing on Van Impe's website:  http://www.thegospel.com/pages/jvim.asp 
Since President Obama has taken office, Van Impe constantly berates the president. Van Impe has taken several of Obama's quotes and interviews, and by piecemeal he puts them together to make his own case. Van Impe has taken a January 2009 quote by Henry Kissinger to portray President Obama as being primed to become leader of the New World Order.  Henry Kissinger's actual quote makes no such claim.  Dr. Kissinger's actual quote states: "The president-elect is coming into office at a moment  when there is upheaval in many parts of the world simultaneously," Kissinger responded. "You have India, Pakistan; you have the jihadist movement. So he can't really say there is one problem, that it's the most important one. But he can give new impetus to American foreign policy partly because the reception of him is so extraordinary around the world. His task will be to develop an overall strategy for America in this period when, really, a new world order can be created. It's a great opportunity, it isn't just a crisis."  --Rgowran (talk) 03:14, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Read WP:Undue weight. -- œ™ 18:50, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: But it specifically says the guideline does not apply when the article is about the tiny minority or fringe theory.Iulus Ascanius (talk) 13:07, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Van Impe's Personal Views

message: Do we want any audio of this quack? I have a 1970s era album of him preaching about the evils of rock and roll.  ALKIVAR™ 10:31, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely. - Jersyko talk 13:50, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I see you noticed the added audio... hope you enjoy it :)  ALKIVAR™ 03:08, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Audio

message: A specific section on the history of the show itself would be helpful to readers. Any show thats been on as long as this must have some sort of story behind it beyond the basic facts of his life. How has it been funded all these years? Who is that wacky announcer guy? How has their message evolved over time? What are some examples of how the current week's news headlines have been "proof" that the world's end is imminent? Why does his 70 year old wife look like she is in her 40s? Is this asking too much? :)
*Good suggestions.  There is, as far as i can tell, a dearth of good information on Van Impe on the internet.  I contacted his organization a few months ago requesting information for this article, but I didn't receive a response.  I would be ecstatic, for reasons I truly don't understand, if Wikipedia becomes the world's best source of information for all things Van Impe. - Jersyko talk 04:09, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Van Impe has snubbed me as well.  I sent him an e-mail slamming his idea of a "Russian/Iranian" invasion of Israel that occurs sometime around a pre-tribulation rapture.  All I used were a handful of Wikipedia articles showing him how Gog, Magog, Meshech, Tubal, and Rosh do not signify modern-day nations.  If he really believed in his theories, he would have responded.  I even went through their stupid e-mail spam filter due to the "large amount of spam JVIM receives."  I am a Christian, but I think this guy is gravely mistaken in his end times theology.  Clinevol98 23:25, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: I hope that this could be added somewhere to this Wikipedia article:
* Nineteen-hundred seventy-four is the year that they are planning for sex on the streets in every major city from coast to coast.  And get ready for a shock!  The music that they are planning to use to crumble the morals of America is this rotten, filthy, dirty, lewd, lascivious junk called rock'n'roll.
I don't know if this is already included in the sound sample.  I think the words are from a 70's radio program, and at least one artist has made a song out of them.  See: Pizzaman - Sex on the streets
:Its in the sound sample :)  ALKIVAR™ 20:12, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Famous quote

message: I just saw the beginning of his show, and the intro calls him 'Dr. Jack Van Impe' - the wiki entry and anything I could find in a quint Internet search just mentions him 'graduating from bible college'. Anyone know where exactly he earned this supposed Doctorate degree???
*I believe he has several honorary doctorates; but not an earned one. - Jersyko talk 06:28, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Doctorate

message: What precisely is meant by "his acceptance of Roman Catholicism and especially Pope John Paul II"? Has he converted to Roman Catholicism? Or does it just mean that he accepts Roman Catholicism as a legitimate form of Christianity, without being the one he himself adheres to? Angr/talk 22:24, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I saw his show once where he mentioned Catholicism. He seemed to indicate that the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification means the RCC is now in line with Protestantism or is at least moving in that direction. I should mention that was not precisely how he said it. To people of his ilk "Protestantism" is simply "Christianity" or "Biblical Christianity" so he likely just said Catholicism is becoming more "Biblical." I don't think it's quite accurate to say he accepts Catholicism as Catholicism, he accepts it as a denomination that is evolving toward what he sees as acceptable for Christianity. I've seen other Fundamentalist or Evangelicals take this position, that Catholicism deserves sympathy as it's "on the road" to "becoming truly Christian", and although they mean well in saying it I personally find it highly offensive.--T. Anthony 07:25, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a source for that?  I imagine you're probably right.  The problem with all things Van Impe, of course, is that his show is probably the best source of information on him, but I pity the person who would want to sit through it enough to find it. · j e r s y k o talk · 13:18, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right I have no source. Oh well.--T. Anthony 01:37, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Roman Catholicism 

message: Dr. Van Impe has never given a specific date for Jesus' return. He has always stated that only the Father knows the specific time of Jesus' return. Dr. Van Impe has theorized that Jesus will return no later than 2018, but he has never given a specific date. Please cite a source saying that he has. Hunter, how are your personal feelings on Van Impe relevant to this discussion? His show is an infomercial, and stations that air him usually state beforehand that his views don't necessarily represent their views.Politician818 00:16, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Second Coming of Jesus

message: Can someone please give documentation showing that Dr. Van Impe is not a fundamentalist anymore? He certainly respects the Roman Catholic Church, but he unquestionably holds a literal interpretation of the Bible. Whoever wrote that he is no longer a fundamentalist doesn't really grasp what a fundamentalist is.Politician818 00:30, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Not a Fundamentalist?

message: On the broadcast from tonight, Feb. 10, 2008, Rexella Van Impe announced that Jack Van Impe's birthday is in February, contradicting the date currently listed in the entry. What documentation is for the June 15, 1930 date? Mr. Van Impe announced on the broadcast that today is his birthday, though I do not know if this refers to today, Feb. 10, or whichever early February day the program was originally filmed or first scheduled to be broadcast. Also I have no proof of the correct year as neither stated his age during the program. 71.255.33.43 (talk) 04:45, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Birthdate?

message: I've read Jack Van Impe article two times over. There isn't one single weasel word in it.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheEpicLevelHandbook (talk • contribs) 02:30, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: No Weasel Words

message: I have tagged the article as needing refs...there are claims in the BLP that need to be verified, especially the statement about Obama. Willking1979 (talk) 14:11, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Refs Needed 

message: How is this not an infomercial?  He buys a block of 30 minutes during off-peak hours to peddle his "products" to the weak-minded.  That's the definition of an infomercial.  All of the "content" is simply them trying to convince you the world is ending so that you should buy their book about the world ending.  They even use televangelists as an example of infomercials in the informercial article!  Iulus Ascanius (talk) 04:23, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I hear ya but c'mon you can't tell me that's coming from a neutral point of view there.. I'm wondering if it wasn't a Christian evangelical show would you still be so adamant about it being an infomercial? OK so it's not stretching the definition all that much, I would even call it 'borderline' infomercial, but still there are so many obvious differences between this show and a 'genuine' infomercial. So what if he wants to promote his books on his show? The majority of the "content" is just evangelical preaching, even if it does serve a purpose it could still stand on its own even without the book offer. With infomercials it's ALL about the product, with a disclaimer before and after, and numerous "call now!" pitches in between. This program isn't 'officially' an infomercial by their own definition as well. -- OlEnglish (Talk) 14:18, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe the most encyclopedic way to respond is this: do any reliable sources call the show an infomercial? If yes, then we can include it. If no, then we can't. (No matter our personal opinions on the matter!) -Phoenixrod (talk) 17:19, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I can agree to that. -- OlEnglish (Talk) 04:15, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree too, but unfortunately as someone noted earlier, the guy is so far out there that no sources really exist except the show itself.  Maybe we should say what was also discussed - that some stations program him without pay (I assume ex-PAX christian stations), while for others it is paid programming.Iulus Ascanius (talk) 13:12, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Informercial 

message: This articles needs a lot more reliable sources, I removed the worse content which lacked reliable sources. Remember it's verification not truth we are interested in, if you can't provide verification it's not going in. --Cameron Scott (talk) 07:54, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  content removed 

message: Will whoever keeps adding this please note that a) we can't add things like that without a reference to back it up b) The word 'incidentally' isn't appropriate to an encyclopedia. DJ Clayworth (talk) 20:28, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Surgeon was a muslim 

message: An IP keeps readding comments made about Obama to the article, and using a Youtube video as a reference. While using a Youtube video might serve as proof that it happened, it doesn't establish the notability of the event. Unless it's reference in reliable secondary sources, the controversy is all original research. Dayewalker (talk) 01:23, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sourcing Obama comments through Youtube 

message: Jack Van Impe made a number of predictions regarding the end times;  specifically, I know that I saw him claim nearly every week during 1998-99 that Y2K would trigger mass chaos and that the return of Christ would happen shortly thereafter.  I added a section about this to the article and cited websites that highlight this.  Why were my edits removed?  They are relevant and cited.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThomistGuy (talk • contribs) 18:35, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ridiculous. The predictions content you added is undue weight, and not notable, Van Impe made a lot of dumb predictions, It does not have any business being in the article. The other content you removed is totally relevant, uncontroversial (and therefor not "likely to be challenged" as per WP:V) biographical material and was only removed to prove a WP:POINT, so I've restored it. It's obvious neither of you care about improving this article. What's wrong with you guys? We're here to build an encyclopedia remember?! Not squabble with each other because you just have to win, all the while the article suffers for it! -- œ™ 16:08, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Y2K and other predictions 

message: I realize that this would likely run afoul of the prohibitions regarding "original research", but I can't help but feel that Mr. Van Impe seems to have gotten progressively crazier the past few years, what with the "socialist America" stuff and casting President Obama as both a Muslim and, possibly, the anti-Christ. I say this because there was a time not too long ago where Jack actually seemed to be one of the more reasonable (to use the term very loosely) televangelists on my television, or at least a less incendiary individual than the Hagees, Robertsons, Parsleys, and Falwells of the world. If true, is there a way, providing someone has the right combination of free time and intellectual masochism, to somehow incorporate the evolution of Jack's unique world view into Wikipedia? Incidentally, Rexella is kind of cute.172.190.61.39 (talk) 08:47, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Van Impe getting crazier? 

message: He seems to skip around a lot in revelations and he has claimed numerous events that didn't happen. When events happen, he narrowly interprets the Bible and previous comments he's made ad hoc to fit the event. Why is this not a section? Where is the criticism section? Here's at least one failed prophecy concerning 2001 http://www.religioustolerance.org/end_wrl11.htm Aaronwayneodonahue (talk) 05:00, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Failed prophecy 

message: his use of chrislam (a modern one-world religion clinton-blair-imams islam-christianity blend conspiracy) is different from the current wikipedia chrislam article (a decades-old african islam-christianity blend), so i'm de-wikilinking it.  cheers. Cramyourspam (talk) 01:51, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chrislam 

message: Substituted at 19:18, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: I thought we could use a photo of Jack, so I got a screenshot from a CC 3.0 licensed Youtube video here: . But WM Commons wouldn't let me upload it. It said "This action has been automatically identified as harmful, and therefore disallowed." Kendall-K1 (talk) 00:12, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photo 

message: A bibliography should be included since he wrote over fifty books 70.26.26.119 (talk) 15:28, 20 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Bibliography