Leaderboard

I just wanted to mention the definition of plagiarism which is using or closely imitating the language and thoughts of another author without authorization and the representation of that author's work as one's own, i.e. not crediting the original author – in other words, stealing and lying - which are significant enough to be mentioned throughout the Bible as something we should NOT do. Perhaps THAT is God’s perspective on plagiarism. In my book, wierwille is the poster child for false teachers – and his unabashed plagiarism is just the tip of the iceberg of his personality disorders – a good reason to question his integrity, competence, and body of work. The example set by his teachings and in much of his work has the undertones of it being ok to disrespect your peers, that you should be willing to steal and lie for your work, and that you can take shortcuts so you don’t have to learn and practice the skills needed for the work.

If I was your lawyer I could have gotten you off the hook by merely saying you were giving the proper attribution to the works cited.

Not always the case. In fact look at THIS comparison John Juedes did, involving Wierwille and Stiles.

(Original by Mel, aka: Spec) A young man was arrested, and refused to give up his phone. When the officer asked him why, he replied: "But officer --- that's my CELL PHONE!"

Not at all. Plagiarism is when you just copy someone else's work without permission. There are so many books out there that have been compiled from the works of other authors that are not instances of plagiarism. Also, if a blurb is copied from another work, and the original author and source are referenced, then that also is not plagiarism. So, while it is not plagiarism, it is dishonest to pretend, as VPW and Tony Robbins have done, that the information was all figured out on their own. I have much more respect for JCOPS by VPW than I do the classes he put together. It's a relatively simple matter to include a bibliography and references in a book than it is on stage or in front of a camera. But the class syllabus could have had them, even if it was just to show who was used as a source. I wonder how many wayers know who Ernest L Martin is. His name is in the bibliography of JCOPS. This is the biblical scientist, not associated with TWI, that determined, through astronomy and computers, the date of Jesus Christ's birth. And while he is in the bibliography, I never saw a reference to him when VPW specified the date.

VPW wanted us to think he'd figured it out on his own. All of it. He may have "collated" it but he didn't give credit to the authors, and he didn't even bother to check if they were saying the same thing, ie, if they were consistent with each other. Because there are differences, in the PFAL material, which strike one when carefully read. However, for one unschooled in the scriptures, it seems that this is an error of their own understanding - not an error in the presentation or content. My opinion is that he took the material, presented it as his own thinking that nobody would find out, or wouldn't care if they did find out, and probably everything snowballed - got bigger than he expected. And TWI having got a bit bigger, he enjoyed the apparent power of it and his ego was fed. By making a video class, and by copyrighting the stolen material, he probably thought he was "getting one over" the actual authors and his assertion of ownership would supercede theirs, if there ever were any court cases. Then, he went on a real power-hunt; and because by that time, nobody had challenged him about the earlier plagiarism, the theft of others' works - he thought he could ride roughshod over everyone and everything. So he hijacked the fruits of others' work - hijacked Doop's and Heefner's followers - built his empire. But his empire was founded on theft and love of money, not on love of God. And so it will fail. Those that sit hoarding the money pot hoard evil to themselves. They might do well to remember that when the Israelite slaves were freed, they plundered Egypt of its ill-gotten gains. And take a look at Isaiah 23:15-18: Ugh, I wish the "quote" thing worked properly - last para in the quote above is of course my own view, not any Bible verse

Mike should (but may not) give YOU credit for your concise statement of the spiritual reality at issue on this thread.

ROCKY: Know what I SAY? Just this: If Wierwille wanted (and apparently he did want) to look like he had figured it out all on his own, wouldn't that actually BE plagiarism, if he actually didn't figure it out all on his own (from God, without any human help)? And wouldn't that make it evident that he did intend to plagiarize rather than credit his human sources? Now, don't get in a tizzy over this, pal! I liked what you said so much that I TOOK IT FOR MY OWN. And if you think that's stealing, let me inform you that God told me (by revelation, of course) that I was to do that. So from now on, if YOU DARE use those same words again, I'm gonna hit YOU with plagiarism! Seriously though: Although VP was intent on stealing others' works without giving due credit, I'm near positive he justified it all by rationalization, simply because of the sheer numbers of people who "flocked to God" through his ministry. (And to his liking, I bet it didn't do his EGO any harm, either!) I'll bet he considered "the end was justified by the means" --- despite that it was truly a matter of lies and deception to have many people suppose the work was his own. Some were never fooled; however, the ignorant and gullible among the masses (who either weren't very "well-read" or who were just too lazy to do their own "fact-checking") were among those taken in by his ploy.

Please clarify. If Wierwille wanted (and apparently he did want) to look like he had figured it out all on his own, wouldn't that actually BE plagiarism, if he actually didn't figure it out all on his own (from God, without any human help)? And wouldn't that make it evident that he did intend to plagiarize rather than credit his human sources?

Taxi, great post! I remember reading, "JCOPS," years ago. Wow! What a book! I knew as I read it, that VPW didn't write it; it was written by people who really knew what they were doing. It was way above the usual TWI Dreck. I think somewhere here at the GSC, someone wrote about the three(?) young men who wrote it. They left TWI, and had successful Academic careers. I think VPW wanted to claim the book, as his own, and they wanted the credit for writing the book. I think that was the reason why they left TWI.

It seems to me that if we are looking at anything related to teaching and clarifying God's Word through - presumably - God's eyes, there is no such thing as plagiarism. That term has no biblical significance at all. So the simple fact that this thread is about plagiarism precludes God's perspective. The book "Jesus Christ Our Promised Seed" has a pretty extensive bibliography, and references to the contributors to VPW's material throughout the book. That is not plagiarism. He is giving credit to the sources of the information, he is not directly quoting them unless referenced, and he has packaged the bulk of the material in his own verbiage. However, I saw no references in the PFAL class material. Based on his extensive use of other authors and research materials in almost everything he taught, I would be hard pressed to believe that the PFAL class was compiled all on his own. I did like how the material was packaged, but it was presented as if he had determined all of that alone. Was any of it directly quoted? Who knows, I sure don't. But there is a plethora of books and materials out there that are the result of gleaning from other sources, and they aren't considered plagiarized. I got the impression that VPW, if he had actually plagiarized, didn't intend to plagiarize. Rather, he wanted to look like he had this all on his own. I once saw a short clip of Tony Robbins speaking on stage about how to be successful. It was interesting. But then a few years later, I heard his mentor, Jim Rohn, speaking. They both shared pretty much the same material, just tailored to their own manner of delivery. The main difference between them was this: Robbins delivered the material as if he had figured it all out himself, just as VPW did. But Rohn told where he found the information, and almost everything he talked about was credited to someone else, including the bible. There were just a handful of points he shared that he took credit for himself, and I can believe he probably did figure those out himself. I have much more respect for Rohn than I have for Robbins. So you can probably guess how I feel about VPW.

So where do you draw the line? Does the work of the late Stephen Hawking, for example, in showing us more of the universe (and of God's magnificent handiwork) fall into this category? No. He had great thoughts, which themselves are not patentable or copyright. BUT the books in which he expressed his ideas - they're copyright. He used ideas from Einstein. Many people have built on the ideas propounded by Einstein. Did you know that in accordance with Albert Einstein's Last Will and Testament of 1950, the Hebrew University of Jerusalem holds the copyright to all of his writings? And Einstein used the ideas of other people, dating back millennia. So who's to say that these amazing men didn't get their knowledge by revelation from God? Did God give it to them directly? Or did they get it by studying God's amazing handiwork? The word is written in the stars, don't forget. Are all who study the stars studying the "Word"? Should Hawking and Einstein not have any copyrights to their discoveries (whether they found them by their own intellectual knowledge, or whether they were told in some way by God)? Do you think, Mike, that they plagiarised each other, these astronomers through centuries? They certainly built on the bodies of knowledge of different aspects of physics, chemistry, biology, atomics. Should none of the ideas ever have been written down for others to benefit from? Should no scientific work ever be given copyright? Why, in your opinion, is it unnecessary to acknowledge the work of others? Whether that be the study of "the written Word" aka the Bible, or the "Word in the stars"? Why, in your opinion, is it unnecessary to acknowledge that God gave others "revelation" too? Surely, rather than hide that fact, it should be a cause for celebration of God's goodness? of God's willingness to teach people as much as they are ready to receive it?

Here's where the logic falls apart, at least for me. According to Mike, Wierwille got revelation to assemble things that had already been given by revelation. I'll call this revelation that had already been given the primary revelation and Wierwille's the secondary revelation. We've already demonstrated that the primary revelation contained errors. Why would secondary revelation be given to use something (the primary revelation) that is known to contain errors? That seems awfully counterproductive, in my opinion.

It wasn't because of any 1942 promise that I got excited about understanding the Bible better. Those amazing miracles recorded in Acts got my attention. I read Acts and it was exciting! Wow, that stuff happened? That stuff is what is available? Where is it? I don't see it in the local churches. They're boring. So soon after, when I met a WoW, who knew a lot of Bible but more to the point, prayed about things and they happened, wow! that got my attention. A lot of strange and unexplainable things happened when he was around - he prayed, astonishing things happened, everything went well. I wanted to know how to get prayers answered. To be able to work miracles, to help people in that miraculous way. It was one sees, seeing the power of God in action, seeing and knowing it's real, experiencing God at work, where there are results - that's what gets attention. Ultimately, this WoW got badly hurt by C G33r, but that (at that time) didn't damage his confidence in God. So I don't know about 1942 promises. The WoW believed it, I think; it wasn't really a talking point; he believed that God would hear and answer. He believed the word taught, having rejected an idolatrous RC upbringing. It was the simple faith of young and enthusiastic believers that got through to many people, worldwide. It was results, not words or fake promises.

One detective at the precinct thinks it was an inside job and is planning a stink operation to flush out the culprits.

Also from the Police Files: A break in at the police station resulted in all the toilet seats being stolen. Police have nothing to go on.

Also from the Police Files: Domestic disturbance at the Tarts residence; Pop-Tarts was very upset with Mom-Tarts for dressing their daughter like a little tart.