oldiesman

When I see the word for word comparison in question form, then I agree with you. But I don't see that here.

It appears this is precisely what Wordwolf and you are surmising. He stole a question mark. Or a question format. The man can't even ask a question without being accused of stealing. I can't find any chapter heading in "Are the Dead Alive Now" that reads "An Intermediate State" So it must be the question mark you say is stolen. BTW, did you actually try to read and compare Bullingers paper to Wierwilles book? I can't find any chapter heading in Wierwille's book that says "The Rich man and Lazarus: An Intermediate State?". The closest I find is "Lazarus in Abraham's Bosom". Without the question mark. Maybe he stole the word "Lazarus" too?

This edition was purchased by me from the Way bookstore back in 1973. It's an oldies original! And what I'm suggesting is that the evil surmising of some against Wierwille is so blatant that he can't even use a question mark in a chapter heading without being thought of as a thief. I'm so so thankful that I don't think like some of you!

Wordwolf, you've got to be kidding. Just because he uses a question format for two of his chapter headings, you say it's a stolen format? That's ridiculous. It's stuff like this that leads me to question your conclusions. There's enough clear stuff without surmising stuff that's not there.

Raffy, that quip wasn't meant as a strawman. It actually was a response to one of your recent statements: You would possibly agree had VPW not copyright his books. And I found one, in 1971! I thought it interesting to find something like that. But it's not a strawman. Not even a corn stalk. BTW, your point is well taken.

Interesting little tid-bit here: My "Are the Dead Alive Now" is from 1971, it says: "Copyright 1971 by The Devin-Adair Company. All rights reserved. No portion of this book may be reproduced in any form without written permission of the publisher, The Devin-Adair Co..." So it appears VPW didn't even own these rights at that time, it was owned by Devin-Adair.

Here's an interesting question: Are you in favor of a Vermont-style carry weapon law across the country? Vermont Carry Law It may have greatly helped Igor Hutorsky.

That is a proven fact, Belle. Do you remember when firearms were required in Kennesaw , GA? Crime plummeted. Must be a great place to live. :)

I am with you Rascal. Everyone who qualifies should be able to carry a firearm. I have a NY State carry permit, but I can't carry my weapon into NYC. Isn't that insane? And there ought to be state reciprocity. One permit for all the states, like a drivers license is good anywhere.

I would imagine (I am speculating) that JS and others are going to see if they can do it in a "kinder and gentler" fashion. ********************** Have a question, Is PP done only by permission of a person asking for it? For example, in twi, if one asked to be ministered to, someone would do it for you. Is PP like that? One has to ask for it first?

Doesn't look like they are. JS said they were examining the doctrine, but doesn't sound like they're getting rid of it. They should go back to the way we did it in twi, what was wrong with that way? :o :P

Actually knowing me, it probably caused me to fork over less mooolah.

I guess I should have DEMANDED to see it, but being only 20 years old, wasn't as near as obnoxious as I am today... :)

I have to listen to the tape to get the context. Can you mail me a copy?

You certainly are misrepresenting when you claim he copies whole books and put his name on the cover. Who are you kidding? I mean even Dr. Juedes isn't THAT extreme.

Wordwolf, I think you are mistaken. This is why I attempt to get things in writing, because people make mistakes.

Railroader II, this may surprise you, but Craig had nothing to do with that policy change as it happened way way back in the 70's. I like you, heard that it was possible to see twi's financials. So in July of 1976, I wrote hq to find out how I may see this. Here's the letter I got back from hq:

Nah. There was ooodles of times I felt very good about myself and still participated in twi-1. As someone once said, Feelings come and feelings go...

Belle I will examine your links. But not now. Having too much fun on da nile.

Dr. Juedes also said: "and what you do" AND I would add that if you look ONLY at the negatives and sins of an individual, your perception of that individual will be biased to say the least.

Well if some posters would just carefully read what I type, they may understand what I've suggested. Of course there are some sentences and paragraphs that were plagiarized. That's obvious. What I question and still do is the "intent" to lie and steal. I think that is much more difficult to prove. But I have no idea about 5%... that was just a wild guess. I suspect its a lot less.

I stand by my statement. If anyone can prove that there's as much as 5% "word for word" lifting (I think the figure is probably closer to less than 1%, but I could be wrong), then I will retract my statement that you are exaggerating. What is proof? Written texts compared one to the other. When one makes accusations of the nature you are making, you really do need written proof. You can't expect folks to believe you otherwise.

Right. Of all of Wierwille's books, how much of a percentage of word for word lifting do you think there is? if there is as much as 5% i'd be amazed. so yeah, making it bigger than it really is is exaggerating. The point can be made without exaggerating.

I suppose a relevant question to ask would be: is this way an improvement over what went down in the past? if part of staff benefits / salaries is to get your childrens college tuitions paid for, is that a good thing? perhaps. as long as EVERYONE's staffs childrens are paid for, and not just a chosen few...

Perhaps. But if I were an innie, I'd want to know that some money is going to college tuitions. At that point I could decide. Maybe what happened is this: TWI staffers got / get salaries on a needs basis. Is it possible that the college tuition donations were worked into the salaries of those staffers? Meaning, they had a "need" to send their children to college, thereby having twi send tuition monies to those colleges to be applied to the children of the staffers? That might explain all that and it be all legal. I do question the double standard of it all however.