Raf

But by all means, NO RUSH ON THAT LAST REQUEST!!! :)

And... yet... I... can't... fight... the... urge... to... read... and... post... CK, I agree with you. Jeff doesn't really know that he was fired. How would he know that? The website doesn't say it! wwwwwwwwipe. FLUSSSSHHHHHH!!!!!!. Okay, I'm done.

All that warmth and fuzziness!

Thanks for hearing me out, NP.

You know, no, there does not have to be intent for there to be plagiarism. But if you want to criticize someone for it, there does have to be intent. Let's look at Oldies' post... Frankly, one has nothing to do with the other. If you can't draw a distinction between teaching the same thing as someone else and passing someone else's work off as your own, I can't help you. You wouldn't know plagiarism if it slapped you in the face, and thus, your entire perspective on this is moot. Again, because it's beside the point. Learned from men scattered across the content is not the same thing as took their words and passed them off as your own. All together now: Because it's not the point. Everyone learns from other people. not everyone plagiarizes. not by a longshot. Bullcrap. Most of the books from which he plagiarized were NOT in the TWI bookstore. Simple: it disarms the investigator. You're not even willing to see the deceptive intent of theft because he cleverly hid his sources, in some cases, in plain sight. And he probably would have gotten away with it if it hadn't been for those darned kids. Take a look at one of the early chapters of order My Steps in Thy Word. I forget which chapter, but it contains an extensive quote from Kenyon. See the quote? Very good. You're disarmed, because he quoted his source. What do you not see in that book? That a significant portion of the remainder of that chapter consists of material lifted directly from Kenyon, even the VERY SAME CHAPTER from which he pulled the lengthy quote! But no one looks for it. It's sloppy. It's lazy. It's unbecoming an honest man.

NP, I guess we have a disagreement about how to consider or weigh what VPW did. See, I agree that his actions didn't always line up with scripture, nor do mine. But I think there's a profound difference, one that is Biblically appropriate to address. That being, while we are specifially told not to judge each other (a hyperbole, considering the full weight of what the Bible teaches on judging), we are also told to hold each other accountable and, more to the point, to hold ministers accountable. So for me, it's not simply a matter of deciding who's the bigger sinner. I've done some pretty terrible things in my life, but I've never killed someone and ate him. Jeffrey Dahmer did that. I've never led a group of drug crazed hippies to come into the home of a pregnant movie star and kill her. Manson did that. I've never taken a position as a "minister" and used it for personal gain and sexual lust. Many have done that, and Wierwille was among them. Yes, the Bible says not to judge, but the Bible also gives clear instructions on standards by which to hold ministers accountable. To me, there's nothing wrong with pointing out where a minister "failed" to live up to the standards set in scripture. In fact, failure seems the wrong word. It was more like a rebellious refusal to adhere to clear Biblical standards. A bigger sinner than I am? I'll let God judge that. Unworthy of the name "minister"? God gave us the standards and responsibility to judge that for ourselves.

I think if there wasn't a good side, or at least a side that looked really good, people wouldn't have stayed in for so long. No one could teach as frequently as Wierwille without sitting down and reading and studying and attempting to understand and see the relationships between Biblical records. I get that. So it doesn't surprise me that someone would observe VPW studying the Bible. And that's good. It really is. And a lot of what was taught was really helpful (even some of the wrong stuff, for while I no longer believe in a "law" of believing, I DO believe in the value of maintaining a positive outlook, expecting the best, etc.). I think it would be a mistake to look at the "good" myopically, though. Whatever good was in TWI came with a horrifying and frankly unacceptable pricetag. I am fortunate in that I did not really pay that price. But I know others did, and I won't forget that any more than I will forget whatever good I managed to get from my experience. NP, sorry if it looked like I was picking on you or being argumentative. I didn't intend to act that way. And if I didn't say it yet, welcome to GSC!

Everyone's an imperfect human. VPW was a predator who used God's people and his perceived authority under God to satisfy his lusts, destroying the lives and reputations of those who spoke up and passing on his ungodly justifications for his reprehensible actions to his successor. Not everyone fits THAT description.

It's almost refreshing to hear stories like that... Until you realize other ways he used that motor coach.

Thought you guys might like to see this. Presstime is the magazine of the Newspaper Association of America http://www.naa.org/sitecore/content/Home/P...20u40-7-13.aspx Scary photo alert...

I don't get it.

i don't think stifle is the answer.

You DO know that's not Bo Derek, right?

I was trying to draw a distinction between what you say he did, which was not plagiarism, and what he actually did, which was plagiarism. Here's a real easy example: In JE Stiles' book on the Holy Spirit (I forget the name of the book), Stiles has a chapter of common questions and answers. One of the questions is whether people can receive "false" tongues, or something like that. Compare the same section of Receiving the Holy Spirit today, and you'll find that the question and answer are lifted almost word for word! That's dishonest. There's nothing in RTHST that talks about Stiles or credits him for his contribution to the book. It was a wholesale theft. Stiles: 8. Is it not possible for a Christian to receive false tongues or a false spirit when seeking to receive the Holy Spirit? Wierwille: 8. Is it possible for a Christian to receive false tongues or a false spirit when believing for the holy spirit? Stiles: Answer: When people ask that question, we know that they; have somewhere come in contact with one of the "faith blasters" who go about making statements which have no foundation in Scripture. When we suggest to earnest Christians that they may get something false, when seeking more of the fulness of God, we sinfully dishonor God and His Holy Spirit. Where, we ask, is there the slightest suggestion in the Bible that the Christian, whose heart longs for more of God, may get false tongues or a false spirit? If such a thing could happen, it would have to be true that, either God was too careless and indifferent about the welfare of His children, or else he was too weak to protect them from the power of the enemy. Wierwille: When I am asked that question, I know that person has come into contact with those whom i term "faith blasters," who go about making statements which have no foundation in Scripture. When someone suggests to earnest Christians that they are in danger of receiving something false when believing to manifest the fulness of God according to God's Word, he sinfully dishonors God. Where is there a chapter or verse indicating that a Christian my get false tongues? It is an unreasonable idea, for the loving Father cares for His children and stands ready with His might to protect them from the power of enemy. Notice any similarities? It's not just a matter of being in agreement on teaching, or teaching something someone else taught before you. It's lifting the words and pretending you wrote them. You may decide that doesn't matter much to you, and that's fine. But to say he credited the writers is a deliberate misrepresentation of what he did, and an apology for his flagrant dishonesty. It is behavior we would not accept from the secular word. To excuse it in the name of God is equally dishonest. I'm not saying that you have done so. I suspect you haven't really thought this through with a proper understanding of what plagiarism is. Do I think the early books were intentionally plagiarized? It's not a matter of what I think. It's easily documentable that countless works of VPW consisted in part of plagiarized writings, without credit to the authors. I'll agree with you on that, as far as it goes. But it has nothing to do with his plagiarism. ALL CHRISTIAN TEACHERS, whether they are right or wrong, fit the description you give. Not all are plagiarists. You don't have to resort to plagiarism to be an effective Christian teacher. Lest we derail, I'll stop here and refer you to http://www.empirenet.com/~messiah7/vp_stiles.htm and http://www.greasespotcafe.com/editorial/pl...m-wierwille.htm

and add a little more drambuie.

What a shock. I got 'em all right.

On THE what?

By the way, my comments and quotes were from ROW's post, not CK's. Just in case there was a misunderstanding. I do not argue with CK any longer, any more than I argue with my butt. When it does what it needs to do, I accommodate it, clean up, and go about my business without thinking much about it afterward.

One of my favorite things about George: I like disagreeing with him as much as I like agreeing with him. You're a great mind. Luvya, man.

Xanadu Olivia Newton-John Grease

Oh, that's good. moore fizz rome ants I think you're right.

Ah yes, the old CES forum. I remember it like it was only yesterday. They shut it down, and i went over to Waydale to tell everyone, and, and... Shoot, the computer just hiccupped or something. Wonder what ever became of that? :)

Welcome to GSC.Not to start off on a bad foot, here, but that quote tells me you don't know what plagiarism is. It is NOT "teaching the same thing." It is taking what someone else wrote and pretending you wrote it. It could be a sentence, a paragraph, a chapter or a book. Most examples of plagiarism show some changes from the original work. That doesn't stop it from being plagiarism. It's fundamentally dishonest, in a field that highly values fundamental honesty. You can read all about it in my new book, Power for Abundant Living. You'd be amazed at how simple it is, and it rarely gets in the way. In one chapter of "Order My Steps in Thy Word," VPW excellently quotes and attributes the quote to EW Kenyon, even while plagiarizing Kenyon in the very same chapter! It's amazing: He does it blatantly while showing, for anyone who cares to see, that he doesn't have to do it!

Easy one: "Three weeks ago, one of our most *celebrated* ambassadors and advisors to Federation leaders for generations, disappeared. He left no word of his destination. Two days ago, intelligence reports placed him on Romulus, and I assure you it was an unauthorized visit." **** "A defection?" "If it is, the damage to Federation security would be immeasurable."

I'm not so sure. I think it would be just as wrong to disqualify the program BECAUSE of its religious content as it would be to disqualify the program for not having any religious content. I think it's an interesting constitutional question. It would be wrong for the state to require people to go through that program, but to penalize them for choosing that program over another one would be just as much a violation of the constitution. And I hope it goes without saying that the judge has no right whatsoever to assess a particular movement's compatibility with Christianity.