Raf

I'd like to announce my intention to plagiarize this line whenever possible. Here's how I put it in my article on the main page:

Lorna, Your post reveals to me that you do not understand what plagiarism is. You think it's teaching on the same topic and covering the same material? If you teach something and I like it and I go out and teach the same thing, that's not plagiarism. Stop misrepresenting Wierwille's plagiarism as just some innocent act of a sloppy writer or perceptive preacher. It was a deliberate act of deception. The reason it matters is simple: Integrity. Wierwille didn't just teach the same thing, and it is an absolute insult to compare him to the Apostle Paul in that regard. Wierwille took what other people wrote, slapped his name on it and called himself a researcher. Then he copyrighted HIS books! We have a word for that in Spanish, but this is a family message board. :)-->

Lifting a line from Dot's excellent post above: Folks, this is what VPW did when he was alive to defend himself. The fact that he's not alive to defend himself now doesn't impress me much. This is how he defended himself when he was alive.

Read the parodies! Read the parodies! http://www.livejournal.com/users/mollyringwraith/1826.html http://www.livejournal.com/users/mollyringwraith/5635.html There's more. It's hilarious.

Dear Linda, Have we met? Your name rings a bell, and not just because of that TV show from the 70s. I'm thinking of a ride from Silver Bay to the Bronx. If it's you, send me an e-mail! God Bless You and welcome to the Greasespot Cafe. I'll get you some coffee. The Living Epistles Society

Oh wow, Zix, check it out. It's almost like the webmaster read this thread and included a photo from Aliens. Wow. What an amazing coincidence.

Oakspear, I notice that you give a reference for every scripture you quote, and a link for the article you quote. You even give a link for the site that led you to the article. This leads me to suspect that you don't buy your own argument. Plagiarism is, essentially, presenting someone else's words or thoughts as one's own. That is not the same as learning from others or correcting their spelling. It is not the same as using someone else's words or thoughts, but properly crediting them. I think you know that.

There was one point where I thought Frodo and Sam were going to get a room.

Lorna, You think I copied you? No way, I think God gave us both the revelation to say the same things. I think my copying you is proof that what I have to say truly is from God. Further, since what I have to say came later, and contains some changes from what you have to say, I can only conclude that God improved the message after you botched it, and my version is closer to His original intent. Rafael.....keep your hands off my cookies!

Test Raf

Nope. No Jim Carrey. Sorry. I saw a teaser trailer for Mask 2 right before Return of the King. It showed a baby doing the boogie woogie. Had a surreal Ally McBeal feel to it. I have no idea if it will be fun or not. Aliens is Alien 2. Definitely one of the best sequels ever.

Ooh, good one.

I think Lorna is right. No, seriously, hear me out. My purpose in contributing to this thread is to invoke some new thought on some of the postings over the past few years regarding Plagiarism. I offer food for thought and know this is a little long but it is my hope to put to rest some of the controversy from the past. While browsing Mel Gibsons new website for his forthcoming movie "The Passion of Christ" http://www.thepassionofchrist.com , I came across a web-site with some interesting views on Plagiarism that I thought would be of interest to some. So my "food for thought". If God inspires his people through his gift of holy spirit (" Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.") to write classes, sermons etc., who really owns those teachings and sharings. When we share with someone the greatness of God's Word, we are all gleaning excerpts from those that have taught and preached to us as well as The Holy Spirit who works in us. "Romans 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? Romans 10:15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!" God is the one that "sends" us to preach and bring glad tidings of good things. So my questions is if God inspires us to preach & teach to move the Word, this is HIS goal, we respond and obey. Do we not want the Word that we speak to give insight to the novice to be spoken again and again to accomplish that which GOD wants. Isaiah 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto ME void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I SENT IT. So when we speak God's word it is really God the author of his Word that is speaking through us, so how can anyone lay claim to "their sermon, their class, their preaching". In the scripture above we know God does not have a mouth, he uses our heart and mouth by our free will with the spirit of God in us. God also guarantees the results of HIS Word not returning void. "Matthew 10:19 But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak. Mark 13:11 But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost." Even in these trying times, the whole purpose for God working through them was to be a witness. So I ask you, if one person benefits from a work that someone does (inspired by God) regarding God's Word, it is absolutely what God wanted. It would be very selfish for me or anyone else to teach the Word and say that I own or copywrite my teaching when in essence it is God who is the author working thru me. Deuteronomy 4:10 Specially the day that thou stoodest before the LORD thy God in Horeb, when the LORD said unto me, Gather me the people together, and I will make them hear MY words, (THRU WHO?)that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live upon the earth, and that they may "teach their children." Isaiah 51:16 And I have put MY words in thy mouth, and I have covered thee in the shadow of mine hand, that I may plant the heavens, and lay the foundations of the earth, and say unto Zion, Thou art my people. Isaiah 59:21 As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and MY words which I have PUT in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever. Jeremiah 1:9 Then the LORD put forth his hand, and TOUCHED MY mouth. And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have put MY words in thy mouth. When Moses wrote the 10 commandments on the tablets, did he lay claim to owning what he wrote, did he copywrite the tablets? The answer is clearly NO. Is it not therefore egotistical to put one's claim to the things of God that are freely given to people by God and for someone to take credit and glory for the spirit of God working in them, when it works in all God's children who are walking in tune with him. Did the "holy men of God spake" copywrite their materials? Just for some insight I will paste the following from a link from Mel Gibson's new movie website: About Using Sermons on SermonCentral.com http://www.SermonCentral.com ©opyItRight: How to Use Other Preachers? Material Without Compromising Your Integrity by Brian Mavis ?All work and no plagiarism makes for dull sermons!? Henry Ward Beecher ?Plans fail for lack of counsel, but with many advisers they succeed.? Proverbs 15:22 Is Using Other Preachers? Sermons OK? Have you ever wondered if researching other preachers? sermons for your own sermon preparation was wrong? What about reading or listening to just one other preacher?s sermon? Or what if you used someone?s outline, or main idea, or illustrations ? or even most of someone else?s sermon? Where is the line, and have you ever wondered if you crossed it? Even people who think that they are being completely original are probably not quite right. Some copy ideas without even knowing it. Rick Warren (a very copied preacher) is known for saying, ?If you take an idea from one person it is called plagiarism. If you take ideas from a number of people it is called research.? Ironically, even that was said before by US playwright Wilson Mizner (1876-1933). He said, ?Copy from one, it?s plagiarism; copy from two, it?s research.? John F. Kennedy is credited for saying, ?Ask not what your country can do for you ? ask what you can do for your country.? But it was really his ghostwriter, John Kenneth Galbraith, who wrote it. And Galbraith may have lifted the idea from Oliver Wendell Holmes who said, ?We... recall what our country has done for each of us, and to ask ourselves what we can do for our country in return.? As the manager of the largest sermon resource site on the Internet, I deal with the pros and cons of using material from other pastor?s sermons on a daily basis. I get emails worldwide from pastors saying how reading other pastors? sermons has helped them as a person and as a preacher. But occasionally I uncover someone who has submitted a plagiarized sermon and is probably preaching it as if they wrote it. Relying on Other Preachers? Sermons is Common Researching other preachers? sermons is not new. Sermons have been printed in books for centuries, and sermons on tapes have been abundant for decades. But with the advent of the Internet, researching and copying other preachers? sermons is easier and more common than ever. Last week SermonCentral was used over 170,000 times. It is the most popular online sermon resource site, but it certainly isn?t the only one. Just that fact alone proves there are a lot of pastors looking for sermon help. Advantages of Sermon Resource Sites There are different reasons preachers rely on other people?s sermons ? some good, some bad. Some benefits of sermon resource sites are: 1. They can help you write a better sermon, which can lead more people to know and grow in Christ. 2. They can give you other perspectives and help you grow in your knowledge of God. 3. They can give you the benefit of other pastors? research and resources. 4. They can help you save time. 5. They can help you with better big ideas, outlines and illustrations. Disadvantages of Sermon Resource Sites Some detriments of sermon resource sites are: 1. They can lead to laziness. 2. They can shortchange your personal conviction that comes with struggling over a passage. 3. They can prevent you from taking into account your congregation?s need, which produces generic sermons. 4. They can tempt you to take false credit for a sermon. Because reading, listening, researching, and relying on other preachers? sermons is so widespread, and because it has potential for such great benefit or detriment, it is important to do it right and for the right reasons. What Not To Do 1. Don?t wait until Saturday to begin your sermon preparation. (Preparing a good sermon is like brewing good coffee ? it needs time to percolate.) 2. Don?t go to a sermon resource site and just print off a sermon and read it. 3. Don?t retell a story as if it happened to you. What To Do 1. First, go to God and ask Him what He wants to say to your congregation. 2. Study the Bible passage on your own before you rely on someone else?s study. 3. Apply the passage to your life ? walk what you are going to talk. 4. With the passage in your heart, and your congregation in mind, discern the main thing (just one thing) you want to say and how you want to say it. 5. Now you can look at other sources. Be open to any better ideas, clearer ways to say things, missed points, and superior illustrations. 6. In your personal notes, cite your sources. 7. When you go to preach, reference your resources. If you just have some common illustrations, ideas, or quotes, there is no need to clutter your sermon with, ?I got this information from?.? But if you have used a significant idea, outline, illustration, or section (and even an entire sermon), give credit where credit is due. You can either mention something before the sermon or in the midst of it. You can also handle this by placing a note in the bulletin. For example you can say something like, ?In my research for this sermon, I used Chuck Swindoll?s outline from his sermon called God is Good.? The widespread use of gleaning from other people?s sermons is here to stay. The goal is to use the resource wisely and well. To cheat your congregation by overusing sermon resources is wrong. But it can be equally as wrong to avoid using them because of pride, and possibly cheat your congregation out of a better message. The Good News combined with good resources is a powerful combination for reaching your congregation and community for Christ. Rafael......get my point!

No Jim Carrey in The Mask 2. And the only thing I have to say about Scooby is, WHY?!?!?!

Except VP never accused God of extortion (send me $8 million or God said he's a gonna call me home). And OR never manufactured snowstorms to add drama to his testimony.

This is something new I'm trying. Let me know what you think. Keeping it elementary for the time being, but looking forward to hearing from people. Raf

Clarification "Oneness" theologians do NOT deny the divinity of Christ. They affirm that He is God. What they deny is that God is tri-personal. In other words, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit as different manifestations or expressions of ONE person, as opposed to three persons making up ONE God. XXXX I'm just rambling now, you can skip this if you'd like: Cynic, when you say that Oneness theologians "deny the divine person of the Son," I think you're being, unintentionally, misleading. That's why I wanted to clarify what you said. For the oneness theologians, Jesus Christ is God. The Father is God. Jesus Christ is the Father. The Father is the Holy Spirit. Jesus Christ is the Holy Spirit. They deny Christ as a person separate from the Father, so in that sense I get what you're saying. But you made it sound like they don't believe Jesus Christ is God, so I wanted to make that a little more clear. Raf

THAT's what reminded me of that joke! Thanks for reminding me. (Actually, I didn't listen to the link: I only read the post with the "Here's Your Sign" tagline on it. That's why my version of the joke is a tad different than the one on the link. Just the same kicker).

First thing in the morning. Here's your sign.

I just re-read these today. Guys, you MUST read them. They're rioutously funny. http://www.livejournal.com/users/mollyringwraith/1826.html http://www.livejournal.com/users/mollyringwraith/5635.html

Yeah, I guess I stopped reading once Bilbo got the ring, since that was why I was looking at it in the first place. I read Flight to the Ford yesterday and was a few pages into Many Meetings, which is so much cooler than the movie. Frodo meets Gloin (which answered my earlier question about Gloin and Balin, although Gimli hasn't been introduced yet). I liked flight to the ford better in the movie only because they made it so much more clear that the stabbing of Frodo was a dangerous thing. In the book it's like, "Oh my, I've been stabbed. This hurts somewhat. Hey, wait, I can't move my arm. Is that tea you're making? Can you rub it on my shoulder? Thanks. There, much better. Whew." Only later do we learn the gravity of the stabbing. In the movie, it's like: FRODO: F-ING OWWWWWWW! Ack! SAM: What's the matter Mr. Frodo? FRODO: Gurgle. STRIDER: Oh s--t, Oh s--t, Oh s--t. MERRY: What's the matter? STRIDER: He's turning into one of them. We need to get him to Rivendell, which is six days away, but we need to get him there like an hour ago. If only there was an unbelievably hot Elf around who could ride a horse faster than the wind. ARWEN: Hello sailor. FRODO: Ugh! ARWEN: Oh s--t. Let's go!

MO is back! Hi MO!

Praise God! Merry Christmas everyone!

Def, You made my point for me. First you said... Then you said the person who called the council favored the Arian position at first. Does it sound like he called the council to put an end to the position he favored? Point is, the people in Invisible Dan's links are not Arians, but more like Sabellians, a whole different heresy. It doesn't bother me that you believe in the Trinity. I'm not out to change your mind. You've heard all the arguments already, as have I. God Bless You.

I skimmed The Hobbit, which I do intend to read in detail another time. Right now I just finished the chapter "A Knife in the Dark." It's amazing how "talky" these books are. I mean, The Fellowship of the Ring is a talky movie, so I figured the book would be even more so. I just didn't figure on Aragorn reciting an entire poem on Weathertop while everyone knows the Black Riders are on their way. :)-->