JCOPS and JCOP were mainly the work of one Walter Cummins with plenty of documentation in the back of the book and footnotes about where they got the information.
There are of course conclusions drawn in those books.
So you have to watch that part of it.
The conclusions that are not acceptable to you that is.
JCOPS and JCOP were mainly the work of one Walter Cummins with plenty of documentation in the back of the book and footnotes about where they got the information.
There are of course conclusions drawn in those books.
So you have to watch that part of it.
The conclusions that are not acceptable to you that is.
Although Walter Cummins probably edited the entire thing, both books were almost certainly the work
of the entire Research Department. The book "vp and me" included some comments about one of
the staffers who did critical work on JCOP, who lcm and vpw were busy attacking later on.
vpw's name as AUTHOR (meaning "I wrote this") is the only name on the book itself,
which is not merely an OVERSIGHT. A less-dishonest approach would have been to list
vpw as the "editor" even though he didn't EDIT it, either- but at least it would have indicated
that the research and words therein were not his own, but that of others.
Naturally, this was outside vpw's ability to admit, so his name's the only one on all the books.
As I've said before, there's basically 2 types of books that were released during vpw's
lifetime, that have his name listed as the author.
A) books that were plagiarized-that is, where the entire, or nearly-entire, contents were
taken from the books and authored materials of other authors, with some words and
sentences moved around, and a general cut-and-paste done
B) books written by the research department, where they wrote the entire book and
did 100% of the work, and then vpw came along and put his name on the cover.
As for the "Studies in Abundant Living", each chapter seems to have been taken from
its own source-some from Kenyon, some from Bullinger, some from other word-faith
sources, and so on. The pamphlet "Studies in Human Suffering" became
"Job-Victim to Victor", and both were taken right out of BULLINGER's book on Job.
Furthermore, those books themselves were mostly compilations of sermons ("teachings")
he had done. As someone pointed out once, and decent pastor or other sermonizer
could produce enough quality material for a book of that size EACH YEAR.
I'm sure any number of us could have done as much at our height of "research".
Well then, these sound (let's say) original to TWI which at least is something. I wonder that (if) VPW didn't plagiarise something or other put out by (say) the JWs, since they are a big group into JCNG.
Any ideas on who would have been in the Research Team at the time? I know Walter C had been in the RT at one time but was "disposed of"; but that was well after both books were published.
Can't recall any comments from "VP & Me" but that was a long time ago.
Yes, he should have said "edit" if it was a group effort (wonder how much VPW did actually put in?) and the other contributors should have been identified and acknowledged. That would, however, have required of VPW a meekness and humility that was demanded but never demonstrated.
Slightly off topic, but what books are you talking about, WW, under your point B?
Twinky, Point B refers to the trilogy of JCNG, JCOP, and JCOPS. For those confused by the initials, Jesus Christ is not god, Jesus Christ our passover, and Jesus Christ our Promised Seed(last included John Cr**ch's research into Bullinger's Witness of the Stars and astromer Joseph Martin's scientific data on the Star of Bethlehem). Most of this was refined and updated by Mark Gra##er, John Lynn and J. Schoenhe1t's One God and 1 Lord from CES.
Strange, I am so sick of hearing about VWP's - stuff - that I'm more likely to give credence to something (anything) that doesn't have his name on it. Well, not really, but I just don't rate the things with his name on very highly.
Getting sucked into my local library this afternoon (a common occurrence) I found a well-borrowed 400 page book entitled, “The Trinity – True or False?” by a couple of guys who say in their foreword that “neither [of them] … lay claim to any biblical “scholarship” and their only qualification for this task is a lifetime’s regard for and study of scripture and a desire that its teaching should be correctly understood. In the use and meaning of original Greek and Hebrew words, we have had to rely heavily on standard works of reference…
“As far as the division of labour is concerned, chapters 4,5,7 and part of 3 are the work of xxx and the balance is that of the co-author yyy…
“Our thanks are due to several of our fellow Bible students to whom we showed the early drafts, and who made many helpful comments and suggestions.”
There is more of this humble approach, acknowledging contributions of others.
The back of the book contains lots of scripture references; a bibliography with all works studied; a history/development of the trinity, and other helpful stuff.
Just reading the foreword and the very last para, it appears their conclusions are that JCNG.
I obviously haven’t read it yet but liked the way they “set out their cart” and announced their antecedents right at the beginning – no pretending to be a research ministry or that they had qualifications in ancient languages; and they acknowledge the help given by others and their sources. Not having my copy of JCNG available, I can’t recall what that contains, but it certainly wasn’t this forthcoming about its basis. Rather, that one is: This is it so just believe it.
It will be interesting to see how these guys get to where they end up, and how they deal with certain scriptures. More on this later, perhaps.
Getting sucked into my local library this afternoon (a common occurrence) I found a well-borrowed 400 page book entitled, “The Trinity – True or False?” by a couple of guys who say in their foreword that “neither [of them] … lay claim to any biblical “scholarship” and their only qualification for this task is a lifetime’s regard for and study of scripture and a desire that its teaching should be correctly understood. In the use and meaning of original Greek and Hebrew words, we have had to rely heavily on standard works of reference…
“As far as the division of labour is concerned, chapters 4,5,7 and part of 3 are the work of xxx and the balance is that of the co-author yyy…
“Our thanks are due to several of our fellow Bible students to whom we showed the early drafts, and who made many helpful comments and suggestions.”
There is more of this humble approach, acknowledging contributions of others.
The back of the book contains lots of scripture references; a bibliography with all works studied; a history/development of the trinity, and other helpful stuff. It is footnoted throughout with scripture references and references to works that the authors considered.
Just reading the foreword and the very last para, it appears their conclusions are that JCNG.
I obviously haven’t read it yet but liked the way they “set out their cart” and announced their antecedents right at the beginning – no pretending to be a research ministry or that they had qualifications in ancient languages; and they acknowledge the help given by others and their sources. Not having my copy of JCNG available, I can’t recall what that contains, but it certainly wasn’t this forthcoming about its basis. Rather, that one is: This is it so just believe it.
It will be interesting to see how these guys get to where they end up, and how they deal with certain scriptures. More on this later, perhaps.
Twinky, CES/Spirit and Truth Fellowship seems to have far better documentation which includes other authors by name. Too bad TWI generaly did not follow this course. i have never been against true biblical research, but to pick and choose strange teachings that seemed to contradicit one another(Bullinger vs. Lamsa for example) is not legitimate research.
Getting sucked into my local library this afternoon (a common occurrence) I found a well-borrowed 400 page book entitled, “The Trinity – True or False?” by a couple of guys who say in their foreword that “neither [of them] … lay claim to any biblical “scholarship” and their only qualification for this task is a lifetime’s regard for and study of scripture and a desire that its teaching should be correctly understood. In the use and meaning of original Greek and Hebrew words, we have had to rely heavily on standard works of reference…
[snip]
Just reading the foreword and the very last para, it appears their conclusions are that JCNG.
I obviously haven’t read it yet but liked the way they “set out their cart” and announced their antecedents right at the beginning – no pretending to be a research ministry or that they had qualifications in ancient languages; and they acknowledge the help given by others and their sources. Not having my copy of JCNG available, I can’t recall what that contains, but it certainly wasn’t this forthcoming about its basis. Rather, that one is: This is it so just believe it.
It will be interesting to see how these guys get to where they end up, and how they deal with certain scriptures. More on this later, perhaps.
Local libraries are ideal places for getting "sucked into" - better yet, the theological sections of nearby
university libraries that have them- not only for providing the opportunity for examining and/or confirming and/or refuting the beliefs and interpretations you've already held for years, but for becoming better acquainted with other interpretations as well.
If you keep frequenting such places, you may not recognize yourself in about another 5-10 years.
Dan, I'm a serious habituee of such places. I have managed to get myself locked into one public library on at least two occasions, perhaps more (I get so engrossed in whatever I picked up that I simply don't hear the calls announcing that the library is closing) - the first time I panicked a little but then a late leaving staff member escaped just before me and I found the secret switch hidden behind the potted plant.
My reading matter became seriously curtailed in the TWI years (read the bible and the prescribed works and little else).
Now I am healing I can read and think about what I'm reading.
If you just got out, what I'd suggest in regard to JCOP and JCNG and JCOPS and any of the other Wierwillian works is put them aside.
Relax and let your brain clear. Don't study. Seriously.
Get a different version of the Bible...one that has NO notes in it (I know how we all marked up our Bibles).
For several MONTHS just read the Bible for the pleasure of it. Don't read passages. Don't think about "literals according to usage." Don't think about what the Greek word is. Just relax. Let God work in you. Don't force it.
Meditate on a passage. Read a whole psalm and just let yourself be absorbed into it. Don't worry about whether it is "to you" or "for your learning." God will communicate that fact to you one way or the other.
Concentrate on building your relationship with God...
The problem with TWI is that a lot of folks work their brains so hard that they lose the loving relationship with God in the process. If your brain has been in TWI mode for a number of years, it will be impossible to do honest research on any of Wierwille's work until you can truly take a fresh look at it. If you're fresh out of TWI, that just won't be possible.
You want to know the test to see if you're brain is truly clear enough to take a fresh look at Wierwille's books? Go to an Eastern Christian liturgy (Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Melkite, Maronite, Syriac, Coptic, etc.). (Note to others: note I DID NOT say a Latin-Rite Mass) If you find yourself bringing up quotes from TWI and getting a really defensive feel in the pit of your stomach, you still have too much TWI-brain to honestly look at those books. Note: the same thing may happen if you go to a solemn Latin-Rite Catholic Mass or one of the many liturgically-based Protestant services (Episcopal, Lutheran, Methodist, etc.), but the feeling wouldn't be nearly as dramatic as it would be with an Eastern Christian liturgy.
(BTW, I am not saying that you should convert to one religion or another...but those with a major case of TWI-brain feel an almost gutteral response to a traditional liturgy, rather than an appreciation for that liturgy...even though it may not be their cup of tea)
But, of course, your mileage may vary and all of the above is in my humble opinion. (YMMV/IMHO)
Good advice, Mark. I was M&A’d ages ago over … nothing; a bit of vindictive aggression from someone who is still in. Spent a long time out. Now discovered this place, where I have PERMISSION TO THINK (singing and dancing again ). Nowadays if it says VPW on the label I’m simply not interested.
On reflecting on PFAL, what appears to be good about it is that lots of it was not devised by VPW but almost all of it simply copied by him. As such, I now no longer have a difficulty in accepting what seems good to me about it.
As for JCOP and JCNG (and JCOPS), if these are VPW products – no thanks. However as research team products done largely by people who did actually seem to understand Greek and Hebrew, that puts a different complexion on these works. Or if they also are plagiarised, what are the credentials of the author whose work is plagiarised? That’s why I started this thread.
I can hardly bear to read KJV (especially that which went through TWI with me) and have now collected various other versions but what I most enjoy at the moment is The Message. I go through long periods where I don’t read much at all in any Bible but just mull over what I have studied over many previous years, fitting it together perhaps differently and perhaps not, and quite often pondering in the light of some thread currently under discussion in GSC (in any section). Meditating in the scriptures is a good thing to do; reading (any version) can be quite simply Works. Some contributors to GSC offer quite different perspectives – eg, Abigail offers the Jewish perspective and her posts often point to something quite interesting and which simply NEVER got an airing in TWI but nonetheless sheds important light on the culture from which such-and-such an incident springs. Other posters offer other input.
I have revived pre-TWI friendships with other Christians and enjoy visiting their churches with them. I work with a Serb; she describes the services at different of her churches that she attends. I quite fancy going for a look. Some parts of other organisations’ services are to be appreciated; others are simply baffling – but if it helps them, why not?
One thing I do know: my relationship now with God is better, purer and more loving than I can remember in years. Not that he has changed, but I have. And He isn’t squashed into a box now.
:) :) Heartily agreeing it is great to be able to think for onesself!!!
Furthermore, those books themselves were mostly compilations of sermons ("teachings")
he had done. As someone pointed out once, and decent pastor or other sermonizer
could produce enough quality material for a book of that size EACH YEAR.
I'm sure any number of us could have done as much at our height of "research".
Interesting you should say so, Wordwolf. Joyce Meyer this past weekend commented that she had written "over 70" books. And she wrote the books, not just had someone else compile her teachings.
Regarding the most precious (to me) Watchman Nee, who was imprisoned for the last 20 years of his life in communist China prison: his books are for the most part compilations of teachings written from transcribed student notes. I have more than 45 Watchman Nee books, and these were almost all obtained pre-1995, pre-internet search.
Recommended Posts
TheInvisibleDan
Twinky,
I had a similar question about 3 years ago in regard to JCNG.
The old thread can be viewed here,
which was a very interesting discussion.
I recall Wordwolf began a thread on Wierwille's plagiarism behind ATDAN?
But I don't know about JCOP.
Edited by TheInvisibleDanLink to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Thanks, Dan. Have printed it off so that I can study at leisure.
I rather imagined both Raf and WordWolf would have a lot to say on the subject(s).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dancing
JCOPS and JCOP were mainly the work of one Walter Cummins with plenty of documentation in the back of the book and footnotes about where they got the information.
There are of course conclusions drawn in those books.
So you have to watch that part of it.
The conclusions that are not acceptable to you that is.
Edited by dancingLink to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Although Walter Cummins probably edited the entire thing, both books were almost certainly the work
of the entire Research Department. The book "vp and me" included some comments about one of
the staffers who did critical work on JCOP, who lcm and vpw were busy attacking later on.
vpw's name as AUTHOR (meaning "I wrote this") is the only name on the book itself,
which is not merely an OVERSIGHT. A less-dishonest approach would have been to list
vpw as the "editor" even though he didn't EDIT it, either- but at least it would have indicated
that the research and words therein were not his own, but that of others.
Naturally, this was outside vpw's ability to admit, so his name's the only one on all the books.
As I've said before, there's basically 2 types of books that were released during vpw's
lifetime, that have his name listed as the author.
A) books that were plagiarized-that is, where the entire, or nearly-entire, contents were
taken from the books and authored materials of other authors, with some words and
sentences moved around, and a general cut-and-paste done
B) books written by the research department, where they wrote the entire book and
did 100% of the work, and then vpw came along and put his name on the cover.
As for the "Studies in Abundant Living", each chapter seems to have been taken from
its own source-some from Kenyon, some from Bullinger, some from other word-faith
sources, and so on. The pamphlet "Studies in Human Suffering" became
"Job-Victim to Victor", and both were taken right out of BULLINGER's book on Job.
Furthermore, those books themselves were mostly compilations of sermons ("teachings")
he had done. As someone pointed out once, and decent pastor or other sermonizer
could produce enough quality material for a book of that size EACH YEAR.
I'm sure any number of us could have done as much at our height of "research".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Well then, these sound (let's say) original to TWI which at least is something. I wonder that (if) VPW didn't plagiarise something or other put out by (say) the JWs, since they are a big group into JCNG.
Any ideas on who would have been in the Research Team at the time? I know Walter C had been in the RT at one time but was "disposed of"; but that was well after both books were published.
Can't recall any comments from "VP & Me" but that was a long time ago.
Yes, he should have said "edit" if it was a group effort (wonder how much VPW did actually put in?) and the other contributors should have been identified and acknowledged. That would, however, have required of VPW a meekness and humility that was demanded but never demonstrated.
Slightly off topic, but what books are you talking about, WW, under your point B?
Edited by TwinkyLink to comment
Share on other sites
Thomas Loy Bumgarner
Twinky, Point B refers to the trilogy of JCNG, JCOP, and JCOPS. For those confused by the initials, Jesus Christ is not god, Jesus Christ our passover, and Jesus Christ our Promised Seed(last included John Cr**ch's research into Bullinger's Witness of the Stars and astromer Joseph Martin's scientific data on the Star of Bethlehem). Most of this was refined and updated by Mark Gra##er, John Lynn and J. Schoenhe1t's One God and 1 Lord from CES.
Edited by Thomas Loy BumgarnerLink to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Thanks, Thomas. Is the CES work any good?
Strange, I am so sick of hearing about VWP's - stuff - that I'm more likely to give credence to something (anything) that doesn't have his name on it.
Well, not really, but I just don't rate the things with his name on very highly.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Getting sucked into my local library this afternoon (a common occurrence) I found a well-borrowed 400 page book entitled, “The Trinity – True or False?” by a couple of guys who say in their foreword that “neither [of them] … lay claim to any biblical “scholarship” and their only qualification for this task is a lifetime’s regard for and study of scripture and a desire that its teaching should be correctly understood. In the use and meaning of original Greek and Hebrew words, we have had to rely heavily on standard works of reference…
“As far as the division of labour is concerned, chapters 4,5,7 and part of 3 are the work of xxx and the balance is that of the co-author yyy…
“Our thanks are due to several of our fellow Bible students to whom we showed the early drafts, and who made many helpful comments and suggestions.”
There is more of this humble approach, acknowledging contributions of others.
The back of the book contains lots of scripture references; a bibliography with all works studied; a history/development of the trinity, and other helpful stuff.
Just reading the foreword and the very last para, it appears their conclusions are that JCNG.
I obviously haven’t read it yet but liked the way they “set out their cart” and announced their antecedents right at the beginning – no pretending to be a research ministry or that they had qualifications in ancient languages; and they acknowledge the help given by others and their sources. Not having my copy of JCNG available, I can’t recall what that contains, but it certainly wasn’t this forthcoming about its basis. Rather, that one is: This is it so just believe it.
It will be interesting to see how these guys get to where they end up, and how they deal with certain scriptures. More on this later, perhaps.
Getting sucked into my local library this afternoon (a common occurrence) I found a well-borrowed 400 page book entitled, “The Trinity – True or False?” by a couple of guys who say in their foreword that “neither [of them] … lay claim to any biblical “scholarship” and their only qualification for this task is a lifetime’s regard for and study of scripture and a desire that its teaching should be correctly understood. In the use and meaning of original Greek and Hebrew words, we have had to rely heavily on standard works of reference…
“As far as the division of labour is concerned, chapters 4,5,7 and part of 3 are the work of xxx and the balance is that of the co-author yyy…
“Our thanks are due to several of our fellow Bible students to whom we showed the early drafts, and who made many helpful comments and suggestions.”
There is more of this humble approach, acknowledging contributions of others.
The back of the book contains lots of scripture references; a bibliography with all works studied; a history/development of the trinity, and other helpful stuff. It is footnoted throughout with scripture references and references to works that the authors considered.
Just reading the foreword and the very last para, it appears their conclusions are that JCNG.
I obviously haven’t read it yet but liked the way they “set out their cart” and announced their antecedents right at the beginning – no pretending to be a research ministry or that they had qualifications in ancient languages; and they acknowledge the help given by others and their sources. Not having my copy of JCNG available, I can’t recall what that contains, but it certainly wasn’t this forthcoming about its basis. Rather, that one is: This is it so just believe it.
It will be interesting to see how these guys get to where they end up, and how they deal with certain scriptures. More on this later, perhaps.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thomas Loy Bumgarner
Twinky, CES/Spirit and Truth Fellowship seems to have far better documentation which includes other authors by name. Too bad TWI generaly did not follow this course. i have never been against true biblical research, but to pick and choose strange teachings that seemed to contradicit one another(Bullinger vs. Lamsa for example) is not legitimate research.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dancing
Thomas,
I think there is where the real challenge is.
Tofind the whys and what fors of those strange teachings.
I've learned from Greasespot that if everyone thinks alike then no one is thinking.
I think that is a tag line for someone here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
Local libraries are ideal places for getting "sucked into" - better yet, the theological sections of nearby
university libraries that have them- not only for providing the opportunity for examining and/or confirming and/or refuting the beliefs and interpretations you've already held for years, but for becoming better acquainted with other interpretations as well.
If you keep frequenting such places, you may not recognize yourself in about another 5-10 years.
Danny
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Dan, I'm a serious habituee of such places. I have managed to get myself locked into one public library on at least two occasions, perhaps more (I get so engrossed in whatever I picked up that I simply don't hear the calls announcing that the library is closing) - the first time I panicked a little but then a late leaving staff member escaped just before me and I found the secret switch hidden behind the potted plant.
My reading matter became seriously curtailed in the TWI years (read the bible and the prescribed works and little else).
Now I am healing I can read and think about what I'm reading.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
Twinky,
I would love to get myself accidently locked into Wesleyan's library for an evening or two (lol).
I would happily resign myself to my captivity, and find some good books to read.
:)
Danny
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheInvisibleDan
P.S.
I'll have to make certain I pack a lunch, when that happens.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
Twinky,
If you just got out, what I'd suggest in regard to JCOP and JCNG and JCOPS and any of the other Wierwillian works is put them aside.
Relax and let your brain clear. Don't study. Seriously.
Get a different version of the Bible...one that has NO notes in it (I know how we all marked up our Bibles).
For several MONTHS just read the Bible for the pleasure of it. Don't read passages. Don't think about "literals according to usage." Don't think about what the Greek word is. Just relax. Let God work in you. Don't force it.
Meditate on a passage. Read a whole psalm and just let yourself be absorbed into it. Don't worry about whether it is "to you" or "for your learning." God will communicate that fact to you one way or the other.
Concentrate on building your relationship with God...
The problem with TWI is that a lot of folks work their brains so hard that they lose the loving relationship with God in the process. If your brain has been in TWI mode for a number of years, it will be impossible to do honest research on any of Wierwille's work until you can truly take a fresh look at it. If you're fresh out of TWI, that just won't be possible.
You want to know the test to see if you're brain is truly clear enough to take a fresh look at Wierwille's books? Go to an Eastern Christian liturgy (Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, Melkite, Maronite, Syriac, Coptic, etc.). (Note to others: note I DID NOT say a Latin-Rite Mass) If you find yourself bringing up quotes from TWI and getting a really defensive feel in the pit of your stomach, you still have too much TWI-brain to honestly look at those books. Note: the same thing may happen if you go to a solemn Latin-Rite Catholic Mass or one of the many liturgically-based Protestant services (Episcopal, Lutheran, Methodist, etc.), but the feeling wouldn't be nearly as dramatic as it would be with an Eastern Christian liturgy.
(BTW, I am not saying that you should convert to one religion or another...but those with a major case of TWI-brain feel an almost gutteral response to a traditional liturgy, rather than an appreciation for that liturgy...even though it may not be their cup of tea)
But, of course, your mileage may vary and all of the above is in my humble opinion. (YMMV/IMHO)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Good advice, Mark. I was M&A’d ages ago over … nothing; a bit of vindictive aggression from someone who is still in. Spent a long time out. Now discovered this place, where I have PERMISSION TO THINK (singing and dancing again
). Nowadays if it says VPW on the label I’m simply not interested.
On reflecting on PFAL, what appears to be good about it is that lots of it was not devised by VPW but almost all of it simply copied by him. As such, I now no longer have a difficulty in accepting what seems good to me about it.
As for JCOP and JCNG (and JCOPS), if these are VPW products – no thanks. However as research team products done largely by people who did actually seem to understand Greek and Hebrew, that puts a different complexion on these works. Or if they also are plagiarised, what are the credentials of the author whose work is plagiarised? That’s why I started this thread.
I can hardly bear to read KJV (especially that which went through TWI with me) and have now collected various other versions but what I most enjoy at the moment is The Message. I go through long periods where I don’t read much at all in any Bible but just mull over what I have studied over many previous years, fitting it together perhaps differently and perhaps not, and quite often pondering in the light of some thread currently under discussion in GSC (in any section). Meditating in the scriptures is a good thing to do; reading (any version) can be quite simply Works. Some contributors to GSC offer quite different perspectives – eg, Abigail offers the Jewish perspective and her posts often point to something quite interesting and which simply NEVER got an airing in TWI but nonetheless sheds important light on the culture from which such-and-such an incident springs. Other posters offer other input.
I have revived pre-TWI friendships with other Christians and enjoy visiting their churches with them. I work with a Serb; she describes the services at different of her churches that she attends. I quite fancy going for a look. Some parts of other organisations’ services are to be appreciated; others are simply baffling – but if it helps them, why not?
One thing I do know: my relationship now with God is better, purer and more loving than I can remember in years. Not that he has changed, but I have. And He isn’t squashed into a box now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kit Sober
:) :) Heartily agreeing it is great to be able to think for onesself!!!
Interesting you should say so, Wordwolf. Joyce Meyer this past weekend commented that she had written "over 70" books. And she wrote the books, not just had someone else compile her teachings.Regarding the most precious (to me) Watchman Nee, who was imprisoned for the last 20 years of his life in communist China prison: his books are for the most part compilations of teachings written from transcribed student notes. I have more than 45 Watchman Nee books, and these were almost all obtained pre-1995, pre-internet search.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.