Oakspear, you're only confirming (in hindsight) what I thought in foresight concerning my observation that many members of TWI put VP on a pedestal. I sometimes wondered how much they were paying attention to what VP said in PFAL. Seemed they only heard what they wanted or needed to hear and not much more.
I know that this is a response for Oakspear but I just have to comment here...I don't look at this response as "placing VP on a pedestal". I know that many people did. I however did not. I simply expected the man that presumed to "teach" me a subject to actually be qualified to do so. I found out many years later as others did that his so called education was "slip shod" at best. But then I thought "surely he actually studied the Word so that he could teach it to others" (being self taught is not a crime). But this is not true either. So what is the truth? VP pretended to be an educated man that conducted his own research (sometimes with the input of others) so that he could teach others. But none of that actually happened. He wasn't on any pedestal so to speak for me, he was simply expected to live up to his own billing.
When he didn't match up I dismissed him as I would any other false teacher. (Had he attempted this flim flam at a University can you imagine the fallout?) Meanwhile most of us have had to go back and reexamine everything that he taught us and try to make sense of it. Certainly there was some truth in what he taught us be it someone elses work originally or not, but with it all mixed up together with the bad...well sometimes it is just easier to call it all crap and start with a clean slate as Rascal pointed out in another thread. One good thing that I pulled out of pfal was that I learned that it is possible to study the bible. Using his principals or not, it is available. So now I can and do actually study for myself and sometimes teach others.
I know that this is a response for Oakspear but I just have to comment here...
It's always helpful to hear (read) the perspective of others on just about any subject.
I don't look at this response as "placing VP on a pedestal". I know that many people did. I however did not.
From my observation that would make you an exception to the rule. I don't mean to imply that everyone who ever sat through PFAL or was involved with TWI "worshiped the ground" that VP walked on. I'm just saying from what I observed -- many -- did.
I simply expected the man that presumed to "teach" me a subject to actually be qualified to do so.
That's reasonable. However, lacking a working knowledge of what qualifies a person teaching God's Word -- How would you possibly know anyone is qualified to teach anything? What qualifies a person to teach science? If the criteria for doing so is having gone to all the "right" schools and receiving all the "right" diplomas, then certainly such a criteria would prohibit any of us here from "teaching" anything the Bible says.
I found out many years later as others did that his so called education was "slip shod" at best. But then I thought "surely he actually studied the Word so that he could teach it to others" (being self taught is not a crime). But this is not true either. So what is the truth? VP pretended to be an educated man that conducted his own research (sometimes with the input of others) so that he could teach others. But none of that actually happened. He wasn't on any pedestal so to speak for me, he was simply expected to live up to his own billing.
From my perspective I don't expect anyone to live up to their own billing. I only try to live up to my own. I've always been a skeptic for as long as I can remember. That skepticism had gotten me into "trouble" on many occasions so I learned very early how to keep my mouth shut on matters which really didn't amount to much in the "grand scheme" of things.
When he didn't match up I dismissed him as I would any other false teacher. (Had he attempted this flim flam at a University can you imagine the fallout?)
That might explain why TWI started their own University. I was there once (for an AC). Beautiful place.
Meanwhile most of us have had to go back and reexamine everything that he taught us and try to make sense of it.
Nothing wrong about that.
Certainly there was some truth in what he taught us be it someone elses work originally or not, but with it all mixed up together with the bad...well sometimes it is just easier to call it all crap and start with a clean slate as Rascal pointed out in another thread.
I don't see it the same way. How can you possibly start with a clean slate unless you do what he claimed to have done and throw away ANY books from ANY source and also stop listening to what people here as well as elsewhere have to say about the "Truth". In other words you would have to go back to the Bible. Unfortunately, unless you're fluent in Greek, Aramaic, and so forth somewhere along the line you're going to have to read what someone else says the meaning of the text is.
One good thing that I pulled out of pfal was that I learned that it is possible to study the bible. Using his principals or not, it is available. So now I can and do actually study for myself and sometimes teach others.
How can you possibly start with a clean slate unless you do what he claimed to have done and throw away ANY books from ANY source and also stop listening to what people here as well as elsewhere have to say about the "Truth". In other words you would have to go back to the Bible. Unfortunately, unless you're fluent in Greek, Aramaic, and so forth somewhere along the line you're going to have to read what someone else says the meaning of the text is.
Starting with a clean slate isn't the same as not listening to anyone else's opinion or explanation (it could be, but not necessarily). I agree that it would be difficult, what with everything that you ever learned and heard about still floating around in your brain, but not impossible.
In my opinion, what hampers many ex-TWI folks is that they still use PFAL as a starting point for determining what they believe. It's a lot of work, but starting with as clean a slate as one can is an important part of moving beyond TWI.
I don't think one can ever get past depending on others for part of youyr knowledge. After all, even if you are fluent in Greek or Hebrew, who taught you Greek and Hebrew? One has to have a basis for determining what is dependable information.
Part of the problem for us ex-TWI folks is that we thought Wierwille was a dependable source and it turned out that he wasn't.
Much of what GSers do for each other is question assumptions. If one can get past the defensiveness that comes with being questioned, a lot can be learned. For example, a poster might say something like "we all know that Corinthians is a reproof epistle". Another poster might question that position. The first poster may at the end of the day still believe that the epistles are divided into doctrinal, reproof and correction, but he will generally understand why after explaining it to someone else, or he may change his mind completely.
When we are seeking to master a subject, we read others, we compare their thoughts, we hold what they say up to a comparison with our own life experiences, we study the topic ourselves. Once we we have done all this we evaluate all we have learned and draw conclusions as to whether we agree with the majority, and how much we agree, then we put forward our own thoughts on the subject based on our research.
If we come to a different conclusion then what has been postulated before us, we are then able to cite areas in which we disagree with a given person, and why, as well as giving our own theories and support for those theories.
The person who plargiarizes, the person who lifts whole pages of someone else's work and presents them as thier own, misses vital steps in this process.
Despite all of TWI's assertions that they were a Biblical research ministry- the reality is that they were anything but. True research of any subject leads the researcher to question and evaluate any preconceived ideas they hold. True research inspires the reseacher to change their beliefs if the evidence they uncover makes it necessary to do so. True research makes the reseacher eager to share their insights gained from their voyage of discovery.
TWI on the other hand vigorously prohibited any of the above from happening, TWI vigorously denounced any who did the above and came up with something outside of the party line. If true research were being done by VPW, then no matter what others said in disagreement with his position he would have had the intellectual tools to re-research on his own and refute their arguments, or the intellectual honesty to admit that the newly presented viewpoint might indeed be the correct one and merit further investigation.
This give and take of ideas, this changing of ideas as new evidence becomes available is what makes any organization or ideaolgy dynamic. The constant evolution of our understanding leads to a deeper appreciation of what is true and valuable.
VPW not only stole from others he prevented himself from growing intellectually and spiritually by doing so. In so limiting himself, he found himself compelled to limit others by autocratic demands for complete obiedience to his dictates, since what he came to fear most were those who possessed the ability to truly research the topic at hand.
When he didn't match up I dismissed him as I would any other false teacher. (Had he attempted this flim flam at a University can you imagine the fallout?) Meanwhile most of us have had to go back and reexamine everything that he taught us and try to make sense of it. Certainly there was some truth in what he taught us be it someone elses work originally or not, but with it all mixed up together with the bad...well sometimes it is just easier to call it all crap and start with a clean slate as Rascal pointed out in another thread.
This quote, at least for me, sums the issue up pretty well for me.
Its pretty much the approach I take personally. At this point in my life its kinda irrelevant to me where VP got the stuff in his books/teachings, etc. Reason being that I've classified him in my mind as an extremely driven, egotistical dude whose primary function in life was to be "king." He was an excellent speaker, a world class charismatic presenter with a sparkling personality (when he wanted) who had an "it factor" that drew people to him and made it "easy" to trust him.
My basic opinion of him is that he's the SAME as 99.8 % of ALL of the other guys who start their own church or ministry. IMO they do it because they want to be the king. The Bible confirms this when you look, historically at the people who were what we call Bible heros. Most of them fell. VP fell too. Seeing as he's about the same as any other guy who failed in ministry, to me, he's no longer something special.
One good thing that I pulled out of pfal was that I learned that it is possible to study the bible. Using his principals or not, it is available. So now I can and do actually study for myself and sometimes teach others.
Amen sister.
This is how I think of VP. When I think of him I focus on whatever good I was able to glean from my experience w/him personally and his ministry. The problem that I have w/ VP lifting other people's stuff is not so much the betrayal factor; his lying to us, presenting himself to me something he wasn't, etc. To me - the plagurism is less important than the CRAZY conclusions came up with after compiling all of his "research."
There were some who respected VP for some of his books back in the day. Yes, the IDEA of him plagurizing was not forefront then. Fast-forwarding to today, it seems that the stuff he was respected for was pretty much the stuff he stole from others who were actual scholars.
Dang it.
I remember sitting through hours of the CF&S class AFTER having anticipated taking it, getting the $$$ together, paying for it, then its finally here. Yay! Then I was APPALLED by the look of his face and the tone of his voice when he "taught" us slang terms for male & female private parts! I wanted to SLAP his face when he told us Mrs. VPW's preference in the position and method he used having SEX!!!!???? AND. Then, FINALLY, the moment came when he in his very VPW way exclaimed that THE original sin - - THE thing that Eve did in the Garden of Eden - the thing that the serpent beguiled her to do - the thing she convinced Adam to do.... (drumroll....) was...
MASTURBATE!!!!
I was like,
WHAT?
You put me through all of that absolute crap to tell me, we, the whole human race were separated from God because Adam pulled his pud!????!?!!!!?????
First of all there's not a man alive that anyone would have to coerce to do that.
SO. When I think of things to be mad at VP about, his lifting other people's work is not the highest thing on my personal list. Its not that I don't care about it, I do. Its just that it doesn't make a whole lot of difference to me at this point.
In the old days, everyone who knew Vp knew he had a wild side and that he was prone to crazy ideas. He even said that the reason they originally voted three trustees was to have Ermal & Harry have equal votes to his so they could keep him from doing crazy stuff. There was always a part of Vp that you just sorta dismissed, even back then; so its easy for me now. To be involved w/TWI there was always "the whole prove all things, hold fast to the good" thing concerning Vp. Especially after you'd been reamed by him a time or two, you had to dismiss part of him.
Not much has changed concerning him for me, I respect the parts of him I respect & have let go of other things.
Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner, but I wanted to comment right now, if I could, on this matter (after I described the collaborative process that brought about JCOP and JCOPS, you said):
This is percisely how creativity is handled in literally EVERY corporation in the US. When a company hires any creative, and employs him in his field of expertise when that person creates ANYTHING the copyrights belong to the corporation, not the individual. You may not like it but when Walter did his research it belonged to TWI and VPW was the "named principal" of the corporation and therefore had the discretion to take any and all works of the employees, publish them as he saw fit and put his name on it if he chose to do so.
I don't disagree. I was not complaining that this was how the books came about. Nor was I accusing VPW or anyone else of doing anything wrong here. I was simply trying to state and show that this was how the books came about. I was trying to show that this was not someone's opinion, but clear and documentable fact.
I believe it would have been better for VPW to credit himself as editor or publisher of the books (and we can get into a discussion of what qualifies someone to the title "editor," but I believe it is entirely appropriate here) than as author. But I haven't lost a second of sleep over that issue. Others may feel differently.
Anyway, you wrote "you may not like it...," and I wanted to clarify that I neither like nor dislike it. It's simply a fact, like the fact that the color of the blue book is, in fact, blue.
I was actually speaking more to a universal "you" than you specifically. I should get better at using a more unspecific term when I'm being unspecific.
I believe it would have been better for VPW to credit himself as editor or publisher of the books (and we can get into a discussion of what qualifies someone to the title "editor," but I believe it is entirely appropriate here) than as author. But I haven't lost a second of sleep over that issue. Others may feel differently.
I couldn't agree more with that Raf. And. I think it was Garth who made a point to the effect that seeing as TWI called themselves a "Biblical Research, Teaching and Fellowship ministry" they should have acted accordingly. It would have done nothing but add credibility to the ministry for Vp to include anyone who added anything to the research of a given publication.
I mentioned earlier that my daughter told me that the research project she's working on as a summer intern @ John Hopkins is going to include her in the list of authors when the thing is published in whatever medical journal. Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems to me that the fact that Vp wrote "checks with his mouth that he and TWI couldn't cash" concerning how great they were that really hack people off on this subject. I mean; if he had never said things like "God taught me..." and said stuff like "we should be better than the world..." people might not be so mad about him lifting stuff.
Is that right? Its not like people would have thought any less of him for giving credit where credit was due.
My points on authorship is that when it comes to companies and employees, like it or not, the employee's work belongs to the company and the company is under no legal obligation to credit the author. And, when a copyrighted work, such as a book contains things that are not the work of the author of the book the book still is legally the copyright protected work of the author.
For the record. I didn't mention legalities to in any way defend, or minimalize the morality issue of Vp lifting other's work. My point was that TWI went ti great lengths to cover Vp & itself legally regardless of how immoral they may have acted in a given situation.
The person who plargiarizes, the person who lifts whole pages of someone else's work and presents them as thier own, misses vital steps in this process.
So so true. The person who merely lifts whole pagess of another's works, makes the same possible false conclusions. The same errors.
If a person skips the process of true discovery.. the conclusions have no merit. At least in my opinion.
I remember sitting through hours of the CF&S class AFTER having anticipated taking it, getting the $$$ together, paying for it, then its finally here. Yay! Then I was APPALLED by the look of his face and the tone of his voice when he "taught" us slang terms for male & female private parts! I wanted to SLAP his face when he told us Mrs. VPW's preference in the position and method he used having SEX!!!!???? AND. Then, FINALLY, the moment came when he in his very VPW way exclaimed that THE original sin - - THE thing that Eve did in the Garden of Eden - the thing that the serpent beguiled her to do - the thing she convinced Adam to do.... (drumroll....) was...
MASTURBATE!!!!
I was like,
WHAT?
You put me through all of that absolute crap to tell me, we, the whole human race were separated from God because Adam pulled his pud!????!?!!!!?????
First of all there's not a man alive that anyone would have to coerce to do that.
SO. When I think of things to be mad at VP about, his lifting other people's work is not the highest thing on my personal list. Its not that I don't care about it, I do. Its just that it doesn't make a whole lot of difference to me at this point.
ROFLOL and gonna .... my pants!!! OMG!!! Did that bring back memories or what????!!!!! That was absolutely hysterical!! Thanks!
Then, FINALLY, the moment came when he in his very VPW way exclaimed that THE original sin - - THE thing that Eve did in the Garden of Eden - the thing that the serpent beguiled her to do - the thing she convinced Adam to do.... (drumroll....) was...
MASTURBATE!!!!
I was like,
WHAT?
You put me through all of that absolute crap to tell me, we, the whole human race were separated from God because Adam pulled his pud!????!?!!!!?????
First of all there's not a man alive that anyone would have to coerce to do that.
Then there's the weird logic that Eve would have encouraged Adam to fondle himself instead of HER....
And HCW - NO ONE has to be coerced to "do a little laundry."
I mean; if he had never said things like "God taught me..." and said stuff like "we should be better than the world..." people might not be so mad about him lifting stuff.
Is that right? Its not like people would have thought any less of him for giving credit where credit was due.
I imagine that if he had presented the same material and admitted right off the bat that he had compiled it word-for-word in some cases from other authors, but giving due crdit to those authors, he probably still would have gotten the following that he did. If he had presented himself consistantly as a compiler of existing material (consistantly...not just an offhand reference in TW:LIL) than I doubt that anyone would have held it against him.
But part of the mystique that he built around himself was the "God taught me", "The Word like it hasn't been taught since the First Century", and "I threw out all my books and commentaries" crap that we all sucked up.
I submit that if before we had taken PFAL someone had shown us evidence that he lied about so many key things and plagiarized his central works, we wouldn't have given him a second glance.
Yeah, maybe, but I'm not talking so much about the Wierwille "worship", which certainly went on, or the lack of paying attention, which also went on, but how Wierwille did an excellent job at getting us to trust him and what he said. Unless one came out of PFAL still skeptical about what was taught there was necessarily a taking of Wierwille's word for it.
I was twelve years old, and I was skeptical after taking PFAL . But who can argue with Ephesians 6:1?
That's reasonable. However, lacking a working knowledge of what qualifies a person teaching God's Word -- How would you possibly know anyone is qualified to teach anything? What qualifies a person to teach science? . . .
If your going to bring science into this you'd better start making sense.
. . .
Wasn't that the purpose of PFAL anyways?
Can you say with absolute certainty what the purpose of PFAL was?
. . .
Much of what GSers do for each other is question assumptions. If one can get past the defensiveness that comes with being questioned, a lot can be learned. For example, a poster might say something like "we all know that Corinthians is a reproof epistle". Another poster might question that position. The first poster may at the end of the day still believe that the epistles are divided into doctrinal, reproof and correction, but he will generally understand why after explaining it to someone else, or he may change his mind completely.
If your going to bring science into this you'd better start making sense.
Can you say with absolute certainty what the purpose of PFAL was?
Bolshevik, don't blame your inability to understand what I'm saying with my ability to say what I mean.
Can I "say with absolute certainty what the purpose of PFAL was"? Sure, I can. The question is: Can you believe what VP said was its purpose? I seriously doubt you could.
Despite all of TWI's assertions that they were a Biblical research ministry- the reality is that they were anything but. True research of any subject leads the researcher to question and evaluate any preconceived ideas they hold. True research inspires the reseacher to change their beliefs if the evidence they uncover makes it necessary to do so. True research makes the reseacher eager to share their insights gained from their voyage of discovery.
Bolshevik, don't blame your inability to understand what I'm saying with my ability to say what I mean.
I've been taught by people from Ivy league schools and other schools. The dudes from Harvard, they are pretty damned good.
I went in to school with the twi thinking that the school and education doesn't matter.
In my experience, it does.
The very first post of yours I read didn't make sense and still doesn't. Maybe it's your communication technique?
Can I "say with absolute certainty what the purpose of PFAL was"? Sure, I can. The question is: Can you believe what VP said was its purpose? I seriously doubt you could.
I've been taught by people from Ivy league schools and other schools. The dudes from Harvard, they are pretty damned good.
I went in to school with the twi thinking that the school and education doesn't matter.
In my experience, it does.
Well, I certainly hope they didn't teach you grammar, for if they did they obviously failed.
The very first post of yours I read didn't make sense and still doesn't. Maybe it's your communication technique?
Maybe it is but, I'm too old to change my style just to accommodate you. Besides, I've always thought a person who was really interested in understanding what another is saying would be smart enough to ask for clarification instead of insulting them.
Uhhh, are you vpw?
Good grief. I don't have to be VP to know what he said.
No, but did you know his mind? He plagiarized, among other things.
Sheesh! You can ask me the same question in as many different ways as you like and the answer will still be the same. I don't have to know his mind to know what he said. Additionally, your pointing out his plagiarism is nothing more than a red herring. It has nothing to do with his stated purpose for PFAL.
Sheesh! You can ask me the same question in as many different ways as you like and the answer will still be the same. I don't have to know his mind to know what he said. Additionally, your pointing out his plagiarism is nothing more than a red herring. It has nothing to do with his stated purpose for PFAL.
So we disagree.
His plagiarism has everything to do with it. Deceit. Deceit. Deceit.
His plagiarism has everything to do with it. Deceit. Deceit. Deceit.
Oh brother! Whether he was insincere about the stated purpose, does not change what he said the purpose was. Like I said -- the real question is: Can you believe what he said? Obviously you can't so it would be a waste of time telling you what he said.
Oh brother! Whether he was insincere about the stated purpose, does not change what he said the purpose was. Like I said -- the real question is: Can you believe what he said? Obviously you can't so it would be a waste of time telling you what he said?
Believe about the snow on the gas pumps or the snow in Tulsa?
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
26
25
27
59
Popular Days
Jun 8
60
Jun 7
55
Jun 10
38
Jan 4
18
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 26 posts
WordWolf 25 posts
Ham 27 posts
Larry N Moore 59 posts
Popular Days
Jun 8 2007
60 posts
Jun 7 2007
55 posts
Jun 10 2007
38 posts
Jan 4 2007
18 posts
Eyesopen
I know that this is a response for Oakspear but I just have to comment here...I don't look at this response as "placing VP on a pedestal". I know that many people did. I however did not. I simply expected the man that presumed to "teach" me a subject to actually be qualified to do so. I found out many years later as others did that his so called education was "slip shod" at best. But then I thought "surely he actually studied the Word so that he could teach it to others" (being self taught is not a crime). But this is not true either. So what is the truth? VP pretended to be an educated man that conducted his own research (sometimes with the input of others) so that he could teach others. But none of that actually happened. He wasn't on any pedestal so to speak for me, he was simply expected to live up to his own billing.
When he didn't match up I dismissed him as I would any other false teacher. (Had he attempted this flim flam at a University can you imagine the fallout?) Meanwhile most of us have had to go back and reexamine everything that he taught us and try to make sense of it. Certainly there was some truth in what he taught us be it someone elses work originally or not, but with it all mixed up together with the bad...well sometimes it is just easier to call it all crap and start with a clean slate as Rascal pointed out in another thread. One good thing that I pulled out of pfal was that I learned that it is possible to study the bible. Using his principals or not, it is available. So now I can and do actually study for myself and sometimes teach others.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
From my observation that would make you an exception to the rule. I don't mean to imply that everyone who ever sat through PFAL or was involved with TWI "worshiped the ground" that VP walked on. I'm just saying from what I observed -- many -- did.
That's reasonable. However, lacking a working knowledge of what qualifies a person teaching God's Word -- How would you possibly know anyone is qualified to teach anything? What qualifies a person to teach science? If the criteria for doing so is having gone to all the "right" schools and receiving all the "right" diplomas, then certainly such a criteria would prohibit any of us here from "teaching" anything the Bible says.From my perspective I don't expect anyone to live up to their own billing. I only try to live up to my own. I've always been a skeptic for as long as I can remember. That skepticism had gotten me into "trouble" on many occasions so I learned very early how to keep my mouth shut on matters which really didn't amount to much in the "grand scheme" of things.
That might explain why TWI started their own University. I was there once (for an AC). Beautiful place.Nothing wrong about that.
I don't see it the same way. How can you possibly start with a clean slate unless you do what he claimed to have done and throw away ANY books from ANY source and also stop listening to what people here as well as elsewhere have to say about the "Truth". In other words you would have to go back to the Bible. Unfortunately, unless you're fluent in Greek, Aramaic, and so forth somewhere along the line you're going to have to read what someone else says the meaning of the text is.Wasn't that the purpose of PFAL anyways?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
In my opinion, what hampers many ex-TWI folks is that they still use PFAL as a starting point for determining what they believe. It's a lot of work, but starting with as clean a slate as one can is an important part of moving beyond TWI.
I don't think one can ever get past depending on others for part of youyr knowledge. After all, even if you are fluent in Greek or Hebrew, who taught you Greek and Hebrew? One has to have a basis for determining what is dependable information.
Part of the problem for us ex-TWI folks is that we thought Wierwille was a dependable source and it turned out that he wasn't.
Much of what GSers do for each other is question assumptions. If one can get past the defensiveness that comes with being questioned, a lot can be learned. For example, a poster might say something like "we all know that Corinthians is a reproof epistle". Another poster might question that position. The first poster may at the end of the day still believe that the epistles are divided into doctrinal, reproof and correction, but he will generally understand why after explaining it to someone else, or he may change his mind completely.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
templelady
When we are seeking to master a subject, we read others, we compare their thoughts, we hold what they say up to a comparison with our own life experiences, we study the topic ourselves. Once we we have done all this we evaluate all we have learned and draw conclusions as to whether we agree with the majority, and how much we agree, then we put forward our own thoughts on the subject based on our research.
If we come to a different conclusion then what has been postulated before us, we are then able to cite areas in which we disagree with a given person, and why, as well as giving our own theories and support for those theories.
The person who plargiarizes, the person who lifts whole pages of someone else's work and presents them as thier own, misses vital steps in this process.
Despite all of TWI's assertions that they were a Biblical research ministry- the reality is that they were anything but. True research of any subject leads the researcher to question and evaluate any preconceived ideas they hold. True research inspires the reseacher to change their beliefs if the evidence they uncover makes it necessary to do so. True research makes the reseacher eager to share their insights gained from their voyage of discovery.
TWI on the other hand vigorously prohibited any of the above from happening, TWI vigorously denounced any who did the above and came up with something outside of the party line. If true research were being done by VPW, then no matter what others said in disagreement with his position he would have had the intellectual tools to re-research on his own and refute their arguments, or the intellectual honesty to admit that the newly presented viewpoint might indeed be the correct one and merit further investigation.
This give and take of ideas, this changing of ideas as new evidence becomes available is what makes any organization or ideaolgy dynamic. The constant evolution of our understanding leads to a deeper appreciation of what is true and valuable.
VPW not only stole from others he prevented himself from growing intellectually and spiritually by doing so. In so limiting himself, he found himself compelled to limit others by autocratic demands for complete obiedience to his dictates, since what he came to fear most were those who possessed the ability to truly research the topic at hand.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HCW
Its pretty much the approach I take personally. At this point in my life its kinda irrelevant to me where VP got the stuff in his books/teachings, etc. Reason being that I've classified him in my mind as an extremely driven, egotistical dude whose primary function in life was to be "king." He was an excellent speaker, a world class charismatic presenter with a sparkling personality (when he wanted) who had an "it factor" that drew people to him and made it "easy" to trust him.
My basic opinion of him is that he's the SAME as 99.8 % of ALL of the other guys who start their own church or ministry. IMO they do it because they want to be the king. The Bible confirms this when you look, historically at the people who were what we call Bible heros. Most of them fell. VP fell too. Seeing as he's about the same as any other guy who failed in ministry, to me, he's no longer something special.
Amen sister.
This is how I think of VP. When I think of him I focus on whatever good I was able to glean from my experience w/him personally and his ministry. The problem that I have w/ VP lifting other people's stuff is not so much the betrayal factor; his lying to us, presenting himself to me something he wasn't, etc. To me - the plagurism is less important than the CRAZY conclusions came up with after compiling all of his "research."
There were some who respected VP for some of his books back in the day. Yes, the IDEA of him plagurizing was not forefront then. Fast-forwarding to today, it seems that the stuff he was respected for was pretty much the stuff he stole from others who were actual scholars.
Dang it.
I remember sitting through hours of the CF&S class AFTER having anticipated taking it, getting the $$$ together, paying for it, then its finally here. Yay! Then I was APPALLED by the look of his face and the tone of his voice when he "taught" us slang terms for male & female private parts! I wanted to SLAP his face when he told us Mrs. VPW's preference in the position and method he used having SEX!!!!???? AND. Then, FINALLY, the moment came when he in his very VPW way exclaimed that THE original sin - - THE thing that Eve did in the Garden of Eden - the thing that the serpent beguiled her to do - the thing she convinced Adam to do.... (drumroll....) was...
MASTURBATE!!!!
I was like,
WHAT?
You put me through all of that absolute crap to tell me, we, the whole human race were separated from God because Adam pulled his pud!????!?!!!!?????
First of all there's not a man alive that anyone would have to coerce to do that.
SO. When I think of things to be mad at VP about, his lifting other people's work is not the highest thing on my personal list. Its not that I don't care about it, I do. Its just that it doesn't make a whole lot of difference to me at this point.
In the old days, everyone who knew Vp knew he had a wild side and that he was prone to crazy ideas. He even said that the reason they originally voted three trustees was to have Ermal & Harry have equal votes to his so they could keep him from doing crazy stuff. There was always a part of Vp that you just sorta dismissed, even back then; so its easy for me now. To be involved w/TWI there was always "the whole prove all things, hold fast to the good" thing concerning Vp. Especially after you'd been reamed by him a time or two, you had to dismiss part of him.
Not much has changed concerning him for me, I respect the parts of him I respect & have let go of other things.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
HCW,
Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner, but I wanted to comment right now, if I could, on this matter (after I described the collaborative process that brought about JCOP and JCOPS, you said):
I don't disagree. I was not complaining that this was how the books came about. Nor was I accusing VPW or anyone else of doing anything wrong here. I was simply trying to state and show that this was how the books came about. I was trying to show that this was not someone's opinion, but clear and documentable fact.
I believe it would have been better for VPW to credit himself as editor or publisher of the books (and we can get into a discussion of what qualifies someone to the title "editor," but I believe it is entirely appropriate here) than as author. But I haven't lost a second of sleep over that issue. Others may feel differently.
Anyway, you wrote "you may not like it...," and I wanted to clarify that I neither like nor dislike it. It's simply a fact, like the fact that the color of the blue book is, in fact, blue.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
HCW
I get your points Raf.
I was actually speaking more to a universal "you" than you specifically. I should get better at using a more unspecific term when I'm being unspecific.
I couldn't agree more with that Raf. And. I think it was Garth who made a point to the effect that seeing as TWI called themselves a "Biblical Research, Teaching and Fellowship ministry" they should have acted accordingly. It would have done nothing but add credibility to the ministry for Vp to include anyone who added anything to the research of a given publication.
I mentioned earlier that my daughter told me that the research project she's working on as a summer intern @ John Hopkins is going to include her in the list of authors when the thing is published in whatever medical journal. Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems to me that the fact that Vp wrote "checks with his mouth that he and TWI couldn't cash" concerning how great they were that really hack people off on this subject. I mean; if he had never said things like "God taught me..." and said stuff like "we should be better than the world..." people might not be so mad about him lifting stuff.
Is that right? Its not like people would have thought any less of him for giving credit where credit was due.
My points on authorship is that when it comes to companies and employees, like it or not, the employee's work belongs to the company and the company is under no legal obligation to credit the author. And, when a copyrighted work, such as a book contains things that are not the work of the author of the book the book still is legally the copyright protected work of the author.
For the record. I didn't mention legalities to in any way defend, or minimalize the morality issue of Vp lifting other's work. My point was that TWI went ti great lengths to cover Vp & itself legally regardless of how immoral they may have acted in a given situation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
So so true. The person who merely lifts whole pagess of another's works, makes the same possible false conclusions. The same errors.
If a person skips the process of true discovery.. the conclusions have no merit. At least in my opinion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eyesopen
ROFLOL and gonna .... my pants!!! OMG!!! Did that bring back memories or what????!!!!! That was absolutely hysterical!! Thanks!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
Then there's the weird logic that Eve would have encouraged Adam to fondle himself instead of HER....
And HCW - NO ONE has to be coerced to "do a little laundry."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
But part of the mystique that he built around himself was the "God taught me", "The Word like it hasn't been taught since the First Century", and "I threw out all my books and commentaries" crap that we all sucked up.
I submit that if before we had taken PFAL someone had shown us evidence that he lied about so many key things and plagiarized his central works, we wouldn't have given him a second glance.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I was twelve years old, and I was skeptical after taking PFAL . But who can argue with Ephesians 6:1?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
If your going to bring science into this you'd better start making sense.
Can you say with absolute certainty what the purpose of PFAL was?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Bolshevik, don't blame your inability to understand what I'm saying with my ability to say what I mean.
Can I "say with absolute certainty what the purpose of PFAL was"? Sure, I can. The question is: Can you believe what VP said was its purpose? I seriously doubt you could.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Hell yeah!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
I've been taught by people from Ivy league schools and other schools. The dudes from Harvard, they are pretty damned good.
I went in to school with the twi thinking that the school and education doesn't matter.
In my experience, it does.
The very first post of yours I read didn't make sense and still doesn't. Maybe it's your communication technique?
Uhhh, are you vpw?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Maybe it is but, I'm too old to change my style just to accommodate you. Besides, I've always thought a person who was really interested in understanding what another is saying would be smart enough to ask for clarification instead of insulting them.
Good grief. I don't have to be VP to know what he said.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
No, but did you know his mind? He plagiarized, among other things.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Sheesh! You can ask me the same question in as many different ways as you like and the answer will still be the same. I don't have to know his mind to know what he said. Additionally, your pointing out his plagiarism is nothing more than a red herring. It has nothing to do with his stated purpose for PFAL.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
So we disagree.
His plagiarism has everything to do with it. Deceit. Deceit. Deceit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Oh brother! Whether he was insincere about the stated purpose, does not change what he said the purpose was. Like I said -- the real question is: Can you believe what he said? Obviously you can't so it would be a waste of time telling you what he said.
Edited by Larry N MooreLink to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
Believe about the snow on the gas pumps or the snow in Tulsa?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Larry N Moore
Bolshevik, you asked me if I could tell you what the purpose of PFAL was. You changing the "goal posts" only makes you look foolish.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bolshevik
The people who care about looking foolish don't post here.
Refresh my memory, what his exact purpose was. You're talking about PFAL right? (I was very only 12 remember, twi ended its use not long after)
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.