Do you have info published here or elsewhere on the 'net about the content of the book?
Apparently, your friends think it has some worthy things to say that don't need the polemic element against DrW. Might be worth considering.
BTW, owing to the title.... care to weigh in (or exWay in) over on the "chapter and verse" thread "Preacher" started? We've been talking about Genesis.
Do you have info published here or elsewhere on the 'net about the content of the book?
Apparently, your friends think it has some worthy things to say that don't need the polemic element against DrW. Might be worth considering.
BTW, owing to the title.... care to weigh in (or exWay in) over on the "chapter and verse" thread "Preacher" started? We've been talking about Genesis.
Really, I'm not plugging the book, mainly because I need more editing and updating and this time,
i have not read your book......was not aware of it until reading your post................but, since you asked, here's my opinion..............what is YOUR thinking regarding mentioning vic's name?.....it makes sense to me, that, if you are exposing what you consider to be wrong or false doctrine that vic was the major proponent of, then it makes perfect sense to "credit" these doctrines to the man who conjured them up!.........as you mentioned, this couple never suggested you not mention bullinger's or lamsa's name??.....why not??........seems THEY...(the couple)...are the ones who have yet to put twi behind them and not you!!
again, i don't know what your purpose is, but whatever it is, it's YOUR"S.......not their's or twi's!!.......sounds to me like they're still hung up in some kind of wierwille "apologeia"...............are they related to vic???...............if they are,....you've already shown respect and deference to them by witholding the multitude of facts regarding vic's perverted, sociopathic and narcissistic behavior toward god's children, his brothers and sisters in christ!............do they have a personal agenda that is at cross-purposes with the "agenda" of your book?.............DO YOU, as the author, see the need to edit out his name and produce a second edition of your book??...........if so,.....then, imo, you should edit out ethelbert's and gerorge's names too, in order to assure editorial honesty and fairness, no?
if you think that editting out wierwille's name would broaden the appeal of your book.....increase its marketability...........then, that is a valid editorial decision that you, as the author and publisher can make...........but.......is that what the purpose of your book is???
anyway, eagle.....thanks for asking for our opinions................that's mine.................for what it's worth..................................peace.
Any thoughts on that? It would have to be a new edition of the book and currently I am forming a small publishing company to move this book as well as others. Since I don't feel that too many at GS greatly admire VPW, though some may, I thought I could get honest feedback here.
Should I go ahead and edit his name out and rewrite it quoting only the doctrinal issues? I can do this.
Eagle,
I haven't read the book, but it sounds very interesting. I think it depends on who your target audience is. I wouldn't remove references to VP to make it more appealing to VP lovers. But if your target audience is way or ex-way people then definitely leave the references in. It seems that it would be a big help to those trying to make sense of doctrinal errors post-way.
If you're going for a broader audience, after all, most people have never heard of TWI or VPW, then it would make sense to relegate him to the footnotes. I could see people scratching their heads, going, VP Who?
The question I have, is what stake does this nice couple whom you admire, who are avid Wierwill admirers and supporters have in you taking vp's name out of the book?
Off hand, the only persons that would come to mind who fit that category of admiration would be upper eschalon CFF members,or Geer group members who'd want to have your book in their bookstores so their members could learn about the errors, but who wouldn't want vp's name used because it would tarnish his reputation since he is admired and exaulted there.  I would imagine if this is the case, it would be a deal breaker to keep VP's name included.
Any thoughts on that? It would have to be a new edition of the book and currently I am forming a small publishing company to move this book as well as others. Since I don't feel that too many at GS greatly admire VPW, though some may, I thought I could get honest feedback here.
Should I go ahead and edit his name out and rewrite it quoting only the doctrinal issues? I can do this.
I think that would be better.
If you can do it in a way that doesn't get personal, then the debate would be about ideas and not people.
Then you could generalize the second one, and incorporate a few other non-mainstream beliefs in it in comparison to your research. This would target a larger audience. Give it a different name..
It may be a limited audience, but the book with vic's name in it may be more appropriate for a group who's theological beliefs do not extend much beyond vic's way of thinking..
Eagle, I clicked your link and saw a small statement that might need revision, regarding the unforgivable sin:
This theory proposes that the Devil, or "Lucifer," can at any time catch a person "confessing the devil" as his Lord and thus gets imparted to that person "unholy spirit." ...
I am unaware that VPW ever taught that the seed boys get "unholy spirit." What was taught and memorialized in the syllabus was "the seed of Satan". Just like one would receive the seed of Christ, another would receive the seed of Satan.
Whatever that seed is seems vague now. I never really understood it, honestly. I think the teaching developed into something entirely different than "spirit" or even "unholy spirit". In fact wasn't it LCM who taught it was some kind of a physical organ or transmitter in the body (as told in athletes)?
Eagle, I clicked your link and saw a small statement that might need revision, regarding the unforgivable sin:
I am unaware that VPW ever taught that the seed boys get "unholy spirit." What was taught and memorialized in the syllabus was "the seed of Satan". Just like one would receive the seed of Christ, another would receive the seed of Satan.
Whatever that seed is seems vague now. I never really understood it, honestly. I think the teaching developed into something entirely different than "spirit" or even "unholy spirit". In fact wasn't it LCM who taught it was some kind of a physical organ or transmitter in the body (as told in athletes)?
Oldiesman
May I suggest you review page 16 of your Advanced Class syllabus?
Here on page 16 it clearly states that GOD, who is "Holy Spirit" gives "holy spirit" and THE ADVERSARY, who is "Unholy Spirit" gives "unholy spirit".
Hey! I didn't write the syllabus! Complain to the author.
May I suggest you review page 16 of your Advanced Class syllabus?
Here on page 16 it clearly states that GOD, who is "Holy Spirit" gives "holy spirit" and THE ADVERSARY, who is "Unholy Spirit" gives "unholy spirit".
Hey! I didn't write the syllabus! Complain to the author.
I have the Advance Class syllabus from 1991. On page 16 it only talks about: "The Great Principle" - ie. God's Spirit teaches His creation in you which is now your spirit and your spirit teaches your mind. Then it becomes manifested in the senses realm as you act. There is a triangle on the page and written in that trangle is "God who is Spirth" with an arrow line pointing to a circle. Inside that circle is written spirit (with a downward pointing arrow) to soul (mind) (another downward arrow) to body. There is another arrow line pointing out of that circle with 'you speak out' written above the arrow line.
There's also a couple scripture references on the page, 1 Samuesl 3:1-19 and Romans 10:9-10. That's it. There's no mention about "unholy spirit" at all on this page. Which Advance class syllabus [year] do you have? Maybe they changed the syllabus over the years?
I have the Advance Class syllabus from 1991. On page 16 it only talks about: "The Great Principle" - ie. God's Spirit teaches His creation in you which is now your spirit and your spirit teaches your mind. Then it becomes manifested in the senses realm as you act. There is a triangle on the page and written in that trangle is "God who is Spirth" with an arrow line pointing to a circle. Inside that circle is written spirit (with a downward pointing arrow) to soul (mind) (another downward arrow) to body. There is another arrow line pointing out of that circle with 'you speak out' written above the arrow line.
There's also a couple scripture references on the page, 1 Samuesl 3:1-19 and Romans 10:9-10. That's it. There's no mention about "unholy spirit" at all on this page. Which Advance class syllabus [year] do you have? Maybe they changed the syllabus over the years?
1971.
It is the syllabus I received when I took AC in 1973.
The page that you referred to is page 8 in this one.
The part I am referring to is actually depicted in a graphic(like the one you described.) but I have no way to scan it.
Then you could generalize the second one, and incorporate a few other non-mainstream beliefs in it in comparison to your research. This would target a larger audience. Give it a different name..
It may be a limited audience, but the book with vic's name in it may be more appropriate for a group who's theological beliefs do not extend much beyond vic's way of thinking..
Printing costs are porohibitive, I've been in the printing business for off and on 35 years and the paper costs alone have sky-rocketed. A self published book of say 10,000 could easily run a half mill depending on the amount of pages.
I did not know you had a book. But I like truth. If you are talking about the CULT we were in then I should think you should mention HIS name. It was his cult
I do not want to read a sugar coated protect the Vic book -- but a truthful book about what happened -- well I would read that.
I did not know you had a book. But I like truth. If you are talking about the CULT we were in then I should think you should mention HIS name. It was his cult
I do not want to read a sugar coated protect the Vic book -- but a truthful book about what happened -- well I would read that.
What is the POV of the book?
Does POV mean "point of view?" In the beginning it was written specifically for ex-Way believers. It can be purchased by anyone but was not targeted for a broad audience. It was mentioned to me that if I removed VPWs name out of it, more people that are ex-Way would buy it. I have to conclude that there are still thousands of Wierwille admirers out there that apparently don't like reading how bad his research really was.
I can take his name out of the general text in almost all cases. I can delegate the source to the notes and references and subject indexes. I can change the name of some of the chapters to appeal to a much broader audience and turn it into a biblical mysteries book.
Since many people do NOT buy it based on being offended that Wierwille is directly challenged in the book, I can separate his name from the doctrine in the general text and subscript him to the back of the book. I can change the introduction easily. However, my belief here is that even if I take his name from the general text, those ex-Wayers that wanted his name removed will most likely STILL NOT buy it because they would still want to believe the old PFAL doctrine anyway. Showing scripture to the contrary will not matter to them in any way, based on my experience.
If I do this, it would be to market it for a general audience who could not relate to the Way experience, but can relate to the biblical contradictions or far out theology. I've been told by others I knew in professional marketing and advertising that were never involved with the Way that I should expand my audience but in order to do that, have to get rid of the cult mentality mentioned in the book, yet keep with the scriptural issues mentioned because the Way is not the only organization that dealt in these matters.
This may be the way to go, whether or not anyone was offended. However, for those that knew the Way and were not attached to Wierwille or the Wierwille name, the original as written is the way to go for them. It would not bother them at all.
I am seriously considering that new edition without Wierwille mentioned in the text (as much, if at all) and relegate the man's name to the back of the book. It will take a while yet, and my company will have to get off the ground because I need full editing control of the book. It costs too much with another publisher.
That way a general audience can read it without thinking "the Way WHAT?"
I've read your book and I don't see any real reason to remove the name. Give credit where credit is due. I am still debating a similiar issue with Loy. Your references to VP are honest. If some folks dont like it well that is their problem isn't it? It is understandable that you would consider the removal for marketability, not to make money but to reach a bigger audience. But do not allow your work to be "watered down" by the "politically correct" folks. If they have a point to make or a story to tell then let them write a book.
I kind of agree with Don't Worry be Happy, it is your book and you are editing it, you decide where you want to go with it and what you want to accomplish with it. That will give you the answer.
I don't feel that I should remove his name because others are offended, either. The bigger audience appeal outside the Way is much more of an appeal now since the book, while selling, did not sell among its targeted audience as expected. I will still be noting Wierwille as the source. That will not change.
It is also a way to keep the book going long after TWI vanishes, should that ever happen, or at least become insignificant. They don't seem to change at all.
I expect the ex-Wayers that were admirers of Wierwille will not buy the book anyway. But there are those in the greater Christian audience that wants to remedy the gospel "contradictions" or the spiritual matters discussed. That would profit those people.
EyesOpen...you mentioned something about Loy...oh boy...your book sounds thought-provoking to start. Let me know when it is done, okay?
Recommended Posts
anotherDan
Plug away, brother!
Do you have info published here or elsewhere on the 'net about the content of the book?
Apparently, your friends think it has some worthy things to say that don't need the polemic element against DrW. Might be worth considering.
BTW, owing to the title.... care to weigh in (or exWay in) over on the "chapter and verse" thread "Preacher" started? We've been talking about Genesis.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I remember when I was growing up in Cleveland, people liked to tell "Polack"(ethnic) jokes.
Somebody(probably not a "Polack") decided it was not "politically correct" (or whatever the term was at that time) to describe it.
One of the late night TV guys who liked to tell "Polack" jokes jumped right on it.
He started telling "Certain Eastern Ethnic European" jokes.
Then, he got the best of both worlds, he poked fun at the "Polacks" and got a bonus of poking fun at people who criticized him.
The answer is quite clear----I think.
Simply replace all references to VPW with references to a "certain Eastern Ethnic European" cult leader.
OR
Leave it in wherever the context requires it.
You can't, and shouldn't, change history just to please those who don't care to face it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eagle
Really, I'm not plugging the book, mainly because I need more editing and updating and this time,
I am doing it myself. For the website, it is The Genesis Pursuit
Thanks for the input on both posts so far. Hope more check in. I'll check into the "Chapter and Verse" thread.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DontWorryBeHappy
Hello Eagle!
i have not read your book......was not aware of it until reading your post................but, since you asked, here's my opinion..............what is YOUR thinking regarding mentioning vic's name?.....it makes sense to me, that, if you are exposing what you consider to be wrong or false doctrine that vic was the major proponent of, then it makes perfect sense to "credit" these doctrines to the man who conjured them up!.........as you mentioned, this couple never suggested you not mention bullinger's or lamsa's name??.....why not??........seems THEY...(the couple)...are the ones who have yet to put twi behind them and not you!!
again, i don't know what your purpose is, but whatever it is, it's YOUR"S.......not their's or twi's!!.......sounds to me like they're still hung up in some kind of wierwille "apologeia"...............are they related to vic???...............if they are,....you've already shown respect and deference to them by witholding the multitude of facts regarding vic's perverted, sociopathic and narcissistic behavior toward god's children, his brothers and sisters in christ!............do they have a personal agenda that is at cross-purposes with the "agenda" of your book?.............DO YOU, as the author, see the need to edit out his name and produce a second edition of your book??...........if so,.....then, imo, you should edit out ethelbert's and gerorge's names too, in order to assure editorial honesty and fairness, no?
if you think that editting out wierwille's name would broaden the appeal of your book.....increase its marketability...........then, that is a valid editorial decision that you, as the author and publisher can make...........but.......is that what the purpose of your book is???
anyway, eagle.....thanks for asking for our opinions................that's mine.................for what it's worth..................................peace.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wrdsandwrks
Eagle,
I haven't read the book, but it sounds very interesting. I think it depends on who your target audience is. I wouldn't remove references to VP to make it more appealing to VP lovers. But if your target audience is way or ex-way people then definitely leave the references in. It seems that it would be a big help to those trying to make sense of doctrinal errors post-way.
If you're going for a broader audience, after all, most people have never heard of TWI or VPW, then it would make sense to relegate him to the footnotes. I could see people scratching their heads, going, VP Who?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
now I see
The question I have, is what stake does this nice couple whom you admire, who are avid Wierwill admirers and supporters have in you taking vp's name out of the book?
Off hand, the only persons that would come to mind who fit that category of admiration would be upper eschalon CFF members,or Geer group members who'd want to have your book in their bookstores so their members could learn about the errors, but who wouldn't want vp's name used because it would tarnish his reputation since he is admired and exaulted there.  I would imagine if this is the case, it would be a deal breaker to keep VP's name included.
Tough call for you, what is the affiliation of these people?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
Hi Stephen. David here. :)
Tough question. It really is. I'll try to lay out some thoughts here,
and you can sift out the chaff you might find.
I keep your book in my car -- because I tend to drive to places to read,
getting away from the computer (to state parks, North Shore of Lake Superior, etc.).
If I'm in the house (these days), there's too many *interruptions* to plain old reading.
Lately -- I need to get out of the house to peruse a good book!
I've yet to read it from front to back. I skip around as the mood hits me.
I've probably read the whole thing by now, but don't test me on it!! :P
One thing I did notice -- the docvic connection to a lot of your chapters,
which you're asking about now. For whom did you write this book??
Mainstream folks, general public, or ex-wayfers?
A lot of folks (mainstream denominations) haven't heard of 4 crucified, 6 denials, etc.
(That's just my imo -- since I don't know it for a fact,
but have been questioned by the same, whenever I mentioned things like that.)
Honestly -- (imo) keeping docvic's name in there relegates your book to refuting what he taught,
and separates your book from the *masses* of others. However -- keeping his name in there
stikes a point with the folks who bought into his doctrine.
To whom do you want to target your *message* to??
Docvic supporters will immediately know who taught what you're discussing.
(With or without the name attached).
Those who have never heard of docvic, will wonder "Who is this guy??"
Like I said -- that's a tough question.
If you want to get a lot of folks looking at your thesis --
meebe just put docvic in the footnotes, and let your discussion of the
various topics be out there for folks to peruse,
as something that was taught somewhere, and believed by many.
I don't often agree with twi folk (these days), however ---
If you're looking for this book to reach a WIDE audience,
it might be better to relegate docvic's name to footnotes.
Again -- just my humble imo.
I know what I used to believe,
and as I read what you have researched,
it makes me glad I have a moustache.
Gives me something to chew on, while reading!!
(Good luck with your editing!!!)
David
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
I think that would be better.
If you can do it in a way that doesn't get personal, then the debate would be about ideas and not people.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
BTW, if you will send me a complimentary copy of your book, I will read it and give you a detailed critique from one who doesn't hate Wierwille. :o :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Why not simply publish two books?
Then you could generalize the second one, and incorporate a few other non-mainstream beliefs in it in comparison to your research. This would target a larger audience. Give it a different name..
It may be a limited audience, but the book with vic's name in it may be more appropriate for a group who's theological beliefs do not extend much beyond vic's way of thinking..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Oldies.....why don't you take wierwille's doctrine of "the law of believing"........and BELIEVE for extra money to buy the book? <_<
You seem to talk a good talk about pfal.....but you walk contrary to its "benefits."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Eagle, I clicked your link and saw a small statement that might need revision, regarding the unforgivable sin:
I am unaware that VPW ever taught that the seed boys get "unholy spirit." What was taught and memorialized in the syllabus was "the seed of Satan". Just like one would receive the seed of Christ, another would receive the seed of Satan.
Whatever that seed is seems vague now. I never really understood it, honestly. I think the teaching developed into something entirely different than "spirit" or even "unholy spirit". In fact wasn't it LCM who taught it was some kind of a physical organ or transmitter in the body (as told in athletes)?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
I think he said that it was that part of the brain was kinda "burned out".
kinda like a hole in the dike..
Much a description of himself..
something "missing", would never "get it.."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Oldiesman
May I suggest you review page 16 of your Advanced Class syllabus?
Here on page 16 it clearly states that GOD, who is "Holy Spirit" gives "holy spirit" and THE ADVERSARY, who is "Unholy Spirit" gives "unholy spirit".
Hey! I didn't write the syllabus! Complain to the author.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
OK Waysider, thanks for the correction. I was quoting from the PFAL syllabus and hadn't looked at the advanced. Thanks.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
What The Hey
I have the Advance Class syllabus from 1991. On page 16 it only talks about: "The Great Principle" - ie. God's Spirit teaches His creation in you which is now your spirit and your spirit teaches your mind. Then it becomes manifested in the senses realm as you act. There is a triangle on the page and written in that trangle is "God who is Spirth" with an arrow line pointing to a circle. Inside that circle is written spirit (with a downward pointing arrow) to soul (mind) (another downward arrow) to body. There is another arrow line pointing out of that circle with 'you speak out' written above the arrow line.
There's also a couple scripture references on the page, 1 Samuesl 3:1-19 and Romans 10:9-10. That's it. There's no mention about "unholy spirit" at all on this page. Which Advance class syllabus [year] do you have? Maybe they changed the syllabus over the years?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
1971.
It is the syllabus I received when I took AC in 1973.
The page that you referred to is page 8 in this one.
The part I am referring to is actually depicted in a graphic(like the one you described.) but I have no way to scan it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
year2027
God first
Beloved Eagle or Steve
God loves you my dear friend
If it was me I leave the book as you wrote it because this book help on get bye at a time you needed it
Getting past the Way Stage is a big one and a hard and you have done it
Wierwille put himself in the open with his books you just answer your heart back at him
so leave his name in them
but begin a new book if you have not all ready one without Wierwille because you are going places he did not go in your walk of God's love
It does not matter how fast or slow things are read but the only thing matters is that you put your heart into them
thank you
with love and a holy kiss blowing your way Roy
PS I did not read all this tread so sorry if I answered like another person
Link to comment
Share on other sites
bulwinkl
Printing costs are porohibitive, I've been in the printing business for off and on 35 years and the paper costs alone have sky-rocketed. A self published book of say 10,000 could easily run a half mill depending on the amount of pages.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Oh.. I had the impression it was an e-book..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
Eagle
I did not know you had a book. But I like truth. If you are talking about the CULT we were in then I should think you should mention HIS name. It was his cult
I do not want to read a sugar coated protect the Vic book -- but a truthful book about what happened -- well I would read that.
What is the POV of the book?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eagle
Does POV mean "point of view?" In the beginning it was written specifically for ex-Way believers. It can be purchased by anyone but was not targeted for a broad audience. It was mentioned to me that if I removed VPWs name out of it, more people that are ex-Way would buy it. I have to conclude that there are still thousands of Wierwille admirers out there that apparently don't like reading how bad his research really was.
I can take his name out of the general text in almost all cases. I can delegate the source to the notes and references and subject indexes. I can change the name of some of the chapters to appeal to a much broader audience and turn it into a biblical mysteries book.
Since many people do NOT buy it based on being offended that Wierwille is directly challenged in the book, I can separate his name from the doctrine in the general text and subscript him to the back of the book. I can change the introduction easily. However, my belief here is that even if I take his name from the general text, those ex-Wayers that wanted his name removed will most likely STILL NOT buy it because they would still want to believe the old PFAL doctrine anyway. Showing scripture to the contrary will not matter to them in any way, based on my experience.
If I do this, it would be to market it for a general audience who could not relate to the Way experience, but can relate to the biblical contradictions or far out theology. I've been told by others I knew in professional marketing and advertising that were never involved with the Way that I should expand my audience but in order to do that, have to get rid of the cult mentality mentioned in the book, yet keep with the scriptural issues mentioned because the Way is not the only organization that dealt in these matters.
This may be the way to go, whether or not anyone was offended. However, for those that knew the Way and were not attached to Wierwille or the Wierwille name, the original as written is the way to go for them. It would not bother them at all.
I am seriously considering that new edition without Wierwille mentioned in the text (as much, if at all) and relegate the man's name to the back of the book. It will take a while yet, and my company will have to get off the ground because I need full editing control of the book. It costs too much with another publisher.
That way a general audience can read it without thinking "the Way WHAT?"
Eagle
Edited by EagleLink to comment
Share on other sites
Eyesopen
Eagle,
I've read your book and I don't see any real reason to remove the name. Give credit where credit is due. I am still debating a similiar issue with Loy. Your references to VP are honest. If some folks dont like it well that is their problem isn't it? It is understandable that you would consider the removal for marketability, not to make money but to reach a bigger audience. But do not allow your work to be "watered down" by the "politically correct" folks. If they have a point to make or a story to tell then let them write a book.
I kind of agree with Don't Worry be Happy, it is your book and you are editing it, you decide where you want to go with it and what you want to accomplish with it. That will give you the answer.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Eagle
Thanks Eyes...
I don't feel that I should remove his name because others are offended, either. The bigger audience appeal outside the Way is much more of an appeal now since the book, while selling, did not sell among its targeted audience as expected. I will still be noting Wierwille as the source. That will not change.
It is also a way to keep the book going long after TWI vanishes, should that ever happen, or at least become insignificant. They don't seem to change at all.
I expect the ex-Wayers that were admirers of Wierwille will not buy the book anyway. But there are those in the greater Christian audience that wants to remedy the gospel "contradictions" or the spiritual matters discussed. That would profit those people.
EyesOpen...you mentioned something about Loy...oh boy...your book sounds thought-provoking to start. Let me know when it is done, okay?
Eagle
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.