so what about a comparison of vpw to billy graham? why does the vpw to mlk thing have to go around about once a year?
Compare VP and BG?
OK, here's one for starters.
The story about VP preaching to the trees as a young man was actually "lifted" from BG. To be fair, though, I think it was Uncle (He wasn't MY uncle.) Harry who told the story.
No one can derail a topic like Ham with his streams of thought. Ever try to get it down on one post?
Of course one can be critical of King. Abraham Lincoln was flawed also, which makes for interesting reading, but doesn't negate his accomplishments.
Whether you love him or hate him, there's no question that MLK was the key figure and spokesman for civil rights in his day, and that the world was changed as a result of his life-and death.
He wasn't killed because he plagiarized, or had affairs,or was as flawed as the rest of us. Ask any black person, or many of any race, what they think of King, and the debate of his impact on history is settled.
i think what got me going with this discussion is that in the way international they were always doing this kind of thing, comparing victor paul wierwille to the other "newsworthy evangelists in the world", and of course victor paul wierwille came up smelling not quite so crappy as he would if he had to stand on his own two feet, you know that stuff the way international always did and maybe still does, "look over there at that out in left field screw up, won't ya? do you want that life or do you want the life in the word with us? huh? do ya? what do you think? do you really want to try it out there with those screw balls?" but the thing is that there is no comparison at all whatsoever because victor paul wierwille was a charlatan and a sexual predator and huckster and an evil doer from the getgo and he never intended to serve the lord with all his heart, soul, mind and body, but instead intended to serve his lusts that popped up whenever they popped up with whoever was convienient when they popped up, even if they were underage or he had to drug them to "convince" them it was "consensual". now if anybody can find even a hint of this kind of activity going on with mlk or billy graham, then and only then can a serious and viable comparison be done. otherwise it's the same old lame stuff of the same old cult days from whence i came when i had to have some straw to grasp at to help myself believe it wasn't all so bad as it was.
I agree with Brainfixed... It's like trying to compare apples to tortillas. Sure, they are both food, but the comparison ends there. MLK made an indelible mark on the history of this country and the world. VPW wasn't even a blip on the radar given the size of the country and the world. Sure, the effect of his life was HUGE to those of us who were involved in twi, but to the entire country? Not by a long shot.
I don't see great value with comparing anything or anyone without weighting both correctly, agreed.
In fact given the overall attitude towards VPW here, I can't see why he's compared to anyone or anything anymore except for the sake of conversation. Like I said, yearly recycle.
King's plagiarism's been noted here before and the comparison's always drawn the same. Everyone generally recognizes King's contribution as greater and his plagiarism as a lesser issue of smaller impact.
I gather that the perception of results scales the morality and ethics of the act committed based on what I'm reading here. Can't say I agree with that approach morally or ethically but in either case there's no great loss at this point how you view it. King's gone as is Weirwille and their respective legacies speak for themselves.
I don't see great value with comparing anything or anyone without weighting both correctly, agreed.
I tend to agree with this........and, that's why the plagairism issue comes front and center (for me on this discussion forum).
In comparing issues side-by-side, many of us on GS have tarred-and-feathered wierwille with the plagiarism charge time and time again. We have detailed how he stole from E. Stanley Jones, J.E. Stiles, B.G. Leonard, E.W. Bullinger and others.
Yet, in weighing Martin Luther King Jr. with the same charge of plagairism.......he gets a free pass. Why?
Click here........I know, wikipedia isn't the greatest of sources.
Although several newspapers had the story for over a year, none published it. The incident was first reported in December 3, 1989 edition of the Sunday Telegraph by Frank Johnson, titled "Martin Luther King — Was He a Plagiarist?" The incident was then reported in U.S. in the November 9, 1990 edition of the Wall Street Journal, under the title of "To Their Dismay, King Scholars Find a Troubling Pattern." Several other newspapers then followed with stories, including the Boston Globe and the New York Times. Numerous newspaper editorials defended King, saying he was still a great man regardless of his academic fraud. There has as yet, been no explanation of the long delay between the discovery and its publication.
Boston University decided not to revoke his doctorate, saying that although King acted improperly, his dissertation still "makes an intelligent contribution to scholarship." However, a letter is now attached to King's dissertation in the university library, noting that numerous passages were included without the appropriate quotations and citations of sources.[7][1]
Plagiarism is one issue........contributions to society are quite another. Does the former nullify the latter? Not in a thousand years. Clearly though, King's dissertation came under scrutiny and review, but in the end was left intact. Leaving a letter attached to this dissertation was like putting an asterisk to his name at Boston University......of which, history could care less.
To weigh these issues, I find MLK's legacy, although slightly tarnished.....standing the test of times.
And, wierwille?........tarnished, tainted, corrupt and immoral. Along with plagiarism, the wierwille legacy was one of abuse, sexual predation, drunkenness, deception, fraud, etc.
It's very difficult to know to any depth to what degree the character flaws - and strengths - of another person effect their decisions, choices, behavior. We ourselves often have difficulty coming to grips with who we really are and admitting why we really do the things we do.
Some choices, although "good", even admirable, are the result of peer pressure, a desire for recognition. Anger, resentment, bitterness - these aren't just accusations to bring to bear against someone else, they're real emotions and feelings that effect we experience. "Fear" - not as dirty a word as we may have once been led to believe but clearly the protective mechanisms we have can go into overdrive and lead us to do all sorts of things for no other reason than the perception we have that we're somehow protecting ourselves, our stuff, those close to us, even when we're not and even when it's counter productive.
Similarly bad choices, things people would judge wrong, can be done for any and all of the same reasons and others as well. The scale tips at every turn. Why is the question and that's something that isn't always clear even when we think it is. We just have to make the best determination we can when we need to, I think.
I once did a study on "worship" and God. The question was "why does God require worship, and what is that - really? In the relationship I have with God, what does it amount to, in real time, in anticipation of the future and what I'll do tomorrow? I was surprised at the conclusions, and still see it as a topic of investigation for myself.
Anyhoo - I see King as a man of many admirable qualities, who was far from perfect but who in fact never had the burden of such a claim to live up or down to, who vigorously pursued his life's work and in so doing left a legacy of inspiration in his actions - what he did - as much or more than with what he said. It's not an easy road he chose. Life can be hard, even when it's easy.
........and, that's why the plagairism issue comes front and center (for me on this discussion forum).
for me then i wonder why take just one of the many thousands of preachers and teachers and ministers and evangelists that could be accused of plagiarism? i don't think that it is just plagiarism with wierwille on this forum at all, but i think that the plagiarism is one level of his dishonesty that even when confronted with it, he held to it as if he did no wrong, and there is a huge difference between out and out plagiarism and repeating the same thing over and over again. i mean you seriously could not have but one church with but one preacher if every time someone preached a sermon that had been preached before it was called plagiarism. what victor paul wierwille did was steal the work of others, put his name to it, sell it as his work, and built a whole cult saying that god had revealed things to him that had not been revealed since the first century church. now that's out and out plagiarism. but borrowing the syntax and even words of others when preaching? that's done all the time in churches throughout the world. in the very article you cite it also says
Keith Miller, in Voice of Deliverance: The Language of Martin Luther King, Jr. and Its Sources and elsewhere,argues that such "borrowing", which he terms "voice merging", follows in a long tradition of folk preaching, particularly in the African-American church, and should not necessarily be termed plagiarism. On the contrary, he views King's skillful combination of language from different sources as a major oratorical skill.
and you really have to make a difference here, too, between preaching and biblical research and teaching. victor paul wierwille himself was the one that started everybody down the rabbit hole of "saying what you mean and meaning what you say" and making sure everything "fit like a hand in a glove" and all that "jot and tittle" stuff about where commas go or don't go, or how many were crucified or what day jesus died, etc., to prove to everybody how right he was and how wrong everybody else was based on their errors, so when he made such an eggregious error as plagiarism, it was a very big deal indeed because the man that made a boat load of money on the idea that he was the only one that got it right was really, in the end, the only one that didn't have a clue but had stolen everything he had "right". so really, plagiarism isn't the issue at all, but the "gateway drug" to the real issue of the man behind the drapes, red or not.
Anyhoo - I see King as a man of many admirable qualities, who was far from perfect but who in fact never had the burden of such a claim to live up or down to, who vigorously pursued his life's work and in so doing left a legacy of inspiration in his actions - what he did - as much or more than with what he said. It's not an easy road he chose. Life can be hard, even when it's easy.
Perhaps.....the category to which we associate these men defines that burden they carry and their greatness.
King / Civil Rights Leader........the torch he carried burns bright in the halls of american history.
Lincoln / U.S. President..........burdened with the civil war and slavery issue and uniting a country.
Wierwille / Founder of TWI........hitched his wagon to the "man of God" claim and went nowhere.
Although some are fooled, most recognize and value sacrifice, honor and integrity as a lasting legacy. Whether its an unknown soldier who fought and died valiantly in war or the u.s. president toiling over countless decisions in a civil war. Honor and respect is synonymous with personal sacrifice....and, the tomb of the unknown soldier commemorates that valor. Self-sacrifice is the legacy of great men and women.
Yet, in weighing Martin Luther King Jr. with the same charge of plagairism.......he gets a free pass. Why?
Because he was black.
Geez, skyrider, do I have to explain ALL the intricacies of modern society to you?
Being serious, though, many times plagiarism is just a reflection of lack of attention to detail or poor scholarship in instances. IMO MLK is more of that variety.
With VPW, I agree with brainfixed - it is a small part of a large hoax.
The whole plagiarism with VP wasn't all that important to me when I started reading GS and questioning my belief in TWI and VP... It just plain didn't matter.. What did matter was how he used "The Word ™" to abuse, rape, steal, and con people who just wanted to believe God and do good. The plagiarism was just one of his methods to accomplish his goal of being set up as The Man Of God For Our Day and Time - a demigod that people would worship and follow without question.
Perhaps.....the category to which we associate these men defines that burden they carry and their greatness.
King / Civil Rights Leader........the torch he carried burns bright in the halls of american history.
Lincoln / U.S. President..........burdened with the civil war and slavery issue and uniting a country.
Wierwille / Founder of TWI........hitched his wagon to the "man of God" claim and went nowhere.
Although some are fooled, most recognize and value sacrifice, honor and integrity as a lasting legacy. Whether its an unknown soldier who fought and died valiantly in war or the u.s. president toiling over countless decisions in a civil war. Honor and respect is synonymous with personal sacrifice....and, the tomb of the unknown soldier commemorates that valor. Self-sacrifice is the legacy of great men and women.
i think this is probably at the crux of things more than any intellectual argument could be, really, because if you took all the details of each man and take them apart the way it's done with vpw around here, you could probably render each one just as slimy as the next if you really, really, really wanted to look that hard and make that much of a case. but i do have to say that with vpw it doesn't take looking very hard or making much of a case because he put his own "fruit" out there publicly and proudly rotten, and went somewhere called "to hell in a handbasket" and took a whole lot of innocent people with him.
Recommended Posts
Ham
some of us were lucky and all..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
It's only love and that is all-------Why should I feel the way I do?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
well.. it's only part of the agreement..
heh..
Probably a fair question would be.. what is it that you feel..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I'm not sure. I just know
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
all I can say is.. if one has a feeling.. hold on to it..
there aren't too many...
:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
we've been played one against another.. one lifetime after the next..
I guess it works..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
the questions of a thousand dreams.. what you do and what you see..
I won't say the rest..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
find the cost of freedom..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I dunno.
Maybe it's all part of some kind of
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
We can't return, only look behind..
I dunno..
who am I, to argue with the lady who defined Woodstock..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
brainfixed
so what about a comparison of vpw to billy graham? why does the vpw to mlk thing have to go around about once a year?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Compare VP and BG?
OK, here's one for starters.
The story about VP preaching to the trees as a young man was actually "lifted" from BG. To be fair, though, I think it was Uncle (He wasn't MY uncle.) Harry who told the story.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hiway29
No one can derail a topic like Ham with his streams of thought. Ever try to get it down on one post?
Of course one can be critical of King. Abraham Lincoln was flawed also, which makes for interesting reading, but doesn't negate his accomplishments.
Whether you love him or hate him, there's no question that MLK was the key figure and spokesman for civil rights in his day, and that the world was changed as a result of his life-and death.
He wasn't killed because he plagiarized, or had affairs,or was as flawed as the rest of us. Ask any black person, or many of any race, what they think of King, and the debate of his impact on history is settled.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
brainfixed
i think what got me going with this discussion is that in the way international they were always doing this kind of thing, comparing victor paul wierwille to the other "newsworthy evangelists in the world", and of course victor paul wierwille came up smelling not quite so crappy as he would if he had to stand on his own two feet, you know that stuff the way international always did and maybe still does, "look over there at that out in left field screw up, won't ya? do you want that life or do you want the life in the word with us? huh? do ya? what do you think? do you really want to try it out there with those screw balls?" but the thing is that there is no comparison at all whatsoever because victor paul wierwille was a charlatan and a sexual predator and huckster and an evil doer from the getgo and he never intended to serve the lord with all his heart, soul, mind and body, but instead intended to serve his lusts that popped up whenever they popped up with whoever was convienient when they popped up, even if they were underage or he had to drug them to "convince" them it was "consensual". now if anybody can find even a hint of this kind of activity going on with mlk or billy graham, then and only then can a serious and viable comparison be done. otherwise it's the same old lame stuff of the same old cult days from whence i came when i had to have some straw to grasp at to help myself believe it wasn't all so bad as it was.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JavaJane
I agree with Brainfixed... It's like trying to compare apples to tortillas. Sure, they are both food, but the comparison ends there. MLK made an indelible mark on the history of this country and the world. VPW wasn't even a blip on the radar given the size of the country and the world. Sure, the effect of his life was HUGE to those of us who were involved in twi, but to the entire country? Not by a long shot.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
socks
I don't see great value with comparing anything or anyone without weighting both correctly, agreed.
In fact given the overall attitude towards VPW here, I can't see why he's compared to anyone or anything anymore except for the sake of conversation. Like I said, yearly recycle.
King's plagiarism's been noted here before and the comparison's always drawn the same. Everyone generally recognizes King's contribution as greater and his plagiarism as a lesser issue of smaller impact.
I gather that the perception of results scales the morality and ethics of the act committed based on what I'm reading here. Can't say I agree with that approach morally or ethically but in either case there's no great loss at this point how you view it. King's gone as is Weirwille and their respective legacies speak for themselves.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
i really don't care about all this crapola about human jerks
let's make christ the measure lol
as always, i'm looking forward to a better day
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
I tend to agree with this........and, that's why the plagairism issue comes front and center (for me on this discussion forum).
In comparing issues side-by-side, many of us on GS have tarred-and-feathered wierwille with the plagiarism charge time and time again. We have detailed how he stole from E. Stanley Jones, J.E. Stiles, B.G. Leonard, E.W. Bullinger and others.
Yet, in weighing Martin Luther King Jr. with the same charge of plagairism.......he gets a free pass. Why?
Click here........I know, wikipedia isn't the greatest of sources.
Plagiarism is one issue........contributions to society are quite another. Does the former nullify the latter? Not in a thousand years. Clearly though, King's dissertation came under scrutiny and review, but in the end was left intact. Leaving a letter attached to this dissertation was like putting an asterisk to his name at Boston University......of which, history could care less.
To weigh these issues, I find MLK's legacy, although slightly tarnished.....standing the test of times.
And, wierwille?........tarnished, tainted, corrupt and immoral. Along with plagiarism, the wierwille legacy was one of abuse, sexual predation, drunkenness, deception, fraud, etc.
.
Edited by skyriderLink to comment
Share on other sites
socks
It's very difficult to know to any depth to what degree the character flaws - and strengths - of another person effect their decisions, choices, behavior. We ourselves often have difficulty coming to grips with who we really are and admitting why we really do the things we do.
Some choices, although "good", even admirable, are the result of peer pressure, a desire for recognition. Anger, resentment, bitterness - these aren't just accusations to bring to bear against someone else, they're real emotions and feelings that effect we experience. "Fear" - not as dirty a word as we may have once been led to believe but clearly the protective mechanisms we have can go into overdrive and lead us to do all sorts of things for no other reason than the perception we have that we're somehow protecting ourselves, our stuff, those close to us, even when we're not and even when it's counter productive.
Similarly bad choices, things people would judge wrong, can be done for any and all of the same reasons and others as well. The scale tips at every turn. Why is the question and that's something that isn't always clear even when we think it is. We just have to make the best determination we can when we need to, I think.
I once did a study on "worship" and God. The question was "why does God require worship, and what is that - really? In the relationship I have with God, what does it amount to, in real time, in anticipation of the future and what I'll do tomorrow? I was surprised at the conclusions, and still see it as a topic of investigation for myself.
Anyhoo - I see King as a man of many admirable qualities, who was far from perfect but who in fact never had the burden of such a claim to live up or down to, who vigorously pursued his life's work and in so doing left a legacy of inspiration in his actions - what he did - as much or more than with what he said. It's not an easy road he chose. Life can be hard, even when it's easy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
brainfixed
for me then i wonder why take just one of the many thousands of preachers and teachers and ministers and evangelists that could be accused of plagiarism? i don't think that it is just plagiarism with wierwille on this forum at all, but i think that the plagiarism is one level of his dishonesty that even when confronted with it, he held to it as if he did no wrong, and there is a huge difference between out and out plagiarism and repeating the same thing over and over again. i mean you seriously could not have but one church with but one preacher if every time someone preached a sermon that had been preached before it was called plagiarism. what victor paul wierwille did was steal the work of others, put his name to it, sell it as his work, and built a whole cult saying that god had revealed things to him that had not been revealed since the first century church. now that's out and out plagiarism. but borrowing the syntax and even words of others when preaching? that's done all the time in churches throughout the world. in the very article you cite it also says
and you really have to make a difference here, too, between preaching and biblical research and teaching. victor paul wierwille himself was the one that started everybody down the rabbit hole of "saying what you mean and meaning what you say" and making sure everything "fit like a hand in a glove" and all that "jot and tittle" stuff about where commas go or don't go, or how many were crucified or what day jesus died, etc., to prove to everybody how right he was and how wrong everybody else was based on their errors, so when he made such an eggregious error as plagiarism, it was a very big deal indeed because the man that made a boat load of money on the idea that he was the only one that got it right was really, in the end, the only one that didn't have a clue but had stolen everything he had "right". so really, plagiarism isn't the issue at all, but the "gateway drug" to the real issue of the man behind the drapes, red or not.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Perhaps.....the category to which we associate these men defines that burden they carry and their greatness.
King / Civil Rights Leader........the torch he carried burns bright in the halls of american history.
Lincoln / U.S. President..........burdened with the civil war and slavery issue and uniting a country.
Wierwille / Founder of TWI........hitched his wagon to the "man of God" claim and went nowhere.
Although some are fooled, most recognize and value sacrifice, honor and integrity as a lasting legacy. Whether its an unknown soldier who fought and died valiantly in war or the u.s. president toiling over countless decisions in a civil war. Honor and respect is synonymous with personal sacrifice....and, the tomb of the unknown soldier commemorates that valor. Self-sacrifice is the legacy of great men and women.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Because he was black.
Geez, skyrider, do I have to explain ALL the intricacies of modern society to you?
Being serious, though, many times plagiarism is just a reflection of lack of attention to detail or poor scholarship in instances. IMO MLK is more of that variety.
With VPW, I agree with brainfixed - it is a small part of a large hoax.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JavaJane
The whole plagiarism with VP wasn't all that important to me when I started reading GS and questioning my belief in TWI and VP... It just plain didn't matter.. What did matter was how he used "The Word ™" to abuse, rape, steal, and con people who just wanted to believe God and do good. The plagiarism was just one of his methods to accomplish his goal of being set up as The Man Of God For Our Day and Time - a demigod that people would worship and follow without question.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
brainfixed
i think this is probably at the crux of things more than any intellectual argument could be, really, because if you took all the details of each man and take them apart the way it's done with vpw around here, you could probably render each one just as slimy as the next if you really, really, really wanted to look that hard and make that much of a case. but i do have to say that with vpw it doesn't take looking very hard or making much of a case because he put his own "fruit" out there publicly and proudly rotten, and went somewhere called "to hell in a handbasket" and took a whole lot of innocent people with him.
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.