Hahahaha!!!! ~ I wish you could see it in the original,... But then again, if yer in this Class, you've pretty much given up all hope of seein' anything new, or original,... eh?
Remember the first time Wierwille said that? I think it was someplace in PFAL., when he was talking about the genealogy of Jesus Christ.
It was early in the first session and VP's referring to when Jesus cursed the fig tree, "...and his disciples heard it. I wish you could see it in the original...." I had not thought of othat before, but you're right. It is a subtle way of VP putting himself on a higher plane than the rest of the class. What's funny is that at a later session we learn there are no "originals" in existence, "...at best we just have copies...." So, there weren't any "originals" for him to wish we could see.
I thought it was in reference to Jesus' sisters ---- oh you know those sisters........ I wish you could see it in the original
No...that was when he taught that Jesus had his barmitspha (sp?) at the age of 12 because he was thought to be illegitimate. What he read was either an expanded translation, or one of his "literal translations according to usage".
My mind is chocked full of completely useless information. I can remember stuff like this but I can't remember where I left my car keys 5 minutes ago.
Anyway-----Why was VP allowed to "wish" for stuff and we weren't?
I dunno, but I "hope" we can come up with an answer.
I think Broken Arrow deserves an E- for effort don't you? This isn't 5th grade anymore where Sister Teresa skoaled you and has you write it down on the chalkboard 50 times.
Thanks, I was wondering. My apologies to all.
Broken Arrow there will be an spelling quiz tonight @ 2100 hours for not spelling Bar mitzvah right. Ah, thanks goodness for spell check.
I think Broken Arrow deserves an E- for effort don't you? This isn't 5th grade anymore where Sister Teresa skoaled you and has you write it down on the chalkboard 50 times.
Broken Arrow there will be an spelling quiz tonight @ 2100 hours for not spelling Bar mitzvah right. Ah, thanks goodness for spell check.
This is a very interesting topic, waysider! My replys (with boxes) are in red.
"I wish you could see it in the original."
Remember the first time Wierwille said that? I think it was someplace in PFAL., when he was talking about the genealogy of Jesus Christ. Notice that he didn't say "I wish I could------" or "I wish WE could-----". What he said was "I wish YOU could---". It's a subtle way of implying that he alone had seen it in the original or, at the very least, knew what the original actually said. Right there in PFAL he was setting himself up to be someone who had special knowledge that others lacked...
Great insight, waysider! I am very fond of semantics myself, and am enjoying all the "sarcastic replys" as well. (I do so love sarcasm - as you are recently well aware of - no harm intended, friend! LOL)
Hahahaha!!!! ~ I wish you could see it in the original,... But then again, if yer in this Class, you've pretty much given up all hope of seein' anything new, or original,... eh?
How true! How true!
...VP's referring to...Jesus... "...and his disciples heard it. I wish you could see it in the original...." ....What's funny is that at a later session we learn there are no "originals" in existence, "...at best we just have copies...." So, there weren't any "originals" for him to wish we could see.
I bet VP even overlooked this blunder of his. How very subtle it was - Being fairly logical myself, I am suprised I didn't pick up on this one years ago myself. Great detective work, Broken Arrow!
Maybe what he was really saying was "I wish I could be original."
Anyway-----Why was VP allowed to "wish" for stuff and we weren't?
YEAH! Like Broken Arrow had also indicated, I "hope" we can find more stuff relating to this topic.
What is funnier is apply that statement to VP's literary works. RHST - "I wish you could see that in the original" by JE Stiles.
Heh heh, Chockfull, you're saying he was admitting his plagiarism!! Good one.
Ain't that the truth! Great insight you two.
It is rather interesting (as waysider pointed out) that VP was setting the stage early to hold his followers in AWE of his "special knowledge"...Wasn't he rather boasting when he said God spoke to him audibly, saying he would "show him the Word like it hadn't been known for centuries, if he would only teach it."? In a subtle way, he (again) was elevating himself above everyone who had not yet heard God speaking out loud to them - or whoever would, for that matter. (I often wonder if he really heard out loud from God himself.)
Somewhere in PFAL, VP was mocking theologians who said, "I've got the ANSWERS!" (anyone remember that one?). Funny, isn't it - he didn't consider it mocking when it was himself who HAD THE ANSWERS!
I remember once at a Rock of Ages where he was teaching in the big top one night, expounding upon some details within the concept of administrations which were way beyond PFAL. He was saying stuff like, "You don't read the past into the present, or the present into the past, etc." He sounded so authoratative because he spoke slowly, and had long pauses between statements. I know many who supposed God was giving it to him right there on the spot, just by the way he deliberated his teaching.
Later on, when I was reading Bullinger's book "How to Enjoy the Bible", I noticed that a great amount of everything he had said in PFAL was already in that book - and many times VERBATIM! In fact, that book reads just like PFAL - not just the learning but even the examples were the same, but spoken as if they were "his own". If you have ever read that book, it looks every bit like it was the blueprint for the PFAL class.
And it is "curious" how he never let on that he was quoting from that book. If someone had never pointed that book out to me, I may have never really realized the extent of the "theft" of it within PFAL.
As waysider had pointed out: "He was a master manipulator of nuance."
reading "i wish you could see it in the original" right here right now just struck me as saying "there is no original out there so trust me on this one". funny how this is the first time that hit me like that.
Wonder if Vic ever had any conVICtions of his own.. He always made the point to make it your own. :blush: The words he tried to make his own weren't actually his > were they?
reading "i wish you could see it in the original" right here right now just struck me as saying "there is no original out there so trust me on this one". funny how this is the first time that hit me like that.
It's funny you should mention it. That is pretty darn close to what he said in CF&S when he "revealed" the "original sin".
reading "i wish you could see it in the original" right here right now just struck me as saying "there is no original out there so trust me on this one". funny how this is the first time that hit me like that.
Great insight, sir! It's not as though the man was stupid enough to say in one breath that his desire was for us to see the originals, (indicating that he had somehow seen them himself) and then turn right around and teach us that there are no originals. At least I will give the man some credit for brains.
But the real point here is that he wanted us to believe that he DID have access to the originals - not the documents themselves, but from their SOURCE - because God spoke to him often.
It's funny also that, although he taught us that we should not put our trust in men, but in God, many times he did say, "Trust ME on this one." - like he did concerning the "original sin" in CF&S.
That's about as close as one would get to saying he was as God himself, without really saying it in so many words. We are supposed to hold God in awe and esteem, and certainly VP wanted that from his followers. (And he rather expected it from the Corps!)
When I entered the 13th Corps, we were given and expected to read a copy of Bullinger's HOW TO ENJOY THE BIBLE. Although not near enough was done by VPW to acknowledge his sources, it doesn't seem like he was exactly trying to hide them since they gave us the copy of the book and sold it in the Way Bookstore, as well as mentioning Bullinger in teachings I heard over the course of my 23.5 years in the Way. I'm not saying there wasn't plagiarism ... I'm just sayin' there was at least mention of HTETB.
When I entered the 13th Corps, we were given and expected to read a copy of Bullinger's HOW TO ENJOY THE BIBLE. Although not near enough was done by VPW to acknowledge his sources, it doesn't seem like he was exactly trying to hide them since they gave us the copy of the book and sold it in the Way Bookstore, as well as mentioning Bullinger in teachings I heard over the course of my 23.5 years in the Way. I'm not saying there wasn't plagiarism ... I'm just sayin' there was at least mention of HTETB.
But it was a surprise to his granddaughter who is said to have remarked to VPW that "You write just like my grandfather taught."
The implication I got from that was that VPW had it in his books already before he was ever introduced to Bullinger's works.
I'm not certain of the veracity of the story, and the quote is a paraphrase from memory.
I recall the same thing, except I remember it being told to him by that physician who he said called him every evening to ask what God taught him that day. I can't remember her name...not Dr. Rawlins. I recall that it was she who introduced him to Bullinger's writings. She supposedely said that he taught like Bullinger wrote. At the time, Wierwille had never heard of Bullinger. VP said he was very encouraged when he read Bullinger because for the first time he found someone who agreed with him. He implied that he already had developed his findings prior to reading Bullinger and that Bullinger merely validated what he already learned.
One of Rev. Wierwille's students In his first Power for Abundant Living class was Dr. E.E. Higgins, whose interest in his research greatly aided him. He notes that she gave him his first copy of E.W. Bullinger's How to Enjoy the Bible.(49) Wierwille has since shown a great interest in Bullinger's work. In fact, The Way's current bookstore catalogue offers for sale four of Bullinger's books. However, Wierwille never mentions Bullinger's 1905 book The Giver and His Gifts, in spite of the fact that it has been in print in recent years. Why does Wierwille neglect to mention this book?
Perhaps the answer to this question lies in the fact that Wierwille's Receiving the Holy Spirit Today includes material that is found also in Bullinger's 1905 The Giver and His Gifts. Sections of Wierwille's third edition, published in 1957 with 164 pages, and of every edition since then bear unmistakable similarity to
14
Bullinger's material. This is evident in significant portions of Wierwille's Introduction and Appendices 2 and 3. Every section of Bullinger's book has been included in Wierwille"s book in some form and the content, general conclusions and in many places even the wording closely match.(50)
Technically, neither The Giver and His Gifts nor The Gift of the Holy Spirit may have been legally protected by copyright at the time Wierwille compiled Receiving the Holy Spirit Today. Nonetheless, scholarly practice is to quote even uncopyrighted sources, which include such things as unpublished theses, newsletters, archives, government documents, correspondence and personal interviews. One who incorporates another man's work while presenting it to the reader as original work certainly falls short of the scholarly integrity the secular world expects and, more important, displeases God as well.
The material above was authored by John P.Juedes and Douglas V. Morton (1983). You can find it in its entirety HERE.
And there is this:
-------------------------------------
Wierwille and The Way praise it as the "most thorough and original coverage of the subject."(43) Even. today "Doctor" emphasizes his holy spirit teachings, since he feels that God raised him up to pioneer accurate Bible study in this field.(44) To emphasize the originality of his work, Wierwille insists that he used only the Bible in writing Receiving the Holy Spirit Today:
"I prayed that I might put aside all I had heard and thought out myself, and I started anew with the Bible as my handbook as well as my textbook."(44)
However, in the very book in which he prayed to "put aside" what he "had heard" he draws thought after thought, and at times word after word, from J. E. Stiles' book, The Gift of the Holy Spirit, written six years before. Both Stiles and Wierwille title chapters of their books "How to Receive the Holy Spirit" and about 18 key points in them closely match in content and even wording. Both books have chapters which list questions and answers, and five of the questions are similar in content. The 250-word answer to question eight in Wierwille's book matches Stiles' answer with almost word-for-word precision!(46) Note these excerpts from question 8 of both books:
13
Stiles. 1948 .
8. Is it not possible for a Christian to receive false tongues or a false spirit when seeking to receive the Holy Spirit? Answer?
When people ask that question, we know that they have somewhere come in contact with one of these "faith blasters" who go about making statements which have no foundation in Scripture. When we suggest to earnest Christians that they may get something false, when seeking more of the fulness of God, we sinfully dishonor God and His Holy Spirit."(47)
Wierwille, 2nd ed., 1954
8. Is it possible for a Christian to receive false tongues or a false spirit when seeking the Holy Spirit? The answer is no.
When people ask that question, I know that they have somewhere come in contact with one of these faith blasters who go about making statements which have no foundation in Scripture. When someone suggests to earnest Christians that they may get something false, when seeking more of the fulness of God according to God's Word, he sinfully dishonors God and His Holy Spirit."(48)
Furthermore, over 100 words of Stiles' answer to question number 19 appear almost verbatim in question six of Wierwille's second edition. Yet, Wierwille never once credits Stiles for the material he derives fro m him, or even mentions Stiles by name!
As "class instructors", we were directed, by the instructors manual, to pass around to the class, Bullinger's HTETB, turned to the page where Bullinger explores the "Four Crucified" theme. The idea was that students would draw the conclusion that both Bullimger and Wierwille, though reaching the same conclusion, did so independently and without knowledge of each others work. Of course, because Bullinger died in 1913, any copying would had to have been on the part of Wierwille. The real irony here is that the entire concept of the "four crucified" theory has long since been debunked right here on GSC.
edit: If you were ever a "class instructor", you were deliberately played (manipulated) on this issue. How does that make you feel?
Recommended Posts
Gen-2
Hahahaha!!!! ~ I wish you could see it in the original,... But then again, if yer in this Class, you've pretty much given up all hope of seein' anything new, or original,... eh?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
It was early in the first session and VP's referring to when Jesus cursed the fig tree, "...and his disciples heard it. I wish you could see it in the original...." I had not thought of othat before, but you're right. It is a subtle way of VP putting himself on a higher plane than the rest of the class. What's funny is that at a later session we learn there are no "originals" in existence, "...at best we just have copies...." So, there weren't any "originals" for him to wish we could see.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gen-2
I thought it was in reference to Jesus' sisters ---- oh you know those sisters........ I wish you could see it in the original
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Maybe what he was really saying was "I wish I could be original."
Anyway-----Why was VP allowed to "wish" for stuff and we weren't?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
No...that was when he taught that Jesus had his barmitspha (sp?) at the age of 12 because he was thought to be illegitimate. What he read was either an expanded translation, or one of his "literal translations according to usage".
My mind is chocked full of completely useless information. I can remember stuff like this but I can't remember where I left my car keys 5 minutes ago.
I dunno, but I "hope" we can come up with an answer.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Watered Garden
FYI only no criticism intended: Bar mitzvah.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
What is funnier is apply that statement to VP's literary works. RHST - "I wish you could see that in the original" by JE Stiles.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
Heh heh, Chockfull, you're saying he was admitting his plagiarism!! Good one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
Thanks, I was wondering. My apologies to all.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
cheranne
EXTRRAAAAA CRISPY IS WHAT HE WAS!!!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Human without the bean
I think Broken Arrow deserves an E- for effort don't you? This isn't 5th grade anymore where Sister Teresa skoaled you and has you write it down on the chalkboard 50 times.
Broken Arrow there will be an spelling quiz tonight @ 2100 hours for not spelling Bar mitzvah right. Ah, thanks goodness for spell check.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
Spell check? THERE'S A SPELLCHECK? :o
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Human without the bean
Remarkable isn't it. ( Actually, it is a very useful tool).
Since I can't spell supercalifraqilisticexpaledoshis!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Sister Teresa skoaled you and has you write it down on the chalkboard 50 times.
She really shouldn't have been dipping snuff. It's unbecoming of a Nun.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
spectrum49
This is a very interesting topic, waysider! My replys (with boxes) are in red.
It is rather interesting (as waysider pointed out) that VP was setting the stage early to hold his followers in AWE of his "special knowledge"...Wasn't he rather boasting when he said God spoke to him audibly, saying he would "show him the Word like it hadn't been known for centuries, if he would only teach it."? In a subtle way, he (again) was elevating himself above everyone who had not yet heard God speaking out loud to them - or whoever would, for that matter. (I often wonder if he really heard out loud from God himself.)
Somewhere in PFAL, VP was mocking theologians who said, "I've got the ANSWERS!" (anyone remember that one?). Funny, isn't it - he didn't consider it mocking when it was himself who HAD THE ANSWERS!
I remember once at a Rock of Ages where he was teaching in the big top one night, expounding upon some details within the concept of administrations which were way beyond PFAL. He was saying stuff like, "You don't read the past into the present, or the present into the past, etc." He sounded so authoratative because he spoke slowly, and had long pauses between statements. I know many who supposed God was giving it to him right there on the spot, just by the way he deliberated his teaching.
Later on, when I was reading Bullinger's book "How to Enjoy the Bible", I noticed that a great amount of everything he had said in PFAL was already in that book - and many times VERBATIM! In fact, that book reads just like PFAL - not just the learning but even the examples were the same, but spoken as if they were "his own". If you have ever read that book, it looks every bit like it was the blueprint for the PFAL class.
And it is "curious" how he never let on that he was quoting from that book. If someone had never pointed that book out to me, I may have never really realized the extent of the "theft" of it within PFAL.
As waysider had pointed out: "He was a master manipulator of nuance."
Maybe this will give us all more to elaborate on.
SPEC
:)
Edited by spectrum49Link to comment
Share on other sites
brainfixed
reading "i wish you could see it in the original" right here right now just struck me as saying "there is no original out there so trust me on this one". funny how this is the first time that hit me like that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Human without the bean
Wonder if Vic ever had any conVICtions of his own.. He always made the point to make it your own. :blush: The words he tried to make his own weren't actually his > were they?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
It's funny you should mention it. That is pretty darn close to what he said in CF&S when he "revealed" the "original sin".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
spectrum49
Great insight, sir! It's not as though the man was stupid enough to say in one breath that his desire was for us to see the originals, (indicating that he had somehow seen them himself) and then turn right around and teach us that there are no originals. At least I will give the man some credit for brains.
But the real point here is that he wanted us to believe that he DID have access to the originals - not the documents themselves, but from their SOURCE - because God spoke to him often.
It's funny also that, although he taught us that we should not put our trust in men, but in God, many times he did say, "Trust ME on this one." - like he did concerning the "original sin" in CF&S.
That's about as close as one would get to saying he was as God himself, without really saying it in so many words. We are supposed to hold God in awe and esteem, and certainly VP wanted that from his followers. (And he rather expected it from the Corps!)
SPEC
:)
Edited by spectrum49Link to comment
Share on other sites
DogLover
When I entered the 13th Corps, we were given and expected to read a copy of Bullinger's HOW TO ENJOY THE BIBLE. Although not near enough was done by VPW to acknowledge his sources, it doesn't seem like he was exactly trying to hide them since they gave us the copy of the book and sold it in the Way Bookstore, as well as mentioning Bullinger in teachings I heard over the course of my 23.5 years in the Way. I'm not saying there wasn't plagiarism ... I'm just sayin' there was at least mention of HTETB.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gen-2
But it was a surprise to his granddaughter who is said to have remarked to VPW that "You write just like my grandfather taught."
The implication I got from that was that VPW had it in his books already before he was ever introduced to Bullinger's works.
I'm not certain of the veracity of the story, and the quote is a paraphrase from memory.
Perhaps someone else here knows more about this?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Broken Arrow
I recall the same thing, except I remember it being told to him by that physician who he said called him every evening to ask what God taught him that day. I can't remember her name...not Dr. Rawlins. I recall that it was she who introduced him to Bullinger's writings. She supposedely said that he taught like Bullinger wrote. At the time, Wierwille had never heard of Bullinger. VP said he was very encouraged when he read Bullinger because for the first time he found someone who agreed with him. He implied that he already had developed his findings prior to reading Bullinger and that Bullinger merely validated what he already learned.
Edited by Broken ArrowLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
One of Rev. Wierwille's students In his first Power for Abundant Living class was Dr. E.E. Higgins, whose interest in his research greatly aided him. He notes that she gave him his first copy of E.W. Bullinger's How to Enjoy the Bible.(49) Wierwille has since shown a great interest in Bullinger's work. In fact, The Way's current bookstore catalogue offers for sale four of Bullinger's books. However, Wierwille never mentions Bullinger's 1905 book The Giver and His Gifts, in spite of the fact that it has been in print in recent years. Why does Wierwille neglect to mention this book?
Perhaps the answer to this question lies in the fact that Wierwille's Receiving the Holy Spirit Today includes material that is found also in Bullinger's 1905 The Giver and His Gifts. Sections of Wierwille's third edition, published in 1957 with 164 pages, and of every edition since then bear unmistakable similarity to
14
Bullinger's material. This is evident in significant portions of Wierwille's Introduction and Appendices 2 and 3. Every section of Bullinger's book has been included in Wierwille"s book in some form and the content, general conclusions and in many places even the wording closely match.(50)
Technically, neither The Giver and His Gifts nor The Gift of the Holy Spirit may have been legally protected by copyright at the time Wierwille compiled Receiving the Holy Spirit Today. Nonetheless, scholarly practice is to quote even uncopyrighted sources, which include such things as unpublished theses, newsletters, archives, government documents, correspondence and personal interviews. One who incorporates another man's work while presenting it to the reader as original work certainly falls short of the scholarly integrity the secular world expects and, more important, displeases God as well.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
The material above was authored by John P.Juedes and Douglas V. Morton (1983). You can find it in its entirety HERE.
And there is this:
-------------------------------------
Wierwille and The Way praise it as the "most thorough and original coverage of the subject."(43) Even. today "Doctor" emphasizes his holy spirit teachings, since he feels that God raised him up to pioneer accurate Bible study in this field.(44) To emphasize the originality of his work, Wierwille insists that he used only the Bible in writing Receiving the Holy Spirit Today:
"I prayed that I might put aside all I had heard and thought out myself, and I started anew with the Bible as my handbook as well as my textbook."(44)
However, in the very book in which he prayed to "put aside" what he "had heard" he draws thought after thought, and at times word after word, from J. E. Stiles' book, The Gift of the Holy Spirit, written six years before. Both Stiles and Wierwille title chapters of their books "How to Receive the Holy Spirit" and about 18 key points in them closely match in content and even wording. Both books have chapters which list questions and answers, and five of the questions are similar in content. The 250-word answer to question eight in Wierwille's book matches Stiles' answer with almost word-for-word precision!(46) Note these excerpts from question 8 of both books:
13
Stiles. 1948 .
8. Is it not possible for a Christian to receive false tongues or a false spirit when seeking to receive the Holy Spirit? Answer?
When people ask that question, we know that they have somewhere come in contact with one of these "faith blasters" who go about making statements which have no foundation in Scripture. When we suggest to earnest Christians that they may get something false, when seeking more of the fulness of God, we sinfully dishonor God and His Holy Spirit."(47)
Wierwille, 2nd ed., 1954
8. Is it possible for a Christian to receive false tongues or a false spirit when seeking the Holy Spirit? The answer is no.
When people ask that question, I know that they have somewhere come in contact with one of these faith blasters who go about making statements which have no foundation in Scripture. When someone suggests to earnest Christians that they may get something false, when seeking more of the fulness of God according to God's Word, he sinfully dishonors God and His Holy Spirit."(48)
Furthermore, over 100 words of Stiles' answer to question number 19 appear almost verbatim in question six of Wierwille's second edition. Yet, Wierwille never once credits Stiles for the material he derives fro m him, or even mentions Stiles by name!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
As "class instructors", we were directed, by the instructors manual, to pass around to the class, Bullinger's HTETB, turned to the page where Bullinger explores the "Four Crucified" theme. The idea was that students would draw the conclusion that both Bullimger and Wierwille, though reaching the same conclusion, did so independently and without knowledge of each others work. Of course, because Bullinger died in 1913, any copying would had to have been on the part of Wierwille. The real irony here is that the entire concept of the "four crucified" theory has long since been debunked right here on GSC.
edit: If you were ever a "class instructor", you were deliberately played (manipulated) on this issue. How does that make you feel?
Edited by waysiderLink 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.