One thing that comes to mind when I think about TWI is "static..." everything is always the same.
People always dress the same, talk in the same lingo, pose the same in pictures, "teach" the same. SNS looks the same (they only show the part of the auditorium where there are people sitting). Same places (except no mention of the places they had to sell off). Still ignoring issues critical to people and the organization. Still no reference to the internet or email or any post-1985 technology.
Way Magazine articles are always the same... same style, content, format. Same ads for the same "research" books and classes. You could take an issue from 1988, photoshop Rosslie's face over Loy's, and it wouldn't look out of place in 2011. (Or course, you'd have to erase the names of people who left TWI.) Who knows, maybe they do just reproduce old issues and change the dates.
John, many thanks for the info. You are amazingly diligent about analyzing and exposing TWI. No doubt you've helped many of us here and others we'll never know about.
I've always been curious about what motivated you to start researching TWI. If it's not too personal, do you care to tell us?
John, many thanks for the info. You are amazingly diligent about analyzing and exposing TWI. No doubt you've helped many of us here and others we'll never know about.I've always been curious about what motivated you to start researching TWI. If it's not too personal, do you care to tell us?
I was about to move to Colorado (around '79). A friend of a friend had a son there who had taken PFAL, was concerned that his son was in a cult and asked that I talk to him. So I found a 1st printing of a 1st edition of the PFAL book in a used bookstore and read it. I was amazed by the book's manipulation of Bible texts, its inaccurate and self-serving definitions of biblical words, and wild claims (like VP taking all his books to the dump). I wrote these down for my new friend, who left TWI (he wasn't actually very involved).
Soon after this, I showed my notes to another friend who compared some of the quotes to his copy of PFAL... and lo and behild there were textual changes in the first ed of PFAL (from 1st to 2nd printing) in which VP changed the "mathematical accuracy" definition of allos and heteros. This meant that VP changed the definitions of words whenever he wanted to- with no real care for actual accuracy. All together, this meant that VPW was deceitful, manipulative, self-contradictory and twisted the Bible to his own ends. The kind of a guy that just begs for someone to expose him.
The same friend was department editor of a journal for pastors, and he offered to edit and publish my notes. Which was tremendous, because my writing skills then were very bad. Thanks to Wes, I was in print in a national journal at age 25 and started to learn to write. It helped draw me into writing more about TWI (and other cults).
Within a couple years, I took PFAL with Pawtucket as my class coordinator, with neither of us knowing at the time where we'd end up as compatriots in answering TWI. I took PFAL, visited New Knoxville, Emporia, Rome City, Gunnison, Word in Business, saw VP from a few feet away, got a threatening letter from Howard Allen, was threatened by off-duty Bless patrol at the BRC, photographed the Way Police car, etc but never was actually involved in TWI.
The more I dug in researching TWI, the more error and deception I found. You don't have to make up any criticisms of VPW and TWI- they're just so full of junk. I had opportunity to publish in various newsletters and magazines, and eventually the internet helped more people find my articles.
I'm really not obsessed with TWI. But I get letters now and then with questions or criticisms that stoke the fire and lead to more articles. Most of the 5 in this update were prompted by email.
Thanks for the personal info, it means a lot to me. Your work (along with GSC) played a big part in opening my eyes to the evil associated with the way international. I appreciate the time and effort you have put in your works exposing them for what they really are. In the end I left twi for personal reasons stemming from being harassed for a year and a half by Rosalie through 2 of her lapdogs. But really, those events were just the straw that broke the camel's back. I had lurked on GSC for several years and read everything you had on your site. I knew they were a fraud but told myself that I could help change things from the inside out.
Experiencing first hand how vicious and manipulating Rosalie is was the last straw. However, if I had not educated myself with all the information exposing them I would no doubt still be with them. It's real easy for someone who has been indoctrinated by them to find reasonings to excuse their ungodliness. Thanks again!
Thank you, John, for your story. Amazing. Such a small world...thanks for thinking critically while so many of us were not. The article you wrote on VP's copying J.E. Stiles book was a boon to me when I was given a copy of it in 1986. Cheers!
The article you wrote on VP's copying J.E. Stiles book was a boon to me when I was given a copy of it in 1986. Cheers!
I met JE Stiles' son, from whom I got the photo of him. He didn't seem to think much of the method of inhaling to receive the spirit. While I'll never know how things went, it appears that articles like that one circulated secretly somewhat even in the ranks of TWI itself.
I met JE Stiles' son, from whom I got the photo of him. He didn't seem to think much of the method of inhaling to receive the spirit. While I'll never know how things went, it appears that articles like that one circulated secretly somewhat even in the ranks of TWI itself.
Yes, John, looking back on things I wanted to thank you for your work as well.
I believe after reading one of your articles on VPW's 'research' I found a copy of JE Stiles book on eBay or another web book sales site and bought it. Comparing it side by side to VP's book and noting the publishing dates was certainly eye-opening, and for me it connected the dots on how deep VP's plagiarism tendencies ran. So for those that think and put things together, some of those nudges in the right direction have done wonders.
Speaking of plagiarism and copying other people's work...
VP plagiarized and copied, and now splinters are copying VP to one degree or another.
I was reading Hendicks' God's Healing Word... most of it is just like reading PFAL. You can put the books side by side and follow along in both of them, with basic content, Bible verses, examples, interpretations of verses, etc the same. It is not technically plagiarism, because sections aren't copied word for word. But it is definitely copying content.
And NEVER do you see a note that says, "I learned this all by sitting through the PFAL class hundreds of times," or "see VP Wierwille, my father in the Word." No attribution, which is just like VPW too.
Hendricks is easier reading,a condensed version of PFAL. He makes it easier to follow and has less detail. But it's also partly because he didn't have theological training like VPW had. VPW misused his training a lot, but he at least showed he had some.
A copy of a copy, but you can still trace back where things came from. And it wasn't from researching the Word itself as they claim.
Hendricks (CRF) is teaching "warrior tongues"? I went to a CRF fellowship from 2000-2005. I recall something about families of tongues, but no warrior tongues. Is this recent?
Speaking of plagiarism and copying other people's work...
VP plagiarized and copied, and now splinters are copying VP to one degree or another.
I was reading Hendicks' God's Healing Word... most of it is just like reading PFAL. You can put the books side by side and follow along in both of them, with basic content, Bible verses, examples, interpretations of verses, etc the same. It is not technically plagiarism, because sections aren't copied word for word. But it is definitely copying content.
And NEVER do you see a note that says, "I learned this all by sitting through the PFAL class hundreds of times," or "see VP Wierwille, my father in the Word." No attribution, which is just like VPW too.
Hendricks is easier reading,a condensed version of PFAL. He makes it easier to follow and has less detail. But it's also partly because he didn't have theological training like VPW had. VPW misused his training a lot, but he at least showed he had some.
A copy of a copy, but you can still trace back where things came from. And it wasn't from researching the Word itself as they claim.
Don't soften what he's doing. It's plagiarism.
If someone takes the words of another and uses them without attribution, it's plagiarism.
If someone takes the words of another, and substitutes a few words, without attribution, it's plagiarism.
If someone takes the words of another, and substitutes a lot of words, without attribution, it's plagiarism.
If someone takes the concepts of another, changes the wording, and does not attribute, it's plagiarism.
Hendricks knows full well where he got his material. Hendricks knows full well there's copyright
notices in the source material. When he used it without attribution, it was both plagiarism and
copyright infringement. Don't pretend he didn't know that was both morally and legally wrong.
That goes for all the others, too. Even when they break the law for what they perceive to
be sufficient reason, they're aware (or are idiots in denial) that they ARE breaking the law.
Hendricks knows full well where he got his material. Hendricks knows full well there's copyright
notices in the source material. When he used it without attribution, it was both plagiarism and
copyright infringement. Don't pretend he didn't know that was both morally and legally wrong.
...................
Hendricks died a few years ago.
I agree in general that people know what they are doing but in Hendrick's case it is up for debate. The man.....could barely compose a grocery list without help. I can't imagine he wrote anything on his own. That would be a stretch. As far as knowing something was morally wrong....fat chance....you have to have morals for that.
His daughter Rochelle could admit this if she wanted too. Her mother Mary Ann Daly was a piano major at ECU but I gather never taught music after graduating. Her family's background was Moravian, but they weren't happy with them, so church consuming visited Lutheran, Episcopalian, methodist, and Presbyterian, joining each but for a short time before getting involved with TWI. Spiritially very dysfunctional.
Neither Wierwille nor Hendricks were writers. The "books" both of them produced were in most cases transcriptions of sermons. When people transcribe, they are typically loose with facts, don't document anything, aren't precise, and rarely have any real research as the basis. This is why VPW's books are so sloppy and inaccurate. The "advantage" of transcribing is that you can produce a large volume quickly, without any real writing effort, and appear to be an author when you aren't.
One of the saddest examples of sloppy research through transcription was the "Common Errors in Understanding" chapter in Jesus Christ is not God. It was transcribed from tape 295. The chapter is obviously very shallow and sloppy when you read it. But when you hear the tape, you also see how VPW is shooting from the hip, stumbling along, without any research or thought as the basis.
VPW and DH are both dead, but this doesn't solve the plagiarism problem. TWI and CRF are still selling the books in their plagiarized state, and so are accomplices to plagiarism- the theft of words and research. They're still making money and trying to cultivate some kind reputation as publishers via this crooked practice.
Soon after this, I showed my notes to another friend who compared some of the quotes to his copy of PFAL... and lo and behild there were textual changes in the first ed of PFAL (from 1st to 2nd printing) in which VP changed the "mathematical accuracy" definition of allos and heteros.
Just so I'm clear in my own mind, and to save me the trouble of locating these two printings, was there a footnote about the definition change in the 2nd printing, or a list of errata, or an introductory note, or some acknowledgement of the change? I'm not sure which would have been appropriate, I'm not a writer or publisher, but it would seem to me that something would be needed.
Just so I'm clear in my own mind, and to save me the trouble of locating these two printings, was there a footnote about the definition change in the 2nd printing, or a list of errata, or an introductory note, or some acknowledgement of the change? I'm not sure which would have been appropriate, I'm not a writer or publisher, but it would seem to me that something would be needed.
I think there was a notation on the introduction page that said something like, "Catch me if you can.".
Just so I'm clear in my own mind, and to save me the trouble of locating these two printings, was there a footnote about the definition change in the 2nd printing, or a list of errata, or an introductory note, or some acknowledgement of the change? I'm not sure which would have been appropriate, I'm not a writer or publisher, but it would seem to me that something would be needed.
vpw made a number of changes between editions, and never indicated anything wasn't
Just so I'm clear in my own mind, and to save me the trouble of locating these two printings, was there a footnote about the definition change in the 2nd printing, or a list of errata, or an introductory note, or some acknowledgement of the change? I'm not sure which would have been appropriate, I'm not a writer or publisher, but it would seem to me that something would be needed.
No, there was no note or acknowledgment of the change. In fact, the context is even more revealing:
"Which Greek word had to be used to have the true Word? The word is heteros because the two malefactors obviously are the same kind. This is the sharp accuracy of God's Word" (1st printing, p. 168; it has a 3 color cover- white, yellow, orange)
"Which Greek word had to be used to have the true Word? The word is heteros because only two categories are involved, Jesus and malefactors. This is the sharp accuracy of God's Word" (2nd printing, p. 168)
"Had to be used... the sharp accuracy." But VP never minded changing it whenever he felt like it!
I'm currently finishing my first semester of work on a masters degree in theological studies. I'm turning over in my mind the possibility of writing a thesis on William J. Seymour, leader of the Azuza Street Revival of 1906-1909. One of the things I'd like to do is some research on J.E. Stiles to see if I can draw any lines connecting Stiles with Seymour, so I can trace the lineage of my own "tongue talking".
If I DO decide to do the thesis, I may well want to pick your brain, too, John! Thanks!
vpw made a number of changes between editions, and never indicated anything wasn't
exactly the same as the previous editions.
"Had to be used... the sharp accuracy." But VP never minded changing it whenever he felt like it!
Owning your own book publishing house comes in handy.
Q: What is difficult about publicly acknowledging content changes in a new edition of a research book?
A: Nothing. It's done all the time, and legitimate book publishing houses insist upon such an acknowledgement.
There's no disgrace or shame in making changes to a piece of research. It happens. But turn a light on when you do, so your readers are not in the dark.
Owning your own book publishing house comes in handy.
Q: What is difficult about publicly acknowledging content changes in a new edition of a research book?
A: Nothing. It's done all the time, and legitimate book publishing houses insist upon such an acknowledgement.
There's no disgrace or shame in making changes to a piece of research. It happens. But turn a light on when you do, so your readers are not in the dark.
Admitting you produced something, then improved it later, is a good thing in most of the world.
If you're claiming you're superior and, in effect, your work is perfect because it comes from
God Almighty, admitting an improvement is a little like saying
"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain."
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
10
11
9
12
Popular Days
Dec 8
13
Dec 13
12
Dec 14
12
Dec 10
7
Top Posters In This Topic
WordWolf 10 posts
Steve Lortz 11 posts
geisha779 9 posts
johnj 12 posts
Popular Days
Dec 8 2011
13 posts
Dec 13 2011
12 posts
Dec 14 2011
12 posts
Dec 10 2011
7 posts
Popular Posts
WordWolf
Admitting you produced something, then improved it later, is a good thing in most of the world. If you're claiming you're superior and, in effect, your work is perfect because it comes from God Almi
Steve Lortz
I think there was an additional reason why TWI was as successful (?) as it was, and why Wierwille's followers were so enthusiastic (before the organization managed to suck all the life out of them). W
OldSkool
Thanks!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
You have some interesting stuff there.
When you have a chance, I'd recommend checking your site.
Looks like you moved some things around, and there's dead links pointing to
where they WERE rather than where they ARE.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johnj
One thing that comes to mind when I think about TWI is "static..." everything is always the same.
People always dress the same, talk in the same lingo, pose the same in pictures, "teach" the same. SNS looks the same (they only show the part of the auditorium where there are people sitting). Same places (except no mention of the places they had to sell off). Still ignoring issues critical to people and the organization. Still no reference to the internet or email or any post-1985 technology.
Way Magazine articles are always the same... same style, content, format. Same ads for the same "research" books and classes. You could take an issue from 1988, photoshop Rosslie's face over Loy's, and it wouldn't look out of place in 2011. (Or course, you'd have to erase the names of people who left TWI.) Who knows, maybe they do just reproduce old issues and change the dates.
Static, both in sameness and in white noise.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
penworks
John, many thanks for the info. You are amazingly diligent about analyzing and exposing TWI. No doubt you've helped many of us here and others we'll never know about.
I've always been curious about what motivated you to start researching TWI. If it's not too personal, do you care to tell us?
Edited by penworksLink to comment
Share on other sites
johnj
I was about to move to Colorado (around '79). A friend of a friend had a son there who had taken PFAL, was concerned that his son was in a cult and asked that I talk to him. So I found a 1st printing of a 1st edition of the PFAL book in a used bookstore and read it. I was amazed by the book's manipulation of Bible texts, its inaccurate and self-serving definitions of biblical words, and wild claims (like VP taking all his books to the dump). I wrote these down for my new friend, who left TWI (he wasn't actually very involved).
Soon after this, I showed my notes to another friend who compared some of the quotes to his copy of PFAL... and lo and behild there were textual changes in the first ed of PFAL (from 1st to 2nd printing) in which VP changed the "mathematical accuracy" definition of allos and heteros. This meant that VP changed the definitions of words whenever he wanted to- with no real care for actual accuracy. All together, this meant that VPW was deceitful, manipulative, self-contradictory and twisted the Bible to his own ends. The kind of a guy that just begs for someone to expose him.
The same friend was department editor of a journal for pastors, and he offered to edit and publish my notes. Which was tremendous, because my writing skills then were very bad. Thanks to Wes, I was in print in a national journal at age 25 and started to learn to write. It helped draw me into writing more about TWI (and other cults).
Within a couple years, I took PFAL with Pawtucket as my class coordinator, with neither of us knowing at the time where we'd end up as compatriots in answering TWI. I took PFAL, visited New Knoxville, Emporia, Rome City, Gunnison, Word in Business, saw VP from a few feet away, got a threatening letter from Howard Allen, was threatened by off-duty Bless patrol at the BRC, photographed the Way Police car, etc but never was actually involved in TWI.
The more I dug in researching TWI, the more error and deception I found. You don't have to make up any criticisms of VPW and TWI- they're just so full of junk. I had opportunity to publish in various newsletters and magazines, and eventually the internet helped more people find my articles.
I'm really not obsessed with TWI. But I get letters now and then with questions or criticisms that stoke the fire and lead to more articles. Most of the 5 in this update were prompted by email.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldSkool
Thanks for the personal info, it means a lot to me. Your work (along with GSC) played a big part in opening my eyes to the evil associated with the way international. I appreciate the time and effort you have put in your works exposing them for what they really are. In the end I left twi for personal reasons stemming from being harassed for a year and a half by Rosalie through 2 of her lapdogs. But really, those events were just the straw that broke the camel's back. I had lurked on GSC for several years and read everything you had on your site. I knew they were a fraud but told myself that I could help change things from the inside out.
Experiencing first hand how vicious and manipulating Rosalie is was the last straw. However, if I had not educated myself with all the information exposing them I would no doubt still be with them. It's real easy for someone who has been indoctrinated by them to find reasonings to excuse their ungodliness. Thanks again!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
penworks
Thank you, John, for your story. Amazing. Such a small world...thanks for thinking critically while so many of us were not. The article you wrote on VP's copying J.E. Stiles book was a boon to me when I was given a copy of it in 1986. Cheers!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johnj
I met JE Stiles' son, from whom I got the photo of him. He didn't seem to think much of the method of inhaling to receive the spirit. While I'll never know how things went, it appears that articles like that one circulated secretly somewhat even in the ranks of TWI itself.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
chockfull
Yes, John, looking back on things I wanted to thank you for your work as well.
I believe after reading one of your articles on VPW's 'research' I found a copy of JE Stiles book on eBay or another web book sales site and bought it. Comparing it side by side to VP's book and noting the publishing dates was certainly eye-opening, and for me it connected the dots on how deep VP's plagiarism tendencies ran. So for those that think and put things together, some of those nudges in the right direction have done wonders.
I appreciate the efforts you've put into this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johnj
Speaking of plagiarism and copying other people's work...
VP plagiarized and copied, and now splinters are copying VP to one degree or another.
I was reading Hendicks' God's Healing Word... most of it is just like reading PFAL. You can put the books side by side and follow along in both of them, with basic content, Bible verses, examples, interpretations of verses, etc the same. It is not technically plagiarism, because sections aren't copied word for word. But it is definitely copying content.
And NEVER do you see a note that says, "I learned this all by sitting through the PFAL class hundreds of times," or "see VP Wierwille, my father in the Word." No attribution, which is just like VPW too.
Hendricks is easier reading,a condensed version of PFAL. He makes it easier to follow and has less detail. But it's also partly because he didn't have theological training like VPW had. VPW misused his training a lot, but he at least showed he had some.
A copy of a copy, but you can still trace back where things came from. And it wasn't from researching the Word itself as they claim.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johniam
Hendricks (CRF) is teaching "warrior tongues"? I went to a CRF fellowship from 2000-2005. I recall something about families of tongues, but no warrior tongues. Is this recent?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Don't soften what he's doing. It's plagiarism.
If someone takes the words of another and uses them without attribution, it's plagiarism.
If someone takes the words of another, and substitutes a few words, without attribution, it's plagiarism.
If someone takes the words of another, and substitutes a lot of words, without attribution, it's plagiarism.
If someone takes the concepts of another, changes the wording, and does not attribute, it's plagiarism.
Hendricks knows full well where he got his material. Hendricks knows full well there's copyright
notices in the source material. When he used it without attribution, it was both plagiarism and
copyright infringement. Don't pretend he didn't know that was both morally and legally wrong.
That goes for all the others, too. Even when they break the law for what they perceive to
be sufficient reason, they're aware (or are idiots in denial) that they ARE breaking the law.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Like a car dealer that turns back mileage.....He knows it's wrong but getting caught is not part of his plan.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
geisha779
Hendricks died a few years ago.
I agree in general that people know what they are doing but in Hendrick's case it is up for debate. The man.....could barely compose a grocery list without help. I can't imagine he wrote anything on his own. That would be a stretch. As far as knowing something was morally wrong....fat chance....you have to have morals for that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thomas Loy Bumgarner
His daughter Rochelle could admit this if she wanted too. Her mother Mary Ann Daly was a piano major at ECU but I gather never taught music after graduating. Her family's background was Moravian, but they weren't happy with them, so church consuming visited Lutheran, Episcopalian, methodist, and Presbyterian, joining each but for a short time before getting involved with TWI. Spiritially very dysfunctional.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johnj
Neither Wierwille nor Hendricks were writers. The "books" both of them produced were in most cases transcriptions of sermons. When people transcribe, they are typically loose with facts, don't document anything, aren't precise, and rarely have any real research as the basis. This is why VPW's books are so sloppy and inaccurate. The "advantage" of transcribing is that you can produce a large volume quickly, without any real writing effort, and appear to be an author when you aren't.
One of the saddest examples of sloppy research through transcription was the "Common Errors in Understanding" chapter in Jesus Christ is not God. It was transcribed from tape 295. The chapter is obviously very shallow and sloppy when you read it. But when you hear the tape, you also see how VPW is shooting from the hip, stumbling along, without any research or thought as the basis.
VPW and DH are both dead, but this doesn't solve the plagiarism problem. TWI and CRF are still selling the books in their plagiarized state, and so are accomplices to plagiarism- the theft of words and research. They're still making money and trying to cultivate some kind reputation as publishers via this crooked practice.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
OperaBuff
Just so I'm clear in my own mind, and to save me the trouble of locating these two printings, was there a footnote about the definition change in the 2nd printing, or a list of errata, or an introductory note, or some acknowledgement of the change? I'm not sure which would have been appropriate, I'm not a writer or publisher, but it would seem to me that something would be needed.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I think there was a notation on the introduction page that said something like, "Catch me if you can.".
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
vpw made a number of changes between editions, and never indicated anything wasn't
exactly the same as the previous editions.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johnj
No, there was no note or acknowledgment of the change. In fact, the context is even more revealing:
"Which Greek word had to be used to have the true Word? The word is heteros because the two malefactors obviously are the same kind. This is the sharp accuracy of God's Word" (1st printing, p. 168; it has a 3 color cover- white, yellow, orange)
"Which Greek word had to be used to have the true Word? The word is heteros because only two categories are involved, Jesus and malefactors. This is the sharp accuracy of God's Word" (2nd printing, p. 168)
"Had to be used... the sharp accuracy." But VP never minded changing it whenever he felt like it!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
double post... Sorry!
Edited by Steve LortzLink to comment
Share on other sites
Steve Lortz
I'm currently finishing my first semester of work on a masters degree in theological studies. I'm turning over in my mind the possibility of writing a thesis on William J. Seymour, leader of the Azuza Street Revival of 1906-1909. One of the things I'd like to do is some research on J.E. Stiles to see if I can draw any lines connecting Stiles with Seymour, so I can trace the lineage of my own "tongue talking".
If I DO decide to do the thesis, I may well want to pick your brain, too, John! Thanks!
Love,
Steve
Edited by Steve LortzLink to comment
Share on other sites
OperaBuff
Owning your own book publishing house comes in handy.
Q: What is difficult about publicly acknowledging content changes in a new edition of a research book?
A: Nothing. It's done all the time, and legitimate book publishing houses insist upon such an acknowledgement.
There's no disgrace or shame in making changes to a piece of research. It happens. But turn a light on when you do, so your readers are not in the dark.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Admitting you produced something, then improved it later, is a good thing in most of the world.
If you're claiming you're superior and, in effect, your work is perfect because it comes from
God Almighty, admitting an improvement is a little like saying
"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain."
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.