Interesting twists on Plagiarism in regards to "The Way & Dr. Wierwille's Works"
By
LornaDoone,
in About The Way
By
LornaDoone,
in About The Way
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
6
5
6
5
Popular Days
Dec 30
18
Dec 27
15
Dec 28
11
Dec 31
6
Top Posters In This Topic
Raf 6 posts
LornaDoone 5 posts
LG 6 posts
Oakspear 5 posts
Popular Days
Dec 30 2003
18 posts
Dec 27 2003
15 posts
Dec 28 2003
11 posts
Dec 31 2003
6 posts
Dot Matrix
It's okay to reference other people's work and use it! Just don't claim it was given to you from God personally via an audible promise and make up snow storms...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steve!
Lorna, if that's the case, why was docvic(praise be his name) so insistent about copyrighting HIS material?
If it's so okay to plagiarize, then why did he set things up so that people would be legally liable if they were to plagiarize HIS stuff?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grizzy
Lorna,,,,,
so I was in IL from 93-96, maybe we meet.
God Bless America; SIZE>
Grizz SIZE>
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Sorry, Lorna.
This isn't new thought.
We've already addressed each of these points already.
First of all, Dot's point. Research is good. Claiming other people's
work was given you directly by God is bad.
Second of all, Steve's point. vpw thought it was perfectly acceptable
for himself to lift whole chapters from books by EW Kenyon, EW Bullinger,
JE Stiles, etc, but made sure all HIS books had copyrights on them so that
no one could do the same with HIS books.
Third of all, you have an improper understanding of plagiarism.
Plagiarism is a rather specific CRIME. It is not writing something SIMILAR
to someone else. It is not studying the work of others and producing a
similar work. It is the deliberate act of taking the work of other people
and claiming it is your own, and making the deliberate decision to avoid
citing your source.
It will get you in trouble in high school. It will get you thrown out of
college, grad school or divinity school. EVERY student and EVERY graduate
knows this. Making the deliberate decision to do so ANYWAY is wrong.
It is a lie, and dishonest. It is theft-the theft of another's work.
It shows a lack of integrity, and a lack of respect for your audience.
It is laziness. It is vanity-pretending you're too important to do your own
work.
There's hundreds of websites that can give you a more accurate definition
of plagiarism. I didn't find a GOOD one, but I did find a number of
websites that showed what different universities thought of it.
Not knowing if you have access to a pdf reader, I've left off the best
one I found, but you can look at this one:
http://www.dartmouth.edu/~sources/about/what.html
If you have Adobe Acrobat reader, you can view this pdf document:
http://www.wesleyan.edu/libr/tut/plagiarism.pdf
There's other points-I'm sure others will chime in with them, and
with better links.
Funny-I was going to leave alone the plagiarism business, but since
you brought it up....
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Galen
While I was functioning as the Protestant Lay-Leader on-board various submarines, Each year I was issued an annual book that listed 'suggested' services for each day of the year. For any given day of the year that your religous service was planned to be held: it gave a suggested theme, hymns, opening statement, one Bible verse, a story, and a closing prayer. The idea was that the entire service was to be read word-for-word from that book. I NEVER did that, but it was suggested to me.
On the other hand, the Catholic Lay-leaders on-board were directed that they were NOT authorised to vary from the proscribed service. Before each patrol, they had to recieve a 'special-blessing' and written authorization so that they could take possession of the host, and later administer the host during each service.
Annual 'Minister's Manuals' are not un-common. I have seen them on the shelves of church studys.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LG
Lorna,
I notice that you give a reference for every scripture you quote, and a link for the article you quote. You even give a link for the site that led you to the article. This leads me to suspect that you don't buy your own argument.
Plagierism is, essentially, presenting someone else's words or thoughts as one's own. That is not the same as learning from others. It is not the same as using someone else's words or thoughts, but properly crediting them. I think you know that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LG
Galen,
Following a "Minister Manual" of prescribed services is not anything like plagierism.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I think Lorna is right. No, seriously, hear me out.
My purpose in contributing to this thread is to invoke some new thought on some of the postings over the past few years regarding Plagiarism. I offer food for thought and know this is a little long but it is my hope to put to rest some of the controversy from the past.
While browsing Mel Gibsons new website for his forthcoming movie "The Passion of Christ"
http://www.thepassionofchrist.com , I came across a web-site with some interesting views on Plagiarism that I thought would be of interest to some.
So my "food for thought". If God inspires his people through his gift of holy spirit
(" Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.")
to write classes, sermons etc., who really owns those teachings and sharings.
When we share with someone the greatness of God's Word, we are all gleaning excerpts from those that have taught and preached to us as well as The Holy Spirit who works in us.
"Romans 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
Romans 10:15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!"
God is the one that "sends" us to preach and bring glad tidings of good things.
So my questions is if God inspires us to preach & teach to move the Word, this is HIS goal, we respond and obey. Do we not want the Word that we speak to give insight to the novice to be spoken again and again to accomplish that which GOD wants.
Isaiah 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto ME void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I SENT IT.
So when we speak God's word it is really God the author of his Word that is speaking through us, so how can anyone lay claim to "their sermon, their class, their preaching". In the scripture above we know God does not have a mouth, he uses our heart and mouth by our free will with the spirit of God in us. God also guarantees the results of HIS Word not returning void.
"Matthew 10:19 But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak.
Mark 13:11 But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost."
Even in these trying times, the whole purpose for God working through them was to be a witness.
So I ask you, if one person benefits from a work that someone does (inspired by God) regarding God's Word, it is absolutely what God wanted. It would be very selfish for me or anyone else to teach the Word and say that I own or copywrite my teaching when in essence it is God who is the author working thru me.
Deuteronomy 4:10 Specially the day that thou stoodest before the LORD thy God in Horeb, when the LORD said unto me, Gather me the people together, and I will make them hear MY words, (THRU WHO?)that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live upon the earth, and that they may "teach their children."
Isaiah 51:16 And I have put MY words in thy mouth, and I have covered thee in the shadow of mine hand, that I may plant the heavens, and lay the foundations of the earth, and say unto Zion, Thou art my people.
Isaiah 59:21 As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and MY words which I have PUT in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever.
Jeremiah 1:9 Then the LORD put forth his hand, and TOUCHED MY mouth. And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have put MY words in thy mouth.
When Moses wrote the 10 commandments on the tablets, did he lay claim to owning what he wrote, did he copywrite the tablets? The answer is clearly NO. Is it not therefore egotistical to put one's claim to the things of God that are freely given to people by God and for someone to take credit and glory for the spirit of God working in them, when it works in all God's children who are walking in tune with him. Did the "holy men of God spake" copywrite their materials?
Just for some insight I will paste the following from a link from Mel Gibson's new movie website:
About Using Sermons on SermonCentral.com http://www.SermonCentral.com
©opyItRight:
How to Use Other Preachers? Material Without Compromising Your Integrity
by Brian Mavis
?All work and no plagiarism makes for dull sermons!?
Henry Ward Beecher
?Plans fail for lack of counsel, but with many advisers they succeed.?
Proverbs 15:22
Is Using Other Preachers? Sermons OK?
Have you ever wondered if researching other preachers? sermons for your own sermon preparation was wrong? What about reading or listening to just one other preacher?s sermon? Or what if you used someone?s outline, or main idea, or illustrations ? or even most of someone else?s sermon? Where is the line, and have you ever wondered if you crossed it?
Even people who think that they are being completely original are probably not quite right. Some copy ideas without even knowing it. Rick Warren (a very copied preacher) is known for saying, ?If you take an idea from one person it is called plagiarism. If you take ideas from a number of people it is called research.? Ironically, even that was said before by US playwright Wilson Mizner (1876-1933). He said, ?Copy from one, it?s plagiarism; copy from two, it?s research.? John F. Kennedy is credited for saying, ?Ask not what your country can do for you ? ask what you can do for your country.? But it was really his ghostwriter, John Kenneth Galbraith, who wrote it. And Galbraith may have lifted the idea from Oliver Wendell Holmes who said, ?We... recall what our country has done for each of us, and to ask ourselves what we can do for our country in return.?
As the manager of the largest sermon resource site on the Internet, I deal with the pros and cons of using material from other pastor?s sermons on a daily basis. I get emails worldwide from pastors saying how reading other pastors? sermons has helped them as a person and as a preacher. But occasionally I uncover someone who has submitted a plagiarized sermon and is probably preaching it as if they wrote it.
Relying on Other Preachers? Sermons is Common
Researching other preachers? sermons is not new. Sermons have been printed in books for centuries, and sermons on tapes have been abundant for decades. But with the advent of the Internet, researching and copying other preachers? sermons is easier and more common than ever. Last week SermonCentral was used over 170,000 times. It is the most popular online sermon resource site, but it certainly isn?t the only one. Just that fact alone proves there are a lot of pastors looking for sermon help.
Advantages of Sermon Resource Sites
There are different reasons preachers rely on other people?s sermons ? some good, some bad. Some benefits of sermon resource sites are:
1. They can help you write a better sermon, which can lead more people to know and grow in Christ.
2. They can give you other perspectives and help you grow in your knowledge of God.
3. They can give you the benefit of other pastors? research and resources.
4. They can help you save time.
5. They can help you with better big ideas, outlines and illustrations.
Disadvantages of Sermon Resource Sites
Some detriments of sermon resource sites are:
1. They can lead to laziness.
2. They can shortchange your personal conviction that comes with struggling over a passage.
3. They can prevent you from taking into account your congregation?s need, which produces generic sermons.
4. They can tempt you to take false credit for a sermon.
Because reading, listening, researching, and relying on other preachers? sermons is so widespread, and because it has potential for such great benefit or detriment, it is important to do it right and for the right reasons.
What Not To Do
1. Don?t wait until Saturday to begin your sermon preparation. (Preparing a good sermon is like brewing good coffee ? it needs time to percolate.)
2. Don?t go to a sermon resource site and just print off a sermon and read it.
3. Don?t retell a story as if it happened to you.
What To Do
1. First, go to God and ask Him what He wants to say to your congregation.
2. Study the Bible passage on your own before you rely on someone else?s study.
3. Apply the passage to your life ? walk what you are going to talk.
4. With the passage in your heart, and your congregation in mind, discern the main thing (just one thing) you want to say and how you want to say it.
5. Now you can look at other sources. Be open to any better ideas, clearer ways to say things, missed points, and superior illustrations.
6. In your personal notes, cite your sources.
7. When you go to preach, reference your resources. If you just have some common illustrations, ideas, or quotes, there is no need to clutter your sermon with, ?I got this information from?.? But if you have used a significant idea, outline, illustration, or section (and even an entire sermon), give credit where credit is due. You can either mention something before the sermon or in the midst of it. You can also handle this by placing a note in the bulletin. For example you can say something like, ?In my research for this sermon, I used Chuck Swindoll?s outline from his sermon called God is Good.?
The widespread use of gleaning from other people?s sermons is here to stay. The goal is to use the resource wisely and well. To cheat your congregation by overusing sermon resources is wrong. But it can be equally as wrong to avoid using them because of pride, and possibly cheat your congregation out of a better message. The Good News combined with good resources is a powerful combination for reaching your congregation and community for Christ.
Rafael......get my point!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LG
I was completely unconvinced by Lorna, but your insightful, original thoughts have persuaded me, Rafael.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cynic
From the introduction to The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination, by Loraine Boettner:
"Any one is at liberty to use material from this book with or without credit. In preparing this book the writer has received help from many sources, some acknowledged and many unacknowledged. He believes the material herein set forth to be a true statement of Scripture teaching, and his desire is to further, not to restrict its use."
http://www.ccel.org/b/boettner/predest/01.htm
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cynic
Actually, it appears that disclaimer appears before the introduction.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hope R.
You can also site the scripture in Ecc 1:9 which reads: "The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun."
But c'mon - jot for jot, tittle for tittle use of words and teachings that have already been printed in someone else's work? It's not a matter of "no new thing". It's a matter of claiming something to be your original work that simply isn't.
If VP's works had the same "look and feel" as say B.G. Leonard or J.E. Stiles' works - we may be able to come to the conclusion that he read them, formulated his own thoughts and opinions, did his own research, and then wrote it down. BUT IT'S WORD FOR WORD FOLKS!
Check out some of John Juedes' publications. I don't agree with some of his methods, but facts are facts.
Wierwille Borrows...A Challenge to the Originality of His Teaching on "Receiving the Holy Spirit Today" J. Juedes, Personal Freedom Outreach; (PFO) Journal, 1983, 3 pp
Overviews the work of J.E. Stiles and prints Stiles' writings next to Wierwille's writings in parallel columns, showing VPW's plagiarism.
Will the Real Author Please Stand Up? John Juedes & Jay Valusek.
St. Louis: Personal Freedom Outreach, 1987. 48 pp, $2.00
Outlines V.P. Wierwille's use of transcribed sermons and other's writings to produce his books. Shows how VPW plagiarized at least 8 books by at least 3 authors. Prints plagiarized writings alongside VPW's writings for easy comparison.
John was nice enough to send me these publications and they blew me away. I knew about the plagiarism - but didn't realize how exact the wording was, the emotions, the exclamations, the punctuation - every jot and tittle!
I believe Dot (or someone like her!) posted much of the line-by-line comparisons a while back.
I just don't see any comparison in reading other people's work and gleaning from it vs. copying word for word hunks of someone elses material, claiming it as your own, and saying God taught it to you.
Hope R. color>size>face>
What a long, strange trip it's been!size>face>color>
Link to comment
Share on other sites
masterherbalist
Well, it did one thing for me..............................................................................
.................made me start reading Bullinger and EW Kenyon, etc directly. At least I didn't have a whole ministry screaming at me. It was very soothing. It was very peaceful. My fellowships kind of reminded ya of Corps nights when the verse and a translation was DISCUSSED. And there could be a difference of opinion. I also remember at one point were Dr. W. encouraged his students to challenge him where appropriate with the Word and research to back up the differing view.
Ah, but it must have been a dream, because next thing I knew, I was being reproved for having a reprobate mind, the spirit of slumber, etc. Sure glad I kept my Bullingers stuff. I was sure disappointed in the biography done by a wayfer. I don't recall any visions or signs given to him.
Oh well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheEvan
How cool is that, Hope? I know Jay Valusek, co-author with Juedes. Yep, went to high school a year with him. My memory isn't all that clear but I may have intoduced him to da Way. Nice to see he's done such good work.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LornaDoone
Thank you Rafael,
I believe you read what I wrote and copied.
Long Gone:
"I was completely unconvinced by Lorna, but your insightful, original thoughts have persuaded me, Rafael."
Why did Rafael persuade you, he did not add anything, he just copied what I put there in the first place. I think some of you did not even read what I put there.
If what someone teaches reaches hearts and you believe that someone else will receive the same deliverance, isn't that God's intention? So what's the play on words. God is the only one who owns his Word and no matter how you present it you are still using HIS words. So when it comes to using God's Word my point was that I wonder if it should be copy righted at all, since you are using the original author's work.
Just more "food for thought".
Lorna.......love my cookies!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kit Sober
The power and the presence of the Holy Spirit (it's His job to lead us into the all truth).
His voice is soft and still and true.
His voice speaks of the Christ in you.
Watchman Nee, maybe my favorite all-time Christian, was so cool. He was in prison- communist concentration camp prison the last 12 years of his life, and he died there. What broke his heart, and then he died, was hearing his wife had died. (She had been under house arrest those 12 years.)
Few, if any, of the books you read by Watchman Nee he even saw. He was in Chinese concentration camp.
I asked one Chinese believer (A Chinese Christian has a much controlled, quiet spirit, awesome to behold), "How do you know if a book is really Watchman Nee?"
He laughed and said, "If it wasn't Watchman Nee, it wouldn't be Watchman Nee." You just can't counterfeit the kind of kindess of that man, or it wouldn't be him.
I just read a story in "Extreme Devotion" which is a voice of the Martyr's "Foxe's Book of Martyrs" for today: When Watchman Nee was in prison the guards kept getting converted when they were assigned to keep guard of Watchman Nee. So they made a rule that no officer could guard Watchman Nee for two times, and they shortened the shifts at Watchman Nee's cell to 6 hours to try to prevent the conversion of the prison officers
:)-->
The presence of Holy Spirit is the test. Stolen works do not carry Holy Spirit. Only things referenced by Holy Spirit carry His power and life
:)--> Holy Spirit stuff becomes sweeter and more lovely as you savor it.
vp's stuff is like cardboard. The more you read the list of ingredients the more counterfeit and tasteless vp's works become
:P-->
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LG
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
Irony...yeah, irony
Assuming that the words do achieve that intention, how much trouble would it be to credit the teacher or author who you got the information from? Very little, I'm guessing. What do you mean by that. Normally "play on words" indicates some sort of figure of speech; what do you mean? Maybe, but there are, in fact, copyright laws in this country and in most others. If someone copyrights a work, then we have a legal obligation to honor that copyright, whether or not we have ethical qualms about the principle of copyrighting bible teachings.For many, part of the allure of Wierwille's "ministry" was that he was "teaching the Word as it had not been known since the first century". Part of the "hook" that kept a lot of us in TWI was the belief that it was the "only place that was teaching the Word of God". If we had known early on that what he was teaching was known as recently as the 1950's and that much of what he was teaching was being taught elsewhere, that particular attraction would have been negated.
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice...but in practice there is
Oakspear
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Lorna,
You think I copied you? No way, I think God gave us both the revelation to say the same things. I think my copying you is proof that what I have to say truly is from God. Further, since what I have to say came later, and contains some changes from what you have to say, I can only conclude that God improved the message after you botched it, and my version is closer to His original intent.
Rafael.....keep your hands off my cookies!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Oakspear
This is a post that has not been seen since the first century. Why, I forgot more about posting than Rafael ever knew.
My purpose in contributing to this thread is to invoke some new thought on some of the postings over the past few years regarding Plagiarism. I offer food for thought and know this is a little long but it is my hope to put to rest some of the controversy from the past.
While browsing Mel Gibsons new website for his forthcoming movie "The Passion of Christ"
http://www.thepassionofchrist.com , I came across a web-site with some interesting views on Plagiarism that I thought would be of interest to some.
So my "food for thought". If God inspires his people through his gift of holy spirit
(" Peter 1:21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.")
to write classes, sermons etc., who really owns those teachings and sharings.
When we share with someone the greatness of God's Word, we are all gleaning excerpts from those that have taught and preached to us as well as The Holy Spirit who works in us.
"Romans 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?
Romans 10:15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!"
God is the one that "sends" us to preach and bring glad tidings of good things.
So my questions is if God inspires us to preach & teach to move the Word, this is HIS goal, we respond and obey. Do we not want the Word that we speak to give insight to the novice to be spoken again and again to accomplish that which GOD wants.
Isaiah 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto ME void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I SENT IT.
So when we speak God's word it is really God the author of his Word that is speaking through us, so how can anyone lay claim to "their sermon, their class, their preaching". In the scripture above we know God does not have a mouth, he uses our heart and mouth by our free will with the spirit of God in us. God also guarantees the results of HIS Word not returning void.
"Matthew 10:19 But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak.
Mark 13:11 But when they shall lead you, and deliver you up, take no thought beforehand what ye shall speak, neither do ye premeditate: but whatsoever shall be given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak, but the Holy Ghost."
Even in these trying times, the whole purpose for God working through them was to be a witness.
So I ask you, if one person benefits from a work that someone does (inspired by God) regarding God's Word, it is absolutely what God wanted. It would be very selfish for me or anyone else to teach the Word and say that I own or copywrite my teaching when in essence it is God who is the author working thru me.
Deuteronomy 4:10 Specially the day that thou stoodest before the LORD thy God in Horeb, when the LORD said unto me, Gather me the people together, and I will make them hear MY words, (THRU WHO?)that they may learn to fear me all the days that they shall live upon the earth, and that they may "teach their children."
Isaiah 51:16 And I have put MY words in thy mouth, and I have covered thee in the shadow of mine hand, that I may plant the heavens, and lay the foundations of the earth, and say unto Zion, Thou art my people.
Isaiah 59:21 As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and MY words which I have PUT in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever.
Jeremiah 1:9 Then the LORD put forth his hand, and TOUCHED MY mouth. And the LORD said unto me, Behold, I have put MY words in thy mouth.
When Moses wrote the 10 commandments on the tablets, did he lay claim to owning what he wrote, did he copywrite the tablets? The answer is clearly NO. Is it not therefore egotistical to put one's claim to the things of God that are freely given to people by God and for someone to take credit and glory for the spirit of God working in them, when it works in all God's children who are walking in tune with him. Did the "holy men of God spake" copywrite their materials?
Just for some insight I will paste the following from a link from Mel Gibson's new movie website:
About Using Sermons on SermonCentral.com http://www.SermonCentral.com
©opyItRight:
How to Use Other Preachers? Material Without Compromising Your Integrity
by Brian Mavis
?All work and no plagiarism makes for dull sermons!?
Henry Ward Beecher
?Plans fail for lack of counsel, but with many advisers they succeed.?
Proverbs 15:22
Is Using Other Preachers? Sermons OK?
Have you ever wondered if researching other preachers? sermons for your own sermon preparation was wrong? What about reading or listening to just one other preacher?s sermon? Or what if you used someone?s outline, or main idea, or illustrations ? or even most of someone else?s sermon? Where is the line, and have you ever wondered if you crossed it?
Even people who think that they are being completely original are probably not quite right. Some copy ideas without even knowing it. Rick Warren (a very copied preacher) is known for saying, ?If you take an idea from one person it is called plagiarism. If you take ideas from a number of people it is called research.? Ironically, even that was said before by US playwright Wilson Mizner (1876-1933). He said, ?Copy from one, it?s plagiarism; copy from two, it?s research.? John F. Kennedy is credited for saying, ?Ask not what your country can do for you ? ask what you can do for your country.? But it was really his ghostwriter, John Kenneth Galbraith, who wrote it. And Galbraith may have lifted the idea from Oliver Wendell Holmes who said, ?We... recall what our country has done for each of us, and to ask ourselves what we can do for our country in return.?
As the manager of the largest sermon resource site on the Internet, I deal with the pros and cons of using material from other pastor?s sermons on a daily basis. I get emails worldwide from pastors saying how reading other pastors? sermons has helped them as a person and as a preacher. But occasionally I uncover someone who has submitted a plagiarized sermon and is probably preaching it as if they wrote it.
Relying on Other Preachers? Sermons is Common
Researching other preachers? sermons is not new. Sermons have been printed in books for centuries, and sermons on tapes have been abundant for decades. But with the advent of the Internet, researching and copying other preachers? sermons is easier and more common than ever. Last week SermonCentral was used over 170,000 times. It is the most popular online sermon resource site, but it certainly isn?t the only one. Just that fact alone proves there are a lot of pastors looking for sermon help.
Advantages of Sermon Resource Sites
There are different reasons preachers rely on other people?s sermons ? some good, some bad. Some benefits of sermon resource sites are:
1. They can help you write a better sermon, which can lead more people to know and grow in Christ.
2. They can give you other perspectives and help you grow in your knowledge of God.
3. They can give you the benefit of other pastors? research and resources.
4. They can help you save time.
5. They can help you with better big ideas, outlines and illustrations.
Disadvantages of Sermon Resource Sites
Some detriments of sermon resource sites are:
1. They can lead to laziness.
2. They can shortchange your personal conviction that comes with struggling over a passage.
3. They can prevent you from taking into account your congregation?s need, which produces generic sermons.
4. They can tempt you to take false credit for a sermon.
Because reading, listening, researching, and relying on other preachers? sermons is so widespread, and because it has potential for such great benefit or detriment, it is important to do it right and for the right reasons.
What Not To Do
1. Don?t wait until Saturday to begin your sermon preparation. (Preparing a good sermon is like brewing good coffee ? it needs time to percolate.)
2. Don?t go to a sermon resource site and just print off a sermon and read it.
3. Don?t retell a story as if it happened to you.
What To Do
1. First, go to God and ask Him what He wants to say to your congregation.
2. Study the Bible passage on your own before you rely on someone else?s study.
3. Apply the passage to your life ? walk what you are going to talk.
4. With the passage in your heart, and your congregation in mind, discern the main thing (just one thing) you want to say and how you want to say it.
5. Now you can look at other sources. Be open to any better ideas, clearer ways to say things, missed points, and superior illustrations.
6. In your personal notes, cite your sources.
7. When you go to preach, reference your resources. If you just have some common illustrations, ideas, or quotes, there is no need to clutter your sermon with, ?I got this information from?.? But if you have used a significant idea, outline, illustration, or section (and even an entire sermon), give credit where credit is due. You can either mention something before the sermon or in the midst of it. You can also handle this by placing a note in the bulletin. For example you can say something like, ?In my research for this sermon, I used Chuck Swindoll?s outline from his sermon called God is Good.?
The widespread use of gleaning from other people?s sermons is here to stay. The goal is to use the resource wisely and well. To cheat your congregation by overusing sermon resources is wrong. But it can be equally as wrong to avoid using them because of pride, and possibly cheat your congregation out of a better message. The Good News combined with good resources is a powerful combination for reaching your congregation and community for Christ.
copyright 2003 by Oakspear Agnostic Press
All rights reserved
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Oakspear,
I notice that you give a reference for every scripture you quote, and a link for the article you quote. You even give a link for the site that led you to the article. This leads me to suspect that you don't buy your own argument.
Plagiarism is, essentially, presenting someone else's words or thoughts as one's own. That is not the same as learning from others or correcting their spelling. It is not the same as using someone else's words or thoughts, but properly crediting them. I think you know that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
LG
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cynic
If Rafael buys and resells Lorna's cookies, it should be okay if he uses her recipes to produce and market his own cookie collection, along with egregiously false and swollen personal claims -- until, of course, he hands the business over to the likes of Long Gone.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheEvan
All right, so let's say (for argument's sake) we minimize the plaigarism charges, justifying it with "well at least it was the truth".
The only place I can go from there is that Wierwille was a liar. Or so I strongly suspect. When he claimed his own unique revelation (the old gas pump saw), which now appears to have been borrowed, it WASN"T plaigarism. OKAY I ADMIT IT. No, the guy was LYING. Bald faced.
And when he claimed that Gawd© taught him as he "put away all those old books and just studied the Word", for, what was the claim? 12-14 years©? No, he wasn't plaigarizing. Yes, he was LYING.
Oh, and when he said that he discovered Bullinger AFTER he had "discovered" all these things, it wasn't plaigarism. No. IT WAS LYING.
There, glad I cleared that up.
Oh, by the way?, it was plaigarism AND lying.
And I won't listen to a liar
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.