"Are the Dead Alive Now" was plagiarized.

[WordWolf]

quote:

Originally posted by oldiesman:

And I still say, so what?

Since this question was raised, I'd like to address it.

I've given this a lot of thought over the years, and here's the conclusions I've

drawn.....

It's fairly easy to illustrate that there is something fundamentally wrong with plagiarism.

Suppose, for argument's sake, that you saw a book on E-bay. The title is "The Ability to

Live Abundantly", and the author goes by the pen-name WordWolf. In reading the excerpts,

you see that its opening prominently quotes John 10:10. It follows this with

"This verse literally changed my life. In my years in the Christian ministry, I've never

manifested an abundant life. It seemed unbelievers were manifesting a more abundant life than

Christians. Yet Jesus Christ said he came that we might have life and that we might have it

more it more abundantly. Why are Christians failing to manifest even an abundant life?"

The remainder of the book lays out keys for how to understand the Bible. There's a chapter on

how to receive anything from God, including an anecdote about "fire-engine-red" curtains.

Another chapter is called "The Battle of the Senses."

You would easily recognize that "my" book was little more than a retyping of the Orange Book.

If I were to take that book, slap a new title on it, change a few words around so that the

quotes are not exact, could I really call myself an author (especially if I fail to give

Wierwille credit for his work?) Could I, in good conscience, sell my book and take the

profits?

Victor Paul Wierwille was a serial plagiarist. He took the research of other men and passed it

off as his own. He took their words and put his name on them.

What should Wierwille have done? To be truthful, he should have cited Kenyon and Bullinger and

anyone else he used as a source in compiling his teachings, classes and books. Wierwille joked

that he had forgotten more about the subject of "holy spirit" than some of his critics would

ever know. Apparently, one of the things Wierwille forgot was to give credit where credit

is due.

Wierwille implies books like Recieving the Holy Spirit Today, Power For Abundant Living,

and Are the Dead Alive Now? were strictly the result of his personal research into the Bible.

It was not. He claimed to throw away all his other texts and use the Bible as his only

textbook and guide. This was dishonest. This was demonstrably false. It was a lie.

Plagiarism is LYING.

It is lying about the amount of work you put into your written project.

When the plagiarist claims to be a uniquely-qualified man of God, the lie becomes magnified.

Why? Because a minister is, by definition, in a position of TRUST in the church community.

No one expects a minister to be superhuman, but it is NOT unreasonable to expect honesty and

integrity. It is not unreasonable, when you read an article that says "by WordWolf" to

expect that WordWolf wrote it. It is not unreasonable, when you read a book that says

"by Victor Paul Wierwille" to expect that Victor Paul Wierwille wrote it.

Victor Paul Wierwille used other people's work to prop up his own "research ability,"

his own wisdom and understanding of God's Word. He used other people's work to exalt himself

as The Teacher, The Man of God, Our Father in The Word. He did so knowing that the words

"by Victor Paul Wierwille" were a lie.

Plagiarism reflects on the character of the plagiarist. The plagiarist is a liar, a thief, an

arrogant, lazy, self-important person who dismisses the hard work of other people and

disrespects the intelligence of his readers-by presuming the readers will never learn of

the infraction.

Plagiarism hurts people. It hurts people by stealing from them. It hurts people by

misrepresenting the accomplishments of the plagiarist. The Bible teaches that love does not

"puff itself up". But what is plagiarism if it's not pretending to do something you did

not do?

We don't accept it from high school students. We don't accept it from college students.

We don't accept it from news reporters, columnists, nor authors. We don't accept it from

historians and researchers. Those are "the world's" professions.

How can we accept a lower standard of integrity from men who profess to stand for God?

And, one last question:

Don't you get bugged when you see someone plagiarizing-attempting to pass off someone else's

work as their own? Doesn't that dishonesty bother you?

[WordWolf]

Power for Abundant Living, Pages 119-120.

"For years I did nothing but read around the Word of God. I used to read 2 or 3

theological works weekly for month after month and year after year. I knew what

Professor so-and-so said, what Dr so-and-so and the Right Reverend so-and-so said,

but I could not quote you The Word. I had not read it. One day I finally became so

disgusted and tired of reading around The Word that I hauled over 3,000 volumes of

theological works to the city dump. I decided to quit reading around The Word.

Consequently, I have spent years studying The Word-its integrity, its meaning, its words.

Why do we study? Because God expects us as workmen to know what His Word says."

From The White Book's preface.

"The Word of God is truth. 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. I did not want to omit, deny, or change any passage for, the Word of God

being the will of God, the Scripture must fit like a hand in a glove."

You can read the entire preface if you want, but that was the only part directly

germane. The rest of it underscores this, as he claims that all the Christians he'd

encountered in schools, seminaries, etc all lacked The Truth as he later found it

once he eliminated all outside sources.

[outofdafog]

Wow if I ever had any doubts about him being a scheister (is that how you spell that?), this thread has certaily dispelled that.

Reading this thread took me back to the first PFAL I sat through....gosh how young and gullible I was now that I think back. 18 years old and just out of high school, took the class, went to the Rock in Sidney, got recruited for Way Marketing program by Je**y Jac*s and Ste*e Hu**man while at the rock, left for North Carolina the day after the rock, parents really ticked off at me, but I was gun ho for God.

In a way, it was so exciting, in other ways, I feel I was so gullible. I don't condemn myself for that now, but it just amazes me how I sat and listened to vic in PFAL and just believed everything he said. I didn't know the man from Adam but I believed every word he said. He truly took advantage I believe of the Hippie Movement.

Then there's How*ard A**en. He reminds me of the red neck side kick of the rural con-man (kinda like Mr. Haney on Green Acres :)--> I can hear them planning it in the cornfields of Ohio now.

*How*rd: Hey vic, you be the teacher and I'll just be your right hand man. You got the charisma, so that's why you get to be the preacher. Yuck Yuck.

Vic: Yeah How*ard, man don't worry, you'll get a cut. I will even make you secretary-treasurer.

How*rd: Hey man thanks. Yuck Yuck

Vic: Just try to act spiritual buddy, you know around the kids. Don't want anyone to be the wiser. I might even throw in some sob story, you know about how I stayed up all night and like my eye fell out or something from the lights.

How*rd: Hey that's a good one Vic Yuck Yuck."

Thank you Lord for freeing me from this insanity.

[GrouchoMarxJr]

Well...it doesn't surprise me that the cornfield preacher stole that one too.

To answer oldiesman...yeah, if I would have known then (1975) that Wierwille was a lying, stealing, wannabe...I would have have split then and there.

[Stayed Too Long]

quote:

Would you have changed direction had he given proper written acknowledgement?

It wouldn't have matter much to me. I was hooked on Wierwille before ever hearing or meeting the guy. I just loved the people in the first twig I went to and believed anything they said. At that period of time life just seemed to come together. I had a lot of trouble comprehending God and the first couple of fellowships my mind was completely at ease on who God was. Without doubt I knew God and His will for me. From then on I was sold and you could have laid VPW's work next to Bullilngers and shown me the plagurism and I would have denied it.

[shazdancer]

Whoa, Wordwolf. I just thought of something.

(Every now and then, I think of something, just by accident!) ;)-->

"over 3,000 volumes..."

I'm sitting at the computer, looking at the bookshelves that line one wall. Each shelf is about 22 inches across, and can hold about 25 books, if they aren't real thick. If the bookcases went all the way to the ceiling, there would be room for 7 shelves, or about 175 books. VP would've needed over 17 bookcases full to satisfy his claim.

Now think about his life. He was a student, then a young pastor making very little money his first year. He had a wife. He had a tot and an infant. He said Rosalind Rinker had told him to "lay aside all other reading material and study the Bible as the Word of God...he took her advice and started intensely studying God's Word in the late summer of '42....*" He supposedly saw snow on the gaspumps a month later.

So how could he afford to own 3,000 books???

Hmmm...

Shaz

*the quote is from a booklet called "The Teacher Dr. Victor Paul Wierwille," which was distributed at ROA '85. Even I know how to give credit, and it doesn't make my statement any more difficult to read. :D-->

[jkboehme]

For additional proof of Wierwille’s plagiarism re ADAN, please see:

Facts & Theories As to a Future State, by F.W. Grant; Payne Brothers (1879)

The Origins of Dispensationalism: The Darby Factor, by L. Crutchfield

John Nelson Darby, by W.G. Turner; McKay & Co. (1944)

A Historical Sketch of the Brethren Movement, by H.A. Ironside; Zondervan (1942)

The Household Church: Apostolic Practice in a Modern Setting, by H.L. Ellison; Paternoster Press (1963)

The Rapture Plot, by D. MacPherson

Christian Millenarianism, by S. Hunt

By the way, E.W. Bullinger and John Nelson Darby were contemporaries.

[lindyhopper]

quote:

Because even had Wierwille given proper written acknowledgement in all his books, would that have caused any of us to do anything any different way back when?

Would we have flocked to other ministries?

Flocked to other causes?

Would we have given less money to twi?

Not taken PFAL, not gone WOW, not gone Corps.

Gotten less committed because we saw proper written acknowledgement in the books?

Would you have changed what you did way-back-when if VP had done the right thing is not the question, OM. Of course, not. He would have been doing the honest thing and we wouldn't have thought twice. The real question is would you have changed having known that he was purposely stealing other people's work and passing it off as his own? Would you have changed knowing he was being dishonest, a liar? Would you have changed knowing that in fact this wasn't "the truth" the way "it hadn't been seen since the first century"? Those are the real questions and are the real questions today for those that are still involved or still believing the same old garbage. I haven't taken a look into it but I would think that there were contemporaries of the true authors that had opposing views and perhaps even critisized their beliefs. We didn't know the real authors and therefore didn't know of any critiacl opnions to the contrary. All we knew was we hadn't heard it before and wern't hearing it other places...so this must realy be from da mouf-O-God. It wasn't, it isn't, and it never was. That is why this should be continually brought up here. People that are in and blinded to the truth need to know it. Not just so they can leave, but so that they can make a truly informed decision because so far they haven't had that opportunity.

If this isn't going to change your day, great, don't read it, don't reply to it, don't click on any thread with the word plagiarism in the title. There ar hundreds of threads where I do just that and guess what, I don't loose any sleep over it.

DO THAT, and I will award you the "You're all dun growed up" award.

[lindyhopper]

Oops I didn't see that there was a second page here. :o-->

Seems I'm a little late.

[WordWolf]

quote:

Originally posted by jkboehme:

For additional proof of Wierwille’s plagiarism re ADAN, please see:

Facts & Theories As to a Future State, by F.W. Grant; Payne Brothers (1879)

The Origins of Dispensationalism: The Darby Factor, by L. Crutchfield

John Nelson Darby, by W.G. Turner; McKay & Co. (1944)

A Historical Sketch of the Brethren Movement, by H.A. Ironside; Zondervan (1942)

The Household Church: Apostolic Practice in a Modern Setting, by H.L. Ellison; Paternoster Press (1963)

The Rapture Plot, by D. MacPherson

Christian Millenarianism, by S. Hunt

By the way, E.W. Bullinger and John Nelson Darby were contemporaries.

Welcome, jkboehme.

I'm sorry to say, your recommendations, useful though they may be for other threads on

other topics, will NOT be particularly useful here.

The subject here is PLAGIARISM, most specifically, plagiarism from Bullinger for ADAN.

This is NOT a thread to discuss the accuracy of DOCTRINE-that would go in the DOCTRINAL

forum. If you want to debate the accuracy of dispensationalism, that would be the forum

to do so. (If you want to just declare it, there's no forum for that-all posts are subject

to discussion within the bounds of good taste-and often beyond that.) I'm not saying this

post made such a declaration, but that WAS the direction you were going. If you wish to

keep going there, please use that forum. (All your recommendations were for books

attacking dispensationalism.)

Furthermore, I'd recommend anyone studying up on dispensationalism OR Darby to skip any

books by MacPherson. MacPherson has a personal axe to gring on dispensationalism, and

considers that doctrine to have been responsible for his father's firing from his job and

his death. (No, I'm not exaggerating.) He's gone out of his way to use all tactics

available to him-including outright lies-to support his attacks on dispensationalism-

which he confines to attacks on Darby. I don't trust him as a reliable source on data.

Finally,

it is MUCH more relevant to this discussion-which you are welcome to continue to

participate in-to review more obvious examples of vpw's plagiarism:

http://www.empirenet.com/~messiah7/vp_stolenrthst.htm

http://www.empirenet.com/~messiah7/vp_stiles.htm

are two good places to start.

[WordWolf]

As posted previously, John Juedes wrote the following on this subject.

quote:

Plagiarism is COPYING from an author. When VP wrote books, he put his name on the cover, saying

"I wrote this--no one else." When writers quote another author, they cire the source, saying

"I wrote this book--but not this paragraph, I'm only copying this part from the author I'm naming

now."

VPW copied A LOT from other authors, but didn't admit that he did by putting their names in the

text or notes. So readers all assumed "VPW wrote this whole book," which is one thing that

impressed people. They figured that if VPW could write lots of books, he must have studied the

Word a lot and found out stuff himself. This drew a lot of followers. But this was all a lie,

because vast sections of "VPW's" writings weren't his-- they were copied word-for-word,

without references. VP lied like this for 30 years, from the 1st or 2nd edition of RTHST to a

Way Magazine article just before he died.

VP doubled the lie by saying often that he learned on his own. Remember the part of Power for

Abundant Living when VP said he took ALL his books to the dump and read the Word alone? He

said "I hauled over 3,000 volumes of theological works to the city dump. I decided to quit

reading around the Word. Consequently, I have spent years studying the Word..."(p.119-120.)

Or the great story in "The Way Living in Love" in which VP tells a fawning Elena Whiteside that

"He [God] spoke to me audibly, just like I'm talking to you now. He said He would teach me the

Word as it had not been known since the first century if I would teach it to others" (p.178.)

TWI thought this was so fantastic that it dates its anniversary to this alleged event rather

than to the formation of TWI.

Have you read the intro of "Receiving the Holy Spirit Today" in which he says he

"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 (p.x). Then VPW copied 70% of RTHST directly from other

authors. He wrote that in the 3rd edition, but in the second edition he admitted learning

from "someone". The fact that he replaced his statement that he learned from someone

(J.E. Stiles, whom he never mentioned by name) with a statement that he learned it all himself

from the Bible alone shows how consciously he lied for his own self-promotion. This isn't the

kind of character or spiritual leader to admire.

Why didn't Stiles, EW Bullinger, EW Kenyon, BG Leonard and others make a fuss when VP stole

their work? VP is the small-timer here. By the time VPW got more than a couple thousand

followers (the size of literally thousands of individual churches across the country) it was

alreadt the mid-1970s. By that time, Stiles, Kenyon, Cliffe, Starr, and Bullinger, had long

lost track of VP and were probably all dead. When Leonard finally found out about VP's

plagiarism, he started adding explicit and blunt copyright notes in his books warning people

not to plagiarize.

Even at TWI's peak, VP was basically an unknown outside of towns which hosted his

"root locations." VP's books were never available in bookstores or offered for sale via radio

ads (although this may have been attempted once without success)--only by taking the class and

getting on TWI's mailing list. By controlling sale of the books closely, VP limited his

exposure. If TWI hadn't been mentioned in articles along with other cults during the cults craze

of the 1970's, it's been almost totally unknown on a national scale. I've spent 20 years

dropping the names VPW and TWI and getting just blank stares. VPW and TWI have always had

greatly inflated views of themselves, their influence and nature.

At its core, plagiarism ls laziness, lying and egotistic self-promotion. Plagiarism is LAZINESS

because VP seldom studies the Bible on his own, but copied and read others' writings. Plagiarism

is LYING because he led readers to believe that he wrote the books himself, rather than making

clear in footnotes that he copied others' words and ideas. Plagiarism is EGOTISTIC SELF-PROMOTION

because VP tried to make himself look like a prodigious author when he was only a deceptive

copyist.

Dr John Juedes, 2000.

[Raf]

quote:

Leonard did not have the time or money or knowledge to pursue it.

Actually, maybe he didn't pursue it, but he did know, and it ticked him off. He added a page to each of his books denouncing plagiarism.

[WordWolf]

quote:

Originally posted by shazdancer:

Whoa, Wordwolf. I just thought of something.

(Every now and then, I think of something, just by accident!) ;)-->

"over 3,000 volumes..."

I'm sitting at the computer, looking at the bookshelves that line one wall. Each shelf is about 22 inches across, and can hold about 25 books, if they aren't real thick. If the bookcases went all the way to the ceiling, there would be room for 7 shelves, or about 175 books. VP would've needed over 17 bookcases full to satisfy his claim.

Now think about his life. He was a student, then a young pastor making very little money his first year. He had a wife. He had a tot and an infant. He said Rosalind Rinker had told him to "lay aside all other reading material and study the Bible as the Word of God...he took her advice and started intensely studying God's Word in the late summer of '42....*" He supposedly saw snow on the gaspumps a month later.

So how could he afford to own 3,000 books???

Hmmm...

Shaz

*the quote is from a booklet called "The Teacher Dr. Victor Paul Wierwille," which was distributed at ROA '85. Even I know how to give credit, and it doesn't make my statement any more difficult to read. :D-->

We discussed this before, Shaz. :)-->

vpw said

quote:

For years I did nothing but read around the Word of God. I used to read 2 or 3

theological works weekly for month after month and year after year....

One day I finally became so disgusted and tired of reading around the Word that I hauled over

3,000 volumes of theological works to the city dump. I decided to quit reading around

The Word. Consequently, I have spent years studying The Word-its integrity, its meaning,

its words.

Those of you who want the page numbers or a fuller quotation can look at my EARLIER posts

in this same thread. (Nobody accuse me of leaving that out this time-I'm announcing that

you can scroll up for that.)

WordWolf (me!) said the following once on that same subject Shaz just brought up.

quote:

For those of you following along at home, if he read FOUR books a week (as opposed

to "2 or 3" as he said) every week, every year, it would take 15 years to make it thru 3,000

volumes-without rereading any. (4 books times 52 weeks is 208 books a year. 15 years at that

pace would make it thru all those books.) Considering he had to be either completing his

education, working, or both during this time, and uncluding things like a trip to India

interrupting this, this would be an INCREDIBLE pace to maintain.

quote:

Anybody know where he kept such a collection of books? If he could fit 25 books on a

shelf-which would mean they are pretty small books-he would need 120 shelves. If he could

fit each shelf in a 3-foot space, and stacked the shelves 7 high, he would need over 40

stacks. This would require at least 2 regular rooms just to store all the books, or one

room with 48' on 2 walls, and 12' on the other 2 walls.

Someone suggested that "professional academic journals are often rather thin. I think a

thousand volumes of them can easily fit into a small closet."

This would assume that the overwhelming majority of the 3000 books would be

"professional academic journals".

Someone also said

"I've noticed that often people buy entire personal libraries at a time at auctions, or are

given libraries of elderly or deceased scholars."

This would assume that either

A) vpw found one or more auctions of personal libraries of professional academic journals

and purchased 3000 books at one or more auctions

or

B) one or more persons donated to vpw entire academic libraries of professional academic

journals, 3000 books' worth of them, or almost 3,000-

and yet a feat of philanthropy this remarkable was HIDDEN by vpw all these years, that he

felt it was not worthy of mention by description, that the donor or source should remain

entirely anonymous.

Therefore, since vpw had the opportunity to do so, this means either:

A) vpw acquired nearly 3000 books by auction or donation,

and those sources had THOUSANDS of professional academic journals

SPECIFICALLY on the Bible or Theology

AND vpw decided to HIDE the specifics of this

or

B) vpw had access to storage space that exceeds the conventional views of

time and space as understood by all Americans to this day,

possibly by quantum tunnelling the books to some other planet

AND he NEVER divulged a word of this to ANY of his students or

anyone else, letting these wizard-like secrets vanish with his death

AND never using them for anything else but books

or

C) vpw lied thru his teeth all his life about this.

Occam's Razor would suggest that B) should be dismissed, and A) considered the longshot,

and C) is correct- especially since he was a proven liar, such as about his miraculous

Tulsa snowstorm (which never happened) and the angel-on-the-phone that kept him from

leaving town- so he has a HISTORY of lying intentionally.

In all fairness, I thought the opposing point of view should be mentioned, since it came up.

As you can see, however, it was hardly an unassailable argument.

[Tom Strange]

quote:

DO THAT, and I will award you the "You're all dun growed up" award.

Lindy, I thought it was "he's all growns up"...

[Ham]

Ah, what difference does it make.. what difference does it make..

Let's say you work your REAR off, and produce a first class product for your company.

Let's say your boss, takes your work, puts his name on it, gives it to his superiors, and gets a REAL BIG pat on the back, and promotion to boot..

Most people would consider that despicable, at the least.

Well, so what? The company got the benefits of said new product, no matter HOW they got it, not matter who got the credit.. so what difference does it make? No big deal..

Tell that to the guy that worked his rear off..

Why is it, when you add religion to the mix, somehow, all the rules are supposed to be different? Well, we're supposed to be "loving".. ptooie.

"Love" to me- would be to honestly give credit where credit is due.

[Ham]

quote:

over 3,000 volumes

Just over 3000 PAGES might be a closer estimate..

[jkboehme]

Quote:

“I'm sorry to say, your recommendations, useful though they may be for other threads on

other topics, will NOT be particularly useful here.

The subject here is PLAGIARISM, most specifically, plagiarism from Bullinger for ADAN.” // WW

WW, I agree that the subject of the thread is PLAGARISM. I have no interest in addressing ‘doctrine.’ I am neither pro nor con dispensationalism. The obvious point that I was endeavoring to make is that there are *multiple* potential sources for Wierwille’s plagiarism re ADAN, while including EW Bullinger, & even excluding extremist MacPherson.

[oldiesman]

quote:

And, IF he was so super intelligent and so right on and teaching the word like it hadn't been taught in the first century, then why weren't all these great men beating down his door? Why didn't that raise a flag for us?

Belle, that's pretty easy to explain. If God taught VPW the Word like it hadn't been known since the first century church, it could be in the available ways for VPW to learn. i.e., thru other people.

Had VPW given proper written acknowledgement to other mens ideas in his books, would that act have negated his claim? I trow not.

quote:

So if vee pee made his claim about throwing out all the books in the middle of the PFAL, then he was essentially leading us to believe that all of PFAL came from his widdle head, the Bible and God, wasn't he?

Well, there is conflicting information about this. I don't have all the answers to this. VPW could have done a lot of the research on his own, which could have been the same research someone else did, years before. That's not impossible to imagine. Then again, we do have evidence of all the men of God he learned from who were scattered across the continent. No question he learned from these men.

Also, we learned in 1972 that lots of VPW's stuff was not original, as was stated in "The Way Living in Love". Somehow it seems other folks didn't realize that he got lots of his stuff from other men, but I got that idea early on and it really doesn't surprise me that he got ooodles of stuff from other men. But then Wierwille said "putting it all together so that it fit -- that was the original work."

And so he's correct there. Far as I can tell, he didn't steal TWI from anyone. He founded it, put it together and made it work in his time.

All this doesn't mean he didn't plagiarize, I understand that. What I'm saying is, even had he given proper written acknowledgement, it wouldn't have changed my direction or commitment.

Would anyone who believed PFAL and realized much profit in it, have questioned its accuracy or profitability had they known it really came from Bullinger or Leonard or other men? I trow not. Would they have left twi and followed other ministries? Maybe, but I doubt it would have mattered to most.

[johniam]

Right now I'm wondering what VP DIDN'T copy from those men. Probably some weird stuff.

[oldiesman]

quote:

And, one last question: Don't you get bugged when you see someone plagiarizing-attempting to pass off someone else's work as their own? Doesn't that dishonesty bother you?

Um, no Wordwolf, it doesn't bother me.

I suppose I have enough things going on in my life today that VPW's plagiarisms of 30 years ago are of no relevance to me at all.

[Ham]

"every woman in da kingdom belongs to da king.."

Who knows- maybe he dreamed THAT little treasure up by his little own self..

[Raf]

WordWolf,

Most of your posts are very well-written, but your post of August 10, 2005 17:38 was a work of art.

Raf

[Raf]

quote:

Originally posted by oldiesman:

quote:

And, one last question: Don't you get bugged when you see someone plagiarizing-attempting to pass off someone else's work as their own? Doesn't that dishonesty bother you?

Um, no Wordwolf, it doesn't bother me.

Well, as a writer, I can say it would bother me if someone tried to pass off my work as their own. I'd just be absolutely steamed. Dishonesty is dishonesty: no excuses!

[Ham]

Let's say I'm a real math whiz (only about half right..) and denounce all of the old math guys opinions, and claim to approach the subject fresh and new..

I publish a paper.

"After years of dedicated, original research, I came up with a real novel concept. You can actually sum up periodic functions, that have a finite number of discontinuities, in the form of Sine and Cosine functions with varying coefficients.."

Sounds pretty convincing? Maybe I oughta make some money off of it..

"They" wouldn't even get mad- they'd laugh me off the planet..

Anybody who's anybody in math knows Fourier came up with this stuff, centuries ago..

And "they" still keep his name attached to his work. But as Christians, I guess we are supposed to do less- and less..

[oldiesman]

quote:

The real question is would you have changed having known that he was purposely stealing other people's work and passing it off as his own? Would you have changed knowing he was being dishonest, a liar? Would you have changed knowing that in fact this wasn't "the truth" the way "it hadn't been seen since the first century"?

Lindy, to honestly answer your question, I wouldn't have changed. I was thrilled to learn the Word of God that finally made some sense to me, and had I learned that these teachings really came from other men, I wouldn't have cared. (Actually I did know that a lot of the stuff came from other men already back then.) What was important to ME, was that it was the Word the Word the Word. I didn't care where Wierwille got it.

Had B.G. Leonard taken me aside 30 years ago and said "Wierwille stole from me", I might have encouraged him to take a chill pill and be thankful that the Word of God is being taught to so many folks and he was a part of that and to thank God we all knew the truth and teaching a lot of the same things.