oldiesman

Mark, I think the reason why they'd never do that is because Dr. & Mrs. wanted everything in TWI's name. What I think SHOULD happen now, is for sweet Rosalie to step up to the plate, being the President and all, and put everything of her own property in TWI's name just as Dr. & Mrs. did, following the same example. Am I correct that the house Mrs. Wierwille lived in all these years is in TWI's name? Well if that's the case then Rosalie should do the same. Since Harve is so concerned about ministry assets, perhaps he should push that idea, if for no other reason than BOT consistency. How about it Harve?

Harvey said: Let me get this straight: Harvey is not for spending ministry assets covering Mrs. Wierwille's personal expenses, because he's afraid that will mean if they did, that eventually, Mrs. Wierwille's assets will eventually go to JP? How bold and concerned Harvey is, to point out that ministry assets might be abused that way! Then I'm sure Harvey will have no problem walking into his boss's office, and demand that she stop using ministry assets for her own personal needs, like cleaning her home, manicuring her lawn, cleaning her pool, etc. and all the other personal servicing that they get by with. Hell, they live like kings and millionaires. Do I have that right or am I off base? And why does sweet Rosalie still, even after all this time, own her own home? Dr. & Mrs. Wierwille put everything in TWI's name, right? How about Rosalie? Harvey, do you see the contradiction?

Rafael, I would say no, because there's a bunch of material that's different, and VP adds more stuff than Stiles says, and Stiles says other things that VP doesn't say. If you do a word by word comparison I would say definitely not. There are similarities yes, but I don't know if that rises to the level of plagiarism.

It might be a good idea to begin a list of what changes innies should be demanding? Below are a few suggestions: 1. Tell Donna Martindale to go back with her husband. 2. Start teaching that adultery is a sin, and really mean it. No more excuses. 3. No more fear motivation where tithing is concerned. As a matter of fact, no more fear motivation, period. 4. Have BOD term limits. [This message was edited by oldiesman on March 08, 2003 at 0:43.]

What I have so far is RHST (2nd Ed.) plagiarized approx. 80% of the "faith blasters" statement of Stiles' "Gift of the Holy Spirit"; and RHST (6th Ed. (which is the one I own)) plagiarized "Gift of the Holy Spirit" approx. 50% of the same statement. If anyone knows of any more instances of plagiarism from J.E. Stiles book only, please let me know. I've ordered B.G. Leonard's "Gifts of the Spirit" to see what I can come up with.

Rafael, Thanks for your input, as usual you give excellent advice.

Wayfer Not, That sounds like a good idea; I'd like to know what she says myself. Evan, I'm going to order B.G.'S book and let you know what I think...

Washingtonweather, Thanks for your input. I have the Kenyon books, so what words/paragraphs in those are plagiarized and in which VPW books are the plagiarisms to be found?

Long Gone, Shortly after the time I read that VPW plagiarized material (I read this from Dr. John Juedes' website), I bought my own copy of J.E. Stiles book, and compared it with my own copy of RHST (3rd edition from 1972). As I recall, I couldn't find anything that was plagiarized, or if I did, it was only a few sentences. I guess that was because Dr. John Juedes was referring to the 2nd edition of RHST, a book that I didn't have, and nobody else seems to have. I want to see plagiarism in my face, so there's no mistake. THEN I will call it plagiarism. Where I will agree with Dr. John Juedes is the overall assumption that most of us, as new believers, thought VPW'S stuff was completely original. Sort of like starry-eyed PFAL students thinking VPW got everything by revelation. But as we stayed around long enough, we knew it wasn't like that. Long Gone, have you made a personal comparison of Bullinger's "Giver and Gifts" with your copy of RHST, and came up with massive plagiarism? If so let me know, I will gladly buy a copy so I can see it for myself.

Lying and copying other peoples texts are wrong. But one point I'd like to make is that if Dr. John Juedes is going to quote statistics like 70%, he has to come up with proof of that. "Where's the beef"? I did a comparison of my copy of J.E. Stiles book to my copy of RTHST, and didn't find anything near what he's claiming. I'm open to hearing and reading facts; not wild statements that can't be proved. I think the vast majority of VPW's writings aren't plagiarized. Prove me wrong.

I think this has always been key to Dr. John Juedes' unrelenting attack against TWI. We never believed the trinity, and because of that, we've always been illegitimate.

John, would Donnie Fugit have thought the baby was stillborn? Come on. Saying the baby was stillborn is basically the same as saying there was no baby. So you're saying TWI-1 wasn't on God's side, didn't have any true godliness, nothing or little of Christianity to share with folks? I was under the impression you thought TWI-1 was a godly ministry at one time; not that the thing was totally worthless. Perhaps you've recently changed? or perhaps I got or opinion wrong?

Paradise Den, I think most ex-TWI folks dont want to address the evils because they want to move on with their life and not focus on the past sins of people. This isn't necessarily denying evil, its just moving on. Is that such a crime? They don't want to deal with it because they really don't have to. Can you blame them? Why redress the past sins of others (dead long ago) when nothing can be done about it now? And maybe because there is some biblical precedent for not gossiping, not wallowing and incubating, feeding on evil works; not focusing on judging others, etc. Just as you and me are entitled to focus on what we do, others are entitled to focus on what they want. In short, I don't judge ex-TWI folks who may not want to address this stuff; they are no less of a christian or a person than I am just because they have a different opinion and lifestyle.

Saying there was never any baby is like saying there was never any bathwater. Both claims deny reality.

This can be a reality not only of the evil, but also of the good. I try to consider both, since both happened simultaneously. I feel the same way, but think the difference is I haven't allowed the bad experiences of others to corrupt or "talk me out of" the godly experiences. When one refers to the whole of TWI as an "abusive cult", one seems to have already jumped on the hate-TWI bandwagon, irrespective of any godliness that occurred. I am sometimes befuddled by someone who stayed in TWI for so long and can't testify or be proud of how wonderful it was. Seems like all that matters are the sins of people. I doubt if I will ever refer to the whole of TWI as an "abusive cult." The Corps maybe...we might all have been better off had that program never gotten off the ground.

Hope, something doesn't quite fit here. If the Judge really said that LCM committed rape, why didn't he have him locked up? To the best of my knowledge, Judges have the authority to lock someone up when they have evidence of a felony being committed.

Rottiegirl, I agree with your statement and that's pretty much how I feel about it. If one uses the same standards across the board, I have little problems identifying cults and identifying TWI as a cult if you also include the RC church and other churches in the mix for their oft evil ways. Let's not give any of these groups a break if the standard is identifying evil. Thanks Goey for pointing out the trinity in the mix.

Ginger, I think it really all depends on your point of view. Marxists might say that all religion is a harmful drug and people go get their daily or weekly dose in cultish bondage. I think all religions might be thought of as cults in that sense. As reported by many, TWI-2 was/is legalistic. But comparing my experience in TWI-1 with the Roman Catholic church: TWI-1's burden was not heavy, but light. I wasn't that dumb to go from the frying pan into the fire. When I was a Roman Catholic, every time I passed a church I had to make the sign of the cross; I had to pray to Mary (Hail Mary); had to recite trinitarian prayers; had to wear amulets (or whatever they call them now) to assure God was on my side if I died; had to go to confession on Saturday in order to receive communion on Sunday; etc. It goes on and on. I was a basket case. But maybe folks don't consider all that RC stuff religious bondage and folks who do all that stuff do it out of their free will; but every time one of us stepped foot in a twig, we were under someone's control; and in bondage. Go figure.

Every evil or dark extremity in TWI either existed at one point in time, or exists now, in the Roman Catholic church, perhaps even tenfold. Why then do they label TWI a cult and not the RC church? Was the RC church ever called a cult? No. I think simply it's because we never believed in the trinity. Hey, they label Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, Moonies, Scientologists, etc.. (who else?) a cult too. All non-trinitarians. Perhaps I'm oversimplifying matters but it makes the most sense to me anyway.

Rottiegirl, I remember VPW saying in the early seventies, that the reason why TWI was labelled a cult was because we didn't believe Jesus is God. That was when I started believing that trinitarians loved to label us a cult, because its just another way to degrade the non-trinitarians. Would they call us a cult if we believe as they do? I doubt it.

The first time I realized VPW didn't get the PFAL class by relevation was when I saw the 4 crucified in the Bullinger bible. But I never knew about all the things VPW learned from B.G. Leonard. It sure looks like VPW wasn't the apostle we all thought he was. He certainly should have given B.G. Leonard more credit for his learning experiences, something like Mrs. Wierwille wrote only years and years before.

Laleo, WOW. You made me cry. Thank you so much for being so kind and loving. Thank you too Dot Matrix. Wow what a thread. I'm completely blown away. Thank you.

Dot, Please feel free to keep posting your stories and recollections; rest assured, I (and I'm sure lots of other folks posting and not posting) are listening.

Long Gone, I will keep your thoughts in mind when debates like this come up in the future. Thanks!

QQ, I mentioned that analogy because I didn't want anyone to think I was minimizing how bad VPW's alleged actions were in drugging women. It doesn't have to be 200 women he drugged to have been very bad; it's bad enough that only 10 might have been. I will admit I'm still speculating about VPW drugging people; it's all so hard to grasp. And regarding your other comment, no, I am not that poster.