Just wondering. My guess is that he actually read it a lot in the early years, along with several others' work, to understand it. He "borrowed" the others' work, of course; but I'm not trying to start another plagiarism thread. Many of you were involved with VP pretty early on, and through the later years. Did he actually spend a lot of (or any?) time "working the Word"? I'm not discussing his "mastery" of Greek or Hebrew, but I would expect that he could use a concordance, etc. He claimed to spend several hours a day doing this. I just wonder if he actually tried to learn something.
George
Well, let's take what we know, or at least what vpw himself said, first, then see where that takes us.
According to TW:LiL (official twi book endorsed by vpw), when vpw grew up, he showed no signs of piety
and devotion beyond a single comment made to a travelling minister who got accolades.
It's likely that single comment accounts not for piety, but rather for interest in the accolades.
(He didn't follow up the incident with any study, not even by his own claims.)
When he went into seminary, everyone was surprised locally, since it was completely out-of-character
for him. The only one who ever claimed vpw ever did preaching was "Uncle Harry", who admitted HE never
saw it, but claimed that vpw was "preaching to the trees" when out of sight. Some people might consider
that an interpolation of when Billy Graham did that as a student-to which there were witnesses.
However, anyone should admit there isn't even Uncle Harry saying he SAW this.
When vpw went into Princeton Theological Seminary (a respectable school unrelated to Princeton University)
for his Masters, he had the option of fields of study like "Church history" or "Bible history" or "Bible languages"
or anything relating to the actual Bible. Instead, he chose "Homiletics", or "preaching" or "how to put a teaching/sermon together",
which is about the SOFTEST option to take in a place like that.
In the years between then and he writing of TW:LiL, vpw claimed he took EVERY class Moody Bible Institute ever taught
(as recorded in TW:LiL). However, Moody has NO record of him ever taking ANY course (one of our posters got that
IN WRITING from Moody.)
He said that the weekly sermons he did for his early pastorate "MADE" him go to the Bible regularly.
(This means he wasn't voluntarily going there already.)
His later teachings-those we've all ever heard- all can be traced to one or more "original authors"-
Leonard, Bullinger, Stiles, and so on.
Frankly, I can see a pattern of him AVOIDING Bible study when possible, and using "shortcuts" (other authors)
whenever possible, completely relying on them more as time progresses.
I can't find a timeframe where he put sizeable amounts of time in the Bible-except when he supposedly was
starting out. That's the timeframe when he claimed that-twice- he was ready to give up on ministry.
It also includes a time of at least a year where he was preaching but BEFORE he claimed he ever believed
the Bible was God's Word. (Again, TW:LiL.)
IF he was ever dedicated to Bible study- which would have to be between his claim to believe the Bible
was God's Word and 1953- he seems to have completely abandoned his OWN study as soon as he had
Leonard and Stiles' work to draw from. From there, he added more authors- Bullinger for example-
but not his OWN study.
I'm not claiming he never disagreed with Bullinger or others, but I DON'T think that was the result of vpw studying
the subjects independently and disagreeing. I think it was the result of him reviewing what Bullinger did and deciding
to go out on his own. Otherwise, he would have caught some gaffes like Bullinger claiming there was a difference
between "kingdom of heaven" and "kingdom of God", when the Bible uses them interchangeably.
The differences included changing "dispensations" to "administrations" (personally, I prefer "stewardships" to either),
changing Leonard's use of "gifts" to "manifestations" (but otherwise retaining the meaning),
and adding increasing wordiness to the definitions later.
Those look more like when an author takes HIS OWN WORK and makes changes in later editions, not like when an
author reads the work of another, then goes off and makes a new work entirely.
I recall there was much 'encouragement' for everyone to spend the first 30 minutes (or was it hour?) every day reading the word. I forget if it was vpw, or craig who said we were 'wasting our life' if we didn't.
I also recall vpw being asked if he started his day that way, and his response that he refuses to be 'put in a box', which I took as a 'no'.
Of course , that 'box' was just fine for everyone else.
You all make valid points. I guess what I'm asking is, did anyone ever see VP studying the Bible (or at least commentaries)? I suppose he actually spent time with his "Research Department," where there would be some study, discussion, etc. Perhaps that's a complete misconception, as well. Maybe he just told them to study so he could present the results; or, worse, told them to prove some particular point of his theology. I don't know if Research Geek could chime in here, or maybe Don't Worry Be Happy.
Of course, if NO ONE can say they saw Vic study the Word, that probably answers my question.
All I can speak to is my own experience. I worked the "Teacher's Room" at the BRC and at Emporia and Rome City, and yeah, come to think of it, Gunnison too. What that means is, during "corps night" or other public teachings, (yeah, come to think of it a couple of "Days in the Word," and the Advanced Class '79, ok, add a couple of ROAs) , he was always well prepared.
Whether or not that constitutes "working the Word," I really can't say. But what I can say, is that he was usually pretty well acquainted with the topic he was teaching on. He had copious notes, and in discussions of some subjects afterwards, he knew what the "traditional thinking " was on a topic, and what his belief and standpoint was. And yeah, he knew alot of verses of scripture, speaking extemporaneously. He had to get that ability from somewhere. Whether he just read other's works, or studied himself, I can't say.
Socks knows how he was, too.
As much as people talk about what a slouch he was, he was good enough to fool alot of folks. Maybe not "biblical scholars" but the average "minister" or " lay person," he could definitely hold his own. I know this still doesn't answer your question, but, hey, I tried. ;)
It appears that VP knew a lot of verses, but only in a very shallow way.
For example, JCNG is an extremely important topic. But the whole book is only about 150 pages (less the indexes), with lots of white space and large print. And one chapter is history, not Bible teachign at all.
Most of the chapters are typical VP teaching. He quotes a verse, then says 3 to 6 sentences about it. Then moves on to another verse. Only 3 to 6 short sentences about important passages? (Go ahead and count the sentences)
Even more amazing is the audio tape on which the "common errors" chapter is based (I think it's tape 295). t's obvious he's quoting a verse, then shooting from the hip about what he thinks about it. Not even a reasonable attempt to understand it, much less cogently analyze it. He's supposed to be a big, world changing researcher, not teaching a grade school Sunday school class.
This format was typical in teachings. Look at any Way Magazine article. Quote a verse, say 3 to 6 sentences about it, then move on. Very shallow in both understanding and teaching. Like the Platt river. Half a mile wide and half an inch deep.
JohnJ, as always your comments are very insightful.
VP was also very formulaic about everything from how the bible fit together, to how to speak in tongues, the the law of believing, to his predatory sexual attacks. Â
Many TWI teachers, clear down to the fellowship level, patterned their own teaching style after this method; read a verse, say three to six lines about it.  There was always an air of pride that TWI was different than the denominations, no long drawn out social sermons, heavy on the verses, light on the commentary was the projected defense of this method.
Unfortunately I think we were all shortchanged when it came to old VP changing the meanings of passages and scriptures to his version of what he thought they should mean.
It appears that VP knew a lot of verses, but only in a very shallow way.
... and he didn't even understand some of those verses correctly or read some of the context or at least not correctly to others.
There is also the quote that LCM used at times in which VPW told him (regarding other people's work) "take what you can and toss the rest" (something to that effect). From that mind set we got things like the "Peleg" teaching and "Eve's Satanic lesbo experience" among others. At least with Peleg we had a source to research ourselves. BTW, ignore the concluding analysis at the end of the Peleg (research paper?) book it is contradictory to official TWI doctrine.
I thought that Wordwolf covered it quite nicely...
It seems to me that anyone who spends a lot of time studying the bible on his own is not likely to steal entire paragraphs, word for word...from other people's books. It stands to reason that anyone who invests a lot of time researching on their own, would at LEAST be able to put it in their own words...but no...Vic simply lifted other people's works and used THEIR words.
I would guess that the average wafer studied the bible more than Vic did...he may have been good at preparing himself for live teachings...but that's simply a case of keeping good notes and compiling them in an appropriate manner. He was well prepared in the presentation of the work that he stole from others...........big deal.
Wierwille's talent was in the category of personality and charisma...what every successful grifter needs. P.T. Barnum would have had Wierwille on the stage with a microphone selling tickets to the freak show.
I can only speak to the one night that I rode with him in the coach from billings. I do remember being woken up in the middle of the night and seeing him sitting up with his bible, concordance and a pad of paper. I couldn't promise he was studying, but it sure looked liked like he was to me.
Well, that's something, anyway. It seems he wasn't doing it for "show," unless there were a lot of others up with him that you (Keith) didn't mention.
I don't mean to invalidate the others' conclusions, but those were primarily drawn by inference. Excathedra's statement, though, is also eyewitness testimony. Studying the Bible couldn't have been a big part of VP's routine if he didn't even have one on the motor coach.
No, I was the only one who woke up that I know of. I just groaned and tried to go back to sleep. He would have had to do some kind of study to put any kind of teaching together. I don't know if he did it consistantly or not as this was the only time I spent with him.
You all make valid points. I guess what I'm asking is, did anyone ever see VP studying the Bible (or at least commentaries)? I suppose he actually spent time with his "Research Department," where there would be some study, discussion, etc. Perhaps that's a complete misconception, as well. Maybe he just told them to study so he could present the results; or, worse, told them to prove some particular point of his theology. I don't know if Research Geek could chime in here, or maybe Don't Worry Be Happy.
Of course, if NO ONE can say they saw Vic study the Word, that probably answers my question.
George
well george for your info you dont know me ,have never heard of me ,etc. BUT!!! i study the bible. sometimes i'v studied for several hours,just like there are times i'v spent 6 or 7 hours banging mindlessly on this keyboard!!! sometimes i'v really wanted to learn something right away and put in a lot a work. what about collage kids and there studying. maybe collage kids just tell there teachers they study and fake the answers on there test. i never saw vp study just as i'v never seen ANY of the airline pilots that fly the planes i'v flown on study to become a pilot. there are NO valid points to this just someone looking to say stuff. how many hours have you studied the bible. vp had to have done some studying in order to put those wonderful classes together. by the way using other peoples reasearch material is NOT plagerism. vp never said he wrote those research books, he also talked about and named all those other people who helped him learn about GOD, mentioned them by name in the class,STAR DALY, BISHOP PILI (check spelling),etc.
vp had to have done some studying in order to put those wonderful classes together. by the way using other peoples reasearch material is NOT plagerism. vp never said he wrote those research books, he also talked about and named all those other people who helped him learn about GOD, mentioned them by name in the class,STAR DALY, BISHOP PILI (check spelling),etc. !!
shiftthis
There are some excellent threads here that discuss these very subjects at great length.
Might I suggest you "study" them a bit before you formulate your final opinion?
For us to say that VPW studied the Bible intensely is like saying a car thief studied automotive engineering extensively, Lol
Keep in mind a few inportant facts...
The end result of his "studies" was to teach a lot of false doctrine....Believing - Recieving, Jesus Christ is NOT God, etc....
The practical result was a lot of SIN ( Adultery, drugging women to have sex, and who knows what else???)
The result we all felt was abused....people put in needless danger (like the truck that crashed near Tinny, NM) , the young man who had a psychotic episode and was merely "kicked out" of the corps and he went wandering around confused for 7 days) I myself saw my WOW sisters suffering because they made the mistake of buying "used" bedding and wound up with bed bug bites from head to toe, etc...
So he "studied" the Bible? Oh yea...and Hitler "studied" Socialism
Recommended Posts
Ham
I dunno.. I think he wanted to think he was the man he wasn't..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
dmiller
GSGeorge --- can't help you out there. All I know is what he SAID he did.
(I also --- tend to think he studied other's works more --- and took what he needed).
But --- that is just my imo. I only saw him *crack the book* at functions, and on stage.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
now I see
"I think he wanted to think he was the man he wasn't.."
That's about the funniest thing I've ever read here!!!!! Â
I think old vic excelled at studying how to market a product, both before and after finding BG Leon*rd.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Well, let's take what we know, or at least what vpw himself said, first, then see where that takes us.
According to TW:LiL (official twi book endorsed by vpw), when vpw grew up, he showed no signs of piety
and devotion beyond a single comment made to a travelling minister who got accolades.
It's likely that single comment accounts not for piety, but rather for interest in the accolades.
(He didn't follow up the incident with any study, not even by his own claims.)
When he went into seminary, everyone was surprised locally, since it was completely out-of-character
for him. The only one who ever claimed vpw ever did preaching was "Uncle Harry", who admitted HE never
saw it, but claimed that vpw was "preaching to the trees" when out of sight. Some people might consider
that an interpolation of when Billy Graham did that as a student-to which there were witnesses.
However, anyone should admit there isn't even Uncle Harry saying he SAW this.
When vpw went into Princeton Theological Seminary (a respectable school unrelated to Princeton University)
for his Masters, he had the option of fields of study like "Church history" or "Bible history" or "Bible languages"
or anything relating to the actual Bible. Instead, he chose "Homiletics", or "preaching" or "how to put a teaching/sermon together",
which is about the SOFTEST option to take in a place like that.
In the years between then and he writing of TW:LiL, vpw claimed he took EVERY class Moody Bible Institute ever taught
(as recorded in TW:LiL). However, Moody has NO record of him ever taking ANY course (one of our posters got that
IN WRITING from Moody.)
He said that the weekly sermons he did for his early pastorate "MADE" him go to the Bible regularly.
(This means he wasn't voluntarily going there already.)
His later teachings-those we've all ever heard- all can be traced to one or more "original authors"-
Leonard, Bullinger, Stiles, and so on.
Frankly, I can see a pattern of him AVOIDING Bible study when possible, and using "shortcuts" (other authors)
whenever possible, completely relying on them more as time progresses.
I can't find a timeframe where he put sizeable amounts of time in the Bible-except when he supposedly was
starting out. That's the timeframe when he claimed that-twice- he was ready to give up on ministry.
It also includes a time of at least a year where he was preaching but BEFORE he claimed he ever believed
the Bible was God's Word. (Again, TW:LiL.)
IF he was ever dedicated to Bible study- which would have to be between his claim to believe the Bible
was God's Word and 1953- he seems to have completely abandoned his OWN study as soon as he had
Leonard and Stiles' work to draw from. From there, he added more authors- Bullinger for example-
but not his OWN study.
I'm not claiming he never disagreed with Bullinger or others, but I DON'T think that was the result of vpw studying
the subjects independently and disagreeing. I think it was the result of him reviewing what Bullinger did and deciding
to go out on his own. Otherwise, he would have caught some gaffes like Bullinger claiming there was a difference
between "kingdom of heaven" and "kingdom of God", when the Bible uses them interchangeably.
The differences included changing "dispensations" to "administrations" (personally, I prefer "stewardships" to either),
changing Leonard's use of "gifts" to "manifestations" (but otherwise retaining the meaning),
and adding increasing wordiness to the definitions later.
Those look more like when an author takes HIS OWN WORK and makes changes in later editions, not like when an
author reads the work of another, then goes off and makes a new work entirely.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hiway29
I recall there was much 'encouragement' for everyone to spend the first 30 minutes (or was it hour?) every day reading the word. I forget if it was vpw, or craig who said we were 'wasting our life' if we didn't.
I also recall vpw being asked if he started his day that way, and his response that he refuses to be 'put in a box', which I took as a 'no'.
Of course , that 'box' was just fine for everyone else.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeorgeStGeorge
You all make valid points. I guess what I'm asking is, did anyone ever see VP studying the Bible (or at least commentaries)? I suppose he actually spent time with his "Research Department," where there would be some study, discussion, etc. Perhaps that's a complete misconception, as well. Maybe he just told them to study so he could present the results; or, worse, told them to prove some particular point of his theology. I don't know if Research Geek could chime in here, or maybe Don't Worry Be Happy.
Of course, if NO ONE can say they saw Vic study the Word, that probably answers my question.
George
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jim
More than Howard.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ex10
George, you ask a great question.
All I can speak to is my own experience. I worked the "Teacher's Room" at the BRC and at Emporia and Rome City, and yeah, come to think of it, Gunnison too. What that means is, during "corps night" or other public teachings, (yeah, come to think of it a couple of "Days in the Word," and the Advanced Class '79, ok, add a couple of ROAs) , he was always well prepared.
Whether or not that constitutes "working the Word," I really can't say. But what I can say, is that he was usually pretty well acquainted with the topic he was teaching on. He had copious notes, and in discussions of some subjects afterwards, he knew what the "traditional thinking " was on a topic, and what his belief and standpoint was. And yeah, he knew alot of verses of scripture, speaking extemporaneously. He had to get that ability from somewhere. Whether he just read other's works, or studied himself, I can't say.
Socks knows how he was, too.
As much as people talk about what a slouch he was, he was good enough to fool alot of folks. Maybe not "biblical scholars" but the average "minister" or " lay person," he could definitely hold his own. I know this still doesn't answer your question, but, hey, I tried. ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
brideofjc
Then you never met any of my professors! Soft???
Link to comment
Share on other sites
johnj
It appears that VP knew a lot of verses, but only in a very shallow way.
For example, JCNG is an extremely important topic. But the whole book is only about 150 pages (less the indexes), with lots of white space and large print. And one chapter is history, not Bible teachign at all.
Most of the chapters are typical VP teaching. He quotes a verse, then says 3 to 6 sentences about it. Then moves on to another verse. Only 3 to 6 short sentences about important passages? (Go ahead and count the sentences)
Even more amazing is the audio tape on which the "common errors" chapter is based (I think it's tape 295). t's obvious he's quoting a verse, then shooting from the hip about what he thinks about it. Not even a reasonable attempt to understand it, much less cogently analyze it. He's supposed to be a big, world changing researcher, not teaching a grade school Sunday school class.
This format was typical in teachings. Look at any Way Magazine article. Quote a verse, say 3 to 6 sentences about it, then move on. Very shallow in both understanding and teaching. Like the Platt river. Half a mile wide and half an inch deep.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
now I see
JohnJ, as always your comments are very insightful.
VP was also very formulaic about everything from how the bible fit together, to how to speak in tongues, the the law of believing, to his predatory sexual attacks. Â
Many TWI teachers, clear down to the fellowship level, patterned their own teaching style after this method; read a verse, say three to six lines about it.  There was always an air of pride that TWI was different than the denominations, no long drawn out social sermons, heavy on the verses, light on the commentary was the projected defense of this method.
Unfortunately I think we were all shortchanged when it came to old VP changing the meanings of passages and scriptures to his version of what he thought they should mean.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
lindyhopper
... and he didn't even understand some of those verses correctly or read some of the context or at least not correctly to others.
There is also the quote that LCM used at times in which VPW told him (regarding other people's work) "take what you can and toss the rest" (something to that effect). From that mind set we got things like the "Peleg" teaching and "Eve's Satanic lesbo experience" among others. At least with Peleg we had a source to research ourselves. BTW, ignore the concluding analysis at the end of the Peleg (research paper?) book it is contradictory to official TWI doctrine.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
when i was in his presence and on the motorcoach, never saw a bible anywhere
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GrouchoMarxJr
I thought that Wordwolf covered it quite nicely...
It seems to me that anyone who spends a lot of time studying the bible on his own is not likely to steal entire paragraphs, word for word...from other people's books. It stands to reason that anyone who invests a lot of time researching on their own, would at LEAST be able to put it in their own words...but no...Vic simply lifted other people's works and used THEIR words.
I would guess that the average wafer studied the bible more than Vic did...he may have been good at preparing himself for live teachings...but that's simply a case of keeping good notes and compiling them in an appropriate manner. He was well prepared in the presentation of the work that he stole from others...........big deal.
Wierwille's talent was in the category of personality and charisma...what every successful grifter needs. P.T. Barnum would have had Wierwille on the stage with a microphone selling tickets to the freak show.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
Yep. His degree was in PRACTICAL theology.. and homiletics if I remember correctly.
I think that they were unaware that they were training a monster..
Edited by HamLink to comment
Share on other sites
Keith
I can only speak to the one night that I rode with him in the coach from billings. I do remember being woken up in the middle of the night and seeing him sitting up with his bible, concordance and a pad of paper. I couldn't promise he was studying, but it sure looked liked like he was to me.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jen-o
even a broken clock is right twice a day...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeorgeStGeorge
Well, that's something, anyway. It seems he wasn't doing it for "show," unless there were a lot of others up with him that you (Keith) didn't mention.
I don't mean to invalidate the others' conclusions, but those were primarily drawn by inference. Excathedra's statement, though, is also eyewitness testimony. Studying the Bible couldn't have been a big part of VP's routine if he didn't even have one on the motor coach.
I appreciate all the input here.
George
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Keith
No, I was the only one who woke up that I know of. I just groaned and tried to go back to sleep. He would have had to do some kind of study to put any kind of teaching together. I don't know if he did it consistantly or not as this was the only time I spent with him.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
shiftthis
well george for your info you dont know me ,have never heard of me ,etc. BUT!!! i study the bible. sometimes i'v studied for several hours,just like there are times i'v spent 6 or 7 hours banging mindlessly on this keyboard!!! sometimes i'v really wanted to learn something right away and put in a lot a work. what about collage kids and there studying. maybe collage kids just tell there teachers they study and fake the answers on there test. i never saw vp study just as i'v never seen ANY of the airline pilots that fly the planes i'v flown on study to become a pilot. there are NO valid points to this just someone looking to say stuff. how many hours have you studied the bible. vp had to have done some studying in order to put those wonderful classes together. by the way using other peoples reasearch material is NOT plagerism. vp never said he wrote those research books, he also talked about and named all those other people who helped him learn about GOD, mentioned them by name in the class,STAR DALY, BISHOP PILI (check spelling),etc.
Edited by pawtucketLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
shiftthis
There are some excellent threads here that discuss these very subjects at great length.
Might I suggest you "study" them a bit before you formulate your final opinion?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Steveo
For us to say that VPW studied the Bible intensely is like saying a car thief studied automotive engineering extensively, Lol
Keep in mind a few inportant facts...
The end result of his "studies" was to teach a lot of false doctrine....Believing - Recieving, Jesus Christ is NOT God, etc....
The practical result was a lot of SIN ( Adultery, drugging women to have sex, and who knows what else???)
The result we all felt was abused....people put in needless danger (like the truck that crashed near Tinny, NM) , the young man who had a psychotic episode and was merely "kicked out" of the corps and he went wandering around confused for 7 days) I myself saw my WOW sisters suffering because they made the mistake of buying "used" bedding and wound up with bed bug bites from head to toe, etc...
So he "studied" the Bible? Oh yea...and Hitler "studied" Socialism
Link to comment
Share on other sites
doojable
How much did vp study the Bible?
Too much
and
Not enough
Oddly enough, vp was fond of the saying,
"A man can know what to do and still choose not to do it."
IMHO it matters not how much he studied - he still chose not to do.
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.