Interesting twists on Plagiarism in regards to "The Way & Dr. Wierwille's Works"

[Oakspear]

:D-->

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice...but in practice there is

Oakspear

[LornaDoone]

Long Gone,

I think you misunderstood, "You are not buying your own argument". My intention was not to argue just present "food for thought". I also believe we should give credit when credit is due. That's respect but it should come naturally to believers to do that anyway. I know Dr. Wierwille did give credit much of the time, I didn't keep track of everyone he quoted, it was not important to me at the time.

If we have used a teaching from a magazine, tape or study and have been inspired by a teacher, of course their insight into the Word that gave the inspiration should be mentioned but sometimes in our enthusiam we may forget.

My concern was (as Christians), do we really need to get so involved into the world's ways and copyright laws. Wouldn't most of you be blessed when someone would teach something you taught them.

Would we believe that when Paul went away for 12 years to get his head together, learned and taught the Word that he had everything copyrighted. Have the copyright laws (which are so worldly) taken away from us the simplicity which is in Christ and Christ working in us? Does God believe in Copyrights?

I am not disagreeing with any of you, I just find that at times we get so wrapped up in legalities.

On a more personal level, if I wrote or shared something and someone else picked up on it and shared or taught it, I could care less whose name they put on it. God knows. I would only be happy if it blessed someone. I guess I'm naive.

I can see both sides of reasoning and understand them, I just wish as believer's we didn't have to get so wrapped up in the world's way of doing things.

Dot, you are right, lying has no place when we present the Word and we were held spell bound by alot of things in TWI. God is the one who keeps track and I am still thankful for all I did learn that was new to me. But now we have grown and know that there are many ministrys that hold the truth. There are also many who are way off.

I first learned the dead are dead & Jesus Christ is not God from the Jehovah's witnesses back in the 50's, so that was not new information for me. They've known that for generations; however they are way off on many things also.

Grizzy I think we split up before you were there but did you know the McPhersons? Buffalo Grove.

Sure love you guys,

Lorna.......love my cookies!

[This message was edited by LornaDoone on December 30, 2003 at 8:20.]

[Zixar]

If Wierwille said, "God told me He would teach me the Word as it has not been known since the first century," and yet lifted whole passages verbatim from Leonard and Stiles in his books, that means that either God lied to Wierwille (i.e., Leonard and Stiles knew it before Wierwille) or Wierwille misrepresented God Himself. (i.e., false prophecy.) Either way, it's extremely damaging to VPW's integrity and credibility.

As for it being inspired by God, I don't think even B.G. Leonard would claim that God told him to name his fictitious characters "Maggie Muggins" and "Henry Boloko". No, research works by men are fine for what they are, but "divine revelation" doesn't really apply to shield them from plagiarism charges.

Secret Signature of the Day==v

"You think you hate it now, but wait till you drive it..."

[LornaDoone]

You are right Zixar but I think God has a sense of humor and probably loved Maggie & Henry? After all look at some of the names he had Adam give the animals. Baboon? Wildebeast?

I also believe BG Leonard walked with God, he sure lived a long time.

Lorna.......love my cookies!

[TheInvisibleDan]

quote:

---

Originally posted by LornaDoone:

My concern was (as Christians), do we really need to get so involved into the world's ways and copyright laws. Wouldn't most of you be blessed when someone would teach something you taught them.

Would we believe that when Paul went away for 12 years to get his head together, learned and taught the Word that he had everything copyrighted. Have the copyright laws (which are so worldly) taken away from us the simplicity which is in Christ and Christ working in us? Does God believe in Copyrights?

---

I agree with you that there can be a bit splitting of hairs when it comes to copyright laws. The past year's battle between Al Franken and Fox over the phrase "Fair and Balanced" comes to mind.

However, if you're someone whose writing is also their livelihood, or even someone who has any serious aspirations or even illusions of becoming a writer - then copyright laws can be very good indeed.

It's tough enough trying to make it as a writer,

but it would totally impossible without copyright protection, if anything or everything you wrote was stolen by someone else, who removed your name and affixed their own to your work,and called it their own.

They may not be perfect, but I'm thankful for copyright laws. They're not so "worldy" or "ungodly" if they are aimed at protecting authors and writers and artists against those who would "steal" from them, wouldn't you agree?

I wonder how much income a J.E. Stiles or a B.G. Leonard lost over the years on account

of that selfish thief in New Knoxville. Could he have at least had the decency to devote even so much a footnote to those gentlemen, so folks could have sought out their works, and give back a little bit to those from whom he received certain ideas? No, VPW even had the audacity at least on one occassion to assert that J.E. Stiles was an "angel" - no mention of his book from which he lifted so many paragraphs almost word for word. That kind of behavior is strikingly more "worldly" than all the copyright laws combined.

It is said that Christians, if living according to the higher law of Christ, need not fret about worldly laws, if all the law is fulfilled by walking in love. If one walks in Christ, one will not steal, one will not murder, one will not screw their neighbor's wife.

If you ask me, in observation of his actions, Wierwille didn't walk in love. I have a difficult time believing he was even a "Christian". If he was such a "Christian", living according to the higher law of Christ that doesn't diss the laws of the world, he wouldn't have stolen other peoples' material and called it his own, yes?

Danny

[excathedra]

quote:

---

Wierwille didn't walk in love.

---

that's always been my major gripe, danny

?

[Zixar]

Lorna:

Re: baboon & wildebeest

You do realize that Adam spoke neither Middle English nor Afrikaans, right?

[This message was edited by Zixar on December 30, 2003 at 12:34.]

[Oakspear]

Adam didn't speak English? -->

When I read my bible it seems like he is.

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice...but in practice there is

Oakspear

[Steve!]

Zixar, I think you need to fix your sig.

[TheInvisibleDan]

I think this forum is undergoing some "technical difficulties" this morning.

Is anyone else running into problems navigating around the forums?

And it looks as if we're trapped inside Zix's box!

Danny

[Steve!]

Here are the links that Pawtucket sent out last time:

http://gscafe.com/groupee/forums?a=frm&s=9...702&f=743601632

http://gscafe.com/groupee/forums?a=frm&s=9...702&f=222600242

http://gscafe.com/groupee/forums?a=frm&s=9...702&f=529604883

http://gscafe.com/groupee/forums?a=frm&s=9...02&f=3036069215

http://gscafe.com/groupee/forums?a=frm&s=9...702&f=794604552

http://gscafe.com/groupee/forums?a=frm&s=9...702&f=174604552

[Zixar]

I don't know what's going on with that, but I eliminated the HTML in the sig just in case. Very weird.

The Secret Signature of the Day has been cancelled by the HTML Police.

[Steve!]

Now I would suggest going back and editing the offending posts . . .

[Zixar]

Nag, nag, nag...

The Secret Signature of the Day has been cancelled by the HTML Police.

[Raf]

Lorna,

Your post reveals to me that you do not understand what plagiarism is. You think it's teaching on the same topic and covering the same material? If you teach something and I like it and I go out and teach the same thing, that's not plagiarism.

Stop misrepresenting Wierwille's plagiarism as just some innocent act of a sloppy writer or perceptive preacher. It was a deliberate act of deception. The reason it matters is simple: Integrity. Wierwille didn't just teach the same thing, and it is an absolute insult to compare him to the Apostle Paul in that regard. Wierwille took what other people wrote, slapped his name on it and called himself a researcher. Then he copyrighted HIS books! We have a word for that in Spanish, but this is a family message board. :)-->

[LG]

quote:

---

Originally posted by LornaDoone:

My concern was (as Christians), do we really need to get so involved into the world's ways and copyright laws.

---

Not all of us are Christians, and the issue is not copyright laws. It?s not occasionally failing to give credit. It?s intentional, rampant, long term deception. Wierwille was not what he represented himself to be. His works were not what he represented them to be. He was a fraud. If so many had not believed him to be a great man of God, and followed his doctrines and practices, it wouldn?t matter much to most of us. But because many did believe his claims, followed his example, and structured their lives and ways of thinking according to his words and example, it matters a lot. That so many are willing to dismiss wholesale fraud as just a shortcoming is indicative, in part, of the corruption he promoted and taught, by both word and example. He didn?t live up to even the most liberal of generally-accepted moral standards, much less those of the Bible.

quote:

---

Have the copyright laws (which are so worldly) taken away from us the simplicity which is in Christ and Christ working in us? Does God believe in Copyrights?

---

Does God not believe in honesty?

It seems rather odd to me for people who profess to be Christians to promote the idea that Christian morals should be of a lower standard than ?the world?s.?

[Raf]

quote:

---

It seems rather odd to me for people who profess to be Christians to promote the idea that Christian morals should be of a lower standard than ?the world?s.?

---

I'd like to announce my intention to plagiarize this line whenever possible.

Here's how I put it in my article on the main page:

quote:

---

Plagiarism does hurt 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, from columnists, from 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?

---

[Doze]

It seems to me that if God really told VPW that he would teach him the word like it has not been known since the first century if he would teach it to others, he would keep that to himself and just teach the word like it has not been known since the first century. In other words let your work speak for itself. It just appeared to be marketing hype to me. Is God really into 20th century marketing? I always am skeptical when people make these "big fat claims" about products. Primarily VPW was an assimilator and marketer of all these people's research without giving them proper credit.

It reminds me of when I was a boy, my father told me we were going to eat at this special place where the fried chicken was so good it would melt in your mouth. Being a good son who idolized his father, I thought he wouldn't lie to me. When I ate that chicken, to this day I swear it melted in my mouth. The persuasive suggestion from someone we consider to be so credible is really powerful.

[LornaDoone]

Originally posted by Rafael 1969:

Lorna,

"Your post reveals to me that you do not understand what plagiarism is. You think it's teaching on the same topic and covering the same material? If you teach something and I like it and I go out and teach the same thing, that's not plagiarism."

Thank you Rafael for expounding on the meaning of plagiarism for me. I realize it's word for word, but I was not thinking in terms of putting someone elses name on the material. I'll have to go back to the forum archives to read BG Leonard's work to see that this was done word for word, I was not aware of this until it was mentioned here.

"Stop misrepresenting Wierwille's plagiarism as just some innocent act of a sloppy writer or perceptive preacher. It was a deliberate act of deception."

I don't think I mentioned Dr. Wierwille's teachings again only in reference to what the original posts were about. I also was led to believe we had a research department that I was told went over eveything that was to be put into print (classes, books etc.) for a year, then it was shelved for a year, then researched for another year & then if they all came up with the same agreement after the two years of research, it was taught. If more was learned down the road, it was changed.

I also wondered why BG Leonard and J.E. Stiles, never sued Dr. Wierwille for plagiarism? Does anyone have insight on this?

I also wholeheartedly believe in copyright laws for people who author or make their living on works that need copyrights. I was intending to keep this to Christian thought regarding the Word of God even though I understand non-Christians may read the forums but my intention is strictly from a Christian point of view.

Not intending to offend but trying to learn and think things through from the Words perspective.

Certainly if I copy someone's work and present it as mine that would be lying and I agree whole heartedly that this is wrong.

In conclusion, I totally agree with the information below that I copied to my original post:

"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. "

Have a very Happy New Year everyone!

Lorna.......love my cookies!

[WordWolf]

As to plagiarism, I once heard an argument that sounded like this...

First of all, vpw never plagiarized. God dictated the passages to him.

Second of all, he may have done it, but God told him to lift the lines.

Third of all, the men he plagiarized approved of it.

Fourth of all, the men should be ashamed of themselves for not approving

of it like God did.

As to the first and second, I'm not even addressing them. If you believe

that, nothing I can say will mean anything to you.

As to them approving of it, several were dead when vpw plagiarized them,

and several of them didn't hear about it for years.

Remember-the distribution of the books was TIGHTLY CONTROLLED by twi-

you could NOT buy them in Barnes & Noble nor could you borrow them from

your local library.

It's been said that BG Leonard added elaborate copyright notes to his

books and became a lot more tightlipped after his work was ripped off.

He did not, however, seek legal action. I cannot prove the reason, and

I was not there, but I suspect it was more a matter of an unwillingness

to sue another Christian, even if he WAS doing wrong.

[def59]

Lorna

The (cough-cough) research department worked to prove the statements made the MOGs. Any actual independent research that contradicted the stated positions of the MOGs and BOT (BOD) were met with dismissal (see John S.'s work on adultery).

TWI did not research to find truth, only to back up prestated beliefs and to find the most obscure interpretations available.

[Oakspear]

Wasn't the "research" department out looking for all those "texts" and "originals" that Wierwille and Martindale were always saying backed up their opinions?

In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice...but in practice there is

Oakspear

[Dot Matrix]

Doze

Welcome to the spot - like your post

Def

You are correct. I was told that very thing by someone on the research staff.

They looked in scripture to validate abortion because girls were getting knocked up by Moggies.

[Dot Matrix]

Raf

Isn't your article on the front page of Grease spot on the subject. I read it a little while ago and it was great.

[Raf]

Plagiarism: The Integrity of Your Word.