Mike--who in the SAM Hell gave YOU the right to define plagiarism????? what, is your name Funk? Wagnall??? Webster???? Where is YOUR published dictionary, with YOUR definitions???? Your reasoning is so wanting, it is un-freaking-believable!!!
...Mike--you are clearly and simply... WRONG----and, as usual, you will not admit it......you do not have god-like powers to change things you do not like so that they agree with your pet theories, sir.
You nailed it Alkafat, and MJ that was great- and you are so right- why follow ANY dead man? Wasn't it God Almighty that said, "MOSES MY SERVANT IS DEAD"?
There are ministries and churches right NOW where the Word/bible is ALIVE! and so are the teachers, evangelists, pastors, and prophets.
Mike, we all know VP plagerized. You are so blind that even if VP had a book that was copied ENTIRELY from someone else you would say that VP's font was inspired, or the heart behind it was what made that book unique.
You make me think of the jury on OJ's trial. The only way they would have seen the light is if OJ stood up and said "I DID IT, I am Guilty"
I guess ole VP would have to come to you in a vision and say, "Mike, those Gspotters are right, I plagerized. Now have some Drambuie and chill out."
For me, the question of whether VPW plagiarized was settled ages ago. Of course he did.
The only question is, what do we do about it? What difference does it make? Why is it important?
If we're evaluating the man and his ministry, it's relevant. If we're evaluating the content, then it's not.
The answer to question 8 in the RTHST book doesn't become any more or less valid just because it was an obvious ripoff of JE Stiles.
The difference between believing and mental assent exists independently of the fact that Wierwille quoted Kenyon on the subject without attribution.
The content should be evaluated on its own merits; the source should only be evaluated when one considers the intellectual dishonesty of the person presenting it.
quote:I guess ole VP would have to come to you in a vision and say, "Mike, those Gspotters are right, I plagerized. Now have some Drambuie and chill out.
Hmmn?
A man is siting at his desk, dilegenty working PFAL, looking for more hidden truths in his quest for mastery. Obedient to the last lost teaching of the Teache, r he finds a sentence that looks interesting and then..... a voice from seemingly nowhere:
Mike!, Mike!,
Shaken a bit, Mike begins to look around the dimly lit room - and there in the corner is the figure of a man, sitting in the easy chair. In his right hand is a small glass, half-full of liquer - Drambuie. Bwtween his fingers is a cigartette - a Kool.
Mike, still somewhat dazed, then realizes who it is in the room, or at least who it appears to be. It is the teacher himself.
Snapping to, Mike then says to himself; "This is the vision I have been waiting for this is...". But before he could finish his thought the teacher says, "Get up and come over here son."
Mike gets up from his chair and approaches the Teacher. "What the hell are you doing son?", the Teacher asks in a somewhat irritated voice.
"I am obeying your final teaching and mastering the new word that God gave you. I am looking for..." But before he can finish the Teacher says, "The hell with that crap son. You got it all wrong." "What?" says Mike, But you said that..."
"Shut up and listen Mike. Take the cotton out of your ears and put it in your mouth. PFAL was something I put together to present some keys so that people could start understanding the Bible - to get to the Word of God. PFAL was just..."
"I won't listen to this" interrupts Mike. "You are wrong. I know that God gave you PFAL, and that it is the Word of..."
"Shut up and listen Mike" Says the teacher, " The truth is that I copied a lot of PFAL from others and did not get them proper credit. And about that snowstorm in 1942, Well son..."
Mike put his fingers in his ears and closes his eye tight and repeat to himself. "This is not real, this is not real", this is not real."
After a few minutes he take his fingers out of this ears and slowly open his eyes. The Teacher is gone without a trace.
Relieved, he thinks to himself, "This proves that I am right, that PFAL is indeed the true word oF God and that Satan will do anything to try and steal it from me and the rest of the world."
Goey
"Most of my fondest memories in TWI never really happened"
Regarding the plagiarism issue - there is no question - Yes, VPW did plagiarize. Enough said.
Having graduated from Rev. B. G. Leonard's "Full Bible Course", (of which "Foundations" is one of over thirty titles,) I can assure you all, that it is perhaps his best work and a must for Christians regarding the basic doctrines of the Christian faith. If you have even the slightest curiousity, I highly recommend it.
Doesn't anybody remember the Great Fore Head going vein-popping spit-spraying potty-mouthed apoplectic at a Corps Week about a certain region leader taking Leonard's Gifts of teh Spirit? He portrayed it as treasonous and worse...
When I told other people about Wierwille's Christian Family and Sex class which I did not like and had to pay for in order to get into the Advanced Class and the Corps, I referred to Maggie Muggins as Maggie Morgasm and Johnny Jump-UP as Johnny Hard-Up. Was I crossing the lines of plagiarism? Was that my crime? I wondered that as several Bless Patrol asked me to leave the grounds in 1993.
quote:Its better to go to the well for water yourself than have someone like Dr pick and choose what you get
First, Roy you are so meek/great. (Hate to use that word, searched for another but it fits) YOU SEE what is going on and you move ahead with new knowledge. You are meek enough to say oh well, I thought VP did a good job but if he stole it, that was wrong now let's go find out what the real author wrote! I love that about you and that is what ticks me off about Mike HE NEVER EVER EVER considers that VPW could ever do anything wrong.
((((Roy))))
Now THE EVAN!
I was howling with laughter
quote: Great Fore Head
And also it blew my mind that he screamed at someone who took Leonard's class? WOW, it still shocks me that I sat in meetings like that (not that one) and did not leave.
Greek2me
I am enjoying it! The book kinda dropped out of heaven and landed here for me! :)-->
I do think folks who have an unrealistic view of VP and "The Great fore head" need to have it said over again that VP plagiarized. Some just do not get it, but others are reading this for the first time and they need to hear it!
Greek2 me - What book would you recommend next?
How do I take a Tim Sullivan class (Tim was taught by Leonard)? How would an interested party find a class in the states? Looks like a lot of activity is in Europe!
When I spoke with Sister Evelyn (Leonard's wife) she said I would have TO GO there for the class because they help people see their ministries that God has called them to do. Their place. I thought that was so neat to build people up with what "they can and want to do" rather than have them acknowledge some leader and learn obedience to them. (Like TWI)
How cool reminded me of what I saw on the field before the corps came along and wrecked it all.
Greek2 me and Evan, can you tell us a little about Leonard's ministry and share your thoughts? We can talk about the other as well, but please if you would like to share go ahead and those still desiring to discuss the topic can as well.
When was "Foundations" written?? When was that paragraph written? (I'm trying to see if there were several editions of "Foundations") and if maybe BG Leonard knew of VPW's plagiarism?? I wonder if others were plagiarising?? It's too bad BG didn't take VPW to court about it!!
Sheesh!! WHAT is SO HARD about crediting an author!?!? It is what people do, but sometimes in human error there is inadvertant plagiarism. Like George Harrison in "My Sweet Lord". It sounds like VPW definitely was not inadvertant in plagiarism.
Raf was going to copy a page from BG and a page from VP and show how they are near the same, in the Holy Spirit book. (I think it will be in the doctrine area)
If you read it again you will see he speaks of it being photocopied and videos... So THAT letter had to be written after their inventions, so yeah, I BET he KNEW!
quote:From B.G. Leonard, "Gifts of the Spirit," page. 14-15
They divide by their very nature, and the nature and characteristics of their operations, into three groups, with three gifts in each group. We have lsited them in these groups, in their proper sequence, and under their respective headings. These headings are likewise suggested by the very nature and characteristics of the gifts and their operations.
INSPIRATIONAL, WORSHIP, OR UTTERANCE GIFTS
1. The gift of tongues.
2. The gift of the interpretaion of tongues.
3. The gift of prophecy.
REVELATION OR INSTRUCTIONAL GIFTS
4. The gift of the word of knowledge.
5. The gift of the word of wisdom.
6. The gift of the discerning of spirits.
POWER OR IMPARTAION GIFTS
7. The gift of faith.
8. The gift of healing.
9. The gift of the performing of miracles.
INSPIRATIONAL, WORSHIP, OR UTTERANCE GIFTS
1. The gift of tongues is the God-given ability to speak in languages that you do not understand, and that at your own volition.
2. The gift of the interpretation of tongues is the God-given ability to bring forth in the language of your understanding, the sum and substance of that which has been spoken in another (to you unknown) tongue.
3. The gift of prophecy (the product of which constitutes the testimony of Jesus) is the God-given ability to bring forth in the language of your understanding - a message direct from the heart of God to His people; a message that is always unto edification, exhortation and comfort; a message that always agrees with the Word of God.
These three gifts are referred to as utterance gifts because that is their mode of operation. They are also referred to as worship gifts, because they are principally utilized in the worship of God. They are known as inspirational gifts because their use inspires both the user and them that hear.
Please compare to RTHST, pgs. 145-148. If you honestly see no evidence of plagiarism, then I submit you are in denial.
This just slaps you right in the face. I could almost hear VPW saying these words....
just change the word 'gift' to the word 'manifestation' and you have the definitions from the Advanced Class, practically word for word....
This has been one of the hardest things for me to reconcile. Since VPW had refered to so many others verbally, I was always aware that he did not get this on his own...I guess I was of the "compilation" sect...."put it together like no one had before..Yadda yadda yadda"
But this flies in the face of even that thinking.
Some of the best stuff I have read on this was Dot's brownie recipe analogy on another thread (don't remember which thread now..maybe some of you computer wizards can find it and link it...I don't know how)I found that very healing.
But Mike would say it is GOD word for word. Yeah, right, like God would choose a power-hungry sexual predator to give His Word to. "I will teach you the word like it has not been known since the first century, if you will sell it and sue anyone who attempts to give it to others...."
The Bible says that God gives his word to holy men, Mike. Anther piece of "data" you have chosen to ignore.
quote:Please compare to RTHST, pgs. 145-148. If you honestly see no evidence of plagiarism, then I submit you are in denial.
Raf, in that particular instance, I don't view it as plagiarism. There are enough dissimilarities....a large one for instance in ideas...one statement is promoting the "gifts" of the spirit while the other is promoting "manifestations". Two completely different and distinct meanings.
That's not to say VP shouldn't have given much more credit to Leonard; he should have. I keep thinking that maybe this was one reason why VP didn't have Leonard's books in the Way Bookstore, among others, because there were enough dissimilarities that VP viewed as glaring error on Leonard's part. But I still think VP should have communicated more about how he benefitted from Leonard.
Actually, this was the subject of our last conversation before your GS hiatus.
It is NOT the existence of DISsimilarities that disprove plagiarism. It is the EXISTENCE of SIMILARITIES that proves it.
Note that I said "If you see no evidence of plagiarism..." Do you honestly see no evidence of plagiarism? None? Then i have to disagree with you.
I suggest you review your definition of plagiarism.
For example, let's take your paragraph above:
quote:That's not to say VP shouldn't have given much more credit to Leonard; he should have. I keep thinking that maybe this was one reason why VP didn't have Leonard's books in the Way Bookstore, among others, because there were enough dissimilarities that VP viewed as glaring error on Leonard's part. But I still think VP should have communicated more about how he benefitted from Leonard.
Now, I change it to the following:
quote:That's not to say VP shouldn't have given more credit to Stiles; he should have. I have often thought that maybe this was one reason why VP didn't have Stile's books in the Way Bookstore, or Leonard's for that matter, because there were enough dissimilarities that VP viewed as glaring error on their part. But I still think VP should have communicated more about how he benefitted from them.
In my paragraph, I have changed quite a few important items compared to your paragraph. I have still committed plagiarism. If you still disagree, then our disagreement is simply over the definition of plagiarism. I'll just leave it at that.
Wierwille DID teach that "the gift is the God-given ability." The gift, in his view, was holy spirit, the latent ability. The manifestation was the operation of that gift in 9 different ways.
I never thought VPW taught that very clearly. No wonder -- the idea wasn't his!
I don't view it as plagiarism. There are enough dissimilarities....a large one for instance in ideas...one statement is promoting the "gifts" of the spirit while the other is promoting "manifestations". Two completely different and distinct meanings.
>>
VPW did attend college prior to "obtaining" his doctorate from a known diploma mill so he had
sufficient previous academic experience to understand the
concept and consequences of plagiarism. Any
college freshman in English 101 recevies a
class syllabus indicating that plagiarism can
result in academice probation and possible expuslion. It simply isn't tolerated.
Of course I do understand that not everyone
goes to college and consequently never gets
practical experience with how research papers
should be prepared and submitted. Thats cool but VPW ,with academic experience (save for his doctorate), would have known this.
Also recall that he self-published those works
,aka using the "vanity press". In doing this he exempted his work from the usual and customary editorial examinations applied towards potential publications so it was rather easy
for him to omit attributions without people
noticing. And given that the works of Leonard and Stiles were relatively obscure , even
for christian publications, made it unlikely
that anyone would know the difference.
That VPW named dropped Siles, Leonard does not serve as a valid substitute for proper attribution in a research work. One notices that
VPW's verbal references to these authors never
included details of how he, VPW, had benefitted just that he had learned from them.
ITs a bit odd that a man who would claim to teach the word like it hadn't been since the 1st century would have publications continaing
information which was extremely similar to that
in pre-existing publications. This would cast
some doubt on VPW's status as the only man of god for the time since , if what he wrote represented revelation then it seems that that
same "revelation" had been given to others before him. So there really was no new truth
It's my personal belief that even the much commented on "promise of 1942" was a variation on tale told by Leonard. I'll be happy to post the Leonard account later.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
27
35
18
78
Popular Days
Nov 10
47
Nov 7
45
Nov 4
40
Nov 11
35
Top Posters In This Topic
excathedra 27 posts
Raf 35 posts
oldiesman 18 posts
Dot Matrix 78 posts
Popular Days
Nov 10 2003
47 posts
Nov 7 2003
45 posts
Nov 4 2003
40 posts
Nov 11 2003
35 posts
alfakat
Mike--who in the SAM Hell gave YOU the right to define plagiarism????? what, is your name Funk? Wagnall??? Webster???? Where is YOUR published dictionary, with YOUR definitions???? Your reasoning is so wanting, it is un-freaking-believable!!!
...Mike--you are clearly and simply... WRONG----and, as usual, you will not admit it......you do not have god-like powers to change things you do not like so that they agree with your pet theories, sir.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hopefull
You nailed it Alkafat, and MJ that was great- and you are so right- why follow ANY dead man? Wasn't it God Almighty that said, "MOSES MY SERVANT IS DEAD"?
There are ministries and churches right NOW where the Word/bible is ALIVE! and so are the teachers, evangelists, pastors, and prophets.
Mike, we all know VP plagerized. You are so blind that even if VP had a book that was copied ENTIRELY from someone else you would say that VP's font was inspired, or the heart behind it was what made that book unique.
You make me think of the jury on OJ's trial. The only way they would have seen the light is if OJ stood up and said "I DID IT, I am Guilty"
I guess ole VP would have to come to you in a vision and say, "Mike, those Gspotters are right, I plagerized. Now have some Drambuie and chill out."
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
For me, the question of whether VPW plagiarized was settled ages ago. Of course he did.
The only question is, what do we do about it? What difference does it make? Why is it important?
If we're evaluating the man and his ministry, it's relevant. If we're evaluating the content, then it's not.
The answer to question 8 in the RTHST book doesn't become any more or less valid just because it was an obvious ripoff of JE Stiles.
The difference between believing and mental assent exists independently of the fact that Wierwille quoted Kenyon on the subject without attribution.
The content should be evaluated on its own merits; the source should only be evaluated when one considers the intellectual dishonesty of the person presenting it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goey
Hmmn?
A man is siting at his desk, dilegenty working PFAL, looking for more hidden truths in his quest for mastery. Obedient to the last lost teaching of the Teache, r he finds a sentence that looks interesting and then..... a voice from seemingly nowhere:
Mike!, Mike!,
Shaken a bit, Mike begins to look around the dimly lit room - and there in the corner is the figure of a man, sitting in the easy chair. In his right hand is a small glass, half-full of liquer - Drambuie. Bwtween his fingers is a cigartette - a Kool.
Mike, still somewhat dazed, then realizes who it is in the room, or at least who it appears to be. It is the teacher himself.
Snapping to, Mike then says to himself; "This is the vision I have been waiting for this is...". But before he could finish his thought the teacher says, "Get up and come over here son."
Mike gets up from his chair and approaches the Teacher. "What the hell are you doing son?", the Teacher asks in a somewhat irritated voice.
"I am obeying your final teaching and mastering the new word that God gave you. I am looking for..." But before he can finish the Teacher says, "The hell with that crap son. You got it all wrong." "What?" says Mike, But you said that..."
"Shut up and listen Mike. Take the cotton out of your ears and put it in your mouth. PFAL was something I put together to present some keys so that people could start understanding the Bible - to get to the Word of God. PFAL was just..."
"I won't listen to this" interrupts Mike. "You are wrong. I know that God gave you PFAL, and that it is the Word of..."
"Shut up and listen Mike" Says the teacher, " The truth is that I copied a lot of PFAL from others and did not get them proper credit. And about that snowstorm in 1942, Well son..."
Mike put his fingers in his ears and closes his eye tight and repeat to himself. "This is not real, this is not real", this is not real."
After a few minutes he take his fingers out of this ears and slowly open his eyes. The Teacher is gone without a trace.
Relieved, he thinks to himself, "This proves that I am right, that PFAL is indeed the true word oF God and that Satan will do anything to try and steal it from me and the rest of the world."
Goey
"Most of my fondest memories in TWI never really happened"
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greek2me
Hey all,
Regarding the plagiarism issue - there is no question - Yes, VPW did plagiarize. Enough said.
Having graduated from Rev. B. G. Leonard's "Full Bible Course", (of which "Foundations" is one of over thirty titles,) I can assure you all, that it is perhaps his best work and a must for Christians regarding the basic doctrines of the Christian faith. If you have even the slightest curiousity, I highly recommend it.
Dot, enoy!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
TheEvan
Doesn't anybody remember the Great Fore Head going vein-popping spit-spraying potty-mouthed apoplectic at a Corps Week about a certain region leader taking Leonard's Gifts of teh Spirit? He portrayed it as treasonous and worse...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MarkedAndAvoided
When I told other people about Wierwille's Christian Family and Sex class which I did not like and had to pay for in order to get into the Advanced Class and the Corps, I referred to Maggie Muggins as Maggie Morgasm and Johnny Jump-UP as Johnny Hard-Up. Was I crossing the lines of plagiarism? Was that my crime? I wondered that as several Bless Patrol asked me to leave the grounds in 1993.
Marked and Avoided
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
Okay,
First, Roy you are so meek/great. (Hate to use that word, searched for another but it fits) YOU SEE what is going on and you move ahead with new knowledge. You are meek enough to say oh well, I thought VP did a good job but if he stole it, that was wrong now let's go find out what the real author wrote! I love that about you and that is what ticks me off about Mike HE NEVER EVER EVER considers that VPW could ever do anything wrong.
((((Roy))))
Now THE EVAN!
I was howling with laughter
And also it blew my mind that he screamed at someone who took Leonard's class? WOW, it still shocks me that I sat in meetings like that (not that one) and did not leave.
Greek2me
I am enjoying it! The book kinda dropped out of heaven and landed here for me!
:)-->
I do think folks who have an unrealistic view of VP and "The Great fore head" need to have it said over again that VP plagiarized. Some just do not get it, but others are reading this for the first time and they need to hear it!
Greek2 me - What book would you recommend next?
How do I take a Tim Sullivan class (Tim was taught by Leonard)? How would an interested party find a class in the states? Looks like a lot of activity is in Europe!
When I spoke with Sister Evelyn (Leonard's wife) she said I would have TO GO there for the class because they help people see their ministries that God has called them to do. Their place. I thought that was so neat to build people up with what "they can and want to do" rather than have them acknowledge some leader and learn obedience to them. (Like TWI)
How cool reminded me of what I saw on the field before the corps came along and wrecked it all.
Greek2 me and Evan, can you tell us a little about Leonard's ministry and share your thoughts? We can talk about the other as well, but please if you would like to share go ahead and those still desiring to discuss the topic can as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
M&A
Boy, you sinner! How dare you think? How dare you be funny without permission! Whatever were you thinking?
;)-->
(I think what you said was a riot!)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
diazbro
Did the concept of excellor sessions exist
in the Leonard classes ? I'm told that there
were "practice" sessions but whether or not
they used "excellor" I don't know. Also remember
that in TWI that in the AC there were no excellor sessions - those were only for the
Intermediate and Foundational classes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CircleGame
Dot,
When was "Foundations" written?? When was that paragraph written? (I'm trying to see if there were several editions of "Foundations") and if maybe BG Leonard knew of VPW's plagiarism?? I wonder if others were plagiarising?? It's too bad BG didn't take VPW to court about it!!
Sheesh!! WHAT is SO HARD about crediting an author!?!? It is what people do, but sometimes in human error there is inadvertant plagiarism. Like George Harrison in "My Sweet Lord". It sounds like VPW definitely was not inadvertant in plagiarism.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
maybe ego plays a part
?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
I immediatley thought BG KNEW VP did it!
First Published 1949
Canada 1966
Unabridged 1970
1997- this one
Raf was going to copy a page from BG and a page from VP and show how they are near the same, in the Holy Spirit book. (I think it will be in the doctrine area)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
Imablvr
If you read it again you will see he speaks of it being photocopied and videos... So THAT letter had to be written after their inventions, so yeah, I BET he KNEW!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
oh yeah he knew
?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dot Matrix
That is how I see it, HE KNEW!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Please compare to RTHST, pgs. 145-148. If you honestly see no evidence of plagiarism, then I submit you are in denial.
More later. It's late, and I'm tired.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tinuviel
Oh geeze...Oh geeze...
This just slaps you right in the face. I could almost hear VPW saying these words....
just change the word 'gift' to the word 'manifestation' and you have the definitions from the Advanced Class, practically word for word....
This has been one of the hardest things for me to reconcile. Since VPW had refered to so many others verbally, I was always aware that he did not get this on his own...I guess I was of the "compilation" sect...."put it together like no one had before..Yadda yadda yadda"
But this flies in the face of even that thinking.
Some of the best stuff I have read on this was Dot's brownie recipe analogy on another thread (don't remember which thread now..maybe some of you computer wizards can find it and link it...I don't know how)I found that very healing.
Okay...so now I want to read BG Leonard's stuff.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
shazdancer
"The gift is the God-given ability..."
Wierwille, word for word.
But Mike would say it is GOD word for word. Yeah, right, like God would choose a power-hungry sexual predator to give His Word to. "I will teach you the word like it has not been known since the first century, if you will sell it and sue anyone who attempts to give it to others...."
The Bible says that God gives his word to holy men, Mike. Anther piece of "data" you have chosen to ignore.
Shaz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oldiesman
Raf, in that particular instance, I don't view it as plagiarism. There are enough dissimilarities....a large one for instance in ideas...one statement is promoting the "gifts" of the spirit while the other is promoting "manifestations". Two completely different and distinct meanings.
That's not to say VP shouldn't have given much more credit to Leonard; he should have. I keep thinking that maybe this was one reason why VP didn't have Leonard's books in the Way Bookstore, among others, because there were enough dissimilarities that VP viewed as glaring error on Leonard's part. But I still think VP should have communicated more about how he benefitted from Leonard.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
Oldies,
Actually, this was the subject of our last conversation before your GS hiatus.
It is NOT the existence of DISsimilarities that disprove plagiarism. It is the EXISTENCE of SIMILARITIES that proves it.
Note that I said "If you see no evidence of plagiarism..." Do you honestly see no evidence of plagiarism? None? Then i have to disagree with you.
I suggest you review your definition of plagiarism.
For example, let's take your paragraph above:
Now, I change it to the following:
In my paragraph, I have changed quite a few important items compared to your paragraph. I have still committed plagiarism. If you still disagree, then our disagreement is simply over the definition of plagiarism. I'll just leave it at that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
shazdancer
Dear Oldies,
Wierwille DID teach that "the gift is the God-given ability." The gift, in his view, was holy spirit, the latent ability. The manifestation was the operation of that gift in 9 different ways.
I never thought VPW taught that very clearly. No wonder -- the idea wasn't his!
Regards,
Shaz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
diazbro
Oldiesman said:
I don't view it as plagiarism. There are enough dissimilarities....a large one for instance in ideas...one statement is promoting the "gifts" of the spirit while the other is promoting "manifestations". Two completely different and distinct meanings.
>>
VPW did attend college prior to "obtaining" his doctorate from a known diploma mill so he had
sufficient previous academic experience to understand the
concept and consequences of plagiarism. Any
college freshman in English 101 recevies a
class syllabus indicating that plagiarism can
result in academice probation and possible expuslion. It simply isn't tolerated.
Of course I do understand that not everyone
goes to college and consequently never gets
practical experience with how research papers
should be prepared and submitted. Thats cool but VPW ,with academic experience (save for his doctorate), would have known this.
Also recall that he self-published those works
,aka using the "vanity press". In doing this he exempted his work from the usual and customary editorial examinations applied towards potential publications so it was rather easy
for him to omit attributions without people
noticing. And given that the works of Leonard and Stiles were relatively obscure , even
for christian publications, made it unlikely
that anyone would know the difference.
That VPW named dropped Siles, Leonard does not serve as a valid substitute for proper attribution in a research work. One notices that
VPW's verbal references to these authors never
included details of how he, VPW, had benefitted just that he had learned from them.
ITs a bit odd that a man who would claim to teach the word like it hadn't been since the 1st century would have publications continaing
information which was extremely similar to that
in pre-existing publications. This would cast
some doubt on VPW's status as the only man of god for the time since , if what he wrote represented revelation then it seems that that
same "revelation" had been given to others before him. So there really was no new truth
or light for our generation - not from VPW
there wasn't.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
It's my personal belief that even the much commented on "promise of 1942" was a variation on tale told by Leonard. I'll be happy to post the Leonard account later.
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.