Talk:Victor Paul Wierwille
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
||
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Charismatic Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Pentecostalism, the Charismatic movement and its relatives and offshoots on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. | |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
I am the copyright holder for the page in qustion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.79.147.192 (talk • contribs) 21:01, 15 February 2005 (UTC).
NPOV statements that keep showing up:
"Believing the original New Testament was written in the native tongue of Paul and the other apostles Aramaic"
-This is disputed as to whether Greek or Aramaic was the native tongue of Paul. Most Biblical scholars teach the original NT was Greek.
"...died of natural causes in 1985."
He died of liver cancer - this is what his death report says. What's so anti-Wierwille about that?
"Mr. Wierwille also wrote three pioneering works..."
Very glowing and not NPOV at all.
Yahnatan 01:50, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] NPOV removal
I will remove the NPOV stub in 48 hours unless someone objects. Deckiller 23:27, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Religioustolerance.org
This article uses the religioustolerance.org website as either a reference or a link. Please see the discussion on Wikipedia talk:Verifiability/Religioustolerance.org and Wikipedia:Verifiability/Religioustolerance.org as to whether Wikipedia should cite the religioustolerance.org website, jguk 15:04, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
That there's a difference of opinion and there's discussion is not the same as giving tacit permission to delete usages of that site as a resource. They document their statements, and wikipedia readers can read them (and other sites, including the pro-TWI sites) and form their OWN opinions as to whether any site is incorrect on a subject. Pete Snowball 04:13, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Dr.
someone went through the article and prefixed "Dr." to every instance of Wierwille's name. This is contrary to Wikipedia's naming conventions. If it were established that he did in fact have a doctorate from an accredited institution, then we could note that, but we still don't put "Dr." in front of every instance of a person's name. -- Antaeus Feldspar 12:54, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Most famous?
One line of this article states that "Wierwille's most famous book was Jesus Christ is Not God"
I don't know if there is anyway to every prove it was his most "famous" book. I think it was the one that might have shocked say people on the bus while you are reading it etc. But, that is just my opinion. Wierwille himself was proud of his work in Receiving The Holy Spirit Today and many Way believers talked about it being a "landmark" book yet that is not a NPOV unless someone outside of the way says so..or so I think. I just felt that (well 1st that this thing I am writing is probably too long for my stupid small point but...) somehow the word "famous" was misleading or just wrong.
- Then I'd suggest mentioning both books and describing them as his most "notable" books. If we get a reliable source talking about which one is most "famous", we can use that, but in the meantime, we don't need to talk about fame, specifically. Can you maybe dig up a reference to where Wierwille talked or wrote about being proud of Receiving in particular? I don't think you need to wait until you have such a reference to add it to the article, necessarily, but having a reference will be good if any later reader wonders "hmmmm, why was this book held up for particular attention?" -- Antaeus Feldspar 01:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- Done. Didn't add the RHST book ref as I am not sure about it at all. Still, I feel that these new changes work. Thanks for the advice! Lsjzl 15:48, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Looks good to me! -- Antaeus Feldspar 01:53, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
-
Hmmmm... Okay... Here we go...
The foremost rationale that I can discern for making Jesus Christ is Not God the first book mentioned is a journalistic "principle" (so much as such animals exist). The (what we used to call) "shock value," of just the title alone, is a great hook for the reader to read on. I understand this, because seeing the book lying on a coffee table at a Way "Twig" in 1975, I was both shocked and intrigued by its title.
I find it hard to believe that "shock value" is not the motive here...which is fine. A little journalistic spice is sometimes nice, sprinkled on Wikipedia's sometimes too-vanilla NPOV. But let's be honest about it, okay?
The statement -- "One of the books was [JCNG]," as the article stood previous to my edit -- from my perspective, is loaded with irony. JCNG was the work that, in the early 1970s (during the seminal years of the anti-cult movement and of so-called "deprogrammers" such as Ted Patrick), propelled the so-called "orthodox" into (I won't say "insanity") naming and defaming The Way International as a so-called "cult." As far as controversy, JCNG was, or is, hardly The Birds of North America, to say the least...
...hence...my edit. But I'm not married to it. I'm sentient enough to realize that my own NPOV on the matter is rightfully suspect.
By the way (heh), if this article is going to refer to The Way International as TWI, will it be okay, if they're mentioned again, that the Evangelical and Reformed Church be refered to as the EEARC and the United Church of Christ as the UOCC? Are we trying to save Wikipedia's bandwidth, or what? ô¿ô 14:31, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
On JCNG, Wierwille himself carried his status as an outsider with pride, and he himself went out and deliberately started his own controversy with this book. At the end of the Rock of Ages 1977, he went with a bus of people with big signs and copies of this book. Claiming it was similar to what Martin Luther did, he went to local churches, and affixed copies of his signs, which read "Jesus Christ is not God-never was, never will be!" and left an AUTOGRAPHED copy of JCNG at each door. (Mind you, what he had told the people at Rock of Ages 1977, was that they'd be attaching a list of all the anti-Trinitarian verses in the Bible, and affixing them to the church doors, a la Martin Luther's 95 Theses at Wittenberg Cathedral.) He specifically set out to be controversial with it.
Further, when people want to know about TWI, they want to know what is MOST pertient about it, and the same can be said about Wierwille. That will always include JCNG.
Finally, the organization's name is on the page. You can read the name clearly. Abbreviating it saves space on the page, saves typing, and is the same for ALL groups, not just this one. TWI will not get special treatment on its page despite your beliefs that it should. Pete Snowball 04:41, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
- Since motivation was not listed, I recommended removing the word "famous" as I thought it was put in by a pro-Wierwille-ite who wanted to hope it was that "famous". I agree that it was a shockvalue title and good points Pete. I suppose to write all here in the article would be attacked as NPOV in a sense haha..so maybe the word "Famous" puts it all together. Still the word reads differently if you had no clue about this article. "Famous" here at Wikipedia, when it truly has no global notability could still be struck down. Just thoughts. Lsjzl 13:34, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Removing his cause of death?
I see someone anynymous removed Wierwille's cause of death and marked that it was a "NP-POV edit." However, his cause of death, as per his death certificate, reads "metastatic melanoma of the liver" and "ocular melanoma", which, in plain English, means "cancer of the liver and eye." Dr Winegarner, himself a member of TWI, signed the death certificate. It is a matter of public record. That which comprises an official government document, complete with the seal of the Ohio Department of Health, by definition is neutral in and of itself.
I can post a copy of this if anyone wishes.
A "NP-POV" is actually HIDING the cause of his death.
Pete Snowball 14:21, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
There seems to be a fascination with REMOVING THE CAUSE OF HIS DEATH. I restored it AGAIN. The specific cause of death is STILL a matter of public record. Removing it for reasons of it being "morbid" are EXCUSES. "Morbid" details would be "and his entrails gushed out". The public record stands.
The real reason some people are obsessed with HIDING THE CAUSE OF HIS DEATH centers around his theology. According to VPW, a Christian who experiences suffering is operating the negative side of the "Law of Believing", and their own fears are CAUSING them to suffer physical events. According to VPW, positive believing will counteract any physical problems or "challenges." Therefore, any Christian of significance should be able to believe away illnesses and injuries. That's why TWI BURIED the cause of his death when addressing the average member. Some people on grounds knew, but the vast majority heard "he just stopped believing."
When he was beginning to suffer from cancer and had to lose his eye, he himself told his congregation that he got cancer in his eye from the bright lights used in 2 weeks of filming a class in the previous decade. Mind you, he was a chain-smoker while announcing that bright lights gave him cancer. Pete Snowball 20:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Acceptable sources for quotation
I'd like to submit that the following are acceptable sources for quotation on Victor Paul Wierwille, as they are each written and published BY The Way International, and by definition that organization has "vetted" each of them as accurate by their standards: "The Way:Living in Love", by Elena Whiteside. It was written in the early 1970s as a booklong advertisement, and includes much of Victor Paul Wierwille's life as spoken by himself and his brother. "Born Again to Serve," by Mrs Dorothea Wierwille. It was written in the late 1990s by his widow and documents her own perspective-as edited by TWI-on its early days, covering, in fact, much the same timespan as the previous book. "VP and Me," by Loy Craig Martindale. It was written in the early-to-middle 1980s by VPW's hand-picked successor as a documentation of the "loving instruction" he received from VPW. Although it was probably meant to cement his own pedigree as President-as the man who stood closest to VPW- it does so by including many accounts of VPW as reported by LCM, who had an interesting interpretation of many of the things VPW said and did.
Do the posters here (those who actually participate in the discussions) agree that these are acceptable for the purpose of quotation? Pete Snowball 13:47, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
Pete, since it's THEIR publication, I can't imagine what the problem would beTen of Swords 21:02, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Removed link
Check for my edit made today. I removed the Bible Bulliten page link. It really offers nothing to show why it should be a link to this page. "The Way denies the deity of Christ like all cults" isn't really what this article is about. (I know it says a lot more.. but not really related to this page.) One could argue that anything Way related is VPW related, but there is a reason we have seperate pages for seperate parts of this TWI entity. (Prob too much writing for the removal of one link but still...) Lsjzl 06:56, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Allegations of sexual abuse
As much as I personally believe some of the stories of rape and/or sexual abuse that I have heard, none ever went to court, nor were charges ever filed, unlike his successor LCM. Therefore they should not be included in this article.Ten of Swords 02:21, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- If substantial allegations were reported in reliable sources then we can mention them. We should be careful to indicate the disposition of the charges. -Will Beback · † · 05:24, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
