I keep hearing from people who realize how corrupt the Wisconsin sect is. One layman identified Martin Spriggs copying Hybels' sermons verbatim, even down to the way they were expressed on the tapes. WELS responded by driving out this man's family and eventually making Spriggs the head of technology at The Guilt Factory.
As I proved on this blog, Limmer and Parlow also plagiarized Hybels. Yet Limmer is extolled by WELS, and Parlow is left alone. Parlow has copied the sermons of false teachers. He claims on the Changer listserve that God's Word works, so when will he try it?
Various eye-witnesses have shown that Glende and Ski have consistently plagiarized Groeschel, even using his graphics and outlines. I deal with plagiarism all the time. Is it deliberate? When people hide the evidence, it is a clear indication that they know they are cheating. I used to go to Glende's website for research. He hid the evidence. I saw some glimmerings in the bulletins posted, but I heard more was kept off the Net.
Plagiarism is deliberately using the original words of another person without attribution. The normal rule is five words in a row - that they should be in quotation marks and cited. Some also claim that key terms should be identified as belonging to another writer.
The excuse that a sermon was not 100% plagiarized is dishonest, devious, and worthy of rebuke. Nevertheless, the minions on the church council endorsed the concept. Deputy Doug Englebrecht excused plagiarism of sermons because "a lot of WELS pastors do the same thing." True, a lot of them are plagiarists (especially in Doug's benighted realm)--the Anything Goes District.
But the everyone does it fallacy is not valid. There are many deliberate murders each year. Does that make them defensible? St. Paul asked, "Should we sin more, that grace may abound? God forbid!" Englebrecht, Glende, and Ski are Antinomians. The Law is obsolete because everyone is justified before birth.
The UOJists should be oozing with grace, since they claim everyone is forgiven, but they are thuggish legalists instead. How can that be? There is a proper relationship between Law and Gospel, but they have no discernment about Biblical doctrine. They use certain words, always twisting them to make everything come out their way.
The evidence is abundant. For example, Glende has been publishing anonymous blogs for some time. He used to send comments as "Anonymouse," but I smoked him out, with some help from Lillo and others. Glende still has one of his blogs up.
I suggest that the Intrepids and their lawyer study that blog for signs of Glende's doctrine and integrity. Glende's blog shows:
1. He is a copycat. He has to use my blog name and pretend he is "the real Ichabod."
2. He has no Gospel content at all. Where are his sermons if he knows doctrine so well? Why does he condemn Yale when Uncle John Brug went there?
3. Why is he so angry and bitter? Having his buddy as his assistant and being able to fire the circuit pastor should make him happy. In a rather short time, Glende and Ski have gotten rid of:
a. Bishop Katie.
b. The assistant or associate pastor.
c. The circuit pastor.
4. Who appointed Tim Glende the judge of blogs? He decided he could edit Techlin's blog, too, and ordered him to change what was posted there.
5. Glende's record at NWC was that of a bully. When a sect glorifies their college football players, some of them get a big head.
6. Someone should tell Glende that the vicarage year is not equal to a year of higher education. A program the seminary students laugh at should not be held over the heads of the laity. Hardly anyone flunks seminary, especially at The Sausage Factory.
7. Shepherds do not beat the sheep, and yet Glende is afraid his congregation is dying. I wonder why.
Englebrecht does the quivering bowl of Jello routine quite well. I have seen the same performance in other Doctrinal Pussycats. He reserves his wrath for truthful blogging and faithful Lutherans.
Englebrecht has created a rotten district, and the entire Church and Change operation supports it. At the synod level, how long has any Changer been unemployed - five minutes? ten? What does FICL promote? Changer propaganda. The members are paying for a slick magazine that few read, so Changers can make money selling Fuller/Willow Creek doctrine to the innocent.
Gurgle said he had already dissolved Church and Change. And now he is working with Kudu Don Patterson, a Changer leader.
1 comments:
Just thought this was interesting to add to the mix in the context of discussing plagiarism. FYI only; no hidden agenda.
__________________
"My Word!": Rethinking the Roots of Plagiarism
By Joshua Kim February 9, 2011 9:30 pm EST
Our next book club selection for our Center for the Advancement of Learning (DCAL) is My Word!: Plagiarism and College Culture, by Susan Debra Blum.
Blum is an anthropologist at Notre Dame, and the book is written for an academic rather than a popular audience. This approach has its pluses and minuses, as the book adheres to academic norms of providing long quotes (almost transcripts) from informants, undergrads at Notre Dame - which Blum calls "Saint U" in order to make her conclusions more generalizable.
Blum sets out to discover, utilizing her anthropological toolkit, why plagiarism seems to have moved from deviant to normative behavior amongst college students. Her concern is not with outright cheating, or the wholesale purchasing of term papers, but rather the seeming inability of students to properly cite sources and give attribution for other peoples ideas and sentences. She seeks not to judge, but to understand, preferring to think about the failure to attribute as a teachable moment.
Blum's main conclusions in My Word (and I hesitate to so simplify her complex and nuanced arguments and observations) are:
Students are mostly confused about attribution and citation, as the rules seem (to them) to be inconsistent, capricious, and illogical.
The dominant culture that students operate in is a "remix culture", one in which cultural capital is developed and displayed by one's ability to reference and quote from popular culture when interacting with peers. Lines from "The Simpsons" (or perhaps "Jersey Shore", "The Daily Show", or "Glee") contribute to the vernacular of the college sophomore. Footnoting one's cultural references would be beyond uncool. This remix culture does not extend to books or magazines or newspapers.
Academic norms of attribution are particularly alien to undergraduates. Learning to operate in the professorial culture of citation requires learning a new language, one at odds with the prevailing mode of communication and therefore difficult to master.
Class work (studying, going to class, writing papers etc.) competes with an endless list of social, paid work, entertainment, and volunteer opportunities and obligations that make up the life of a college student. Campuses are "total institutions", where students find the demands on their time to be both enticing and endless. The ethos of "work hard / party hard" best captures student life, a result Blum thinks of a performance culture that has pushed kids to be active achievers since pre-school. The result is that students spend less time on class work than professors would expect and want. Papers are written with an eye towards maximum efficiency, which when combined with Google and competing deadlines, often results in un-sourced and un-attributed quotes and ideas finding there way into final drafts.
The medium of the long-form (10 to 20 page paper) feels foreign and disconnected to the present and future work demands for almost all students. Comparable, perhaps, to speaking and reading in Latin. The disconnect between students fluency in absorbing, interacting with and creating rich media - and professors comfort with the long-form writing, is growing with each new class. Does Quentin Tarantino footnote his movies? Do the kids on Glee stop to give credit to the original artist for the songs they sing?
Post a Comment