Twitter-TF Tenney at Jentezn Franklin's 2morrow!

[Jack Shephard]

Sam do you find a problem with this?

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by JTULLOCK

admit I am a fan of JF-though that is not a fair term to use. I like his ministry. I have listened to thousands of messages in the UPC and out of the UPC. Many UPC ministers copy from others. That is common knowledge. if you deny that it is the remove the rose colored glasses.

I understand plagiarism is illegal, but I don't believe that covers sermons. I really don't there is only plagairism issues it is trademarked or copywritten. Vebal sermons aren't Just copying word for word what someone says is not wrong. If it were then no one could EVER quote another person in a magazine article.

Perhaps some see it as unethical. I don't. If you feel that God is using you to minister a particular sermon do it. If you feel you must give credit to the person whom you heard it from then do so. Otherwise there is no ethical issue, IMO.

As far as the pride issue goes I would that it is childish for someone to get hurt about someone using their sermon with out credit cause NO preacher should be in it for credit from anyone but God. Also you are assuming that JF and other are 'too stuck' on themselves to give credit. That is off base you have no idea if JF is stuck on himself.

I have used others thoughts when minstering before, but not given credit cause I didn't preach it because I heard them do it. I preached it cause God moved me to do it and I didn't recit it.

I don't know you from Adam, but I don't think that the accusations you are making is fair no matter who you are making them too.

First, the bolded: No one has assumed anyone is "hurt." The allegations, as far as I can tell, are coming by others (not the actual speakers). So to assume the childishness of others, while defending JF and others as NOT being prideful for giving credit. It's a two-way street you insist on being one-way.

I have experience with the UPC. While ideas, phrases and even witty illustrations have been shared (often and sadly without credit), I don't see it as a normal or acceptable practice for preachers to take another's message word-for-word. Take the idea and communicate it from your heart if you must. But it's respectful for people not to take credit and "cite sources," yes even in a sermon. You see, speaking, printing, writing an email, etc these are all forms of publication. The risk of plagiarism becomes more increased when the words are broadcasted or preached in a setting/forum where profit is made.

You seem to be all over the place in your defense of JF (whom I have not personally accused, but will certainly not agree with this sort of practice which you defend).

Using thoughts and almost reciting another's sermons word-for-word aren't they same. Do you agree?

A speaker gets far more respect when they are humble in their remarks, not trying to be Mr. Original, not trying to allow themselves to take credit for being "tuned in" to the Spirit either. It isn't hard to say "I heard somewhere" or "As JF published in his book...." It doesn't destroy a sermon. Some of the best speakers in Christendom use this courtesy. This is not a matter of "me feeling" it's a matter of ethics, which are far more objective than my own subjective opinions -- albeit in form more than degree.

If it's no biggie, than let JF confirm it's true. "I used TFT, Arnold, Mangun and other's sermons and didn't cite them - nor do I believe we have to."

If it's your regular practice of listening to other's sermons to find out what you want to preach the following weekend, I kindly suggest a little homiletic creativity, a fresh dose of inspiration, a moment on your knees, and maybe even a break. Otherwise, it's not hard to give credit where credit is due. To sound "more biblical" -- how does "honor" sound?

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by Sam

Years ago when I was a teenager at a Baptist youth camp, the evangelist stood behind the podium and said, "Tonight I'm preaching -------------'s sermon on--------". I don't remember the person's name nor the sermon subject. That was over 50 years ago. I've never heard anyone say something like that since.

I remember one UPC church where I attended, the pastor preached a sermon one Saturday that I had read in the Pentecostal Evangel (Assembly of God magazine) a few days before.

The first article I had published in the Pentecostal Herald was pretty much "borrowed" from a sermon I had read in the Pentecostal Evangel several years before and had used as a Sunday School lesson at our UPC church. It wasn't a quote because it had been several years since I had read it, but it was pretty similar.

What was your impression of that minister during the sermon? Did his credibility and trustworthiness and character increase in your eyes?

JTULLOCK, that's my point. It really just seems more dishonest on the part of the speaker.

[Jack Shephard]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

First, the bolded: No one has assumed anyone is "hurt." The allegations, as far as I can tell, are coming by others (not the actual speakers). So to assume the childishness of others, while defending JF and others as NOT being prideful for giving credit. It's a two-way street you insist on being one-way.

I have experience with the UPC. While ideas, phrases and even witty illustrations have been shared (often and sadly without credit), I don't see it as a normal or acceptable practice for preachers to take another's message word-for-word. Take the idea and communicate it from your heart if you must. But it's respectful for people not to take credit and "cite sources," yes even in a sermon. You see, speaking, printing, writing an email, etc these are all forms of publication. The risk of plagiarism becomes more increased when the words are broadcasted or preached in a setting/forum where profit is made.

You seem to be all over the place in your defense of JF (whom I have not personally accused, but will certainly not agree with this sort of practice which you defend).

Using thoughts and almost reciting another's sermons word-for-word aren't they same. Do you agree?

A speaker gets far more respect when they are humble in their remarks, not trying to be Mr. Original, not trying to allow themselves to take credit for being "tuned in" to the Spirit either. It isn't hard to say "I heard somewhere" or "As JF published in his book...." It doesn't destroy a sermon. Some of the best speakers in Christendom use this courtesy. This is not a matter of "me feeling" it's a matter of ethics, which are far more objective than my own subjective opinions -- albeit in form more than degree.

If it's no biggie, than let JF confirm it's true. "I used TFT, Arnold, Mangun and other's sermons and didn't cite them - nor do I believe we have to."

If it's your regular practice of listening to other's sermons to find out what you want to preach the following weekend, I kindly suggest a little homiletic creativity, a fresh dose of inspiration, a moment on your knees, and maybe even a break. Otherwise, it's not hard to give credit where credit is due. To sound "more biblical" -- how does "honor" sound?

Wow you are long winded. Let me see if I can be brief...doubt it.

I was not nor never said JF is not prideful. I have no clue. I was saying that to assume he is too prideful to give credit is goofy. You did pretty much accuse him of being too prideful to give credit.

How am I ' all over the place' in my defending JF? I think it is pretty clear that I don't think he has done any wrong with using others sermons, if he in fact has. When you say that they get more respect for not acting as if they are Mr. Original I have issue with this. I have never heard any preacher say that I am Mr. Original, no one has preached this thought but me.

I do think that it is no big deal or any deal for that matter to acknowledge if I am using a thought someone else had. I wouldn't mind if anyone used any sermon I have ever preached. That would be neat to me if someone liked how I put it together and used it at their church.

Lastly I didn't say it is my practice to listen to another person in order to get a sermon. I have done mayb e2 times I can remember and I didn't even use the same title. I don't even preach anymore now. Now I don't think you are assuming that is what I do or did. I am sure that you were just painting a word picture for me. Oh yes using a thought and reciting ones sermon are different, IMO. Honor has a nice ring to it.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by JTULLOCK

Sam do you find a problem with this?

a problem with what?

---A problem with TFT and Madonna going to a trinity church?
No, in my opinion oneness folks aren't any more saved than trinity folks. We are all part of the Body of Christ. So I have no problem with oneness and trinity folks mingling or mixing.
TFT is a big boy and can go where he wants,
but,
isn't there a protocol to be followed before a UPC minister preaches for someone in a town where there is a local UPC Church? Shouldn't TFT, if he follows the Manual, get permission from the local UPC minister before he goes to a church in his (the local UPC minister's) town? If TFT, a highly respected person in the UPC who has a lot of influence disregards the Manual, can he expect other ministers to follow it? Or is he above the law?

---A problem with one minister preaching another minister's sermons?
No, not unless he (the speaker) tells people that God spoke to him and gave him that message for them and if he uses the other minister's personal examples as if they had actually happened to him (the speaker). To me that would be dishonest and deceitful.

When I was at ABI, one of the guys was in the second year class and they were required to submit a typed up sermon every week. He would hand a Pentecostal Evangel to a friend and have her type up the sermon for him and then he would submit it as his own. He said something like, "Actually, the Lord did give me that sermon --He gave me the money to buy the Pentecostal Evangel," or "It is my sermon. I paid for the magazine so any sermon in it is mine."

[Jack Shephard]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

What was your impression of that minister during the sermon? Did his credibility and trustworthiness and character increase in your eyes?

JTULLOCK, that's my point. It really just seems more dishonest on the part of the speaker.

I don't see it as dishonest...if anything it should be flattering to Mr. Original himself. Lord knows some preachers are ego driven anyway.

[Jack Shephard]

Originally Posted by Sam

a problem with what?

---A problem with TFT and Madonna going to a trinity church?
No, in my opinion oneness folks aren't any more saved than trinity folks. We are all part of the Body of Christ. So I have no problem with oneness and trinity folks mingling or mixing.
TFT is a big boy and can go where he wants,
but,
isn't there a protocol to be followed before a UPC minister preaches for someone in a town where there is a local UPC Church? Shouldn't TFT, if he follows the Manual, get permission from the local UPC minister before he goes to a church in his (the local UPC minister's) town? If TFT, a highly respected person in the UPC who has a lot of influence disregards the Manual, can he expect other ministers to follow it? Or is he above the law?

---A problem with one minister preaching another minister's sermons?
No, not unless he (the speaker) tells people that God spoke to him and gave him that message for them and if he uses the other minister's personal examples as if they had actually happened to him (the speaker). To me that would be dishonest and deceitful.

When I was at ABI, one of the guys was in the second year class and they were required to submit a typed up sermon every week. He would hand a Pentecostal Evangel to a friend and have her type up the sermon for him and then he would submit it as his own. He said something like, "Actually, the Lord did give me that sermon --He gave me the money to buy the Pentecostal Evangel," or "It is my sermon. I paid for the magazine so any sermon in it is mine."

Once again your wisdom is great. Of course if preacher B uses preachers A storys as if it acutally happened to preacher B then that is wrong but to use the sermon as a whole is not wrong IMO.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by JTULLOCK

I don't see it as dishonest...if anything it should be flattering to Mr. Original himself. Lord knows some preachers are ego driven anyway.

On the one hand you blast preachers for their ego, while on the other excusing the ego of the one preaching another person's thoughts practically verbatim. I'm confused.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by JTULLOCK

I don't see it as dishonest...if anything it should be flattering to Mr. Original himself. Lord knows some preachers are ego driven anyway.

Some years ago I preached at a nearby (about 60-70 miles away) church one Sunday night. The sermon was "original" in that I didn't hear or read it somewhere and then recycle it as my own but I'm sure it contained stuff I had heard or read somewhere. A week or so later I preached at another church in a city near that first church and the pastor there told me that after he had heard me preach the week or so before, he had preached my sermon to his congregation. I had no problem with that. Actually, I took it as a compliment.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by JTULLOCK

Wow you are long winded. Let me see if I can be brief...doubt it.

I was not nor never said JF is not prideful. I have no clue. I was saying that to assume he is too prideful to give credit is goofy. You did pretty much accuse him of being too prideful to give credit.

How am I ' all over the place' in my defending JF? I think it is pretty clear that I don't think he has done any wrong with using others sermons, if he in fact has. When you say that they get more respect for not acting as if they are Mr. Original I have issue with this. I have never heard any preacher say that I am Mr. Original, no one has preached this thought but me.

I do think that it is no big deal or any deal for that matter to acknowledge if I am using a thought someone else had. I wouldn't mind if anyone used any sermon I have ever preached. That would be neat to me if someone liked how I put it together and used it at their church.

Lastly I didn't say it is my practice to listen to another person in order to get a sermon. I have done mayb e2 times I can remember and I didn't even use the same title. I don't even preach anymore now. Now I don't think you are assuming that is what I do or did. I am sure that you were just painting a word picture for me. Oh yes using a thought and reciting ones sermon are different, IMO. Honor has a nice ring to it.

Yes, it's flattering. Take away your flattery (as the impersonated preacher) for a moment.

Why WOULDN'T you cite a source?

Here's the choices:

1) Laziness
2) Pride
3) Dishonesty
4) All the above

Preaching a thought is not what I have summed up here, nor is what JF is accused of. It's the identical outline of another minister, analogies/illustrations and all, and not just one section, but from start to finish. Before I bemoan the decay of ministerial ethics, I'll assume your views are of a minority opinion. Hopefully