7 Comments

  1. Know More Than I Should

    What’s the problem? For get love! All is fair in war and making money. Beside, as L. Ron Hubbard famously observed, religion is a real moneymaker. Of course, never mind that latter day Capitalianity isn’t all that different from the old Pharisaic moneychangers or that, as Paul succinctly pointed out in I Timothy 6:10, the love of money is the root of all evil.
    .
    Now, let us all join the choir as they sing Give Me That Money-making Religion.
    .
    Give me that money-making religion.
    Give me that money-making religion.
    Give me that money-making religion.
    It’s good enough for me.
    .
    It was good for L. Ron. Hubbard.
    It was good for L. Ron. Hubbard.
    It was good for L. Ron. Hubbard;
    And that’s good enough for me.
    .
    I love filthy lucre.
    I love filthy lucre.
    I love filthy lucre.
    It’s all that I can see.

    Reply
  2. Keith Williams

    First of all, thanks for the kind words about me and my favorite project (Holy Bible: Mosaic). Your story of exposure to the church calendar, appreciation for the Great Tradition, and personal/family spiritual growth is exactly the kind of thing I hoped would come from that project, and even if your story is the only one then I consider all my work worthwhile.

    Second, I should probably make it clear that this is a personal response rather than an official response from Tyndale House Publishers. I am a senior editor for Bibles and Bible reference works, and have been working within the editorial department at Tyndale since 2005. Obviously, I have a bit of an insider’s perspective; but I am one person, and my comments haven’t been reviewed or approved as the response of Tyndale.

    I have never worked with Mark Driscoll or any of his content. In fact, I’ve never read any of his books, and I don’t think I’ve every interacted with anything he has done on more than a cursory level. I’ve watched some of his videos (probably never more than 10 minutes) and read some of his blog posts. My overall evaluation has been that I don’t really like the style or substance of his message. I wasn’t excited when I heard that Tyndale had decided to publish him; but I wasn’t ready to quit either. I don’t think people deserve to be published only if I like or agree with their message.

    On the other hand, I do know and respect the people in the editorial department at Tyndale who worked on this book. They are not sloppy, nor are they ignorant of copyright laws.

    When I heard about Mefford’s claims against Driscoll’s book, I was concerned and examined the evidence. When I saw the PDFs that she posted on her site (since taken down), I was somewhat perplexed at how she viewed the situation in the Tyndale title as plagiarism. Driscoll clearly used the categories laid out by Jones, but seemed to be explaining the concepts in his own words and did mention Jones as the source of the ideas, at least in a footnote. I didn’t see plagiarism there. The examples she gave from Trial, however, were clear instances of plagiarism from IVP’s New Bible Dictionary. But that is not a book that went through Tyndale’s editorial and publishing process. As far as I know, it was self-published by Mars Hill (and also distributed through Logos Bible Software). It has nothing to do with Tyndale, and to hold Tyndale responsible for its content strikes me as extremely unfair.

    IVP’s response has to do with this non-Tyndale title; Tyndale’s response is only addressing the book that we published. Much of the conversation I’ve seen, especially in the articles you link to, don’t seem to recognize the difference and seem to imply that Tyndale and IVP are somehow in disagreement over this issue. In fact, the two publishers are responding to different things.

    I also know people in Tyndale’s publishing groups and the publicity team, and I can say that I would be shocked to learn that any effort was made to silence Janet Mefford. I know Tyndale and Salem have a working relationship, much like Tyndale has with other Christian media channels. I am not involved in those relationships and deals directly, so I have no particular insight there; but again, I know the people at Tyndale and don’t believe they would engage in strong-arm tactics to bury the truth.

    I understand the strong and vitriolic responses that Mark Driscoll elicits, but I really think Tyndale is getting dragged into the mud on this unfairly.

    Grace and peace.

    Reply

    1. Keith – thanks for the clarification on the IVP/Tyndale bit.

      I do not believe the editing department messed up, as I understand somewhat the nature of editing and the responsibility of the author. I further do not believe Tyndale would strong arm another’s voice.

      I am still in strong disagreement, however, over the nature of Driscoll’s work lifted from other sources.

      Thank you for your kind and patient response.

      Reply
      1. Keith Williams

        Perhaps I’m being obtuse, but can you explain to me precisely what you find objectionable in the Tyndale title, A Call to Resurgence? Where do you disagree with anything Tyndale specifically has done with regard to publishing Driscoll?

        I’m honestly asking these questions. If you can point to things we need to fix, I will address them as best I can.

        Reply

        1. Keith,

          I am not speaking specifically to any publishing choice, expect that I believe (along with others of course) Driscoll creatively lifted from another source for some of this book.

          I have significant issues with Driscoll’s theology and presentation of the theology, as I am plainly stated, but the only issue with the publishing is the material. I mean, if publishers refused to publish authors I find objectionable, it’d just be me and John Wesley on the market! 😉

          Of course, I realize and accept that you will disagree with this.

          Reply
  3. Royce

    Seems like this all could just be the “tip of the iceberg” so to speak.
    Is anyone looking into lack of attribution or citation by this controversial “author” in other books?

    For instance:
    http://wenatcheethehatchet.blogspot.com

    Reply
  4. menoclone

    It takes guts to take on the establishment, ANY etablishment, especially if they have a big legal department.
    Cut & paste operations are so easy to do. Plagiarism is lying and thieving, and unchristian to say the least. This is a “tip of the iceberg” as was implied in a previous comment.
    Our whole American society is lately based on deceptions and frauds practiced by mean-spirited people backed by huge amounts of cash. The present day is too much akin to the time of Jesus. It’s the Christian agape against the Caesar coin. Kudos and God’s courage to you.

    Reply

Leave a Reply, Please!