Talk:Robert Brinsmead

message: Regarding PT/Verdict moving beyond "parochial" Adventist concerns. I made some changes, because the word "parochial" for example can have a non-neutral connotation of "old fashioned" or "outdated" or similar (I am not assuming you necessarily meant it this way). A refinement would be to say, "expanded into areas not often examined by scholars of the time", however this would certainly need a good reference. If PT claims this, I would make a comment in the article, "PT claimed...", because it is not an independent reference.
Doug0531 said,
:"Brinsmead didn't simply "reject the investigative judgment," as is currently stated (someone changed what I wrote).  I am not overstating when I wrote that he systematically dismantled the theological rationale for the denomination's claim to its unique calling.  The "Investigative Judgment" entry notes "1844 Re-examined," but it does not socially locate it, nor did it attempt to respond theologically.  It was not a peripheral document in its day, though denominational authority tended to avoid its place and presence in the conflict that came to a head at Glacier View."
You basically want to say that it was a major document. This would be a helpful and informative comment. However the article cannot claim that 1844 Re-Examined, "systematically dismantled the theological rationale...", because many notable sources (e.g. the ATS, BRI) would disagree. Much research went into it, but this is not a helpful statement either. Wikipedia is not about so-called "truth", but rather what various different experts have considered to be "truth". Find a (preferably independent) published reference by a reputable person who commented on the impact it had in the church. I think this is a better way - comment on what effects it precipitated. Perhaps you could quote somebody as saying (in their opinion) it was well argued.
You mentioned the investigative judgment article for example doesn't do justice to this. Please, be bold and improve that article! Colin MacLaurin 11:24, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice improvement regarding 1844 Re-Examined - neutral tone. If you wanted to add force to the statement, you might comment (preferably with a good reference) on the effect it had within the church. Good job, Colin MacLaurin 14:10, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

text: It turns out there is a citation about the emotion surrounding Brinsmead and his views. I have added a quote from a published article by Larry Pahl, "The name of Robert D. Brinsmead was once capable of evoking strong emotion and division in the Adventist circles brave and informed enough to discuss his controversial ideas." It seems that there are good sources of information on Brinsmead, so let's hunt them for useful citations. Colin MacLaurin 08:01, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  More replies 

message: The images were useful ones. Would the editor who added them please inform us where they took the images from? We may be able to use them in the article. For example, if the Avondale College one was a photo you took yourself, you can release it into the public domain and then use it in this article. The business award one may not be legitimately used here, however please say where you got it from, e.g. a website or something, and we will see what the copyright status is. Colin MacLaurin 14:08, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have emailed Ferguson regarding photos. Colin MacLaurin 09:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: Please help with the chronological order. I have tried to keep the text coherent and in order, but need to help of editors more knowledgeable about Brinsmead. Particularly, some of the "later views" tidbits (such as reading Luther) probably belong in the 1970s (evangelical) section. Also, when did he become involved in politics? Colin MacLaurin 18:15, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Timeline 

message: * Is Qua Ngo's website the official one for Brinsmead? Please clarify the status/relationship between the two. Personally, I would like to see the website itself claiming something like this, but am prepared to accept your word about it if answered here. Colin MacLaurin 18:15, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I kept and improved the Qua Ngo website, as it seems helpful. Ironically, I was the one who added it when I wrote the original article, because it turned up after a Google search. Technically external links should be to authoritative figures in the subject area, and this is dubious for Qua Ngo as I have never heard of him; however perhaps one could argue an archive of articles has nothing to do with Ngo's notability. Also adding Worldview Publications for now. Colin MacLaurin 13:06, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please note that "Qua" and "Ngo" run together equal "quango," i.e. the web site address.  It is likely that this is not a person but merely a clever-ish way to represent the site.  Doug0531 01:02, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I do not believe http://www.worldviewpublications.org represents the current views of Robert Brinsmead. If it did, I expect it would be publishing articles by him (since he is or at least was a prolific writer), which it has never done. As a subscriber who corresponds with the editor, I am personally certain that neither the writings nor ideas of Brinsmead are used in its publications. It would be easy, however, to verify this by using the reader's comment page to ask the question. I deleted the reference that indicated Worldview Publications echoes Brinsmead's current thinking, since it was (a) undocumented, and (b) to my knowledge, incorrect. Since this discussion indicates that it was inserted tentatively, I'm assuming this will not be a controversial deletion. --Chazann 22:06, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

text: "Wall of Division" is a phrase found here: http://www.quango.net/brinsmead/shorthis.htm.  /boq/ The United Church of God split from the Worldwide Church of God in May 1995 when the Worldwide Church of God declared that the Sabbath was not "THE SIGN" or "The Wall of Division" of who is a Christian and who is not. /eoq/  It is the last sentence in "A Short History of How Robert Brinsmead's Writings Helped Transform the Worldwide Church of God."  The author is William Ferguson.  Insofar as the phrase is used as a descriptor in that 1995 context, it could be useful.  Since Mr. Ferguson is knowledgeable in Worldwide Church of God matters, he would be my choice to edit this in.    —Preceding unsigned comment added by Doug0531 (talk • contribs) 14:05, August 25, 2007 (UTC)   My bad.  Forgot to sign.  Doug0531 19:40, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Thanks for providing the origin of that phrase. It appears to be a WWCoG term, so please make that clear in the article. A reference to a report from that church would be better than quoting Ferguson (incidentally, I recall reading Ferguson's article myself). Colin MacLaurin 13:25, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Miscellaneous 

message: I just read the website about the compiled emails regarding Valorie's passing, which I notice also has a lot of other details which were incorporated into this page. Brinsmead's niece provided the information. There are many statements there which need a better reference - presumably she is not considered a notable authority (other than being his niece, of course). Editors with a "Deletionist" philosophy would probably reject all this information, but I would be content for now with putting a "According to Brinsmead's niece, ..." ahead of some of the large claims made, e.g. Ford being inspired about Brinsmead. It is not a great source, and hopefully someone will read the BRI resources or anything else with more notability and cite that stuff. Colin MacLaurin 13:18, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What web site?  URL please.  Doug0531 00:36, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  http://www.quango.net/verdict/Valorie-Brinsmead-RIP.htm, which I have already used as a (admittedly not strong) reference, "piped" as "Archived emails regarding Valorie Brinsmead's passing from quango.net" in the References section. Colin MacLaurin 09:59, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Colin, I consider personal communication between Mr. Brinsmead's niece and Mr. Ferguson to be an adequate (though anecdotal) reference for early RDB history on the quality and quantity of his education in the 1950s.  Because issues around grades and graduation are essentially straight-up biographical, I would support their inclusion.  (The e-mails suggest that Mr. Ferguson continues to observe the evolution of this Wikipedia entry.)  Desmond Ford is still around.  He can verify or not the claims concerning himself in this matter.  As one interested in clarifying the historical portions of this entry, perhaps you could e-mail him and ask clarification.  Your removal (i.e. distance) from the primary events might contribute to stimulating his response.   Doug0531 11:07, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank-you for your positive assessment of their reliability, however the question is how Wikipedia would see it. An article may get away with some unreferenced minor details. However, the claim about Avondale is a very dubious sounding point - please don't misunderstand me here - on a personal level I trust Ferguson and B's niece (see WP:AGF), but this is a surprising claim, and another source would be better. Regarding the Desmond Ford comment, there are policies about that - I ask that others help by searching them out themselves. A principle is that sources should be check-able by other readers and editors, so a private email is of dubious help. What would be very helpful is if Ford published something somewhere about it. A lesser step but quite sufficient (because Ford is already notable independent of his website - that's a policy somewhere) would be if Ford put something up on one of his webpages. But emailing Ford is a good idea - I will plan to do this. (But even if Ford does agree, it is still one POV - point of view. For example, sceptics of supernatural events - a major position or POV - would disagree. -Colin MacLaurin 16:12, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for your willingness to e-mail Dr. Ford and seek more objective validation concerning some claims around his 1950s views of Mr. Brinsmead at Avondale College.  My main point, however, was really more about using Mr. Brinsmead's niece's e-mail as a voice to ground claims concerning high school performance, year of college graduation, etc.  I do hope you're not claiming that objective grade records from, say, Murwillumbah High School from the 1950s would be required in order to make a comment about high school performance.  A URL pointing to the e-mail in which these kind of minor claims are made ought to be adequate, it would seem.    Also, Dr. Ford's attestation concerning his view of Mr. Brinsmead's influence and energy in 1957 may not even exist on the Internet.  I don't know how one ought to handle this matter.  Your last sentence about skeptics of supernatural events is not clear.  Say again what you were trying to say in that sentence.  Doug0531 12:31, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

text:  Year of college graduation etc. are fine, in my opinion, if referenced from his niece. Personally, I have barely read any of the materials I have added in the external links section, and none of the offline sources apart from an old version of Schwarz. We need to scrutinise these for citations, cite as much as we can, and see what is lacking. About supernatural sceptics, I meant that it is not a totally neutral statement to say 'God said such and such to Ford...' since even if Ford himself says this, many POVs (points of view) will disagree, and Wikipedia should state all major POVs. However if Ford does admit it, I think that asserting the event without any "Ford claims..." would be OK, but others may disagree. Colin MacLaurin 09:04, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

text:  A quick scan of one of the Adventist Today articles showed it has a lot of good information, which we should add. The other  article seems broken at the moment. I would do it myself but I'm currently enjoying travelling Germany! Ciao (Italian import to Germany), Colin MacLaurin 09:18, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

text: This begins to answer my question about how long a section should remain before it is taken down. It is unfortunate that the e-mail you sent, Doug0531, bounced. Sometimes apparent bounces do go through, so we could hope for that. How long will we wait before heavily redacting or deleting this section. I think it would be quite interesting to get some documentation of Brinsmead's current views. Surely there must be some available. Does anyone have an e-mail or address for him? It would seem he should at least be contacted to verify his current thinking or to ask if he has published anything recently. Chazann 22:25, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Contacting him is a great idea. However, please do not add information from private emails to Wikipedia. Ask Brinsmead or others to publish their views somewhere, at least on a personal website (that applies if they are already notable, e.g. Ford or Brinsmead etc.), and then quote that website in Wikipedia. See policies re: referencing and citing. Colin MacLaurin 08:57, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Regarding Desmond Ford, I have emailed Good News Unlimited asking for his point of view. Regarding Ferguson, try another email address, as the second one I found worked for me (but not the first). Colin MacLaurin 02:24, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information supplied by Ferguson and Brinsmead's niece 

message: I've been harping on about Wikipedia:No original research a lot, but what I was really thinking of was:
* Wikipedia:Verifiability
Please have a quick read. By the way, this Brinsmead article and the dynamics of its creation/progress are fascinating. Colin MacLaurin 07:34, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Verifiability policy 

message: The following critical site has a good list of links for Brinsmead and various other Adventist figures: http://www.btinternet.com/~fountain/sda/. Colin MacLaurin 00:31, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brinsmead websites 

message: This should have been done long ago: Colin MacLaurin (talk) 13:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other cuts 

message: "Brinsmead first published the magazine Present Truth in April 1972." I removed this uncited comment since it disagrees with the published source by Gary Land, who says it was started in 1968 but aimed at a more general audience in the 1970s after he gave up perfectionism.
This might explain it: one entry called "Present truth" in the library catalogue worldcat.org says it was published "Snohomish, Wash. : International Health Institute, 196?-1971." Also "Vol. 4, no. 4 (Nov. 7, 1970)... Edited by Norman Jarnes."
This may solve the discrepancy. It appears Brinsmead changed publishers in 1972 to one in Fallbrook, California. Perhaps the volume numbering restarted. Essentially a new magazine, with a different perspective(?) See the article Present Truth Magazine I've started, and please contribute to it, with verifiable comments. Colin MacLaurin (talk) 13:29, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Colin, I believe that Land hasn't done his homework, and I'm not about to do it for him.  A citation for the first issue of PT, April 1972, can be found in any library that might contain hard copies of the original issues.  I have a complete set, beginning to end.  My own first-hand knowledge of this process began in the early 1970s.  In terms of Brinsmead's impact on the SDA denomination, the 1970s was the decade that matters, the era when the greatest impact occurred.  The 1960s was a fly in the room.  You could save yourself chasing rabbits by simply asking questions of those who were primaries in those days.  Have you contacted Mr. Brinsmead as yet, to interview him, as I suggested to you months ago?  Have you asked Bill Diehl (http://www.presenttruthmag.com) what he remembers?  What about Norman Jarnes, son of the late Peter Jarnes (who taught theology at Union College, Lincoln NE)?  Norman ran the office throughout the 1970s in Fallbrook CA.  For 1960s information, try Tom Durst, Jack Walker.  The 1970s Present Truth (name changed to Verdict in 1978) is the vehicle that both captured the attention of SDAs as well as the imagination of non-SDA protestant evangelicals in that decade.  Ask some of these people what they remember about IHI history. Then, when you get your information sufficiently grounded, you could post it to this Wikipedia essay. Otherwise, you're going to be left with a mishmash.  The real test of your work is when those of us who were there read those portions of the essay that address events we knew first-hand, and we agree that it is an accurate telling of the story of thirty and forty years ago.Doug0531 (talk) 04:02, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have made some changes to the article, expressing both points of view (actually for the birth year I have put cited views in a footnote only, so they have less significance given them) - a combining of Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Ignore all rules, I guess :-). I appreciate your suggestion or challenge to meet Brinsmead - Bill Ferguson gave me Brinsmead's email and I plan to email him tomorrow have emailed him. On a similar note, I have had the good fortune of having numerous in depth conversations recently with Arthur Patrick - I certainly find it interesting to meet these guys. Here's a challenge/suggestion for you in return: it seems that you and other editors are keen that your perspectives be understood - how about you (and others) write up  your recollections, and ask presenttruthmag.com to put them on their website? One question: you omitted to address the item of evidence I mentioned above - this database entry. Colin MacLaurin (talk) 15:20, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You have a much broader interest in this overall entry that I do.  My knowledge is of the 1970s.  Other than some early demographic details that I've been aware of for many years, my contributions are almost exclusively about the 1970s.  For info about the 1960s, contact Norman Jarnes, Jack Zwemer, Tom Durst.  Norman led the publishing work in Snohomish WA and later at Fallbrook CA.  The 1970s Present Truth/Verdict was a breed of another color, not strictly the child of anything done in the 1960s (though, of course, in sequence one followed the other).  Colin, everyone wants to be understood, even you.  Other than to state the obvious, what might be your point about "keen that your perspectives be understood?"Doug0531 (talk) 19:30, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I was suggesting a good way for you (and others) to express your recollection of events. I would support adding an external link from this page and Present Truth Magazine to such a webpage. Colin MacLaurin (talk) 03:17, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Present Truth Magazine 

message: Is this article by Brinsmead? If so, it contradicts a few facts in the article. Colin MacLaurin (talk) 10:48, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This Editorial Introduction is from Present Truth, Volume 7, Number 2, March 1978.  The tag line "Come, let us reason together," was used by Mr. Brinsmead for all the years the journal was published.  In my hard copy of this issue are his initials at the end of this editorial, RDB.  Doug0531 (talk) 14:43, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  This is a primary source. Gary Land's encyclopedia (quoted in this article) is probably a tertiary source. Wikipedia articles should use mainly secondary and tertiary sources. However I agree that Brinsmead knows better than Land about the dates of his own life! Let's cite Brinsmead for these details, but we must keep it to a minimum. Colin MacLaurin (talk) 06:21, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Resources 

message: Which sort of "liberal" was Brinsmead in the 1980s? I have called the decade "Liberal era" after Pahl's comment, "Brinsmead's scholarship turned, some would say, liberal." Does this mean liberal Christian or liberal Adventist? Colin MacLaurin (talk) 12:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Brinsmead had not been an Adventist since the early 1960s.  The likelihood that the Adventist denomination would want to own him in the 1980s would be none. The reference point, it seems to me, is certainly not Adventism.  Perhaps the liberalization of his own mindset is what is at issue here.Doug0531 (talk) 19:11, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questions 

message: Brinsmead himself emailed me and told me his birthdate is "August 9, 1933". He also said that last time he read this article, the year and month of his birth were both wrong. Gary Land's article also says 1933. I have changed the dates. Colin MacLaurin (talk) 04:50, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth year