I’m confused. Ellen White specifically claimed many, many times that what she wrote came directly from God. She didn’t claim she was just using common cultural phrases or sayings. You can’t claim the Bible writers are borrowing from each other. The Bible has one author, God. “Although I am as dependent upon the Spirit of the Lord in writing my views as I am in receiving them, yet the words I employ in describing what I have seen are MY OWN, unless they be those spoken to me by an angel, which I ALWAYS ENCLOSE IN MARKS OF QUOTATION.” - Review and Herald, Oct 8, 1867, quoted in Selected Messages, Vol 1, p.37 She gave credit to her “angel”, but she only gave credit to the people she stole from when they pressed her to do so.
Re her your first paragraph: The presenter here showed that there were times when she did copy and gave reasons for it. He explained that pretty thoroughly. Re the Bible writers, he also explained that pretty well. They did copy each others and extra biblical writers in conveying meaning and messages they were inspired with. This fact detracts nothing from Gods overall inspirational authorship of Scripture. Re the quote from selected messages, I look frwd to studying that one in context asap. Re your last comment, the presenter well covered how that all worked in her day.
I just read the entire RnH article which you quoted a portion of in your comment. So the "Br Smith" had asked her questions re her reception of the health reform message as she had put it forth in more than one expose and she was answering him as to how she received this particular message. She was not giving a defence for how she wrote down any other messages. Just for this particular health message. So in context she is saying that when she first received from God light on it she wrote what she had been shown. Later she checked others materials parts of which she found harmonised with what she was shown and after reading these she wrote further on the subject and, as she stated, borrowed heavily from these other harmonious materials. Hope that helps. Definently worth reading that whole RnH article for context.
It’s not right to apply today’s standard on writers of her time. Without a clear understanding of the norms of her time, it is disingenuous to make accusations. In this context I would expect that borrowed text to express your own thoughts would become your own.
I agree 💯 with you. Recommending books was not enough when she copied them on an industrial scale, in fact whole books, not mentioning once the sources. Yes, it was a forced admission for the GC to be eased of the plagiarism allegation 😂
@@kristicooper1435 Bible writers weren’t transcriptionists. Revelations 4 shows that John wrote what he saw, not transcribed word for word what he was told to write. If you read different books of the Bible with different authors, you realize the different personalities of the writers. If Bible writers were just transcribing, you wouldn’t get this.
14:00 I believe Pastor Bohr is actually referring to her use of Geikie and recommendation of Geikie in SIGNS OF THE TIMES, Dec. 14, 1882. It is in this same recommendation, that she recommends Conybeare and Howson's LIFE OF PAUL. And a formal recommendation from Ellen White was published multiple times: "The Life of St. Paul by Conybeare and Howson, I regard as a book of great merit, and one of rare usefulness to the earnest student of the New Testament history" (SIGNS OF THE TIMES, Nov. 30, 1882, p. 540; Dec. 21, 1882, p. 577; Feb. 22, 1883, p. 96; March 1, 1883, p. 101; May 10, 1883, p. 209.).
She recommended "Deabegna? Is that spelling correct? I'd like to research this a little because I get this plagiarism argument A LOT. IS that spelling correct? Deabegna? - Like at 11:55 or so?
D'Aubigne. While urging upon all the duty of first bringing their offerings to God, I would not wholly condemn the practice of making Christmas and New Years gifts to our friends. It is right to bestow upon one another tokens of love and remembrance if we do not in this forget God, our best friend. We should make our gifts such as will prove a real benefit to the receiver. I would recommend such books as will be an aid in understanding the word of God, or that will increase our love for its precepts. Provide something to be read during these long winter evenings. For those who can procure it, D’Aubigne’s History of the Reformation will be both interesting and profitable. From this work we may gain some knowledge of what has been accomplished in the past in the great work of reform. We can see how God poured light into the minds of those who searched his word, how much the men ordained and sent forth by him were willing to suffer for the truth’s sake, and how hard it is for the great mass of mankind to renounce their errors and to receive and obey the teachings of the Scriptures. During the winter evenings, when our children were young, we read from this history with the deepest interest. We made it a practice to read instructive and interesting books, with the Bible, in the family circle, and our children were always happy as we thus entertained them. Thus we prevented a restless desire to be out in the street with young companions, and at the same time cultivated in them a taste for solid reading. { RH December 26, 1882, par. 18 }
Jean-Henri Merle d'Aubigné.... yes she quoted from his work
I’m confused. Ellen White specifically claimed many, many times that what she wrote came directly from God. She didn’t claim she was just using common cultural phrases or sayings.
You can’t claim the Bible writers are borrowing from each other. The Bible has one author, God.
“Although I am as dependent upon the Spirit of the Lord in writing my views as I am in receiving them, yet the words I employ in describing what I have seen are MY OWN, unless they be those spoken to me by an angel, which I ALWAYS ENCLOSE IN MARKS OF QUOTATION.” - Review and Herald, Oct 8, 1867, quoted in Selected Messages, Vol 1, p.37
She gave credit to her “angel”, but she only gave credit to the people she stole from when they pressed her to do so.
Re her your first paragraph: The presenter here showed that there were times when she did copy and gave reasons for it. He explained that pretty thoroughly.
Re the Bible writers, he also explained that pretty well. They did copy each others and extra biblical writers in conveying meaning and messages they were inspired with. This fact detracts nothing from Gods overall inspirational authorship of Scripture.
Re the quote from selected messages, I look frwd to studying that one in context asap.
Re your last comment, the presenter well covered how that all worked in her day.
I just read the entire RnH article which you quoted a portion of in your comment. So the "Br Smith" had asked her questions re her reception of the health reform message as she had put it forth in more than one expose and she was answering him as to how she received this particular message. She was not giving a defence for how she wrote down any other messages. Just for this particular health message. So in context she is saying that when she first received from God light on it she wrote what she had been shown. Later she checked others materials parts of which she found harmonised with what she was shown and after reading these she wrote further on the subject and, as she stated, borrowed heavily from these other harmonious materials.
Hope that helps. Definently worth reading that whole RnH article for context.
It’s not right to apply today’s standard on writers of her time. Without a clear understanding of the norms of her time, it is disingenuous to make accusations. In this context I would expect that borrowed text to express your own thoughts would become your own.
I agree 💯 with you. Recommending books was not enough when she copied them on an industrial scale, in fact whole books, not mentioning once the sources. Yes, it was a forced admission for the GC to be eased of the plagiarism allegation 😂
@@kristicooper1435 Bible writers weren’t transcriptionists. Revelations 4 shows that John wrote what he saw, not transcribed word for word what he was told to write. If you read different books of the Bible with different authors, you realize the different personalities of the writers. If Bible writers were just transcribing, you wouldn’t get this.
Just because someone has taken something does not permit you to do so.
14:00 I believe Pastor Bohr is actually referring to her use of Geikie and recommendation of Geikie in SIGNS OF THE TIMES, Dec. 14, 1882. It is in this same recommendation, that she recommends Conybeare and Howson's LIFE OF PAUL. And a formal recommendation from Ellen White was published multiple times: "The Life of St. Paul by Conybeare and Howson, I regard as a book of great merit, and one of rare usefulness to the earnest student of the New Testament history" (SIGNS OF THE TIMES, Nov. 30, 1882, p. 540; Dec. 21, 1882, p. 577; Feb. 22, 1883, p. 96; March 1, 1883, p. 101; May 10, 1883, p. 209.).
So, you are saying Ellen's claims are at the equal standing with the bible?
She recommended "Deabegna? Is that spelling correct? I'd like to research this a little because I get this plagiarism argument A LOT. IS that spelling correct? Deabegna? - Like at 11:55 or so?
D'Aubigne. While urging upon all the duty of first bringing their offerings to God, I would not wholly condemn the practice of making Christmas and New Years gifts to our friends. It is right to bestow upon one another tokens of love and remembrance if we do not in this forget God, our best friend. We should make our gifts such as will prove a real benefit to the receiver. I would recommend such books as will be an aid in understanding the word of God, or that will increase our love for its precepts. Provide something to be read during these long winter evenings. For those who can procure it, D’Aubigne’s History of the Reformation will be both interesting and profitable. From this work we may gain some knowledge of what has been accomplished in the past in the great work of reform. We can see how God poured light into the minds of those who searched his word, how much the men ordained and sent forth by him were willing to suffer for the truth’s sake, and how hard it is for the great mass of mankind to renounce their errors and to receive and obey the teachings of the Scriptures. During the winter evenings, when our children were young, we read from this history with the deepest interest. We made it a practice to read instructive and interesting books, with the Bible, in the family circle, and our children were always happy as we thus entertained them. Thus we prevented a restless desire to be out in the street with young companions, and at the same time cultivated in them a taste for solid reading. { RH December 26, 1882, par. 18 }