The Plagiarism Charge Refuted: A Response to "Testing the Adventist Prophet" - Part 1
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 сен 2024
- NEXT:
The Plagiarism Charge Refuted: A Response to "Testing the Adventist Prophet" - Part 2: What the Critics Fail to Mention (Coming Soon)
____________________________________________________________________________________
One of the greatest mistakes of the critics is that they think there is only one mode of inspiration, the revelatory or "vision mode," such as the prophets Daniel or Nathan receiving visions and/or dreams, or the apostle Paul hearing and seeing Jesus speak to him. However, Pastor Kevin Morgan, author of “White Lie Soap,” points to various other biblical examples of inspiration besides the vision mode, highlighting how they parallel the modes used by characters in the Bible and showing how effective these modes are in communicating God's truths.
Thank you for viewing the Introduction to our video series on the plagiarism charge. In this video we continue our response to a video titled "Testing the Adventist Prophet" (click here: • Testing Ellen White's ... . Our narrator Pastor Kevin Morgan responds to a few points along with laying down some more fundamental principles needed to have a proper understanding of this important subject.
First, that the narrator of "Testing the Adventist Prophet" has a misunderstanding of the phrase "Spirit of Prophecy." Ellen White is not "the spirit of prophecy" as much as Paul, Elijah or the prophet Nathan were not "the spirit of prophecy." The Spirit of Prophecy is the Holy Spirit, not the human instruments the Holy Spirit is using. Therefore, it is the Holy Spirit which Adventists hold in high esteem, while respect the instruments He uses.
Second, Walter Rea commits the either/or fallacy (also known as False Dilemma). In his book he highlights either divine dictations or borrowings from others. But although even Bible authors have borrowed from others in their own writings (see our Introduction video) and although there has been times when God does dictate words (such as the Ten Commandments) yet Rea fails to write in his book that there are other methods of inspiration. Such methods include the very little realized "divine guidance" (which may be named differently by other scholars). Simply put, God can indeed, and has often done, inspire authors to research and collect phrase and words to best describe their visions. Examples include Luke 1:1-4, Eccl. 12:9-11 and 2 Kings 14:9, among others. Unfortunately, the narrator of "Testing the Adventist Prophet," who admits to reading Rea's book, follows Rea's methodology and commits this fallacy also.
In the third section, Pastor Kevin Morgan explains in brief some methodology Ellen White used when putting together her writings. Our next video will explain this more in detail. And finally, we learned that while Walter Rea seemed concerned that Ellen White would not credit her sources, he, ironically, felt no need to give credit to the primary individual who provided the exhibits for his book--Bruce Weaver, who is still friends with Kevin Morgan, the presenter.
Enjoy this episode.
___________________________________________________________________
REFUTATIONS BY PASTOR KEVIN MORGAN:
Chapter 7 of White Lie Soap: Affirming Ellen White's Integrity, by Pastor Kevin Morgan
www.academia.e...
Chapter 8 of White Lie Soap: Cleaning Up the Friendly Fire, by Pastor Kevin Morgan
www.academia.e...
Plagiarism: A Historical and Cultural Survey, by Pastor Kevin Morgan
www.ministryma...
Was Ellen White a Plagiarist? by Pastor Kevin Morgan
www.ministryma...
Please see our Introduction video for more resources.
__________________________________________________
The Advent Defense League is dedicated to providing sound refutations of arguments against biblical truths which Adventists hold dear through articles, books, social media and videos. We also provide training in apologetics. Visit our websites: adventistdefen.... To train in apologetics, join our apologetics training club at: / adventistdefenseleague
CREDITS
_Pastor Kevin Morgan, author of White Lie Soap.
_Bruce Weaver II, main contributor to Rea's book who never received credit from Rea.
_Tim Poirier, Vice-Director of the White Estate Inc.
_THE CONFLICT BEAUTIFUL podcast.
_Edwin M. Cotto, Director of the Advent Defense League.
_Mixkit.co
_Bensounds.com
Part 2 has been uploaded. Please see: ruclips.net/video/WjPvu6Xvl-g/видео.html
Thanks
Do you guys know the ghost behind that video?
@@c19comandante57 we don’t know him. We have emailed him and he has responded, but has not identified himself.
@@AdventDefenseLeague - Interesting . I wonder why they hide behind YT accounts.
Wow, it's really true what former sda claim about current sda. I've heard time and time again that when sda are confronted with opposition that their line of defense is to degrade the the person personally or attempt to take the value of the content down by showing someone's attitude or I'll will. It does not matter the intent or ill will of the accuser if the content is valid.
The testimony of the friend clearly stated Walter's intention to protect his friend yet he still gave him some credit. The obvious sense of the testimony is the friend is now slandering Walter as well as the sda speaker today. I wonder why?
You should face the accusations not the intent of the opposition. The intent of the opposition does not change the content.
Spirit of Prophecy = Ellen G. White. Ask any Seventh-day Adventist Member and they will say so. If I raise my hand today, saying that I received the Spirit of Prophecy, the SDA Church will never accept that. In the same way, the SDA Church does not accept ANY other person that claimed or may claim received the Spirit of Prophecy from other churches over the last 150 years.
Individual members can say different things, but to which of the established 28 Fundamental Beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church could you point to to support the claim you've made in your comment?
@@AdventDefenseLeague Many people in the Adventist Church have claimed the Spirit of Prophecy and have been rejected as heretics.
According to the White Estate Ellen White is an infallible interpreter of scripture .
When will the Seventh Day Adventist Church accept the writers Ellen copied as having authority equal to Ellen White.
Desire of Ages is totally copied from other writers and most Adventists have been fooled into thinking Ellen White wrote it. Studies show people will not follow leaders they believe they can't trust and this is why the Adventist Church can not be honest.
Adventists have to repent from this deceit
@@barryford1482 you wrote:
// According to the White Estate Ellen White is an infallible interpreter of scripture //
Cite the passage and location where the White Estate made this claim. I'd like to see it.
@@AdventDefenseLeagueA statement by Robert Olson and he said the writings of Ellen White is equal to the writings of Paul .
I remember some prominent Adventists have claimed Ellen is an infallible interpreter of scripture.
You must know there are SDA meetings where nothing but Ellen is used replacing scripture and in the weekly lesson Ellen is used far more than scripture.
To compare this with how other churches operate I'm now Anglican and only scripture is used. We only use small books authored by the Priest with questions to challenge us to think about the scriptures we are studying in prayer meetings. and only scripture is used in Church the only exception is the creeds Nicesan and Apostles
@@barryford1482 we've already responded to this claim by Olson here: ruclips.net/video/klqN8joukgY/видео.html
Either way, we have 28 fundamental beliefs that does not say that.
I'm curious...what part of Hebrews 1:1-4 do we misunderstand when it comes to last day prophets? Aren't the words of Jesus in the Gospels sufficient to receive comfort, edification, and exhortation? As for Ellen pointing folk to the Bible, she certainly missed the mark re: the shut door, health reform, and eschatology, to name a few. Perhaps it's time to rethink the crutch of Ellen (the cataleptic, hysteric, ecstatic) and return to the Bible, and the Bible alone, as the rule and guide to our faith and practice.
You also have been dupe. that Dr title looks bad on you mister. makes you look dumb.
If Hebrews meant what you take it to mean, then Revelation is disqualified.
I understand that you used to be an Adventist, which makes it surprising that you don't understand the biblical basis for the closing of one door and the opening of another in the heavenly sanctuary, the care of one's health as the temple of the Holy Spirit, and the biblical view of last-day events.
@@kevinmorgan_truthyou are idiot
How do I access Bruce Weavers complete audio file. It is not where the video said it was. Part of the file is at 16:27 into this video. GOD BLESS.
I didn't understand the point of Kevin Morgan's comments in Section 1 "The Spirit of Prophecy". It seemed to be a disagreement that was an agreement. Sure the Spirit of Prophecy is the Holy Spirit. But when Adventists use that phrase they are specifically referring to the work and ministry of Ellen White. Which is the point Test the Prophet is making. Kevin's explanations demonstrated that.
The official stance of the Adventist Church as seen on their website, is that the phrase "Spirit of Prophecy" represents the gift of the Holy Spirit manifesting the prophetic gift among God's people in all ages, and the EGW was simply one of those blessed with this gift.
@@AdventDefenseLeague So then Test the Prophet hasn’t misunderstood the phrase “spirit of prophecy” as your video description and Kevin Morgan claim. When Adventists use that language they are talking about Ellen White. It is not taken as simply a general reference to the Holy Spirit. Unless Adventists think only Adventists have the Holy Spirit, there is more being claimed. That’s the whole point behind the argument that it is an identifying mark of the remnant. And when Adventists talk among their own circles that is the language they use and mean when they say “Spirit of Prophecy says” such and such. The hearer doesn't think the one who uses it is referring to Paul, or John, or any other biblical prophet. It is used specifically for Ellen White's writings.
@@DanielnKitavi I was an SDA for many years, and whenever I would hear people within the church say, 'Spirit of Prophecy', I always took it as being a reference to Ellen White.
@@7kardia750 Even when you look at some of Ellen White's writings they are published under the name "Spirit of Prophecy Vol 1" 2, 3 etc.
@@DanielnKitavi Yes, the point is this: the WRITINGS and not Ellen White herself (as Test the Prophet implies) are referred to as "the Spirit of Prophecy" because they are an inspired message from THE SPIRIT OF PROPHECY, which is the Holy Spirit.
I want to buy the book but its sold out on amazon
10:8
Here Adventist admit un-logically that Ellen G. White was taking sources of other people "to make it more meaningfull"
While "Test the Prophet", showed sentence by sentence, that Ellen G. White was saying the same things that other people told, even things that have no sigificant religious or faith matter, also was coppied by Ellen G. White - as also some commentors under this films also rightfully pointed out by giving some examples.
The fact that Ellen G. White copied even stuff that are un-cessesary for Adventist matter of faith, make false and void this "defense" that Ellen G. White is justyfied in her source of inspirtation.
Can you provide an example of something she supposedly copied that was "unnecessary for Adventist matters of faith?"
@@AdventDefenseLeague Stolen narration of the story of Daniel March about Disciples relation and with deatils to meeting with Risen Christ. The dails that scripture don't contain, are same vision Daniel March contained - she put same narration with slightly diffrent order of text and it's usless for your doctrine.
Silence.... 🤔
Adventism has its own multiverse. Which is funny. Go to ANY Sabbath School Class, in any corner of the planet where the SDA has a church planted, raise your hand, and ask any SDA member to describe what the Spirit of the Prophet is. All of them, 100% will say Ellen G. White. Now, the guy from this video wishes in his dreams to convince whoever is NOT an SDA member that the pure understanding of the SDA church (that is purely represented by its members) relates to the Spirit of Prophecy as "something" that can be stretched among many other bothers and sisters of our time.
The "Continuing and Authoritative", words are very well placed inside the SDA Creed - Sorry, Beliefs - The SDA church believes that the REAL, VALID, and AUTHENTIC Spirit of prophecy was only manifested in Ellen White's Ministry and it will be, the final representation of this gift. Elle White was a fraud since the beginning, but it amaze me that in 2023, 2024, SDAs are planning to distribute 1 Billion books of the Great Controversy, not 1 Billion Bibles (which would be normal for a Christian church)... which tells a lot about how important EGW is for the sustainability of a church that loses 4 of ea. 10 and that is getting old...
The current financial situation of the SDA church will bring the organization to a breaking point, AS Dr. Trim has been alerting about for so many years but Ted is like his father...and worse than that, the guy can't understand that we are not in the 90s... One more point. The NAD has only 72 days of the operating budget. They can't afford to lose white Americans (high-dollar churches), they pray every day for the government never to crack down on immigrants (primarily in the south) or 43% of the churches will be wiped out, they can't afford any fluctuation on Tithes and offerings, Andrews is not providing good quality pastors (and a great part of the students are internationals who will come back to their countries) 4 of each 10 churches have NO senior pastor and there is a program for part-time volunteer lay-led pastors for 30% of the SDA churches in 7 conferences because these churches can't reach the minimum threshold for a full-time salary.
So what is the cheapest way.... yes... EGW... the cheapest route to a generation and demographic group that doesn't even know what the acronym SDA means. 79% of the GC delegates are over 65 years old... EGW is the last option.... flying lions and beasts are not working anymore, Doug Bachelour is one of the top refuted SDA preachers on RUclips, Hope Channel is a disaster, and SDA in Canada is alive because is connected to the respirators... I can keep going.....
The breaking point is coming and the choice will be to stay with EGW or kick her out... by the way, the guys from 1916 didn't have the B*** to do it. Your youtube channel is just a towel covering something that smells very bad.
Gish Gallop Fallacy, emotionalism, and no proof of any of the stated supposed facts and statistics. Morgan points to scripture and what the church has published, regardless of what a few misguided members might say. You haven't been to every church planted on the planet to prove your claim (another fallacy). You seem upset. However, this is not a venue to rant complaints and grievances. I don't care about many asterisks you put into the word, its still cussing. Para que Possamos... please be angry elsewhere. Thanks.
@@AdventDefenseLeague good luck 🤞
@@paraquepossamos I don't believe in luck. Thanks anyway.
@paraquepossamos: Love your statement, filled with TRUTH! SDA's hate truth, they would rather hold onto a lie and end up in the hell they say does not exist than to love truth and be a true child of God through Christ!
I don’t agree with your conclusion of Rev. 19:10, regarding ‘the spirit of prophecy.’ In saying, ‘the spirit of prophecy is the gift of prophecy’, you are saying something other than what John said. John stated, the “testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” He did not say, 'the gift of prophecy’, but ‘the testimony of Jesus’.
Compare this to Jesus’ words, “You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me.” John 5:39 (NKJV) Compare also to Revelation 14:12, which informs us that God’s people keep the “faith of Jesus.” This idea of keeping ‘the faith of Jesus’ also ties in with Revelation 12:17, which essentially says the same thing but uses the expression ‘testimony of Jesus’.
Interestingly, both Rev. 14:12 and 12:17 speak of God’s people as those who keep His commandments. What this then means is God’s people are not only keepers of His commandments, but they also have the faith of Jesus/testimony of Jesus. Thus, just as Jesus is at the very heart of the Scriptures, given to us by inspiration of God (see 2Tim. 3:16), He is also in the heart of every child of God (see Gal. 2:20; John 1:12; 14:15; 15:9,10).
You appear to be reading meaning into John’s words to fit the Seventh-day Adventist narrative that God’s remnant church will manifest the gift of prophecy. Or to put it another way, you appear to be saying God’s remnant church, which you believe is the Seventh-day Adventist Church, would be known for having a ‘prophet’. You acknowledge this gift as having been manifested in Ellen White.
In saying, “the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy”, I believe John was making a declaration about Jesus being at the very heart of the work of the Holy Spirit (see John 16:1-15) . I don’t believe John’s words were meant to be taken as a prediction that God’s remnant church will manifest the gift of prophecy through Ellen White.
Comparing Rev. 12:17 with Rev. 19:10 reveals that the "testimony of Jesus" (Rev. 12:17) is the "spirit of prophecy" (Rev. 19:10). That's what the angel told John. We prefer to let the bible explain the bible.
@@AdventDefenseLeague you apparently did not comprehend what I shared with you.
@@7kardia750 yes, you tried to parallel "faith of Jesus" with "testimony of Jesus." That methodology only works when a clear definition is absent. Rev. 19:10 clearly defines the "testimony of Jesus" as the "spirit of prophecy." I'm not going to now say, opps, actually it's something else.
But you can do that if you'd like though.
@@AdventDefenseLeague I believe you are missing the point John was making. In your video, you are suggesting John essentially said the 'spirit of prophecy is the gift of prophecy.' 1:44 - 2:33 But that is not what he said in Rev. 19:10. He said, 'the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.' I believe you are reading meaning into John's words that isn't there.
@@7kardia750 well three chapters later in Revelation we read Rev. 22:9, which mentions "thy brethren the PROPHETS." Pastor Morgan quoted this text in conjunction with 12:17 and 19:10, to say that the Spirit of prophecy is the gift of prophecy. "Prophets" manifest this gift. When the Holy Spirit was poured out upon the disciples in Acts 2, they manifested the Spirit of prophecy, as was prophesied in Joel 2. Paul himself speaks of many spiritual "gifts," one of them being "prophecy."
1 Corinthians 1:4-7 NKJV - I thank my God always concerning you for the grace of God which was given to you by Christ Jesus, that you were enriched in everything by Him in all utterance and all knowledge, even as the TESTIMONY OF CHRIST was confirmed in you, so that you come short in no GIFT, eagerly waiting for the revelation of our Lord Jesus Christ. (Compare with 12:28-31, 13:1-2, and Rev. 19:10).
Hence, the Spirit of the "prophets" manifested in them the "gift of prophecy." I see no issue here.
Let's think about this: Ellen said several things about her writings, which will leave the typical numb-minded automaton confused. 1) Her writings are not to be above the Bible; 2) the "Testimonies" (which are entirely of divine revelation, and therefore, equal to Scripture) must be either wholly accepted or rejected; 3) Her writings must be laid aside and the Bible only is to be studied and understood. So, Ellen, which one is it?
PS: All the shuffling thru her writings to "prove" a point -- despite the attempt at differentiation from the Mormons, Christian Scientists, etc. -- is very cult-like....bad idea. Here's the rub: SDA => LDS => ______. (You can fill in the blank.)
Adventist dont believe that EW writings are above or equal to the BIBLE as you put it. you are so delusional that you say lies and dont even realize it.
Let me invite you to one of our LIVE Zoom meetings we have every week in our ADL Group, which airs on RUclips as well. I'd like to talk about this comment you made here. It will make for a great conversation and opportunity to clear up some misconceptions embedded in it, typical of what I always see in critical arguments like yours. What do you say?
@@AdventDefenseLeague -Has the doctor responded to your invitation ?
There you go mister,a special invitation for you to speak your mind. waiting on you sport.
@@c19rebelmax52 not yet.
ADL wrote: In the upcoming videos we will continue the responses and little by little get more and more specific. TTP did not lay a strong biblical foundation first as he should have. All he did was compare quotations here and there but failed to explain the Bible's various methods of inspiration, along with failing to explain how the biblical prophets wrote. This is exactly what Rea did, and it is not a scholarly method of teaching. And your insistence for us to also jump right into the specifics without first laying down some important fundamental principles demonstrates that you are following the wrong method too. How ironic therefore the name, "Christian Scholars Forum."
We at the ADL, however, did lay a strong biblical foundation with the Introduction video we made, along with this one. We have a little more to go and then we'll get into some more specifics. Enjoy the show and thanks for commenting!
PASTOR KEVIN MORGAN writing: Intervening responsibilities have delayed the rest of the videos.
Seriously though…. are you for real? Test the Prophet sat with open Books and showed you word for word what she plagiarized from others. Are you blind are you in denial or dissonance? Can you not hear nor see? how can you refute that?
Ironically you are ignoring my comments in your other posts. Is that on purpose?
Watch out for upcoming videos where we will respond more directly to those moments when he had his open books.
@@AdventDefenseLeague This is Esmie, actually we have not recognized any comments on our other post we would be happy to address them, which channel and under which video? You can also email us directly if you wish, or phone call.
@@scienceofsalvationfamilymi8887 Hello Esmie. When I wrote "your other posts" I meant his posts here, on this video... not posts on other videos. He, as is usual of critics, came on here posting comments littered with emotional instead of addressing specific points in this video. We at the ADL do not have time for tit-for-tats. Time is short. If you have a point in the video you'd like to respond to, let's hear it quickly.
In the future we can certainly set up a meeting to discuss doctrine. It would be a first if a critic actually does it, as I typically get denied the request to do that. Zoom meetings are best. I don't give out my personal phone number to critics, as I've been harassed by critics in the past.
ADL
We believe people need to understand the fundamentals before looking at specifics. That's why, hopefully, you learned the letters of the alphabet in school before learning to sound out words and then to read sentences. I am aware that some people fell through the cracks because of changes in educational philosophy and never learned how to sound out words. That makes reading new words more difficult. If you can reason by analogy, you will grasp why we have taken this approach. We'll get to the specifics soon enough. Seriously. 🙂
Blessings
15:20 - 19:03 Two wrongs don't make a right. That Walter Rea didn't give credit does not lessen the wrongdoing of Ellen White, who didn't give credit to authors whose writings she used in her own books.
We did not claim that if Rea was guiltless so was EGW. We simply pointed out the irony of Rea's lack of giving credit, which the critics love to praise.
I agree with you that two wrongs do not make one right. The issue with Ellen White is that she has ADAPTED wording in giving her own account, so wherein should she give credit? Should she say, "I used someone else's beautiful thought gem, but now I have reworded it so it isn't the same thought gem"? That's rather awkward. Do you want her to give credit for using other works on the life of Christ to fill in details of history that are generally common knowledge, footnoting it saying, "Several authors point out that Jewish boys were required to go to Jerusalem when they reached 12 years of age" or "the fact that Pilate's wife was not a Jew is noted by several authors" or "contrary to what I have written that Jesus wrote in the sand the sins of those present, Geikie says that what Jesus wrote in the sand were the words He was presently going to speak"?
Walter Rea ironically is faulting Ellen White for not giving credit to her sources, when giving credit would be awkward at best, but he never mentions that he is not responsible for finding the examples in the book that bears his name. That is the point.
Walter Rea himself admitted that his book the white lies has errors. so why you hanging your faith in a man who has admitted that his books is full of LIES. can you explain that?
@@c19comandante57 where did he say his book is full of lies? Please provide evidence. Seems you might be the one lying here.
This is how Adventist apologists and theologians, pastors explain away the EGW plagiarism issue with proof-texts as pretext for her lifelong habit. You cannot silence the truth!
If true, do you know of anyone managing to take her or the estate to court on this matter?
@@SomeChristianGuy.
It is true, however, the decision to accept Ellen White as genuine prophet or reject her as a false prophet, based on solid evidence, is an individual's choice. The church is in a great controversy since 1980, over this most devisive issue. I believe, if this were to be taken to the court, the church would lose.
@@christopherpitta3803 unfortunately by your method of interpretation regarding this matter, various biblical authors would lose in a court of law as well. But with a careful look at a few bible examples, a clear understandstanding of how inspiration actually works (realizing that there is more than one method, not just visions and dreams), and the legal conclusions reached by (Catholic, and thus unbiased) attorney Vincent Ramick, the verdict has always been, and continues to be, NOT GUILTY, for all parties involved.
@@christopherpitta3803
Based on what mate?
According to my research, this issue has actually been assessed by copyright lawyers with a Catholic persuasion so as to avoid conflict of interest and bias accusations. Their determination was that the charge is baseless and that no sane lawyer would actually take it to court in the first place, let alone win. I forget the name of the lawfirm offhand.
Edit: Adventist Defence league mentions the lawfirm above.
So unless someone has verifiable information to the contrary, as far as I can tell the only reason this accusation exists is because of type of brainless bias typical of the internet which keeps conspiracies on life support because it suits agendas, much like the kind which you find amongst atheists who still believe in the Draper and White revisionist history of the conflict between Christianity and Science.
I could care less about whether people like Adventists or not since as you say each must make up his own mind, but we should recognise the great irony and stupidity of charging others of moral failings whilst ourselves doing so on the basis of a lie.
Its demented.
Subjective opinions are welcomed, as this is an open forum, but please come back with some actual critique responding to contents in the video. That will help produce a more meaningful discussion.
Awesome. I have refuted pastors of other denominations on this issue by using other points of argument. I thank you for your materials I have downloaded before as a resource to counter those who attack our faith's perspectives.
Thanks for viewing! There are still pending responses as we continue to produce these videos, some of which you might have used also. Please also see our Introductory video to this series as well (ruclips.net/video/rB-Wt5dVDKk/видео.html). Blessings!
Please see the the next video, just uploaded: ruclips.net/video/WjPvu6Xvl-g/видео.html
Have you read THE RAMIK REPORT ? is is very interesting. there is also a interview with one of the Ramik Attorneys . just be ready when you bring that out to former adventist and EW haters. they will start saying that the GC paid the ramik lawyers to lie to cover up things. steve daily. on his face book page claims that the ramik law firm lawyers were bought and paid to lies. thats all they can say when one brings up the ramik report.
@@AdventDefenseLeague -Great job. thanks for the videos.
@@c19comandante57 thanks for commenting! Please subscribe. We will be releasing more of these videos within the next few weeks.
Keep it up ADL! Spread the Truth!
Thanks! We should be releasing the next video in 2 to 3 days. Stay tuned! Please "subscribe." ! 🙏
Please see the the next video, just uploaded: ruclips.net/video/WjPvu6Xvl-g/видео.html
Rebuttal to Refutation: 5. Typhographical errors?
Did Sodom exist before the flood? this was what she said: "He (Enoch) did not make his abode with the wicked. he did not locate in Sodom, thinking to save Sodom" (Ms 42, 1900.10).
Did Enoch preach alongside Noah? "...while the ark was in building, the voices of Noah, Enoch, and many others were heard in warning and entreaty" (Australian conference Record, vol.v, September 15, 1902).
6. Extra-Biblical details: Were thy inspired? Without exception, all the extra details of the biblical narratives were copied from uninspired sources.
Temptation lasted for 40 days or six weeks? "...and for nearly six weeks resisted temptation" (CD, 186, 1938). Others have said:
George Dana Boardman (1828-1903) "During the long period of nearly six weeks the devil was doubtless ceaselessly tempting him" (The divine man from the nativity to the temptation, p. 270, 1887).
Charles H. Spurgeon (1834-1892) "Six weeks of temptation...but it lasted for nearly six weeks" (Luke 4, sermon delivered at the Metropolitan Tabernacle, Newington, August 15, 1889).
Was John thrown into the boiling cauldron? This has no authentic proof. It was handed down as a historical legend. John would surely have mentioned it if it were true.
Adam was with Eve when she was tempted says the Bible. That's the end of argument.
It was John Milton who developed the idea that they had separated against the instruction by the angels!
About Mary being taken away from the nailing of Jesus and the dogs feeding upon the mortal remains of Judas, were plagiarised from The prince of the House of David, 1855, Ingraham.
So God permitted all this plagiarised stuff as inspired!
>"John would surely have mentioned it if it were true." -- Why? Because you want him to brag about it?
>"Adam was with Eve when she was tempted says the Bible. " -- Nope; you are reading that INTO the text. It also makes Adam look like a wimp. Do you really mean to say that Adam allowed Eve to listen to the wiles of Satan and then take the fruit and eat?
>"It was John Milton who developed the idea that they had separated against the instruction by the angels!" -- Where? EXACTLY? I have his book and have read it. He says a lot of things that EGW did NOT. How did she know what was truth and what was not?
>"About Mary being taken away from the nailing of Jesus and the dogs feeding upon the mortal remains of Judas, were plagiarised from The prince of the House of David, 1855, Ingraham. " -- Prove it. You can tell us the date the book was published, but not the page? WHY? BTW, I just checked. on page 396, it leaves us with Jesus on the Cross. Then on page 397, it BEGINS with the 3rd morning after the crucifixion.
>"Extra-Biblical details: Were thy inspired? Without exception, all the extra details of the biblical narratives were copied from uninspired sources." -- Do you have proof that they were NOT inspired?
Do consider the metaphorical use of Sodom in Scripture: Lam. 4:6; Zeph. 2:9; Rev. 11:9.
On the next one, you are 120 years too late in catching this mistake. The point of the passage is that Noah wasn't the only one who spoke about God to that perverse generation. Many of the patriarchs who died before the flood did so.
God determined to purify the world by a flood; but in mercy and love He gave the antediluvians a probation of one hundred and twenty years. During this time, while the ark was in building, the voices of Noah, Enoch [Methuselah], and many others were heard in warning and entreaty. And every blow struck on the ark was a warning message. {AUCR September 15, 1902, par. 8}
If you had posted in the video about the 50 supposed contradictions, you would have seen that I gave the references in Scripture that point to a full 40 days of temptation with the other video.
Here are the two verses that describe Jesus' temptation during the 40 days in the wilderness. “And he was there in the wilderness forty days, tempted of Satan; and was with the wild beasts; and the angels ministered unto him” (Mark 1:13). “And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, being forty days tempted of the devil. And in those days he did eat nothing: and when they were ended, he afterward hungered. And the devil said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, command this stone that it be made bread” (Luke 4:2, 3).
A COPYRIGHT LAW FIRM DEBUNKS WALTER REA, HERE IS THE STORY:Now let’s take Walter Rea. He reads Ellen White and says: I found a certain phrase here, a certain paragraph there, and it came from this predecessor. Well, that’s not proof; that’s assumption. And I think the first step in any accurate critique is to go back to the real original-it might be Virgil, Homer, the Bible. Because how do you know it was original with the predecessor-how do you know he did not get it from someone else who, in turn, got it from still another earlier someone else? Didn’t Solomon say, “There is no new thing under the sun”?
Review: In your legal opinion, Mr. Ramik, you pointed out that many of the works Mrs. White is accused of “stealing” were, in fact, not copyrighted by either author or publisher, and were, therefore, in the public domain-were thus public property. You went on, further, to point out that even if they had been copyrighted, Ellen White’s use of these materials fell well within the carefully prescribed boundaries of “fair use,” as defined by the law of her day. One contemporary critic, however, raises the question of ethics and propriety: Was it moral for Ellen White to borrow heavily from other people’s literary productions and not, at least, acknowledge the sources? Would you care to respond to the question of ethics here?
Ramik: Well, yes. Walter Rea has publicly said (and I’ve listened to the cassette recording of one of his presentations and then read the verbatim transcript carefully) that there is nothing “moral” in a purely legal definition of plagiarism. Of course, elsewhere, he attacks Mrs. White on moral grounds, on ethical use of others’ materials. Well, first, he’s totally wrong in saying there’s no element of morality in the charge of plagiarism. H. M. Paull, who wrote Literary Ethics about 1928, is still today a recognized authority on the subject. Incidentally, while he never came right out and defined “plagiarism” in his book (because, as I said a moment ago, “plagiarism,” per se, is not a crime), he does contrast plagiarism with piracy. The literary pirate does not care whether he gets caught; but the plagiarist worries that he will be found out. (And you say there’s no element of morality involved in plagiarism!) Incidentally, to accuse Ellen White of plagiarizing Conybeare & Howson’s uncopyrighted Life of Paul is absurd, if for no other reason than the fact that she publicly urged her readers to get a copy and read it for themselves.
But the fact that she copied other materials and use them as her own and then claiming to be she had seen them from vision is the real issue.
@@savebygrace5140 Baseless. call it what you want.EW was no PLAGIARIST . Its a LEGAL OPINION of a COPYRIGHT LAWYER. and EW haters are acting like they are COPYRIGHT EXPERTS.
@@c19rebelmax52you are dumb
Rebuttal to Refutation: (Spirit of prophecy)
1. The proof-texts from Revelation do not refer to Ellen White. Spirit of prophecy is not her writings, but the prophetic writings of the bible prophets, and in this context, the revelation of Jesus to prophet John, who was to bear testimony to these things, and in wider context, every believer who testifies of Jesus has the spirit of prophecy. There is no prediction for a female prophet for the last days. Moses predicted Jesus to be the last of the prophets:
"The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken" (Deuteronomy 18:15), which was fulfilled as we in Hebrews: "God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son" (Hebrews 1:1, 2). But Ellen white claimed the position of the Son of God:
“In ancient times God spoke to men by the mouth of prophets and apostles. In these days he speaks to them by the testimonies of his Spirit. There was never a time when God more earnestly instructed his people concerning his will, and the course that he would have them pursue, than now” (RH, June 9, 1885.10).
Ellen White: “God has spoken to us through His word. He has spoken to us through the testimonies to the church and through the books… If we disregard them, what excuse can we offer?” (8T, p. 298.1, 1904). (To be continued)
"The proof-texts from Revelation do not refer to Ellen White." This first statement it tells me that you have not watched the video, or else you would not have made it, since in the video Kevin said the very same thing. The phrase "Spirit of Prophecy" is the Holy Spirit, who uses human instruments to manifest that particular gift. Here is the official position of the church:
“For the early Christians the ‘spirit of prophecy’ was a reference to THE HOLY SPIRIT, who imparts the prophetic gift to God’s messengers.” (www.adventist.org/articles/the-gift-of-prophecy)
You then wrote, "every believer who testifies of Jesus has the spirit of prophecy." But again, that is the same thing we are saying. It is as if you do not want to see that we are in agreement. I will quote you Walter Rea: "I do not seek to show those who, having eyes, do not wish to see, or to shout at those who, having ears, do not wish to hear." (The White Lie, page 9).
Then you wrote, "There is no prediction for a female prophet for the last days. Moses predicted Jesus to be the last of the prophets." But the verse you quoted in Deut. does not say that Jesus would be the "last prophet." I'm afraid you eisegetically inserted that presupposition into that text. Hebrews 1:1-2 does say that Jesus was the prophet "in these last days" but "these last days" was during the time the author wrote Hebrews. All the apostles believed they were living in the "last days" during their times (i.e. Romans ). But the evidence that there were prophets after Jesus is seen in Philips four daughters, who were prophets (Acts 21:9) and the following individuals:
Acts 13:1-2 - Now in the church that was at Antioch there were certain prophets and teachers: Barnabas, Simeon who was called Niger, Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen who had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul. As they ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, "Now separate to Me Barnabas and Saul for the work...."
What about in the last days? The following texts prove there will be prophets in the church all the way until Jesus returns: 1 Cor. 1:4-8 (cf. Rev. 19:10), Eph. 4:11-13, 1 Thess. 5:19-23, Rev. 12:17 (cf. Rev. 19:10). In 1 Thess. 5:19, Paul's admonishing to "quench not prophesyings" is an advice to last all the way "unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ" (verse 23). In 1 Cor. 1:46,"the testimony of Christ was confirmed" in them "So that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for THE COMING of our Lord Jesus Christ." And the "testimony of Christ" is "the spirit of prophecy" (Rev. 19:10). Really the only thing critics do with this is accuse us of "proof-texting" (while ironically proof-texting). But these texts are clear. The gift of prophecy will be in the church until Jesus comes.
Finally, is the gift given to females as well? Well, why not? Philips four daughters were obviously female prophets. There is no verse in the scriptures that say only males can be prophets in the last days, and if you have such a verse, make sure to include it in your next comment. Meanwhile, Joel 2:28-29 predicts that both "sons and your DAUGHTERS shall prophesy." Critics are not aware that this prophecy was to be fulfilled twice. Just look at verse 23:
Joel 2:23 - He will cause the rain to come down for you, The former rain, AND the latter rain in the first month.
There are TWO rainings of the spirit of prophecy. We know the first took place at Pentecost (Acts 2:14-17). The second must take place in the last days.
TO BE CONTINUED...
You then wrote, "But Ellen white claimed the position of the Son of God..." following that with a quotation from the RH where she wrote, "In ancient times God spoke to men by the mouth of prophets and apostles. In these days he speaks to them by the testimonies of his Spirit." But that quote does not even indicate that she "claimed the position of the Son of God." Please, try not to inject into these quotes anything they are not saying. That is misleading, and "we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ" to answer for our crimes. In that quote she is simply saying that in the past God used "apostles and prophets" but in the future, these days, He used "the testimonies of his Spirit." In the former she is indirectly quoting Hebrews 1:102, but in the later (and here the critics have eyes but do not see) she is indirectly quoting Rev. 19:10! The issue is that you still think Adventists view HER as the "Spirit of Prophecy" but its not her, nor any human instrument, that is the Spirit of Prophecy. The Spirit of Prophecy is simply the Holy Spirit giving "prophecy" to them.
A closer look at Hebrews 1:1-2 simply reveals that Jesus was the climax of all that was spoken by the prophets, yet it was Jesus himself who said that there will be false prophets in the last days, and that we are to test them (Matt. 7:15, 24:11, 24, 1 John 4:1, Rev. 16:13, 19:20). How much easier to say that there will be absolutely NO true prophets in the last days and thus remove all chances of being deceived, than to give a test by which to try them? The implication is that there will be both the false AND the genuine manifestations of the gift of prophecy, and that God’s people should be ready to put them all to the test. So, its not a wholesale removal of the gift my friend. We are not commanded to reject all manifestations of this gift... rather we are commanded to test them.
I recommend you view my video response to a gentlemen by the name of Allen Parr on this very subject. Be open minded brother, and see the evidence I provide there from the scriptures. If I am wrong I will have to answer for it. But if you are wrong, you have rejected a prophet of the Lord as the ancient Israelites have done time and time again:
ruclips.net/video/klqN8joukgY/видео.html
@@AdventDefenseLeague
Facts are plain not to be mistaken. She did claim equality even with the bible. You are misleading innocent viewers. Why should I be afraid of a false prophet?
@@19818456 I believe I have backed up pretty convincingly my previous two comments. We will let readers decide. But I want you to prove where she "claimed equality with the bible." I'd like to see such a statement.
@@AdventDefenseLeague
Just have to compare Bible text and Ellen White quote. You need not have specific statement on this.
Rev 12:17 that's all I Will say
Add in Rev. 21:8.
Please see the the next video, just uploaded: ruclips.net/video/WjPvu6Xvl-g/видео.html
@@davidconklin9552 As mentioned above, add in Revelation 22:29, which is a parallel to Revelation 19:10.
Rebuttal to Refutation: 2. Ellen white to edify, comfort and exhort?
She was not an expert on the Bible knowledge, she could only endorse through her fake visions what the men of experience have discovered from the bible. She herself was in great need of edification, exhortation and comfort as a disappointed Millerite. Who was comforting the believers before she entered the scene? The Holy Spirit. It is the same Spirit comforting the believers since the ascension of Jesus. Pointing to the Bible is not something unique to her alone. There were many others who pointed to the Bible long before her! Nevertheless, there are many statements in her works which make her writings equal and essential for salvation, well informed Adventists would agree with this.
Rebuttal to Refutation: 3. Joseph Smith and Ellen White, what they have in common?
Both claimed to have been visited by angels and God. Both were commanded to write:
Ellen white: "But the angel said, "Write out the things which have been shown to you" (Ellen White attitude toward her writings, p. 198).
"The Lord has said, "Write out the things which i shall give you" (1BIO, p. 91; Ms88, 1900).
Joseph Smith: "And while I yet in the Spirit of truth, the commandment was, "write ye the vision all out...And the voice said to me, Write the vision...For the lord said the vision is further, so write" (The vision: Joseph Smith's poem, vs. 23, 24, 39, 1843).
Both have seen Abraham in heaven (who is still waiting to be resurrected!).
Ellen White: "here we saw good old father Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, Noah, Daniel, and many like them" (The Day Star, 1846). You can find this statement in many of her books.
Joseph Smith: "I saw father Adam and Abraham; and my father and my mother; and my brother Alvin, that has long since slept" (Doctrine and Covenants, 137.5, 1836).
Which of them is the genuine prophet?
Rebuttal to Refutation: 4. The vision of the fall of Satan, man and the plan of salvation from God?
The great controversy themes were conceived and developed fist by John Milton in the clearest details in his epic poems, The paradise Lost and the Paradise Regained. These works had been the source of her visions and writings (including the temptations of Jesus in the wilderness) on this theme. Lovett's grove vision was a drama played out by James and Ellen White before the gullible congregation. There had been few others who preached and written on the great controversy theme before her.
You did not refute my response to your first rebuttle elsewhere. You'd have to do that before we respond to this new one, or else we are not getting anywhere.
@@AdventDefenseLeague
I follow my order, not yours
@@19818456 so you're not here to have a real discussion, just to waste everyone's time. And you admit to not responding to my rebuttle before.
@@19818456 if you don't feel the need to respond to me when I rebut your claims, I won't feel the need to respond to you either. I'm interested in actual dialogue with honest individuals who want to reason with me and find truth together, not tit-for-tat debates over text.
I'm not sure there is anything here that requires a specific reply, but thank you for watching and responding.
You are correct in asserting that other writers besides Ellen White understood pieces of the grand spiritual conflict going on in our world. Besides the blind poet John Milton, whose poems are generally inaccessible for most readers, we could cite several other writers who groped after the great controversy theme, which can be described as "the triumph of God's love." Henry Melvill described the great controversy broadly (without using the term): "We shall indeed find, as we proceed, that Christ, who was specially the seed of the woman, specially bruised the head of the serpent. But the prophecy is to be interpreted in a much larger sense. It is nothing less than a delineation of an unwearied conflict, of which this earth shall be the theatre, and which shall issue, though not without partial disaster to man, in the complete discomfiture of Satan and his associates" (Melvill, Sermons, p. 11). (Having written on the great controversy before reading Melvill, Ellen White happily adapted wording from this statement for Ms. 55, 1886.) Melvill also correctly noted that the central issue of the Bible is God's love: "And it is one beautiful instance of the adaptation of revelation to our circumstances, that the main thing which it labors to set forth is the love of our Maker" (Sermons, p. 230). In loose parallel with the great controversy theme, Alfred Edersheim declared the message of the Bible to be-" 'He loved us from the first of time, He loves us to the last.’ And this it is which we learn from the unity of Scripture” (Bible History, vol. 1, p. 7). Yet, as valuable as these insights are, none of these three authors puts the pieces together in the same way that Ellen White did or with the same inspiring effect.
Blessings.