Someone said you should avoid trying to meet your heroes.
I don’t know her either, but I suspect that if Jeremy were to actually meet EGW personally, the reality would be much different than his fantasies about her.
I mean, someone who would abandon her child, turn on one of her former confidants as she did with Dr. Kellogg, or slap an employee for whatever reason, definitely had a dark side which-as Mark Twain said of the moon-was never seen by the rest of the world.
Frank. you nailed it again in this paragraph.
The plagiarism is certainly a legal issue, but above that it is a moral issue (especially for a “prophet of God”…). I know that it must been painful when one’s prophet is busted like that and it requires humility and honesty to acknowledge that one’s prophet was fuping her followers. Unfortunately, most followers react trying to defend, justify, and explain the acts of the perpetrator, the so-called prophet. All in name of God, of course… The apologists can’t deal with shame, so they just go berserk favoring and defending the failed prophet.
It seems that, like Michael Cohen did for Trump, Jeremy wants to be known as “EGW’s Fixer” … 
[quote=“TomNorris, post:55, topic:25515”]
While it is long past time to deal honestly with Ellen White, there should be no doubt that the WHITE ESTATE is guilty of promoting a massive publishing fraud about Ellen White.
[/quote
Tom, for your dismay, this time I agree with you on the whole post. You said what had to be said.
The White Estate has been nothing but a money-maker machine, with absolutely no regards to ethics.
The WE also published the book, “I Was Canright’s Secretary,” a total fraud since the supposed author (Carrie Johnson) was NEVER his secretary, she probably never met him. Arthur White is the culprit of this fraud, along with Carrie of course.
I know you don’t like him, but Steve Daily just published a new book documenting this fraud, co-authoring it with Carrie’s granddaughter Nancy Paige. Here is the book on Amazon:
Oh yes (LOL). those “post-mortem” books…
That’s what I call those “compilations” that the WE publishes as being part of her books. For me it’s another fraudulent practice bevause the church members buy them believing that EGW was actually the author - when she is not.
it is true that their direct access gave them an experience that cannot be taken away from them…undoubtedly their personal knowledge of her character gave them pause to criticize any of her methods…
but we have the value of more than 100yrs of retrospect, where every aspect of her writing process has been objectively studied and analyzed…we have the value of professional opinion of what the law was and intended, and also what the general practice of the time and place was…we are able to see egw in a context that they couldn’t have…we are able to see her value, quite apart from her methods…
given that her death came in 1915, it’s to be expected that egw’s writing ended at that time, unless others were using her name surreptitiously, which they weren’t…but there are very much of her writings that weren’t released by the White Estate by 1915, and there are also endless new compilations now that group her writings topically, making them much more accessible…we also have online now, whereby egw can be topically searched in seconds…we don’t have to sit and recall where we could have read something as attendees of the Bible conference would have…we have ways to navigate egw’s vast output now than they couldn’t have…
our much greater contextual understanding and access enable a view of egw that was impossible for the 1919 Bible conference…we are able to see definitively that she really was what she claimed…we are able to rejoice in her gift, and place it squarely within our exceptional calling as a Church…
time and circumstance also allow us to see what happens when egw is denigrated, as happened at the 1979 Adventist Forum at PUC that i personally attended…a denigration of egw doesn’t strengthen faith…it doesn’t lead to Christ…many who were on the Ford train in 1979 are now no longer in the Church, or any Church…they spend their time mocking or railing against the Church…
but what a different picture from those who steadfastly continue in the faith outlined by egw…these are strong committed Adventists, wholly committed to meeting Christ in the clouds…their lives demonstrate a positive progression of understanding and practice, just as the gift of prophecy and all the spiritual gifts have intended…
I bet she would tell him, “Stop trying to fix me!” 
Jeremy… what’s next, saying that you now know more than EGW herself knew???..
The only thing that is known more broadly nown is the fraudulence itself. At the 1919 BC people were starting to be suspiscious, but they didn’t yet have an accurate idea of the iceberg’s real size… In this sense, yes, we now know much more than they knew…
I thought this was a given long before now!
From the person under discussion. And from several people who have experienced that strangely warmed encounter. Luke 1:35 “And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee:…” Luke 1:8 “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you:…”
Thanks for your response. I had not heard that mentioned before.
i think the reason you’ll likely have trouble convincing knowledgeable people of your claims, or even understanding why they won’t accept them, is that your definition of plagiarism isn’t what lawyers and experts, like Ramik and Veltman, use…it looks like you think you see plagiarism when you see word and sentence similarity…but under this definition the entire body of 19th century religious writers were plagiarists, and guilty of crime…yet this isn’t what we see…it isn’t how the law at the time was developing or applied…
the best course is to read the summary of the Ramik Report, which outlines in detail 19th century legal trends and objectives (the Veltman Desire of Ages Project notes are also a worthwhile read)…with this understanding, it’s relatively easy to see why Ramik concludes, as any other knowledgeable professional would, that “considering all factors necessary in reaching a just conclusion on this issue, it is submitted that the writings of Ellen G. White were conclusively unplagiaristic.” Veltman didn’t seek to settle the question of plagiarism, but his stated opinion nevertheless is that egw wasn’t a plagiarist…for him, "a writer can only be legitimately charged with plagiarism when that writer’s literary methods contravene the established practices of the general community of writers producing works of the same literary genre within a comparable cultural context. In the process of doing our research we found that Ellen White’s sources had previously used each other in the same way that she later used them. At times the parallels between the sources were so strong that we had difficulty deciding which one Ellen White was using.”
the reason our Church leaders aren’t sweating bullets or even responding to this issue anymore is that they know they have professional opinion on their side…for better or worse, our Church puts a premium on professional opinion that doesn’t conflict with a plain reading of the Bible…essentially this means that it’s never going to be accepted that egw was a plagiarist, or that she infringed copyright law, no matter how many well-meaning members think she was and did; no matter how big a fuss they make; and no matter how much of what they consider evidence they produce…there are too many clear considerations that militate otherwise…
had the Ramik Report and the Veltman Desire of Ages Project concluded that egw was indeed a plagiarist - that she produced her output surreptitiously, under cover of the darkness of crime while claiming inspiration - obviously our Church would have been in a crisis…but now, because egw has been professionally evaluated and fully exonerated, there isn’t deemed to be a crisis, but a plethora of uninformed members who will presumably eventually get it…you’re just on the wrong side of this question…
As always, one suspects your critique of others is actually an accurate description of yourself.
According to my understanding of EGW’s theology and eschatology, no one will know for sure whether they’ve been fully exonerated until the Second Coming.
But maybe her version of the gospel is as wrong as is my reading of it and either the pope, Joseph Smith, Mary Baker Eddy, Bertrand Russell, Ayn Rand or The Artist Formerly Know as Prince will be shown to have had a better handle on Jesus good news.
Either way, one thing seems certain. It will not be left to you, a bunch of legal eagles, or the leadership of the GC to decide whether or not JC and dad are willing to forgive EGW’s sins. So it seems we are all destined to wait and see if Jesus saves a seat for her beside his at the heavenly feasts or instead decides that a re-baptism in his fiery lake of burning love will be her eternal lot!
Exactly why they paid the attorney for his report.
Go back and review Veltman’s research. And do your own research.
The church did not deal with this issue earlier; thus, here we are: in crisis.
I am afraid the Church will never deal with this issue. For as long as they have apologists writing nonsensical arguments and denying the facts, why would they “deal” with the issue. The Church keeps growing in the 3rd world where access to info remains limited so whatever the Church teaches goes. Someone should write a book, “The Art of the Deceit” …
i think you’re stuck on the notion that the Church paid Ramik for a favourable report - that they paid him to get them off the hook in the same way that all guilty persons pay their hand-picked lawyers…but this isn’t the case…Ramik was paid for his opinion, given his expertise on the subject of 19th century plagiarism and copyright infringement…he wasn’t hired to be defense counsel in a prosecution…
keep in mind that Ramik produced his report in 1981, in the aftermath of the Ford debacle at PUC in 1979…the denomination used Ramik’s services to launch a professional, comprehensive look at the questions Ford had raised…it happens that the Ramik Report fully vindicates egw, and enabled the Church to stand firmly against Ford, but also Numbers and Rea…we can say that the Church was lucky, but we can also say that the Church, and egw herself, have been right all along…i haven’t seen that our Church is even responding to this issue now…our leaders have all moved on…they fully know the scoop…
i think this situation is quite like the anti-vaxxer / religious freedom debacle, launched at Village Church at Andrews not long ago…after thousands upon thousands of medical authorities had pronounced the mRNA vaccines safe for use, and after literally billions of people had received shots without incident, a group of angry conservatives decided to take matters into their own hands and create an issue which they sought denominational approval and accommodation for…but our GC refused to budge…their lot was with professional opinion, no matter how loud and obnoxious Village Church became…
i think the same thing is happening with this egw plagiarism issue, although now it’s progressive adventism that has decided to be upset…but the denomination knows the Ramik Report has been around for over 40 yrs, and that people have had plenty of time to read it, and familiarize themselves with the issues…but if they haven’t, well, that’s their problem…they’re in their own private crisis…i don’t see the GC responding to this plagiarism issue even one iota in the future…
i think everyone agrees that things are either from God or Satan…but your conclusions with respect to the origins of egw are just off, way off…the evidence is overwhelming that she was a prophet of God…the Spirit in her writings is unmistakable, if there was no other evidence…it doesn’t get any plainer than in the case of egw…
Ramik was in response to Rea, not Ford. Rea presented to a select group from the GC in Jan 1980. Out of that was the decision to do the Veltmann study and get a legal opinion. The evidence from Rea freaked the GC to the extent they urged him not to go public on the proviso they would release it.
Actually they are responding to it but not in the way many would expect. TW is diubling-down on his stand on EGW. That is why it is being emphasised, why a new position in the local church was created. His idea is that a good defense is a good offense. He is turning a belief in in the “sainthood” of EGW to be a (the) test of standing in Adventist.
That is how the church is responding.
this may be true, but the Ramik Report has had the effect of answering the criticisms not just of Rea, but of Ford, which was the bigger scandal as far as ordinary members were concerned…i was at AUC during the Rea situation, and honestly, no-one cared…Dr.Wood debated Rea publicly, and neither i, nor anyone i knew, bothered to go…of course i wish now that i’d gone, just for the sake and interest of it…
but i think the impact of Numbers, Ford and Rea really rested on the notion that similarity in words and sentence structure meant plagiarism (i think almost everyone starts with this assumption)…this is still the issue for those who still get worked up over the issue…the Ramik Report, but also the Veltman contribution, has enabled us to see the working situation in the 19th century, and the fact that legal plagiarism requires substantially more than word and sentence similarity…i’ve read the summary of the Ramik Report several times over the yrs…it’s a good read…
but the point is, it’s the Ramik Report that enables this level of offense…if the Ramik Report had concluded that egw was a plagiarist, she’d have been dropped from our Church by now, along with many of our beliefs…our entire Church would have a different raison d’etre…
The evidence is obviously not overwhelming as the vast majority of people in the world are unimpressed by your “logic”, consider your “biblical” justifications to be mere rationalizations, and are convinced that it’s you who’s “off, way off” in FantasyLand when it comes to EGW.
Further it simply does not make sense to most people that a supposedly omnipotent god who, by definition, has the power to communicate with anybody, would arbitrarily limit himself to only a few dozen humans, given the billions available.
Again, this is the apathetic attitude about 99.9996% of the world’s population have in regards to the unsubstantiated claims of EGW’s “divine” inspiration.
Maybe if Jesus had come before EGW had died, as she had predicted, he would have been able to convince people that she really had been speaking for him….
This topic was automatically closed after 14 days. New replies are no longer allowed.