A Response to the Video:
Seventh-day Adventism, the Spirit Behind the Church
by Bob Pickle
Answers to Questions Raised by:
Mark Martin, Sydney Cleveland
Dale Ratzlaff, The White Lie
. . . and Others
Discern Fact from Fiction
Jehovah's Witnesses, Cont.; Plagiarism
< Prev T. of C. ... 92-93 94 95-96 97 98-99 100 101 102 103-105 ... Next >
#98 & #99: "Both have been guilty of plagiarism of earlier works without giving
credit to the previous
authors."—Leslie Martin. |
#98: Both plagiarized. If
this charge is true, it can't be proven by the "evidence" in the documentation
package.
In the index under "Point 53," it says: "Both SDA's and JW's are guilty of plagiarism
of earlier works. The SDA section is documented under
point 54 and the JW plagiarism is listed here." When one turns to "Point 53," one finds a
single sheet put together by a Mr. Gary Busselman
from South Dakota. This sheet purports to contain an outline of history about the Witnesses.
The only evidence that one finds on this sheet even
remotely connected to this charge is the following:
John Aquila Brown:
published in book, Even-Tide (1823), his interpretation of the "seven
times" of Daniel, by means of the day-year
formula, to produce 2520 years, in exactly the same way as the Watchtower Society does
today, except he started with 604 BC and ended up with
1917 AD. This 29 years before C. T. Russell was born, 47 years before C. T. Russell
started his Bible study group, and 50+ years before the book
"Three Worlds" was written.
A major problem with this is that Brown was from Britain. Did Russell ever hear of
Brown's work, let alone read it? The documentation
package is advertised as "substantiating the information contained in this program."
Yet no demonstration of a connection between Brown's
book and any Watchtower publication is even attempted. If the Watchtower really plagiarized
Brown's book, where is the evidence?
Besides, Busselman's sheet is unreliable. It says that
"Ellen G. White . . .
founded the Second Advent Movement, the present Seven-Day
[sic] Adventist group" after splitting off from the "Miller movement."
However, the Millerite Movement was the "Second Advent Movement,"
or at least a very prominent part of it, and Mrs. White didn't found it. She was only four
years old when Miller started preaching!
Busselman's sheet also says that "William Miller" "quit the movement he founded
when his predictions, called the 'great disappointment
of 1844,' failed." This is very slightly true. He officially quit the movement in December
1849 when he died. As he was dying he said to
"Brother Bosworth": "Tell them (the brethren) we are right. The coming of the Lord draweth
nigh; but they must be patient, and wait for
him."—Bliss, p. 377.
Perhaps Busselman's sheet is the reason why the video leaves the impression that N.
H. Barbour was a Seventh-day Adventist. The sheet
identifies Barbour, Paton, and Wendell as being Second Adventists. Since it says that Mrs.
White started the "Second Advent Movement," this
leaves the impression that Barbour, Paton, and Wendell were Seventh-day Adventists. In
actuality, they were Advent Christians, not Seventh-day
Adventists.
#99: Both were "guilty" of this crime. One other
problem with claiming that the Witnesses were "guilty" of plagiarizing Brown's
book is this: Since Brown was from Britain, his book was fully in the public domain. There
was no copyright protection in America on British
books written prior to July 1, 1891 (Nichol, pp. 454, 455). Thus it is incorrect for anyone to
say that the Witnesses were "guilty" of plagiarizing
Brown's book.
|
|
Like this book?
Save your printer and your ink!
Buy the entire 160-page book for just
$9.95 + S/H.
Automatic discounts start at 5 copies.
|
|
|
< Prev T. of C. ... 92-93 94 95-96 97 98-99 100 101 102 103-105 ... Next >
|