The  Flying  Scroll

Archive 3

Home Page

Previous Booklet

Next Booklet

8

The  Flying   Scroll

 

Was Ellen G. White a true prophetess of God?

Is there Scriptural evidence that
forbids that accepance?

I believe you will find compelling evidence
for the position stated
in this study.

What does the Bible say about it?

 

 

 

Scriptural presentation 

by

Jack Gent

 

 

                                                                            NIV   If unlisted.
                                                                            Emphasis Supplied.

                                                                           1998 -- All rights reserved.

                                                                            Feel free to download this booklet
                                                                            to print copies to share with others.
                                                                            (Do give proper credit, though,
                                                                            to the author.)

 

 

The  Flying  Scroll

 

Zech. 5:1-4  --  I looked again -- and there before me was a flying scroll!
         He asked me, "What do you see?"
         I answered, "I see a flying scroll, 30' long and 15' wide."
         And he said to me, "This is the curse (God's curse) that is going out over the whole land; for according to what it says on one side, every thief will be banished, and according to what it says on the other side, everyone who swears falsely will be banished."
         The Lord Almighty declares, "I will send it out, and it will enter the house of the thief and the house of him who swears falsely by my name.  It will remain in his house and destroy it, both its timbers and its stones."

Does this mean that every child who steals a candy bar from his friend and eats it will have this scroll come and utterly destroy his house?  If a person should steal some apples from his neighbor's tree, would he suffer the same fate?  I don't believe this is what God is pointing out to us, but to a far more serious crime which is almost always, if not always, associated with a specific type of criminal, in God's sight.

I believe that God, tells us who He was speaking of when He revealed this to Jeremiah.

Jer. 23:30-32  --  "Therefore," declares the Lord, "I am against the prophets who steal from one another words supposedly from me.
         "Yes," declares the Lord, "I am against the prophets who wag their own tongues and yet declare, ‘The Lord declares.’
         "Indeed, I am against those who prophecy false dreams," declares the Lord.  "They tell them and lead my people astray with their reckless lies, Yet I did not send or appoint them.  They do not benefit these people in the least," declares the Lord.

This is the type of thief God is speaking of.  False prophets for committing literary theft from another and claiming that these words that have been stolen are words they have received from God.

God's curse, the scroll, "will also enter the house of him who swears falsely by My name." This is what Jeremiah is prophesying when he states, "Yes," declares the Lord, "I am against the prophets who wag their own tongues and yet declare, ‘The Lord declares.’ "  When they steal these words from another and claim that these words have been given them from the Lord, they are fulfilling the requirements to qualify as those who swear falsely by His name.  These are the qualifications by which God verifies that they are false prophets.

The storehouses, the vaults or buildings for storing the manuscripts and papers produced by these false peophets, who meet or have met this qualification, will be visited by this flying scroll and the house will be completely destroyed; both its timbers and its stones.  This doesn't sound like some symbolic event but a destruction of the structure by the curse of God.  Zechariah is describing end-time events.

Remember, these false prophets are those who claim to be receiving words directly from God and their adherents are receiving these words as the word of God.  God says, "I am against those who prophesy false dreams...  They tell them and lead my people astray with their reckless lies, yet I did not appoint or send them.  They do not benefit these people in the least," declares the Lord.

It is important to remember that these false prophets come in God's name.  They are the founding charismatic leaders of Christian sects and cults because they claim direct revelation from God for their authority.  This authority they claim is equal to the Bible and in some instances, superior to biblical authority.

I believe there are many small religious cults who have such a founding charismatic leader, or was founded by one, who have an active constituency.  These, if false, will undoubtedly be visited by the flying scroll.  I believe this is especially referring to the larger groups who make this claim due to the large number of members who are held in their unscriptural beliefs.  I would like to point out the larger groups that these qualifications might be applied to.

1. The Catholic Church

They qualify due to their claim that their church tradition is equal to the Bible for authority of Christian behavior and doctrine.  In fact, they claim that if these sources of authority should conflict, then church tradition is the safer and more reliable of the two.  Their church tradition has been derived by their succession of "infallible" papal leaders.  But what does Christ Himself say about this type of arrangement?

Matt. 15:6-9 RSV  --  So, for the sake of your tradition, you have made void the word of God.
         You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said: "This people honor me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; teaching as doctrines the precepts of men."

Every extra Biblical authority must be evaluated by the word of God, the Bible.  If it conflicts with the Scriptures, it must be discarded and one can be sure that the propagator is a false prophet.

Isa. 8:20 KJV  --  To the law and to the testimony: If they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.

2. The Mormon Church

They qualify as they claim that their founder and prophet, Joseph Smith, received his material from God the Father and Jesus Christ, in addition to messages from angels.   Smith even prepared a book for which he claimed divine assistance and claimed it to be superior and more accurate than the Bible.  This book he called the Book of Mormon.  This book is received as the word of God by the adherents of this church, and considered by them to be superior to the Bible for establishing their faith and practice.  They claim all other churches represent Babylon.

3. The Seventh-day Adventist Church

They qualify in that they hold their prophet and founder, Ellen G. White, to be equal in authority to the prophets who wrote the Bible under inspiration of the Holy Spirit.  No member is allowed to propagate anything from the Bible that conflicts with the writings of Ellen White, regardless of how obvious and clear the Biblical account may be.

Her writings and teachings have been found in numerous places and occasions to be guilty of the curse on both sides of the scroll.  It is almost impossible for a member of the church to see how she merits the curse on the scroll in spite of how obvious the qualifications for these curses she fulfilled.

4. Jehovah's Witnesses

They qualify as they claim divine authority for their founder-prophet, C. T. Russell.  So many of his prophecies were time-proven to be false that their theology has undergone repeated revision and suppression of early material.  This, however, is common with all these organizations in spite of the fact that each one will deny that their organization has ever resorted to this.  Facts to the contrary are abundant in each of the above groups.

5. World Church of God

They qualify as they claim divine authority for their founder-prophet, Herbert Armstrong.  He claimed to be an apostle of God and that his God-given authority was not to be questioned by any church member.  Since his death there has developed a division in the church.  One group has repudiated his teachings, to a degree, in an attempt to be accepted by Evangelical Christians.  The other group has remained status quo with their original doctrines essentially intact.  Just how this will all sort out is still not completely clear.

I would like to point out how difficult it is for a true believer in any of these organizations to see any fallacy in their "infallible" founder.  They fully believe their founder to be personally instructed by God and any doubting of his claims is the same as doubting God.

For my first illustration I would like to present some excerpts from an ex-Mormon's testimony on why he left the Mormon Church.  This testimony is taken from the Web page of Eric Kettunen, who, I believe, has the best collection of this type of testimony anywhere.  I would suggest you look up and read the entire testimony of this impressive ex-Mormon.  You can access Eric's Web page at --

www.exmormon.org/whyleft46.htm .

You will note that this testimony was the 46th.  There were approximately 70 in this file of similar caliber on my last browsing.

This ex-Mormon, giving his testimony, had been a true believer and in order to find out all he could about his religion so as to better propagate his faith and defend it against all objections, he intensely began a study of Mormon Church history.  The result had the opposite effect.  He became increasingly disillusioned as to its truthfulness.   His lack of zeal became apparent in his weakening testimony.  This greatly concerned his wife Cindy, herself a faithful believer with a strong testimony.
 

In 1992 Cindy went to her alma mater to BYU Education Week.  I couldn't go due to work constraints.  She attended a variety of lectures and came home uplifted and said what a spiritual experience it was.  Cindy went on how she desired me to go the following year because she felt strongly it would have a positive effect on me and my testimony.  So in the summer of 1993 I accepted the challenge and drove to Utah with my two daughters, who were 15 and 17 years old at the time. When I attended a lecture on Joseph Smith, the professor gave an anecdote about Joseph's life that disturbed me deeply.  The experience was about an entry in Willard Richard's diary.  Bro. Richards was telling of a time when he and Joseph were leaving the mansion house to go to the church office.  The diary entry stated how Joseph's faithful wife, Emma, asked Joseph if he was practicing pleural marriage. The diary then told that Joseph answered "No." After they left the mansion house and was walking to their office, Bro. Richards asked Joseph why he had lied to Emma.  Joseph said Emma would never accept polygamy and he would have to go to hell to save her. The audience was so impressed that Joseph had the power over hell as "The prophet of the restoration," and that he also loved her so much as to go to hell to save her soul. I couldn't believe my ears!  Did I miss some- thing?  If I remember correctly, didn't 2 Nephi 9:34 say that "Wo unto the liar, for he shall be thrust down to hell?

 
This is an excellent example of the typical response to obviously damaging evidence to the character of their "prophet" as viewed through the ears of a classroom of true believers.  Instead of it presenting to them an unacceptable defect in his character, they only see it as confirmation of the unlimited power that God bestows on him.

This ex-Mormon further notes in his personal testimony the reason he left the Mormon church.
 

I read the book The Great Apostasy by James E. Talmage while on my mission.   As I researched Mormonism it brought back to my mind the discoveries of Talmage about Catholic history; its deceit, its revisions of history, and its control of its ignorant and faithful masses.  The very thing Talmage had critiqued about Catholicism, the church had been doing since its beginning, too.

 
In the study of all these religions mentioned you will find them to share in the same activity.  It is because their founders claim divine revelation from God in assembling their doctrines.  Therefore, they can't admit later that they made a mistake when time has proven their predictions false.  The faithful must rescue their founder by claiming the prophecy was conditional, or that God was testing their faithfulness by allowing a false prophecy to be promoted, or simply to spiritualize it away by a fluff of symbolic application that might harmonize with their scenario.

Now I will present the same type of circumstances with damaging facts of history to the acceptance of Ellen White as a prophetess of God, and how a true believer contorts his/her mind into a pretzel to give it a spin that harmonizes with her belief.

The context of this episode to be discussed is that about 130 years ago Ellen White wrote a book (Early Writings) about the early activities in the developing of the SDA Church.  Various members of the church were impressed that Christ's coming was near and with all the promises of God in the Bible about restoring the Israelites to their homeland, they felt the call to go to the Holy Land and convert Israelites to Christianity.  There was at that time no Jewish state in Israel and none on the horizon as far as anyone at that time could see -- but the promises of God concerned them.

Read Early Writings p. 75 for the complete context.  Note some of the excerpts from this page which should make it clear.  Note her usage of I was pointed to, I saw, I was shown, etc.  These were always used when she wanted to emphasize that God was revealing this to her.
 

Then I was pointed to some who are in the great error of believing that it is their duty to go to Old Jerusalem, and think they have a work to do there before the Lord comes... I saw that such a mission would accomplish no real good, that it would take a long while to make a very few of the Jews believe even in the first advent of Christ, much more to believe in his second advent. I saw that Satan had greatly deceived some in this thing... I also saw that Old Jerusalem would never be built up.  --  Early Writings, p 75.

 
The above material was brought up when a nephew of mine was talking to a female college student attending an SDA college.  Their conversation became focused on Ellen White and the college student told him that her religion instructor at college had offered anyone in the class an A if they could find one incident where Ellen White contradicted the Bible or had any of her prophecies to fail.

My nephew told her he would be happy to help her obtain an easy A and promised to send her several choice items to choose from.  He sent several but she chose the following to respond to the question:  --  Will Old Jerusalem be rebuilt?

EGW:  --  I was pointed to some who are in the great error of believing that it is their duty to go to Old Jerusalem...  I also saw that Old Jerusalem never would be built up.  (EW p. 75)

Ans:  --  She failed to forsee what the future actually held; a substantial return of Jews, after which Jerusalem underwent massive building up.

After several weeks of searching for an "escape spin," my nephew received this E-Mail answer to the above contradiction:
 

Hello...  I know I've taken forever in responding.  Apologies.  I've been extremely busy.  Anyway, I wanted to respond to the E-Mail you sent with what you said were things that EGW said against the Bible.  If you would like I will answer in detail on each accusation but because of your background I don't feel that to be necessary at this point.  Excuse me if I sound blunt but didn't you ever go to college?   In college they teach us critical reading.  That means we learn to understand the things we read. I read every thing you referred to and believe me, you took it all out of context.  For example, when you said that Mrs. White said that Jerusalem would not be built up again, you make it sound like she was talking of the physical structure.   I am assuming you have read the whole passage for yourself and am surprised that you interpret it as such.  She was speaking of the spiritual building up of it. At any rate that is just one example of many that I completely and adamantly disagree with what you said.  Perhaps you should take a break from the books and spend some time in earnest prayer to the Father.  He can teach our hearts things that we could not learn in 10,000 years of reading. I will pray for you that you will open your heart to what the Father has to teach you.   I'm not saying what that is... but I am saying that you sure need to go back and read carefully what you think is so wrong.  Have a wonderful day.  God bless, C----

 
I believe this should be clear to all that what we are seeing here is not some skill that she has learned in college to understand things she reads in its context, but an extreme example of taking something simply and plainly stated and taking it completely out of its context.  The obvious context it was written in was so devastating to the image she had built up of her prophetess that she couldn't handle the reality.

I believe the answer that my nephew gave in rebuttal says it all, and must be obvious to all.  Her response is exactly the reaction of the classroom of believers to the incident in Joseph Smith's life, that we noted earlier.

Notice now the reply to this answer by my nephew:
 

Hi C---  In regards to your last E-Mail, I can't help but wonder if you read the quote in Early Writings on page 75, the last paragraph.  One has to believe that EW was referring to the physical Old Jerusalem for two reasons: First, she actually says old Jerusalem, not Jerusalem. Secondly, when you read the very large para- graph involving her statement about Jerusalem never being built up again, you will notice that the entire paragraph is dealing exclusively about people who thought it was their duty to work for the Lord in Jerusalem before He comes.  That is all she talks about with no indication of any spiritual meaning of the word Jerusalem whatsoever. It's true that I never went to college, or took any critical reading courses, but I hardly think that it takes a rocket scientist to figure out context.  In most cases it is relatively easy unless you have a preconceived idea in your mind that you are trying to defend.  If there is some hidden meaning in this paragraph that I have somehow missed, please humor a poor ol' uneducated hick and point it out for me in as easy to understand language as you can. By the way, I am kind of confused, who or what is spiritual Jerusalem anyway?  I know that as believers in Christ we are spiritual Israel, but what is spiritual Jerusalem?  If you could show me, in this context first from EW and then from Scripture, I would appreciate it. You said that, if I like, you would answer in detail on each accusation I have given you against EW, and yes that is what I would like for you to do.  I have spent many hours putting the list together and I hardly think that just telling me that I don't know anything about context is a responsible or credible answer. By the way, in my many conversations with Adventists in the last couple of years, I have noticed a mindset that I myself used to have.  Whenever an Adventist comes across someone who believes differently than they do, the Adventist assumes that the other brother or sister simply does not have as good a relationship with the Father as they do, so they just say "I'll pray for you." Doesn't that sound so very Jewish, self-righteous, narrow-minded, and arrogant? Is it any wonder that most other denominations are offended by the Adventist mindset? Especially in light of the words of Christ who said that "Other sheep have I that are not of this fold."  He was speaking of the Jews, and it is obvious that Adventists have finally out-jewed the Jews.  I know you won't mind if I sound blunt, but if the shoe fits, wear it.   --  I've got to go, so bye for now.

 

Let us carefully note the different ways this discussion about any future restoration of Jerusalem, or lack thereof, cancels any possibility of her being a messenger or prophetess of God.

"I saw also that Old Jerusalem never would be built up again."   She always used I saw to verify that this was shown to her in vision -- in order to place her authority for this statement beyond doubt.

I believe we can say without reservation that God did not show her this.  He knows the end from the beginning and his prophecies never fail.  Therefore, this has to be an instance of wagging her own tongue and yet declares, "The Lord declares." This is swearing falsely in the name of the Lord.  This certainly merits one side of the flying scroll's curse.  Notice also what God says about Jerusalem being built up again.

Jer. 31:38-40  --  "The days are coming," declares the Lord, "when this city (Jerusalem) will be rebuilt for me from the tower of Hananel to the corner gate...
         The city will never again be uprooted or demolished."

There was no apparent possibility of the Israelites returning and rebuilding Jerusalem 130 years ago, but this verse was available, telling it would be rebuilt.  It also states in many places including this one that Christ will dwell there after His Second Coming and rule the world.  It also states that when it is built for Christ that it will never again be uprooted or demolished.

This statement from Early Writings is a direct contradiction to the above Scripture.   It also is time-proven to be a false prophecy.  What does the Bible say about the prophet who makes a false prediction?

Deut. 18:32  --  If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the Lord does not take place or come true, that is a message the Lord has not spoken.  That prophet has spoken presumptuously.  Do not be afraid of him.

I believe the side of this flying scroll which brings God's curse on the thief has not been adequately covered as pertaining to Ellen White.  Remember this thief is speaking of a prophet "who steals from one another words supposedly from Me."  This is perhaps a qualification for which she has no peer.

Recently I was introduced to material from an SDA-promoting Web page entitled "The Real Ellen White Web site."  The one page presentation they made on "Who is Walter Rea," bothered me as it was so untrue.  I prepared an answer to this page which I hope someday soon to place on my own Web page.  I would suggest that, if possible, you obtain this one page study from this Web site, but if you are unable, I will quote portions and present material in rebuttal.

The study I previously prepared follows: --

On "The Real Ellen G. White Website" we found a one page discussion of "Who is Walter Rea?"  As is so often the case where the Seventh-day Adventist Church discusses such matters, often only partial truths are allowed.  These part truths are presented at times to convince the unwary of an outright falsehood.  I would like to quote the first paragraph of this page and follow with the facts which reveal this statement to be a deceptive lie.
 

Walter Rea was a SDA pastor for 36 years.  Walter Rea believed Ellen White was a prophet of God.  But Mr. Rea had a problem.  Through his own studies Mr. Rea began to arrive at theological conclusions that were contrary to the writings of E.W.  Mr. Rea was in a dilemma.  How could he be right when God's prophet indicated he was wrong?

 
There is truth mixed in this statement in order to get someone to swallow the deception.  Yes, Walter Rea was a SDA pastor for 36 years and believed Ellen White was a prophet of God.  "But Mr. Rea had a problem."  This also is perfectly true.  "Mr. Rea began to arrive at theological conclusions that were contrary to the writings of Ellen White."  Let me quote from some of her writings that Walter Rea found contrary to his conclusions that he had arrived at through his own studies:
 

In the letters I write, in the testimonies I bear, I do not write one article expressing merely my own ideas.  They are what God has opened before me in vision.                            -- Testimonies Vol. 5, p 67. I have not been in the habit of reading any doctrinal articles in the paper (Review & Herald) that my mind should not have any understanding of anyones ideas and views, and that not a mold of any man's theories should have any connection with that which I write.                           -- Letter 37 - 1887. My views were written independent of books or the opinions of others.                            -- Ms 2 - 1867 I am glad you are having success in selling my books; for thus you are giving to the world the light that God has given me...  The instruction they contain is not of human production.                            -- Letter 339 - 1904.

 
These are only a few of many such statements that had caused Walter Rea to conclude that she was a true prophet of God.  Through his (Rea's) own studies he came to conclusions contrary to these statements.  Notice a couple of examples which were devastating to me when I first saw them as I had prized these so highly as statements supplied to Ellen from God.  Note this famous EGW quote:

I testify to my brethren and sisters that the church of Christ, enfeebled and defective as it may be, is the only object on earth on which   He bestows His supreme regard.  --  Testimonies Vol. 1, p. 15 (1892)

Note this quotation 50 years earlier (1842) of a non-SDA writer:

But the church of Christ, enfeebled and defective as it may be, is the only object on earth on which He bestows His supreme regard.  --  From The Great Teacher pp. 158-160 – John Harris.

The following appeared in the Review, Vol. 37, No 6, 1871.  It was called "Selected," which meant they were not sure who wrote it.

The great want of this age is men.  Men who are not for sale.  Men who are honest, sound from center to circumference, true to the heart's core -- men who will condemn wrong in a friend or foe, in themselves as well as others.  Men whose consciences are as steady as the needle to the pole.   Men who will stand for the right if the heavens totter and the earth reel.

Over 30 years later Ellen paraphrased this same quote and claimed it as her own:

The greatest want of the world is men -- men who will not be bought or sold, men who in their inmost souls are true and honest, men who do not fear to call sin by its right name, men whose conscience is as true to duty as the needle to the pole, men who will stand for the right though the heaven's fall."  -- Education, 1903, p. 57.

These are only a couple of the thousands of such instances of literary theft (that Walter Rea and many others since then have uncovered) that Ellen committed.

The SDA Church desperately needed some information to combat Walter's findings.  They selected their own trusted theologian and scholar, Fred Veltman.  Elder Veltman was the head of the religion department at Pacific Union College.  They were convinced that The Desire of Ages, probably Ellen's best written book would be found free of any copied material.  Veltman was allowed to choose a staff to work with him on 15 selected chapters from The Desire of Ages.  After 8 years of research and a cost of $500,000 Veltman delivered his report to the General Conference president, Neal Wilson.  We quote from Veltman's summary of his findings:
 

It is of first importance that Ellen White herself, not her literary assistants, composed the basic content of The Desire of Ages text.  In doing so she was the one who took literary expressions [copied] from the works of other authors without giving them credit as her sources [plagiarism].  Second, it should be recognized that Ellen White used the writings of others consciously and intentionally -- implicitly or explicitly Ellen White did not admit to and even denied dependency (copying) on her part.                 -- The Desire of Ages Project -- The              Conclusions, Ministry Nov. 1990, p. 11.               (Comments within brackets supplied)

 

How widespread was her copying?  Dr. Veltman was able to identify over 30 different writers with whom Ellen obtained significant material without giving any credit.  Again we quote from Veltman's conclusions:
 

The content of Ellen White's commentary on the life and ministry of Christ, The Desire of Ages, is for the most part derived [copied] rather than original...  In practical terms, one is not able to recognize in Ellen White's writings on the life of Christ any general category of content or catalog of ideas that is unique to her.              -- Ibid. p. 12.                (Comments within brackets supplied)

Veltman, in his research, found that of the 15 chapters that his group studied of the book's 87 chapters, William Hanna headed the list of contributions, taken from his book The Life of Christ. There were 321 parallels definitely identifiable in these 15 chapters and this would average 21 segments taken by each chapter.  The second most productive site was Daniel March's Night Scenes of the Bible and Walks and Homes of Jesus. There were 129 parallel sentences in these 15 chapters definitely identified.

Veltman's report was for the purpose of hushing the critics.

Can you imagine Neal Wilson's disappointment?  At least he now had the truth.  Did he broadcast this to all the faithful as he had planned?  Notice his statement in the Review without explanation of what the research revealed.

This research gives us great assurance that God did indeed use His human instrument as a part of His continued self-revelation and to bring great blessings to us all.  -- Review and Herald, Sept. 22, 1988.

I believe that we can truthfully say that this research, instead, gives us great assurance that what Walter Rea had been telling the church was the truth, the very truth that the church had been unwilling to accept.  Now that we can see the other side of the coin, let us note the deception in the manner this Web site (The Real Ellen G. White) is trying to lead us:
 

Rather than renounce his cherished theories, he [Rea] decided that Ellen White was the one who was wrong.  So Mr. Rea set out to do all in his power to prove Ellen White to be a false prophet.  [The proof was staring him in the face, just as it was staring the G.C. President in the face when he received Veltman's report.]  He had no other choice.  If he failed to prove Ellen White a false prophet he would have to admit that he was just plain wrong. In the early 1980's Mr. Rea published a book The White Lie.  In this blasphemous work Mr. Rea attempted to show that Mrs. White plagiarized her writings from others.  The Adventist Church asked their Roman Catholic lawyer to analyze Mrs. White's writings to see if she used plagiarism.  Unfortunately for Mr. Rea, the lawyer's research completely debunked Mr. Rea's thesis.  The book was proven to be a farce and Mr. Rea appeared to be a fool. Don't those who fight against God always end up looking like fools?  --  (Comments within brackets supplied)

 
I marvel at the mileage the SDA Church has gotten out of their paid opinion to the Catholic Attorney, Vincent Ramik.  In looking into Ellen's copying from the writings of other authors without giving credit, he cites the case of Emerson Vs. Davies of 1845.

In his summation of his opinion, to the church who hired him, he stated that Massachusetts Circuit Justice Story in effect exonerates a writer (Davies) who had used another man's words and ideas and woven them into his own composition.  This is the statement that the SDA Church says completely debunked Mr. Rea's thesis.

This little statement by the Catholic attorney, that the judge in effect exonerates the accused writer who had committed the same acts that Ellen was accused of, the "in effect" was because the material being copied had no copyright protection, which prevented the one bringing the suit to be awarded damage.

When asked by a critic of the decision why he had failed to reveal the outcome in the case he quoted from, Ramik stated that he hadn't mentioned the outcome in any of the cases he cited.  He was then asked: In view of the case's outcome, which had in fact found the defendant writer guilty, wouldn't Ellen White, brought before Judge Story on a charge of infringement, have been found guilty?  He responded: "That's the wonderful thing about the courts: Anybody can go to court and win anything."

In looking at both sides of this discussion, which  side, to you, appears to be the fool?

"Don't those who end up fighting against God always end up looking like fools?"  I believe we can agree with that statement, but I can't see in any way how this can apply to Walter Rea.  I believe that Rea's independent studies, which revealed Ellen White's literary copying and using as her own without giving credit, is not blasphemy or fighting against God.  It was instead a courageous effort to expose the truth.  The opposite must be said of those who deceitfully and falsely try to prevent truth from being revealed.

I believe that, if the SDA Church officials and this Real E. White Website would actively promote their own research by Elder Veltman, and that of Walter Rea, instead of broadcasting the made-to-order conclusions of a "Catholic attorney," who for a tidy sum gave them what they wanted to hear; then it would be evident that they were interested in finding the truth.

Does this not give you a clue as to which ones in this matter of dispute are the ones who are searching for the truth?

To defend Ellen White's extensive copying from other authors and claiming it as her own, church apologists often state that this was standard operating procedure during this period of history and generally accepted.

Years before any suspicion of Ellen using any other source for her writings than the Holy Spirit (which she claimed), we note in this editorial in the Youths Instructor:
 

It is just as wrong to appropriate to one's self credit for productions written by another as to steal a horse.  One who signs his name to another's words, and allows it to appear in print as his own, is a thief of the darkest hue.  Taking another's knowledge and parading it as one's own is a despicable thing to do.  The student who copies an examination is dishonest, but plagiarism is an even meaner kind of thievery...   It is as much of a disgrace, to say nothing of the sin, as to break into a neighbor's house and steal his goods.