A Reform-minded Seventh-day Adventist forum In our aim to exalt everything important, first and foremost, we seek to promote a clear understanding of Daniel, Revelation, the three angels' messages and the alpha and omega of apostasy.
Joined: 13 Apr 2003 Posts: 24 Location: St. Paul, MN USA
Posted: Sun Apr 13, 2003 9:52 am Post subject: The plagiarism charge / Desire of Ages Project
I have been going through the book Desire of Ages noting all instances in which EGW is alleged to have copied words from other people without citing them as a source. I started with Walter Rea's book and now I'm working my way through Dr. Veltman's study. But, I find two problems:
1) I don't own all the books that Dr. Veltman refers to, nor do the local public libraries.
2) There's a lot of chapters that haven't even been looked at by either Rea or Veltman.
So, I'm casting a wide net trying to see if there are others who would be interested on in looking at just one chapter in DA and any one book that I don't have (see below)?
E. W. Thayer, Sketches From the Life of Jesus
William S. Kennedy, Messianic Prophecy
John Harris, The Great Teacher
Frederic W. Farrar, Life of Christ
Ingraham, Prince of the House of David (on order)
George Jones, Life-Scenes
Melvill, Golden Lectures
Melvill, Miscellaneous Sermons
John Cumming, Sabbath Evening Readings
________, Cumming’s Minor Works
J. R. Miller, Week-day Religion
George F. Pentecost, Bible Studies from the Old and New
Daniel March, Days of the Son of Man
________, Walks and Homes of Jesus (on order)
John Cunningham Geikie, The Life and Words of Christ (on order)
John Kitto, Daily Bible Illustrations
Francis Wayland, Salvation by Christ
Edward Bickersteth, A Scripture Help
Robert Boyd, The World’s Hope
Charles Deems, Who Was Jesus
Ezekiel Hopkins, The Whole Works of Ezekiel Hopkins
Stephen Olin, The Works of Stephen Olin
Charles Stanford, The Evening of Our Lord’s Ministry
Joined: 13 Apr 2003 Posts: 24 Location: St. Paul, MN USA
Posted: Thu Apr 24, 2003 7:26 pm Post subject:
In addition to looking at a chapter could you also confirm some quotes (see below)?
On chapters you could try chapter 2 in Desire of Ages; neither Rea or Veltman looked at it. You may find this to be either an intersting experience because it will require you to really pay attention to the msg of each author or it will be very frustrating because there won't be very much material that is verbally identical--contra the claims by Rea of 80-90% of EGW's material was copied. And this isn't even taking into account the quality of the writings!
1) Veltman has a quote from Farrar, page 123, sentence 6 (btw, when was your copy published and by whom? Could you send me a xerox copy of the pages where the quotes are found?)
"How was it that these youths of Galilee, how was it that a John so fervid yet contemplative, a Peter so impetuous in his affections yet so timid in his resolves, were thus brought at once--brought, as it were, by a single look, by a single word--to the Saviour's feet?"
2) Rea (page 310-1) "quotes" Farrar, page 142 as:
"The House of Prayer ... had been degraded into a place more like shambles ... while the lowing of oxen, the bleating of sheep ... the huckstering and wrangling, and the clinking of money ... might be heard in the words addressed to the Most High were drowned, in the uproar that invaded the temple."
Chpater 75 (this chapter seems to have quite a few quotes from Farrar according to Veltman--I haven't looked at it as I recall):
3) Farrar, page 12: "They led him to Anna first."
4) Farrar, page 11: "It seems to have been jointly occupied buy the prime movers in this black iniquity, Annas and his son-in-law, Joseph Caiaphas."
5) Farrar, page 30: "It is most remarkable, and, so far as I know, has scarecly ever been noticed, that, although the Pharisees undoubetly were actuated by a burning hatred against Jesus, and were even so eager for His death, as to be willing to co-operate with the aristocratic and priestly Sadducees-- "
Last edited by djconklin on Sat Apr 26, 2003 8:18 am; edited 1 time in total
This is obviously a different edition from the one Rhea and Veltmann used as the pages do not match up.
published by AL BURT Company -- Burt's Home Library Series-- a series which includes the standard works of the world's best literature, bound in uniform cloth binding...........
Year? (Can't find the date-- though handwritten inside the cover I see the book was presented to someone in 1927)
Quote:
2) Rea (page 310-1) "quotes" Farrar, page 142 as:
"The House of Prayer ... had been degraded into a place more like shambles ... while the lowing of oxen, the bleating of sheep ... the huckstering and wrangling, and the clinking of money ... might be heard in the words addressed to the Most High were drowned, in the uproar that invaded the temple."
OK that one is from the chapter "JESUS AT THE PASSOVER" page 100 in my edition.
-----Continuous quote from page 100-101 below:
"The vicinity of the Court of the Gentiles, with its broad spaces and long arcades, had been too tempting to Jewish greed. We learn from the Talmud that a certain Babba Ben Buta had been the first to introduce "3,000 sheep of the flocks of kedar into the Mountain of the House" --i.e., into the Court of the Gentiles, and therefore within the consecrated precincts. The profane example was eagerly followed. The canujoth of the shop-keepers, the exchange booths of the usurers, gradually crept into the sacred inclosure. There, in the actual Court of the Gentiles, steaming with heat in the burning April day, and filling the Temple with stench and flith, were penned whole flocks of sheep and oxen, while the drovers and pilgrims stood bartering and bargaining around them. There were the men with their great wicker cages filled with doves, and under the shadow of the arcade, formed by quadruple rows of Corinthian columns, sat the money-changers with their tables covered with piles of various small coins, while, as they reckoned and wrangled int he most dishonest of trades, their greedy eyes twinkled with the lust of gain. And this was the entrance-court to the Temple of the Most High! The court which was a witness that that house should be a House of Prayer for all nations had been degraded into a place which, for foulness was more like shambles, and for bustling commerce more like a densely crowded bazar; while the lowing of oxen, the bleating of sheep, the Babel of many languages, the huckstering and wrangling, and the clinking of money and of balances (perhaps not alway just), might be heard in the adjoining courts, disturbing the chant of the Levites and the prayers of priests!
"Filled with a righteous scorn at all this mean irreverence, burning with irresistible and noble indignation, Jesus, on entering the Temple, made a scourge of the rushes that lay on the floor; and in order to cleanse the sacred court of its worst pollutions, first drove out, indisciminately, the sheep and oxen and the low crowd who tended them. Then going to the tables of the money-changers He over-threw them where they stood, upsetting the carefully arranged heaps of heterogeneous coinage, and leaving the owners to grope and hunt for their scattered money on the polluted floor. Even to those who sold doves He issued the mandate to depart, less sternly indeed, because the dove was the offering of the poor, and there was less desecration and foulness in the presence there of those lovely emblems of innocence and purity; nor culd he overturn the tables of the dove-sellers lest the birds should be hurt in their cages; but still even to those who sold doves, He authoritatively claimed, "Take these things hence," justifying His action to the whole terrified, injured, muttering, ignoble crowd in no other words than the high rebuke, "Make not my Father's house a house of merchandise."
And his disciples, seeing this transport of inspiring and glorious anger, recalled to mind what David had once written "to the chief muscian upon soshannim" for the service of that very Temple, "The zeal of thine house shall even devour me."
END QUOTE
Last edited by dedication on Fri Apr 25, 2003 10:16 am; edited 1 time in total
Desire of Ages p.155 does contain the "missing" phrase:
The consequent confusion indicated a noisy cattle market rather than the sacred temple of God. There could be heard sharp bargaining, the lowing of cattle, the bleating of sheep, the cooing of doves, mingled with the chinking of coin and angry disputation. So great was the confusion that the worshipers were disturbed, and the words addressed to the Most High were drowned in the uproar that invaded the temple. The Jews were exceedingly proud of their piety. They rejoiced over their temple, and regarded a word spoken in its disfavor as blasphemy; they were very rigorous in the performance of ceremonies connected with it; but the love of money had overruled their scruples. They were scarcely aware how far they had wandered from the original purpose of the service instituted by God Himself.
It always amazes me when I see this "evidence" of copying. It's just odd bits and phrases-- how can that be termed "plagerism?
Quote:
) Veltman has a quote from Farrar, page 123, sentence 6
"How was it that these youths of Galilee, how was it that a John so fervid yet contemplative, a Peter so impetuous in his affections yet so timid in his resolves, were thus brought at once--brought, as it were, by a single look, by a single word--to the Saviour's feet
That one is on page 78 of my copy.
Preceeding it is a paragraph on Christ changing Simons name to Peter.
-----------
QUOTING FROM PAGE 78
"It was the first care of Andrew to find his brother Simon, and tell him of this great Eureka. He brought him to Jesus, and Jesus looking earnestly on him with that royal gaze which read intuitively the inmost thoughts --seeing at a glance in that simple fisherman all the weakness but also all the greatness of the man--said, giving him a new name, which was long afterward yet more solemnly confirmed, "Thou art Simon, the son of Jena; thous shalt be called Kephas;" that is, "thou art Simon, the son of the dove; hereafter thou shalt be as the rock in which the dove hides." It was, indeed a play upon the word, but one which was memorably symbolic and profound. Non but the shallow and the ignorant will see, in such a play upon the name, anything derogatory to the Savior's dignity. The essential meaning and augury of names had been in all ages a belief among the Jews, whose very language was regarded by themselves as being no less sacred than the oracular gems on Aaron's breast. Their belief in the mystic potency of sounds, of the tongue guided by unalterable destiny in the realms of seeming chance, may seem idle and superstititious to an artificial cultivation, but has been shared by many of the deepest thinkers in every age.
"How was it that these youths of Galilee, how was it that a Johnso fervid yet contemplative, a Peter so impetuous in his affections, yet so timid in his resolves, were thus brought at once--brought, as it were, by a single look, by a single word-- to the Savior's feet? How came they thus, by one flash of insight or of inspiration, to recognize, in the carpenter of Nazareth, the Messiah of prophecy, the son of God, the Saviour of the world?
"Doubtless in part by what He said, and by what John the Baptist had testified concerning Him, but doubtless also in part by His very look. On this subject, indeed, tradition has varied in a most remarkable manner; but on a point of so much interest we may briefly pause."
"Any one who has studied the representations of Christ in mediaeval art will have observed that some of them, particularly in missals, are degradingly and repulsively hideous, while others are conceived in the softest and loveliest ideal of human beauty. Whence came this singular divergence?
END QUOTE
-----
Farrar then goes into medievial art depictions of Christ. He quotes what church fathers say about Christ's appearance.
------
------
EGW writes:
DA.138-139
Of one purpose only were they conscious. One presence filled their thought. They exclaimed, "Rabbi, . . . where dwellest Thou?" In a brief interview by the wayside they could not receive that for which they longed. They desired to be alone with Jesus, to sit at His feet, and hear His words.
"He saith unto them, Come and see. They came and saw where He dwelt, and abode with Him that day."
If John and Andrew had possessed the unbelieving spirit of the priests and rulers, they would not have been found as learners at the feet of Jesus. They would have come to Him as critics, to judge His words. Many thus close the door to the most precious opportunities. But not so did these first disciples. They had responded to the Holy Spirit's call in the preaching of John the Baptist. Now they recognized the voice of the heavenly Teacher. To them the words of Jesus were full of freshness and truth and beauty. A divine illumination was shed upon the teaching of the Old Testament Scriptures. The many-sided themes of truth stood out in new light.
It is contrition and faith and love that enable the soul to receive wisdom from heaven. Faith working by love is the key of knowledge, and everyone that loveth "knoweth God." 1 John 4:7.
The disciple John was a man of earnest and deep affection, ardent, yet contemplative. He had begun to discern the glory of Christ,--not the worldly pomp and power for which he had been taught to hope, but "the glory as of the Only-begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth." John 1:14. He was absorbed in contemplation of the wondrous theme.
---------
---------
There are similarities, but I don't see any plagerism.
Last edited by dedication on Fri Apr 25, 2003 10:36 am; edited 2 times in total
Joined: 13 Apr 2003 Posts: 24 Location: St. Paul, MN USA
Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2003 9:21 am Post subject:
On the first quote by Farrar thank you very much for sending a whole paragraph!
>It always amazes me when I see this "evidence" of copying. It's just odd bits and phrases-- how can that be termed "plagerism?
That's one of the "neat" things about this study. I find that those making the claim have about a dozen and a half assumptions which they aren't even aware of. This is one of them--they have an extremely liberal definition of plagiarism--just like Rea accuses EGW of plagiarism even when she _does_ give her source!
It is possible that in the first example Rea's source (he didn't create the examples--someone else did--it is possible that Rea was duped) read the missing phrase into Farrar from EGW.
I agree with the different pagination bit. Frequently, my "edition" doesn't have the same material on the same page--and yet I find very little, if any, differences in the material, so why are the page numbers different?
Does Farrar write long paragraphs? I noticed that Hanna, March, and Fleetwood did, while EGW has short ones.
Last edited by djconklin on Sat Apr 26, 2003 8:21 am; edited 1 time in total
Farrer writes both long and short paragraphs as seen in the quotes given above.
As I was reading his book I found much interesting material, there are similarities with EGW, and there are differences.
Of course when one is dealing with the same account from the Bible there is bound to be similarities!
I thought to myself-- I bet if I took a book written after EGW on the Life of Christ I could find similar "evidence"!
So I pulled down a book by Charles Edward Forlines (1947 Abingdon-Cokesbury Press) called "Finding God Through Christ".
Charles (who I think was a Methodist) graduated 1897-- received B.Theology in 1901, became teacher in Western Maryland College in 1905 and in 1935 became president of the Westminster Theological Seminary Westminster, Maryland. The book was published after his death and is a collection of his manuscripts.
Sure enough -- as I randomly selected and scanned one chapter I could see many similarities with Desire of Ages!!
Amazing!! Surely she did not "plagerize" from this man whose book came out years after her death?
LOOK:
Page 109 of Forlines book:
------------------
"To hasten the death of the malefactors, the soldiers broke their limbs. They did not break the limbs of Jesus, because he was already dead. They did, however, thrust a spear into his side. After this there could be no doubt about the reality of death. There came forth from his side both blood and water. This was a great revelation. Dead men do not bleed. Whence, then, this blood and water? Only a literally broken heart seems an adequate explanation. Jesus was dead, having died of a broken heart."
-----------------
NOW look at page 771-772 in Desire of Ages
(you can read the whole thing, I will just give the important phrases)
---------------
"His consent having been obtained, the legs of the two thieves were broken to hasten their death; but Jesus was found to be already dead. ....
The priests wished to make sure of the death of Jesus, and at their suggestion a soldier thrust a spear into the Savior's side. From the wound thus made, there flowed two copious and distinct streams, one of blood, the other of water. This was noted by all the beholders, .........
They broke not His legs, because He was already dead. To satisfy the priests, they pierced His side. Had not life been already extinct, this wound would have caused instant death.
It was not the spear thrust, it was not the pain of the cross...the stream of blood and water that flowed from His side, declared that He died of a broken heart.
------------------
Now I'm wondering--
There are sure a lot of similarities here but I know EGW did NOT have this man's book to "plagerize" from.
Joined: 13 Apr 2003 Posts: 24 Location: St. Paul, MN USA
Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2003 2:48 pm Post subject: Coincidences
30 years before Rea published his book Alexander Lindey wrote a book entitled "Plagiarism and Originality". One of the things he noted, as I recall, was that if you have two people writing on the same subject you will find some identical wording. This is an artifact of the topic being written about. I would suggest that it is also influenced by the times and culture in which one is raised.
To reinforce the example you gave here's one sentance from Giuseppe Ricciotti's The Life of Christ (1947, orig. written in 1941), page 643:
"Jesus died literally of a broken heart caused by grief."
---
Lindey also gave 9 reasons why one should not to a double-column analysis such as Rea did.
---
>As I was reading his book I found much interesting material, there are similarities with EGW, and there are differences.
I find that the differences not only outweigh but are also more significant than the similarities.
Now I think you wanted Farrer's similarities not Forlines (even though I was amazed at how many other similarites I found between those two)
But Farrer's book was available to EGW, while Forlines book was NOT.
Looking at chapter 75 in Desire of Ages
BEFORE ANNAS AND THE COURT OF CAIAPHAS
and chapter 57 in The Life of Christ (Farrer)
JESUS BEFORE THE PRIESTS AND THE SANHEDIN
Farrer writes two pages about "skeptics" and proper treatment of the gospels and which gospel writer wrote what and that the different accounts taken together show Jesus went through three trials.
Then on the third page (456) The Life of Christ (Farrer)
----------
QUOTE:
"When the tribune, who commanded the detachment of Roman soldiers, had ordered Jesus to be bound, they led Him away without an attempt at opposition. Midnight was already passed as they hurried Him, from the moonlit shadows of green Gethsemane, through the hushed streets of the sleeping city, to the palace of the High Priest. It seems to have been jointly occupied b the prime movers in this black iniquity, Annas and his son-in -law, Joseph Caiaphas. They led Him to Annas first. It is true that this Hanan, son of Seth, the Ananus of Josephus, and Annas of the Evangelists, had only been the actual High Priest for seven years (A.D. 7-14), and that more than twenty years before this period he had been deposed by the Procurator Valerius Gratus. He had been succeeded first by Ismael Ben Phabi, then by his son Eleazar, then by his son-in-law Joseph Caiaphas. But the priestly families would not be likely to attach more importance than they chose to a deposition which a strict observer of the Law would have regarded as invalid and sacrilegious; nor would so astute a people as the Jews be likely to lack devices which would enable them to evade the Roman fiat, and to treat Annas, if they wished to do so, as their High Priestde jure, if not de facto Since the days of Herod the Great, the High Priesthood had been degraded, from a permanent religious office, to a temporary secular distinction, and , even had it been otherwise, the rude legionaries wuld probably care less than nothing to whom they led their victim. If the tribune condescended to ask a question about it, it would be easy for the Captian of the Temple--who may very probably have been at this time, as we know was the case subsequently, one of the sons of Annas himself--to represent Annas as the Sagan or Nasi-- the "Deput" or the President of the Sanhedrin--and so as the proper person to conduct the preliminary investigation.
i. Accordingly, it was before Hanan that Jesus stood first as a prisoner at the tribunal (John xvii.13, 19-14)........
-----
END FARRER'S QUOTE
-----
BEGIN EGW QUOTE
DA 698
Over the brook Keron, past gardens and olive groves, and through the hushed streets of the sleeping city, they hurried Jesus. It was past midnight, and the cries of the hooting mob that followed Him broke sharply upon the still air. The Savior was bound and closely guarded, and He moved painfully, But in eager haste His captor made their way with Him to the palace of Annas, the ex-high priest.
Annas was the head of the officiating priestly family, and in deference to his age he was recognized by the people as high priest. His cousel was sought and carried out as the voice of God. He must first see Jesus a captive to priestly power
Last edited by dedication on Fri Apr 25, 2003 7:11 pm; edited 1 time in total
Joined: 13 Apr 2003 Posts: 24 Location: St. Paul, MN USA
Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2003 4:09 pm Post subject:
>Now I think you wanted Farrer's similarities not Forlines (even though I was amazed at how many other similarites I found between those two)
But Farrer's book was available to EGW, while Forlines book was NOT.
I know. I was confirming what you found with another example.
Thanks for your efforts so far.
Veltman next suggests Farrar as a source down on page 59:
"The emphatic repetition of the 'I, and its unusually significant position ...
then from page 80:
"But He would not repeat it, in spite of their insistence, because He knew that it was open to their wilful misinterpretation ...
Actually I wrote and posted my last post before reading your comments about Lindey.
Yes, I do find that those who write about the same Biblical stories have a lot of simularities AND differences.
Yes, the differences are even more important in showing each had their own message and reason for writing.
Quote:
)3) Farrar, page 12: "They led him to Anna first."
4) Farrar, page 11: "It seems to have been jointly occupied buy the prime movers in this black iniquity, Annas and his son-in-law, Joseph Caiaphas."
5) Farrar, page 30: "It is most remarkable, and, so far as I know, has scarecly ever been noticed, that, although the Pharisees undoubetly were actuated by a burning hatred against Jesus, and were even so eager for His death, as to be willing to co-operate with the aristocratic and priestly Sadducees-- "
Well, I covered #3 and #4 in the above post.
You know I would never have found them if you hadn't also suggested checking out CHAPTER 75 in Desire of Ages.
The above quotes are all in Farrer's chapter that deal with the same history of Jesus before the Sanhedrin. Those three quotes are not on pages 10, 11, 30, all three of them are on pages 456-457 in Farrar's chapter 57.
-----------------
Page 456-457 of Farrar's "The Life of Christ"
"Jesus Before the Priests and the Sanhedrin"
QUOTE: (continuing where I left off in the last post)
{page 456 bottom}
". Accordingly, it was before Hanan that Jesus stood first as a prisoner at the tribunal (John xvii.13, 19-14). It is probable that he and his family had been originally summoned by Herod the Great from Alexandria, as supple supporters of a distasteful tyranny. The Jewish historian calls this Hanan the happiest man of his time, because he died at an advanced old age, and because both he and five of his sons in succession--not to mention his son-in-law-- had enjoyed the shadowof the High Priesthood; so that, in fact, or nearly half a century he had practically wielded {page 457} the sacerdotal power. But to be admired by such a renegade as Josephus is a questionable advantage. in spite of his prosperity he seems to have left behind him but an evil name, and we know enough of his character, even from the most unsuspected sources, to recognize in him nothing better than an astutue, tyrannous, worldly Sadducee, unvenerable for all his seventy years, full of a serpentine malice and meanness which utterly belied the meaning of his name, and engaged at this very moment in a dark, disorderly conspiracy, for whcih even a worse man would have had cause to blush. It was before this alien and intriguing hierarch that there began, at midnight, the first stage of that long and terrible trial (John xvii. 19-24)
"And there was good reason why St. John should have preserved for us this phase of the trail, and preserved it apparently for the express reason that it had been omitted by the other Evangelists. It is not till after a lapse of years that people can always see clearly the prime mover in events with which they have been contemporary. At the time, the ostensible agent is the one usually regarded as most responsible, though he may be in reality a mere link in the official machinery. But if there were one man who was more guilty than any other of the death of Jesus, that man was Hanan. His advanced age, his preponderant dignity, his worldly position and influence, as one who stood on the best terms with the Herods and the procurators, gave an exceptional weight to his prorogative decision. The mere fact that he should have noticed Jesus at all showed that he attached to His teaching a political significance--showed that he was at least afraid lest Jesus should alienate the people yet more entirely from the pontifical clique than had ever been done by Shemaia or Abtalion. It is most remarkable, and, so far as I know, has scarcely ever been noticed, that, although the Pharisees undoubtedly were actuated by a burning hatred against Jesus, and were even so eager for His death as to be willing to cooperate with the aristocratic and priestly Sadducees--from whom they were ordinarily separated by every kind of difference, political, social and religious--yet, from the moment that the plot for His arrest and condemnation had been matured, the Pharisees took so little part in it that their name is not once directly mentioned in any event {page 458}connected with the arrest, the trial, the derisions and the crucifixion. The Pharisees, as such, disappear; the chief priests and elder take their place. It is, indeed, doubtful whether any of the more distinguished Pharisees were members of the degraded simulacrum of authority which in those bad days still arrogated to itself the title of a Sanhedrin. If we may believe not a few of the indications of the Talmud, that Sanhedrin was little better than a close, irreligious, unpatriotic confederacy of monopolizing and time-serving priest-- the Boothusim, the Kamhits, the Phabis, the family of Hanan, mostly of on-Palestinian origin--who were supported by the government, but detested by the people, and of whom this bad conspirator was the very life and soul.
--------
END QUOTE
How this passage is thought to be "plagerized" by EGW I can't tell.
There is a bit of similarity on page 699 of chapter 75 in Desire of Ages.
...."The trial must be so conducted as to unite the members of the Sanhedrin against "Christ."
In other passages not dealing with the trial, in DA, Ellen White talks about the Sadducees and Pharisees.
DA.405.002
A deputation of Pharisees had been joined by representatives from the rich and lordly Sadducees, the party of the priests, the skeptics and aristocracy of the nation. The two sects had been at bitter enmity. The Sadducees courted the favor of the ruling power in order to maintain their own position and authority. The Pharisees, on the other hand, fostered the popular hatred against the Romans, longing for the time when they could throw off the yoke of the conqueror. But Pharisee and Sadducee now united against Christ. Like seeks like; and evil, wherever it exists, leagues with evil for the destruction of the good.
DA.538.003
So, as the priests, the rulers, and the elders gathered for consultation, it was their fixed determination to silence Him who did such marvelous works that all men wondered. Pharisees and Sadducees were more nearly united than ever before. Divided hitherto, they became one in their opposition to Christ.
Last edited by dedication on Sun Apr 27, 2003 12:44 pm; edited 1 time in total
Veltman next suggests Farrar as a source down on page 59:
"The emphatic repetition of the 'I, and its unusually significant position ...
This too, is from the same chapter 57 "Jesus before the Priests and the Sanhedrin. page 459-461 of Farrar's book "The Life of Christ".
-------
QUOTE
... There is every reason to believe that the shops which had intruded even under the Temple porticoes were not only sanctioned by their authority, but even managed for their profit. To interfere with these was to rob them of one important source of that wealth and worldy comfort to which they attached such extravagant importance. There was good reason why Hanan, (Annas) the head representative of "the viper brood," as a Talmudic writer calls them, should strain to the utmost his cruel prerogative of power to crush a Prophet whose actions tended to make him and his powerful family at once wholly contemptible and comparatively poor.
{page 460}
"Such then were the feelings of bitter contempt and hatred with which the ex-high Priest assumed the initiative in interrogating Jesus. The fact that he dared not avow them--nay, was forced to keep them wholly out of sight--would only add to the intensity of his bitterness. Even his method of procedure seems to have been as wholly illegal as was his assumption, in such a place and at such an hour, of any legal function whatever. Anxious, at all hazards, to trump up some available charge of secret sedition, or of unorthodox teaching, he questioned Jesus of His disciples and of His doctrine. The answer, for all its calmness, involved a deep reproof. "I have spoken openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue and in the Temple, where all the Jews come together, and in secret I said nothing. Why askest thou me? Ask those who have heard me what I said to them. Lo! these"--pointing, perhaps, to the by-standers-- "know what I said to them." The emphatic repetition of the "I" and its unusually significant position at the end of the sentence, show that a contrast was intended; as though He had said, "This midnight, this sedition, this secrecy, this indecent mockery of justice, are yours, not mine, There has never been anything esoteric in my doctrine; never anything to conceal in my actions; no hole-and corner plots among my followers. But thou? and thine?" Even the minions of Annas felt the false position of their master under this calm rebuke; they felt that before the transparent innocence of the youthful Rabbi of Nazareth the hoary hypocrisy of the crafty Sadducee was abashed. "Answerest thou the High Priest so? said one of them with a burst of illegal insolence; and then unreproved by this priestly violator of justice, he profaned with the first infamous blow the sacred face of Christ. Then first that face which,as the poet-preacher says, "the angels stare upon with wonder as infants at a bright sunbeam," was smitten by a contemptible slave. The insult was borne {page 461} with noble meekness. Even St. Paul, when similarly insulted, flaming into sudden anger at such a grossly illegal violence, had scathed the ruffian and his abettor with "God shall smite thee, thou whited wall" (Acts 23:3) but He, the Son of God-- He who was infinitely above all apostles and all angels--with no flash of anger, with no heightened tone of natural indignation, quiely reproved the impudent transgressor with the words, "If I spoke evil, bear witness concening the evil; but if well, why smitest thou me?" It was clear that nothing more could be extorted from Him; that before such a tribunal He would brook no further question. Bound, in sign that he was to be condemned--though unheard and unsentenced--Annas sent Him across the court-yard to Joseph Caiaphas, his son-in-law, who, not by the grace of God, but by the grace of the Roman Procurator, was the titular High Priest.
END QUOTE
------
------
How does EGW record the same scene?
See DA 699-700
DA.699.001
Christ read the priest's purpose as an open book. As if reading the inmost soul of His questioner, He denied that there was between Him and His followers any secret bond of union, or that He gathered them secretly and in the darkness to conceal His designs. He had no secrets in regard to His purposes or doctrines. "I spake openly to the world," He answered; "I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing."
DA.699.002
The Saviour contrasted His own manner of work with the methods of His accusers. For months they had hunted Him, striving to entrap Him and bring Him before a secret tribunal, where they might obtain by perjury what it was impossible to gain by fair means. Now they were carrying out their purpose. The midnight seizure by a mob, the mockery and abuse before He was condemned, or even accused, was their manner of work, not His. Their action was in violation of the law. Their own rules declared that every man should be treated as innocent until proved guilty. By their own rules the priests stood condemned.
DA.699.003
Turning upon His questioner, Jesus said, "Why askest thou Me?" Had not the priests and rulers sent spies to watch His movements, and report His every word? Had not these been present at every gathering of the people, and carried to the priests information of all His sayings and doings? "Ask them which heard Me, what I have said unto them," replied Jesus; "behold, they know what I said."
DA.700.001
Annas was silenced by the decision of the answer. Fearing that Christ would say something regarding his course of action that he would prefer to keep covered up, he said nothing more to Him at this time. One of his officers, filled with wrath as he saw Annas silenced, struck Jesus on the face, saying, "Answerest Thou the high priest so?"
DA.700.002
Christ calmly replied, "If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou Me?" He spoke no burning words of retaliation. His calm answer came from a heart sinless, patient, and gentle, that would not be provoked.
DA.700.003
Christ suffered keenly under abuse and insult.........
page 703.01
Christ had said nothing that could give His accusers an advantage, yet He was bound, to signify that He was condemned. There must, however, be a pretense of justice..........
DA 703.02
But first of all, an accusation was to be found. They had gained nothing as yet, Annas ordered Jesus to be taken to Caiaphas.
Last edited by dedication on Sun Apr 27, 2003 12:38 pm; edited 4 times in total
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in
