BelieveTheSign

Plagiarism: Difference between revisions

Page Discussion

Plagiarism (view source)

Revision as of 17:59, 7 January 2022

2 bytes added ,  2 years ago
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 61: Line 61:
If William Branham has simply said "I read this information in Clarence Larkin's book", then he would not have been guilty of plagiarism.  But he didn't.  Instead he said that he received it by divine revelation.  He said that God gave it to him, which was a lie.  He got the information directly from Clarence Larkin and others.  Below are '''specific examples of plagiarism in William Branham's ministry'''.  We have also addressed a few questions about plagiarism in the Bible which can be found by [[Q&A:Plagiarism|clicking here]].
If William Branham has simply said "I read this information in Clarence Larkin's book", then he would not have been guilty of plagiarism.  But he didn't.  Instead he said that he received it by divine revelation.  He said that God gave it to him, which was a lie.  He got the information directly from Clarence Larkin and others.  Below are '''specific examples of plagiarism in William Branham's ministry'''.  We have also addressed a few questions about plagiarism in the Bible which can be found by [[Q&A:Plagiarism|clicking here]].


=Defenses against the charge of plagiarism=
We have had message believers state that there are several reasons why William Branham was not guilty of plagiarism.  However, these claims do not hold up to any kind of scrutiny and simply appear to be symptomatic of [[Cognitive Dissonance]].
==Derivative work==
It is argued by some message believers that William Branham did not plagiarize clarence Larkin's works but rather created a derivative work.  The argument was presented as follows:
:''...a derivative work is a work based upon one or more pre-existing works. Briefly, any other form in which an original work may be recast, transformed, or adapted can be considered a derivative work. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications that, when taken as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is also a "derivative work" (Source: Title 17 U.S.C. Section 101).  In other words, using an existing idea to create or transform it into another idea. To put it bluntly, it means you can copy someone’s idea for the purpose of presenting a new idea. So basically, what William Branham did was a typical derivative work from Clarence Larkin.
It is correct that U.S. copyright law protects the right to "make a derivative work," such as a movie from a book.  But a derivative work does not include a direct copying of Larkin's work verbatim and including it in the Church Age book.
We suggest that anyone concerned with this issue should review Larkin's work on the church ages and then read the first few chapters of Branham's church age book.  Several pages of Larkin's work are copied almost verbatim.
William Branham's plagiarism of Larkin's work is morally, ethically and biblically wrong.
==Public domain==
The argument that William Branham did not plagiarize Larkin's works is as follows (taken from an argument presented by [[The Message|a follower of William Branham]]:
:''According to U.S. copyright laws, any works published before 1923 are already entered into public domain. It means it is given to the public. Anyone can freely use of the materials without asking permission or paying anything.  Both of Larkin's 2 books being published before 1923, has already entered in public domain.  By this alone, it is a proof that there is no plagiarism because the material was never stolen. There is no such thing as stealing in public domain materials.
The problem with this argument is that it doesn't look at what the situation was during William Branham's lifetime.  Larkin's ''The Book of Revelation'' was published in 1919 and passed into the public domain in 1975, 10 years after William Branham died.
So William Branham was in clear violation of U.S. copyright law when he published the Church Age book in 1965.
==Larkin was mentioned by Branham==
William Branham only mentioned Clarence Larkin 3 times in the recorded sermons.  He is never mentioned in the Church Age Book.
:''I've been reading '''Dr. Larkin's book''', Dr. Smith's book, Dr. Scofield's notes, different commentaries from men everywhere, and yet I '''cannot put theirs together to make it come out right'''.<ref>GABRIEL'S.INSTRUCTIONS.TO.DANIEL JEFF.IN 61-0730M</ref>
:''And so, no doubt that down through the age there has been hundreds times hundreds of people, scholars, abled men, trying to explain what these seventy of weeks were. And I've read many of their commentaries on it. And I'm very grateful to Mr. Smith of the Adventist church for his views. '''I'm very grateful to Dr. Larkin of his views.''' I'm grateful to all these great scholars for their views on this. And in reading them, it enlightens me much that '''I can find places that looks right. But''' to get the views that I--I thought that I would like to explain, I searched through the encyclopedia of time to find out what time meant.<ref>THE.SEVENTIETH.WEEK.OF.DANIEL_  JEFF.IN 61-0806</ref>
:'' I had my own idea, as every minister does, of reading maybe what other man had said; and believing as much as I possible, with them, on the things that they had drawed up, their conclusion. I had read the book of Mr. Smith, Uriah Smith, which is the Adventist teacher, and I had read his--his thoughts on it. And '''I had read Mr. Larkin.''' I had read, oh, so many different ones, of their commentaries on This. But, somehow or other'n, I thought I had a--a little view of it, myself, that might be of places different. But trying one time, just speaking three subjects, the first... or the four subjects of the four horse riders. I preached on it four nights, one on one horse, and the other.  B'''ut then just before it happened, I was given a vision'''...<ref>THE.FEAST.OF.THE.TRUMPETS  JEFF.IN  64-0719M</ref>


So while William Branham mentions Larkin, he never mentions him in the context of the sermons that he preached that were based on Larkin's materials.  Larkin is never mentioned in the church age series or the seven seals series.  Larkin is also not mentioned in the Church Age book.
That is what plagiarism is all about.  Taking someone's work and not giving them due credit.  He said he didn't really agree with Larkin when he actually stole a lot of his ideas.  That is just wrong morally, ethically and biblically.


=Examples of William Branham's plagiarism=
=Examples of William Branham's plagiarism=
Line 682: Line 643:


We have received several emails on the subject of William Branham's plagiarism.  Our responses to these questions can be found in our article entitled [[Q&A:Plagiarism]].
We have received several emails on the subject of William Branham's plagiarism.  Our responses to these questions can be found in our article entitled [[Q&A:Plagiarism]].
=Defenses against the charge of plagiarism=
We have had message believers state that there are several reasons why William Branham was not guilty of plagiarism.  However, these claims do not hold up to any kind of scrutiny and simply appear to be symptomatic of [[Cognitive Dissonance]].
==Derivative work==
It is argued by some message believers that William Branham did not plagiarize clarence Larkin's works but rather created a derivative work.  The argument was presented as follows:
:''...a derivative work is a work based upon one or more pre-existing works. Briefly, any other form in which an original work may be recast, transformed, or adapted can be considered a derivative work. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications that, when taken as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is also a "derivative work" (Source: Title 17 U.S.C. Section 101).  In other words, using an existing idea to create or transform it into another idea. To put it bluntly, it means you can copy someone’s idea for the purpose of presenting a new idea. So basically, what William Branham did was a typical derivative work from Clarence Larkin.
It is correct that U.S. copyright law protects the right to "make a derivative work," such as a movie from a book.  But a derivative work does not include a direct copying of Larkin's work verbatim and including it in the Church Age book.
We suggest that anyone concerned with this issue should review Larkin's work on the church ages and then read the first few chapters of Branham's church age book.  Several pages of Larkin's work are copied almost verbatim.
William Branham's plagiarism of Larkin's work is morally, ethically and biblically wrong.
==Public domain==
The argument that William Branham did not plagiarize Larkin's works is as follows (taken from an argument presented by [[The Message|a follower of William Branham]]:
:''According to U.S. copyright laws, any works published before 1923 are already entered into public domain. It means it is given to the public. Anyone can freely use of the materials without asking permission or paying anything.  Both of Larkin's 2 books being published before 1923, has already entered in public domain.  By this alone, it is a proof that there is no plagiarism because the material was never stolen. There is no such thing as stealing in public domain materials.
The problem with this argument is that it doesn't look at what the situation was during William Branham's lifetime.  Larkin's ''The Book of Revelation'' was published in 1919 and passed into the public domain in 1975, 10 years after William Branham died.
So William Branham was in clear violation of U.S. copyright law when he published the Church Age book in 1965.
==Larkin was mentioned by Branham==
William Branham only mentioned Clarence Larkin 3 times in the recorded sermons.  He is never mentioned in the Church Age Book.
:''I've been reading '''Dr. Larkin's book''', Dr. Smith's book, Dr. Scofield's notes, different commentaries from men everywhere, and yet I '''cannot put theirs together to make it come out right'''.<ref>GABRIEL'S.INSTRUCTIONS.TO.DANIEL JEFF.IN 61-0730M</ref>
:''And so, no doubt that down through the age there has been hundreds times hundreds of people, scholars, abled men, trying to explain what these seventy of weeks were. And I've read many of their commentaries on it. And I'm very grateful to Mr. Smith of the Adventist church for his views. '''I'm very grateful to Dr. Larkin of his views.''' I'm grateful to all these great scholars for their views on this. And in reading them, it enlightens me much that '''I can find places that looks right. But''' to get the views that I--I thought that I would like to explain, I searched through the encyclopedia of time to find out what time meant.<ref>THE.SEVENTIETH.WEEK.OF.DANIEL_  JEFF.IN 61-0806</ref>
:'' I had my own idea, as every minister does, of reading maybe what other man had said; and believing as much as I possible, with them, on the things that they had drawed up, their conclusion. I had read the book of Mr. Smith, Uriah Smith, which is the Adventist teacher, and I had read his--his thoughts on it. And '''I had read Mr. Larkin.''' I had read, oh, so many different ones, of their commentaries on This. But, somehow or other'n, I thought I had a--a little view of it, myself, that might be of places different. But trying one time, just speaking three subjects, the first... or the four subjects of the four horse riders. I preached on it four nights, one on one horse, and the other.  B'''ut then just before it happened, I was given a vision'''...<ref>THE.FEAST.OF.THE.TRUMPETS  JEFF.IN  64-0719M</ref>
So while William Branham mentions Larkin, he never mentions him in the context of the sermons that he preached that were based on Larkin's materials.  Larkin is never mentioned in the church age series or the seven seals series.  Larkin is also not mentioned in the Church Age book.
That is what plagiarism is all about.  Taking someone's work and not giving them due credit.  He said he didn't really agree with Larkin when he actually stole a lot of his ideas.  That is just wrong morally, ethically and biblically.


{{Theology}}
{{Theology}}
Retrieved from "http:///index.php?title=Special:MobileDiff/25917"