Inspiration/Revelation: What It Is and How It Works

The “Copying” Charge

As we will study in more detail in the second of this series of three presentations, no charge has been leveled against Ellen White in her professional capacity as a prophet of the Lord that had not already been made against the prophets of the Bible—whether the charge be that of copying, or of having made unfulfilled prophecies, or of having made some errors in what was written or said, or of having to go back and change something that was said by the prophet—even matters of major substance that had to be corrected. IRWHW 50.6

We will deal here only with the charge of copying other writers—inspired or uninspired. Originality is not now, nor has it ever been, a test of an individual’s prophetic inspiration, as Robert W. Olson, Director of the Ellen G. White Estate, pointed out to the religion editor of Newsweek magazine; and therefore, literary “borrowing does not dilute her [Mrs. White’s] claim to inspiration.” ⁵⁹ IRWHW 50.7

The Bible writers copied from one another without attribution of source, and apparently felt no compunctions about such practice: IRWHW 50.8

“Micah 4:1-3 borrowed from Isaiah 2:2-4. The scribe who compiled 2 Kings 18:20 also borrowed from Isaiah 36-39. Matthew and Luke borrowed heavily from Mark as well as from another common source. None of these ever acknowledged their borrowing. (See The S.D.A. Bible Commentary 5:178, 179.)” ⁶⁰

In fact, many scholars openly acknowledge that some 91 percent of the Gospel of Mark was copied by Matthew and Luke when they wrote their respective Gospels! IRWHW 50.9

Of perhaps greater interest, however, is the fact that the writers of the Bible would from time to time copy (or “borrow”) the literary productions of noninspired authors, including pagan writers. For example, about 600 B.C. Epimenides wrote: IRWHW 50.10

“They fashioned a tomb for thee, O holy and high one—The Cretans, always liars, evil beasts, idle bellies! But thou art not dead; thou livest and abidest for ever; For in thee we live and move and have our being.” ⁶¹

Sound vaguely familiar? Well, the Apostle Paul twice used some of these words, once in Titus 1:12 (“One of themselves, even a prophet of their own said, The Cretians are always liars, evil beasts, slow bellies”) and again in his sermon on Mars Hill in Athens, in Acts 17:28 (“For in him we live, and move, and have our being”). IRWHW 50.11

Jesus did not invent the Golden Rule of Matthew 7:12. A generation earlier Rabbi Hillel had already written: “What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor; that is the whole Torah, while the rest is the commentary thereof.” IRWHW 50.12

The thoughts—and even some of the words—of the Lord’s Prayer may be found in earlier ritual prayers known as the Ha-Kaddish. ⁶² IRWHW 50.13

Substantial parts of John’s Apocalypse—the Book of Revelation—are lifted bodily from the Book of Enoch, a pseudepigraphical work known to have been circulated some 150 years before John wrote the last book of the Bible; and even Jude borrowed a line (“Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints”) from the same source. ⁶³ IRWHW 50.14

Indeed, some 15 apocryphal or pseudepigraphical books are cited in the New Testament—generally without attribution of their source. IRWHW 50.15

Doctor Luke tells us that he did a substantial amount of research and investigation in sources then available to him before he wrote the Gospel that bears his name: IRWHW 50.16

“Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, ... it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; so that you might know the exact truth about the things you have been taught” (Luke 1:1, 3, 4, NASB). ⁶⁴

In commenting on this passage, Robert W. Olson remarks: IRWHW 50.17

“Luke did not acquire his information through visions or dreams but through his own research. Yet while material in the gospel of Luke was not given by direct revelation it was nonetheless written under divine inspiration. He did not write to tell his readers something new, but to assure them of what was true—‘that you might know the exact truth about the things you have been taught.’ What Luke wrote was not original, but it was dependable. God led Luke to use the right sources. (See The S.D.A. Bible Commentary 5:669).” ⁶⁵

Because an inspired writer quotes from an uninspired writer, it does not follow that the earlier writer must now be seen somehow as having come under the umbrella of inspiration. Inspiration is a process, not a content. IRWHW 50.18

Just as biblical authors used noninspired sources, Ellen White also copied from the writings of authors who were not inspired. ⁶⁶ IRWHW 51.1