Legal matters . . .

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Edit Profile

Author Message Mark Simmons Posted on Friday, July 02, 1999 - 12:59 pm:        Greetings, I am looking for any cogent response from an attorney to the Ramik Report (see http://www.WhiteEstate.org/issues/ramik.html). Thanks. Mark Simmons, JD University of Idaho College of Law Lynn W Posted on Wednesday, July 07, 1999 - 9:27 am:        Mark, I am not an attorney, but I am curious what the Ramik Report is about. Can you give us the gist of it? Lynn Nancy Posted on Wednesday, July 28, 1999 - 4:52 pm:        I would appreciate a response on this because regardless whether EGW plagurized or not prophets are suppose to be 100% correct in all things which I might add she was incorrect regarding Christ's return. How stupid. No man knoweth the day or hour, not even the angels. So how do they (SDA's) get around that do you think? What does this Ramik report prove. What need does a woman in vision have to borrow from other authors especially non-Adventist? I always wondered why we needed her or any so called prophet when we have the bible. That is my one and only source!! Please respond anyone, Nancy Lydell Posted on Thursday, July 29, 1999 - 4:48 am:        That's the report that was put together by a Catholic lawyer hired by the SDA denomination. He supposedly investigated EGW and the issue of plagerism and his conclusion was that it was "okay" that she borrowed stuff because back in the time she was writing, supposedly the copyright laws were different, or whatever. "Funny" how none of it addresses this: 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 prophesy 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. hmmmmm Pat Darnell Posted on Friday, July 30, 1999 - 12:44 pm:        I would like to see more info on this subject, also. I "was told" - and that's rumor - that Ramik was a personal friend of someone in the GC. If that be the case, the whole thing was contrived to deceive the "little flock" who keep buying all those horrid compilations which come out every year or two. Let us know what is found out... maggieb Posted on Friday, July 30, 1999 - 4:56 pm:        Here is my very non-cogent explanation of the Ramik Report: why be surprised in the 1990's when an attorney defends the party who pays him to do so? :-)