Quote:
Originally Posted by Unregistered
Please take a moment and look at this thread from the big picture.
Watchman Nee, arguably a martyr, is well-respected interdenominationally.
But on this forum he is a plagiarist, based upon the flimsiest of evidence.
Who among us has not appropriated a story and retold it with embellishments, perhaps even narrating it in the first person?
What purpose does this thread serve? What is the expected response from a visitor to this forum?
|
I too endeavor to see things from, as you say, the big picture. I have been following this thread for the past few weeks in the matter of potential plagiarism in the writing of the book “The Spiritual Man”. The following is a quotation taken from the preface of that book, pgs. 11-12.
“
I am not the first to advocate the teaching of the dividing of spirit and soul. Andrew Murray once said that what the church and individuals have to dread is the inordinate activity of the soul with its power of mind and will. F.B. Meyer declared that had he not known about the dividing of spirit and soul, he could not have imagined what his spiritual life would have been. Many others, such as Otto Stockmayer, Jessie Penn-Lewis, Evan Roberts, Madam Guyon, have given the same testimony. I have used their writings freely since we all have received the same commission from the Lord, therefore I have decided to forego notating their many references.” “Shanghai, Watchman Nee, June 4, 1927”.
According to Wikipedia, Watchman Nee was born November 3, 1903, and according to the date given in the preface of TSM he would be just 23 years old at the point of writing. If you read through the entire preface, he seems to indicate and consider himself to be a teacher and leader at this juncture of his life. The following 231 pages of the three volume book (my copy) seem to be written with that same general attitude and disposition, in my opinion. He mentions above, five different authors to whom he used their “many references” to include in the TSM. It is impossible to know “who said what”, and what WN “had on his own”, throughout the book. Was WN a plagiarist? Well, he did come right out and credit a few people, along with saying “many others” in the writing of. Can you imagine taking this charge to a court in 1927 China for plagiarism? WN seemed okay with it. Things have changed significantly near 100 years later haven’t they? But today, if you have this attitude (highlighted in the above WN quote) with many publishing house books and materials you may or will get yourself spanked, or sued, if you know what I mean.
I had not thought of this matter in this way, in the big picture, until this OP. I thought it important to provide the quote.