The P. Word in Different Works - Oh no!

I guess Plagiarism is common everywhere! Look at The New Bible Dictionary entry on marriage and then check out Understanding Theology, Vol. III by Kendall, R.T.

The New Bible Dictionary, 3rd Edition (The oldest edition I have in Spanish by J.D. Douglas reads the same as the new 3rd Edition by Wood, D.R.W., Marshall, I.Howard.

b. Wedding ceremonies

An important feature of many of these ceremonies was the public acknowledgment of the marital relationship. It is to be understood that not all of the following steps were taken at all weddings.
(i) Garments of bride and groom. The bride sometimes wore embroidered garments (Ps. 45:13–14), jewels (Is. 61:10), a special girdle or ‘attire’ (Je. 2:32) and a veil (Gn. 24:65). Among the adornments of the groom might be a garland (Is. 61:10). Eph. 5:27; Rev. 19:8; 21:2 refer figuratively to the white garments of the church as the Bride of Christ.
(ii) Bridesmaids and friends. Ps. 45:14 speaks of bridesmaids for a royal bride, and we assume that lesser brides had their bridesmaids also. Certainly the bridegroom had his group of companions (Jdg. 14:11). One of these corresponded to the best man at our weddings, and is called ‘companion’ in Jdg. 14:20; 15:2, and ‘the friend of the bridegroom’ in Jn. 3:29. He may be the same as ‘the steward (AV ‘governor’) of the feast’ in Jn. 2:8–9.

And it continues elaborating on the procession...

Thomson, J. G. S. S. (1996). Marks. In D. R. W. Wood, I. H. Marshall, A. R. Millard, J. I. Packer, & D. J. Wiseman (Eds.), New Bible dictionary (3rd ed., p. 734). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

Here's Kendall's not so different version of it...LOL...and no citation given:

2. An important feature of the ceremony was the public acknowledgement of the marital relationship.
a. Special garments for the bride and groom.
(1) The bride sometimes wore embroidered garments (Ps. 45:13–14), jewels (Is. 61:10), ornaments (Jer. 2:32) and a veil (Gen. 24:65).
(2) The groom might wear a garland (Is. 61:10).
b. Wedding attendants:
(1) Bridesmaids and friends (Ps. 45:14).
(2) The groom had his companions (Judges 14:11; Matt. 9:15).

It continues with the procession just like the Dictionary does...hehe...at least I quoted the Spanish version of the dictionary when I did my paper on Marriage vs Cohabitation in Spanish ;-)

Kendall, R. T. (2001). Understanding Theology, Volume Three (pp. 454–455). Ross-shire, Great Britain: Christian Focus.

Anyway, just FYI...it's a common problem.

DAL

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Jan Krohn

How do you know RT Kendall is the copycat? His volumes are based on a series of talks from 1992 to 1996. He might as well have used some of his earlier works, which the authors of the NBD quoted without attribution.

Therefore, unless you have some more substantial evidence, a more neutral tone of language would be appreciated when it comes to accusations of plagiarism.

DAL

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/849373#Comment_849373

Actually, the way I wrote it seems to suggest either one copy the other. I didn't really specify who copied who. As far as older works goes, my Spanish version of the dictionary is based on the 1982 English version, which is the second edition, meaning the first edition which contained the same is even older, which in turn maybe older than Kendall's work...someone copied the other that's for sure and that was the whole point of the post.

DAL

Ps. Should I add the fact that the 1982 version of the dictionary was published in England and contains the Bibliography at the end of the article and Kendall's name seems to be absent from the list of contributors. Hmm yep The evidence seems to be pointing to one person in particular.

Robert M. Warren

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/849376#Comment_849376

The gentleman who wrote this webpage cites a 1962 American (Tyndale House) edition of the NBD: http://www.bibletexts.com/glossary/wedding.htm

DAL

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/849383#Comment_849383

The gentleman who wrote this webpage cites a 1962 American (Tyndale House) edition of the NBD: http://www.bibletexts.com/glossary/wedding.htm

That alone proves he plagiarized since he was only 27 years old in 1962. Not only that, but his academic studies (A.B., M.Div., D.Phil. & Doctor of Divinity) were not achieved until 1970 - 1988; so I seriously doubt he contributed anything to The New Bible Dictionary 1st, 2nd or 3rd edition for that matter.

The point, leave O'Brien alone! Why expose one and not the others who have done it throughout history. Everyone does it to one degree or another. When you study a subject and you teach that subject from the overflow of your studies you are in a sense plagiarizing by teaching something you learned by studying what others have already written a long time ago. Since when commenting on the Bible became a business? It's God's Word! No wonder a lot of greedy churches and their pastors are charging $50 bucks "donations" to send you a lousy sermon that some Joe Nobody preached and that probably got it from another person who wrote it a long time ago and nobody even remembers him/her anymore. Sad but true, As I've always concluded (without even reading Paul) some do see Godliness as a way of gain!

DAL

Ps. The saddest part is how people boast about how they've written 50 books or more and perhaps they just copied and pasted most of the material and presented it as their own. But then again, who should care anyway? 1) No harm done, is just material that edifies to some degree and 2) everyone deserves to make a buck or two, no?

Jan Krohn

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/849399#Comment_849399

I don't see any proof, however, that is substantial evidence now, and leaves a crack in the respect that I have for Dr. Kendall. [:(]

His writings really had an impact on me when I was quite a young Christian.

DAL

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/849410#Comment_849410

I don't see any proof, however, that is substantial evidence now, and leaves a crack in the respect that I have for Dr. Kendall.

His writings really had an impact on me when I was quite a young Christian.

See that's the point we're missing! You were edified, it influenced you in a good way. Isn't that what old stories and the parables of the Bible do to you even if they're presented in a different way than it was written originally? The material originates with God and it's our job to explain it to save people even if it means someone said it in a similar way in the past. I like Dr. Kendall's work on Understanding Theology and others and even if he didn't acknowledge the source I'd still quote his books if it helps someone learn about the Truth. So my take on it, don't worry if he plagiarized or not he helped you just like O'Brien has helped me and that's all that matters.

DAL