Thank you for providing the documentation about this.Nestor wrote:Cynthlia said:
but... [sic.] you are making unsupported claims here, I do have to ask what in the world are you taking about, and what is the source of your information ? Obviously we don't want unsupported claims, or false reports or misinformation given here, and I am sure you do not either.Well, the following wesite will give you additional documentation:[quote/]
The above URL is an official announcement from the REVIEW. It is an authorative statement to the effect that in the example cited the book being circulated is a very much shortened version of what we generally call THE GREAT CONTROVERSY. Personally, I would probably favor this, if I were to see what is being circulated. So, my comments in the past are not negative. However, it points out, in my thinking, that many of those who aplaud the circulation do not understand what is being circulated. I also think that if they knew, some who wish for the entire book to be circulated, would object to the circulation of this smaller version.
I do not have any reason at this point to believe the meaning has been changed or important parts left out to decieve or mislead. I would have to read a copy before forming an opinion and either endorsing/circulating it or objecting to it myself.
Perhaps you are right, some would object, and maybe that doesn't matter. We don't know that they do. Even if they do? Have they read it? People are always disagreeing, criticizing and objecting to things without cause, or any rhyme or reason....( or doing the opposite with just as little facts ) The thing is those people don't usually listen to rhyme or reason or facts anyway, so...
IMO, just the fact that it is a smaller (condensed) version is not enough for some, or any, to object to it, nor would that be logical. Excerpts of EGW's writings have been published for years in our periodicals and other books, (even during her lifetime- and she never objected) to get the word out. It would depend on the content and the meaning. As long as any editing or condensing keeps the original meaning intact and doesn't change it,and gets the message across and causes folks to study further, or got to the original book for more, I have no problem.
We would also both have to read it before being able to have an informed and hopefully intelligent further discussion about it here as surmisings or conjectures or what if's or perhaps etc before doing so like this are mostly a waste of time, imo.
I will try to get a copy.
Have a blessed day...