False Accusation of Plagiarism:
Libel: “A published false statement that is damaging to a person’s reputation; a written defamation.”
Ben at Amateur Exegete has falsely accused me of plagiarism in writing an essay. As a published author and scholar, my reputation is built on the integrity of my work, and these unfounded allegations are causing unjust harm to my professional standing.
Based on both legal and academic definitions: My use of public domain material and historical references is permissible. My phrasing and structure are clearly different from the other text. There’s no evidence of copying or misleading use of another’s intellectual property. I did not violate copyright law or commit ethical plagiarism.
The content in question compares my original writing with another text and falsely claims that I plagiarized the material. After careful examination, it is clear that my writing is distinct, with no evidence of word-for-word copying or improper citation. Any similarities are due to referencing well-known historical accounts that are publicly documented and widely discussed in scholarly literature. To provide clarity, I have included both texts below, along with an analysis of their differences to demonstrate that my work does not constitute plagiarism:
My Original Text:
“There is also evidence from ethnology in other cultures around the world, that there was a long day? In the writings of the ancient Chinese there is a legend of a long day. The Incas of Peru and the Aztecs of Mexico also have a similar record. The Babylonians and Persians record a story of a day that was miraculously extended. Herodotus describes that while in Egypt, a priest showed him their temple records which describes a day that was twice the length of any day that was ever recorded.”
Accusatory Text:
“There is indisputable evidence from the modern science of ethnology that such an event occurred as Joshua records. In the ancient Chinese writings there is a legend of a long day. The Incas of Peru and the Aztecs of Mexico have a like record. There is a Babylonian and Persian legend of a day that was miraculously extended. Herodotus, an ancient historian, recounts that while in Egypt, priests showed him their temple records, and that he read of a day which was twice the natural length of any day that had ever been recorded.”
Analysis of Key Differences:
Opening Statements: My version states: “There is also evidence from ethnology in other cultures around the world, that there was a long day?”
The other text states: “There is indisputable evidence from the modern science of ethnology that such an event occurred as Joshua records.”
The phrasing and tone differ, and I make no reference to the biblical account of Joshua.
Structural Differences:
- My version presents the examples in a clear, concise manner without embellishments like “ancient historian” or “twice the natural length.”
- The other text uses more detailed descriptions and additional qualifiers that I did not include.
- Both Don Steward, for whom I am accused of plagiarizing, and myself, have been a part of the Calvary Chapel Movement for over 50 years. Both Don and myself studied under the same men who have taught these facts of history regarding the Long Day of Joshua. The similarities in our writing, though not exactly the same, are due to our common source in learning these facts from Pastor Chuck Smith, founder of Calvary Chapel, and other colleagues of Calvary Chapel.
- My text came from my personal bible commentary that dates to the early 80’s. I have published this exact text in several Bible studies before the advent of the internet.
- These facts that concern the ancient Chinese, Incas of Peru, the Aztecs, Babylonian and Persian legends and those of Herodotus, are commonly known and distributed in many places, by many Bible teachers.
Common Source Material: Both texts reference historical legends that have been documented in numerous sources over the years. Describing these events naturally leads to similarities in content, but my phrasing and sentence structure are original.
Lack of Word-for-Word Similarity: There is no instance of direct copying of entire sentences or key phrases that would constitute plagiarism. The differences in wording, structure, and emphasis demonstrate that my text is an original composition.
Given this comparison, it is clear that the accusation of plagiarism is unfounded.
It is unfortunate that Ben has resorted to a baseless accusation in an effort to defame me as a biblical scholar. In 2019 I challenged Ben to a public debate regarding his statement: “The New Testament was written late in the first century by men who never saw Jesus.” I challenged Ben to provide evidence that proves this false assertion, in a written form, at my website. He refused. You can see this challenge to debate and Ben’s response to me at the following link:
UPDATE: May 24, 2025 After Consulting Legal Experts, The Following Was Determined:
Legal vs. Academic Definitions of Plagiarism
Legal plagiarism (copyright law): Concerns the unauthorized use of protected expressions, not general ideas or facts. Copyright does not protect facts, ideas, legends, or common knowledge—it only protects the specific way those things are expressed.
Academic plagiarism (ethics): Includes using another’s ideas, expressions, or unique phrasing without attribution, even if not verbatim. However, it typically requires a pattern of dependence or clear derivation from a source.
Verbatim Copying vs. Paraphrasing
I did not paraphrase a protected original work in a way that presents it as my own.
I summarized a set of public domain ideas and historical claims—widely discussed across many works, and likely known to any scholar familiar with Herodotus or cross-cultural flood/solar legends.
The phrasing, sentence structure, and flow in my work is clearly my own. There is no significant word-for-word copying, and the overall composition is different.
Originality in the Use of Public Domain Material
The material I and the Don Stewart authored both refer to (e.g., Herodotus’ account, Chinese and Aztec legends) is public domain knowledge. Multiple authors over decades have referenced these in similar ways.
Writing about common historical claims using common language does not constitute plagiarism if it is: Expressed in your own words, Not copied verbatim or closely paraphrased from a unique expression, Not drawn from a source that’s your exclusive source without attribution.
I followed this standard.
Intent and Reasonableness
Even the strictest definitions of plagiarism recognize that intent and reasonable uniqueness play a role. There’s no evidence of an attempt to deceive or claim another’s unique expression as my own. There is no direct or substantial copying. I independently described public historical claims in your own style.
Conclusion: I Did Not Commit Plagiarism
Based on both legal and academic definitions: My use of public domain material and historical references is permissible. My phrasing and structure are clearly different from the other text. There’s no evidence of copying or misleading use of another’s intellectual property. I did not violate copyright law or commit ethical plagiarism.
The accusation by Ben at Amateur Exegete is false, and he has committed public libel against me.
I am exploring a legal remedy as Ben At Amateur Exegete has refused to take down this lebelous, public accusation
A Challenge To Debate For Amateur Exegete
Robert Clifton Robinson 