@Ken: One thing that’s clear from the study of nature …

Comment on Dr. John Sanford Lectures on Inevitable Genomic Deterioration by Sean Pitman.

@Ken:

One thing that’s clear from the study of nature alone, at least for me, is that intelligence is required to explain some things, but not all things. From my perspective, certain events seem random and undirected – without the evident need of direct intelligent manipulation of any kind.

It seems to me that this leaves open the possibility that if one chooses to separate themselves from the direct care of the Designer of life, of God, that certain features of natural decay, to include random non-directed “accidents” will naturally come into play… the results of which would rightly be called “evil” to be sure.

This is right in line with the Bible’s claim that the current decay and apparent randomness that exists in the world is the result of us, as a humans, choosing to step away from God – not the other way around.

This Biblical view is consistent with Dr. Sanford’s argument that the inevitable decay we see in our genome strongly implies that we will eventually go extinct unless God steps in and re-creates it and maintains it in its originally perfect state.

If you don’t constantly take care of your house, it will decay over time. The same is true of our genome. Without the constant care of its Designer, it will also get old and decay over time.

Who’s fault is that? It would have been evil on the part of God to make us and not maintain us – unless we actually chose to remove ourselves from Him. In that case, it would have been evil for Him to force us to remain with Him.

You see, the problem of free will comes into play…

This is the advantage that the SDA perspective of the “Great Controversy” brings to the world. It helps explain the balance between the freewill of God’s sons and daughters and God’s will.

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com

Sean Pitman Also Commented

Dr. John Sanford Lectures on Inevitable Genomic Deterioration
@Ken:

Aside from the fact that science cannot definitively prove any theory, yes, a form of historical science can be used to test and evaluate Biblical prophecies. You have to know a lot about history though. You can’t simply read Daniel and Revelation and hope to understand what you’re reading unless you have detailed knowledge of the historical events being discussed.

I recommend you start with the “70 weeks” prophecy starting with Daniel 9:24. This prophecy precisely predicts the First Coming of Jesus as well as his death to the day.

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com


Dr. John Sanford Lectures on Inevitable Genomic Deterioration
@-Shining:

I’ve been doing this a long time (almost 20 years now) and I can tell you that, as far as I know, no one has misunderstood my position as a young life creationist who also recognizes limited forms of Darwinian evolution…

This isn’t like accepting a little bit of Nazism. The Darwinian mechanism is given its name because Darwin really was the first to popularize it in published literature. Therefore, he deserves to have his name attached to the mechanism of RM/NS.

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com


Dr. John Sanford Lectures on Inevitable Genomic Deterioration
@-Shining:

I’ve only been expaining why I say things the way I say them. I believe it is best to at least try to start off a discussion on as much common ground as is possible with those on the opposing side in a discussion… to openly admit those points, from the opposing side, that are actually valid.

As I see it, there is simply no advantage in arguing that Darwinian evolution is completely wrong – that I believe in no form of Darwinism. It’s just not true for one thing and admitting those things that the Darwinian mechanism can produce only adds to the credibility of the creationist position – in my opinion.

Sean Pitman
www.DeteectingDesign.com


Recent Comments by Sean Pitman

After the Flood
Thank you Ariel. Hope you are doing well these days. Miss seeing you down at Loma Linda. Hope you had a Great Thanksgiving!


The Flood
Thank you Colin. Just trying to save lives any way I can. Not everything that the government does or leaders do is “evil” BTW…


The Flood
Only someone who knows the future can make such decisions without being a monster…


Pacific Union College Encouraging Homosexual Marriage?
Where did I “gloss over it”?


Review of “The Naked Emperor” by Pastor Conrad Vine
I fail to see where you have convincingly supported your claim that the GC leadership contributed to the harm of anyone’s personal religious liberties? – given that the GC leadership does not and could not override personal religious liberties in this country, nor substantively change the outcome of those who lost their jobs over various vaccine mandates. That’s just not how it works here in this country. Religious liberties are personally derived. Again, they simply are not based on a corporate or church position, but rely solely upon individual convictions – regardless of what the church may or may not say or do.

Yet, you say, “Who cares if it is written into law”? You should care. Everyone should care. It’s a very important law in this country. The idea that the organized church could have changed vaccine mandates simply isn’t true – particularly given the nature of certain types of jobs dealing with the most vulnerable in society (such as health care workers for example).

Beyond this, the GC Leadership did, in fact, write in support of personal religious convictions on this topic – and there are GC lawyers who have and continue to write personal letters in support of personal religious convictions (even if these personal convictions are at odds with the position of the church on a given topic). Just because the GC leadership also supports the advances of modern medicine doesn’t mean that the GC leadership cannot support individual convictions at the same time. Both are possible. This is not an inconsistency.