In regard to the interpretation of Bible prophecies and scripture …

Comment on Gary Gilbert, Spectrum, and Pseudogenes by Bob Helm.

In regard to the interpretation of Bible prophecies and scripture in general, there is something called exegesis, which is intended to produce the objective meaning of the text. Of course, some pericopes of scripture are difficult to exegete, and the process of exegesis is not always 100% accurate. But in the case of Daniel 9, you have a prophecy that points to the time for the Messiah’s appearance and death, and then goes on to predict the abomination of desolation and the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple. The fact that these events really did occur at the specified time and in the order that was predicted strongly affirms the Messianic interpretation of Daniel 9 as valid exegesis. To think that these events fell into place chronologically by chance does not seem possible. The prophecy is simply too specific for a chance fulfillment. It does not have a wax nose! So I have to conclude that while there is no absolute proof for the Christian Faith (as in mathematical proof), there is strong evidence to back up Jesus’ claims. Sir Isaac Newton saw this plainly when he called Daniel 9 the cornerstone of the Christian faith. Again – I am glad to acknowledge someone who holds to a fideistic position as a brother in Christ, but this position has more in common with the Enlightenment and Barthian Neo-Orthodoxy (which speaks of faith as a blind leap in the dark) than with true New Testament evangelical faith.

Bob Helm Also Commented

Gary Gilbert, Spectrum, and Pseudogenes
“The research is crystal clear: people walk away from Church in droves not because of theology or ideology, but largely because of relationships and experiences.” – Professor Kent

At one time, this was perhaps true, at least in the case of Seventh-day Adventists, but it is no longer true. Commenting on the findings of the recent “Adventist Retention Study,” Ivan Williams states: “There was a rumor that people don’t leave the Adventist Church because of doctrinal issues, but that they leave because they had a bad experience. The article basically debunks that rumor, and now we understand that some people do leave over doctrinal issues. We cannot have a cookie-cutter approach to this. People leave the church for many and varied reasons, and we need to have many and varied reasons to connect and win them again.” It is clear that some people do leave the church and Christ because of intellectual reasons: The greatest intellectual problem people have is related to theodicy – “Where is God when bad things happen to good people.” And evolution is an intellectual problem that rates a close second. These two intellectual issues are responsible for leading countless people down the slippery slope to atheism.


Gary Gilbert, Spectrum, and Pseudogenes
@Nic Samojluk: Nic, the latest info from astrophysics have pretty much put to rest the idea of a “Big Crunch.” There is simply not enough matter in the universe to cause it to collapse on itself. In fact, there is evidence that the expansion of the universe may be accelerating,due to mysterious dark energy, although others have attributed this data to relativistic effects. But a “Big Crunch” does not appear to be in the works.


Gary Gilbert, Spectrum, and Pseudogenes
I would add that the truthfulness of the Genesis creation account and Christianity itself cannot be determined by aesthetics. Christianity may be beautiful and it may provide hope, but if you don’t think it measures up to cold, hard reality, please have the guts to abandon it! However, if you do abandon it, don’t hang around and teach at an Adventist school or some other Christian school. There are plenty of secular schools that will gladly employ you, and they will probably pay you a higher salary as well. I must be blunt. As much as I disagree with Richard Dawkins, I at least respect his intellectual honesty. I cannot say that for Brian Bull!


Recent Comments by Bob Helm

Dr. Walter Veith and the anti-vaccine arguments of Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche
I believe in good medicine and am thankful to God for the Moderna vaccine. Walter Veith deserves to be ignored, and not just on this issue.


Complex Organisms are Degenerating – Rapidly
@Carlos: Far from being outdated, I would say that Sean’s arguments are cutting edge. As for the assertion that scientists don’t use Darwin’s model for evolution, that is correct – because Darwin had no knowledge of Mendelian genetics. The original Darwinian model was replaced by the Neo-darwinian Synthesis about 1940, which claims that evolution takes place as natural selection acts on random mutations. Although this model still dominates biology today, it is facing increasingly serious problems, which Sean has touched on.


Complex Organisms are Degenerating – Rapidly
@Sean Pitman: OK, I see it now. Sorry – I missed it earlier.


Complex Organisms are Degenerating – Rapidly
Sean, Dr. John Sanford, who was an important contributor to the development of GMOs, has written a book on this issue entitled, “Genetic Entropy.” I don’t see him quoted anywhere in your article, and I’m wondering if you are familiar with his work. It is noteworthy that Dr. Sanford has abandoned Darwinism and adopted creationism/intelligent design, not originally for religious reasons, but because of this problem.


Evolution from Space?
Sean, once again I urge you to publish your material in book form, preferably with a non-Adventist publisher. You have such wonderful material, but the Educate Truth audience is so small.