Supreme Court Decision on Church Employment Case
@Ken:

Since all science is “faith-based” to one degree or another, a mix of both evidence and leaps of logic or faith into that which is not absolutely known or knowable, the only question that remains is what type of faith/evidence-based science should be taught at an Adventist school? You keep trying to draw a dividing line between science and faith when science itself is not independent of faith – of the need to make leaps of faith.

Given this understanding of the true nature of science and intelligent leaps of faith, why should popular secular ideas of origins that are directly opposed to SDA fundamentals be the only ideas taught in our schools as scientifically valid? Why shouldn’t we present scientific evidence that favors the SDA position in our own schools as well? – and why shouldn’t these ideas be presented by those who actually subscribe to the validity of the SDA position on origins as the most rationally tenable world view?

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com

Supreme Court Decision on Church Employment Case
@Ron:

Just because the Samaritan was more righteous than the church leaders of the day does not mean that the Samaritan would therefore be fit to teach or represent in some official paid capacity the doctrinal elements of Jewish theology.

You’re confused in thinking that righteousness is the same thing as being qualified to be a paid representative of the a particular church organization. There are righteous Catholics, Buddhists, Hindus, Mormons, and even agnostics and atheists who will no doubt be in heaven someday, but who would not make good representatives or promoters of all of the fundamental goals and ideals of the SDA Church as an organization.

For example, let’s say that you had a heart condition that required surgery to repair. Let’s say that your next door neighbor is a very nice man who is morally upright in every way and has generously offered to do your surgery for free! The only problem is that he’s not a doctor and has no medical training of any kind. Does the fact that he’s still a very nice and good man mean that he is therefore qualified to perform cardiac surgery on you or anyone else? – for free or for pay?

In the same way, just because someone is morally upright and righteous before God does not mean that such a person is automatically qualified to be a paid representative of a particular church organization…

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com

Supreme Court Decision on Church Employment Case
@Bill Sorensen:

There is no viable “motive” in our relationship either with God or our fellow man that is acceptable to God unless it is created by a biblical “knowledge” of who God is, who we are, what God requires, and how we can obey His will.

That’s simply not true. The Bible claims that God has written the Royal Law of love onto the hearts of all mankind – even for those who had no knowledge of the Bible. It is therefore possible for someone without any access to “biblical knowledge” to be saved.

Paul makes this especially clear in Romans 2:14-15:

Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them. – Romans 2:14-15

Along these same lines Ellen White writes:

Those whom Christ commends in the judgment may have known little of theology, but they have cherished His principles. Through the influence of the divine Spirit they have been a blessing to those about them. Even among the heathen are those who have cherished the spirit of kindness; before the words of life had fallen upon their ears, they have befriended the missionaries, even ministering to them at the peril of their own lives. Among the heathen are those who worship God ignorantly, those to whom the light is never brought by human instrumentality, yet they will not perish. Though ignorant of the written law of God, they have heard His voice speaking to them in nature, and have done the things that the law required. Their works are evidence that the Holy Spirit has touched their hearts, and they are recognized as the children of God.

How surprised and gladdened will be the lowly among the nations, and among the heathen, to hear from the lips of the Saviour, “Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these My brethren, ye have done it unto Me”! How glad will be the heart of Infinite Love as His followers look up with surprise and joy at His words of approval!

– Ellen White, Desire of Ages, p. 637-638

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com

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.