Comment on Ted Wilson: No Room for Evolution as Truth in Adventist Schools by Gene Fortner.
Alvin Plantinga has noted that fideism can be defined as an “exclusive or basic reliance upon faith alone, accompanied by a consequent disparagement of reason and utilized especially in the pursuit of philosophical or religious truth.
The “Faith” of Dr. Davidson, Mr. Zinke, and Elder Wilson is not fideism and it not blind. It is based on the reliability and accuracy of the Bible, personal experience, and the abysmal failure of science on origins and its inability to refute the Laws of Biogenesis and Heredity.
I tend to see faith as related to its Latin root “fides.” Romans saw it as “reliability” or trust within a relationship. A healthy trust is based on evidence and consistency. My faith is not a leap in the dark, and the evidence I base it on is open to logical and scientific query.
Faith, Trust, and Evidence:
by Tom Price
Biblical faith isn’t believing against the evidence. Instead, faith is a kind of knowing that results in action. The clearest definition comes from Hebrews 11:1. This verse says, “Faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.” In fact, when the New Testament talks about faith positively it only uses words derived from the Greek root [pistis], which means ‘to be persuaded.’ In those verses from Hebrews, we find the words, “hope,” “assurance,” “conviction” that is, confidence. Now, what gives us this confidence?
Christian faith is not belief in the absence of evidence. It is the proper response to the evidence. Koukl explains that, “Christian faith cares about the evidence…the facts matter. You can’t have assurance for something you don’t know you’re going to get. You can only hope for it. This is why the resurrection of Jesus is so important. It gives assurance to the hope. Because of a Christian view of faith, Paul is able to say in 1 Corinthians 15 that when it comes to the resurrection, if we have only hope, but no assurance—if Jesus didn’t indeed rise from the dead in time/space history—then we are of most men to be pitied. This confidence Paul is talking about is not a confidence in a mere ‘faith’ resurrection, a mythical resurrection, a story-telling resurrection. Instead, it’s a belief in a real resurrection. If the real resurrection didn’t happen, then we’re in trouble. The Bible knows nothing of a bold leap-in-the-dark faith, a hope-against-hope faith, a faith with no evidence. Rather, if the evidence doesn’t correspond to the hope, then the faith is in vain, as even Paul has said.”
So in conclusion, faith is not a kind of religious hoping that you do in spite of the facts. In fact, faith is a kind of knowing that results in doing. A knowing that is so passionately and intelligently faithful to Jesus Christ that it will not submit to fideism, scientism, nor any other secularist attempt to divert and divert and cauterize the human soul by hijacking knowledge.
Tom Price is an academic tutor at the Oxford Centre for Christian Apologetics and a member of the speaking team at Ravi Zacharias International Ministries in Oxford, England.
Gene Fortner Also Commented
Ted Wilson: No Room for Evolution as Truth in Adventist Schools
why should not an understanding of evolution shed light on the reading of Genesis as most non-fundamentalist Chrsitians today suggest?
Definition of Evolution
When we talk about “evolution,” we don’t mean, “any kind of change.” Nor do we mean minor variations that result from natural selection. We use the term “evolution” to mean;
“The doctrine that unguided natural forces caused chemicals to combine in such a way that life resulted; and that all living things have descended from that common ancestral form of life.”
This not supported by any empirical evidence, only by pure speculation.
The universal scientific laws of Biogenesis and Heredity complete refute Neo-Darwinism.
End of Discussion
Ted Wilson: No Room for Evolution as Truth in Adventist Schools
“there is nothing but semantic difference between the DI definition that Gene has given us and theistic evolution. ”
What nonsense, your ignorance of Intelligent Design is astounding.
Introducing The College Student’s Back to School Guide to Intelligent Design
Casey Luskin September 25, 2009 3:07 PM | Permalink
There are a lot of false urban legends promoted in academia about intelligent design (ID). They often start with myths promoted by misinformed critiques in scientific journals, court rulings, or even talks by activists at scientific conferences. Unfortunately, it’s not uncommon for this misinformation to then be passed down to college students, who may know very little about ID and lack the resources to correct their professors’ misinformed and misplaced attacks on ID. Not anymore.
If you’re a college student, recently gone back to school and expecting to hear a lot of anti-ID views from your professors, we’re pleased to present this “Back to School Guide” for students as follows:
The College Student’s Back to School Guide to Intelligent Design
The guide contains suggestions for helpful pro-ID books, articles, and websites for students to read when investigating the issue. Additionally, it contains “Answers to Your Professor’s Most Common Misinformed Objections to Intelligent Design.” Nine answers are given to common but false arguments against ID like “Intelligent Design Proponents Don’t Conduct or Publish Scientific Research” or “Intelligent Design Is a Science Stopper” or “Intelligent Design Has Been Refuted by the Overwhelming Evidence for Neo-Darwinian Evolution.”
There are three easy tips to remember as a student with an anti-ID professor:
• Tip #1: Never opt out of learning evolution. In fact, learn about evolution every chance you get
• Tip #2: Think for yourself, think critically, and question assumptions.
• Tip #3: Proactively learn about credible scientific viewpoints that dissent from Darwinism on your own time, even if your classes censor those non-evolutionary viewpoints.
” All Jones decided was that ID is supernaturalism and shouldn’t be introduced now as part of science.”
Jones was wrong. he got duped by strawman arguments and his lack of education.
He prepared for the trial by watching “Inherit the Wind”.
Recent Comments by Gene Fortner
GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
Bill “How inane would it be to claim an apple tree is not an apple tree unless and until it has apples on it?”
Comparing babies and apple trees is a bit more inane than comparing apples and oranges.
“The ONLY DEFINITION FOR SIN that we have in the Bible is that it is the transgression of the law… IT CONDEMNS EVERY SIN, AND REQUIRES EVERY VIRTUE.” E.G. White, ST, March 3, 1890 par. 3.
If it is a sin to possess a fallen nature then there must be a law against it. Has God given a law forbidding anyone from being conceived with a fallen human nature? If there ever was a law that was impossible to keep, this would be it, for how could one choose not to violate it before one existed?!
No statement was necessary.
In fact I consider it thoughtless.
FB#6 should have absolutely no effect on their ability to support the world church and perform work faithfully and with integrity.
Sin is transgression of the law.
Where does it say being born is a sin?