Comment on GC Votes to Revise SDA Fundamental #6 on Creation by Nathan.
It is just that mainstream science journals do not publish those articles that question fundamental aspects of modern evolutionary theory
My point exactly, a biased system. 
Nathan Also Commented
When I visit the biology department websites at SDA colleges, I am seeing some faculty who publish a LOT of articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals. (Quote)
Please enlighten me on these peer-reviewed scientific journals and the SDA scientist articles that were published.
Brad, your suggestion for Sean to submit his theories to peer-reviewed journals is excellent. Personally, I wonâ€™t bet on this happening. Many of our most brilliant Adventist scientists are more so â€œhobbyistsâ€ than true â€œscientistsâ€ who lack either the skills or motivation to successfully publish their research. Sean has a few medical papers to his credit, so skills are certainly not the issue. If he canâ€™t convince practicing scientists of his theories, then there is valid reason (beyond what many of us already see) to question his â€œscienceâ€. If he can get them publish and they gain a receptive audience, then more power to him. It would be nice if many of his ideas were true after all. (Quote)
Peer reviewed journals, Geanna you know as well as the rest of us here, that the only peer reviewed journals you are talking about is from an evolutionist standpoint. No young earth creationist research(i.e. Sean Pitman’s research) will be accepted because (1) It supports young earth and the Bible and (2)it does not fit into the new age agenda’s(satan’s agenda) rebellious attitude of Pride! Pride! Pride!.
Evolutionists, theistic evolutionists, and many “creationists” have been seduced by the world’s convincing “arguments of academia” impressive credentials and the ensuing “success, power, and prominence” that come from finding secular and humanistic worldly truth aside from God’s word. His word is TRUTH(John 17:17); it is ETERNAL, LIVING, and ACTIVE(Heb 4:12) and will not return void(Isa 55:11)
“The non-verifiable “assumptions”(guesses) of the scientific community are accepted without question in our high-tech, sophisticated, humanistic, impersonal “politically correct” society…even by the majority of professing Christians who hide behind the hypocrisy of being “theistic evolutionists”. Since any form of macroevolution is unbiblical, it is therefore a sin to be a true Christian and hold to old universe evolutionary ideas. It is making God what we want Him to be. It is making God in our image. This is not much different than making a golden calf, is it?
Since the Fall of Genesis 3, man has been more interested in the approval of men, rather than the approval of God(John 5:44, 12:43) We compare ourselves with ourselves instead of with Christ, who should be our only comparison. 2 Cor 10:12 “For we dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves with some that commend themselves: but they measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise.”
Psalms Ch 1 clearly states that there are only two paths to walk in this world either righteous or ungodly, there is no fence sitting! One day soon we will all stand before the Creator Lord Jesus Christ and answer for our lives lived in this world. Will we have lived for the praise of the power and glory of our Saviour or will our lives have been lived for the temporal praise of the power and glory of this world?
1 Cor 3:18-20 “Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.
For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.
And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.”
Macroevolution is “…wisdom of this world…”.
It always comes back to the simple question of faith. Do we put our faith in God or do we put our faith in fallen man?
Recent Comments by Nathan
The Reptile King
I have misquoted you (Dr. Geraty) in the flying planes statement and I do sincerely apologize for my misquote.
The Reptile King
@Sean Pitman: Not only does Geraty “subscribes to theistic evolutionism as the true model of origins:” He also states that those opposed to this storytelling of origins (conservative Adventism)are “the type that fly planes into buildings”. Scary that this man was the president of an Adventist Insitution. With this kind of thinking, I wonder if he would have locked up EGW and the rest of the pioneers in Gitmo if they were alive today?
Adventist kid: BobRyan,You contribute in quite a number of places. I noticed your edits on wikipedia. May I suggest that you go read the responses of others to your verbose essays on that site?Young Earth Creationism is unscientific. That is all there is to it. So either Adventism and Science are mutually exclusive (that canâ€™t be!) or we can both believe in Science (evolution), and the bible while being Adventist. I take the second option.
Could you share the wikipedia link with us if possible, thanks.
LSU student: ‘Apostates or Apostles’?
Seems to me that Dr. Bradley hardly represents a true follower of Christ, aside from his rather “colorful” language which by the way lost him all due credibility as a “Christian”. Furthermore Dr. Bradley contradicts himself in his own quotes, which I found to be rather disturbing. Hey, I guess lying seems to be the thing to do these days to cover ones own dissent into apostasy and blatant lack of trust in God’s word.
At least be honest with yourself and others if you dont believe in something, isnt that the Christian thing to do?
Sadly, Dr. Bradley lost all my trust and faith in him as a professor of Adventist higher education.
Adventist Review: Pastors Who Don’t Believe
[Off topic post deleted. You can send me a personal E-mail if you wish. – sp]