Bill Sorensen: I would never deny the right of any church …

Comment on Walla Walla University: The Collegian Debates Evolution vs. Creation by Mack Ramsey.

Bill Sorensen:
I would never deny the right of any church fellowship to define its teaching and discipline any member who they felt was contrary to it. It is simply common sense to affirm this reality.

This is true. You can definitely come to church and say, “this is how it is you like like it or leave”. But what you’re talking about is a matter of church law, not god’s law and church law can be changed easily. And this isn’t the only monumentally idiotic thing that our church does. The NAD just got hammered for trying to let women be conference presidents. That’s not biblical, that’s political. So is the kerfuffle regarding science at La Sierra. It has nothing to do with science, or even religion. If this was an issue of science, then people would be content to let scientists speak for them just like on any other non-controversial (by SDA standards) scientific subject. If it was religious then we’d be more focused on the spiritual and emotional message that the bible has than trying to recreate a literal and historical narrative from the bible since the spiritual and religious value of a literal reconstruction is nil. However, more importantly there is no way that the Bible can be used a legal notarized mandate from God to let you run the church how you see fit. You have obvious and firm opinions, but no matter how well justified you think those opinions are, they are not themselves an indication of truth. In this one issue your in the minority on this issue, at least among walla walla college students (and probably college students everywhere). You’re only recourse is to cry “Conspiracy!” and make trouble for honest people trying to understand the universe in good faith. You’re so quick to kick anyone out that doesn’t subscribe to you narrow and rigid beliefs. This church makes plenty of mistakes, and continues to do so. Eventually the outdated and absurd notion of YEC, and non-evolution theories will be seen as one of them even by hard core conservatives. Much the same way as geo-centrism is now considered a laughable idea, even by the most intransigent and hostile to science believers. Let me put it another way. There is not a single major scientific discovery or technological advance that wasn’t resisted by religious conservatives and yet progress marches forward and conservatives die out. A generation from now you’ll be waiting for jesus and legions of young idealistic Adventists will come to power and formally change this doctrine, and many others that are short sighted and out dated. Assuming of course Conservatives haven’t ripped the church to shreds in unrelenting purges.

Mack Ramsey Also Commented

Walla Walla University: The Collegian Debates Evolution vs. Creation

Or this is something that everyone who reads the bible does. There’s no such thing as “sola scriptura” that’s a self-aggrandizing fiction that says we have the only correct interpretation. But even within Adventist circles we don’t read the bible the same way now as we did a few years ago, let alone a few generations ago. To ignore a person’s own biases and cultural perspectives is to embrace ignorance. We all bring our own selves when we read the bible. If “sola scriptura” was truly possible then humanity would have developed a single cohesive interpretation of the bible long ago. You say “liberals” are twisting the bible, that’s probably true, but then so are “conservatives”. If we can not live together then there is no point in having a church and the mission has already failed.

Walla Walla University: The Collegian Debates Evolution vs. Creation

BobRyan: ernet in Christian forums”.

The topic here is “can SDAs be forced to pay those who reject SDA doctrine – to continue to preach/teach against our beliefs and undermine our mission”.

Another point of correction: It was not at all apparent at the GC2010 session for the world wide church – that 50% side

Yes. You should pay them. It’s that whole don’t muzzle the ox bit or deny a workman his wages in the bible. You’ve hired these men you pay them. You paid them to teach science they taught it. Just because in your opinion you disagree with your teachers is not an indication of bad teaching, but that you a bad student. It’s possible for a teacher to make mistakes, but who corrects the teacher? other teachers, not the students. You may want to cover your years and scream “nanananananana” but this does not advance our mission. Dedication to truth advances our mission and for teaching the truth the teachers at la Sierra were unfairly persecuted. But let’s use a different issue to clarify things. I don’t agree with the churches stance on the non-ordination of women. But I don’t feel as if I’m being “forced” to support this policy with my tithes and offerings. This is an issue that I disagree with and I hope it changes. May it will someday, maybe it won’t. But even if it doesn’t (and let’s face it it probably won’t) just because I don’t agree doesn’t mean I don’t support the church. Same goes for you. You can be “forced” to support positions you do not personally agree with. Your taxes go to programs you don’t like, your pathfinder dues to things you may not agree with, the church supports positions that are incorrect (both liberals and conservatives have their bugaboos) every society has things that each individual member doesn’t agree with. If you think the aggregate is on the whole a positive one than the sacrifice is worthy.

Walla Walla University: The Collegian Debates Evolution vs. Creation
@Bill Sorensen: Just to be clear, you’ve equated me and all other so called liberals with the Devil, implying of course that you and your ilk are what? God? Holy Angels? Infallible saints? I am not a devil and you are not infallible. To even claim such even in metaphor is blasphemy. To reject compassion and tolerance toward your neighbors is apostasy and a far greater apostasy than puerile accusations of apostasy liberals may suffer. To seek a purge in the ranks of everyone who’s opinion differs from yours is self-destructive. To ignore the advise and wisdom of experts is childish. To retain an inflexible, stagnant philosophy is a choice you can not force onto others. With one breath you accuse the minority of subjecting it’s beliefs onto you, the next you claim a special mandate to make the church conform to your image of what it should be regardless of the wishes of the majority. I believe you are right in one respect who will control the church is an important question. Personally I think God controls the church and the changes we are seeing are divinely inspired. I certianly don’t see sputtering hatred and intolerance reflected in the fruits of the spirit. Unless of course you think the church is run by the devil in which case you should leave for the sake of your own soul. I mean either god is in control, or the devil and if the devil is in control then it’s no place for godly men. If god is in control then you should submit to his divine will. And this is beside the point but I’m really very amused that you consider any discussion of change to be an aggressive “attack”.

Recent Comments by Mack Ramsey

NCSE Report: Adventist Education in the Midst of a Sea of Science
Honest question. Do people believe that we should abandon accreditation and accept the consequences there in, or is accreditation still desirable? Is that too “worldly”?

The God of the Gaps
I’m amused that the author spent time writing a very nice article about how absurd GoGs type thinking is but in the end decides to go with it anyway simply because he’s ideologically opposed to evolution for no other reason than it makes a sort of intuitive sense for him. Bill’s even better. He’s going with GoGs because the alternative throws him into an existential crises.