Geanna Dane says: March 30, 2010 Clearly the Adventist church is no …

Comment on An appeal to our leadership by Sean Pitman, M.D..

Geanna Dane says:
March 30, 2010

Clearly the Adventist church is no longer what I thought it was. I used to enjoy copmanionship with fellow believers and had no idea what aa HUGE deal it would be if one asks questions. Everything here reinforces in my mind that I don’t think any of you really care about who I am or what my relationsship with God is like. It all seems to be about facts and beliefs- if I have those “right” I’m good and if I question them and am seeking truth outside of accepted norms I’m “fighting against the holy spirit.” I should hardly be surprised by all the conclusions you have made regarding my faith.

Facts and beliefs, while important, don’t make anyone “good” or “bad”. It isn’t knowledge that saves a person, it is motive – or an actual relationship with God.

However, this doesn’t mean that knowledge, beliefs, and doctrines aren’t important. The Gospel’s “good news” of hope in a bright literal future is based on knowledge. While this knowledge does not save anyone, it does have the power to provide a solid basis for hope.

I think you’re confusing the point of this website with your personal relationship with God. You can have a saving relationship with God without having a solid basis for hope or a clearer picture of who God really is. Jesus told the woman at the well that the time has come when God desires people to worship him, not only in Spirit, which is a very good thing, but in truth, or true knowledge, as well… which is even better ; )

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com

Sean Pitman, M.D. Also Commented

An appeal to our leadership

Ervin Taylor says:
March 30, 2010

While it is correct that the majority of SDA lay members believe in Young Life Creationism (and probably Young Earth Creationism as well), a survey undertaken in 1994 of North American Adventist scientists teaching at Adventist colleges and universities documented that only 43% believe that “God created all living organisms during a literal six-day period less than 10,000 years ago.” About 7% agreed that “God created all living organisms over an indeterminate length of time over the last 100,000 years” and about 18% agreed that “God created life millions of years ago and over this period guided its development”

Geanna has it right: “Adventism thrived quite well before all the so-called creation experts jumped on the band wagon and told us how we actually have to interpret not just every word in the Bible but also Ellen White.”

If all these theistic evolutionists are truly “thriving” as real “SDAs” in our churches and schools, why are they being so secretive about their positions? Why their hesitancy about being open and honest and completely transparent about what they are saying and doing as leaders within the Church? Why is LSU threatening students with censure, poor letters of recommendation, permanent negative comments on their transcripts, and potential expulsion when a student thinks to present what is really being taught in the classroom to the Church constituency at large?

Why hide in the closet if theistic evolution is so positive for the SDA Church? Why try to cover it up so earnestly? Why doesn’t LSU proudly advertise the truth of your observation that pretty much the entire science department at LSU, and much of its religion department as well, actively supports some form of God-directed evolution taking place on this planet over hundreds of millions of years? – and is not alone in this opinion as many other teachers and leaders in the employ of the SDA Church are of the same opinion? Yet, as hard as you look, you will not see a single LSU advertisement to this effect. Quite the contrary. LSU is desperately trying to give the impression, in its PR advertisements, that it is full support and actively promotes of all of the SDA fundamental ideals…

Why the need for such deception given the truth of your comments?

Sean Pitman
DetectingDesign.com


An appeal to our leadership

Carl says:
March 28, 2010

I’m sorry Carl, but you’ve fallen for a lot of very weak evidence. (Sean)

You have come up with many objections to the standard model, but you don’t have a model that can possibly explain the evidence within 10,000 years. Objections do not make a model. You have never explained how the continents have moved, seas dried up, the Flood occurred, it got warm, it got cold, the fossils formed, etc, and this all happened in about 10,000 years. Objections to the standard model do not logically lead to such wild speculations.

I do have a model that can explain many of your “evidences” for long ages within a much much shorter time than mainstream conclusions. In fact, many features I’ve pointed out to you can only be explained by a far shorter time frame than that supposed by mainstream thinking… strongly favoring a catastrophic model within fairly recent history. In other words a time frame that is less than 10,000 years is not significantly countered by your “evidences”.

Your main problem is that you take on the standard uniformitarian assumptions and forget that uniformitarian notions do not hold true in the face of evidence for non-uniform catastrophes on an almost unimaginable scale.

Also, if you are still convinced that the SDA position on origins is clearly mistaken, … (Sean)

I have never been talking about origins, which I thought I made clear before. I do not believe in abiogenesis. My point is that a literal plain-text interpretation of Genesis 1-11 is not compatible with the physical evidence. If God created the earth in a way that makes it impossible to trust our senses and interpret the evidence, then he is a deceiver. I can’t accept that, so I must look for an understanding of Genesis that is consistent with the abundant evidence of old life. I don’t like it any more than you do, but I can’t avoid it.

The SDA position on origins is not limited only to the origin of life, but also deals with the diversity of all main forms or “kinds” of life. In other words, the SDA position on a literal creation week directly counters mainstream views on the origin and diversity of life which requires hundreds of millions of years of gradual evolutionary change via a very painful and cruel mechanism of “survival of the fittest”.

Could it possibly be that you simply don’t know how to interpret the evidence before you correctly? That you are deceiving yourself instead of God deceiving you?

What perspective is most consistent with the biblical view of God? A God that would deliberately use a very painful, even evil, mechanism of survival of the fittest to creation, then call it all “very good” at the end of hundreds of millions of years of untold suffering, pain, and death? All when he could have just spoken it into existence fully formed to begin with in an ideal non-predatory state?

Come on now… What kind of God do you really believe in?

… why not do the honest thing and go work for a public university instead of posing as something your not and taking a paycheck from an organization with which you fundamentally disagree? (Sean)

My understanding of Adventism is that our deepest value is a relentless search for truth. I will never accept that my search for truth should be limited by adherence to a creed. I stick around to encourage others who are also searching. Every once in a while, I even hear from people who appreciate my contributions.

A relentless search for truth is a personal value that all should have and cherish. However, if your personal search for truth takes you away from Adventism, what on Earth would make you think that you should still by paid by Adventists for proclaiming your truth against what they still think is truth? – on their dime?

I don’t care if you think you have all the truth in the world, is it not still stealing of the time and money of the organization you are fundamentally opposing and undermining if you take their money while actually working against them? – on a fundamental level?

Should the SDA Church pay people to teach and preach that the Virgin Mary is alive and well in heaven and that we should all be praying to her for our salvation? – even if they are really honest and sincere about it? Even if they really do believe that this is “the truth”?

How are you not doing something very similar? – yet claiming that you are free to do whatever you want and still be paid by the SDA Church because you are not bound by creeds? Are you not bound by common honesty and integrity? – to not take time or money from anyone for doing contrary to what you are being paid to do?

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com


An appeal to our leadership

Of course, the physical evidence that we see around the world wouldn’t be the part of the reason. The mid-Atlantic rift, the now measurable continental movement that is consistent with the magnetic reversals across the Atlantic sea floor, the Chixulub impact crater (as well as many others), the dinosaur nests that don’t look at all like they survived a flood, the 800,000 years of ice core evidence, the Egyptian records that predate the Flood, Kennewick man (about 8,000 years ago), the Black Sea Flood about 7,500 years ago, the impossibility of locating Noah’s Flood in the geologic column, the Cosquer Grotto with its now-submerged entrance below the Mediterranean Sea and its artwork from about 27,000 years ago, the somewhat older artwork in the Chauvet Cave, the Yellowstone caldera (600,000 years ago) …

The rate of continental drift as it compares to magnetic reversal patterns has a lot of problems given the mainstream perspective. It is far more consistent with a catastrophic model where the drift started out much more rapidly and has since declined in speed. This theory is also far more consistent with current continental coastal erosion rates as well as surface erosion rates and the huge lack of ocean sediment given the mainstream perspective.

The numerous impact craters are only evidence of huge catastrophes that occurred during the formation of the geologic record – a record which was largely produced during and after the Noachian catastrophe.

Dinosaur nests are explainable many ways. They Noachian flood was not a simple rising and falling of water, but had periods of calm and even the local absence of water per periods of time due to huge tidal actions on a world-wide basis.

Ice core dating is a huge problem and has many inconsistencies and contradictions – especially given the long hipsothermal period of global warming that was supposed to be several degrees warmer than today (where the Greenland ice-sheet is melting very rapidly). For more information on this topic see:

http://www.detectingdesign.com/ancientice.html

Your other “dates” are based on the assumed reliability of radiocarbon and other forms of radiometric dating. These dates are calibrated dates, calibrated based on mainstream evolutionary assumptions.

I’m sorry Carl, but you’ve fallen for a lot of very weak evidence. A large quantity of evidence does not equal quality evidence. A huge pile of junk is still just a bunch of junk – not solid science.

Also, if you are still convinced that the SDA position on origins is clearly mistaken, why not do the honest thing and go work for a public university instead of posing as something your not and taking a paycheck from an organization with which you fundamentally disagree? Have some integrity…

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com


Recent Comments by Sean Pitman, M.D.

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.