Comment on Board requests progress reports from LSU administration by Christiane Marshall.
I haven’t had time to follow the conversations here lately so I haven’t read all of the posts in this thread.
Here are my thoughts. As a Christian who originally lost my faith due to things I learned in college; regained my faith due to the living relationship between Christ and his followers, and the Holy Spirit’s draw and Christ’s knocking on the door of my own heart–I recognize there is a lot more than physical evidence to consider here.
“NATURE and revelation alike testify of God’s love. Our Father in heaven is the source of life, of wisdom, and of joy. Look at the wonderful and beautiful things of nature. Think of their marvelous adaptation to the needs and happiness, not only of man, but of all living creatures. The sunshine and the rain, that gladden and refresh the earth, the hills and seas and plains, all speak to us of the Creator’s love. It is God who supplies the daily needs of all His creatures.” (Steps to Christ)
Isn’t it interesting that nature and revelation testify of God’s love? The book doesn’t begin by stating that we should use revelation to prove others wrong. Isn’t the theme of the entire Bible that God so loved the world…?
How many times have we heard that something scientists believed in the past has now been debunked? I love science! I recently took biology courses and was afraid it might affect my faith negatively. However, the opposite happened. I saw so much complexity and beauty and symmetry that I could clearly see how nature testifies of God’s love! My faith was strengthened.
How can anyone be so sure that what is presented in textbooks is true? I mean, think about it. Someone who has an advanced degree today may have had time in the lab–but there is no way one person can have hands on experience studying all of the things that have been gathered together into the body of knowledge that is called evolution!
Those with an advanced degree by necessity choose a very narrow area to do a master’s thesis, then a more narrow area to do their Ph.D. The more a person knows, if they would admit it–the more they know they don’t know. Yet they think they can post positively that there is proof of evolution.
Have you ever thought about how much time it would take you to confirm all of the points that you think “prove” evolution? Try this exercise if you believe evolution is a truth: write down every point that you believe is evidence of evolution. (Why do you believe each point?) Categorize them in the different scientific specialties (biology, biochemistry, geology, etc.).
Create a plan on how you would actually be able to prove to yourself that these points have been made so clear that no reasonable person could doubt them. I don’t mean by reading what has been “peer reviewed,” but what you can actually do yourself. How can you prove it in the field, in the lab, etc.? If you even have time in your lifetime to get to each point, what questions come up in your own mind about the different research papers you are trying to prove? How long do you think it would take for you to answer all of them beyond the shadow of a doubt?
I know that each time I read a research paper, it takes an incredibly long time to analyze the implications of only one.
As you look over this plan, can you reasonably say that it is possible in one person’s lifetime?
As a Christian, you must at least believe that you should be honest. Spouting out facts that others have claimed they have proven is not honest unless you speak plainly: “so and so claims such and such, but I do not have first hand knowledge of this.”
If you actually begin to prove everything (on paper not in the field), you will be checking out every citation. Every citation represents a paper that cites other work. You will continue to go backward until it looks like a mirror in a mirror in a mirror. Only here and there you will probably notice discrepancies in how one author claimed what the other author claimed that the other authors claimed, and so on. You will begin to see slight prevarications.
As a Christian, you must know that you are responsible to be a good steward of your time.
Do you think that the Lord wants you to be spending all of your time proving that a scientific theory is true?
Do you think He wants you to dishonestly make claims you haven’t been able to prove even to yourself–especially if these are claims that could weaken the faith of others?
The only way you can continue to make these claims is if you are either ignorant of the fact that you just don’t know these things for a fact–or if you decide to ignore that you’ve probably spent most of your learning time in books, trusting what you read based on little footnotes and citations.
Little footnotes and citations.
What does that mean, really? It means that you have put an inordinate trust in the work of others whose lives and character you are ignorant of. It means that you have faith that these individuals have not fudged their facts or results in order to get funding for their next project or to simply complete a degree. And you trust dissertation committees too. Lots and lots of hearts and minds that our God says are “deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked…” (Jeremiah 17:9)
It means that you trust these authors more than you trust the living God.
Wouldn’t it be better to search both revelation and nature to find God’s love? Why are you looking to find anything else? It’s all a fabrication to distract us from the work we’ve been given to do, the Great Commission.
Anyone here have some soul-winning to do? Wouldn’t you rather do that than spend your time contributing to faith crushing? Look for God everywhere, not Darwin. You won’t be disappointed.
Table of Contents
Recent Comments by Christiane Marshall
GC Votes to Revise SDA Fundamental #6 on Creation
@Sean Pitman:
We may just be arguing apples and apples. I am certainly not advocating ‘blind faith’ as you have had cause to address frequently on this sight. I am arguing against an over-dependence on extra-biblical evidence for our faith walk.
How do you know that the Bible is really the Word of God, while other religious texts, like the Book of Mormon, is not? How do you tell the difference? My LDS friends tell me that God gives them a warm feeling deep within themselves when they see or hear the truth. That is how they know that the Book of Mormon is from God. For me, I don’t find this approach very helpful when it comes to establishing a solid hope or confidence in the Bible as God’s word.
I actually had the opportunity to study many of the world’s so-called sacred texts before accepting the Bible as the true one. The Bible’s internal testimony coupled with the convicting witness of the Holy Spirit is what finally tipped the scales for me. Yes, I did do a bit of reading about historical and archeological and logical reasons why this testimony was credible – but it was the testimony of the Bible itself (coupled with the personal witness and testimony of Christians and the witness of the Holy Spirit) that helped me experience a saving faith. Most people are not as analytical as you or I. Most read the Bible and are convicted that it is true – without undertaking an extensive research project into the scientific reasons that may be so. Poor uneducated people in the third world experience a more vital faith than you or I, without such in-depth confirmatory knowledge. Doug Batchelor did not have a computer and a library full of data to assist him in that cave outside of Palm Springs – only the Bible! Most people who are converted to Christ testify that it was through influence of friends who witnessed to them about their relationship with Christ (a very subjective thing scientifically) – not through a rigorous scientific examination of the empirical data.
Once again, most people have no empirical evidence that the resurrection took place – they have only the testimony of those who witnessed that it took place. Yes, there are logical inferences that confirm that it must have taken place. But when you say empirical I’m assuming you are saying something that can be observed in present time reality and scientifically tested.
“Empirical evidence is a fancy way of describing facts that can be experienced and tested only through the senses.”
Faith has to do with learning to trust our spiritual senses above our physical ones. How else would you explain the numerous persons who testify that they were ‘deeply impressed’ to take a certain path when all the empirical data seemed to say otherwise – later to find out that their life depended on this ‘spiritual sense’ choice! Of course I’m not arguing for pentecostalism here, but you get the idea.
Did the faith of Jesus’ disciples increase or decrease after they saw Him resurrected from the grave?
Of course it was strengthened. Christ said however that it was a more blessed experience to believe without such empirical experience. What was He saying? I think He was saying that it is more blessed to take God at His Word than to demand or depend upon empirical evidence. The story of Gideon is a powerful testimony to this principle.
Victor
“Don’t go backwards to interpret Genesis as allegorical or symbolic”
Victor,Sometimes it’s appropriate to hit-the-nail on the head.Take for example Jesus’ statement to the Samaritan woman, “Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.â€That might seem inappropriately direct, but it wasn’t.It was just what she needed.The scattered servants of Christ needed to hear the president of the world church express a clear understanding of where the church needs to go.And my own experience with non-Christians is that they respond much more vigorously and appreciatively to a meaningful presentation of the Bible than they do to a generalistic and generic appeal to their feelings.I’m sure you aren’t advocating a meaningless presentation, but I’m all for exactly the type of message President Wilson gave.I suspect those outside the church who care enough to listen to his message appreciate the frankness with which this leader expressed the direction he intends to go.I think many of them know he wasn’t targeting them – he was talking to us.
Robert, I agree with you AND with Victor. I don’t really know what the answer is. In the information age, everything has changed. We have to rethink a lot about how we do things. We want to have a private evangelistic series and present truths by presenting the building blocks first, and building understanding before presenting the “more difficult aspects.” But how can we now? The last meetings we held, people went home and googled our personal names as well as doctrinal topics.
Sure we want a clear and meaningful message, but we want to protect those who are not ready to receive all of the truth at this time. We don’t want to push them away. It isn’t that we are afraid of offending them personally. It’s that we don’t want walls to go up so that we can’t reach out to them successfully.
I don’t know what the answer is. Even this forum is disturbing when our members have out and out conflicts, especially when behavior is not becoming of a Christian. It’s available for the whole world to see!
What it comes down to is things are different now. We need to approach everything differently. Otherwise, evangelistic interests will begin to think of us as the religious “Amway” brigade and lock their doors before we go up the steps.
The increase of knowledge and the rapid availability of it has changed our landscape. Christiane
“Don’t go backwards to interpret Genesis as allegorical or symbolic”
Did Wilson explain how SDA members can actually hold our leaders accountable?We have many leaders out here in the Pacific Union Conference who have not been accountable and still aren’t, but what can ordinary “Joe and Jill Schmo†church members do?
I wondered the same thing. I just realized this year that I really don’t know enough about how our church works and how changes are made. It’s my intention to study this out. Of course Biblical principles and a Christlike attitude must be followed (Matthew 18, and Proverbs 17:9–“He that covereth a transgression seeketh love; but he that repeateth a matter separateth very friends”). Biblical principles and Christlike attitude first, church policy second.
Christiane
Michigan Conference takes substantial action in LSU conflict
I hope more will follow, and will do so prayerfully.
EducateTruth.com promoted on 3ABN
A classic case which should cause any Adventist to stop in their tracks when judging motive or destiny is the following one:
“If William Miller could have seen the light of the third message, many things which looked dark and mysterious to him would have been explained. But his brethren professed so deep love and interest for him, that he thought he could not tear away from them. His heart would incline toward the truth, and then he looked at his brethren; they opposed it. Could he tear away from those who had stood side by side with him in proclaiming the coming of Jesus? He thought they surely would not lead him astray.
God suffered him to fall under the power of Satan, the dominion of death, and hid him in the grave from those who were constantly drawing him from the truth. Moses erred as he was about to enter the Promised Land. So also, I saw that William Miller erred as he was soon to enter the heavenly Canaan, in suffering his influence to go against the truth. Others led him to this; others must account for it. But angels watch the precious dust of this servant of God, and he will come forth at the sound of the last trump.” – EW 258
