@Geanna Dane: Rich wrote: “He doesn’t accept anyone but those …

Comment on LSU promotes acceptance of homosexuality but not creation by Sean Pitman.

@Geanna Dane:

Rich wrote: “He doesn’t accept anyone but those who in every land fear and work righteousness in Christ.”

Jesus said: “Whosoever believeth in him shall not perish but have everlasting life.” Furthermore “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” And “let he who is without sin throw the first stone.”

There must be a lot of people at this website without sin. And I’m not being sarcastic.

This is why I think it very wise not to accuse anyone with differences in doctrinal understanding of “sin” or “evil” or any other sort of moral deficiency. Differences in understanding over a doctrinal issue, such as the literal creation week, are not inherently a matter of morality or of eternal life.

Of course, just because one’s understanding of various doctrines doesn’t make a person good or bad, saved or lost, doesn’t mean that doctrines are not important. They are important. They have the power to provide a solid hope in the future and to make people’s lives better here and now. I think that such things are worth dying for, but not killing for. No one should be forced to understand such “truths” as I understand them. All should be free to accept or to leave such understandings behind of their own free will.

That being said, an organization that seeks to promote certain doctrinal perspectives on these issues, as a unified body of believers, should also be free to only hire those representatives who actually hold to the same beliefs. No one should expect to get paid by any organization while going about doing their own thing independent of the organization which they are supposed to represent. The organization need not make any moral judgment in association with who it does and does not hire.

This is simply an organizational issue… not a moral issue. After all, only God can rightly judge the heart when it comes to a clear understanding on these issues. We, as erring human beings, should not think to judge the heart or understanding of another on such doctrinal issues. We are called to share, not to force, these items of “Good News” with other people.

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com

Sean Pitman Also Commented

LSU promotes acceptance of homosexuality but not creation
As noted earlier, this is not a forum to debate homosexuality… sorry.

Sean Pitman


Recent Comments by Sean Pitman

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.