Every time they mention the church’s position on creation, it is prefixed by the word, “voted”. They want to imply that the church’s stance on this is about a vote rather than about scripture, as if a vote can mandate the meaning of scripture. This is Satan at his most subtle, and their twisted truth is so close to the reality that you need spiritual insight from the Holy Spirit to understand what is really being said. Yea, hath God really said we were created in seven literal days, or was that just the majority vote?

AGreed – the Evolutionist argument is never from the Bible – it is always from “the need to change the Bible” and then they try to back away from their own handiwork claiming that the only reason Bible believing Christians believe the Word of God “SIX days you shall labor…for in SIX days the Lord made” is — because of a “vote”.

It is becoming politically “correct” nowdays to conclude that people CHOOSE to believe the Bible – only to the extent that it is NICE to believe the Bible.

(Take the gay marriage issue for example). The idea is that if you CHOOSE to believe the bible in some area that is not “nice” for the National Academy of sciences, or not “nice” for the GLBT groups — then you have “chosen” a bad thing.

There is almost a “who cares” attitude when it comes to “yes but what does the Bible say” question. The real issue for many of these “Bible is NOT the Word of God” groups is “are you politically savvy enough to believe ONLY those parts of the Bible that we SAY you can believe and still be NICE”.

in Christ,

Bob

Like or Dislike: 0  0

This is only my opinion and none of anyone on this site.

You said: “The thing that concerns me a great deal at this point is the idea that there is no scientific information to support “Intelligent Design.” At least that is the statement I’ve heard numerous times on this site”

If you want to learn more I think you would really be interested in this man and his videos if you have not already. I get no money for referring him to you. He got me interested in this topic and energized me to do so.

Watch his life story and his videos noted below:

http://walterveith.org/walter-veith-life-story.html
http://amazingdiscoveries.org/webstore/us/100-the-genesis-conflict-series-8-dvd-set.html

Like or Dislike: 0  0

While interested in, and total belief in, the Biblical account of our beginnings I simply did not have the time to delve deeply into the subject after graduation. I was very busy mother rearing five children, helping my husband with his business and caring for his elderly parents for over 20 years plus helping out in Sabbath School and other church activities. After all one,often very tired, woman, can only do so much!

But I am very interested–and concerned–over the “raging debate” about the teaching of evolution in some of our institutions (LSU seems to be the focal point right now.)

The thing that concerns me a great deal at this point is the idea that there is no scientific information to support “Intelligent Design.” At least that is the statement I’ve heard numerous times on this site. I was not at the General Conference in Atlanta so was unable to hear for myself things that were said by the defenders of our belief in creation but from what I have heard (in a round-about way) there were apparently some of our scientists who were rather weak in their own beliefs–they believed it “by faith” but really had no scientific support for it. If this is truly the case I am absolutely appalled!

In other places on this site I have suggested that these scientists (and any others who want to hear the “Other Side of the Story”) subscribe to “Acts and Facts” a monthly publication by the “Institute for Creation Research.” To my knowledge this is an independent organization and not the “child” of any particular denomination. It is staffed by credible scientists whose one mission in life is to show scientific evidence that there HAD to be an Intelligent Mind behind the origin of our world. Their magazine is free (at least I’ve never had to pay for my subscription) and packed with all kinds of research–and they have many books and other publications ranging from small books for children to very serious publications for scientists.

I do not mean to be critical but I simply do not understand is why so many of OUR scientists do not seem to be able to send out the same clear, unapologetic message. We have all sorts of books on most of our other Fundamental Beliefs but, as far as I can tell, nothing much on this topic. Why?

I have been an Adventist all of my life and I can never remember reading much of anything scientific on this subject in any of our publications supporting our belief in creation. Somehow it was never a problem to me–the Bible said it and I believed it (still do!) But is glaringly obvious that we need, and have needed, for many years the clear trumpet sound of scientific evidence. Please don’t try to tell me it isn’t available–ICR seems to be able to find it and we certainly should also! After all, we are supposed to be the “head, not the tail” in all things scriptural!

This is not some “minor” point that we can simply overlook. God has not left us to fumble around in the dark on this issue and if we are to be a people ready to meet the Lord in the clouds–and if we are to be able to show other inquiring minds that we truly have the final message to a dying world–we had better get our act together and be able to meet this heresy head on with solid science to back up our belief in Genesis1 and beyond!!

Fellow Believers, we do need more faith–and we do need much prayer but I strongly believe God expects us to stop just fumbling around on ths issue and DO SOMETHING POSITIVE in this situation–starting with our scientific personnel , LSU and all up and down our whole system. Otherwise Jesus just may have come and gone and we will be left behind with our mouths open wondering “what happened?” (After all, we ARE Laodiceans you know!)

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Every time they mention the church’s position on creation, it is prefixed by the word, “voted”. They want to imply that the church’s stance on this is about a vote rather than about scripture, as if a vote can mandate the meaning of scripture. This is Satan at his most subtle, and their twisted truth is so close to the reality that you need spiritual insight from the Holy Spirit to understand what is really being said. Yea, hath God really said we were created in seven literal days, or was that just the majority vote?  
I suggest you actually read the Bible to find out. What does it say? How doth thou readest?

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Like or Dislike: 0  0

1) God created the world in 6 days
2) Moses wrote it down in Genesis
3) Jesus confirms that this is the case
4) The whole Christian world agrees that this happened
5) Darwin published “Origin of the Species”/SDA church organized
6) Athesits believe that the world was not created in 6 days
7) SDA church puts down their beliefs (vote) including those about creation in a way (they think) is unambiguous
Certain SDA Professors start to believe that evolution is a better explanation on how God might have created the world and they twist the words voted previously in the SDA fundamental beliefs to state that they are within the beliefs of the church to continue in this way.
9) The church clarifies there position by voting on a better wording to substantiate a belief that goes back to #2

I hope that the church’s stance is based on #2 (since #1 can’t be verified in a religious sense without #2) rather than #7 or #9.

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Like or Dislike: 0  0

Let us go to the source on that point and see if pastor Oberg has told even half of the truth in that regard.

Our first conference was at Volney in Bro. Arnold’s barn. There were about thirty-five present, all that could be collected in that part of the State. There were hardly two agreed. Each was strenuous for his views, declaring
2SG 98
that they were according to the Bible. All were anxious for an opportunity to advance their sentiments, or to preach to us. They were told that we had not come so great a distance to hear them, but had come to teach them the truth. Bro. Arnold held that the 1000 years of Rev 20 were in the past; and that the 144,000 were those raised at Christ’s resurrection. And as we had the emblem of our dying Lord before us, and was about to commemorate his sufferings, Bro. A. arose and said he had no faith in what we were about to do; that the Sacrament was a continuation of the Passover, to be observed but once a year. {2SG 97.2}

These strange differences of opinion rolled a heavy weight upon me, especially as Bro. A. spoke of the 1000 years being in the past. I knew that he was in error, and great grief pressed my spirits; for it seemed to me that God was dishonored. I fainted under the burden. Brethren Bates, Chamberlain, Gurney, Edson, and my husband, prayed for me. Some feared I was dying. But the Lord heard the prayers of his servants, and I revived. The light of Heaven rested upon me. I was soon lost to earthly things. My accompanying angel presented before me some of the errors of those present, and also the truth in contrast with their errors. That these discordant views, which they claimed to be according to the Bible, were only according to their opinion of the
2SG 99
Bible, and that their errors must be yielded, and they unite upon the third angel’s message. Our meeting ended victoriously. Truth gained the victory. {2SG 98.1}

Clearly the “inconvenient details” do not support Oberg’s statement

Chris Oberg: at 43:00 “But in our early history we learned all the time, month after month, year after year they’ll say ‘we had a meeting where hardly two of us agreed, yet we left in harmony. We lived our life in the early years not all of us agreeing”

in Christ,

Bob

Like or Dislike: 0  0

In that sermon you will discover that “Ellen White did not like conservatives” and that a church where “hardly two or three agreed” but yet all were in complete harmony is the church of the 1800′s.

A few of the ending comments in that video with a few minor comments in parenthesis by me -

40:50 – Pastor Chris Oberg said: “two things come to mind as I listened carefully to what I heard Fritz Guy say.

(Thing -1)

40:59 – “I heard Fritz say that the old time religion that was good enough for Grandma and Grandpa might not be sufficient today. It helps us feel calm when we’re anxious, its familiar its what we know but it isn’t the whole story. We wouldn’t want the medical care of 100 years ago… who here wants the medical care of 100 years ago. When Uriah Smith was 12 ” (A story about a doctor cutting Uriah Smith’s leg off on the kitchen table without anesthesia – follows)

41:48 “Do you want the medicine of 100 years ago? I don’t!”… 42:00 “do you want the politics where only Anglo men can vote in society. That’s 100 years ago! Do you want the educational system of 100 years ago? No! 42:12 The old time religion that is foundational that is precious to us is not the end of the story”.

(Thing-2)

42:23 – “I am also thinking that we your pastors at La Sierra want you to be very clear on this church members because it has become very popular now in Adventist Christianity to say – ‘well if we can’t agree on this we are not even Adventist’. If you don’t believe in this (the ten horns and what they mean) we will not survive as a church. Language we heard in the 1888’s we heard it in 1901, 1905 we heard it again in Atlanta a few weeks ago. If we don’t all agree we can’t move ahead or somebody in the circle must not be Adventist”. 43:00 “But in our early history we learned all the time, month after month, year after year they’ll say ‘we had a meeting where hardly two of us agreed, yet we left in harmony. We lived our life in the early years not all of us agreeing” (Examples of some agreeing with health reform and Sabbath “earlier than others”). 43:25 “Some never did understand Ellen White’s ministry and claim it for their own. The editor of the Review, the two most important men in charge of the paper for Adventist Christianity didn’t agree theologically on the trinity and the nature of Christ, yet they can work 10,20,30,40 years together and help the church grow and thrive. ”

43:48 “It is a fallacy when someone says ‘unless 16 million Adventist Christians believe and think alike we are not Adventist. That’s a fallacy. (the sound of LSU clapping). Because just spend a week with Adventist Christians from around the globe and watch what the eat and what they drink and what the do on Sabbath and watch what they wear and how they worship and watch how they describe their family life at home…do that spend a week with a few 100 thousand Adventist Christians and you will see that we don’t have to behave and think precisely alike to be Adventists” (The grand equivocation)

44:48 “So when someone tries to persuade you – unless this or unless that you’re not Adventist and unless 16 million of us all move the boat this way – not Adventist. I just want to say to you La Sierra Christians there is more to the story there is always more to the story always more light up ahead.” (the grand equivocation combined with the “story” told in Genesis 3 to Eve)

45:06 “Let us not be persuaded by what is going on in culture – because it is so popular in the world right now to draw lines in the sand to name the two parties involved to say who is right and who is wrong” (As Oberg just did in complaining about Atlanta a few weeks ago) “to say who is in and who is out. To identify the point of view and to cluster around it and to mark others –…– are very savvy about this. And that’s what is creeping into the church right now. Where we are drawing lines and naming sides and calling some in, and some out and who are the real Adventists and who aren’t and I want to tell you there is nothing more unbiblical or unadventist than that idea”. (Now completely leaping into the shoes of the attitude Oberg is supposedly trying to condemn.) “We can all be Adventist Christians”.

in Christ,

Bob

Like or Dislike: 0  0

For example “Doctors prefer Crest” makes it appear that all or the majority of doctors prefer or recommend Crest to their patients when in fact all that is needed for the statement to be true is that more than 1 doctor prefers to brush his teeth with Crest toothpaste.

Here is where “critical thinking” would be of service to the reader in a true caveat emptor fashion.

In the case of LSU today – we have the poster child for caveat emptor.

in Christ,

Bob

Like or Dislike: 0  0