Kenn says: “This highly possible scenario, of a universal academic theological …

Comment on LSU responds to Michigan Conference by Dennis McMullen.

Kenn says:
“This highly possible scenario, of a universal academic theological “confession-cleansing” process, curse it, or praise it, as I see it, can in turn easily expediate into an educational revolution of unprecedented dimensions in the history of our people, with daunting consequences for the future of the entire church, again I say, curse it, or praise it.”

Kenn, I love your post. It is delightful to imagine the drama in these confession-cleansing meetings. I have already pointed out two major areas in which SDA medical institutions fall short of the standard of medicine set forth in the Red Books. According to the purifiers, the doctors have failed in many areas. For some reason, Loma Linda, is more interested in the worldly credentials of its staff than in their doctrinal allegiance to the church. They even hire professors who are not Seventh-day Adventists for their staff! If the theologians are consistent, they will summon the dean of the medical school, to their inquisition chamber, and force him to confess that he has not always followed Mrs. White’s medical directives in his school. Because he has been such a bad boy, they will probably force him to grovel on the floor and plead for forgiveness. If he refuses to grovel, they will feel justified, to fire him and the entire medial staff at Loma Linda, and replace them with good people, from holy institutions, like Weimar or Wildwood. The present impure group doctors, who work at Loma Linda, routinely substitute their own fallible human judgment, based on scientific experimentation, for God’s absolute truth found in Mrs. White’s books. While the theologians are purifying the medical school, they can correct some other injustices. Every doctrinally pure Adventist knows that doctors make far too much money. Any two bit doctor, who works 60 – 70 hours a week, can make as much money in 3 months as the average preacher makes in a year. That can not stand. The theologians should empty all the Porsches and Lexuses from the doctors parking lot, and fill it with faded Chevettes and dented Ford pickups! To show that they have learned their lesson, and are truly humble, the male doctors should wear overalls to work, and the lady doctors should wear ankle length skirts and bloomers. Why should doctors be allowed to put on airs, like they are better than everyone else? To be sure the reforms stick, medical students must all be brought in for their own “confession-cleansing” sessions. No one who places scientific experimentation above God’s word will be allowed to graduate from Loma Linda school of Medicine. Mrs. White’s books will become the main textbooks for the medical school. Only those aspects of conventional medical science which supports her writings will be allowed in the curriculum. If Genesis, which was written in ancient Hebrew, a language which no modern person understands perfectly, and which has been recopied many times over the centuries, is to be given priority over science, why should the church attribute any less authority to Mrs. White’s medical statements?

Since we know that God never lies, let me present our next pearl of medical wisdom:

There are works of fiction that were written for the purpose of teaching truth or exposing some great evil. Some of these works have accomplished good. Yet they have also wrought untold harm. They contain statements and highly wrought pen pictures that excite the imagination and give rise to a train of thought which is full of danger, especially to the youth. The scenes described are lived over and over again in their thoughts. Such reading unfits the mind for usefulness and disqualifies it for spiritual exercise….{CT 383.1}
Even fiction which contains no suggestion of impurity, and which may be intended to teach excellent principles, is harmful. It encourages the habit of hasty and superficial reading, merely for the story. Thus it tends to destroy the power of connected and vigorous thought; it unfits the soul to contemplate the great problems of duty and destiny. {CT 383.2}
…Many a miserable, neglected home, many a lifelong invalid, many an inmate of the insane asylum, has become such through the habit of novel reading. {CT 383.3}
It is often urged that in order to win the youth from sensational or worthless literature, we should supply them with a better class of fiction. This is like trying to cure a drunkard by giving him, in the place of whisky or brandy, the milder intoxicants, such as wine, beer, or cider. The use of these would continually foster the appetite for stronger stimulants. The only safety for the inebriate, and the only safeguard for the temperate man, is total abstinence. For the lover of fiction the same rule holds true. Total abstinence is his only safety. {CT 383.4}

When one of the professors at a major Adventist university informed me that many of the books published by SDA publishing houses are fiction, I was shocked. In light of Mrs. White’s opposition to fiction, I had always assumed that the church would never knowingly publish fiction. I was a gullible child, who believed every word in those books. I based my faith in God on the information I received from Adventist books and periodicals. The professor went on to inform me that one of my favorite evangelistic books, THE MARKED BIBLE, was pure fiction. Finally, I learned that some of the “true” stories have been so intermingled with imaginary conversations and scenes, that people who were actually there can hardly recognize the story. The main difference between the SDA church publications and secular publications was that the secular publications were more open about which books were true and which were fiction. The publishing houses have improved their labeling somewhat, since they now refer to their fiction as “true to life”. If the church really believes that God, Himself, through Mrs. White, has told us that fiction is always very dangerous, and in some cases can cause insanity, how could they possibly justify their actions? In light of Mrs. White’s warning about fiction, there is no possible moral or legal justification for the behavior of the SDA publishing houses, and for the Book and Bible Houses which sell that dangerous material. Anyone in the church who has participated in secretly causing spiritual decline and mental illness among innocent Adventist children must be held accountable. Everyone involved in the publishing work must be forced to attend the“confession-cleansing” sessions. Those sessions should be a fascinating spectacle.

While it is fun to laugh at human folly, there is a serious down side to this folly. Many people have been hurt by the purifiers. After the church has completed those private “confession-cleansing” sessions, the church leaders themselves should submit to a “confession-cleansing” session to the rest of Christendom, for their role in promoting the myth called “creation science.” “Creation science,” as they interpret it, is an oxymoron. Other conservative Christian groups, who also reject orthodox science, have drawn their inspiration from the Seventh-day Adventist church. Thus, the Seventh-day Adventist church has amplified the damage to the cause of Christ which began when the Pope set himself up as the arbiter of scientific truth. When theologians set themselves up as authorities in science, they make themselves look foolish, and thus they effectively break the bonds between faith and reason. There is no reason for this damage. There are more productive ways to interpret the Bible. When the Bible is properly understood, science is the product of faith, not its enemy. The Bible tells us that God is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. He is a God of laws, including the laws of nature. He has presented Himself in two complementary books. The Bible is God’s revelation written in human language, nature is God’s revelation written in matter. Both books contribute to our understanding of God.

Dennis McMullen Also Commented

LSU responds to Michigan Conference
Dr. Stone said:
“Dennis, [edit] So, I say again, show us the “ubiquitous” evidence for Darwinian evolution! Even Stephen Gould couldn’t do it, and he gave us “saltation.” Frances Crick gave up and said we “evolved” from outer space genes! Ron Stone M.D.(Quote)”

Dr. Stone, I would enjoy a debate about creation and evolution, but first I want to make some comments which are directed towards the purpose of this forum, which is to determine whether it is appropriate for theologians to dictate scientific truth. I see you have not responded to any of my questions about your practice of medicine. Why not? If SDA physicians refuse to allow theologians to dictate their craft, why should they expect general biology professors to allow the theologians into their class rooms? To put it kindly, SDA physicians who encourage this type of behavior by theologians are inconsistent.

There are very many medical statements in Mrs. White’s writings, which modern Adventists physicians ignore. I have already mentioned the grave dangers of self abuse which most SDA doctors ignore. Next, I will mention the extreme risks associated with wigs. Let me quote her here:
“Fashion loads the heads of women with artificial braids and pads, which do not add to their beauty, but give an unnatural shape to the head… The artificial hair and pads covering the base of the brain, heat and excite the spinal nerves centering in the brain….The heat caused by these artificials induces the blood to the brain. The action of the blood upon the lower or animal organs of the brain, causes unnatural activity,…{RH, October 17, 1871 par. 9}…
In consequence of the brain being congested its nerves lose their healthy action, and take on morbid conditions….RH, October 17, 1871 par. 10}
Many have lost their reason, and become hopelessly insane, by following this deforming fashion. Yet the slaves to fashion will continue to thus dress their heads, and suffer horrible disease and premature death, rather than be out of fashion. {RH, October 17, 1871 par. 11}”

Dr. Stone, as an Adventist physician, you do believe that Mrs. White is a prophet of God, don’t you? If so, do you acknowledge that heavy wigs around the base of the skull can heat up the brain and cause insanity and death? Do any of your patients wear wigs? If so, have you warned them that their wigs might cause insanity? If you don’t accept Mrs. White’s statement about wigs, is it fair for me to proclaim that you believe “God is a liar?”

Doctors, who are cheering while theologians dictate scientific truth, should sober up, and think about the implications from what has happened. Seventh-day Adventists theologians have dug up the bone which Roman Catholic priests buried hundreds of years ago, and have set themselves up as authorities, who have the right to judge the validity of scientific theories. This smelly bone has already diminished the Roman Catholic church. It reeks even more now, after all these years. By its actions, the Seventh-day Adventist church is severely damaging the cause of Christ, since many people will generalize to all Christians, and will assume that all Christians are antagonistic to science.

Now, to answer your question. In my previous post, I provided an example of evolution, which can be verified in the lab. When bacteria are exposed to antibiotics, they change to develop resistance to those antibiotics they have encountered. That is evolution. Recently, scientists unearthed hominoid bones from tiny creatures, Homo floresiensis, they have labeled “Hobbit.” Their bones are found surrounded by stone artifacts and charcoal indicating that they shared many traits with us. These primitive hominids are evidence of evolution. Their existence does not exclude creation, but it does make the task for anyone who wishes to take Genesis 1 literally more difficult.

You asked me about two scientists, Francis Crick, and Stephen Gould. I understand that they are both dead, and can not speak for themselves. I believe that both of these men were confirmed evolutionists until their deaths. In other words, in their minds, the evidence for evolution was greater than any unresolved problems. Neither of them was able to solve the problem of how life began in the first place. There is still no adequate scientific theory to explain the origin of life.

When I was at La Sierra, circa 1970, the professors spent most of their time trying to poke holes in evolution. They were fairly successful in pointing out problems in Darwinism. Unfortunately, none of these problems in Darwinism were fatal to the theory. My professors’ were using an approach has been labeled “God of the Gaps,” because we find our God wherever scientists have gaps in their theory. As scientists fill in the gaps, the evidence for God becomes smaller and smaller. Because it depends on shrinking gaps, by itself, God of the gaps is not adequate. My professors were unable to close their argument by providing a positive scientific theory, of their own, which could explain the evidence. I have tried to keep abreast of the field, and so far the church still lacks any convincing scientific theory to replace Darwin’s theory. A few weeks ago, the Adventist Theological Society had a creation conference in Keene, Texas. The turn out was pitiful. Fortunately, we were treated to a lecture about the big bang by Dr. Bernard Brandstater, from Loma Linda University. Apparently, Dr. Brandstater recognizes that God of the Gaps is inadequate, since he has taken up philosophy to help him understand the issues surrounding creation better.

After attending the meetings by the Adventist Theology Society, I have concluded that the Adventist theologians are working from a position of weakness. If they were sure that science will support their fundamentalist theology, there would be no need for them to vote about scientific truth. The evidence would speak for itself. It other words, if they can’t win the scientific argument on its merits, they will settle the questions by legislation. This will not end well.


LSU responds to Michigan Conference
Sean Pitman said:
“Remember now, the issue under discussion involves a clearly stated fundamental Pillar of the SDA Faith. And yes, notion that very high level intelligent design and creative power was required to produce life on this planet, and the idea that this life was produced in a very vast array within recent history, has a great deal of scientific backing. I’m sorry, but mainstream opinion does not mean that the SDA position on origins isn’t based on good scientific reasoning, because it is.”

I’m not sure why you added this word of caution? Is that a warning of some type?

Is it possible that we are not discussing the same thing? I recently attended meetings put on by the Adventist Theological Society about creation. They believe that the earth was created about 6,000 years ago, in 7 literal days. That is what I have always believed is the traditional Adventist position. You statement is sufficiently vague, that it doesn’t affirm either of these things. Do you accept them? What do you mean by a short time, 6,000 years, 100,000 years, a million years? Let me give an example of information which goes against the traditional SDA position about the age of the earth. Scientists have drilled ice cores from the antarctic which they have dated to 800 kyears ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_core Since ice floats, any world wide flood would probably predate the glaciers on the antarctic. Do you accept these dates?

Dr. Pitman also said:
“Also, I am a medical doctor and I think Mrs. White contributed heavily to the cutting edge position of the SDA Church in the medical sciences. After all, why else do you think that SDAs are the longest lived group of ethnically diverse people in the world?”

Dr. Pitman, I agree, that Mrs. White did indeed have a great many good things to say about health. That is not my point. Dr., do you embrace everything Mrs. White said on health? Do you incorporate all the information contained in her book, SOLEMN APPEAL TO MOTHERS, into your practice? Since “self abuse” is the cause of so much illness, including insanity and dementia, surely you question your patients about “self abuse” and warn them of the dangers. Have you submitted any scientific papers describing how red heads are more resistant to “self abuse” than other people? Mrs. White had a great deal to say against drugs. Dr. Pitman, do you use drugs in your practice?

Dr. Stone, the same questions I asked Dr. Pitman apply to you. Do you believe Mrs. White was a prophet of God. If so, do you believe that every word she said about medicine is literally true? Are you willing to put everything she said into practice? Do you use drugs in your practice? If you don’t follow every word in her writings, is it fair for me to ask you if you believe that “God is a liar?” If you are secure in your position, and if you know that the facts will support you, why do you feel the need to use such inflammatory statements to carry your point?

Dr. Stone asked:
“Dennis, please inform us of the “ubiquitous” evidence for evolution in the world. I’m sure I’m not the only one interested in your “new” information! Ron Stone M.D(Quote)”

I don’t remember making the claim that I have “new” information about evolution. Can you refresh my memory?

Evolution is all around us. For example, when bacteria are exposed to antibiotics, some of them develop resistance to the antibiotics they encounter. That is why doctors are cautioned not to use antibiotics indiscriminately. Antibiotic resistance is a classic example of the scientific law of evolution. Although the wikipedia is not always correct, the definition found under evolution should suffice for our discussion:
“Evolution is the change in the inherited traits of a population of organisms through successive generations.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
In other words, evolution is the study of how living things change over time. That is a well established scientific principle.

Darwin’s book about the origin of species is entitled, THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES, not THE ORIGIN OF LIFE. The question about how life began in the first place is a different issue altogether. At this time, there is no generally accepted scientific explanation for the origin of life.

Now, that I have presented some of the abundant evidence for evolution, perhaps you doctors would be willing to present the scientific evidence to support the traditional SDA position that the earth is about 6,0000 years old, and was created in 6 literal days. Afterwards, perhaps you gentlemen would like to explain why you think theologians should be able to impose their interpretation of the Bible onto the science lab. How is the stance taken by the modern Seventh-day Adventist church different from the stance assumed by the Roman Catholic church when they persecuted scientists who disagreed with their theology. Since you are both physicians, are you prepared to allow theologians to dictate medical science to you? How long do you think Loma Linda Medical School would retain its accreditation, if doctors give theologians the same authority over their field that the church has asserted over general biology? Under the circumstances, why should any legitimate accrediting agency continue to accredit Adventist universities?


LSU responds to Michigan Conference
Richard, said, ” It’s tiresome to me when I hear people claim the church is deceptive on this issue when what they are really saying is that God has told a lie.”

Speak for yourself, Richard. Unless you are God, when someone disagrees with you, that is not the same as disagreeing with God. Theologians make may serious mistakes, but God never lies! Undoubtedly, many Catholic theologians made similar accusations against Galileo.

Conservative Adventists have the right to hold any theological opinion they wish, so long as they are clear that their opinions are not based on science. When they use ecclesiastical decrees to force their opinions on scientists, and when scientists comply with their wishes and teach theology under the guise of science, that is dishonest. When the church goes down this anti-scientific path, where will we stop? Mrs. White had a great deal to say about medicine, much of which the Adventist professional schools ignore. Will our professional schools, including Loma Linda University School of Medicine, be forced to check their scientific teachings with Mrs. White’s writings, to be sure they agree, before they teach them? In your search for theological purity, are you going to force Adventist doctors to swear to teach only those scientific facts which agree with Mrs. White? If so, how long will Adventist professional schools be able to maintain their accreditation? Perhaps, if we are lucky, the Seventh-day Adventist church will be able to roll back the clock to the days when Adventist institutions were not accredited.

Remember now, the issue under discussion involves a clearly stated fundamental Pillar of the SDA Faith. And yes, notion that very high level intelligent design and creative power was required to produce life on this planet, and the idea that this life was produced in a very vast array within recent history, has a great deal of scientific backing. I’m sorry, but mainstream opinion does not mean that the SDA position on origins isn’t based on good scientific reasoning, because it is.

Also, I am a medical doctor and I think Mrs. White contributed heavily to the cutting edge position of the SDA Church in the medical sciences. After all, why else do you think that SDAs are the longest lived group of ethnically diverse people in the world?

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com