Samuel Pipim comments on GC’s decisions regarding creation
July 8, 2010 
40 Comments
A Reflection on the 2010 Atlanta General Conference Session
By Samuel Koranteng-Pipim, PhD
Director, Public Campus Ministries, Michigan Conference
[Excerpt]
1. Creation
Given the recent discussions in the church about the promotion of theistic evolution in some of our institutions, it came as no surprise that the world church re-affirmed its belief in the historicity of Genesis 1-11, a literal 6-day, 24-hour, contiguous, creation. The delegates did so in two important actions–namely, (i) approving a 2004 “Affirmation of Creation Statement,†and (ii) recommending to the Church Manual committee to incorporate essential components of that Statement into our Fundamental Belief #6.
The 2004 “Affirmation of Creation Statement†is a significant document that summarized the views of the church after a three-year discussion of the issue of creation and evolution. In view of the fact that some within our ranks are claiming that our present Fundamental Belief #6 (dealing with Creation) is ambiguous or broad enough to allow for naturalistic evolution, the 2004 Affirmation of Creation Statement makes very explicit what is implicit Fundamental Belief #6—namely, God actually created the heavens and the earth in six literal days, of 24-hours each.
In the deliberations on the floor and in their vote for these two actions delegates essentially rejected the new views on Creation, arguing that theistic evolution: (i) undermines the authority and reliability of Scripture, (ii) attacks the character of God, (iii) overturns key aspects of the doctrine of salvation, (iv) overthrows the foundation for morality, and (v) seriously erodes distinctive doctrines of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
The 2004 Affirmation of Creation Statement ensures that there will be no doubt in anyone’s mind about our church’s position. It was very clear that the representatives of the world church were very concerned that at a time when the Church needed resources to preach the gospel, we are actually paying some people to stand in our classrooms and pulpits to undermine our biblical teaching on Creation. I believe that the 2004 Affirmation Statement will ensure that our members and employees are held accountable.
By recommending to the Church Manual Committee a rewording of our current Fundamental Belief #6 to incorporate the essential components of the Affirmation of Creation Statement, the delegates were seeking to bring a definitive closure to the claim by some that theistic evolution is an option for Seventh-day Adventists. (Full article)
As usual, Sam is totally on target. His books are also great for showing how the secular humanistic philosophies promoted at LSU and other places are undermining our biblical beliefs. If you haven’t read them, you’re really missing a valuable message.
Ron Stone M.D.(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Amen! The SDA Church has taken a significant step forward at this GC session…
Sean Pitman
http://www.DetectingDesign.com
Sean Pitman(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Agree. The not-so-open door is now closed even more redundantly than it was before. I think liberal evolutionists inside the church were starting to “imagine” that the Adventist church as a denomination was embracing evolutoinism to a far greater degree than was in fact happening.
Now they are left with a mild dose of “reality” to correct their speculative suggestions that only a “tiny minority” of the 17 Million member SDA church thinks the bible is correct on the doctrine of origins.
So the real question is – what happens next?
Do evolutionists among us choose to believe the Word of God now instead of just continuing on down the road of the scorched-Bible all-for-evolution downward spiral?
Hopefully some will. But many will not.
Perhaps the best result is that the yet-to-be-deceived unsuspecting SDA students still headed for destinations like LSU – will be hard to misdirect with arguments by LSU professors suggesting that evolutionism is a good big-tent flavor of Adventist doctrine.
Another good result is that SDA Administrators will have rock-solid ground for taking whatever action needs to be taken to ensure that our hiring practices are in line with denominational beliefs? Maybe teachers in our schools today who see their own “beliefs” in evolutionism being at odds with the too-explicit-to-ignore position of the SDA world church on Bible creation, will choose to promote evolutionism some place else, or better yet – accept the Word of God.
Another good result is that constituents will be without excuse if they do not hold their conferences, unions and university administrators accountable for not upholding the beliefs of the church.
in Christ,
Bob
BobRyan(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Bob, The evolutionists were “imagining” because they were allowed to do whatever they want by the administration and Pacific Union Conference administration, besides the Board. I agree that “reality” has set in, and we see their response–hunker down to rationalize and actually lie about what is going on.
Ron Stone M.D.(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
The triumphalism that I’m hearing on this site is premature. It has taken me a long time to get as a negative about this situation as I am, and I will need to see real results before I get positive, and nothing has happened yet. For starters, we won’t have the new FB #6 until 2015. If people are waiting for an airtight FB #6 before tackling problems such as LaSierra, those problems won’t even begin to be dealt with for 5 more years.
The Darwinist forces in the SDA church are fanatical and deeply entrenched; they have control of whole conferences and unions, and complete control of LaSierra, and it will take an horrific bloodletting to dislodge them. I’m pretty certain that the church doesn’t have the stomach for it.
David Read(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
@David Read:
I wish I were able to disagree with you here, but I have to say that I agree that it is going to be a very long and very difficult battle from here on out.
I am somewhat hopeful, however, given the strong words and stance of our new GC President, Ted Wilson. This is one ray of light that is more than we had just a month ago…
Sean Pitman
http://www.DetectingDesign.com
P.S. I’ve read through quite a bit of your book now and I must say that I really am enjoying it. It is very well done. I may not agree with all of your conclusions, but I do agree with the vast majority of them it seems…
Sean Pitman(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
@David Read:
I agree that recent events merely indicate a willingness at the GC level to begin to confront the problem — this is not over. Elder Wilson stated during his “Yes, Creation” talk that there would be a fight coming up over this issue.
I believe that those in the GC that are now put in place to meet this thing head on – will lose this battle if the rank and file members do nothing.
I have an article about this thing being a very likely omega candidate orders of magnitude larger than anything the “Living Temple” controversy, or the Ford, Walter Rea or Brinsmead controversies could ever have imagined.
in Christ,
Bob
BobRyan(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
There are four problem groups that will work to oppose GC administrators trying to put out the fires of evolutionism inside the Adventist church.
1. Political appointees who have little regard for Bible doctrin and serve at the local and Union levels and believe their local constituents are in favor of a “big tent” that includes evolution. They will gladly drift along on whatever wave of popularity and apparent job-security they find.
2. Activists who may not actually believe in evolutionism but “need” a “big tent” model for some other pet project (abortion, gay rights, progressive Adventism etc). Many of them will see a clamp down on evolutionism as a “narrowing of the grey” that might next come to their pet project.
3. Actual Evolutionists determined to “stay and change the church”. This could be the smallest of the first three groups. This group could also include the tide of young adults coming to our colleges from highschools and academies that are promoting “evolution as fact”, or simply influenced “by the media” to believe in evolution as “revealed truth” in the context of a church and school that simply do not take the problem seriously.
4. Outside groups. Those that have some control over education and certification. Or those who influence potential employers.
in Christ,
Bob
BobRyan(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
An article? An omega candidate? What are you talking about?
Geanna Dane(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
Though I’m sure Bob could speak for himself – Let me put on my ‘conservative’ spectacles and interpret Bob’s statement for you.
Ellen White spoke in her writings of an “Alpha and Omega” of apostasy. She referred to the “Living Temple” apostasy of John Harvey Kellog as the “Alpha.” She said that later the ‘Omega’ of apostasy would come. This ‘Omega’ would be of a more dramatic nature:
“I am instructed to speak plainly. “Meet it,” is the word spoken to me. “Meet it firmly, and without delay.” But it is not to be met by our taking our working forces from the field to investigate doctrines and points of difference. We have no such investigation to make. In the book Living Temple there is presented the alpha of deadly heresies. The omega will follow, and will be received by those who are not willing to heed the warning God has given.” {1SM 200.1}
“Be not deceived; many will depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. We have now before us the alpha of this danger. The omega will be of a most startling nature.” {1SM 197.4}
Ever since her statements, orthodox/conservative Adventists have proposed various candidates. Brinsmead embraced an extreme form of justification by faith and eventually gave up belief in the Sabbath and an apocalyptic Second coming. Certainly ‘startling,’ but it didn’t hold a candle to the candidates who would follow.
Ford (who was accused of being in cahoots with Brinsmead) would develop an elaborate attack on the church’s foundational pillar – the sanctuary doctrine. The influence of his ideas were powerful enough to lead large numbers of ministers to abandon the Adventist faith. He has never abandoned his propositions – even though they have been summarily overturned by Adventist Biblical scholarship. He has never apologized for these destructive influences nor repented of his errors – instead, liberal Adventists in Southern California have apologized to him for the way he was treated!
Walter Rea’s book ‘The White Lie’ was a direct attack on the inspiration of Ellen White. Many abandoned their confidence in the writings of Mrs. White through this book. Rea’s arguments have likewise been thoroughly answered by Adventist scholarship. Unfortunately, this has not prevented liberal ‘Adventists’ from continually rehashing Ford’s and Rea’s hackneyed contrivances.
Conservative Adventists view theistic evolution as a very startling infidelity indeed. They view this as a strike at the very heart of Adventism as well. They view it as having such destructive, wide reaching, and even devilish implications – that it could certainly be a viable candidate for the ‘Omega’ of apostasy. This is a view that Bob is apparently giving credence to.
Ellen White said that the Alpha of apostasy had to be met ‘head on.’
As a result, conservative Adventists who believe in the writings of Ellen White, and do not question the veracity of the statements above (nor her highly pointed statements about the infidelity of theistic evolution), believe that theistic evolution must also be met ‘head on.’ In other words, in a very decisive and unequivocal way. The current actions by the GC president and delegates is viewed as a demonstrative step in this direction.
Of course, I probably don’t even understand the meaning of the words ‘evolution’, or ‘conservative.’ So, you might want to also ask a liberal Adventist what was meant by Bob’s cryptic statements.
One final caveat: Ellen White was very clear in stating that demons were assisting Kellog in promoting his devilish ‘Alpha’ doctrine. Regarding this ‘Living Temple’ theory she said in effect, ‘Don’t waste your precious missionary time investigating the depths of Kellog’s deadly heresy – instead, vigorously oppose it.
If evolutionary theory constitutes a doctrine of devils (a conclusion I am hard pressed to refute, considering the worldwide carnage and infidelity it has produced) – then there are probably devils assisting its promulgation.
To play the ‘devils advocate’ for a devilish doctrine, could be a very dangerous endeavor indeed.
Victor
Victor Marshall(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Dave, I totally agree with you. All this talk about “winning” is totally premature. We have actually “won” NOTHING, as the situation has not changed one bit.
Will it continue to “go our way?” Well, I have my doubts also. LSU, including the administration, the Board, and the Pacific Union Conference will not back down on this issue easily, as they have too long a record of supporting it!
Are we willing to continue our fight? I certainly hope so.
Ron Stone M.D.(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
I should not be so negative. The election to the GC presidency of Ted Wilson, who is a very strong supporter of the traditional Adventist view of origins, is obviously a very positive development. The latest movement is in the right direction. I must acknowledge that and be grateful. But to borrow from Churchill, this is not the end, nor even the beginning of the end. It is, rather, the end of the beginning.
Or, to borrow another metaphor, I think we have reached the place where most Adventists are willing to admit we have a problem. But admitting you have a problem, while a necessary and crucial first step to recovery, does not solve the problem. The hard work still lies ahead.
David Read(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
I agree 100%. The major work is still ahead, and it looks like we have the right man in charge to possibly help us. God IS great! But, we do have lots of work to do, with God’s guidance.
Ron Stone M.D.(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Thank you so much for tackling this terrible problem. We must stand for what the Bible tells us!
Sincerely, Warrine Harden
Warrine Harden(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
The solution is actually quite simple. The GC holds the ultimate purse strings. Ask the offending profs and administrators to look for other work. If they don’t wish to go, turn off the funding tap. Without a paycheck, or funds to operate the school with, they will disappear due to thier need of a new paycheck.
D Burt(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
D Burt, I don’t know how the funding for our conferences and institutions actually works. Does anyone know? I would be interested in knowing more. Perhaps we have an “insider” who could help us?
Ron Stone M.D(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Ok, so the reaffirming of #6 has been done. BIG DEAL !! Do you REALLY think that it is going to change any thing ?? These people are too arogannt to care !! Just look at what DIDN’T happen at WWC. Until we get rid of the “suits” in charge, there’ll be no change. UNLESS some parents & supporter’s start speaking w/their money !! But do they have the courage to do so ??
Nanci Williams(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Well stated Nanci, The Pacific Union Conference will do exactly as it pleases, as we have seen it do in the past.
Ron Stone M.D.(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
7-22-10
Let’s just say I’m a tiny bit more hopeful! Things are looking better than they have looked in a long, long time, but, as I see it, the battle has really just begun. It is not going to be an easy battle–this snake has made tremendous inroads in our church while too many of the “watchmen” have not only been sleeping at their posts but apparently some have actually been aiding and abetting this heresy. I refuse to mention names–name-calling is not the least bit Christlike–but they know who they are (and so does God!)
Our new leaders are facing a fearsome battle and they desperately need our prayers and support. Please don’t close down this site. It is the one way that I know of to keep the rank and file knowledgeable about what is going on and is a place where we can keep our leaders aware of our displeasure of the “anything goes status quo”– “We the people†simply cannot back down and shut up now!
Lydian Belknap(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
A simple suggestion as an addition to other needed approaches: Why not ask for a letter-writing campaign from all the members in the churches of North America to send to LSU and other institutions, expressing our decision to send no young people to LSU until the professors unanimously agree and teach Biblical creationism, both scientifically and theologically. (Professors are absolutely free to teach anything they want to teach, but not in our institutions. This is a theological decision. Science is God’s second book and must be understood in light of revealed Truth.)
Was this not Ellen White’s approach to the alpha of apostasy? “Do not send your children to Battle Creek.” We are a large body and would have a big influence if everyone were encouraged to participate. If LSU had too few students to function, that would say the most.
Linda Hoover(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Good idea. However, LSU already has a high percentage of non-SDA students, so their tactic may be to simply “fill in” the empty slots with anyone who is willing to cough up some big bucks to attend.
IF LSU was actually run by real bible-believing SDA’s, your suggestion would work, but the administration, the Board, and the Pacific Union Conference administrators are not going to be of much help, as we are plainly seeing now! I believe they will simply thumb their collective noses at any attempt at “outside interference” as they will call it.
Ron Stone M.D.(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
I’m always amused when anyone says “24 hour day”. This really says nothing because an hour is defined as 1/24 of the time it takes for one rotation of the planet. Therefore, if a planet were rotating very, very FAST, it would have a 24 hour day. And, if a planet were rotating very, very SSLLOOWW, it would still have a 24 hour day. The difference would only become apparent if one were able to compare the time it takes for an hour on the fast planet with the time it take for an hour on the slow planet while measuring from a third planet, you would find that an hour on the fast planet is shorter in time than an hour on the slow planet. But there would still be 24 hours on each planet.
While I agree with the sentiments of Pippin, I just wish he (and many others) would abandon the useless “24 hour day” phrase.
Allen Roy(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
Uh, Allen, why are you so “amused” by people speaking of a “24-hour day” when they are speaking of the day on our EARTH, as Sam Pipim is obviously speaking of? This does not “say nothing” since most (perhaps not you?) would assume he is speaking of here on this planet, and not on Jupiter, Saturn, Mars, etc.
So you actually believe the phrase “24 hour day” is “useless?” Earth people use that phrase quite frequently, and the vast majority of the other “earth people” know what it means. You don’t?!
Ron Stone M.D.(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
@Victor Marshall:
Victor – a well worded reply for our benefit. I had been thinking the same regarding the Omega but you put it better in words. Thank you.
Roger Seheult(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
@Allen Roy:
Well Allen, you’d think people would know what the word “day” would mean. But a lot seem to think this means millions of years. Even when “evening and morning” are included in the text. You’ve got to talk like a lawyer with these people because they’ll parse every word to fit their ideology.
Roger Seheult(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Regarding the Omega:
Ellen G. White:
“As in the days of the apostles men tried by tradition and philosophy to destroy faith in the Scriptures, so today, by the pleasing sentiments of higher criticism, evolution, spiritualism, theosophy, and pantheism, the enemy of righteousness is seeking to lead souls into forbidden paths. To many the Bible is as a lamp without oil, because they have turned their minds into channels of speculative belief that bring misunderstanding and confusion. The work of higher criticism, in dissecting, conjecturing, reconstructing, is destroying faith in the Bible as a divine revelation. It is robbing God’s word of power to control, uplift, and inspire human lives.”—Acts of Apostles, p. 474.
Enough Said.
Roger Seheult(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
For those interested in the alpha-omega angle of evolution in the SDA church may I recommend an excellent article that I stumbled across:
http://omega77.tripod.com/mfalphaomega.htm
Roger Seheult(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
We have our school system to escape gov propaganda and save our children from being fed with lies. Evolution is lie. It has always been, and will always be. God is Creator and Saviour, those who don’t believe that can freely got to Catholic Church which believes otherwise on both issiues.
Ivan(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
@Roger Seheult:
Good point – and on the Omega post as well.
I gave the Review an article on evolution as a classic Omega Candidate – they have expressed no interest at this point.
in Christ,
Bob
BobRyan(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Darwin says Evo evolved, at random, suffering and death. And the Sabbath had nothing to do with it. Theistic Evoeans say God created everything, so, as deliberately as He created fish, He created Evil (aka Satan), which is suffering and death. And the Sabbath is just a nice thing to observe, but Earth Day may be even nicer. I rather like Darwin’s version better. Maybe my grandchildren will be going to USC rather than LSU.
wesley kime(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Well, as usual – “doctor” Pipim stands for the truth the same way he stands for sexual morality.
If he were serious about his resignation he would withdraw his preaching, books and DVD’s. But somehow I suspect he is already planning a comeback.
Jag(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
A few general truths that become apparent to Bible students:
The enemies of truth will look for “any excuse” to denegrade those like Dr. Samuel Pipim who rebuke sin, proclaim unpopular truth, uphold the word of the Lord.
Obviously the cheapest method is to simply proclaim the fact that the saints are humans and are fallible when one of them falls. Then in an act that reveals their true spirit those who oppose the truth will insist that the righteous man not rise again… not resume ministry in any form that might honor God.
So what does God say?
Proverbs 24:16
For a just man falleth seven times, and riseth up again: but the wicked shall fall into mischief
Psalms 37
23 The steps of a man are established by the LORD,
And He delights in his way.
24 When he falls, he will not be hurled headlong,
Because the LORD is the One who holds his hand.
Isaiah 1 – “Though your sins be as scarlet they shall be as white as snow”.
The righteous are prone to repentance and confession – those who only live to deride the truth – are not familiar with that process until they turn and submit to the Holy Spirit who “convicts the world of sin and righteousness and judgment”.
in Christ,
Bob
BobRyan(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
Unless, of course, the sin is failure to heed the warnings of 3SG 90-91. At that point he WILL be hurled headlong in the maelstrom of internet bullying. The LORD will be the only One who holds his hand, because anyone else will be seen labeled at a “TE” or as a “creationist” within quotation marks, and we know this from higher critical reasoning.
Let’s remember that “ET’s exist.” The point remains.
Professor Kent(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
2
Actually, I don’t think we should be dwelling on Samuel Pipin’s moral lapse. Even though inquiring minds “want to know,” he is not in the “TE’s exist” realm and his lapse had nothing to do with 3SG 90-91 or Colin Patterson or the Flying Spaghetti Monster or belief in reptiles-to-birds happy fiction. Therefore, it’s an off-topic POV.
Professor Kent(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
0 
2
@Professor Kent:
Once again Kent “the creationist” is right on target.
I agree fully!
in Christ,
Bob
BobRyan(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
BobRyan(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
And who better than Bob to sniff these souls out, sifting the wheat from the chaff?
Hint: definitely not Kent “the creationist”
Professor Kent(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
0 
1
Who better than Kent to point out the contrast between a determined TE trying to indoctrinate SDA students – vs a one time event with someone like Pipim who then turns and is repentant.
Again Kent
– I thank you for bringing that point up. In 3SG Ellen is not talking about someone who “used to be TE” or who “one day was TE but then repented”.
The contrast was very helpful and you were right to point that out.
Again – I appreciate your work in that regard.
in Christ,
Bob
BobRyan(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
You’re very welcome, Sir Ryan. It’s a special joy to bring the riches of 3SG 90-91 and 3SG 92-94 to light. (I’m hoping you fill in the details on 3SG 92-94 on the other thread, because higher reasoning dictates that “TE’s exist.”)
Professor Kent(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
0 
2
Hi Fellow believers around the world, thank you for your comments. As custodians of this awesome truth we embrace, it is really refreshing to know that there folk like you who so jealously guard the truth that God has seen fit to entrust to us mortals.
We should never be surprised to see these elements creeping into our institutions and churches. If ever there was a time for us to take a stand for the truth it is now.The Lord has gifted this church with a very strong voice in the form of His trusted servant Ellen White.
Read her books and you will see that some of the happenings have been graphically illustrated through her writings.
Be prepared for an onslaught of awesome proportions.
May The God of Grace grant us the wisdom and strength to remain faithful and true .
The end is almost in sight.
God bless
Ronnie Naivety
Johannesburg South Africa
ronnie@stargatescientific.co.za
Ronnie Naidoo(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
2 
0