Comment on Beyond the Creation Story – Why the Controversy Matters by Sean Pitman.
I do sympathize with Mark Finley and others who wish to promote the Bible above our God-given abilities to reason. However, in the end, his main argument in support of the Bible’s authority is self-defeating.
If the Bible does not appeal to our God-given reasoning abilities, what separates Christians, Adventists in particular, from other religious groups who believe that their own holy book is the true Word of God? What separates the Bible from the Book of Mormon or the Qur’an?
Finley’s argument that Eve sinned because she trusted her reason above the naked word of God simply isn’t true. God had already provided Adam and Eve with far more evidence of who He was than did the serpent. God had given abundant evidence of His Divine character and love for Adam and Eve. Eve did not fall because of a lack of adequate empirical evidence that would appeal to her intelligent mind. Rather, Eve fell because she desired what she knew was not hers and sought out reasons to justify her sinful desire (i.e., otherwise known as rationalization, which is not the same thing as basing one’s decisions on the weight of reasonable evidence). If Eve had been innocent in her own mind, she would not have tried to hide from God when God came calling for her and Adam later that day.
The appeal to faith in the Bible that is blind to what one’s God-given reasoning ability is telling the honest searcher for truth paints God as arbitrary and impossible to please – even for a heart that is sincere in the search for Truth. If Eve had been honestly tricked, it would have been unfair of God to punish her.
Sin, by definition, must be a deliberate rebellion against what is consciously and rationally known to be true. It is for this reason that sin is illogical, irrational, and an eternal mystery. It is also for this reason that Jesus once said, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin.” – John 9:41 NIV
Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com
Sean Pitman Also Commented
Beyond the Creation Story – Why the Controversy Matters
@Ron D Henderson:
The very fact that you’re trying to present arguments to support your perspective shows that you’re trying to appeal to the reasoning abilities of another person in order to support your own perspective, your own particular interpretation, of the Bible as being true or valid. Are you not, therefore, talking about of both sides of your mouth? – using reasoning to support the Bible while claiming that reason is not needed to support the Bible?
Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com
Beyond the Creation Story – Why the Controversy Matters
@Paul Giem:
Exactly. It is for this reason that I argue that only those who are honestly and sincerely following where their God-given reasoning abilities are leading them will find God. It is easy to fall into the mode of rationalization when it comes to one’s personal desires that one knows are not good. One looks for reasons to justify bad behavior. This isn’t the type of reasoning I’m talking about…
Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com
Beyond the Creation Story – Why the Controversy Matters
@Ron D Henderson:
How did you originally determine that the Bible was true without first determining that its claim to Divine origin and authority was reasonable? – without using your God-given reasoning abilities to determine the truth and value of the Bible?
Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com
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.
