Comment on Beyond the Creation Story – Why the Controversy Matters by Ron D Henderson.
Sean Pitman. The Bible makes it quite clear that no man with all the reasoning skills he has can find out God (Job 17:7; Ps. 132:5, Ec. 3:11, 8:17; Rom. 11:33).
However, I believe that Sean is arguing from an angle, a perspective, that I believe is quite unnecessary. I say this because we all know and understand that everyone is given reasoning ability from birth. This is part and parcel of the human composition, somewhat like animals as well; so, the type of discussion here on reason for us Christians is actually uncalled for.
Uncalled for because, and again I say, we all believe that God gave man the mind with its reasoning ability; none should deny this. If this is what Sean means then we are in the same boat. However, if Sean thinks that we must rely on reasoning alone to understand nature’s data, then he is quite wrong. That is not possible.
There has to be the element of faith which the Bible says we must have. Good sincere people read the Bible and still they are infidels or unbelievers. Since none of us was there in the beginning to know how God performed his mighty works of creation, we must believe by sanctified reasoning and faith that the Bible is correct.
The atheist cannot do this because he dismisses God out rightly. We Christians do not dismiss God simply because we chose to believe the Word of God found in the Bible. And while we arrive at this conclusion and decision via our reasoning ability, we recognize that our ability to reason out correctly the works of God is severely limited and we must resort to faith as well.
And of course we resort to faith not blindly, but due to our prior reasoning experience with God as we experience Him in humanity, and through the written Word. So when the Good Book says that no man can find out God unto perfection, and that His ways are past finding out, it means that our reasoning ability is limited, due to sin. And even without sin we still cannot find out God completely because he is Creator and we the created. If we were able to find out God completely we would be His equal. And we are certainly not. So we are only pitting ourselves against ourselves when we discuss ‘reason’ the way we do.
To understand ‘reason’ properly we must have the God insight. Without that we become slaves to reason as some ancients had become, and as the modern non Christian scientists is today.
The real issue we should all be united on is that we cannot have teachers in our institutions teaching science from an evolutionary perspective, teaching that the Bible is wrong, and that it is ‘religion’ and does not belong in the science class room!! We are not evolutionists, we are creationists!
And we expect our institutions to teach from that perspective. Failure to do so should incur strong measures like removal of the teachers. This is exactly what the secular world does in order to maintain a pure strain of evolution. Why should we Christians settle for any less?
It’s time we give them an ultimatum. Stop or go! And if the whole institution wishes to be contrary, or remain defiant, then we sell out and leave them to themselves. This is not hatred or dogma; it is simply upholding our biblical beliefs that we have chosen to accept.
Ron D Henderson Also Commented
Beyond the Creation Story – Why the Controversy Matters
I see, Ken you are getting to know about our church; that is good. Let me say, Ken, I have never had any issue with Sean, barring that discussion on ‘reason.’ I do not know what Sean believes or teaches. I have never had any contact with him that I am aware of. I used to know a Pitman from the West Indies, I believe Grenada, years ago, do not know whether he’s the same person.
As regards prophecy, since you mentioned EGW and ‘worms of for food,’ there’s something known as ‘conditional’ prophecy where it will be fulfilled at the time delivered if all conditions are met.
For example, the case with Jonah and Nineveh in the Bible; God told him to tell those Ninevites that they will be destroyed in 40 days due to their wickedness. However, they repented and sought God’s mercy, so he accepted their repentance (that’s mercy) and postponed the destruction. The text brings this point.
There are other examples in the Bible of conditional prophecy. EGW’s reference you quoted falls in that category; had the brethren rallied to the cause and sought God as they should have done the prophecy would no doubt have been fulfilled.
The thing about the church, ours, is that we follow biblical teachings that as an organisation we have written down. When anyone strays from this then we take measures, as any other organisation, atheists, secular, or religious, does and is entitled to do. Our church does not morph or change to please anyone who might have some ‘bright’ ideas.
However, we do believe that, and have experienced, individuals arise and seek to change the structure and beliefs of the church; Desmond Ford is one you mentioned.
How do we know whether they are right or wrong, you ask? We test them by the biblical beliefs which the body of believers have agreed upon and have written down. Is it a matter of interpretation? Well, regardless, we subscribe to the interpretation that the body of believers as an organization hold in common. We believe that this is the biblical approach to take concerning ‘new light.’
Of course we also believe that ‘new light’ is in order and can be accepted by the organisation. However, we do that by having the appropriate groups study the issue, communicate with the rest of the organisation, and if they all agree, then we vote that practice or belief into our system of beliefs at the appropriate time when the church meets in plenary sessions.
We are also aware that along the road of any organisation apostasy, rebellion, or disenchantment does arise. We have experienced, and are experiencing this in the church.
But we believe that God will guide the church through to the end, so we encourage members to stay on board in spite of the rebellion or apostasy of others. Hope this sheds some further light for you.
Everyone is free to believe whatever he or she wishes. However, if you join a body of believers, and are baptised, you are bound to continue in the beliefs you have previously ascribed to.
You may have other thoughts, that’s fine; but if you teach these, and they are opposed to what the church believes and teaches, then you create an obstacle that in the end will destroy your membership if you persist in teaching and promoting those beliefs.
Again, this is the normal procedure for dealing with people who try to turn their church, their organisation, their club, or whatever entity, unto another path or direction. This procedure of dealing with such individuals is a biblical injunction.
Cheers my friend,
Ron.
Beyond the Creation Story – Why the Controversy Matters
Ken! I appreciate your point as always; and as always I have a counter to make. This situation in our church is an ongoing episode though out the annals of historical time. Men arise with erroneous views arise and seek to destabilize, subvert, and destroy the very organisation that gave them birth and future. It is not new. Protests are in order, as was Luther’s and the reformers. Your comparison with Camping is actually out of place, however. Certainly he cannot be likened to Behi, and others who have spoken out against the scientific organisation of which they are part. And certainly science will not die due to protests of others-be it good or bad. What you do not know, my friend, is that this church will survive, as will science, simply because God is in charge. The same God which to you at present is but a mist. We speak what we know and have experienced. Soon you will hopefully understand this point!
Ron.
Beyond the Creation Story – Why the Controversy Matters
Correction on the texts in my previous post. That should be Job 11:7 and Ps. 132:5 should be removed. Thankfully I could reason that one out!
Recent Comments by Ron D Henderson
Scientists and the Temptation to Bias Results
This is so sad but not surprising. One can add to this article the intimidation at universities of creationists, and even the threat of not graduating those who hold creationist world views. And even the governments’ educational systems support these frauds one way or the other. I guess the devil must do his work of obfuscation and deceit. Unfortunately some of humanity will learn the truth too late.
Believing the Disproven – An Adventure in Science
Excellent article! However this is not unique or strange for the truth presenters. How many times in the Bible we read of the ‘truthers’ accommodating error? Legion; just check the record of the kings of Israel and Judea. Did not our mother inherit that from satan in the Garden under the forbidden tree? Check how she evangelized her husband, our father! But then again, God had and still has His remnant!! Good to know that. Evolution? Just open satan’s box of strategies for planet earth and see some of His plans!
Ted Wilson: No Room for Evolution as Truth in Adventist Schools
I am all for accountability. If these teachers are not accountable for upholding our biblical teachings we may as well close up shop for anything goes! But that is not our practice. We are duty bound to promote and subscribe to our teachings. Those who do not do so or cannot do so must be relieved of their duties. [edit] We endanger our students when we teach falsehood in our science classes. The UK recognized the importance of accountability to its false science in schools and banned creation in government supported schools. Are the Gentiles wiser than the children of God? Elder Wilson must now put teeth to his words by calling all our institutions to accountability or the GC will have to see that they do…
Dr. Nick Matzke Explains the Evolution of Complexity
I find it quite amusing how we argue evolution with a straight face and are so hypothetical, philosophical, and imaginary. It’s not what could be or what should be. It’s actually what is! When we take the ‘what is’ and run it backwards to the earliest beginnings we find that there is no difference between what is and what was. The evolutionary concept of ‘evolving’ is very hard to come by. We do not see it. And what we see is in itself a complete whole and not an evolutionary misfit. For the religion of evolution to survive it has to exercises humongous faith and story telling but without any specimen and its generation before them. For creationists there is only one model and that is the Genesis account. And by the Genesis account I mean a literal acceptance of Genesis and all support passages through out the Scriptures. I do not refer to ‘other’ creation accounts that would neuter the Genesis narration. These are akin to the varied evolutionists’ accounts of origins. The ‘debate’ was like watching two individuals debate the origin of a motor car parked in front of them. Each had his imagination, philosophy, and supposition. Except if the car could talk it would say, first, you both were not there and so are badly off track. Secondly, it would say, I was made by someone with intelligence, humor, and skill. Of course for the evolutionist to say that would give the game away and their religion would become extinct! One day it will, believe it or not!
The Adventist Accrediting Association is Still Reviewing LSU
Let us not forget that God is in charge of this work and of his church. And yes, we do suffer for our negligence, procrastination and compromise. But God is still in charge. If the men at the helm of his church on earth are delinquent and refuse to rock the boat, then they will be removed in His good time. In the mean while we must be faithful and do all in our power to correct the situation in our sphere of control, regardless of the ‘feelings’ of the ‘peace, peace’ lovers in the church.
