@Professor Kent: I don’t believe this comment is contradictory to …

Comment on A big reason why so many people are leaving the church by Shane Hilde.

@Professor Kent: I don’t believe this comment is contradictory to her many statements regarding faith and evidence. Notice she says we should be settled in our belief of the divine authority of God’s Word. We must have good reason to settle first.

In the same paragraph quoted, she says, “All truth, whether in nature or in revelation, is consistent with itself in all its manifestations.” This is why she was able to say, “Moses wrote under the guidance of the Spirit of God, and a correct theory of geology will never claim discoveries that cannot be reconciled with his statements.”

Human reasoning is a necessary tool for detecting truth; however, human reasoning has its limitations. She says the Bible should not be tested by “man’s ideas of science.” What does she mean by this?

First she makes the point that there are things we cannot understand because we are finite. She gives some examples of what men of science think:

Yet men of science think that they can comprehend the wisdom of God, that which He has done or can do. The idea largely prevails that He is restricted by His own laws. Men either deny or ignore His existence, or think to explain everything, even the operation of His Spirit upon the human heart.

She’s not saying Bible shouldn’t be tested at all, but it shouldn’t be tested by man’s ideas of science. She’s talking about a faulting knowledge base. While our ability to reason is by no means perfect, it’s all we have to use to detect truth. She says, “All true science is in harmony with His works” (PP 115).

If they contradict each other, one of them has to be wrong. How do we determine that? God has given us the ability to judge and weigh evidence, and most of all he has given us the Holy Spirit to guide us into all truth.

“Faith rests on evidence,” she says (T5 68). Of the Bible she says:

In order to arrive at truth, we must have a sincere desire to know the truth and a willingness of heart to obey it. And all who come in this spirit to the study of the Bible will find abundant evidence that it is God’s word, and they may gain an understanding of its truths that will make them wise unto salvation. (SC 111)

In the end there is a difference between man’s ideas of science and true science.

Shane Hilde Also Commented

A big reason why so many people are leaving the church

Professor Kent: I’m speaking to evidence that arises solely from scripture and the influence it has on one’s mind through the Holy Spirit.

If I understand you correctly, I don’t see how one could confirm the truth of the Bible unless it made claims that were testable. Listen, I’m not arguing that someone can’t come to believe in the Bible in the situation you described.

All I’ve been saying is that God never asks us to believe without giving sufficient evidence upon which to base our faith. This evidence can come from a number of sources: archeology, history, testimony, prophecy, fruition of God’s promises, a changed life, etc.

Ellen White said:

The greatest evidence of the power of Christianity that can be presented to the world is a well-ordered, well-disciplined family. This will recommend the truth as nothing else can, for it is a living witness of its practical power upon the heart. {AH 32.2}

A well-ordered, well-disciplined family is something we can see for ourselves. It confirms the claims and promises of the Bible. If I asked you why you believed the Bible was trustworthy and the Word of God, and all you said was because it says so, that means nothing to the person who does not know God.

If we can show nothing for our faith in God’s words, then our faith is nothing and useless. We essentially deny the power we claim it has. A changed life is empirical data. If a particular physical or mental exercise leads to a manifest change that is consistent and lasting, we can look at that and say, “Wow, there must be something to that Bible for it to produce a change like that in someone.” Even that kind of evidence is external.

I think we’re more in agreement than you may think.


A big reason why so many people are leaving the church
Jeff,

First, I need to understand whay you mean by “evidence within Scripture.” The Bible makes plenty of truth claims that can be verified in reality. If nothing the Bible claims can be verified in reality, on what basis can we trust it?

Might I remind you, Shane, of SDA Fundamental Belief #1: In this Word, God has committed to man the knowledge necessary for salvation. In this Word, God has committed to man the knowledge necessary for salvation. The Holy Scriptures are the infallible revelation of His will.

I agree with this 100%, but every book has knowledge. If I buy a book that teaches me how to build a house, but once I actually start following the directions and things don’t turn out, it’s safe to assume the knowledge committed within the pages necessary for building a house is faulty. The statement of belief you refer to is regarding our view of Scripture, not how we arrived at that view.

Do you seriously want us to believe that God failed in providing sufficient evidence within scripture to come to God with the conviction He is real?

I’ve never suggested anything of the sort. The Bible claims to be God breathed. That’s quite the claim. If we can’t test that by any means, then how do we know the claim is true? We can test many of the Bible’s historical claims, scientific claims, impact on human character claims, God’s promises, etc. Those are all things that can be verified in reality.

That we have to approach God’s word as if He cannot be trusted, and therefore requires validation from elsewhere? That we cannot believe the knowledge God shared for salvation unless we find something more credible beyond God himself?

I’m really not understanding what you’re arguing. You attempt to rebutt me but then use the very thing you tell me I shouldn’t be using. God appeals to our reason. It’s the only way he can communicates to us.

We can believe anything we want. I didn’t say we weren’t capable of doing that, but do we have any reason or evidence for what we believe?

In order to trust the Bible, one has to have a reason to trust the Bible–able to produce some tangable evidence. This will vary from person to person. One person may not need all the scientific evidence to support their belief in a recent creation, but that doesn’t mean God hasn’t provided it.

I cannot imagine a source with more authority than God himself.

Neither can I. How do I decide who is God though? The god of Mormonism, the Koran, or any other Holy text?

I think the weight of evidence is in favor of the God of the Bible. No other book is prophetic and can take the scrutiny and still come out on top as being trustworthy in all its claims.


A big reason why so many people are leaving the church

Eddie: there is a LOT of biology to be learned that doesn’t really deal with the evolution-creation controversy

Agreed. Evolution has little to do with becoming a doctor, or pretty much any discipline that would utilize biology. Unless of course your dealing with a history oriented class dealing with origins.


Recent Comments by Shane Hilde

La Sierra University Hires Another Darwinist
ADvindicate has also published an article about LSU and Raul Diaz that expands on a few details.

http://advindicate.com/?p=2625


A little-known history about Belief 6
@Eddie: The Bible does not specify an age of accountability (to my knowledge), but the Israelites considered the age of 12 to be the turning point. I wouldn’t base a theology off of tradition though. Also, it’s not our place to judge what happens to those who have not been able to make a decision.


Perspectives from alleged LSU students
@Blodgett: Was there a comment you’d like to add?


At La Sierra, Biology Faculty Affirms Importance of Teaching About Creation in Curriculum
@David Read: And perhaps not something Christ would do. I can understand your frustration though. I’ve been on the verge of quitting this whole thing many times. I’ve been guilty of letting that frustration control and influence things I shouldn’t have said.

I have to remind myself to look at the big picture. In the end all those who are not supposed to be in the church will be sifted out. I pray I am not one of them.


Board of Trustees Addresses Curriculum Proposal
I know from talking to a couple of reporters from Press Enterprise and Inside Higher Ed that Randal Wisbey was effective in shutting down communication between any outsiders and the biology faculty. It appears he made himself the only channel of communication between the board and biology faculty.

I emailed Larry Becker about what bylaw the board members broke that was worthy of dismissal, and I have yet to hear a response from him.

I would also note that board members at other universities appear to be free to talk to the faculty.

Another interesting point. He removes three board members for trying to work on the problem and come up with a solution, and then turns around sort of embraces what they’re doing. He can’t publicly condemn it because everyone can see, whether you agree with what they wrote or not, that it’s a significant step for the faculty to be speaking to the church.

Did he forbid the document from being published? No. If you’re really excited about seeing the biology department making advancements in solving the issue, why are you removing the people who are making that happen. He never did anything like that.

What has Wisbey done to address and fix this issue? Nothing. He’s dragged it out, lied about what’s been happening, and told everyone involved to shut up or get in trouble. What on earth is he trying to do?

Who knows, he might even be a part of the underground movement to sever LSU from the church by using WASC as the big hammer. It’s obvious from one former board member, there was interest in using WASC to manipulate the situation.