Comment on A big reason why so many people are leaving the church by Sean Pitman.
Did you not read the rest of page 114 of Patriarchs and Prophets?
While Mrs. white does say that, “There should be a settled belief in the divine authority of God’s Holy Word. The Bible is not to be tested by men’s ideas of science.”, she is clearly talking about the popular notions of scientists of her own day which directly countered biblical statements of historical reality (as they do today).
On the same page (p. 114) Mrs White goes on to explain the nature of faith and science – that both are intertwined with each. One does not exist without the other.
Skeptics who read the Bible for the sake of caviling, may, through an imperfect comprehension of either science or revelation, claim to find contradictions between them; but rightly understood, they are in perfect harmony. 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. All truth, whether in nature or in revelation, is consistent with itself in all its manifestations.
Notice how Mrs. White describes nature and revelation has being very closely related, both having a common source and both testifying to the truth of the other as each is correctly interpreted.
She argues that the popular “science” of her day was “false science” – not a true form of rational thought or scientific investigation or understanding of the natural world:
This is false science, and is not sustained by the word of God. Nature is the servant of her Creator. God does not annul His laws or work contrary to them, but He is continually using them as His instruments.
Beyond this, on the same page (p. 114) she specifically argues that it is nature and natural laws that testify for the existence of her Author and form the basis of a rational faith in God’s existence and in the credibility of His Word:
Nature testifies of an intelligence, a presence, an active energy, that works in and through her laws. There is in nature the continual working of the Father and the Son. Christ says, “My Father worketh hitherto, and I work.” John 5:17.
I’m not sure how she could have been any more clear in her support of the need for a rational understanding nature and the use of empirical evidence as a rational basis for faith in God’s existence and in the credibility of the Bible.
You really need to read Mrs. White in context and not take a single sentence out of context from the many passages where she lists off many physical evidences and tells us that God intended for us to use these evidence to build our faith in the credibility of the written Word…
God does not expect us to believe without a solid basis in empirical evidence. The appearance of axe heads floating is not contrary to the hypothesis of deliberate design (as I’ve seen with my own eyes). However, the notion that American Indians are descendants of the lost tribes of Israel (as the Book of Mormon claims), is inconsistent with well-established scientific evidence.
Such statements that are so clearly contrary to seemingly definitive empirical evidence, if coming from the Bible, would certainly call its overall credibility into serious question for most intelligent candid minds… and rightly so.
It is because the Bible, unlike any other book that claims Divine authority, is so consistent with empirical evidence for its historical claims (which can be investigated in a potentially falsifiable manner) that it is able to gain a great deal of predictive value and therefore credibility with the intelligent candid mind who is honestly searching for truth.
Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com
Sean Pitman Also Commented
A big reason why so many people are leaving the church
@Professor Kent:
Rejection of the Seventh-day Sabbath because of a rejection of the clear reading of the Genesis account of origins is a rejection of the nature of inspiration of the Bible that Mrs. White (and the SDA Church) was trying to promote. Such a rejection completely changes the picture of God in one’s mind and the nature of the Bible as well as the Bible’s power to change one’s life and one’s world perspective. The Bible means something very different if it is viewed as a allegory vs. if it is viewed as literally true on those topics where the author(s) clearly intended to be taken as describing real historical events.
Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com
A big reason why so many people are leaving the church
@Professor Kent:
There are many different ways to “believe in the Bible” that are completely opposed to the type of belief or faith that Mrs. White was trying to promote. Many believe that the Bible is a book of good moral instruction, but has nothing of any real value to say about the physical world. Many believe that the Bible is a collection of man’s best wisdom over the centuries, but is not actually the Word of God.
What Mrs. White was talking about is that a belief in mainstream evolutionary theories destroys a belief in the Bible as the clear Word of God on every topic it touches upon – to include the topic of origins. The evolutionary perspective undermines faith in the character of God that Ellen White understood and which the SDA Church is trying to promote. It undermines faith in the reasonableness and rationality of God – suggesting that God is willing to “command men to observe the week of seven literal days in commemoration of seven indefinite periods, which is unlike his dealings with mortals, and is an impeachment of his wisdom.”
Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com
A big reason why so many people are leaving the church
@Shane Hilde:
Exactly! Not even Abraham was asked to believe in the naked word of God devoid of empirical evidence that would appeal to the rational candid mind. God was not offended when Abraham asked for this evidence because without such evidence, Abraham would truly have been insane to simply follow voices in His head claiming to be the voice of God without any external empirical confirmation…
There are false spirits out there that will lie to us. These spirits must be tested. And, the only basis upon which to employ and interpret tests is our God-given human reasoning abilities.
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.
