@Ron Stone M.D.: Geraty has REJECTED Genesis in favor or …

Comment on Adventist Review: Pastors Who Don’t Believe by Sean Pitman.

@Ron Stone M.D.:

Geraty has REJECTED Genesis in favor or a more “enlightened” philosophy, which is secular humanistic version of “creation” better known as Darwinian Evolution. Sean says he hasn’t “rejected” it but just doesn’t “understand” it well enough to believe it. People choose to believe what they want to believe, no matter what the “evidence.”

You people who claim to be so good at reading hearts and motives really do scare me more than most agnostics or atheists – much more. You are setting yourself up in the place of God contrary to the warnings of the Bible. It is the Bible that explains that such moral judgments, regarding correct understanding of various doctrinal issues that deal with our relationship with God alone (like the literal 6-day creation week), which are not intuitively knowable, are the prerogative of God alone to judge in any sort of definitive manner. Romans 14:4 NIV

A correct understanding of the literal 6-day creation week is nothing at all like understanding that it is wrong to deliberately hurt somebody else for personal gain – that it is wrong, morally wrong, to do to somebody other than you would like to be treated (like stealing, murder, adultery, etc.). Such knowledge is internally derived – written on the heart by God Himself. This is not the case for the literal 6-day creation week. This kind of knowledge is not internally known or knowable without investigation of externally-derived evidences. Such knowledge is only derived through study and conviction as one realizes the meaning of the totality or weight of available information that is coming in from outside of one’s self. Such realization comes at different times and by different means for different people. And, you simply cannot tell when someone does or does not truly understand such concepts as “true”. Only God knows that…

In this line, contrary to your suggestion, note that I never said that I could know if anyone has or has not rejected what they consciously knew to be true – just the opposite in fact. I don’t know if Dr. Geraty has or has not gone against what he really does understand as the truth. That information can only be known, for sure, by Dr. Geraty and God alone. All I’ve ever said is that it is possible that people like Dr. Geraty have not comprehended what is true even though it may be right there before their very eyes. This happened to the disciples all the time. The saw and heard, but did not comprehend the truth.

This happens to you and I all the time as well. I dare say that you have not comprehended many truths – to include many biblical truths that are right there in front of you. Does this mean that you’re gong to be lost? Because you didn’t understand and follow some biblical truth that was right there in front of you? Of course not. You must first understand and then reject before you can be charged with deliberate rebellion against known truth or a truth that you refused to learn for fear of being responsible for it. You can’t rebel against what you do not know or consciously understand…

No one is judged, on a moral basis, for a lack of comprehension. God only judges those who deliberately rebelled against or avoided that which they consciously knew (or knew they could have known) to be true because of various selfish motives.

You need to demonstrate much much more Christian charity. Whenever possible, you must be willing to give the benefit of the doubt – a gift which you seem very very unwilling to give even though you would want God to be so charitable to you if you happened to have not understood something for which someone wanted to bring you to judgment…

I myself, for example, had serious doubts regarding the validity of the Theory of Evolution and the literal nature of the creation week for some time. What if I had died during this time? Would I have been lost forever? – because I didn’t understand the truth?

Come on now. Think just a little bit about what you’re saying here. Imagine the shoe on the other foot for once and see if you can’t muster just a little bit of empathy for those who do not see the light as you see it regarding concepts and ideas that are not internally self-evident.

Consider, as an illustration of this point, the case of William Miller. Despite his rejection of the Sabbath light that was given to him, Mrs. White indicates Miller will be saved:

God suffered him [William Miller] to fall under the power of Satan, the dominion of death, and hid him in the grave from those who were constantly drawing him from the truth. Moses erred as he was about to enter the Promised Land. So also, I saw that William Miller erred as he was soon to enter the heavenly Canaan, in suffering his influence to go against the truth. Others led him to this; others must account for it. But angels watch the precious dust of this servant of God, and he will come forth at the sound of the last trump.

– Ellen White, Early Writings, p. 258

Again and again Mrs. White points out that we cannot judge the motives of someone else regarding their comprehension of such truths which are not internally derived. Regarding such truths see advises, as does the Bible:

“Judge not, that ye be not judged.” Do not think yourself better than other men, and set yourself up as their judge. Since you cannot discern motive, you are incapable of judging another. In criticizing him, you are passing sentence upon yourself; for you show that you are a participant with Satan, the accuser of the brethren. The Lord says, “Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves.” This is our work. “If we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.” 2 Cor. 13:5; 1 Cor. 11:31.

– Ellen White, Desire of Ages, p. 314

Sean Pitman

Sean Pitman Also Commented

Adventist Review: Pastors Who Don’t Believe
In any case, any further comments concerning the morality or lack thereof of those involved with the LSU situation will no longer be posted here on Educate Truth. However, You are free to send me a personal E-mail if you wish (my E-mail can be obtained by visiting my website listed below).


Sean Pitman

Adventist Review: Pastors Who Don’t Believe
@Ron Stone M.D.:

Well, Sean, atheists have written books explaining what, why, and how they have rejected God’s Truth. Those at LSU have explained what they believe and why they have accepted Man’s word and rejected God’s Truth. You say we can never know anything about this, and they must not really “understand” what they are doing.

I don’t know if they do or do not really understand what they are doing; and neither do you. Only God knows for sure…

Not only would I and others here disagree with you, but I believe the atheists would disagree. The idea that church members cannot be “judged” by their words and actions is simply not biblical.

And the soldiers who nailed Jesus to the cross would have claimed at the time that they knew exactly what they were doing too… but did they really? Jesus prayed for them saying, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” – Luke 23:34 NIV

It is quite possible that even if a person is very adamant that he/she knows exactly what he/she is doing, that this person may not really know. This is a possibility that only God knows for sure. You simply cannot make this particular type of moral judgment with complete accuracy. You and I can judge the rightness or wrongness of the word or act (specifically regarding a doctrine like the literal 6-day creation week), but we cannot judge the rightness or wrongness of the heart; the motive.

There is a difference between being mistaken and sinning. Sinning requires a deliberate rebellion against known truth – something that you cannot tell for sure in cases of doctrinal disagreements on such things as the literal creation week or the true origin of the Sabbath or any other such commandment that deals specifically with man’s relationship with his or her God and God alone.

Sean Pitman

Adventist Review: Pastors Who Don’t Believe
@Ron Stone M.D.:

Sean says Moses and the Prophets are “empirical” evidence then says they are not!

Moses and the prophets are only “empirical evidence” in support of the Bible’s credibility if they actually say something true regarding the real world in which we all live (which I think they clearly do).

However, if Moses and the prophets did in fact clearly contradicted the real world (i.e., real history), the hypothesis that the Bible’s credibility is supported by them would be effectively falsified (as is the case for the Book of Mormon, for example) in such a situation.

It is in this sense that things like biblical prophecy must be held up for testing before biblical prophecy can be rationally accepted as credible (at least any more credible than the Book of Mormon).

In other words, biblical credibility is dependent upon the empirical evidence. Without the empirical evidence, there would simply be no greater rational reason to believe the Bible as any more credible than some moral fable that someone simply made up as a “cleverly invented story”. – 2 Peter 1:16 NIV

Sean Pitman

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.