Comment on Adventist Review: Pastors Who Don’t Believe by Sean Pitman.
However, since the Elder was not “employed†by the Church in any way, he was not “stealing†and they had no basis for making any “judgment†about the topics, since they really did not know the “inner motives†of the Elder, they allowed the sermons to be spoken.
How many think this would happen at your SDA Church? Why would the Elder not be allowed to speak? Is a “moral judgment†necessary?
A moral judgment, which requires the ability to accurately read the motives of the heart, is not necessary in order to make a judgment on doctrinal error. These are completely different types of judgments.
One doesn’t need to know or understand the motives of the one proposing doctrinal error in order to explain to this person that you see them as having an incorrect understanding of the issue at hand – with patience, kindness, and gentleness (1 Peter 3:15 NIV). You don’t need to call them evil or make any other moral judgment whatsoever in order to disagree with them. You simply say, “Your ideas are not in line with what we currently consider to be ‘present truth.’ Therefore, you will not be allowed to present your ideas as an official representative of our organization.”
That’s all there is to it. I really don’t understand your need to judge the internal motives of those with which you have a doctrinal disagreement over something like the reality of the 6-day creation week? or the true perspective on the origin of life on this planet? Do you really not see it as possible for someone to be honestly and sincerely mistaken? – and not be evil at the same time?
Come on now. Think about what you’re saying here. According to you some of the most kind and generous people alive today would be lost because they didn’t understand the truth about the 7th-day Sabbath, or the true state of the dead, or the literal 6-day creation week, or the superiority of the Bible vs. the Qur’an, or, God-forbid, the health message on clean and unclean meats!… etc.
You know that I had Muslim neighbors at one time who were nicer to me and my wife, and much much more generous and willing to help us at the drop of a hat, than most Christians I know? And you’re trying to tell me that they are evil just because they didn’t accept the validity of the Bible during the time I knew them and talked to them about my faith? You don’t think that there is even the remotest of chances that they may end up in Heaven someday? – very surprised to find out the truth on many things they never comprehended while in this life?
However, the idea that we cannot judge “morality†is totally un-biblical, since God tells us in the Bible what IS and what is NOT moral.
God has told us what is and is not true for ourselves. He has not given us the ability to convert another nor the ability to read the heart of another. Beyond this He has never told us that a person is immoral if he/she does not comprehend certain truths that are not intuitively knowable – such as the importance of the literal 6-day creation week or the true state of the dead or the superior credibility of the Bible vs. the Qur’an or the Book of Mormon. God has specifically noted, in the Bible, that He is willing to “wink” at honest ignorance on such issues – “wink” at those things a person honestly does not know or comprehend (as long as that person has not deliberately rejected a known chance to comprehend a suspected truth).
You cannot quote me a single passage of Scripture to the contrary while I can and have quoted you many in support of this concept…
Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com
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).
Sincerely,
Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com
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
www.DetectingDesign.com
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
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.
