@ken:The first test of a claim to being a prophet …

Comment on Angry Scientists: Publishing on Intelligent Design by Ron Stone M.D..

@ken:The first test of a claim to being a prophet is that the doctrines supposedly coming from God in those messages – have to be tested against the Bible (“sola scriptura” as they say). If the teaching supposedly coming from divine revelation is flawed – then the person is a false prophet because God does not contradict God.The second test of a claim to being a prophet is found in Matt 7 “by their fruits” you shall know them. The test is against the person to see if they are known for living a sanctified life – devoted to prayer and integrity.And as you note – when it comes to additional messages that cannot be tested via Bible (like – hey there is a tree that will fall on this spot next Tuesday, as a silly example) – then you have things like accuracy and fulfillment.in Christ,Bob  

Great summary Bob. Also, the Bible itself is “self-explanatory” in that it has to be (IF it is “God’s Word”) internally consistent. Of course, this means nothing to liberals, even if they consent to its truth, since they believe one can simply “reinterpret” any bible verse to mean virtually anything!

Ron Stone M.D. Also Commented

Angry Scientists: Publishing on Intelligent Design
@Kenneth Christman M.D. Ken, who, besides Frances Crick, believes in “aliens” starting life here on earth? I know he believes in “transpermia” but he is not an real ID apologist, as far as I know. He simply made this idea up because he knows Darwinian evolution cannot explain the DNA code, etc. Do any of the major ID spokespeople believe this type of stuff? Just wondering!

BTW, I also agree with you that one must either believe God’s Word or reject it. Many, including those within our SDA faith, choose to reject it, as we see at LSU.


Angry Scientists: Publishing on Intelligent Design
You’re absolutely correct Sean. And that “first step” is why evolutionists fight so hard against IDers, even those that do not profess any Christian or religious beliefs.

I understand why Ken has “trouble” with some IDers. Some, not all, profess no religious affiliation, which frustrates the atheistic evolutionists, who try to say they DO have some religious belief, otherwise they would believe in evolution!


Angry Scientists: Publishing on Intelligent Design

BobRyan:
Indeed. We’ve got serious systemic problems folks. (cf. Rev. 3:16)
God bless,Rich  

Agreed, the real problem is when humans disregard God’s Word and, instead, choose to believe Man’s word.


Recent Comments by Ron Stone M.D.

Will the mRNA Vaccines Change Your DNA?
Great article Sean! This guy is worshiped almost like a god on Fulcrum 7,


Dr. Robert Malone: From Vaccine Inventor to Conspiracy Theorist?
Another great article Sean. Good to see some actual truthful and factual information online!


Pacific Union College Encouraging Homosexual Marriage?
This is the typical garbage that has been coming out of PUC for many years. People wonder why our colleges are losing students, despite the fact that we take more and more non-SDAs each year.


My Goal for La Sierra University

The reason the LaSierra situation has gone uncorrected so long is that most of our administrators have exactly the sort of political instincts that Dan Jackson has. They are politicians and consensus builders; they want to keep the peace and make the trains run on time. But the circumstances call for men of principle, hard men who are willing to stand for the right “though the heavens fall,” i.e., regardless who is offended and loudly complains.

Dave, I agree with you. Jackson’s trying to play on “both teams” is not going to go well for him.

Unfortunately, politics is the “SOP” of many of our SDA officials, Jackson being just one. “Political instincts” are the rule, instead of actually doing what is “right” according to what we know in God’s Word.


Bradley, Beach and Kaatz retain attorney

Shane Hilde: Think big fish: LSU or the Seventh-day Adventist Church.Graham might not have followed procedure with these men, but I don’t know what the procedure is. I’ve read what the process is in the faculty handbook, but I don’t know if that applies to administrative positions which are at will employees. If it does apply to them, then it appears the process was not followed.

Trustees book says, in 6,9,F, that the Trustes may “discontinue” virtually anyone working at the university.

Does that mean to “fire” or to “force their resignation? Seems like it does.