Regarding the question: “Would Adam and Eve have been …

Comment on GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation by Rich.

Regarding the question: “Would Adam and Eve have been guilty of sin if God had not directly told them not to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil?”. Without the/a law there can be no sin. By telling Adam and Eve not to eat the fruit of that tree, He was establishing a law. From that point on it became a sin to partake of that tree. Breaking the law is always sin, regardless of our knowledge or lack of knowledge of a paticular law. But untill we are brought to an awareness of the law we are not held accountable for transgressing it. And yes, one who is unaware of the Sabbath commandment, and is breaking it, is guilty of transgressing the fourth commandment. But he is not held accountable until he is brought to a full knowledge of the law. This is the beauty of the Holy Spirit and the process we call sanctification.

Rich Also Commented

GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
@Sean Pitman: The scenario is less than perfect. This is a hypothetical situation that could never happen. This makes God less than perfect, because He “failed” to tell them about a law that He had established. The bottom line is that if there is an established law, it can be broken, whether you are aware of it or not. Unlike human civil law, God does not hold us accountable if we are unaware of the transgression of His law. Let’s look at the life of Paul as found in 1Timothy 1:12-13. “And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord who has enabled me, because He counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry, although I was formerly a blasphemer, a persecutor, and an insolent man; but I obtained mercy because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.” In verse 15 Paul refers to himself as the chief of sinners, referring back to his “old” life. One cannot be a “sinner” unless one breaks one of God’s laws. Obviously, Paul was breaking God’s laws, but he believed he was doing what was good…but God was merciful to him, because he did it “ignorantly in unbelief”.

GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
I would take issue with Geraty’s statement, “since when is salvation by correct knowledge anyway?”.
Correct knowledge determines how we view God. In evolution we have eons of death and decay before man emerged, versus the Genesis 1 account, which has man being formed by God and made in His image and likeness.
One view shows essentially a very cruel, disinterested God, and the Biblical view shows a very loving, compassionate God. This is precisely why “correct knowledge” is so important, and potentially salvational.
In addition accepting the evolutionary account of man’s eventual emergence over untold eons of time is incompatible with God’s hand written fourth commandment. How can man possibly work six days and rest on the seventh in the evolutionary model? Therefore, I propose that it is impossible to be an evolutionist, theistic or otherwise, and be a Seventh Day Adventist Christian.

Recent Comments by Rich

God and Granite Cubes
@Sean Pitman: How is it that your statement/quote,

“Here’s a quote that explains the problem I have with the multiverse idea (i.e., a “Theory of Anything” can be used to explain absolutely everything – and therefore nothing):”

does not also apply the concept of God? If God is the Theory of Anything, then by your own assertion, God is also “nothing”.

God and Granite Cubes
I guess the answer to your question, “However, what would it take before one could be rationally suspicious that a particular phenomenon could only be explained by a level of intelligence and creative power that, from our finite perspective at least, would be indistinguishable from what we would expect from a God or a God-like being?” is nothing. I can’t conceive of anything that could only be explained by that level of intelligence. Certainly nothing in the natural world meets that criteria, and even your illustration of the granite blocks fails on the principle of Emergence. The granite block, or the international space station for that matter, are all naturally emergent phenomena created by a human being which is in turn an emergent phenomenon in an continually emerging universe.

Also, the existence of intelligence does not necessarily imply the necessity for God. Depending on how you define intelligence, every living thing, from bacteria, to plants to humans displays some form of intelligence, and unless you are proposing some form of pantheism, they are not God.

God and Granite Cubes
“There is no demonstration or tenable argument for how evolution works”
Actually, that is not true. Even the very basic, and limited information about genetics taught to medical students back in the 1980’s provided at least the broad outline of how evolution works, and everyday more information is filling in the details.

If you want to claim that a supreme intelligence called God is directing evolution, then I could probably accept that as a matter of faith, but you don’t even need to be a scientist, just look. Evolution is everywhere. It seems to me that only intentional blindness could not see it.

Northern California Conference Votes to Act Independent of the General Conference
@Inge Anderson: I would like to make just one point. When Jesus was commenting on the widow who gave her last two mites, He was making a point that the widow gave sacrificially or “all she had” as opposed to the wealthy who gave only from their “abundance”. It is not how much we give, but our motive in giving. We are to give from the heart. This was the point Christ was trying to make. We are to be good stewards. If we know, or if we are certain that funds are being blatantly misused and we continue to give, we become as guilty as the ones misusing the funds. One more point… the widow probably had no other options as to where to give her money. In our world today we have many options regarding where to give our tithes and offerings. All of our funds ultimately belong to God. Therefore we need to manage His funds wisely.