@Daniel Shannon: IF we are truly united together in Him …

Comment on Creeds and Fundamental Beliefs by Sean Pitman.

@Daniel Shannon:

IF we are truly united together in Him we will be in harmony, we WILL be saying the samethings because it will be Christ speaking, not ourselves.

There are many honest and sincere Christians who are not on the same page when it comes to various doctrines that the Adventist Church considers to be “fundamental”. This is due to the fact that different people are on different points in their understanding of the Scriptures and in their walk with God. God does not expect everyone to be on the same point in the path when it comes to knowledge or their relationship with God. So, there will be differences of opinion which are inevitable – even among the saints of God.

This is not to say, however, that all are therefore qualified to be an official representative of a particular organization, like the Adventist Church, simply because they might be in a saving relationship with God.

To be an effective representative of an organization requires training and education and general agreement when it comes to the primary goals and ideals of the organization itself. This also implies that just because there are those who may not qualify as effective representatives of a particular organization does not mean that they are therefore not in a saving relationship with God or that God is not leading them and inspiring them. It just means that they do not currently represent, in an effective manner, the primary goals and ideals of the Adventist Church. That’s not necessarily a bad thing.

In short, this is not a moral issue. It is simply a practical matter of church order and government. That’s all. Church order and government, as with any viable organization, requires the enforcement of internal rules to which all who wish to belong must voluntarily submit or leave the organization. Otherwise, there would be chaos within and the organization itself would fragment and crumble into irrelevance.

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com

Sean Pitman Also Commented

Creeds and Fundamental Beliefs
@Ron:

You are confused yet again. The ability to adapt to new environments beyond very low levels of functional complexity requries pre-programmed information to exist within the gene pool. Without such pre-programmed information, there is no ability for adaptation beyond very low levels of functional complexity.

Darwinian-style evolution is based on the notion that high level information can be created within that gene pool which was never there before. This isn’t the same thing as breeding or Mendelian variation – both of which are based on pre-existent genes or alleles which allow for such high-level variation in form and function.

In short, you don’t seem to appreciate the difference between something like Mendelian variation (based on pre-existent genetic information) and Darwinian-style evolution (based on the generation of novel genetic information). They really aren’t the same thing.

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com


Creeds and Fundamental Beliefs
@Ron:

So, explain to me the difference in mechanism between Darwinian-style evolution and something that requires intelligent design to produce? In your opinion, is it possible to produce all things via truly mindless evolutionary mechanisms? How can I tell if something did or did not require the input of an intelligent designer?

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com


Creeds and Fundamental Beliefs
@Ron:

Again, there was no option during the Catholic Inquisitions of the Middle Ages since the Church controlled civil government as well its own internal government. No one was really free to leave the Catholic Church during this time without fear of severe civil penalties.

This is not the case today since there is still a separation between church and state in this country (thank God). All are free to leave the SDA Church at will – free of any civil reprisals of any kind.

However, this does not therefore mean that all are free to expect a paycheck from the SDA Church for teaching or preaching whatever they want. The Church is also free to hire only those whom it feels would most effectively represent its primary goals and ideals – to include its efforts to promote its most fundamental doctrinal ideas to the world…

In no meaningful sense of the word can this sort of expectation be called a “persecution” of those who cannot or will not represent the church as the church sees fit – on the church’s dime.

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com


Recent Comments by Sean Pitman

Scott Ritsema, Dr. Lela Lewis, Pastor Wyatt Allen an Dr. Peter McCullough on COVID-19 Vaccines
Yeah, well, it might help to actually understand the primary data one is looking at before one makes up his/her mind… which Dr. McCullough clearly doesn’t understand – particularly when it comes to the meaning of the VAERS data.


Scott Ritsema, Dr. Lela Lewis, Pastor Wyatt Allen an Dr. Peter McCullough on COVID-19 Vaccines
If you’re going to just present one side of an issue, just do that. Don’t bother citing your “academic” credentials and history of “always” trying to present a balanced perspective. And, don’t complain about others, like the mainstream media, doing the very same thing that you’re doing – presenting only one side of an issue.

Beyond this minor point, have you nothing of real substance or interest to say about the actual primary claims being made? about all the scientific data that appears to strongly counter the sensational claims that Dr. McCullough’s presented in this video?


Scott Ritsema, Dr. Lela Lewis, Pastor Wyatt Allen an Dr. Peter McCullough on COVID-19 Vaccines
Then don’t complain about others doing exactly what you’re doing…

Anyway, the real issue with the video is that the main claims are almost all completely false and those that are true are presented in a very misleading manner – which has the potential to harm or even kill people. That’s the real problem.

Now, I know that you’re a registered nurse and lifestyle director of the Eden Valley Institute of Wellness in Loveland, Colorado. And, that’s great! I would suggest to you, however, that excellent health would also help someone do very well with the mRNA vaccines. But why not just rely on excellent health alone? Doesn’t the Adventist Health Message completely negate the need for vaccines? Well, no, it doesn’t. I know of several very healthy vegans who have been seriously sicked by COVID-19 with some having sustained permanent and progressive injuries – and some have even died. So, I would suggest to do both – to follow the Health Message as carefully as possible and to take the mRNA vaccines. This will provide the greatest level of protection possible to our Adventist brothers and sisters. It’s certainly what Mrs. White advocated in her own day when smallpox was killing many people. She certainly wasn’t opposed to the smallpox vaccine and supported her own son William White getting vaccinated, along with his staff and associates (Link). And, her own secretary (D. E. Robinson) wrote that Mrs. White was also vaccinated for smallpox (Link).


Scott Ritsema, Dr. Lela Lewis, Pastor Wyatt Allen an Dr. Peter McCullough on COVID-19 Vaccines
That’s just it. Scott didn’t claim to “be providing a neutral platform”. He just complained about others not doing so, and then didn’t do so himself. He said that,

“I believe that everybody needs to hear both sides. My background in academics was in history, I was a history teacher. I got into ministry later in life… but I come from that academic background of dialogue and inquiry. And, as a history teacher, whenever I notice that maybe one side was getting a little more play and imbalance, and the other side had some valid and interesting things to bring to the table, whether I agreed with them or not, I would always want to give air to that other side – to let people think and evaluate for themselves and grant people that they are capable, that they are individuals with a mind, and can evaluate the evidence for themselves.”

Yet, immediately after saying all this about being all even-handed with presenting a topic, he immediately says that in this particular video, he’s “Looking forward to hearing another side of this discussion” – without actually evenhandedly presenting and/or discussing both sides for his audience to “evaluate the evidence for themselves”.

Again, I don’t mind if someone wants to present one particular side of a discussion. However, when someone states, upfront, that they are an “academic” who is all into presenting data on both sides of an issue so that people can make up their own minds, it comes across as a bit non-academic when only one side is then presented without any time given for anyone on the other side to address and give their own take on the claims being made.


COVID-19 and Vaccines – Update
As I’ve asked others, why do you think that the overall “all-cause” death rate in the United States, and around the world, suddenly spiked in March of 2020 if this pandemic we’re in is really no big deal? – if the death rates have been so exaggerated as you claim? If not for the COVID-19 pandemic, what else has killed off more than 600,000 people so far in this country alone (3.9 million worldwide)? – beyond what would usually be expected? (Link)

I’m sorry, but Dr. McCullough is basing his position off of a false interpretation of the VAERS data (maintained by the FDA and CDC by the way) and false interpretations of a few other papers as well, which he evidently doesn’t understand.