@BobRyan: I agree the Bible plainly says the world was …

Comment on Revisiting God, Sky & Land by Fritz Guy and Brian Bull by Stephen.

@BobRyan: I agree the Bible plainly says the world was made in 6 days. But what is a ‘day’ exactly? Who says a day is a 24 hour period? The Hebrew word ‘yom’ can mean different things depending on the context.

For example, Gen 1:5 suggests ‘day’ is only a 12-hour period. If it is based one day-night period following the rotation of the world on its axis, well there is a problem because there was no sun until ‘day’ 4 (Gen 1:14). If day is based on ‘evening and morning’, there is another problem because the seventh-day has no such phrase (Gen 2:3).

I agree we should read the BIble literally and plainly – but who says you are actually reading it literally and plainly? You are just reading it based on a tradition that says the word ‘day’ should read as one 24-hour period, when the text doesn’t necessarily say that at all. Who says it is talking about one human-day and not a God-day?

Besides, I am sure you don’t really read all of Gen literally anyway. For example when God said the serpent would eat dust (Gen 3:14), do you think He literally meant it or was being figuratively? Because serpents don’t literally eat dust they eat mice and other small animals. If you are prepared to read this part figuratively, then how do you pick and choose?

Stephen Also Commented

Revisiting God, Sky & Land by Fritz Guy and Brian Bull
@Edward Graves: Did Moses know everything? Did God instruct Moses about DNA, airplanes and automobiles, gunpowder, antibiotics – because there is no evidence in the Bible and it sure would have been a handy advantage for the Jewish nation. Jesus makes clear on the case of divorce that not only did He not instruct Moses about everything, Moses didn’t even perfectly replicate God’s perfect will in the Torah, only God’s permissive will.

A flat disk doesn’t mean a circular sphere floating in space as we understand today. There are other texts that talk about the earth on an immovable pillar (Psalms 104:5; Psalms 93:1; Job 9:6, Job 38:4) and having four corners (Rev 7:1). Or are you suggesting we not read these texts ‘literally and plainly’ but perhaps figuratively – if so, then why not read Gen 1 the same way?

Prophets are just human. The vision is from God, but the words spoke and written are from men. God doesn’t tell men everything, but revelation is progressive, as Ellen White noted on several occasions. The ancients no better understood their world than we do of heaven before us.


Revisiting God, Sky & Land by Fritz Guy and Brian Bull
@Holly Pham: Who decides what ‘real science is’? One could make a similar analogy, where Ervin might say, ‘Gunshot wound to the head’; whereas, Sean might say, ‘Gunshot, what gunshot?’


Revisiting God, Sky & Land by Fritz Guy and Brian Bull
I don’t really know what to believe about the scientific truth or falsehood of evolution (because I am no scientist). However, can someone please explain to me why if evolution is a bunch of hog wash, some 98% of scientists believe in it, with that number going up further for scientists in an evolution-related field (geology, paleontology, biology, physics etc.)? After some 150-plus years, why has it not been exposed as a hoax if that is what it is?

What also concerns me, is if you look at the history of the SDA Church’s own Geoscience Research Institute, which the Church has poured millions of dollars into, not only have they not down anything significant to refute evolution, many of its own scientists have gone on to accept evolution!

Moreover, for those who say it is all a conspiracy or peer pressure from the academic community, why would Christian scientists, especially professors at Adventist universities, risk they jobs, reputations, families and place in the Church by accepting evolution? Surely the strong peer pressure is to keep quiet about evolution and just teach creationism at Adventist universities – not the opposite! Why would someone risk all unless they felt very strongly about it being true?

I only ask, because again I am not a scientist, so I have to based my own judgments on the best evidence out there. I have never been to the moon but I believe Neil Armstrong walked there (and was not a Hollywood studio) based on the overwhelming number of scientists who say it happened. How then am I meant to consider the issue of evolution if the vast, vast number of scientists say it has merit?


Recent Comments by Stephen

Changing the Wording of Adventist Fundamental Belief #6 on Creation
@Sean Pitman:

Sorry, I am not an American. Is LLU also a hotbed of evolution or quite different?


Changing the Wording of Adventist Fundamental Belief #6 on Creation
@Bill Sorensen:

Rom 2:14: ‘Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law.’


Changing the Wording of Adventist Fundamental Belief #6 on Creation
@Holly Pham:

Sean this is exactly where I get confused with the two different types of YEC Creationists (see my comments above). Are we to use science or not?


Changing the Wording of Adventist Fundamental Belief #6 on Creation
@Sean Pitman:

Thanks Sean, that is where I think I get really confused. There really does appear to be two type of YEC Creationists. There are those who just say, ‘forget the science, you should be believing the Bible, not that secular stuff’. Then there are those who say, ‘no science is good, because it is a form of divine revelation (i.e. lesser light) BUT science can prove the YEC hypothesis.’ It appears some YEC pick and choose which approach to take depending upon the circumstances.

If I recall, Educate Truth had a fight with the Spectrum people about this very issue. It is all very confusing really.


Changing the Wording of Adventist Fundamental Belief #6 on Creation
@Eddie:

Why is GRI located at LSU – isn’t that the hot bed of evolution itself?