Bob Helm wrote: “Yes, I believe that a theistic evolutionist …

Comment on Science, Methodological Naturalism, and Faith by Jared.

Bob Helm wrote: “Yes, I believe that a theistic evolutionist can be saved, but intelligent people can recognize theistic evolution for the farce that it is.”

I suggest you tone it down, Pastor Helm. For a pastor to be using this language, showing disrespect toward the views and intelligence of others, is inappropriate. Your language certainly fits well here, but not for someone with your standing.

Jared Also Commented

Science, Methodological Naturalism, and Faith
Bob Helm wrote, “I have already mentioned how Darwinism (which is based on MN) has hurt the practice of medicine.”

What’s your point, Bob? Do you deny Christianity has ever harmed the practice of medicine? Has refusal to acknowledge the gains made by methodological naturalism ever harmed the practice of medicine?

I don’t see how an argument over which belief system, Christianity or human secularism, has most hindered medicine sheds any real light on which belief system is more valid. Medicine obviously benefits from the approach of methodological naturalism, and I’m personally convinced that Christian views independent of science can certainly benefit one’s health and medical response to treatment.


Science, Methodological Naturalism, and Faith
The original wording implied that anyone believing in theistic evolution lacked intelligence. That’s not appropriate language in dealing with one’s opponents.

You’re getting yourself confused, Sean. You’ve asked me not to be so sensitive and personally attached to my ideas. I actually share your conviction that theistic evolution is wrong. Should I now poke fun at your intelligence for your wrong a priori assumption about me?

Lecturing others seems to come natural for you.


Science, Methodological Naturalism, and Faith
Sean Pitman wrote: “What alternative language would you suggest for describing a perspective that appears, to Bob and me at least, to be antithetical to the very basis of Christianity? What kind of language did Jesus use to describe the actions of those who were destroying the faith of His people?”

Where in scripture did Jesus say people lacked intelligence? Where did he call others stupid? Especially if they disagreed with his interpretation of potentially falsifiable scientific evidence?

You give Christianity a bad name when you disrespect others who has a different viewpoint. You don’t need to mock your enemies.


Recent Comments by Jared

2013 Annual Council Votes to Change Wording of Adventist Fundamental Belief #6
@Sean Pitman:

That’s a long-winded reply!

I never suggested the evenings and mornings were not literal (they are not in Exodus 20 or in the new FB#6 wording), that the Biblical authors were mistaken, or that pastors and teachers should be free to teach as they please. I simply suggested that the proposed wording may not help all that much.

I don’t understand why a belief articulated 33 years ago is so misleading that it must be revised to save the church. The current wording has clearly articulated the church’s position for decades. Those who insist on changing it will themselves one day be criticized for poor word choice.

That’s my opinion. Apparently my opinion is offensive to those who disagree. I now regret having shared it.


For real education reform, take a cue from the Adventists
@ D Fender: I know that what you say is true. Having been raised in the church I have watched Adventism morph into something that is a far cry from where we began and where we should be.

I’ve spent a decade teaching in our church schools and more than that working with Pathfinders and Sabbath Schools across the nation. I remain horrified with the heresy that is being taught in many of our churches and the lack of objection being lodged by the older members of the congregation.

However, I do not agree with your assessment of the state of ALL the young people in our midst – those that are up and coming leaders. There are a few that are still heralding Adventist doctrine and those teachings that make us peculiar and unique.

There will always be the Kelloggs, Jones and Waggoners, Brinsmeads, Raes, and Fords criticizing and undermining what the church teaches and claims collectively to believe. However, there are young people out there who are willing to “stand for the right though the heavens fall.”

God allows for free-will. This is one of our fundamental doctrinal teachings. He allows us to snub our noses at Him and all that has been already searched and studied and say, “We no longer agree or believe that You are like this.” In the end, He allows us to say, “We are right, and You are a liar.”

However, there are serious consequences for this decision – especially once we stand in a leadership position. Yet, God tells us through the scriptures and Mrs. White that there will be a time of shaking to separate those who are truly His and those who are not. Our job is to continue standing in the gap for those who are so in error in their teaching and intrepretation and to work toward restoration and redemption. That is in fact the purpose of true education.

So, it may sound “Pollyannish” or like I’m looking at things through “rose colored glasses.” In truth, I see things all too clearly. And yet, the Lord makes it clear that “He is not slack in keeping His promises as some would understand slackness.” He tarries a bit longer, and while He tarries it is our job to make intercession for those that are not yet His or have gone astray in their understanding.


2013 Annual Council Votes to Change Wording of Adventist Fundamental Belief #6
@Bob Helm:

You wrote: “Actually, the word earth can also be translated land.”

You’re making my point: if we are going to be literal in interpreting words, we need to be consistent. The Hebrew word for “days” (yowm) can have multiple meanings, as can the Hebrew word for “earth” (‘erets). It’s easy to look up the various ways in which these two terms have been translated differently throughout scripture. In essence, you are defending a literal reading of one phrase (“in six days the Lord made”) and choosing a more figurative meaning of another phrase (“the heavens and the earth”).

Again, the bigger problem is that the proposed change to the wording of FB#6 could be interpreted by many as supporting a narrow view of how long it took for the Lord to make “the heavens and the earth,” and used forcefully to punish those who advocate young life creationism (the earth made many thousands or millions of years ago) instead of young earth creationism (the earth made about 6,000 years ago). The motivation to revise the wording–to punish those who interpret things differently–serves well such an unintended consequence. I think it’s a mistake.


For real education reform, take a cue from the Adventists
Bravo for the Adventist education system. And thank you for posting the article. It’s been flying around all week and is a refreshing look at an all too highly criticized topic.

That being said, there is a problem in our academic institutions, but it exists not just in our schools.

I recently heard someone say: “If you have Adventist parents with Adventist children attending your Adventist church and not sending their children to your Adventist school we have an Adventist problem.” Then I watched as two leaders in a church got angry because the speaker was suggesting that there was an issue with someone’s relationship with God.

There is a vast difference between our relationship with our Savior and our support of the Seventh-day Adventist church and it’s doctrine.

The speaker went on to suggest that if we were unwilling to teach Adventist doctrine then we were no different than any other parochial school and there was no purpose to our existence.

The problem, as already stated, in our institutions is that we have deviated so completely from our original beliefs and teaching. Firing tenured teachers is not the answer, I agree. However, we need to reclaim our uniqueness as Adventists.

There is a fine line between encouraging students to reason and think for themselves and teaching heresy. As an instructor for the Seventh-day Adventist education system, my opinions are of little import. We have Adventist schools to teach Adventist doctrine. If teachers, parents or students have an issue with that then they need to find education somewhere else.

That may sound harsh or cruel. However, IF we turn back to the initial purpose or “blueprint” – as was previously suggested in another discussion – then the loss of those instructors, students and parents that want a more liberal education will not be as keenly felt.

In fact, I would suggest that IF we as a church were to encourage revival and reformation in our teachings both as a church and an educational system we will find so many people coming into our churches and enrolling in our schools that we’ll have the problem of not enough space.

It’s fairly simple. God makes things very clear. He will reward those who are faithfully obedient to Him.


For real education reform, take a cue from the Adventists
For too many years we, as a church, have taken this stance that we dare not make public the “ugly and messy” things that are occuring behind closed doors.

IF these teachers are simply open up “satanic things” to the students so that they are “equipped” to fit the foe. . .Bravo!!! My hats off to them.

However, IF, as it has been suggested, this situation is in actuality an issue of a crisis of faith or understanding of the scriptures then we have a much bigger and worse situation.

This is not simply an issue of “church discipline” as several have suggested. This isn’t someone commiting adultery or being a gossip.

These are leaders in Adventist academic institutions that are attempting to circumvent the work that has been done in the past 150 years. These are educated and professional individuals that are acting in direct conflict with the contract that they had to sign when they accepted the position.

As leaders we do not arbitraily get to decide that we no longer agree with the church doctrine so we can change what we do and how we handle things.

There is plenty of scripture that says exactly what will happen if we continue in this vain. And there is enough scriptural backing to support those that stand against such teachings.

Mrs. White states: “To restore in man the image of his Maker, to bring him back to the perfection in which he was created, to promote the development of body, mind, and soul, that the divine purpose in his creation might be realized–this was to be the work of redemption. This is the object of education, the great object of life.”

Too much time has been wasted, too many souls have already been lost, because the leaders of the church would rather keep issues and situations hidden in the name of “Christlike behavior”.

It is time to stand for right though the heavens fall.

Jesus dealt gently with those who were uneducated and didn’t know Him. However, when it came to dealing with the Pharisees and Sadducees, He made scenes, turned over tables, yelled and cracked a whip.

You can’t have it both ways. Ask what would Jesus do and then be willing to “man up” and accept the true answer. I have a difficult time believing that Jesus would EVER “go gently into” this discussion – especially after every avenue that has been tried has been exhausted to no avail!