Comment on A Historical Review of the Creation Debate Among SDAs by Allen Roy.
@bill quoted Elln: â€Apart from Bible history, geology can prove nothing. . . . Relics found in the earth do give evidence of conditions differing in many respects from the present; but the time when these conditions existed can be learned only from the Inspired Record. In the history of the flood, inspiration has explained that which geology alone could never fathom.”
Ellen first wrote this quote in about 1856 about 5 years after Darwin published his Origin of the Species. What is utterly fantastic about this is that this idea that geology as a science must be understood within a paradigm (in this case Biblical history). This concept was not realized until the mid twentieth century when Thomas Khun explained how science can only be done within a paradigm. Here again, Ellen was 100 years ahead of her time. The problem is that we have not appreciated what she has really said. In another place Ellen talks about how students who take sciences from secular universities must be STRONG IN THE FAITH. Thus again showing that the real issue is not about science vs religion but rather religious beliefs vs. religious beliefs. What we have in some of our schools are people who attended public Us and didn’t realize that they were facing issues of faith. They became fooled by the claim of naturalists and evolutionists that the issue was science vs. religion and so they have been compromising their faith ever since and teaching others to do the same.
We need people who will stand up and say that this is all about faith in the Bible and which religious belief you are going to accept as true — Naturalism or Creationism.
Table of Contents
Allen Roy Also Commented
A Historical Review of the Creation Debate Among SDAs
If you read the chapter in “Patriarchs and Prophets”, Why was sin Permitted, and the corresponding chapter in “the Great Contorversy” you will find Ellen saying that Satan fell before the creation of the Earth. And that he traveled throughout the universe tempting angels and other created being on other planets to join him. Part of the reason for his fall was jealously over Jesus being taken into counsel over the plans for the creation on this planet with Adam and Eve, et. al.
When you put 2-and-2 together, it is plain from these chapters that Ellen believed that God had created and populated the universe with angels and other intelligent life forms on other planets. That Lucifer fell taking within 1/3 of the angels and spreading his doubts throughout the intelligent life forms of the universe. THEN, God prepared this planet for life and its ecosystems.
So, it seems that she considered verse 1 to be the Creation of the universe which was then followed by the creation week at a later date. It seems to me that the most likely place where a passing of time can be found is IN vs 2 between the description of the condition of the earth and God the Spirit coming down in preparation for the Creation week.
Recent Comments by Allen Roy
Dr. Ervin Taylor: ‘A truly heroic crusade’
Taylor wrote: “He must reject all of the mainline conclusions of 99.9% of all those scientists who are involved in all isotopic dating methods, and all other types of dating methods including dendrochronology, varve dating, ice core dating, stable isotope studies of ocean cores, and on and on.”
This is pure Argumentum ad Populum. This logical fallacy is common among naturalists when faced with opposition which they are incapable of comprehending.
Dr. Ervin Taylor: ‘A truly heroic crusade’
@Taylor. What utter nonsense! He hasn’t a clue what creationism is about, not to mention science!!
Former LSU student letter reveals professor’s agenda
I attended LSU back in the early 1970’s I remember the same professors (Guy especially) expressing doubts about the creation account and using extra reading books which claimed that the Genesis account was myth based on ancient Middle East pagan myths. This was presented in a way that it was enlightening, a better understanding than the traditional, backward views of the old SDAs. At the time, I was puzzled why this would be taught, but didn’t say anything. Now I can see where all that was leading. Happily, I wasn’t taken in [edit].
Angry Scientists: Publishing on Intelligent Design
The difference between the Flying Spaghetti Monster is that he has never told anyone in any book that he wrote or caused to be written that he created them last Tuesday. In fact the argument goes ‘We don’t know but what we were created last Tuesday by the Flying Spaghetti Monster with fake memories of history built in. You don’t know if your “god” created you last Tuesday.”
Wrong. The God of the Bible walked and talked with Adam and Eve and told them that he had created them and why. He has talked with prophets ever since. So, we do know that God created us approximately 6000 years ago because he told us. All we have to do is believe it.
Or, all we have to do is believe, based on no evidence whatsoever, that the Flying Spaghetti Monster did it. It’s all based on faith.
Allen Roy
AKA: SkepticalChristian
Jay Gallimore comments on evolution conflict
24 hour day
By definition an hour is 1/24th of the time of one rotation of the planet.
It doesn’t matter how fast the planet is rotating, an hour is always 1/24 of the rotation time.
If you had two planets side by side (planet A and Planet B) and one (planet B) was rotating twice as fast as the other, each planet would still have 24 hours per day/rotation. The difference is that an hour on planet B, when measured by time based on planet A, would be 1/2 the length of time as an hour on planet A. But still, Each planet would have 24 hour days. What matters here is which planet do you live on.
A minute is 1/60 of an hour and a second is 1/60 of a minute. Our Measurements of time is based on the rotation of the planet. The second is based on the minute and the minute is based on the hour and the hour is based on the rotation of the planet. Time is not based on the second or some fraction there of. Nuclear clocks have been set up to try to have a basis to measure time across the universe based on the second. Still even then it is an measurement at only approximates the time of 1/60 of 1/60 of 1/24 of 1 rotation of the planet.
So to saying that the days of the creation week were 24 hours long is really a redundancy. A hour is 1/24 of a day.
As for physics AiG has an excellent summary and explanation found here:
“Do creationists believe in weird science?”
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab2/do-creationists-believe-in-weird-physics
