Comment on A little-known history about Belief 6 by BobRyan.
Far from declaring victory and sitting down – our theistic evolutionist evangelists realize that in fact they have a long way to go beyond the tiny victory they achieved in 1980 – if they really want TE to be supported by actual Seventh-DAY Adventists.
Fritz Guy admits his evolutionist bias and his desire to see the Adventist denomination CHANGE –
Realities for Adventist Theology in the 21st Century
Fritz GuyIn the meantime, the evidence for a long developmental history of the visible universe
(something like 13.7 billion years since the “big bang†and often known as “stellar evolutionâ€) has become conclusive, and is accepted by most Adventist scientific and theological scholars. This consensus represents a significant development in much Adventist thinking—from a short age of the entire universe to a short age only of life on planet Earth—in spite of its evident tension with a literal reading of Genesis 1:1-2:4a and Exodus 20:11, and with the expressed view of Ellen White.33
There Fritz Guy claims victory over the long-ages idea for the Universe – but STILL admits that we have a “short age LIFE” doctrine for earth (inspite of his efforts regarding belief 6.)
Furthermore, the available empirical evidence regarding Earth’s own biological history is recognized as more compatible with a long scenario of gradual development than with a short scenario of sudden, recent appearance of present life forms. 34 The accumulating evidence has come from various sources—radiometric dating, genetics, comparative anatomy, geology, and paleontology—and it “has convinced virtually all working biologists†that a “framework of variation and natural selection is unquestionably correct.†35
Initially there was only one method of radiometric dating—using carbon-14—that projected dates back to 40,000 or 45,000 years, which of course was already a problem for those who believed the whole universe was created less than 10,000 years ago. But it assumed that the production and radioactive decay of carbon-14 has been stable throughout time; but the assumption about radioactive decay was (and is) unprovable, as young-earth creationists quickly pointed out. Now, however, there are forty to fifty radiometric dating methods, including uranium-lead and similar methods (such as potassium-argon) and some completely independent methods (such
as fission-track dating and hydration layer measurements). Some of these newer methods produce ages of four to five billion years for the earth, and two to three billion years for fossils preserving life forms.At the present time there seems to be no good reason to doubt the gradual development and increasing complexity of life over an extended period of time.
Fritz Guy makes it clear that his own views do NOT favor the “short life” or “young life” position of Seventh-DAY Adventists – and so he argues that we need a CHANGE. He is trying to argue from the standpoint of success regarding the age of the Universe and possibly the age of rocks on earth – in an effort to move the bolder uphill one last mile.
The fact that this (billions of years of evolution of life on earth) recognition complicates our theology hardly justifies discounting the overwhelming empirical evidence. In 1844 our Adventist forbears recognized the empirical evidence that their theology was mistaken, and they revised it accordingly.
So our intellectual efforts in the 21st century ought to be directed not to attacking various details of the prevailing developmental model, much less to denying it outright, but either (a) to developing a comprehensive alternative model, which no one has done
or is likely to do, or (b) to incorporating into Adventist thinking the idea of a gradually increasing complexity of living organisms over a long period of time 36 as an alternative to the traditional paradigm of a six-day creation less than ten thousand years ago.37
Guy freely admits that our statement on doctrine DOES NOT support his belief in billions of years of life on earth! He argues explicitly for a change! He argues that just as the Millerites had WRONG doctrine – so do we now have WRONG doctrine.
He never argues “Belief 6 teaches that life has evolved for billions of years” all he did with Belief 6 is try to adjust the stranglehold noose that Belief 6 puts on evolutionism – by a notch. But it is there all the same and he knows it!
Make no mistake about it.
From the “BEING ADVENTIST IN 21st CENTURY AUSTRALIA “
Envisioning an Effective Adventist Future:
What the Church Can Be in the Twenty-first Century
by Fritz Guy, Ph.D.http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/doctrines/au2002conference/guy/guy-future.htm
• A subject that just won’t go away is the time and manner of creation—that is, the relation of the creative activity of God to natural history. At the International Faith and Science Conference at Ogden in August 2002, the fundamental issue was the extent to which modern science influences our interpretation of the early chapters of Genesis. It is important to note that the issue was “the extent to which,” not “whether,” science influences our interpretation. …
But there was considerable disagreement was about the age of life on planet Earth. Some argued that the evidence for a very long history of life is persuasive, and that Genesis 1 should be understood as a theological affirmation of God as the source of everything that is. Others insisted that the available evidence is not sufficient to invalidate the traditional understanding of Genesis 1 as a factual description of the actual process of creation. The general discussions were courteous and respectful, but the differences were deep and sometimes passionately expressed. A possible outcome of our continuing conversations might be a recognition and acceptance of a diversity of views on this subject.
http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/doctrines/au2002conference/guy/guy-future.htm
in that above statement – Fritz Guy adds the point that at present not only does Belief 6 condemn his “3 billions years of fossil life on earth” mantra – it also leaves us in a place that does NOT support “a diversity of views on this subject” and so — at the very least – he urges that we change in that regard.
This is far from “I changed belief 6 and now it is all over but the screaming and yelling”.
in Christ,
Bob
Table of Contents
BobRyan Also Commented
A little-known history about Belief 6
I think it is interesting that it was the corrupt leadership of the Jews at the time of Christ – and to some extent the wide wild singing popular support for them at times – the determined the fate of the Jewish nation.
Those who hijack leadership roles in a given conference or union in areas of education, administration etc in the SDA church just so they can introduce error – can only survive and prosper in that role as long as there are enough people who will “do nothing” to stop it in their local conference.
That is why I am glad the Michigan conference leaders had the leadership initiative and vision to take a stand and let the chips fall where they may.
in Christ,
Bob
A little-known history about Belief 6
Ken: Might I humbly suggest that today of all days is not a day for internecine dispute but rather for peace and love.
Merry Christmas
indeed – today is the day that we celebrate the birth of the Messiah (the Christ). “God with Us”.
The incarnation of God Himself — who chose to step off of the throne of the universe and become an infant born to Mary – sent to save the world. A world that welcomed him by trying to kill all the baby boys two years old and under in the vicinity of his birth in an effort to kill him.
God – our Creator decided that “salvation at any cost” – no matter the price – was worth it to save mankind. And Christ said in Matt 10 that those who freely choose that path of salvation must “take up their cross and follow Me”.
This is a world where Satan has obtained the cooperation of man in many respects.
The Angels of heaven said on that day “Glory to God in the highest and on earth peace good will toward men”. Luke 2
And yet another angel from heaven say in Rev 12:12 regarding the fact that Christ was winning the war against Satan — “Woe to those who dwell on the earth for the devil has come down to you knowing that he has but a short time”.
Even Christ Himself said in Matt 10 “do not think that I have come to bring peace – I have not come to bring peace but a sword” Matt 10.
Christ was referring to the fact that Satan – as the “god of this world” 1Cor 4:4 is at war against our Creator and leads as many of mankind as will – to follow his directions – whether wittingly or unwittingly.
in Christ,
Bob
A little-known history about Belief 6
BobRyan: I am wondering if some over at the spec of truth board – are suggesting that being employed by the SDA church and consuming SDA tithe, offering and gift dollars is a “basic right” of hindus, atheists and evolutionists – such that any denial of their demands in that regard is a “civil penalty” being applied?
Time will tell if they are trying to make that case.
Frankly I doubt that we will see a rush for employment applications by members of those groups operating outside the SDA church today
Ron said : Sean, This statement is completely dis-ingenuous. The intent of the movement to “clarify” the 6th fundamental belief is exactly that – to impose a civil penalty on those who anything other than the most limited of interpretations.
BobRyan:
What civil penalty would that be?
Ron: Perhaps “civil” penalty isn’t the right word, but I am referring to the penalty of having your job threatened and your character maligned.
Ok but that brings us back to my prior statement – listed first in the text above.
in Christ,
Bob
Recent Comments by BobRyan
Academic Freedom Strikes Again!
george:
By definition, I don’t believe in miracles or apocryphal, anthropomorphic stories about same.Why aren’t scientists observing them today if they occur?
Circular argument. If they were naturally occurring we would expect scientists to see that they are still occurring today. If they are singular events caused by an intelligent being – that being would be under no obligation to “keep causing world wide floods” as if “to do it once you must continually do it”. Armstrong went to the moon.. shall we argue that unless he keeps going to the moon so each new generation can see it … then it did not happen?
Your argument is of the form “all eye witness evidence to some event in the past is no evidence at all unless that event keeps repeating itself so we too can witness it”. Seems less than compelling.
“Could it be that science is better able to detect hoaxes and false claims?” As a rule for dismissing every eye witness account in the past – it is less than compelling. (even when that event cannot be repeated)
Evolutionists “claim” that dust, rocks and gas (in sufficient quantity and over sufficient time and a lot of luck) self organized into rabbits via prokaryote-then-eukaryote-then-more-complexity. But such self-organization cannot be “observed” today.
(What is worse – such a sequence cannot even be intelligently manipulated to occur in the lab)
By your own argument then you should not believe in evolution.
Academic Freedom Strikes Again!
@Sean Pitman:
Suppose you were at a crime scene … there is a tree limb on the ground and a bullet hole in the victim — “all natural causes”? or is one ‘not natural’? Those who say that nothing can be detected as “not naturally occurring in nature” – because all results, all observations make it appear that every result “naturally occurred without intelligent design” seem to be missing a very big part of “the obvious”.
Academic Freedom Strikes Again!
george:
Gentlemen,What just God would allow an innocent child to be born guilty for the sins of a distant ancestor? …What if there was only One Commandment? Do Good. ‘Kant’ see a problem with that.
An atheist point of view is not often found here – but this is interesting.
1. God does not punish babies for what someone else did – but I suppose that is a reductionist option that is not so uncommon among atheists. The “details” of the subject you are commenting on – yet according to you “not reading” – is that humans are born with sinful natures. A “bent” toward evil. That is the first gap right out of the gate between atheism and God’s Word..
2. But still God supernaturally enables “free will” even in that bent scenario, the one that mankind lives in – ever since the free-will choice of the first humans on planet earth – was to cast their lot in with Satan and rebellion..(apparently they wanted to see what a wonderful result that poor choice would create). John 16 “the Holy Spirit convicts the world of sin and righteousness and judgment”. And of course “I will draw ALL mankind unto Me” John 12:32. (not “just Christians”). Thus supernatural agency promotes free will in a world that would otherwise be unrestrained in its bent to evil.
3.God says “The wages of sin is death” — so then your “complaint” is essentially “that you exist”. A just and loving God created planet Earth – no death or disease or suffering – a perfect paradise where mankind could live forever … and only one tiny restriction… yet Adam and Eve allowed themselves to be duped by Satan… tossing it all away. The “Just God” scenario could easily just have let them suffer the death sentence they chose. He did not do that… hence “you exist” – to then “complain about it”.
4. Of course you might also complain that Satan exists – and Satan might complain that “you exist”. There is no shortage on planet earth of avenues for complaint. But God steps in – offers salvation to mankind at infinite cost to himself – – and the “Few” of Matthew 7 eventually end up accepting that offer of eternal life. The rest seem to prefer the lake of fire option… sort of like Adam and Eve choosing disease and death over eternal life (without fully appreciating the massive fail in that short-sighted choice).
In any case – this thread is about the logic/reason that should be taken into account when a Christian owned and operated institution chooses to stay faithful to its Christian mission — rather then getting blown about by every wind of doctrine. Why let the alchemy of “wild guessing” be the ‘source of truth’ when we have the Bible?? We really have no excuse for that. As for science – we can be thankful that it has come as far along as it has – but no matter how far back you rewind the clock of our science history – we should always have chosen the Bible over wild guessing.
Newly Discovered Human Footprints Undermine Evolutionary Assumptions
Ervin Taylor:
Perhaps Dr. Pitman would enlighten his readers what on earth “the neo-Darwinian story of origins” might be. Darwin did not address origins.
Origins of what?? the first eukaryote??
Or “origins of mankind”??
Darwin himself claimed that his own false doctrine on origins was totally incompatible with Genesis and that because of this – Genesis must be tossed under a bus.
hint: Genesis is an account of “Origins” as we all know — even though “bacteria” and “amoeba” are terms that don’t show up in the text.
The point remains – Darwin was promoting his own religion on origins totally counter to the Bible doctrine on origins. He himself addresses this point of the two views.
Newly Discovered Human Footprints Undermine Evolutionary Assumptions
Ervin Taylor:
Here we go again.If the footprints upon close examination, are determined not to be from a hominim/hominid, I wonder if Educate Truth (sic) will announce that determination.Or if the date of the surface is determined to be much younger, will there be a notice placed on fundamentalist web-sites.If you believe the answer to these questions are yes, I have a big bridge that I would like to sell you for pennies on the dollar.
Here we go again … hope piled upon hope…no matter the “observations in nature” that disconfirm the classic evolutionary hypothesis
Reminds me of “What we still don’t know” by Martin Reese and Leonard Suskind
