MOreover I don’t see the need to choose between YOUR …

Comment on An appeal to our leadership by Victor Marshall.

MOreover I don’t see the need to choose between YOUR version of Adventism and evolution.

Geanna,
Bob Ryan and Sean Pittman and David Read etc. are not presenting ‘their’ version of Adventism. They understand very clearly what Adventism and evolution are. I agree wholeheartedly with David Read’s last assessment and I encourage you to study it more carefully.

Those who want to cavil about the trustworthiness of inspired counsel, who want to revise the ‘orthodox’ foundations of our faith, who want to wed the Word of God with the science of men, are the ones trying to create their own version of Adventism.In doing so they even have the temerity to accuse those who are trying to uphold the pillars of the faith as, ‘Creating their own brand of Adventism’ – and that their own revised brand is more genuine. I agree with David Reed when he says, ‘The overwhelming majority of Seventh-day Adventists, both in North America and around the world, remain young earth creationists.’

Your more recent posts are becoming more strident in tone:
“PURE, UNADULTERATED SPECULATION”
“PURE, UNADULTEREATED SPECULATION”
“IT’S OTHERS HERE THAT FAIL TO DO SO BY INVENTING WILD STORIES THEY LABEL AS “SCIEBCE” AND “BIBLICAL EVIDENCE.”
“UTTERLY RIDICULUS ON MANY LEVELS”
“SPECULATION that cannot be supported from the Bible”
“you go so far to call this SCIENCE and BIBLICAL EVIDENCE!”
“More convenient adhocery lacking any evidence other than imagination”

“Let’s not be so… accusatory!”

I’m not quite sure what is motivating you to rail against Creationists and those who support a faith-filled Adventist understanding of the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy. I know that this is usually an indication that someone is fighting against the Holy Spirit.

As Christians we are called to talk faith, not doubt. We are called to place confidence in the Word of God and inspired counsels, not cavil against their clear statements. There will always be hooks to hang your doubts upon. The fact that you seem so vociferously trying to find these hooks, and undergird them with ‘science and reason’ – is frankly disturbing. The fact that you seem so intent on proving these faith-filled Christians wrong – is likewise frightening.

Often those who are raised in the Adventist faith arrive at the point where they find their own voice and strive to understand the faith for themselves. Its okay to ask the important questions, to study them out for oneself, to not accept everything one has been taught just because people said that’s the way it is. Its not okay to make clever and harsh jabs at the very pillars and foundations of the faith in the process.

The Word of God is like the burning bush. We should remove our shoes when we approach it – it is holy ground. For our salvation’s sake it must take precedence over the word of man.

Victor Marshall Also Commented

An appeal to our leadership

I no longer see a place for me in the Adventist church. I used to find love and acceptance but now things have really change. I need a new home.
It is finished.

Geanna,
So let me get this straight.
You enter into dialogue with Adventist creationist strangers on a forum containing heated debate over a broiling controversy. The creationsts admonish you (sometimes kindly, sometimes not so kindly) to believe the world-wide Adventist perspective on the biblical creation account. You refuse their admonishments and then declare yourself a martyr that is leaving the Adventist church. In other words because of what strangers said to you on a heated forum – you are now turning your back on Adventism.

You must know that what was said to you was said because these people sincerely think that belief in evolution can have a profoundly deliterious effect on ones spiritual condition. What they said (more often than not) was said because they cared enough in their own way to try and warn you.

You can of course find another ‘home’ where Christians are more ‘loving.’ You can find a church that is not concerned about doctrine, or theology, or rules or governance. You can find a fellowship that says, ‘It doesn’t really matter what you do or what you believe – as long as you love Jesus.’
There are such churches.

Love cares enough to admonish and correct – not just enable.
When I got tired of my earthly father’s discipline I ran away from home and disowned him. When I finally accepted Christ, at 30 years of age, I returned to him and confessed his wisdom and my foolishness.

If you do leave, I encourage you to own your decision. Not to blame it on educate truth.


An appeal to our leadership
“The Barna Group, a California-based research firm, recently (one year ago)did a survey to find out how many US adults hold a ‘biblical worldview’… The result: a steeple thin 9 percent. (virtually the same percentage for the last decade). Among 18 to 23 year olds, it was 0.5 percent, fewer people than might show up at a Lady Gaga concert. Even among “born again” Christians, it was only 19 percent.”

“In a separate report, Barna found that more than 6 in 10 born-again Christians say they are customizing their faith, not following any one church’s theology. “Americans are increasingly comfortable picking and choosing what they deem to be helpful and accurate theological views and have become comfortable discarding the rest of the teachings in the Bible.” the report notes. The blunt implication: Scripture is no longer the sheet anchor of American Spirtuality.” – Christian Science Monitor 3/29/2010

“A lot of people think religion is something you piece together from ideas you think are sweet and that you personally find beneficial. No… It’s an objective reality. It’s just what is.” – Mark Dever Pastor of Capitol Hill Baptist Church

Conclusion? The general trend of our society is the:
1. Abandonment of a Biblical view – partucularly among youth.
2. Creation of an individual theology – a theology that does not
necessarily reflect the wholistic theology of the Bible or any
church.

Final observation? Adventist theology is objective not subjective
Biblical theology is objective not subjective
The Adventist faith is not a free-for-all of often diametrically opposed opinions under one large tent of subjectivity, drifting from its historical and Biblical moorings (though it may appear to be so in California).

The developed world is hurtling towards a place where objective Biblical truth is unimportant and inconsequential as far as ‘relgion’ is concerned. Christianity is hurtling toward a place where affiliation with no church, denomination, or mutually agreed upon set of theological standards is considered to be a necessary part of ‘Christianity.’

What will be the common denominator? Personal experience.

Should it be any surprise when we find many in the Adventist church embracing these ideas. Of course not. The tendency will always be for the church to conform to the world. What can we do to help turn the tide?
Post on educatetruth 😉


An appeal to our leadership
Kevin,
I thought my two previous comments were fairly balanced. The preponderance of positive marks seem to indicate they struck a cord with the experience of many.

Ellen White spoke often of how many souls are unable to come into our fellowship because we are unable to receive them. Why? My experience has been because of cold legalism. Because sister so and so might condemn them for bringing cheese to potluck. Not because brother so and so might tell them it was okay to cohabitate. The Devil has agents in the church. Some tempt others by their example to sin in the area of lifestyle. Others are spreading ruin through backbiting, condemnation, accusation, evil surmisings and false conspiracies. It is this spirit which is driving our youth into the arms of the world. Not just the lure of the world.

“There are in our churches those who profess the truth who are only hindrances to the work of reform. They are clogs to the wheels of the car of salvation. This class are frequently in trial. Doubts, jealousies, and suspicion are the fruits of selfishness, and seem to be interwoven with their very natures. I shall name this class chronic church grumblers. They do more harm in a church than two ministers can undo. They are a tax to the church and a great weight to the ministers of Christ. They live in an atmosphere of doubts, jealousies, and surmisings. Much time and labor of the ambassadors of Christ are required to undo their work of evil, and restore harmony and union in the church. This takes from the courage and strength of God’s servants and unfits them for the work He has for them to do in saving perishing souls from ruin. God will reward these troublers of Zion according to their works…. Satan exults when men and women embrace the truth who are naturally faultfinding and who will throw all the darkness and hindrance they can against the advancement of the work of God.” EV.371

Which class do these extremely detrimental people usually fall into?

Jesus never condemned the Pharisees for being too strict with God’s law. Rather, He condemned them for neglecting that law for the traditions of men.

He said they neglected the ‘weightier matters’ of God’s law. They were strict observers of the Sabbath – yet they neglected acts of mercy and love toward their fellow man. Who hasn’t observed this extremely harmful phenomenon in Adventist churches?

We never read in the writings of Inspiration that the major problem in the end-time church will be too much preaching of the law

This was the problem in 1888 (a time when Christ could have returned). It is still the problem in many of our churches. Too little preaching of Christ – too much of the law. She said that God’s people had become as dry as the hills of Gilboa with preaching the law. This inordinate emphasis on the law had left them spiritually destitute. As a result her stern reproofs for the church leadership pointed them once again toward the ‘weightier matters.’
These were her counsels then. I believe we should heed them now:

“My burden during the meeting was to present Jesus and His love before my brethren, for I saw marked evidences that many had not the Spirit of Christ.” – MR 961 p.14
“Evil speaking, and evil thinking are ruinous to the soul. This has been the current in this conference. There is nothing the church lacks so much as the manifestation of Christlike love.” – Sermon Oct.21, ’88 – Crisis Years p.284
“The worst thing – the most grievous – is the want of love and the want of compassion one for another. That is what God presented in such a light before me…” – MS 26 – 1888 p.5
“To have unity and love for one another is the great work now to be carried on…. There is altogether too little of the love of Christ in the hearts of those who claim to believe the truth. While all their hopes are centered in Jesus Christ, while His Spirit pervades the soul, then there will be unity, although every idea may not be exactly the same on all points.” – Letter Feb.18, 1887

You notice she didn’t say the ‘worst thing’ was neglecting to uphold the importance of the law.

Don’t get me wrong. I wouldn’t be posting on this site if I didn’t feel strongly that we need to uphold the law of God (particularly the 4th commandment) from ‘liberal’ efforts to destroy its importance through evolutionary and higher-critical theory. Please read my other posts.

At the same time I cannot help but continue to emphasize the importance of the ‘weightier matters’, lest in the conflict we lose sight of Christ.

Let us not forget that Calvary was a microcosm of the final crisis. It will be legalists (a movement to return to God’s law as misrepresented by Sunday observance) – promoting a salvation by works theology, who will call for Christ’s crucifixion in the person of his saints at the close of time.

“It will be urged that the few who stand in opposition to an institution of the church and a law of the state ought not to be tolerated; that it is better for them to suffer than for whole nations to be thrown into confusion and lawlessness. The same argument eighteen hundred years ago was brought against Christ by the “rulers of the people.” – GC 615

Finally, you say:

In Jesus’ time, the problem with the Pharisees was not strict faithfulness to the written counsel of God, as is the issue in Adventism today.

I think the Pharisees would beg to differ. They were incredibly concerned about the the inroads of liberalism and compromise rampant in the church of their day. The Saducee and Herodian parties, at the highest levels of the church, were promoting the worst kinds of compromise and heresy. It was the Pharisaical spirit which Christ condemned most – not their traditions, or the apostasy of the Saducees. This spirit developed in response to the apostasy of their day.


Recent Comments by Victor Marshall

Last Thursdayism
“The deepest students of science are constrained to recognize in nature the working of infinite power. But to man’s unaided reason, nature’s teaching cannot but be contradictory and disappointing. Only in the light of revelation can it be read aright, ‘Through faith we understand.’Heb.11:3” – Ed.134


Last Thursdayism
Farewell


Last Thursdayism
@Sean Pitman:

As if all of your previous statements were not enough – here you come with this outrageous statement:

But I do deny that the Bible is the final authority. I don’t think that it is the final authority.

I think it is plain enough now for all to see that the founding scientist of EducateTruth, who has vigorously been seeking to have LSU tow the orthodox Adventist line – is himself heterodox when it comes to the most foundational of Adventist beliefs!
Not only have you equated science with faith, you have supplanted Biblical authority with scientific authority. Isn’t this exactly in essence what theistic evolutionists do?! Is it possible that one who incessantly declares others to be ‘blind’ would himself be blind to his own hypocritical presuppositions?

Seventh-day Adventists are ‘people of the book.’ They claim the Protestant principle of ‘Sola Scriptura’ as the very foundation of their faith. You are not a Sola Scripturist. By your own standard, if you were employed by the Adventist church, you yourself should consider employment elsewhere.
This is indeed a most grave and serious ironic twist.

If the issues are not yet clear enough I will here quote one of the denominations most preeminently orthodox theologians. You will find that his clear and definitive statements are diametrically opposed to your own:

“A fundamental principle set forth by Scripture concerning itself is that the Bible alone is the final norm of truth, the primary and absolute source of authority, the ultimate court of appeal, in all areas of doctrine and practice… The principle of sola Scriptura implies two corollaries: the primacy and the sufficiency of Scripture….”

“Paul likewise rejects human “knowledge” (KJV “science”; Greek gnōsis) as the final authority (1 Tim 6:20). Both OT and NT writers point out that since the Fall in Eden, nature has become depraved (Gen 3:17-18; Rom 8:20-21) and no longer perfectly reflects truth. Nature, rightly understood, is in harmony with God’s written revelation in Scripture (see Ps 19:1-6 [revelation of God in nature] and vv. 7-11 [revelation of the Lord in Scripture]); but as a limited and broken source of knowledge about God and reality, it must be held subservient to, and interpreted by, the final authority of Scripture (Rom 1:20-23; 2:14-16; 3:1-2).”

“2. The Sufficiency of Scripture. The principle of sola Scriptura implies the further corollary of the sufficiency of Scripture. The Bible stands alone as the unerring guide to truth; it is sufficient to make one wise unto salvation (2 Tim 3:15). It is the standard by which all doctrine and experience must be tested (2 Tim 3:16-17; Ps 119:105; Prov 30:5, 6; Isa 8:20; John 17:17; Acts 17:11; 2 Thess 3:14; Heb 4:12). Scripture thus provides the framework, the divine perspective, the foundational principles, for every branch of knowledge and experience. All additional knowledge and experience, or revelation, must build upon and remain faithful to, the all-sufficient foundation of Scripture. The sufficiency of Scripture is not just in the sense of material sufficiency, i.e., that Scripture contains all the truths necessary for salvation. Adventists also believe in the formal sufficiency of Scripture, i.e., that the Bible alone is sufficient in clarity so that no external source is required to rightly interpret it.”

“Adventists maintain the rallying cry of the Reformation–sola Scriptura, the Bible and the Bible only as the final norm for truth. All other sources of knowledge and experience must be tested by this unerring standard. The appropriate human response must be one of total surrender to the ultimate authority of the word of God (Isa 66:2).” – Richard M. Davidson, ‘Interpreting Scripture According to the Scriptures:Toward an understanding of Seventh-day Adventist Hermeneutics.’ BRI

Not only do you seem diametrically opposed to foundational Adventist theology. You also appear (for all intents and purposes) to be fundamentally opposed to the purposes and goals of EducateTruth itself.

“4. More important than all of these is that the Bible find its place as the ultimate authority on all it touches upon within the classroom…… The bottom line of this controversy is not about creation vs. evolution, but authority. Does the Bible inform our science or does science inform the Bible? This question lies at the heart of this controversy.” – Shane Hilde

In light of this further unfortunate irony – perhaps you should seek employment on another web site.

I encourage you to reexamine the basis for you faith and prayerfully surrender it to the Word of God – not scientific reason.

“When we come to the Bible, reason must acknowledge an authority superior to itself, and heart and intellect must bow before the great I AM.” (SC 110).


Last Thursdayism
@Bill Sorensen:

More “sure” than what? More sure than Peter’s testimony. Peter’s testimony is helpful and helps us believe that Jesus is the Messiah. But even Peter’s testimony is not adequate to affirm Jesus and who He is. We must necessarily turn to “Moses and the prophets” and validate Jesus as the Messiah based on their testimony.

Simply put, Moses is the final authority in all matters of doctrine and faith. If it is not in harmony with Moses, it is false. And this includes Jesus and His ministry.

Very good Bill.
I like to look at it this way as well. Moses said that, “at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall the matter be established.” We have the two witnesses of the Old and New Testaments – each one establishes the testimony of the other – both are further established by a third witness – the Holy Spirit. These three witnesses are sufficient to establish truth.

The bible affirming itself as the final authority is the same as God affirming His own authority.

Another interesting parallel passage in the Bible is, “For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he sware by himself.” In this passage we have the concept that God is a sufficient witness for Himself. Of course, in a sense, He is also actually three witnesses isn’t He!


Last Thursdayism
@Bill Sorensen:

The bible presents its own evidence. It is self affirming.

If you deny the bible is the final authority on its on self affirmations, then you are simply not a bible Christian.

The bible does not try to “prove” everything. Something are simply stated as a fact. Especially things that are not “proveable” by science and/or human experience.

Science and human experience may be helpful, but they are not the final word and it is a mistake to try to affirm every jot and tittle of scriptual teaching by such “proof”.

Well stated Bro. Sorenson.