LSU statement regarding resignations and Bradley’s email
PS. Jesus loves sinners. Remember he never saves the righteous, he only came to save sinners.

LSU statement regarding resignations and Bradley’s email
@Faith:

Actually, looking for and exposing error is the definition of a witch hunt, e.g. the Salem witch trials, and the Spanish Inquisition!

I am not surprised at the witch hunt because I have seen it over and over again in the Adventist church. Kellogg, Jones and Wagner, Ford, Brimsmead, Numbers, Standish, and many others. Our president recently asked every member in the church to speak up for religious liberty. How can you ask civil governments to grant religious liberty if you are not willing to grant religious liberty within the church?

After all, what is Religious Liberty if it isn’t the principle that the majority needs to grant the minority the right to be wrong? I don’t see the current attitude in the Seventh-day Adventist church as much different than the attitude in the Catholic church during the Spanish Inquisition. Orthodoxy always excludes and kills. Granted, we aren’t burning people at the stake, but threatening their job is about as close to that as a church can get in the United States today. I think “Educate Truth” is proof that Seventh-day Adventists do not believe in Religious Liberty.

Jesus did not call us to search for and expose error, He called us to search for and expose the truth. There is a big difference.

Changing the Wording of Adventist Fundamental Belief #6 on Creation

Sean Pitman: No one is demanding that they “get out of the church”. . . . . anti-Adventist views on such a fundamental level.

You don’t see how characterizing a dedicated believer’s understanding of truth as “fundamentally anti-Adventist” would drive them out of the church?

I guess that explains why you don’t see that what you are doing here is fundamentally wrong.

Changing the Wording of Adventist Fundamental Belief #6 on Creation

Professor Kent: Nothing saddens me more than the droves who leave the Church when they learn that many of their cherished beliefs regarding this evidence don’t hold up so well to scrutiny.

I agree. I am sure that Sean and Bob don’t mean to undermine faith in God, but every time they say that it is impossible to believe in God and in science at the same time, I feel like they are telling me that any rational person must give up their belief in God, because belief in God and rationality can’t exist in the same space. Who would want to belong to that kind of a church?

Changing the Wording of Adventist Fundamental Belief #6 on Creation

Sean Pitman: and have little if anything to do with the main point of their prophetic claims

And by analogy, this appears to be a weak point in the creation argument. Who is to decide what the main point is?

It seems entirely possible that in trying to make Gen. 1 too literal, that we are missing the whole point of the story.

Changing the Wording of Adventist Fundamental Belief #6 on Creation
Regarding falsifying the existence of God through the miraculous:

While it is true that one can’t falsify the existance of God and the Biblical miracles at a philosophical level, it seems to me that it is possible to falsify it at a practical level. For instance prayer for healing. How many families who pray for a miracle for a loved one in the Intensive Care Unit receive a miracle?

While the answer to that question doesn’t answer the question of the existence of God at a philosophical level, it does answer the question at a practical level. After 36 years of medical practice I can say definitively that at a practical level when it comes to miracles in the ICU, God does not exist. Even if a miracle happens latter today, it wouldn’t be enough to establish an expectation for the future. So at a practicle level it seems it is possible level to falsify the existence od God, or at least prove His nonintervention which seems to me to be pretty much the same thing at a functional level.

Changing the Wording of Adventist Fundamental Belief #6 on Creation
@Sean Pitman:
Sean, what is your definition of “Neo-darwinism” as opposed to “Darwinism” as opposed to “evolution”?