Comment on Rewrite of fundamental belief 6 voted by NCC by Sean Pitman.
I am shocked that the NCC would undermine Adventist doctrine by seeking to revise FB #6. I’m also shocked that EducateTruth would support it. How dare you people tell us that our fundamental beliefs are wrong as they are currently written. YOU are the ones who are undermining them!
FB#6 could be modified to more clearly reflect both the historical position and the current official position of the SDA Church regarding the literal nature of the creation week described in the Genesis account.
– please reference the decision of the General Conference’s executive committee: http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/statements/main_stat55.html
There’s nothing wrong with changing doctrinal statements. The problem comes when paid representatives expect the Church, or any organization for that matter, to continue to pay them despite their active opposition to the clearly stated current ideals of the organization…
I was at the NCC constituency meeting yesterday as a voting representative. I spoke and voted in favor of this recommendation and heard the opposing arguments – ranging from “academic freedom” to worries about “witch hunts” or the “inquisition”.
Yet, no one seems to use such inflammatory language when it comes to describing popular measures of Church government and order. No one would think twice about asking a pastor to resign from employment in the SDA Church if he/she started promoting Sunday sacredness, or eternal torment in Hell fire, or the virtues of worshiping the Virgin Mary or any other such doctrine in clear opposition to what the SDA Church stands for as an organized body. There are other Christian churches where such ideas would pose no problem for a paid representative to promote. It is just that the SDA Church is not one of these.
Why then is it some sort of “inquisition” or “witch hunt” or suppression of “freedom” when it comes to the expectation that those individuals employed as teachers within our Church should be held to this same standard with regard to certain pillars of the SDA faith? Teachers can promote anything and actively proselytize for any and all philosophical or doctrinal positions with impunity? – and expect to get paid by the SDA Church at the same time? Really?
I’m afraid that such individuals confuse the civil liberty of freedom of speech in this country with the expectation to be paid for their free speech by any particular organization. They forget that the rest of us also have the liberty to choose who we want to hire to represent us and to expect to actually get what we are paying for…
Sean Pitman
http://www.DetectingDesign.com
P.S. My father, Tui Pitman, says to tell you hi and that he remembers you as a sincere and intelligent student…
Sean Pitman Also Commented
Rewrite of fundamental belief 6 voted by NCC
@Larry Roberts:
The question was asked above, “Why were there so many opposed to the resolution?†I found myself asking the same question during the Constituency meeting. The debate on “Other Agenda Item†#3 was fascinating.
I agree with your critique of Agenda Item #3. It was poorly worded and went too far – as far as a suggested intrusion into one’s personal life. This is, hopefully, the primary reason why it was voted down. It was possible, however, to reword the proposal during the meeting, but no one had enough foresight to suggest such a thing – including me. Things happened so fast that it was hard to think of such things at the time. Perhaps such a reworded proposal can be introduced next time which will be more in line with your suggestions…
Until then, the LSU situation in still on the table and still needs to be addressed in a decided manner if the school, and perhaps even the Church, is to be saved from a severe fracture…
Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com
Rewrite of fundamental belief 6 voted by NCC
@Carl:
Note to Sean: When you respond, please point me to a short-history model that can be scientifically tested. You already know the list of events that it must explain in sequence, but you have never addressed that point. Simply saying that things can happen faster than the standard model claims is not sufficient.
This is not the proper thread for this particular discussion. See my response to your questions at the 3ABN thread:
http://www.educatetruth.com/media/educatetruth-com-promoted-on-3abn/comment-page-3/#comment-12669
Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com
Rewrite of fundamental belief 6 voted by NCC
@Carl:
Thanks, Eddie. I find it strange that we try to improve on Scripture.
This isn’t an effort to improve on the language of the Bible. It is, however, an effort to present a clear interpretation of what we think the biblical authors as a whole were trying to say about creation. Different people disagree on this. However, the SDA Church, as an organized body, has a specific belief in this regard which is considered to be a fundamental pillar of our faith…
Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com
Recent Comments by Sean Pitman
After the Flood
Thank you Ariel. Hope you are doing well these days. Miss seeing you down at Loma Linda. Hope you had a Great Thanksgiving!
The Flood
Thank you Colin. Just trying to save lives any way I can. Not everything that the government does or leaders do is “evil” BTW…
The Flood
Only someone who knows the future can make such decisions without being a monster…
Pacific Union College Encouraging Homosexual Marriage?
Where did I “gloss over it”?
Review of “The Naked Emperor” by Pastor Conrad Vine
I fail to see where you have convincingly supported your claim that the GC leadership contributed to the harm of anyone’s personal religious liberties? – given that the GC leadership does not and could not override personal religious liberties in this country, nor substantively change the outcome of those who lost their jobs over various vaccine mandates. That’s just not how it works here in this country. Religious liberties are personally derived. Again, they simply are not based on a corporate or church position, but rely solely upon individual convictions – regardless of what the church may or may not say or do.
Yet, you say, “Who cares if it is written into law”? You should care. Everyone should care. It’s a very important law in this country. The idea that the organized church could have changed vaccine mandates simply isn’t true – particularly given the nature of certain types of jobs dealing with the most vulnerable in society (such as health care workers for example).
Beyond this, the GC Leadership did, in fact, write in support of personal religious convictions on this topic – and there are GC lawyers who have and continue to write personal letters in support of personal religious convictions (even if these personal convictions are at odds with the position of the church on a given topic). Just because the GC leadership also supports the advances of modern medicine doesn’t mean that the GC leadership cannot support individual convictions at the same time. Both are possible. This is not an inconsistency.
