GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
yes

GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
Bill “How inane would it be to claim an apple tree is not an apple tree unless and until it has apples on it?”

Bill,

Comparing babies and apple trees is a bit more inane than comparing apples and oranges.

BTW,

“The ONLY DEFINITION FOR SIN that we have in the Bible is that it is the transgression of the law… IT CONDEMNS EVERY SIN, AND REQUIRES EVERY VIRTUE.” E.G. White, ST, March 3, 1890 par. 3.

If it is a sin to possess a fallen nature then there must be a law against it. Has God given a law forbidding anyone from being conceived with a fallen human nature? If there ever was a law that was impossible to keep, this would be it, for how could one choose not to violate it before one existed?!

GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
Ethan,

IMHO,

No statement was necessary.

In fact I consider it thoughtless.

FB#6 should have absolutely no effect on their ability to support the world church and perform work faithfully and with integrity.

GC Delegates Vote to Tighten Language of Fundamental #6 on Creation
@Bill Sorensen:

Bill,

Sin is transgression of the law.

Where does it say being born is a sin?

God and Granite Cubes
Nima Arkani Hamed and others have proposed over 1e500 universes because fewer of them would not obviate fine-tuning. Why believe in them? As a New Scientist writer has explained:

But the main reason for believing in an ensemble of universes is that it could explain why the laws governing our Universe appear to be so finely turned for our existence … This fine-tuning has two possible explanations. Either the Universe was designed specifically for us by a creator or there is a multitude of universes — a multiverse.

Cosmologists deserve credit for making the choice so clear. In that spirit, Discover Magazine offers the multiverse as “Science’s Alternative to an Intelligent Creator” (2008).

It matters that this stuff is considered “science” today.

(Link)

@george: