Wow! This does look promising. I hope and …

Comment on World Church moves to advance statements regarding creation by Sean Pitman.

Wow! This does look promising. I hope and pray that these important issues for the SDA Church today will indeed be substantively addressed by the GC – – especially when it comes to significantly clarifying the wording of SDA Fundamental Belief #6 on Creation.

Anything short of specifically addressing and updating the current ambiguous wording of FB#6, wording put in place by so called “progressive” men like Fritz Guy and Lawrence Geraty (who do not personally believe in or wish to uphold the literal nature of the creation week) will leave the SDA Church no better off.

After all, the GC has already put out a very clear statement in support of a literal 6-day creation (back in 2004) – a very clear statement that has been completely ignored by those at LSU and elsewhere who point to the weakness and claim ambiguity in the language of FB#6 as an excuse for their subversive actions against the Church’s historical position on this “Fundamental” Pillar of Faith…

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com

Sean Pitman Also Commented

World Church moves to advance statements regarding creation
@Bravus:

No, I’m implying that recent creationism is sinking. The mountains of evidence against it are so immense, and young people are becoming better and better educated in actually looking at the evidence.

You mean that more and more young people are being brainwashed to believe that mole hills are really mountains in order to support a theory which is the basis of intellectual atheism…

Millions of Christians all around the world are able to reconcile evolutionary theory with their faith, and the Sabbath can be established on God’s words and a symbolic creation story just as well as on a literal creation story and (b) despite the claims made loudly and frequently here, the evidence is as the evidence is.

If you make everything about your “Christian” faith symbolic, what is there that distinguishes your faith in the existence and personal care of God from a belief in garden fairies, Santa Claus, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Hmmmm? As far as I can tell, such social Christianity is no better than essential atheism when it comes to establishing a solid hope in anything.

It is as William Provine, late professor of biological sciences at Cornell University, explained in his very interesting speech for a 1998 Darwin Day keynote address. As part of this speech he noted:

Naturalistic evolution has clear consequences that Charles Darwin understood perfectly.

• No gods worth having exist;
• No life after death exists;
• No ultimate foundation for ethics exists;
• No ultimate meaning in life exists; and
• Human free will is nonexistent.

Provine, William B. [Professor of Biological Sciences, Cornell University], “Evolution: Free will and punishment and meaning in life”, Abstract of Will Provine’s 1998 Darwin Day Keynote Address.

Provine also wrote, “In other words, religion is compatible with modern evolutionary biology (and indeed all of modern science) if the religion is effectively indistinguishable from atheism.”

Academe January 1987, pp.51-52

It seems to me that Provine was right. Darwinian-style evolution is just one more argument for the philosophical position of “Naturalism” – a position that suggests that everything within the physical world, everything that we can see, touch, hear, taste, or smell, is ultimately the result of non-deliberate mindless forces of nature. These forces do not have feelings or care about you or me or our feelings regarding what they are or are not doing to us or for us.

Now, if you want to by into the basis of such a philosophy, you are certainly welcome. It is just very difficult to hold such a philosophical view and make your “Christianity” appear to be “reasonable” at the same time…

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com


World Church moves to advance statements regarding creation
Congratulations to Elder Ted N.C. Wilson. Our prayers are with you. God is leading His Church…

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com


Recent Comments by Sean Pitman

Dr. Aseem Malhotra: From Pro-Vax to Anti-Vax
Freedom of choice and being opposed to vaccines are two different issues. The fact is that Dr. Malhotra is strongly opposed to the mRNA vaccines against COVID-19, claiming that they are far more harmful than beneficial. That clearly makes him anti-vax. He’s not just arguing for personal freedom here, he’s directly arguing against the vaccine itself as being dangerous since he claims that it caused his own father’s heart attack. The problem is that the weight of scientific evidence doesn’t support Malhotra’s anti-vax claims.

Now, I’m happy to support your personal freedom to believe and do whatever you want to believe and do – as long as it does not substantially increase the risk of those around you. However, when it comes to spreading falsehoods and outright lies against the mRNA vaccines, I’m going to speak out against that and call it what it is – sensational nonsense being spread by those who are opposed to vaccines based on nothing more substantive than personal emotions. That’s just not a good basis for determining “standard of care” for medical practice.


Dr. Walter Veith and the anti-vaccine arguments of Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche
Natural immunity is great! In fact, natural immunity alone prevents approximately 10% of the population from becoming ill from all of the variants of COVID-19. The problem is that for a great many people, especially people older than 50, natural immunity just isn’t enough to prevent serious sickness and even death. The claim that the mRNA vaccines make people “more susceptible” simply isn’t true. While one can still get infected after vaccination, mRNA vaccines have clearly proven their ability to dramatically reduce the risks of serious illness from infection with a dramatic reduction in the rate or percentage of those who are vaccinated being hospitalized or dying (compared to those who are not vaccinated). Also, those who are vaccinated suffer much less severe long-term effects from infection.

In short, the overall risks of getting infected by COVID-19 are significantly greater, regarding any type of serious risk, as compared to getting vaccinated with the mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 – and these benefits of vaccination become greater and greater with age since natural immunity naturally declines with age.


Dr. Aseem Malhotra: From Pro-Vax to Anti-Vax
The strong anti-vaxx stance of many Adventists has been a big surprise to me as well! I just don’t get it. We’re supposed to be strong supporters of good cutting-edge advances in medical science…


Dr. Aseem Malhotra: From Pro-Vax to Anti-Vax
I think it’s even less common than that. However, when my boys were vaccinated, we did have the techs pull back on the syringe both times (Link). Myocarditis occurs about twice after every 100,000 injections. On top of that, research shows it’s typically mild and resolves quickly (Link).


Dr. Aseem Malhotra: From Pro-Vax to Anti-Vax
Maybe rarely…