« Of Fatwas And Beauty QueensHomeColin Farrell on Christianity »

Adventists revalidate belief in literal, 6-day creation

Miseducation

Seems odd that the Seventh-day Adventist Church would take so long a time to say what they knew they'd say all along: that the earth was created in six 24-hour days. Amusingly the Adventists have what the call the Geoscience Research Institute but which is nothing more than another creationist propaganda machine.

The church's statement came last month, after three years of special conferences on the issue of creation. It was approved at a meeting of the Adventists' 293-member Executive Committee at the Silver Spring, Md., headquarters of the church. The faith has 13.6 million members internationally and 936,000 in the United States.

Creationist ministry

Comments

6 literal 24 hour days, eh? Reminds me of Epicurius: Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? then he is impotent. Is he able but not willing? then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? then how come evil exist? Now to apply this to the subject at hand: Is God willing to create the universe in an instant, but not able? Then he is impotent. Is he able but not willing? Then he is a procrastinator. Is he both able and willing? Then why did the bible say it took six days? Thought I'd have some fun. Couldn't think of a better adjective for #2 though.
(In an attempt to offer balance, light hearted sarcasm is intended) Should young earth creationist just give up their position? Perhaps let the theory of evolution take over by default. Maybe they shouldn't offer the counter view which not so long ago was the primary view. After all “scientific discovery”, especially discoveries of the evolutionary kind have never been wrong. Both evolutionist and creationist share the same evidence and the same scientific methods. Why does the conscientious evolutionary scientist come up with such a different view as that of the conscientious creationary (is that a word?) scientist? (No jokes about oxymoron’s please?) My vote would be for theological bias. In theological terms, for the evolutionist, Science is every bit the religion that Adventism, Muslim or Catholicsm is. The differences being; the center of the religion (God, man, E=mc sq., 42, a prophet, me), the purpose of life, how does it end, and how did it start, etc. The evolutionist sees the knee as a marvel of nature. The creationist sees the knee as a masterpiece by a designer. If evolutionist sees the Geoscience Research Institute as propaganda machine in support of young earth. Then the creationist probably sees the entire US Education system as the same. Round and round it goes. Rereading the Scopes Trial seems so appropriate about now. It seemed to be a victory for evolution but an embarrassment to both science and creationists. Personally, I am glad the Adventists took as long as they did. Perhaps in that time they were able to give a fair analysis of the volumes of Scientific data, Biblical interpretation, and some of that other important stuff. Frankly, I am surprised they responded in as short a time as they did. The ramifications of an abrupt response would affect their educational and medical institutions as well as the ideology of (what was it?) 13 million people. In response to the comment that God is impotent because he won’t destroy evil I offer the following… In a home with children it would be nice if the children would obey there parents out of love and respect, but I have yet been in a home where the children didn’t disobey. Now should the parent kick the child out of the home, spank the child, or for the extreme – kill the child. What affect would those actions have on the other children. In my home it was I better obey or else Dad will introduce my backside to his belt. My obedience no longer came from love and trust but rather fear. Obedience from fear leads to the spirit of rebellion. So from my readings of the Bible, I think that is why God did not destroy Satan. Not impotence, rather love for the individual and love for freedom of choice. Gods actions would impact the rest of the universe and its inhabitants. A literal six days, why not? Why not 6 pico seconds? If you question the literalness of six days then does that lead to questioning the entire Bible? If the first chapter isn’t literal then should the gospels be viewed as metaphors? But there is a fossil record so to speak (archeology) that proves the historical accounts of the Bible. No human as ever seen an act of macro-evolution. No human has ever seen a designer create a planet. Hmmmmmmmmm? Well that should be enough esoteric rambling for one night.

How do you feel?

Feel free to share your feelings about Adventists revalidate belief in literal, 6-day creation. Please stick to the theme of the entry. Disagreement is fine. Homophobia, racism, and kindred expressions of hatred will be deleted. This site is one of my hobbies. I genuinely enjoy hearing from people and hate moderating or killing comments. Forthright disagreement is fine as long as it is civil.
My thanks,
Richard