The seven days of creation are suffering with increasing numbers of theologians and science teachers in our institutions favouring theistic evolution. It is unreported, and the Faith-Science conferences - which are a continuing annual event - reported in favour of the fundamental belief in a 7 day creation (mustn't forget that the Sabbath also was created...), but the thoughts in class rooms and lecture theatres are supportive of the alternative.

But then the belief in the Bible as final authority is attacked from many angles.

Daryl, how would the statement "the Adventist church's interpretation of the infallible Bible are fallible," (not wrong but fallible) differ from the statement "the Adventist declaration that the Bible is infallible is fallible?"

Can we realistically say that a statement of doctrine is infallible but an interpretation by the same group that made the statement is fallible?

Colin I share your concern about the creation/evolution issue. Any deviation from the literal 7 day creation story undermines the cornerstone of all our beliefs indeed our very identity as the Seventh-day Adventist church hinges on this belief and it is a requirement for membership. There can be nothing that the devil would like more than to have our church turn it's back on this most fundamental of all our beliefs. Tonight at a service for my father one of our churches top theologians will be speaking, I'm tempted to take him aside and question him about the issue and what is being done about it. I realize this a bit OT Daryl but I think it directly relates to the topic.

Redfog

Colin, are you familiar with the proposals of Dr. Russell Humphreys, an SDA scientist who has done some work in this area of origins. IMO, he has a very plausible scenerio. It is well laid out in his book Starlight and Time.

No, but, while he appears to have a positive presence on the web, I am aware of Dr Kent Hovind, also a physicist - south of the border where you are, though Dr Colin Mitchell, whom we have in SE England here, warned me off the meteor scenario for causing the flood and seasons; both these geologists are young-earthers. When he's not teaching, Mitchell is a consultant to the UN on soil geography. He's revised his book, now Creationism Revisited.

You should be aware that the Adventist Geoscience Research Institute is staffed by young-earth geologists....There's a good number of young-earthers out there

Nearly all statements about the Bible are necessarily fallible since humans are, too. Prove all things, it says, so even doctrinal wording is up for testing, but the Bible texts are priviledged. The only commentary which is part-priviledged is the SOP commentary and testimonies: they have to be tested by Scripture, but have a presumption of accuracy. See bottom of post for an infallible human statement regarding this thread.

In view of the second topic on this thread, I should point out the theological difference between infallible and inerrant. Infallible is the Bible's content on salvation. Inerrant is the Bible's content on history and science. Whether we opt for both is the next question after Daryl's clarified question - which is clearly still under discussion.

Back to SOP, the ongoing doctrinal dispute about Jesus' two natures involves proofs from both Scripture and SOP. Still, we don't formally apply "infallible" to Ellen White's writings, but we do say they are "authoritative", since her authority of office is Biblical, via prophetic fulfilment, but she is not Biblical. All other Adventist published commentaries are generally agreed but not automatically binding, and so subject to discussion.

The Bible's infallibility is both traditional and professed, so is the cornerstone of belief, to answer Darius' point. God's truth in written word earns itself infallibility since it is recognised as absolute truth. Our affirmation of that infallibility, while all humans are fallible, would be an infallible statement of an unchanging & unchangeable truth.

[ December 24, 2005, 06:43 PM: Message edited by: Colin ]

I see, from reading other threads, that this is still an issue.

Still an issue though of how many people here?

Is Darius the only one, or are there others here?

The devil is in the details.

What do you mean by the devil is in the details?