Archive for November, 2009
“The foundations of scientific materialism are in the process of crumbling. In Signature in the Cell, philosopher of science Stephen C. Meyer shows how the digital code in DNA points powerfully to a designing intelligence behind the origin of life. The book will be published on June 23 by HarperOne. Unlike previous arguments for intelligent design, Signature in the Cell presents a radical and comprehensive new case, revealing the evidence not merely of individual features of biological complexity but rather of a fundamental constituent of the universe: information. That evidence has been mounting exponentially in recent years, known to scientists in specialized fields but largely hidden from public view. A Cambridge University-trained theorist and researcher, director of the Discovery Institute�s Center for Science and Culture, Dr. Meyer is the first to bring the relevant data together into a powerful demonstration of the intelligence that stands outside nature and directs the path life has taken. …” Read More: http://www.signatureinthecell.com/about-the-book.php
“A pro-life movement seeking to guarantee basic human rights to unborn babies is exploding in 32 states and leaders say it could be just the key to nullifying abortion provisions in President Obama’s health-care “reform.” While abortion was not specifically mentioned in earlier bills under consideration, H.R.3962, unveiled by Nancy Pelosi this week, does in fact state abortion is to be covered. Concerns are mounting that whatever the final form of the legislation, the procedure will become more accessible, requiring health insurance companies to fund abortions. Gualberto Garcia Jones is director of Personhood Colorado and a legal analyst for Personhood USA, a grassroots Christian organization that seeks to legally define every unborn baby as a “person” protected by God-given and constitutionally protected rights, including the right to life. His organization was set up to support personhood efforts across America through legislation and constitutional amendments. …” Read More: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=114423
“Maryland Senator Ben Cardin met with staff members, physicians, and administrators at Washington Adventist Hospital (WAH) in Takoma Park, Maryland, to learn more about the hospital’s collaboration with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on medical and scientific research, an effort that seeks to improve access to healthcare and promote public health.
Norton Elson, scientific liaison to the FDA/Washington Adventist Hospital collaboration, and Mark Turco, director of WAH’s Center for Cardiac and Vascular Research, briefed Senator Cardin on some areas of collaboration with the FDA, including cardiac, critical care, and oncology.
During the visit, Cardin complimented the work WAH does on prevention and wellness and expanding healthcare access in the community through free health screenings, educational outreach, as well as the relocation of the hospital to a new White Oak campus and reuse of the existing Takoma Park campus. The relocation is expected to takes several years to complete. …” Read More: http://www.adventistreview.org/article.php?id=2928
I wrote the article listed below many years ago when George Bush Jr. was running for the White House and published it in my http://sdaforum.com web site. As I was reviewing the material I had previously written, I could not resist the temptation of sharing this old news item with the potential readers of this new forum I am in the process of building from scratch. I decided to republish it here because it reflects what is still taking place in some abortion clinics. In the event you take the time to read it, I wonder whether you might take the time to give me some feedback on it.
What saddens me is that my own church policy justifies the killing of innocent human beings under a variety of circumstances. If you have any doubt about this, I suggest that you read our Adventists “Guidelines on Abortion.” This alarming situation prompted me to devote half of my working time to do something about this anomaly. The result was my doctoral dissertation which you can access online at the following Internet address: http://sdaforum.com/page13.html . The investigation revealed that our Adventist pioneers were definitely pro-life. This situation was altered when the State of Hawaii decided to legalize abortion back in 1970.
The non Adventist physicians at our Castle Memorial Hospital demanded the right to provide elective abortion services to their patients, and the church leadership yielded to the pressure for fear of having to suffer a significant financial loss. Profit ruled the day from that day on, and our church shifted its position on abortion from pro-life to pro-choice. What a sad story!
*********
“Many times I wondered what happened when an abortion procedure failed and the baby was born alive. Common sense dictates that such a baby would be entitled to the protection of the law. Is this the case? I don’t think so. A few months ago I was talking with a respectable physician who answered this question for me. She related the traumatic experience of a botched abortion procedure in behalf of a mother of five children who had a hard time taking care of them. When she discovered she was pregnant again, both the woman and her physician reasoned that an abortion was the right answer under the circumstances, and the procedure was scheduled. Unfortunately, the poison failed to perform its intended job, and the baby was born alive. What do you thing happened then? Was the baby provided the emergency care it needed and to which it was entitled to by law? Not a chance! How can a physician engaged in the art of killing suddenly shift to a healing mode? The baby was doomed to die, and die it did!
The Baby Hope Case
A couple of weeks ago, I received a fax from the Pro-Life Infonet Weekly containing a report of the “Baby Hope” case, which took place in Cincinnati last year. This baby girl was accidentally born at approximately 22 weeks while the attending physician was performing a partial birth abortion, a procedure designed to kill the baby instants before it is fully born. This girl lived for three hours without the help of an incubator. Do you think that the doctor made an attempt at saving the baby’s life? Not a chance! It was doomed to die, because the attending physician, trained in the art of healing, was engaged in the art of killing. The baby’s mother was psychologically in a killing mood as well. Consequently, no effort was made to provide the emergency care wanted babies are routinely offered. Was the doctor prosecuted for denying emergency care to a dying patient? Not by a long shot. He continued doing what he relishes doing: killing more babies, but making sure he does within the limits prescribed by the law, which is before they are fully born.
The Born Alive Infant Protection Act
When the “Supreme Court overturned a pro-life Nebraska law banning partial birth abortions, Rep. Charles Canady decided it was time for congressional action. He introduced the “HR 4292, The Born Alive Infant Protection Act of 2000,” designed to protect the insensitive destruction of children who survive the partial birth abortion procedure. If passed and implemented, it would require medical personnel to provide appropriate emergency medical care to such infants. This legislation has full support from the National Right to Life, as well as from many other pro-life organizations. During the congressional hearings, Canady argued that, unless the law specifically offers legal protection for those accidentally born alive as a result of a botched abortion, very soon abortionists would be delivering babies and killing them afterwards. It would be much simpler for them, and probably less risky for the mother! Such a legal provision would unmistakably equate an infant born alive with a “person,” and a “human being.”
Post-Birth Abortions
This may sound like an oxymoron, but there are ethicists who are already talking about “post-birth abortions,” where parents and physicians would be granted a month or so to decide if a born-alive baby was entitled to life. The term abortion would be redefined to include the killing of “disabled or unhealthy newborn babies” up to a month or so after birth. One of those ethicists advancing such an extreme interpretation of abortion is Peter Singer, from Princeton University. If you think this is far fetched, consider the recent case in Great Britain, where a judge overruled the parents’ desire to save the life of a 19-month-old child affected with a lung disease. In spite of the parents’ legal fight to preserve the life of their child, the presiding judge sided with the physicians who thought otherwise, and the sick child became a ward of the state.
A Major Election Campaign Issue
This is why a major coming presidential election campaign issue will be the future composition of the Supreme Court. Some of the members of the high court are getting rather old. John Stevens is 80, and William Rehnquist is 75. Besides, Sandra O’Connor and Ruth Bader are cancer survivors. This means that the next president might have the power to influence the future composition of the Supreme Court for decades to come. Al Gore, who flip-flopped on the abortion issue, is determined to be the one granted the privilege of appointing future members of the high court in order to help women preserve their right to poison or dismember their unborn children at will without any unwanted interference from the government. He is greatly concerned that “one extra vote on the wrong side … would change the outcome and a woman’s right to choose would be taken away.” George Bush, is also determined to become the next occupant of the White House, knowing full well that it would allow him to alter the composition of the Supreme Court in the opposite direction, thus favoring the pro-life agenda. As you can see, the life of future generations is at stake on the outcome of the next presidential election.”
The God’s Wrath Dilemma
Last evening I received a telephone call from a friend of mine who is in the process of listening to Dr. Graham Maxwell’s Sabbath School tapes. For many decades, Maxwell held his Loma Linda University Church Sabbath School listeners spellbound with his unique understanding of God’s wrath, and I had the privilege of sitting and participating in his SS school discussions.
To my judgment he is one of the greatest theologians I had ever known, and he was the son of the author of the well-known Bedtime Stories which I used to read to my three children when they were small. Maxwell was a master in the one-to-one-debate, and he would allow his SS students to engage him in a lively exchange of opinions and arguments.
The Problem
The caller told me that he had a problem agreeing with Dr. Maxwell’s interpretation of God’s wrath. I asked him why, and he responded that Maxwell seemed to be unwilling to accept a literal reading of the Bible. Of course, there are several passages of Scripture where we find clear and unmistakable allusions to God’s wrath, and our view of the Cross and the Plan of Salvation is, of course, contingent on the way we interpret such biblical texts.
It is a fact that the Bible does speak about God’s love, and it also makes allusion to God’s anger and wrath. In fact the number of allusions to God’s wrath is almost equal to the references to God’s love. I counted 13 allusions to God’s love and 12 references to God’s wrath. Can we ignore the clear biblical references to God’s displeasure towards sin? Perhaps we can, but we should not. If we do, we will be guilty of distorting the true Gospel of salvation.
The Traditional Understanding of God’s Wrath
The traditional understanding of the Gospel is as follows: God hates sin and he must punish the sinner because justice must be met. The penalty for transgression of God’s Law is death; the sinner must die. Out of love and compassion for the sinner, God poured his anger and wrath upon his own Son in order to meet the demands of justice, which allowed him to offer forgiveness of sins to those who repent of their transgression. Jesus, the son of God took the penalty for transgression upon himself that sinners might live.
Can Justice Demand Injustice?
This understanding of the reason for the death of Jesus creates certain moral problems, and Dr, Maxwell used to illustrate this as follows: What would you think of a father whose son was guilty of a terrible offense. Suppose the guilty boy repented of his crime and asked for forgiveness. Would it make sense for the father to say to him: “Son, I am willing to forgive you for what you have done, but justice must be met. You have a little brother who is innocent of any crime. If we agree to kill him, this would allow me to forgive you for your transgression.
Would such a manner of administering justice make things right? Does the death of the innocent undo the injustice perpetrated towards someone? Can justice be restored by another unjust act? Can the killing of the innocent restore legal equity? Can God’s anger and wrath be appeased by another criminal act? Was the death of Jesus a requirement for the forgiveness of sins? Did God say to sinners: “I will be willing to forgive your transgressions provided you kill my Son”?
Some enigmatic Biblical Texts
Some biblical texts seem to suggest that such was in fact the case. Here are some examples: “In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.” [Heb. 9:22]; “In order to free us from this present evil world, Christ took the punishment for our sins, because that was what our God and Father wanted.” [Gal. 1:4]; “This is God’s purpose for you: because Jesus himself underwent punishment for you, giving you an example, so that you might go in his footsteps:” [1 Pet. 2:21]
Did God Pour his Wrath Upon his Son?
How can we solve this dilemma? Shall we interpret these verses in a literal manner? My friend who called me last evening is of the opinion that we should. The Bible seems to require this; rejecting a simple and literal reading of these biblical texts seem to be evidence that we are attempting to twist the true meaning of Holy Writ. Can we set aside the notion that God did pour in fact his anger and wrath towards sin by venting his frustration and displeasure on his own Son? Did God shower his fury on Jesus as the only remedy for transgression?
God’s Personal Testimony About Jesus
As I listened to my friend, the first thing which came to my mind were the following texts of the Bible: “After being baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove and lighting on Him, and behold, a voice out of the heavens said, ‘This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well-pleased.’” [Matt. 3:16-17]; “Peter said to Jesus, ‘Lord, it is good for us to be here; if You wish, I will make three tabernacles here, one for You, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah.’ While he was still speaking, a bright cloud overshadowed them, and behold, a voice out of the cloud said, ‘This is My beloved Son, with whom I am well-pleased; listen to Him!’” [Matt. 17:4-5]
Searching for a Solution
So I quoted these two verses to my friend and asked him: “How can we reconcile these apparently contradictory statements? How can we say that God poured his anger towards sin on Jesus, when God himself testified twice that he was his “beloved Son” with whom he was “well pleased”? Can we read these apparently contradictory statements in a literal manner? Should we ignore what God declared about his Son from heaven in order to be able to interpret what Paul and Peter stated in a literal way? Is there a way to solve this problematic enigma? Let’s consider for a moment one of the most prominent Messianic descriptions of the work of Jesus Christ found in the Bible:
What Can we Learn from the Classic Messianic Prophecy?
“He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering. Like one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows, yet we considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted. But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed.” [Is. 53:3-5]
Notice the following details: The Messiah was “despised and rejected by men;” we [not God] “esteemed him not;” we [not God] “considered him stricken by God, smitten by him, and afflicted.” Now the question: Was the Messiah “despised and rejected” by God? Was he “stricken,” “smitten,” and “afflicted” by God or by men? It was us who despised and rejected him; it was us who “esteemed him not;” it was us who “despised” him; it was us who “considered him “stricken by God;” In light of these clear statements from Scripture, should we not perhaps stop blaming God for what we did? After all, it was us, sinful human beings, who killed the Author of life.
There is much more on this issue. If time permits, I might expand on this topic in the future.
A few years ago, when I was working on my doctoral dissertation, one day I decided to visit the Loma Linda University Library’s “Heritage Room.” I was looking for material which had been published in our Adventist periodicals dealing with the issue of abortion. I was appalled by the scarcity of articles that had been published in recent years. Then it occurred to me to check the number of articles that had been published during the same time span on the Sabbath. I was floored.
Here is the result: I counted 242 articles dealing with the issue of abortion listed in our Adventist Periodical Index between 1971 and 2006. Now compare this with the number of articles dealing with our favorite subject, the Sabbath. I located 21,324 articles dealing with said topic for the 1971-2006 years in our Periodical Index, which means that for every topic dealing with abortion we published 88 topics on the Sabbath. This fact seems to suggest that for us the most important subject is sacred time; human life is not. Evidently, our focus lately has been on the sacredness of holy time, while neglecting the importance of the sacredness of human life.
Another interesting discovery was that I found 144 articles dealing with the issue of abortion between 1984 and 1993, while during the following decade the number was reduced to 30. This is significant; it reveals the effect of the publication of a comment in our official “Ministry” magazine putting an end to the readers’ comments on abortion and the publication of two pro-choice Adventist books: one by David Larson, “Abortion: Ethical Issues and Options,” and another authored by James Walters entitled “What is a Person.”
What followed was a dead silence on the issue. Several pro-life leaders left the Adventist denomination in disgust because they felt that they could no longer support the Adventist Church’s altered position on abortion. They concluded that leaving the Adventist community was the only ethical response if they wanted to avoid having their hands stained with the blood of the innocents. I almost did the same, but decided against such a move when I realized that there was no community of faith which was still faithful to both the Fourth and the Sixth Commandment of the Decalogue.
I am glad I remained an Adventist because this gives me a chance to say now to my fellow Adventists: Let’s focus on human life. Focusing on the Sabbath with the exclusion of the Sixth Commandment places us in danger of imitating the Jewish leaders who two thousand years ago crucified the Author of Life and then rushed to keep God’s Sabbath holy.
Ignoring root of ‘honor killings’ [is] dangerous. A bestselling author and critic of Islam says a recent “honor killing” in Arizona illustrates that authorities need to come to grips with the Muslim problem in America. Noor Faleh Almaleki, 20-year-old daughter to Faleh Hassan Almaleki, was placed in a hospital October 20, the day police say her father ran her and her boyfriend’s mother down with his Jeep. The incident happened while the women were walking across a parking lot in the west Phoenix suburb of Peoria. Almaleki died from her injuries Monday, having been in a coma nearly two weeks following the mishap. The woman who accompanied her is expected to survive. Faleh Hassan Almaleki, 48, fled after the attack on his daughter, but was arrested Thursday when he arrived at Atlanta’s airport, where he was sent from the United Kingdom after authorities denied him entrance. … Read More: http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=753150
Scientists Find that the Alps Erode at the Same Speed They Rise. A group of German and Swiss geocientists working with the Helmholtz Association of German Research Centres has made a paradoxical discovery – the Alps are growing in height just as fast as they are shrinking. The result correlates the mountain activity with climate. The Alps came about by the collision of the African and European continents which began some 55 million years ago. The famed mountain range most likely gained its greatest height millions of years ago as a result of this tectonic activity. In their measurements over the past decades, however, scientists have discovered that the Alpine summits grow up to a millimeter annually when compared with the low land. But researchers from the GFZ German Research Centre for Geosciences determined that the mountains eroded simultaneously at almost the same speed as they grew. … Read More: http://www.germany.info/Vertretung/usa/en/__PR/GIC/2009/11/12__Alps__PM.html
Supporters of an effort to require Riverside’s La Sierra University to teach Biblical creationism alongside evolution in biology classes say the university’s vow to promote creationist beliefs does not go far enough in addressing their concerns. More than 6,300 people from across the country have signed an online petition expressing concern that evolution is presented as fact at La Sierra and other Seventh-day Adventist universities. La Sierra’s board of trustees last week unanimously voted to endorse Adventist beliefs that the world was created in six 24-hour days and said the teaching of evolution must be “within the context of the Adventist belief regarding creation.” Wisbey said the role of the board is to provide general oversight of La Sierra, not to determine how each professor teaches each class. … Read More: http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_S_lasierra18.2f5fedb.html
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-South Carolina) in a Judiciary Committee hearing last week asked Attorney General Eric Holder a question that the nation’s top cop could not answer. Graham asked: “Can you give me a case in United States history where a[n] enemy combatant caught on a battlefield was tried in civilian court?” The inquiry was followed by an extensive silence before Holder attempted to answer, and the attorney general could only verbalize: “I don’t know. I’d have to look at that. I think that, you know, the determination I’ve made….” before Graham sternly cut him off in mid-sentence. “We’re making history here, Mr. Attorney General,” Graham stated. “I’ll answer it for you. The answer is ‘no.’” … Read More: http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=778156
“Schools let students seek secret abortions. SACRAMENTO � A 12-year-old girl is prohibited from bringing aspirin to California public schools without a note from her mother or father � but in many California districts she may sign herself out of classes, leave her junior-high campus without parental permission, secretly have an abortion and return to school before the end of the day � and her own family may be none the wiser.
Parents and educators across the state have been in heated debate over school policies allowing children to be excused during class time without parental notification for “confidential medical services” such as abortions, birth control, and drig and mental health services. …” Read More: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=116315
The Manhattan Declaration Regarding Human Life. WASHINGTON (BP)–A diverse group of Christian leaders joined together Nov. 20 to declare a commitment to defend the sanctity of human life, biblical marriage and religious liberty without compromise. In a 4,700-word statement named the Manhattan Declaration, about 150 evangelical, Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox signers said they were coming together to “embrace our obligation” to speak and act in support of the dignity of all human beings, marriage as the union of a man and a woman, and the freedom to express religious convictions.
“[W]e will not comply with any edict that purports to compel our institutions to participate in abortions, embryo-destructive research, assisted suicide and euthanasia, or any other anti-life act,” the statement says, “nor will we bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships, treat them as marriages or the equivalent, or refrain from proclaiming the truth, as we know it, about morality and immorality and marriage and the family. We will fully and ungrudgingly render to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.” … Read More: http://www.bpnews.net/BPnews.asp?ID=31736
Hacked e-mails reveal global-warming fraud? Officials at a key global warming research center in the United Kingdom have authenticated a series of e-mails and other documents apparently taken from their computer system by a hacker, but they cannot explain what scientists in internal exchanges meant by references to a “trick” that would “hide the decline” of global temperatures nor by instructions to delete contrary data. Author James Delingpole writes in a London Telegraph column the most damaging revelations indicate climate-change scientists may have “manipulated or suppressed evidence in order to support their cause.” U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, has urged members of Congress to consider the joint opinion of nearly 32,000 scientists, including more than 9,000 Ph.D.s, who believe humans likely have little or nothing to do with any “global warming.” … Read More: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=116657