A Retired Pastor’s Response to the 2015 GC Session Actions
by Lawrence Downing, July 14, 2015: The actions taken at the recent GC session generated a wide variety of responses. There are people who view the voted actions as evidence that the church is finally aligned with God’s will. Others read the same actions and conclude the church is no longer a good fit for them. Still others take a wait-and-see attitude. As a retired pastor with more than four decades under my belt, I am grateful I carry the “Retired” label. When a majority of the GC delegates voted NO on the motion to allow each division to decide whether to ordain women, the task of adding new members to the church, retaining present members and impacting younger people took on imposing challenge. Add to this action the requirement that a “true” Adventist, as defined by the Fundamental Beliefs, holds to a short-earth chronology and believes that creation took place in six literal 24-hour days and the challenge exponentially increases. The statement that marriage is between one man and one woman will alienate another segment of our population.
Now that the revised 2015 Fundamental Beliefs document has taken on an official life of its own, men and women who pastor local congregations question their place in the Adventist church. Competent, dedicated pastors are giving thoughtful attention to whether they should pursue other careers. Sure, write these off as those who are among the “Sifted,” as in “The Sifting Time.” Foolish talk! The church will pay a heavy price if we lose even one person as a consequence of voted actions that lack clear biblical authority and violate fundamental human freedoms. It would be well to consider this: In the graduate program of a school of business, I taught that one of the fundamental roles of management is to be certain that those who represent the company are sold on the product. If the salespeople do not think they offer a superior product, trouble awaits. I believe there is ample evidence that the men and women who represent the Adventist church are not proud of the recent actions their church took and a significant number do not believe they are part of a superior organization. If this is correct, trouble awaits.
Put yourself in the position of the minister who has kept up on developments in cosmology, geology, anthropology, theology and other sciences. Now he or she is to deny the findings that are reported in respectable science and religious journals? Is the pastor to ignore what she or he believes? Be less-than-truthful and affirm what is not believed? Or is the pastor to address current understandings and support and guide parishioners as they seek to reconcile biblical teachings with contemporary issues? The Fundamental Belief document thwarts the last option, an option that some might suggest is the best of the three.
What is the appropriate pastoral response to an action that violates his/her moral values and the spirit and practice that he or she believes is consistent with the teachings and actions of the Christ she or he serves? For many pastors, the denial of ordination to women colleagues is immoral and is inconsistent with basic Christian values! The GC actions on these matters, I believe, erects an unnecessary barrier that inhibits pastoral fulfillment, growth and satisfaction; challenges membership retention and diminishes the number of potential new converts who might otherwise be attracted to the Adventist message. If the GC administrative team have as their objectives the disruption of life in the local parish, the alienation of thoughtful men and women, both among pastor and people in the pew, and the suppression of moral values, they have successfully implemented an effective plan that has high probability for success. And these are the same people who have time and again assured pastors “We are here to help you!” If what they have done is help, then dole out the obstructions! Time will tell how the final chapter plays out.
as a sociologist I think the church in North America is playing a radical ferminist agenda.where has this surge of women ordination come from all of a sudden. as retired minister you mean it has taken you 40 years to study and conclude that women are denied their fundamental freedoms.
Where did the surge in abolitionist feeling for our SDA Pioneers in their day come from, when there had been slavery for thousands of years, back into NT and then older OT times?
It is muddled with secular teachings and ideals. The truth can’t possibly exist in that environment.
“Competent, dedicated pastors are giving thoughtful attention to whether they should pursue other careers”
Well said Lawrence. The SDA Church is just lucky that there is no real other viable large-scale Church denomination that teach and uphold BOTH of the following two very distinct beliefs: i) the seventh-day Sabbath; and ii) state of the dead.
I suspect even our most disheartened pastors still strongly support these two core distinctive teachings. One might disagree with the Adventist teaching (or disagree with its emphasis) on women’s ordination, the age of the earth or treated of LGBT people in the pews, but that is a far cry from simply giving up the Sabbath and working as a minister on a Sunday.
If there was such another large viable Sabbath-keeping denomination, the current SDA Church would be in real big trouble. Perhaps in China and Brazil, where there are such alternatives, then the results might be interesting.
Other denominations are not so lucky. If you were say a Methodist and went through this experience it would be relatively easier to jump ship.
I know a pastor who during the Ford Fiasco, resigned and took a job as youth pastor in a very large church in the same city. Are you suggesting that in accepting that position he would violate the Sabbath Commandment by worshiping God on Sunday?
While the SdA church has a very strong principle of observing the 7th day of the week, for most churches the day one worships is far down the list of important doctrines, but WHO one worships. God never commanded only one day of worship; and rest was to be on the 7th day–which for observers of Sunday it is simply the day of celebration that began with the Resurrection, not lying in the tomb. Maybe that is why the restrictions and prohibition surrounding Sabbath from its very beginning have prevented the joy that was experienced after the Resurrection.
When we can recognize that making a day of worship so restrictive and of salvific importance, all joy has been robbed for many Christians of the real reason there is Christianity: the Resurrection and NOT Sabbath from the Jewish Law which was never given to Gentile Christians.
Elaine I am just trying to state the obvious. I doubt even most liberal-progressive SDA pastors would feel comfortable taking a job in a Sunday-keeping church, where to do so would be their implicit aborgation of the Sabbath. Some may be ok with doing that, like your friend, but I suspect many would not.
The rest of your comment gets into a merits discussion about the Sabbath. I wasn’t making a merits claim.
I was simply making a practical observation. Regardless of the merits of your point about the Sabbath not mattering, my point is most SDA pastors, even liberal-progressive ones, do think the Sabbath matters.
My observation was to point out the SDA Church is lucky about that. If there was another large Sabbath-keeping Church, then the current GC leadership might be in trouble.
I think it would be possible to keep the Sabbath on Saturday and still work as a pastor on Sunday. I can’t think of an Bible injunction against worshiping God on Sunday as long as we still treat the seventh day as the Sabbath.
Just a thought.
Not good Theology.
I am so thankful I did not grow up to celebrate the day my Sunday School teacher saved me from drowning.
But grew to learn that LIFE was a awesome gift from God with it’s incredible potential, possibilities beyond the wildest dreams of a mere lad just having fun at the beach with his siblings.
If that which was already – from the Creation was not “Very Good” and worth keeping their would have been no cross.
From the foundations of the world God’s mind blowing generous acts of creating and Creation with ALL of it’s constituent parts was already “VERY GOOD”!!
“The Lamb slain from the Foundation of the world”
Absolutely underscores that.
And what happened at Calvary validated God’s eternal purpose.
Lawrence you have presented a thoughtful analysis of what our church is facing in 2015 and beyond. Some may read your article and consider responding as a member of a church or a group. For me the only way I can respond is individually. God wil hold me personally accountable. My response is to ask myself as an individual, “do I serve a living God.?”. And if I serve a living God, then it means I will take Him everywhere I go. It will affect everything I do. It will affect my relationships. It will affect my ethics. It will affect my work. It will affect my play. It will affect the way I think. It will affect the way I live. It will affect the way I vote. It will affect the way I participate and do church. It will affect everything I do. Because if Jesus is not Lord of all, then He is not Lord at all. That is what we need a lot more of today. How we need men and women of conviction. We need men and women of purpose, people who will say, “This is right. I don’t care if it is popular. I don’t care if a vote went one way. Truth cannot be found by a plurality. I have to do what is right.” The WO issue will help me to define and distinguish what my values are and how I respect women in ministry. The outcome in San Antonio was a mistake. Be a man, be a woman, of purpose. Be a man, be a woman, of conviction. As Philip P. Bliss wrote in his classic hymn, “Dare to be a Daniel, dare to stand alone! Dare to have a purpose firm! Dare to make it known.”
The ultimate significance of the “Statement of Beliefs” is that it becomes a standard by which pastors, teachers, other employees, and members, are defined as moral or immoral. To blindly follow those criteria by checking one’s knowledge and integrity at the church door, is to deny Truth as one has come to know it. To paraphrase Ellen White’s philosophy of education, the purpose of learning/thinking is to equip students to be open-minded in their discovery of what is true, to honor truth and integrity, and not “merely be reflectors of other men’s thoughts.”
I don’t recall any exceptions. I recall Graham Maxwell’s interpretation of this principle–“Be willing to have the courage to follow truth wherever it leads you, regardless of the consequences.” In retrospect from my 80th year of life, those ideas mean as much to me as anything I hold dear. Sadly, it would seem the current GC leadership would demonize what I would call my greatest value in life–my integrity.
Greetings to my old friends in this thread.
Thanks for the Graham Maxwell quote. I sat in his Greek class in 58 for one quarter (went to Union after that where Mervyn was my teacher of Greek) at PUC but didn’t hear his statement in this regard. Remember you there, too.
As the song says, “there is wisdom born of pain”. So good to connect with you Bruce through this thread. We hear a lot these days of the Wounded Warriors” veterans who have served in the Armed Forces of USA. We are asked to give them our support and respect. I wonder how many “Wounded Warriors/Wounded Healers (like Nouwen defined it) we have who have fought the good fight, sometimes a “lover’s quarrel” with the church and survived. We are all on this incredible journey. Thank you for being a mentor and friend in mine. Sam Geli
Lawrence,
If a pastor leaves their position or any member of the church leaves because of a particular vote taken at a General Conference session, I ask what other deeper issues were already lurking under the surface of their spiritual turmoil where that single action caused them to make such a decision. That people would make such decisions should cause us to question the real spiritual strength we are cultivating in our members and see that we are growing people who are strong in theology but failing to nurture real relationships with God or them discovering the empowerment of the Holy Spirit. It exposes the failure of the church as much as the failure of the individual.
It is not brother Lawrence’s possible “failures” as an individual that we as a church have a problem with going forward, that is between him and God. William Noel has gone to the proverbial “something else is hiding underneath” route to minimize what the points are for us to ponder in his personal reaction to the GC gathering. Stay with the ideas and pass on innuendo.
Grieving. It is now almost certain that in spite of the friendly, inclusive churches they now attend as children and early teens, my grandchildren will be the last Hansons baptized before abandoning the church as adults.
I’m in that same position, Andy.
It’s already difficult enough to continue to expect my grandchildren to be active in church. They’re being wooed away by a multitude of other activities.
When they begin to seriously study the “28 Beliefs” I’m afraid they’ll say, It’s Not For Me.
“For many pastors, the denial of ordination to women colleagues is immoral and is inconsistent with basic Christian values!”
And conversely those who believe ordination of women violates both the spirit and letter of Scripture — what about them? I disagree with the one sided approach you have taken.That may be one of the main obstacles to WO – the apparent inability of the pros to give careful and respectful consideration to other views.
Maranatha
” Time will tell how the final chapter plays out.”
The only thing we can be sure of is this. Only those who have no convictions are satisfied with what transpired at the GC sessions. They simply don’t care, one way or the other.
This lack of conviction does not and will not fit either side that has any viable moral convictions. I think the church leaders are hopeful that most people don’t care, in which case, everything is basically, business as usual.
I believe the bible teaches male headship. None the less, I have respect for those who have strong convictions otherwise. In the end, no one is satisfied who cares.
The SDA church is governed more and more by political agendas, and less and less by the bible. How much longer this can or will go on, only God knows. And any viable reason to “keep the church together” seems less and less significant. It would seem that if God plans to do anything about it, He will need to do it soon, and if not, a physical split seem inevitable.
In matters of conviction, we find a vast centrist population of balanced Adventists who give credence to both the theory AND practics of the gospel; we also have a left-wing cadre that is attracted primarily to the social side of Christianity, and a right-wing contingent that looks primarily to the theory (“the word”) of the Bible and the writings of Sister White. Ordinarily these two groups form two complementary sides of the same religious coin, but as tempers flair and populism attacks, the two groups disengage and flee to opposite corners of the gospel tent, claiming the opposite group is out of touch with Christ and therefore apostate. I for one greatly appreciate the value contributed at all corners of the Adventist gospel tent, and when a group of conviction (however radically driven) pulls up stakes and departs in protest, it hurts a lot to be so fitfully abandoned. The Lord pointedly declared that his true followers would be known for their oh-so-obvious care and love for one another, and if we could settle into this vital definition of what it means fundamentally to be an Adventist, we would undoubtedly live together far more peacefully and productively than has been true through most of our tortured historical past….
Well said, Ed! I appreciate your well-thought insights.
The church is maintaining the FB. Some member will not agree with that. Remember this is not a forced membership. As far I’m concern the SDA church is the remnant church describe in Revelation
Humans decide the Fundamental Beliefs, not God. The FBs have been added since I was baptized and many others. They have also had many additions, editing, and deletions, all made by men. It is not a holy set of commandments if they can be periodically changed. Does God change?
The FBs are base in the Bible. If at one period I fell that my convictions are different that ones of the SDA Church, like you Elaine I’ll leave the Church, but at difference that you I will not lingering around. I’ll look for something that I concur and never look back to SDA church .
Never look back? Maybe if the Adventist church was Sodom. For my part – I’d miss all my brothers and sisters in Christ who have nurtured me in the faith these last 40 years.
The Lord walked the road to the cross and He never looked back or doubted. But He prayed for those who crucified Him.
Neo, I hope if you leave you will still pray for the ones who stay.
Excellent rejoinder. I’m out of here should I decide the SDA church is not for me. It always boggles my mind why the disenchanted stay around and take potshots at the teachings and personnel.
It is very simple, if you actually care to understand: They still have an allegiance in their hearts. Please don’t make any more cruel comments.
Surely God has in fact changed. Otherwise the Bible is nonsense. Gods story evolved as people have done.
2 Timothy 3:
1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
Romans 1:
25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
30 Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
31 Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
32 Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
Yes Bill, I also believe we are there. It is all laid out for us; but we still are unable to see (or read). We still hold on as spoilt children; lost within ourselves.
While denial of women ordination is indeed a step that holds our denomination in the “dark ages of patriarchy of the past” the changes to the FB’s were necessary. It was necessary to state that marriage is between a man and a woman to concur without our stance that homosexuality is sin. To move to make the six days literal 24 hour periods is necessary to remove any notion that we accept a theistic long time period evolution for the basis of life as we see it today.
While I believe that the biome of earth was created in six literal days I don’t believe the universe, or the material that was pre-earth as we know it, is only a few thousand years old and I am one that keeps up on cosmology, archeology, etc. and except that there are no smoking guns to prove let’s say a global flood. But faith doesn’t have to be supported by science knowledge or theories of beginnings. Science doesn’t have all the answer and is changing all the time, and it need not put my faith in God’s word in jeopardy (face it, we are limited in our perceptions and understandings, even in our ability to interpret discovery in the natural world). I have learned to live with the tensions.
I, also, have learned to “live with the tensions” because there are far more urgent and practical issues on which to focus my attention. Things like showing people how God can make a positive difference in their daily living.
We need far more adjusted focus on the true faith of Jesus than many have. Politics in the church is an unfortunate reality, but we can’t let it distract from what you say are indeed “far more urgent and practical issues” for which we as believers need to engage in.
Kevin,
Well said. My only problem would be assuming 24-hour days which is not stated in the Bible. Is this a precedent for adding things to the Bible?
We think this is protecting the Sabbath as we keep it today on this planet. We should be opposing evolution because of the character of God who is love and would not create through death and violence before sin. This is so gigantic an issue as to invalidate Christianity and Christ’s salvation yet we are concerned about the day. Our salvation is not in a day which symbolizes Christ as our rest, but in His dying on the cross.
It’s not that easy Brother Noel to paper over such significant differences that have deep meaning. It’s interesting to observe the reactions to the WO vote. It seems like those in the 42% camp are being asked by some in the 58% group to “get on with it”, “turn the page”, “focus on other things”, “move on to other more important issues” in just nine days after the vote. In other words “get over it!”. Some persons are going through a period of grief and genuine sorrow after this sad outcome at the GC in San Antonio. To ask them to forget all the study, prayer, committees and materials, books published, on this subject of ordaining women is futile. Unity is not based on forced closure, Grief is a reaction to loss. Healing takes time. We need reconciliation based on sensitivity and understanding even where there is disagreement. The inability to reconcile differences harmoniously extinguishes love that once burned brightly. It’s not just intimate partnerships that are destroyed by not being able to resolve conflict. Business associates, neighbors, friends, and colleagues are affected as well. In each case we have a choice when conflicts arise. We can struggle, give in, deny, and avoid, or we can cooperate, collaborate, negotiate, and accommodate. As much as some would like the WO to magically disappear, it isn’t going away no matter if “there are far more urgent issues” What could be more urgent than respecting 68% of your constituency?
Sam, William Noel opts for some generic “gospel” that has little or no substance. It is like “If everyone will be nice to everyone, this is all there is to explaining Christanity.
So he is not confronted with any specific doctrinal issues and opts to believe they are not relevant to define Christanity. By the way, he represents more than a few who advocate the Eccumenical movement, not on in the world in general, but Adventism in particular.
All his comments center on this spiritual concept and agenda.
Read 1 Cor. 13, especially verse 2.
Belief is in the head. It is a mental commitment to a framework of ideas. The issues here, mentioned by Mr. Downing, demonstrate the fragility of the frame when the foundation is seismically shaken by unavoidable, even contradictory, powerful issues, in this case, the denomination’s willing blindness to women’s issues and “cosmology, geology, anthropology, theology and other sciences” concerns.
I see that personal religious belief and commitment is surprisingly flexible. The idea of a specific “truth” as a rigid backbone for faith is not born out by reality. The former SDA’s I’ve had contact with since my leaving the church some 40 years ago easily, without regrets, have modified their beliefs. None keep Sabbath, some joined other churches, some are agnostic, some consider themselves spiritual but not religious. One is retired from a role in the General Conference and has contempt for Adventism. One was a college roommate of a former GC president.
For people exiting the church, for whatever reason, abandoning the perceived hefty doctrines of Adventism is easily done. Sabbath keeping is quickly surrendered since it is self-imposed. The “state of the dead” is a state of mind which one can keep if one wants. The social, professional, and monetary connections are another matter, as I have detailed elsewhere.
There is pain in change. But there is also pain in staying when the brain is under strain. Dilemma. Who is going, who will stay?
Mission Catalyst is a growing Sabbath-keeping church plant!
I so appreciate the sentiments in this article. Thanks so much!
just curious. the remnant, the ‘light unto the world,’ God’s word to the final generation, how did it get so convoluted? how could God, the Almighty Sovereign, allow this to happen to His favorite church? If God is watching over His church, then why such controversy? how can a church ordained to warn the world be so controverted and conflicted, so polarized? either God is not Almighty, or He is not Sovereign, but in stead, allows us to fumble our way along until we finally get it…whenever that is. the clear message of the three angels is not so clear, in fact, foggy at best. certainly not how the book, Great controversy’ paints the picture. the last day message is floundering at best. God help us.
The gates of hell shall not prevail against God’s church!!
AMEN!!!
SAM GELI IS 110% right on target. Please reread his offerings on this blog. Our Jesus
is ALL in ALL. Either Jesus, through the Holy Spirit, is totally in everything we think and do, 24/7, every day of every year, or we have not accepted HIS love, His grace, His mercy, His free offer of life eternal, by faith. We don’t need to be on our knees, constantly, in praying for our wants, but should be so in love with our Savior, He influences our every thought, word, and deed. There is magnificent joy in
raising up Jesus, to every soul on Earth to
experience His LOVE.
Open your minds to this. Over 50% of the church are females. Do you really , in your heart of hearts, believe that women, in the pulpit, as Pastors of God’s people, as shepherds of God’s precious souls, would hear God shouting “NO, NO, NO, you can’t do that!!!!!! I’ve reserved that role for the male species only”. Quit it, right now. STOP, STOP IT I SAY!!
Women should be housebound, covered from head to toe in black tents, pregnant and
cleaning the house. Think about it!!!!
What, Earl? Do you think we don’t have a bible, or maybe you think we can’t read? If anyone should stop, it is people like yourself who think you can ram rod your non-biblical over the church. But only if you take away the bible, or……..claim the bible can’t be understood. The end result is the same thing.
bill sorenson,
how come we don’t believe in slavery, it’s in the bible? in fact, paul recommends onesimus be a good slave and his owner be nice and kind to onesimus, but no denunciation of the institution. i wonder why that is? if scripture doesn’t condemn it, then how come christians don’t practice it today? could it be we have morally evolved since the first century and have become enlightened to realize, even though scripture argues in support of the institution, we now know it is wrong? i like to believe the God of love had a hand in this ex-biblical evolution.
paul tells women to shut up in church, should we not make that #29 in our list of standards? we would be following scripture, but thankfully, we don’t.
no, not everything from the writings of paul and the mind of first century patriarchy is practiced today, and that is a good thing.
I think Paul avoided addressing the issue of slavery in the society of his day because of his intense focus on spreading the Gospel and encouraging people to learn to live in God’s love. If we were focused in the same way even a fraction as much as he was we wouldn’t be fighting about so many issues that instead occupy our attention.
william, i like your point, nevertheless, the institution of slavery was allowed by scripture to stand untouched. yet we don’t follow that reality today, we have rejected it. something ‘winked at’ in the bible we now find reprehensible, yet we insist first century biblical notions about men and women are somehow sacrosanct and not to be challenged. in this case, we cherry pick what is ordained by God and what isn’t, thus by doing so, we kind of prove the bible is errant. we recoil at the thought, but proceed to prove it by our inconsistency. people who think find this kind of biblical interpretation lacking persuasive truth.
We don’t believe in multiple wives just because it is “in the bible”. What God has tolerated in the past, is not a reason to decide He will always tolerate it.
bill,
you prove my point. we are we so inflexible and adamant that God does not women ordained, we ignore your point. why do we think what He found so intolerable in the past- women ordained, (if indeed He did) – is so intolerable now?
Unless our church is willing to allow differences in understanding, how can people of moral integrity stay when they are forced to affirm something which is in opposition to their deeply held, carefully studied beliefs? This isn’t the “shaking/sifting out of those who are unworthy” but a matter of forcing them out.
Because neither people with moral integrity nor anyone else are being _forced_ to affirm any of this administrative nonsense. Fortunately there is as yet no effective church thought police.
I agree. If the FB are not a creed, as we have been led to believe from its inception, then one should not feel pushed out if they don’t agree with every jot and tittle. It causes more heat than light.
FB only puts into words those things that most SDAs tend to believe, and should not be so detailed as it is becoming. AT does give some of us an outlet to debate them and see how others are thinking.
Let’s take a little time and think about why it took 40 year to wander in the wilderness? Maybe we are doing the same things that they did that keeps us out of the promised land??
“Put yourself in the position of the minister who has kept up on developments in cosmology, geology, anthropology, theology and other sciences. Now he or she is to deny the findings that are reported in respectable science and religious journals? Is the pastor to ignore what she or he believes? Be less-than-truthful and affirm what is not believed? Or is the pastor to address current understandings and support and guide parishioners as they seek to reconcile biblical teachings with contemporary issues? ”
As a consumer of modern sciences and being an amateur it is unlikely that one could be clear about all the fine points of each discipline. With consensus views of many disciplines being accepted as truth are we not expecting our pastor to be a referee where the rules of the games are not entirely clear? It takes faith to believe in the million and million of years of evolution as it does to believe in the literal interpretation of the biblical creation account. Do we expect our pastor to be clear the conflict is basically a conflict of belief systems? Relativity renders the contest between geocentricity and helio-centric a moot point. Quantum mechanics eliminated the seeming contradiction of wave and particle nature of matter.Scientific consensus at one point treated Relativity as Jewish science with no merit. Einstein himself had difficulty accepting probability interpretation of quantum phenomena by stating that “God does not play dies (with nature).”
If you want to take a good deal from this article then you have
to apply these strategies to your won webpage.