The second International Faith and Science Conference met in Denver, Colorado, USA, during August 2004. Concerns related to the interaction of faith and science led the General Conference Executive Committee (Annual Council 2001) to authorize a series of conferences on faith and science during the years 2002-2004. A number of Divisions held their own regional conferences. The purpose of the conferences was not to re-examine the Church’s biblical doctrine of creation but to examine the contributions and limitations of faith and scientific research in the area of origins.

During the second international conference papers were prepared summarizing the findings of the discussions during the previous two years. The new element at this conference was a discussion on the ethics of dissent dealing with the ethical responsibility of those who differ in significant ways from the biblical position of the church on the topic of creation. The discussion was open, candid, and highly professional. It was obvious that a small number of individuals—scientists and theologians—did not support or felt uncomfortable with the biblical doctrine of creation in six literal, consecutive days as clearly revealed in Genesis 1.

The report of the organizing committee states that “while we found widespread affirmation of the Church’s understanding of life on earth, we recognize that some among us interpret the biblical record in ways that lead to sharply different conclusions.” It also states that “we witnessed in these conferences a high level of concurrence on basic understandings, especially the normative role of Scripture, buttressed by the writings of Ellen G. White, and the belief by all in God as beneficent Creator.” It was clear that in spite of the challenges we face from scientific research and theories the world church continues to uphold the biblical doctrine of creation. Through the office of the General Conference president, the organizing committee’s report was submitted to the Annual Council which after careful discussion produced its own response to the report and its recommendations. Particularly important in that response is the re-affirmation of “the Seventh-day Adventist understanding of the historicity of Genesis 1-11: that the seven days of the Creation account were literal 24-hour days forming a week identical in time to what we now experience as a week; and that the Flood was global in nature.” The response calls “on all boards and educators at Seventh-day Adventist institutions at all levels to continue upholding and advocating the Church’s position on origins. We, along with Seventh-day Adventist parents, expect students to receive a thorough, balanced, and scientifically rigorous exposure to and affirmation of our historic belief in a literal, recent, six-day creation, even as they are educated to understand and assess competing philosophies of origins that dominate scientific discussion in the contemporary world.”

To a large extent the value of this document will be determined by the way it is used in educational institutions when employing personnel, and by the commitment of administrators, teachers, and pastors to its content and to its promotion. It is particularly important for our young people to understand the complexity of the issues in the area of faith and science and at the same time to remain loyal to the biblical teachings on origins. Our commitment to the Bible, as our norm of faith and practice, requires that in the formulation of our world-view we begin affirming the literal, historical and theological divine revelation recorded in Genesis 1-2.