By Wesley Kime M.D.

St. Faith and Dr. Evidence have gone to the blogs, duking it out for custody of LIKE and DISLIKE.  You two seem as separated as East and West and never the twain shall meet except at Armageddon. You seem to think you’re apples and oranges growing in separate groves continents apart, incapable of cross-pollination, brought to proximity only by UPS Air Freight and Trader Joes, or Spectrum or Educate Truth.  Each proclaims he holds the keys to the kingdom and the other the keys to hell.

Break it up, you two!  Very unseemly. You’re supposed to be married, a marriage made in heaven, remember?  And you’re Adventist, remember?  Alas, Another Adventist divorce, and not an amiable one.

It’s time you two got some serious counseling.  I’ve been waiting for that to happen.  Alas, it hasn’t.  I’ll try.

I’ll try by parables, not by syllogistic vectoring or fusillades of quotes.  And the parable I give is physiology.  For to me, being an MD (parabolic of the health professions), physiology is the most immediate and compelling parable of how Faith, by whatever name, and Evidence, by whatever name, work.  It is what I’ve studied for a lifetime, and — since announcing it seems important nowadays, even in the pulpit — have my doctorate in.  Also parabolic is the research laboratory, where I spent a couple of years of my life.

Physiology is the parable of how, in His image, we are fearfully & wonderfully made.  Right now physiology might well be even more informative than theology or academia.

Faith and Evidence: you are organs in the same organism, integral and integrated, afferent and efferent: you are the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems, the frontal cortex and brain stem.  You are systole and diastole, the left and right ventricles, one balancing and empowering the other.    The left ventricle can’t eject until the right ventricle empties into it.

You are male and female, and what God hath joined together, thus and thus only to be fruitful and multiply, let no man put asunder.

It works very like human physiology with enzymes and hormones, cells and organs, bone and stromal jelly all working together in the same person.  Or like the separate kingdoms, animals breathing carbon dioxide out and oxygen in, and plants taking carbon dioxide in and producing oxygen.

When thinking of separate organisms, it’s most like symbiosis.  Symbiosis, as per favorite professorial PowerPoint, is when two beings or creatures, like fungus and intestine, or fungus and orchid, not merely assist each other but depend upon each other for mutual survival.  The very excrement of one is food for the other, food the other gets nowhere else.

Where does Evidence end and Faith begin?  Ideally one can’t tell: it’s seamless.  But sometimes Evidence seems to have abandoned Faith, a sore trial. Alas, Faith is sometimes the one that weakens, falters, faints.  Evidence and Faith are designed to work as fail-safes, backups, as reserves so that when one chokes out the other kicks in.  It’s normal and physiological for one to be active and the other not.  So it’s diastole and then systole., diastole-systole, forever.  If both ventricles are active simultaneously that’s arrhythmia and you’re sick; if neither, that’s cardiac arrest and you’re dead.

With Faith and Evidence working together like that, there’s no room for philosophical detours into servitude or blind Faith, a term which, it will be happily noted, is not herein used.  Except that it brings us to commensalism and our next PowerPoint.  That’s when two beings or creatures or living entities simply coexist on the same planet, or in the same organism, but are functionally oblivious of each other.  Then Faith is dead blind; Evidence is a dead-end.  By the way, when they coexist on the same blog they tend to be hostile and oblivious.

That’s all very poetic and beatitudinal but now for the nitty-gritty, the lab.  Popular wisdom and scientific myth to the contrary, the lab is not the model of Evidence supreme.  It’s more the model – in the lab we have experimental “models,” not parables — of total, constant interdependence of Faith and Evidence, sometimes a tense and sweaty relation, interested or disinterested, manipulated or liberated.  Mountains of Faith are required before Evidence ever comes on the scene, or can: first by the investigator, overarching Faith in the hypothesis he sets out to prove, not infrequently against already existing proof to the contrary.  Faith by the university in the investigator’s record and his spiel.  For grant funding by the NIH or whatever governmental agency or parochial foundation, the grantor will have to have Faith that the conclusions accruing from the investigation will be totally objective even if unwelcome or quite the opposite, friendly.  Finally the lab proceeds by Faith in hiring techs and engaging research fellows and expensive analytical and data processing equipment and experimental animal cages, and likewise exercising their own kind of Faith, Animal Rights Activists who somehow are in the process.

Then and only then come the data, the closest science ever sees of pure Evidence.

And finally, the – ta dah! — conclusion!, hopefully (Faith is already back) reflecting only, and honestly, and intelligently, the data.  “From the foregoing data it can be concluded that…” is the required, so familiar way The Journal of Clinical Investigation or Nature or Lancet put it, whereupon the rebuttals and counter experiments, the counter-conclusions, the rancor, the ardor, the hubris settles in.  Again.  I’ve been there.

Meanwhile back at our big tent, big enough for every diversity of culture, every worship- and lifestyle, ideology, theology and theodicy, ethic and ethnic, thus big enough, surely, but apparently questionably, for both Faith and Evidence.  By the way, I’m so old I remember when the big tent was for evangelism; now, more like a flea market.

We all have attaché cases bulging with proof texts for either Faith or Evidence – either or.  To me, all those texts prove neither.  They prove both.  Like John 20:7, where Christ instructed Thomas to “reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side,” for proof. In the next breath He blessed those who didn’t require such proof, but didn’t curse Thomas either, but gave us Thomas’s experiential proof for our own Faith.  And John 10:38 where He says, even though you “do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”  Which immediately confronts us with the consummate circular interaction: “No man can come to Me except the Father … draw him,” but “no one cometh unto the Father but by Me.”  John 6:44; 14:6.

And do we SDAs not understand – perhaps it is peculiar to and distinguishing of Adventists – that the whole Great Controversy is the story of God presenting proof to the universe, consummated by the Evidence of His crucifixion, of His character, and proof that Satan lied?  God, we believe, we know, could have simply proclaimed both those things and commanded that the universe simply believe it.

As Adventists, what happens when, as foretold in Matthew 24:24, St. Faith does the St. Vitus Dance and Dr. Evidence is operating without a license, behind a mask behind a mask – so that if it were possible the very elect will be deceived?  Then, only those who have stocked up on both will survive.

For an Adventist, where do Evidence and Faith end and God begin?  From the beginning and throughout.  Without Him central, this whole essay, never meant to be heavy, would be foolishness.  If Faith cannot survive without Evidence, neither of them exist without God.  Directly or indirectly, everything comes from Him.  In the end, at bottom, always, that’s what Faith and Evidence are all about, God.  To prove Him, confirm Him; to serve Him; to worship Him, praise Him, which is why we were created.  As described in Genesis 1, where Faith and Evidence first embraced, and were first put asunder, whereupon Cain bashed Abel to pulp.

For the Evidence and Faith of Adventism, Genesis 1 is Ground Zero.

Posted by Educate Truth Staff

Editor’s note: The author wishes to remain anonymous, because of the
political climate surrounding the issues being discussed.

Since the 1960’s LSU (formerly LLU-LS – La Sierra campus of LLU, until 1990) has gradually changed. The primary change began in the early 1970’s. A group of LLU-LS faculty initiated a branch church in downtown Riverside, called City Parish. It was probably a good idea, but in the operation of that church over several years a group of faculty with similar goals and beliefs coalesced around a vision for LLU-LS. Their vision was to move the campus away from being a sectarian university that teaches SDA beliefs, and (as was at times openly stated) to take LLU-LS out of the SDA educational system.

The primary persons involved in this faculty group were from various disciplines, including religion, biology, physics, modern languages, math, history, and education. There also were other sympathizers who were not an active part of the group. The “group” worked, over a number of years, to gain political strength with the other faculty. During those years the LLU central administration was based at Loma Linda, leaving the La Sierra Campus with weak leadership in some ways. The group capitalized on that situation and the resulting faculty distrust of administration, to gain political strength.

During that time some members of the “group” proposed and launched an honors program called the Interdisciplinary Program (generally referred to as InterDip). The teaching in that program followed the vision of the “group.” Ronald Numbers was at that time teaching a class on the history of medicine for the LLU Medical School, and also was one of the primary teachers in InterDip courses, along with a LLU-LS religion faculty member. Several LLU biology graduate students were teaching biology labs, and from conversations with InterDip students they learned that the two InterDip faculty had largely convinced these students that life was the result of evolution over millions of years, and not special creation. The biology graduate students requested the Dean of the College to have faculty in the biology graduate program at Loma Linda give a series of lectures in InterDip to counteract this influence. This was done. A few years later a new Dean closed down InterDip, because of the negative influence it was having.

In 1980 the Dean of the College of Arts and Science resigned, and a search committee was formed to choose a new Dean. Somehow the “group” managed to fill all but one position on that search committee. They launched an elaborate process designed to appear very democratic, while actually aiming from the start to install their candidate, who was at that time Dean of the Graduate School, as the new Arts and Sciences Dean. Their plan didn’t work, thanks to the decision of the LLU President. It did result in the choice of a person poorly prepared to be Dean, resulting in a few difficult years for all. That Dean finally resigned after serious decline of his health, the departure of his wife, and other problems.

The “group” had plans for changing some academic departments to better meet their vision, with the priority areas being religion and biology. The Dean of the School of Religion was Kenneth Vine. His views didn’t match the “group’s” agenda. For example he removed one religion faculty from teaching the course on Ellen White when he learned that this person presented a very negative view of White. Vine was near retirement age, and when he retired the “group” was delighted. The chair of the department of biology was far from retirement, so a different strategy was employed. The biologist in the “group” took on the task of diverting the biology department from its commitment to biblical creation, to a more evolution-focused philosophy. In order to do this he would have to become chair of that department. He made serious efforts to accomplish this goal over a period of 5 or 6 years, largely by political maneuvering. The biology faculty were not sympathetic with his vision for the department, and he failed to accomplish it.

When LLU and La Sierra ended their twin-campus collaboration in 1990 the “group” had more success in establishing their political leadership at La Sierra, now La Sierra University. They successfully selected the person of their choice as President of the new University, and in a few years replaced him with another of their favorites. After the biology graduate faculty left La Sierra in 1990 and became the Department of Natural Sciences at LLU, the new chair of the department of biology at LSU was successful, over the years, in guiding the department to follow the vision of the “group,” replacing any interest in a literal creation with teaching that urges the students to accept evolution over millions of years as the true story of origins. There is reason to think the faculty of religion have followed a similar path.

This history has brought LSU to its current position, with some leading faculty seeking to turn students away from the long-established beliefs of the SDA church, to a set of beliefs more in line with many mainline protestant denominations.

This is an open letter to new La Sierra University Provost Steve Paluk from Warren L. Johns, Esq. Read “LSU’s public relations man calls Educate Truth ‘attack website‘” for more related information on WASC and La Sierra University.

Accreditation offers no straw-man excuse enabling LSU to infect its curricula with “theistic evolution.” A church owned university requires accreditation both by its underwriting owner/parent and the secular agency exercising oversight jurisdiction.

Mission Accreditation: The West Point faculty is honor bound to teach and to defend the constitution of the United States. “Academic freedom” offers no refuge for deviation from principle. A core principle of LSU’s church parent is absolute commitment to the Genesis account of the miraculous, recent creation of life on earth. Mission accreditation mandates allegiance to that principle. The First Amendment to the U.S. constitution guarantees the church, and its educational subsidiaries, “free exercise” to advance its mission, unimpeded.

Overtly touting “theistic evolution” by teaching “Evolution is supported by an overwhelming and constantly growing amount of scientific evidence…It [evolution] is the single unifying explanation of the living world, and nothing makes much, if any, sense outside of this unifying theory,” and by publicly harassing students in classrooms for challenging Darwinian junk “science” is subversive to both academic freedom and to church mission accreditation.

Curricula Accreditation: Historically, LSU has enjoyed secular accreditation by WASC without compromising the religious mission of its parent church. Graduates have pursued successful careers in science after being taught the truth about God and His creation miracle.

On June 29, WASC reported it will be returning to the campus in 2011 to review “teaching evolution in the science curricula.” Since God authored science, true religion and true science should be presented as positive components of LSU curricula. Secular accreditation has never been a straw-man justifying breach of faith by teaching “theistic evolution.” Academic freedom implies open investigation of evidence.

WASC inquiry can be appropriately addressed by implementing a curricula that includes at least three basic courses:

Intelligent Design: Biology history can summarize theories of origin, including Darwinian conjecture, with objective analysis of its shortfall; and
Genomic Science: Cutting edge molecular biology featuring the complexity of the cell, DNA, genetics, and Mendel’s law of heredity.
Theology of Origins: Dept. of Religion course built on the Genesis account of the beginning of life and its correlation with the Christian gospel.

One astute observer has noted: “No creation. No gospel, No future.” Church employees, like all other humans, ultimately are individually accountable to the Lord God Almighty, the Creator of all things.

Warren L. Johns, Esq. (ret.)
LSU Class of 1950; Board of Trustees, 1960’s; Alumnus of the Year, 1994

Warren L. Johns practiced law as a career in California, Maryland, and the District of Columbia until partial retirement in the summer of 1992. Admitted to practice before the United States Supreme Court in 1963, he has been a member of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. His non-fiction Dateline Sunday, U.S.A., drew national attention as a legal history documenting blue law confrontation with the U.S. Constitution’s first amendment. His 1999 Ride to Glory targeted some of evolution’s more obvious shortfalls while the 2007 Beyond Forever documented and analyzed, from a lawyer’s perspective, what Darwin himself described as “holes” and “flaws” in his theory.

A 1958 graduate of the University of Southern California’s Law Center, and holder of La Sierra University’s 1994 “Alumnus of the Year” award, the author’s professional resume appears in Who’s Who in American Law; Who’s Who in America; and Who’s Who in the World.

By P. Harold Wallar, MD
LSU Alumnus

The Seventh-day Adventist church invests about one million dollars a year in its Geoscience Research Institute (GRI), located just 20 minutes from La Sierra University and staffed by five competent creation scientists: Dr. James Gibson, Dr. Raul Esperante, Dr. Timothy Standish, Dr. Benjamin Clausen and Dr. Ronnie Nalin. Surely these men of science and faith have been deeply concerned by LSU’s attempts to subvert biblical creation right in their backyard.

The GRI is supposed to be the combatant against forces attempting to undermine the church’s position on origins. But what does public record show are GRI’s activities to address the problems at LSU? So far, almost nothing.

It seems GRI is either not willing or is not being allowed to help resolve the LSU controversy. Why is the GRI silent when this topic is its specialty, when its voice is needed now more than ever? Is the GRI out of service? Are these scientists unable to support the Bible and the position of the church against LSU’s assault? Has the GRI lost its direction? Are they afraid? Are they unwilling? Or have these men been silenced from their superiors so they cannot perform their responsibilities? Is not one million dollars a year enough to enable the GRI to function in its chartered role?

Whatever the reason, their silence obviously begs many questions.

There is one positive. The GRI is planning a series of public lectures on creation for the 2010 General Conference session in Atlanta, called, “Reasons Seventh-day Adventists believe in a recent six-day Creation.” However, that is thousands of miles away from the mess they’re seemingly ignoring at home.

I encourage the scientists at GRI to speak up and get involved at this crucial time. The church needs creation warriors, unafraid to speak for truth. The church depends on you. Students and teachers depend on you. We all depend on you.

Warren l. Johns Letter

Warren LeRoi Johns practiced law as a career in California, Maryland, and the District of Columbia until partial retirement in the summer of 1992. Admitted to practice before the United States Supreme Court in 1963, he has been a member of the American Association for the Advancement of Science. His non-fiction Dateline Sunday, U.S.A., drew national attention as a legal history documenting blue law confrontation with the U.S. Constitution’s first amendment. His 1999 Ride to Glory targeted some of evolution’s more obvious shortfalls while the 2007 Beyond Forever documented and analyzed, from a lawyer’s perspective, what Darwin himself described as “holes” and “flaws” in his theory.

A 1958 graduate of the University of Southern California’s Law Center, and holder of La Sierra University’s 1994 “Alumnus of the Year” award, the author’s professional resume appears in Who’s Who in American Law; Who’s Who in America; and Who’s Who in the World.

How are such faculty and administrators who think themselves so “progressive” in advance of the foundational pillars of the organized SDA Church on such basic fundamental issues going to be remotely capable of “bringing our young people home at the end of the day?”,² as Elder Paulsen put it, if they don’t really believe in or see evidence for the home message to begin with? Ultimately, is there to be no real accountability to the organized SDA Church for what is presented as “truth” from either pulpit or classroom? – by paid representatives supported by God’s own monies in the forms of tithes and offerings?

The viability of the SDA Church, as an organization, and the developing minds of a generation of SDA young people, is largely in your hands. Who knows whether you have not attained to your positions of great responsibility for such a time as this?

Open Letter Re LSU – Jan 1 2009

References:

1. EdTruth. Yes, They Should Resign. EducateTruth.com. [Online] 2009. [Cited: December 21, 2009.] http://www.educatetruth.com/news/jan-paulsen-says-yes-they-should-resign/.
2. Paulsen, Jan. An Appeal. Adventist News Network. [Online] 2009. [Cited: December 21, 2009.] http://news.adventist.org/statements/an-appeal.html.
3. GC, SDA, Executive Committee. Response to an Affirmation of Creation. Adventist.org. [Online] October 13, 2004. [Cited: December 21, 2009.] http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/statements/main_stat55.html.
4. Greer, Lee. BIOL 111: Genomes and their Evolution. EducateTruth.com. [Online] December 11, 2009. [Cited: December 21, 2009.] http://www.educatetruth.com/presentations/biol-111-genomes-and-their-evolution/.
5. EdTruth. La Sierra Evidence. EducateTruth.com. [Online] 2009. [Cited: December 21, 2009.] http://www.educatetruth.com/category/la-sierra-evidence/page/3/.
6. Stripling, Jack. Creating Controversy. Inside Higher Education. [Online] September 21, 2009. [Cited: December 21, 2009.] http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/09/01/evolution?utm_source=MailingList&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Big+News.
7. LSU, Board. Final Board Draft Statement. Scribd. [Online] November 2009. [Cited: December 21, 2009.] http://www.scribd.com/doc/22530002/Final-Board-Draft-Statement11-09.
8. LSU, Board. Resolution Regarding a Scientifically Rigorous Affirmation of Seventh-day Adventist Beliefs. Scribd. [Online] November 2009. [Cited: December 21, 2009.] http://www.scribd.com/doc/22530019/Resolution-Regarding-a-Scientifically-Rigorous-Affirmation-of-Seventh-day-Adventist-Beliefs.
9. Dwyer, Bonnie. In the Eye of the Storm. 4, s.l. : Spectrum, 2009, Vol. 37.
10. Hayward, James. The Many Faces of Adventist Creationism: ’80-’95. L. 3, s.l. : Spectrum, March 1996, Vol. 25, pp. 16-34. http://www.spectrummagazine.org/files/archive/archive21-25/25-3hayward.pdf.
11. LSUweb. Student Perspective – Biology Student Testimonial. LaSierra.edu. [Online] November 2009. [Cited: December 21, 2009.] http://www.lasierra.edu/index.php?id=1213#c1764.
12. Loughborough, JN. Testimonies for the Church. No. 32, p. 30.
13. Loughborough, JN. Testimonies for the Church. p. 650. Vol. 1.
14. White, Ellen G. Counsels to Writers and Editors. p. 35.
15. Nichol, Francis D. SDA Bible Commentary, 7 vols. plus supplement. Washington, D.C. : Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1970. p. 1083. Vol. 6.
16. White, Ellen. G. Silver Spring, MD : Ellen G. White Estate, 1888.
17. —. Spiritual Gifts, 4 vols. Battle Creek, MI : Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, 1858, 1860, 1864. pp. 90-93. Vol. 3.
18. —. Testimonies for the Church. p. 207. Vol. 1.

May 26, 2009

Dear Mr. Wisbey:

This letter is in regard to your letter about “naturalistic evolution” being taught at La Sierra University. I graduated from LSU in 2005, and in my last year I took a biology class that did teach naturalistic evolution. There was no discussion of divine guidance or intervention. Natural selection was taught as being the primary catalyst for the evolutionary process. Sir, I think you have committed a straw man fallacy in your letter, and have thereby avoided the issue.

1. David said naturalist evolution is being taught at LSU.
2. You said that implies atheistic evolution is being taught.
3. You said, “We reject this implied atheistic charge.”
4. You then seem to conclude the accusations are false, or at least undercut the education being offered.

You never denied that naturalistic evolution was being taught. Instead, you denied atheistic evolution was being taught. Do you honestly believe theistic evolution is compatible with the Bible? Do you believe the biblical account of creation is literal? Naturalistic evolution is being taught, and I am a witness to it as are many others. In effect, your letter is misleading. Will you write a letter specifically denying some teachers at LSU are teaching naturalistic evolution as fact?

Sincerely,

Shane Hilde

This is in reply to the open letter from Randal Wisbey, President of La Sierra University (LSU), in regard to the fact that science professors at LSU are not only teaching, but promoting the truth of Darwinian-style evolution in their classrooms.

Wisbey presents the standard argument heard over and over again over the years that this shouldn’t matter because all of these professors believe in God as the ultimate Creator and are good Christian men and women who actually “value” Adventism.  Wisbey explains that LSU is all about teaching the “prevailing scientific views within a supportive classroom environment that values the Seventh-day Adventist Church’s contribution to the understanding of biblical creation.”

I’m confused here.  What aspect of the stated fundamental positions of the SDA Church are being valued when a professor explains to his/her students that the Church’s clearly stated position on origins is actually ludicrously mistaken?  – that life on this planet really did evolve over hundreds and thousands of millions of years in a Darwinian manner?  – that humans and apes really do share a common ancestor that gave rise to all hominids over the course of millions of years?  That death and suffering on this planet did not begin with the moral fall of Adam and Eve, but predates Homo sapiens by hundreds of millions of years of untold suffering and carnage?

Wisbey admirably tries to put lipstick on this pig (Palin style), by pointing out all the good things that LSU is doing to make up for what he tries to describe as a this minor discrepancy and a general commitment to openmindedness  -  a “willingness to consider a variety of views.” Wisbey goes on to explain that, “This grows from our church’s commitment to ever be open to new light.” – to include “new light” that challenges the fundamental basis for the very existence of the church?  What happens to the uniqueness of the SDA Church if it actually accepts and starts promoting the validity of Darwinism?

This isn’t about atheistic thinking here.  It is quite possible to believe in God while also believing in Darwinian-style evolution over the course of billions of years.  However, it is very difficult if not logically impossible to reconcile this view with what makes the SDA Church unique among Christian denominations.

At the very least Wisbey and LSU should be open and honest about what is actually being actively promoted at LSU.  It is no secret what many of the science and even religion professors believe and promote as the gospel truth to their students.

For decades Larry McCloskey actively promoted Darwinian evolution occurring over billions of years to his students to the active exclusion of any substantive discussion or presentation of the unique SDA view on origins in his classroom.  In his own syllabus he wrote:

“It is vitally important for you to realize that this course—as a science course—is describing evidence from mainstream science, and is not dealing with beliefs…

Evolution is supported by an overwhelming and constantly growing amount of scientific evidence. New discoveries continue to fill the gaps identified by Darwin in The Origin of Species. The evidence is in the form of direct, measurable, empirical observation. Is it informed to dismiss Darwin’s ideas as ‘just a theory’?…  There is nothing ‘theoretical’ about the evidence supporting evolution. The research about evolution is ongoing and continues to support and refine Darwin’s original ideas. No data have been found to refute the idea.  It is the single unifying explanation of the living world, and nothing makes much, if any, sense outside of this unifying theory.

The reason this unifying theory has become so widely accepted in the scientific world is that it has stood up to intense, thorough, continual observation and criticism. The way to become rich & famous in science would be to show a fundamental error in the theory. The built-in skepticism of science prevents these ideas from becoming dogma.”

Lee Grismer has done and is doing the same thing.  His own publications as sole author overwhelmingly clarify his position for anyone who wishes to consider what he is actually teaching his LSU students.  Grismer is an expert on the vertebrate life of Baja California, which he argues, in his papers, has been affected by the “dynamic environmental history . . . over the last 4-5 million years” and that this history “has had a profound effect on the evolution, distribution, and genetic structuring of Baja California’s terrestrial vertebrates.” – L. Lee Grismer, Evolutionary biogeography on Mexico’s Baja California peninsula: A synthesis of molecules and historical geology, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2000 December 19; 97(26): 14017–14018.

Lee Greer, who actually refers to himself as an “evolutionary biologist” is fairly new to LSU’s faculty, but is already very active in promoting the gospel of Darwinian evolution to his students – as I know by conversations with students and personal discussions with Greer and a review of Greer’s published position on origins.  Even in his bimonthly “chapels” at LSU he has actively promoted the idea that the various accounts of creation in Genesis are contradictory and allegorical – i.e., that there was no literal creation week or worldwide Noachian flood just a few thousand years ago. He has been recorded on a panel discussion of this issue at the Loma Linda University Church for a creation/science weekend explaining his views on this issue (see Link).  It is no secret, which is a shame because I personally think a lot of Greer in particular and think he is an honest, sincere, very concerned teacher who really does care about his students and wants with all his heart to lead them in what he considers to be the right direction.

But again, this isn’t about sincerity or nobility of purpose or all of the other wonderful things that LSU has done and is doing.  This is about the willingness of LSU, as an institution, to support one of the most fundamental of all SDA doctrinal positions – beyond mere lip service to their employer.  So far, such support is not only lacking, but is actively scorned in a very public and open manner.  The Church’s position on origins is actually belittled and ridiculed in the science and even religion classrooms at LSU.  It is not only disrespected, it is undermined in a most active and most open way possible by LSU professors – and not without effect.  Many of LSU’s students have lost their faith in the Gospel story as stated by the SDA Church and have either left the Church or become what I like to call “Country Club Adventists” – who only stick around because they appreciate the society, not the fundamental doctrines, of Adventism.  Many of my own family have left the Church over this issue as well.  So, it is actually quite personal for me.

So, I challenge Wisbey, the leadership of LSU, and the SDA Church in general to at least take the lipstick off the pig and present the unvarnished truth of what is being promoted at LSU and let the parents of the students who are paying and often sacrificing a great deal for “Adventist education” to decide what they really want to pay for.  The lipstick looks silly anyway.

Sincerely,

Sean Pitman, MD
www.DetectingDesign.com

March 16, 2009

Elder Jan Paulsen, President
General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists
12501 Old Columbia Pike
Silver Spring, MD 20904-6600 USA
Telephone: 301-680-6000

Dear Elder Paulsen,

I recently gave a lecture at La Sierra University (LSU) on the topic of Evolution vs. Creation at the invitation of the student body (2/20/09). It is no secret that the teachers of the upper division science courses at La Sierra are teaching the Theory of Evolution as “more than a theory”, the gospel truth in essence, to the science students at LSU – - to the active exclusion of any discussion of either creationists concepts or intelligent design theory; not to mention the unique SDA take on the origin of life on this planet specifically stated in the clarified fundamental positions of the SDA Church (Belief #6; as of 2004).

I know this issue has been brought to the attention of Elder Mostert back when Dr. Geraty was president of LSU (before his retirement in 2008 when the current president, Randal Wisbey took over). I am also aware of the standard line given when the powers that be at La Sierra are/where questioned regarding this matter – that “We all believe in God and Creation here at La Sierra”. While this may be true in the most general sense, it certainly is not true when it comes to the unique SDA take on this issue.

I have extensive syllabus materials which are being presented to the science students at LSU. I’d like to briefly quote some relevant passages from these syllabus materials to illustrate my point:

From the Syllabus intro: “It is vitally important for you to realize that this course—as a science course—is describing evidence from mainstream science, and is not dealing with beliefs. Some will decide they cannot ‘believe’ the scientific evidence, and your right to decide that is encouraged and supported. If you expect to be competitive in any modern science-based profession, and hope to perform well on standardized or pre-professional qualifying exams, you simply must know what the scientific evidence is, whether or not you ‘believe’ it.”

From elsewhere in the Syllabus: “Evolution is supported by an overwhelming and constantly growing amount of scientific evidence. New discoveries continue to fill the gaps identified by Darwin in The Origin of Species. The evidence is in the form of direct, measurable, empirical observation.

Is it informed to dismiss Darwin’s ideas as ‘just a theory’? In science, the word theory means something that accounts for many observations and explains & integrates a great variety of phenomena. The colloquial use of the word theory comes close to what scientists mean by a hypothesis. There is nothing ‘theoretical’ about the evidence supporting evolution. The research about evolution is ongoing and continues to support and refine Darwin’s original ideas. No data have been found to refute the idea.  It is the single unifying explanation of the living world, and nothing makes much, if any, sense outside of this unifying theory.

The reason this unifying theory has become so widely accepted in the scientific world is that it has stood up to intense, thorough, continual observation and criticism. The way to become rich & famous in science would be to show a fundamental error in the theory. The built-in skepticism of science prevents these ideas from becoming dogma.”

Aside from such statements in the syllabus, no countering statements, creationist views or interpretations, or any uniquely SDA position on origins is mentioned in the entire syllabus or lecture notes. The students themselves tell me that only the Darwinian-style evolutionary view of origins is being taught in the science classes at LSU and that the teachers openly claim that Darwinian-style evolution is in fact true while the historical view of the SDA Church is clearly outdated and, well, obviously wrong.  It seems to me that the teachers at LSU are actively undermining what the Church, as an organized body, has stated very clearly to be fundamentally important and that these same teachers are simply thumbing their noses at the GC’s guidelines on this issue:

“Church leaders at all levels are encouraged to assess and monitor the effectiveness with which denominational systems and programs succeed in preparing young people, including those attending non-Adventist schools, with a biblical understanding of origins and an awareness of the challenges they may face in respect to this understanding.”

Such statements seem to carry no weight at LSU and are simply disregarded – quite openly. It seems that at the very least an employee of an organization should respect the goals that the employer feels are fundamentally important for the organization. Yet, such respect is lacking at La Sierra. I fear that unless steps are taken to correct this issue that irreparable damage is being done and will continue to be done to our young people – the future life blood of the SDA Church. It seems to me that this issue is becoming a more and more prominent problem in our Church – especially in our universities and even undergraduate level schools.  Sooner or later I think this particular issue has the potential to split the Church.  As painful as it may be steps need to be taken now to limit the severity of this split. I therefore solicit your help in this matter.

If you are interested, the three-part video of my lecture at LSU (along with a developing debate on this issue started by Ervin Taylor, the executive editor of the journal Adventists Today) can be viewed at:

http://www.detectingdesign.com/videoclips.html#Creation

I can also forward you the syllabus materials directly if you are interested and send you contact information for some of the students who have and are currently bringing this issue to my attention. I also have numerous other letters and E-mails from concerned parents, pastors, scientists, and other educators across the country if you are interested in these as well.

Thank you again for your time and consideration of this matter.

Sincerely,

Sean Pitman, MD
www.DetectingDesign.com

Source: Adventist News Network

Paulsen speaks on issue of origins
Adventist position on creation affirmed by church president

19 Jun 2009, Silver Spring, Maryland, United States
ANN staff

Responding to ongoing discussions in the church, the president of the Seventh-day Adventist world church urged Adventists to look to scripture as the validity of their faith as it relates to origins.

In a statement released today, Pastor Jan Paulsen appealed to church administrators, ministers, teachers and writers to articulate and reflect the church’s stand on creation.

“We must not allow ourselves to come adrift from the Bible in defining our values and in stating what we hold,” Paulsen said.

Paulsen referred to the church’s position on creation, which was affirmed by the General Conference Executive Committee in October of 2004.

Paulsen said that his appeal came with respect for integrity and professional skills from educators, ministers and writers.

___________________________

AN APPEAL

By Jan Paulsen

I place this before you in awareness of an ongoing discussion in some quarters between faith and science, particularly as it relates to origins and creation.

For us as a community it has always been of utmost importance to stay close to the Scripture. Faith has that as its final point of reference. We must not allow ourselves to come adrift from the Bible in defining our values and in stating what we hold.

Our position as a church in the matter of origins is clearly although somewhat broadly stated in our Fundamental Beliefs. This position is further amplified in a statement voted by the General Conference Executive Committee at the 2004 Annual Council. To remind ourselves of the details of that action, I have included the wording in this appeal:

• “We strongly endorse the document’s affirmation of our historic, biblical position of belief in a literal, recent, six-day Creation.

• We urge that the document, accompanied by this response, be disseminated widely throughout the world Seventh-day Adventist Church, using all available communication channels and in the major languages of world membership.

• We reaffirm 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.

• We call 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.

• We urge church leaders throughout the world to seek ways to educate members, especially young people attending non-Seventh-day Adventist schools, in the issues involved in the doctrine of creation.

• We call on all members of the worldwide Seventh-day Adventist family to proclaim and teach the church’s understanding of the biblical doctrine of Creation, living in its light, rejoicing in our status as sons and daughters of God, and praising our Lord Jesus Christ–our Creator and Redeemer.”

I appeal to all engaged by our church in the ministries of administration, preaching, teaching, and writing to articulate and reflect our stand as a community on Creation. We are a faith-community, and the world of faith is the world in which God’s creative powers are on constant display. Sometimes the findings of science may reflect some of this, but often not. Faith is certainly not subject to findings of science.

To those who teach at our colleges and universities, let me say that you have a demanding, often difficult, but sacred assignment. It is a ministry you hold in trust. It is understood that to care for your ministry responsibly you have to take your students on many a journey of findings into various disciplines of study. They need to know what they will meet in their profession and in life. As part of that exercise you will also expose them to the elements and concepts of evolution. That is understood.

As your pastor, however, I appeal to you that when you take your students out on the journey, you bring them safely back home before the day is over. And their home must always be in the world of faith. You owe it to the students, you owe it to God, you owe it to their parents, you owe it to the church, and you owe it to yourself as a believer to safely guide them through difficult moments on their journey.

This appeal comes with the greatest respect for your integrity and your professional skills. But you are also my sister and brother in faith, and we share a common commitment to God to whom we shall ultimately bring the fruits of our labor. I pray that he will give to each of us the strength that accompanies faithfulness.