Once again Sean, an excellent reply. If I could …

Comment on La Sierra and Battle Creek College by Roger Seheult.

Once again Sean, an excellent reply. If I could put it into my words:

Professor Kent says that there is not a “shed of evidence of a young earth “Not a shred. Not a shred. Not a shred. Not a shred” I’ll add to this – in your opinion Professor.

I suppose that after looking through Sean’s Website or hearing a few lectures from Professors [Leonard Brand, Ariel Roth, Paul Giem, Walter Veith, Arthur Chadwick, etc…] which summarize a number of peer reviewed scientific journals papers, Professor Kent would still say that there is not a shred of evidence (circumstantial or otherwise) of a young earth. This is because, I can only assume, he simply doesn’t want to deal with it.

Which answers the question – we believe the evidence and is the reason why our faith has a basis. Professor Kent does not. So really, this discussion is not based on who believes based on evidence and who believes based on blind faith. No, the argument stems from the fact that Professor Kent refuses to acknowledge the evidence for a young earth and expects everyone else to do the same.

Roger Seheult Also Commented

La Sierra and Battle Creek College
@Professor Kent:

Professor Kent,

You said that, “I gather that you say “yes,” and Sean Pitman says “yes, and David Read says “yes,” and Roger Seheult says “yes,” but not one of you can point to a shred a physical evidence–not one shred–that offers any tangible evidence for these fundamental SDA beliefs on origins. ”

1) Please tell me where I said that members of the GRI staff should be fired? I have never commented on the GRI staff ANYWHERE.

2) Please show me where there is “evidence” that Archaeopteryx gave rise to sinornis? – real physical evidence

3) Please show me evidence that proof that whole multifunctional proteins (longer than 100 AA long) can evolve from nothing.

4) Please show me the evidence that proteins evolved before DNA (or is it the otherway around) LOL)

5) Please show me the proof that DNA came together spontaneously from premordial soup when one (Nitrogenous base) requires an alkaline environment and the other (phosphate) requires an acidic environment at the same time.

6) Show me the proof that fossils that are millions of years old at the top of mountains were able to resist erosion for that period of time while square miles of land are being erroded every year from our coasts.

7) Show me the proof that river deltas (by which we can measure the age of a river) were able to not deposit mega tonnes of sediment in their deltas for the millions of years required.

8) Show me the proof that paleocurrents which show that the direction of water currents across the US in the precabrian and later levels all flowed in the same direction by chance and had nothing to do with massive water movements

9) Show me the proof that a RED blood cell can survive for 68 million years in the fossil of a T-rex bone. – let me say that again…..68 MILLLLION years (spoken like Mini-me on Austin Powers).

10) Show me the proof that random mutations in genomes can cause punctuated explosions of sepcies – that something that is governed by statistics and uniform wondering leads to massive speciation that appears suddenly in the fossil record. Don’t offer me an explaination – show me the proof.

I’m sure that you’ll be able to provide scientific peer reviewed references to each and every article that offers proof beyond a shadow of a doubt of my concerns. Anything less would make your assertions of me not being able to “prove” the theory of creation seem hypocritical.


La Sierra and Battle Creek College
To make it clear, Mr. Wilson is not the cause of the Church’s direction but rather the effect.

He was elected. His views were well known before he was elected. Let’s not make this argument about who is the General Conference President and for how long.

This is about having a clear and consise statement of belief from the church and holding firm to it. There are some who would paint this as going backwards, however, going forward or backward in the sense of time only exists in the space-time continuum. God lives outside of this and never changes. If we are to be his church espousing his message for this end time, going backwards or forwards is irrelevant. What is important is conveying a clear and consise message that is correct.

That message was marred, attacked, and mocked when a competing scientific theory was taught and promoted as truth at an Adventist University. This was done under the guise that the fundamental belief #6 was written to include an understanding of creation that has never been held by the SDA church (long time periods). Interestingly, Fritz Guy, and Gereaty, not withstanding the requisite denial, (http://spectrummagazine.org/blog/2010/07/02/clarification_regarding_history_fundamental_belief_6_creation) were involved in the writing of the set in 1980. Regardless of what they say today, many have found the ability to find “long ages” in the original #6 (something that has never been believed in this church). The necessity for the church to clearify it’s own belief goes without saying, especially when there is so much confusion.

Individual members of a church cannot dictate what is meant by a set of the church’s fundamental beliefs. Only the church, working through the pre-ordained process can clearify what is said (with direction from the Word and Holy Spirit). If members disagree with the belief, they must reconcile this with themselves and not force the church to change their beliefs – or else change them within the frame work of the constituency

The Church, Jesus Christ, Ellen White and our founders have not nor have ever believed that the earth was created in more than 6 days. We will not start to believe so that SDA theistic evolutionists may feel more comfortable straddling the proverbial fence of “science” and religion at the expense of the very heart of our belief Jesus Chirst as creator and savior. Rather that have them find out later that the intelliectual inconsistency of this postition is enormous (Sabbath, Sin, Death, Salvation), I would rather them understand up front what they are getting themselves into and be honest with themselves. Thestic Evolution is inconsistent, yea, antithetical to Seventh-day Adventism.


Recent Comments by Roger Seheult

Faith without Evidence: Are we really a bunch of ‘Flat Earthers’?
There are too many of them. Where do I start. https://www.swau.edu/dinosaur-research-draws-world-wide-acclaim-inspires-new-tv-series
Mary Schweitzer’s T-rex.

That’s just off the top….
wait another one –
Walter Veith….
wait more….


Faith without Evidence: Are we really a bunch of ‘Flat Earthers’?
Ad hominum attack means that no other better arguments were available at the time of writing. I win.


Southern Adventist University opens Origins Exhibit
@Ervin Taylor:

I literally have not logged on to this website in years. It looks like the same arguments are going back and forth which means that if you haven’t been able to solve them by now, you aren’t going to convence each other of your points. What is really amazing to me and anyone intersted in the topic, however, is the tone of the comments, which usually reveal the maturity of the writer especially if they include absolutes:

Examples:
“vast majority of scientifically-informed Adventists will thank Dr.Kent ”

“this misnamed web site”

“Dr. Kent has done a masterful job”

These are usually tip-offs to a lot. Also, it makes me wonder that if Sean Pitman is so ill-informed, and he operates on such a mis-leading web site, why does the good Dr. Taylor waste his time coming to this website, reading the material and then commenting on it? In fact I can bet that Dr. Taylor has spent more time on this web site then I have in the last year – and that speaks volumes about what Dr. Taylor really thinks of this website – perhaps the good Dr. Kent as well.


The Metamorphosis of La Sierra University: an eye-witness account
Again, the question is begged: Why would they work so hard to change the university rather than just leave and go where universities already believe the way you do? Dare I say that there lies a larger conspiracy that transcends LSU and that may be going on at your local SDA instituation? Again, why the push over a generation to change a whole university and to denude it of its fundamentals?


Educate Truth’s purpose and goals
Most of the blogs that are critical of this site aren’t interested in what this site is really out to do. They simply want to demonize it ergo Alinsky’s rule of indetify, demonize, and marginalize. Hence their cherry picking from the comments for their own purposes.

Thanks for the recap though.