Comment on La Sierra University Hires Another Darwinist by Richard.
If the charges made here are true–that LSU has hired someone eager to teach evolutionist views–this is unfortunate, indeed. However, the assertion that the new hire will be disrespectful appears to have no foundation thus far in fact. It’s an assumption at best.
And the extreme views espoused here that we should burn an institution and eliminate SDA education to thousands of southern California students because of one or two individuals is absolutely ludicrous. Fortunately, reasonable minds at the GC and the NA Division recognize the depravity of these suggestions. Those calling for the end of LSU’s affiliation with the church have lost their sense of mission and are consumed by a growing sense of vindictiveness.
Richard Also Commented
Sean Pitman: Dr. Diaz believes and teaches neo-Darwinism as the true story of origins.
Please give us the date and venue at which you heard him teach this. I think Prof Kent is right: you are bearing false witness.
Recent Comments by Richard
Two Conflicting Arguments in Defense of La Sierra University
Sean, in all seriousness, this article is posted at the wrong site. It needs to be posted at Spectrum since it addresses the Spectrum crowd. Surely you realize this.
LSU Responds to Issues Regarding Dr. Diaz and WASC
Jesus was put on the cross, in part, because of false accusations brought against Him. I know He cannot possibly look lightly upon those who bring false accusations against others. Our country’s judicial system is built on the presumption of innocence for good reason, and one can say it adheres to Biblical principle. Thus, while I have leaned all along toward believing that La Sierra has some elements that at a minimum bear vigilance, I very much applaud Prof Kent’s insistence that we not rush to judgment, and his reminder that we are all subject to confirmation bias. I also respect his willingness to consider factual evidence when presented.
I have visited this site with some regularity the past few years, and confess at times I did not know what to believe or who to side with. One issue I have leaned away from was Prof Kent’s position on faith. His arguments have been articulate, thoughtful, and forceful, as well they should be. And he might be right. But I bring this up because he has now made a point that we should all be humble enough to contemplate seriously. He remarked, “Why I should prioritize [Sean’s] word ahead of God’s–and then be roundly criticized for refusing to do so–is utterly beyond me.” Wow! It seems to me there is only one individual whose word can truly be trusted, and that is God.
If anything, I appreciate the great respect Prof Kent has for rightness, fairness, and dependence on God’s word, and wish that we could be more gracious and accommodating in our discussion, which the Creation-Evolution Study Group rightly called for.
By the way, did I miss the link to that group’s document? I would like to read it myself.
Warm regards to all.
WASC Team Recommends Formal Notice of Concern Regarding LSU
You guys don’t understand accreditation and its obligations, which are mandated by congress. WASC accredits many private universities and fully supports their right to teach religious doctrine. What they require, however, is that the institution functions as an educational institution, and not as a church. They are not in the business of accrediting churches. They do not micromanage what is taught (which you folks wrongly assume). They do require that the institution makes education its primary function, and that it develops and adheres to policy that does not change capriciously because of outside influence. Their concern with the structure of SDA university boards is that the chairman in particular and other members do not have the institution’s educational role as their primary obligation. In the action that resulted in a lawsuit, for example, the chairman acted in his capacity as a church officer and in the interests of the church rather than as a university officer concerned with the best interests of the institution. And in so doing, established policy was bypassed.
The church can exert its influence in many ways, but does not have to do so by making a church officer the chairman of the board. Having a different board structure does not spell the end of higher Adventist education, which you people seem to think. There are too many fearmongers at this very negative website.