Comment on GC Votes to Revise SDA Fundamental #6 on Creation by Ron Stone M.D..
Uh, Geanna, I am not a fan of “happy fiction” such as you allege. In fact, I have a medical degree and have practiced real science for over 32 years. I also have a Masters Degree in Biology with an emphasis on Systematic Zoology. So, I know “fiction” when I see it, and Darwinian Evolution is pure fiction, since it has no empirical evidence that can be submitted.
Even Gould knew this and came up with his baloney theory of “punctuated equilibrium!” Crick also had his pet baloney theory of “panspermia” which is not only pure baloney but hilarious.
Ron Stone M.D. Also Commented
Hello ShaneI was referring to Ronâ€™s query: â€œAre we to believe God or Man?â€My point being that those that believe in some form of theistic evolution obviously believe in God.Regards
The idea that as long as you believe in “god” everything is A-OK is exactly why we need websites like this one. Those that believe in theistic evolution obviously don’t take Genesis 1 seriously. It’s just some fairy tale God told us (or someone else) because we’re too stupid to understand the “real” story, which of course is Darwinian evolution. This, as I’ve stated before, is pure secular humanism–Man is the ultimate authority on earth. Just ask any “expert!”
@Ken:As do Hinduâ€™s and Buddhists.The issue here is that theistic evolutionists donâ€™t believe in the SDA view of Godâ€¦ a view that we consider to be helpful and important to share with the worldâ€¦Sean Pitman
Exactly Sean. My post regarding God did not mean the hundreds or thousands of false gods of pagan religions,or even the false concept of god as perpetuated by liberals. I meant the Creator God of the bible.
GC Votes to Revise SDA Fundamental #6 on Creation
Nathan, You’ve summarized the real issue very well. Are we to believe God or Man? Is faith in God our main aim, or faith in humanistic philosophy? Many at LSU have chosen the latter, but we know which is correct.
Recent Comments by Ron Stone M.D.
The reason the LaSierra situation has gone uncorrected so long is that most of our administrators have exactly the sort of political instincts that Dan Jackson has. They are politicians and consensus builders; they want to keep the peace and make the trains run on time. But the circumstances call for men of principle, hard men who are willing to stand for the right â€œthough the heavens fall,â€ i.e., regardless who is offended and loudly complains.
Dave, I agree with you. Jackson’s trying to play on “both teams” is not going to go well for him.
Unfortunately, politics is the “SOP” of many of our SDA officials, Jackson being just one. “Political instincts” are the rule, instead of actually doing what is “right” according to what we know in God’s Word.
Shane Hilde: Think big fish: LSU or the Seventh-day Adventist Church.Graham might not have followed procedure with these men, but I donâ€™t know what the procedure is. Iâ€™ve read what the process is in the faculty handbook, but I donâ€™t know if that applies to administrative positions which are at will employees. If it does apply to them, then it appears the process was not followed.
Trustees book says, in 6,9,F, that the Trustes may “discontinue” virtually anyone working at the university.
Does that mean to “fire” or to “force their resignation? Seems like it does.
GMF: If what has been reported about Jackson is correct it is very troubling. Also, one can only wonder why he was selected as the NAD President.Iâ€™ve seen a thing or two which made me wonder about Jackson but this report, if true, has to be the worst. May the Good Lord help us!
Jackson was selected to replace Don Schneider, who was also very “passive” in his approach to this problem.
Besides telling Wisbey to “love Jesus” Jackson did virtually nothing.
My Goal for La Sierra University
Sean, Great summary and analysis of the current situation. Another good review of this matter is in the Jan-March 2011 Elders Journal. It also goes into the 2004 evaluation and recommendations, as you have quoted.
Bradley, Beach and Kaatz retain attorney
How about a “class action” suit against anyone and everyone who has heard the tape or has heard OF the tape?