So Ron, good buddy, isn’t your mantra of criticizing SDA …

Comment on Catholic School Fires Math Teacher for Expressing Atheistic Views by Eddie.

So Ron, good buddy, isn’t your mantra of criticizing SDA leadership and California SDAs merely a “smokescreen”? How is criticism ever going to resolve the crisis? What exactly do you think is the “real issue” here and how it should be resolved?

Judging from the tone of your posts, I would guess you favor one of the following options: (1) goad the General Conference (through a steady stream of criticism) to fire the leaders and hire new ones who are willing to fire the liberal professors; (2) goad the current leaders (through a steady stream of criticism) into firing the liberal professors; (3) shut down LSU’s biology program; or (4) shut down LSU. If you favor the first or second options, who would you replace the professors with? How many qualified candidates do you know who are qualified to teach biology, support traditional SDA views of origins, and are actually looking for a job? Do you believe that any of the above options, if taken, will actually resolve the crisis within the church’s educational system? If you don’t believe that any of the above options will resolve the crisis, what alternative do you suggest?

Eddie Also Commented

Catholic School Fires Math Teacher for Expressing Atheistic Views
Geanna, naturally I recommend Loma Linda University. But good luck finding a job in a SDA institution, because there may not be any science programs left in SDA institutions by the time you finish (I can almost hear the applause).

Catholic School Fires Math Teacher for Expressing Atheistic Views
Maybe it’s time some of you get a PhD degree in biology and EDUCATE TRUTH once and for all! Maybe God is calling YOU?

Catholic School Fires Math Teacher for Expressing Atheistic Views
If I felt that I could not in good conscience teach the SDA pillars of origins in a SDA institution, and if I knew that my actions were stoking controversy for my institution, I would resign and look for a job elsewhere. That’s how I feel, and for all we know some professors at LSU may feel the same and may already be looking for job elsewhere. But if we were to follow St. Edmond School’s example and outright fire “liberal” professors at LSU–an action that appears to be endorsed by some here–WHO WOULD THEY BE REPLACED WITH?

As I mentioned before, there are very few individuals who aspire to become a science professor in a SDA institution, and not all are suitable candidates. THE CRISIS AT LSU WON’T BE SOLVED BY MERELY FIRING PROFESSORS! First, the underlying causes of the crisis must be addressed, which is going to require a long period of introspection, study, discussion and culture-changing decisions. Many of you are highly educated SDAs who have read and thought a lot about science, yet few of you chose to become a science professor–why? Why is it that so few young SDAs aspire to become science professors?

For years there have been repeated calls by some at LLU and elsewhere to close the expensive graduate program in earth and biological sciences at LLU, yet it appears to be the single major source of “conservative” SDA biology professors–and our best hope for training prospective graduates to replace the “liberal” professors that you are clamoring to get rid of. If you’re going to find relatively conservative SDA professors to teach in SDA institutions, LLU’s graduate program must be supported and strengthened. Furthermore, the science progranms in other SDA institutions must also be supported and strengthened. But supporting these programs won’t do any good if you continue to urge your children to become a pastor, doctor, dentist or nurse instead of a science professor. SDA higher education is a mission field that has been neglected as “mission” for far too long.

Recent Comments by Eddie

Changing the Wording of Adventist Fundamental Belief #6 on Creation

SDA Bio Prof: The Bible makes multiple falsifiable prophecies about Nebuchadnezzar conquering Egypt, yet history never records it happening. Does this mean the Bible is effectively falsified?

Sean Pitman: Egyptians had a strong tendency not to record their losses… only their victories.

Sean, does that mean YOU personally believe Babylon conquered Egypt, just as predicted by two prophets? In the absence of any empirical evidence? If the Egyptians didn’t record their losses, why wouldn’t the Babylonians have recorded such a stunning victory?

Southern Adventist University opens Origins Exhibit

Holly Pham: One of the things that has always concerned me is that, according to what I’ve read, birds and reptiles have completely different forms of respiratory systems (flow-through vs. bellows) How is this explained by evolutionists?

Evidence from the vertebrae of non-avian theropod dinosaurs suggests that they, too, possessed unidirectional flow-through ventilation of the lungs. So, according to evolutionary theory, it evolved first in “primitive” non-avian theropods rather than in birds, and comprises one of many shared derived characters supposedly linking birds with more “advanced” theropods. However, I don’t think there is any evidence or even a hypothesis for a step-by-step process of HOW it evolved. Here is a reference:

Southern Adventist University opens Origins Exhibit
@Bob Helm: Bob, if you send me an e-mail at I will send you a pdf file of a 1991 article published by Chatterjee in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 332:277-342, titled “Cranial anatomy and relationships of a new Triassic bird from Texas.”

Curiously his description is based only on cranial anatomy. I don’t think he ever published an analysis of its postcranial anatomy.

Southern Adventist University opens Origins Exhibit

David Read: Eddie, ecological zonation will yield the same basic order that you’re pointing to: invertebrates appear before vertebrates; fish appear before amphibians; amphibians appear before reptiles; reptiles appear before mammals; reptiles appear before birds, etc.

It could, and it’s the best creationist explanation, but it doesn’t explain why flowering plants were absent from lowland forests. Or why so many land plants appeared before mangroves, which today occur strictly in the intertidal zone. Or why no pre-flood humans have been found. Or, if Sean is correct that the flood ended at the K-T boundary, why many modern groups of birds and mammals (including marine mammals) which first appear during the Tertiary were not buried by the flood.

David Read: The fact that something appears before something else in the fossil record is not proof than anything evolved into anything else.


David Read: You seem to be complaining that God has not made the fossil evidence compulsory, i.e., so clear that no reasonable person can possibly doubt it. And if God hasn’t made the evidence skeptic-proof, then the skeptic is God’s fault, God is responsible for the skeptic.

I’m not complaining. I’m merely pointing out that the evidence can be interpreted in different ways by honest people. And I’m relieved to see that even you don’t think the evidence is crystal clear.

David Read: Only people of faith can be saved, that is, only people who are willing to trust God and put away doubts can be saved.

I agree.

Southern Adventist University opens Origins Exhibit

David Read: Those tracks are so obviously bird tracks that the fact that some scientists want to assign them to “birdlike theropods” is itself a very useful teaching tool as to how the model creates the data.

David Read: That the model actually creates the data is one of the hardest concepts to get across, not only to lay people but even to the scientists themselves.

How does the model affect the data? Data don’t change and they shouldn’t change. It’s the interpretation, not the data, that is affected by the model.