Deal with LSU

By Educate Truth Staff

When David Asscherick’s letter appeared on the web in May 2009, it was not widely known that La Sierra University biology professors were promoting the theory of evolution, and excluding the evidence for a recent creation. The news was met with much caution from the LSU Board of Trustees. Responses ranged from “I believe that this issue needs our prayers, more than ever before” to “I believe that our professors need to continue to grow in their understanding of the expectations we hold for faith” to “I’m not interested in being a part of a witch hunt.”

While many others believed the initial allegations, there were still many who questioned its validity. A common response was “they are teaching evolution, but strong evidence in favor of a recent creation is also being presented.” However, as we’ve learned since then, this is entirely untrue.

President Randal Wisbey took a slightly different approach in his response to Asscherick’s letter: “We reject this implied atheistic charge. Every one of our science faculty share the goal of students experiencing a vibrant Adventist Christian faith while pursuing their education in the sciences.”

Wisbey’s defense was, “The professors are not atheistic.” However, such an allegation was never made, and Wisbey succeeded in not addressing the real issue.

Soon after Wisbey’s letter, the evidence began to surface. Students at LSU began sending class syllabi and presentations for the public to see on Educate Truth. After further digging, two things became clear: at least four of the biology professors expressed their personal belief in the theory of evolution, and openly taught it in their classrooms, as the “single unifying explanation of the living world…” (McCloskey).

In June 2009, Louie Bishop published his experience with the biology department. He said:

[One biology professor] talked about the Biblical Creation accounts in detail [at a worship breakout], and concluded that Genesis chapters 1 and 2 are contradictory accounts. The message I received was a message of doubt toward the Bible, which is no doubt what many other students were led to feel. I can now believe this is happening on a Seventh-Day Adventist campus, because I’ve seen it with my own eyes!

It is a fact that Evolution is being taught and promoted by professors of Biology on the La Sierra University campus. They are obviously welcome to hold such views, yet I believe they have come to the wrong place to promote those beliefs.

Since this controversy has been made public, LSU has given no evidence its professors are presenting creation positively in their science classes, or at all. Bishop said, “[O]nly Evolution is presented and studied at an objective level. My teacher this quarter has spoken openly of the glory of God in nature, and for that I am thankful! But evidence for a young-age earth, in support of the Biblical account, is not presented for study. The objective support of the Bible is not touched on.”

Carlos Cerna, 2009 LSU alumnus, recently said of his experience in the senior biology capstone class:

Whenever the topic of Creation would come up (from a student, not a professor) the student would be “attacked” by one or both of the professors, and there was a lot of deriding, belittling, and ridiculing in their retorts to the idea of Creation. So I believe that whether or not Creation was mentioned in that class, it was not something to be taken as plausible in any shape, case, form, or fashion.

Teresa Regester, mother of former LSU student AJ, pulled her kid out: “I did contact the President’s office at La Sierra and told the nice lady I spoke with what my concerns were, and that our son would not be attending there any more.”

Maritess Gay Asumen, a former teacher’s assistant said:

Yes, I can attest that La Sierra University teaches and advocates for evolution. In fact I took many of these classes from professed evolutionist professors. I was the teacher’s assistant for many of these classes and was influenced to some degree. I think the church should stand up for its beliefs, because it makes the students very confused and frustrated. These non-SDA beliefs are not only found in biology classes, but also taught in the school of religion and many core classes that students are required to take in order to graduate. NSCI (scientific foundation courses) 405, 406 and 407 are some of the classes.

Ezequiel Vasquez said: “I attended LSU and I am fully aware of the controversy first hand. As I attended LSU I was a fresh convert to not only Adventism but Christianity. The debate on this issue really shook my foundation, because I didn’t expect it. I was not taught evolution as a competing theory, but as the only valid one.”

There are more students with similar stories.

Does LSU’s promotion of the theory of evolution sound neutral? These testimonies clearly show how students are being affected.

In a letter to Wisbey, Carlos Cerna said:

When I came to La Sierra University and began studying evolution, my thinking was, “yeah right, this ridiculous theory I’ve heard all my life, ‘that we come from monkeys,’ is plain ridiculous.”

Well, Dr. Wisbey, it’s hard for me to admit it, and I don’t even like talking about it, but when I studied the theory, as it was presented in class, plus the studying of the books for the class, I actually started questioning Creation myself. I’ll never forget it. I would say to myself, “now Carlos, you know that this is all junk,” but at the same time Dr. Wisbey, I was reading the data from the Biology book, and getting indoctrinated by the faculty so much that I genuinely and sincerely had started to question Creation.

I also remember asking myself, “if Creation was in the Bible and it didn’t actually take place the way it’s written, then what else could there be in the Bible that is false.” To put it bluntly, I questioned the Bible, religion and the existence of God.

It is not guaranteed students who are presented the theory of evolution as fact will struggle with their faith or even lose it. However, why does it seem La Sierra is willing to take the risk? For the professors who teach these classes, the answer is because they believe what they are teaching is truth. The university has not admitted this much, so we can only speculate why they continue to support the promotion of evolution.

Alfredo Lee, a pastor in the Southeastern California conference, feels frustrated and betrayed by La Sierra University. In a note to Educate Truth last year, Pastor Lee said, “My daughter is a major in Biology at La Sierra this summer. She told me at least three years ago about this situation. Sadly, now she believes in evolution, as some of her teachers at La Sierra. I am a pastor, and I sent my daughter to a Christian and Adventist University, never expecting this. I feel frustrate and betrayed.”

Others have said their lack of belief in a recent, six-day creation was due in part to their education at LSU. According to Julie Cook, a non-Adventist student once told her that she no longer believed in the creation week because of LSU. Cook said, “Not only did the school have a responsibility to uphold Adventist doctrine, but to protect the faith of all Christians that attended it.”

Not only are Adventist students being influenced, but also Christians from other faiths. How ironic it is that an Adventist university is destroying the faith of other Christians in a recent, six-day creation. Chris, a former student at LSU, said last year he walked out of the biology class because of the unbiblical things the professor was saying. Other students have resorted to sleeping through class in order “not to lose their salvation,” according to Michelle Doucoumes.

Adventist parents are well aware of the potential dangers of having the theory of evolution promoted at an Adventist university, but many are still unaware of the situation at LSU. Here are reactions of parents to LSU’s promotion of evolution:

My daughter is attending LSU and is a biology major. I home schooled her all her life and raised her in the Adventist belief. I had no idea when I put her in to La Sierra that they would be teaching evolution as truth. I am so disappointed and sad. They have raised doubt in her mind. -Cynthia Salvador

I have two granddaughters now attending La Sierra and one is now questioning Creation. My prayers are for the people who allowed these professors to have a captive audience. -Verah Huso

Although I graduated from LSU, I am not comfortable sending my daughters to learn this brand of science. They have attended public community college for their first 2 years and have learned enough about evolutionary theory. I expect our Adventist education system to show how science strongly supports short creation and a Master Designer. -Marlin Gimbel

When my children are ready for college, we will be looking for a school that teaches Biblical principles. -Andrea Griggs

We have a daughter at Southern, and will soon have a son there also. I would be furious if we were to find out that our children were charged the enormous tuition fees for classes that misrepresent Biblical truths. They can receive THAT kind of education anywhere, … and for much less expense. We expect MORE from our educational institutions than what one would find elsewhere. -Taletha Robinson

My daughter went to La Sierra. When I discovered they were teaching naturalistic evolution – I transferred her to Pacific Union College. The transfer was for this reason alone! -Karen McPherson

My daughter is preparing to attend La Sierra University in a few weeks and I am very concerned to hear that evolution is being taught there. The reason I am sending her to an Adventist college is to keep her away from this apostasy. If I hear it affects her curriculum I will remove her. -David Hunzelman

My daughter is a senior at Great Lakes Adventist Academy. She is now looking for a college to attend. La Sierra is now off that list! -Patricia McClain

And the list goes on and on of parents who have discovered what is being taught at LSU and are appalled, no longer interested in sending their kids there.

What is LSU more concerned with, preserving and building the faith of their students or employing evolutionary biologists? The only action LSU has taken to address this issue was creating a one-unit seminar class for freshman. Ironically, the professors teaching the class are the very ones promoting evolution. This seminar class had absolutely no affect on the classes and professors called into question, besides increasing the workload of students and teachers.

How long of a list must be complied of students whose faith has been destroyed by the promotion of evolution at LSU? One student? Five students? Ten? The LSU biology department has ceased to be an adequate representative of the Seventh-day Adventist Church’s belief in a recent, six-day creation. If LSU is unwilling to meet the needs of its constituency and to align itself with the biblical teaching of creation, then it is left to the Pacific Union, North American Division, and General Conference to do their part in assuring that Adventists get what they pay for.

The church is going to lose much more than a few professors if LSU goes unchecked. It will continue losing a generation of youth. Enough is enough. This is not a time to pander to the whims of a few, who blatantly defy the historicity of Genesis. This is not the time to let these professors linger in our classrooms, while failed attempts at redeeming them are made, and more souls are being lost. Those who have the responsibility and power to influence LSU must exercise their God-given leadership for the sake of LSU and its students.

Share on Facebook0Pin on Pinterest0Share on LinkedIn0Tweet about this on TwitterDigg thisShare on Google+0Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Print this pageEmail this to someone

92 thoughts on “Deal with LSU

  1. Amen!

    I could add many more names of parents and students who feel frustrated and betrayed by the “SDA” education they received at LSU. At least if LSU would warn potential parents and students ahead of time by telling them that their science teachers will in fact promote the modern Theory of Evolution as the true story of origins, no one would feel betrayed later on… except for tithe payers perhaps…

    If you’re going to argue for complete academic freedom for LSU professors to undermine the stated fundamental positions of their employer, the SDA Church in this case, at least warn people ahead of time that this is what is going to happen to their children…

    This is the very least LSU can do – the very least.

    Sean Pitman
    http://www.DetectingDesign.com




    0
    View Comment
  2. “I expect our Adventist education system to show how science strongly supports short creation and a Master Designer”

    I would expect them to as well. The problem is that there is no convincing evidence of a short creation. The GC has spent millions of dollors on the Geoscience Research Institute in order to find evidence for a short creation, and in the last fifty years the effort has been an absolute failure. There just isn’t any evidence to teach. You can’t expect any biology teacher to teach information that doesn’t exhist.




    0
    View Comment
  3. I think that exposure to evidence for one or other is a part of Great conflict. It show that SDA is realy for freedom of speach and faith. SDa is not fundamentalistic church. Adventist Sabbath is not sabbatarian but prophetic sabbath. Here is more at work “do not take things seriously” immature professors, who gave themself the right to mocked the theory of creation. Serious people would take the evidence seriously and impartially. So this is a situation in which everyone must learn, and respect the rules of the game.




    0
    View Comment
  4. Ron: There just isn’t any evidence to teach. You can’t expect any biology teacher to teach information that doesn’t exhist.

    This is not true. Southern Adventist University and Southwestern Adventist University both have professors who believe and teach the evidence for a recent creation. You fail to understand that the Church believes there is reasonable evidence in support of the biblical creation. I’d even go so far as to say that if a person rejects the biblical creation, he cannot legitimately call himself a Seventh-day Adventist Christian. He can call himself a Christian. Keep in mind salvation is not found in church membership, so just because I say this doesn’t mean I’m judging anyone’s salvation. Rejecting the sixth fundamental belief effectively demolishes quite a few other beliefs that are unique to Adventism. How can we maintain our distinctive identity as Adventists if we are no longer professing anything different than any other Christian church? Why call ourselves Seventh-day Adventists? Tradition? Nonsense!




    0
    View Comment
  5. “Southern Adventist University and Southwestern Adventist University both have professors who believe and teach the evidence for a recent creation.”

    Uh, Shane, they aren’t the ONLY ones!




    0
    View Comment
  6. Any of our schools who are teaching evolution as the only viable answer should be boycotted by SDA’s. Don’t send your children there! Shout it far and wide in publications and news. DO NOT send your children to these schools. If the GC won’t do anything about it, then let the schools close down for lack of students.




    0
    View Comment
  7. Oh GREAT! … I was just about to fund my grandson to La Sierra … so glad I had this email alert for LSU set up … any Christian teacher can present far more evidence to justify a literal creation by an intelligent designer than one who falls for the false hope of evolution by chance.
    Please just get on your knees and pray for guidance before hiring any of these misguided instructors. We serve an awesome God who will direct in the hiring practices of our beloved institution. No one can understand creation or anything else in the Bible without the help of The Holy Spirit. This school will fade into the past without such guidance. My prayer is that this toxic news is not true.




    0
    View Comment
  8. On a positive note, I have contacted a number of our other Universitys and on the surface they all stongly profess to teach Literal 6 day Creation(of course LSU does too). There are other choices for our students if parents care enough to send them somewhere else.




    0
    View Comment
  9. That is a fantastic article with names and specific details pointing even the most cursory reader to irrefutable evidence of what is going on at LSU beneath all the marketing and PR hype to the contrary.

    I pray to God that there is an Adventist administrator in a responsible position that can take action with this information.

    The truth shall set you free.

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  10. Shane,
    I believe we should take this campaign to another level. It seems to me, the LSU President and the Faculty senate are determined not to listen to Biblical instruction and for that matter the Holy Spirit, and sadly the Pacific Union Conference which owns and operates LSU is not doing any thing to uproot this cancer from our midst. Therefore my suggestion is that, we organize a boycott of the Pacific Union Conference and send our tithes elsewhere, perhaps to the Michigan Conference because they are doing a wonderful job in upholding what the SDA church stands for. I believe if the money stops flowing to the conferences, the church leadership will wake up and meet this apostasy head on.




    0
    View Comment
  11. Michael Adjei-Poku says, “my suggestion is that, we organize a boycott of the Pacific Union Conference and send our tithes elsewhere, perhaps to the Michigan Conference because they are doing a wonderful job in upholding what the SDA church stands for.”

    Let’s instead keep paying our tithe and pray for those in leadership who do want to do the right thing that they would have wisdom, skill and courage to do so. Withholding tithe from workers who may be sincerely doing things right with those who are not is taking the church reins into our hands instead of allowing God to take them in His. David didn’t agree with Saul, but he respected Saul’s anointing to leadership of the kingdom. I don’t think the ministers in church government are more guilty than Saul.
    God bless,

    Rich




    0
    View Comment
  12. Thank you for this excellent article! I found it very helpful. The compilation of specific incidents one after another presents evidence that is clear and overwhelming about the true nature of the situtation and eloquently demonstrates that something needs to be done. I certainly hope the General Conference will take action to confront this issue! Let us earnestly pray that God will move on hearts and give wisdom to take remedial action.




    0
    View Comment
  13. There is a huge bit of SDA history that people need to know about, and I believe that this site has an obligation to inform its readers as much as possible. It is not right to frame LSU faculty members as arch heretics when, in fact, they are only a small piece of a bigger issue involving many more people.

    During the 1950’s, church leaders became aware that the evidence from geology and archaeology (particularly Egyptology) did not fit well with Ussher’s chronology. R. R. Fighur recognized these issues and, among other things, was instrumental in starting Geoscience Research Institute. Dr. Richard Hammill, a GC Vice President, President of Andrews University and chairman of the GRI Research Guidance Committee, was very much involved in discussing these issues. Late in his retirement, Dr. Hammill was very clear that he saw major problems with a short chronology. Here are two quotations from an interview. (The complete interview from 1997 is available on line.)

    Hammill Interview: http://www.atoday.com/files/Mar-Apr%201997_1.pdf

    “I would suspect that the majority of Adventists will always believe in a short chronology of creation. I think however, that increasing numbers of Adventists who have studied into the subject will be forced to realize, as I have, that life forms have existed on the earth for long periods of time before other genera and species appear.”

    “ … we planned at first that it [Geoscience Research Institute] would be a research group …. We had thought we might even develop a carbon 14 and amino acid dating lab. But then the person that we had trained in that area left the Institute. … Some of the early staff there, like Richard Ritland, Harold James and Ed Lugenbeal, were oriented toward research. The main controlling committee established a group known as the Research Guidance Committee, of which I was the Chair. … However, when Robert Pierson became president of the General Conference, he appointed one of the vice-presidents to be chairman of the Geoscience Research Board. Immediately he disbanded the Research Guidance Committee. Under his influence, the emphasis was changed from research to apologetics. Since that time the Geoscience Research staff has been chosen to be apologists for the short chronology of earth history.”

    The person who left was P. E. Hare. He had started research intending to show that C14 dating was not valid. When he realized that his own work supported C14 dating, he soon found that he was not welcome to continue, so he left GRI and became internationally known for his work at the Carnegie Institute. Others also left because they were no longer free to do honest science.

    So, what you might say is that, fifty years ago, the church took a hard look at the scientific data and didn’t like what it saw, whereupon Robert Pierson changed GRI from “research to apologetics.” That’s pretty much where we’ve been ever since. You won’t read about it in the Review because, for some reason, church leaders think it’s better that most people don’t know about such problems. Thankfully, Adventist Today has presented a good bit of what others have wished to suppress.

    Before you demand action at LSU, you need to take some time to understand the problem. There have been several meetings to deal with science issues. Generally, these meetings have been dominated by conservative theology, and science people have not found much satisfaction. The issue is not limited to just a few people who have decided to undermine the teachings of the church. It’s a major fraction of science educated Adventists who find themselves in a political process where the power structure of the church has never permitted an open discussion of the problems. Many Adventist scientists have either left the church or chosen to be quiet.

    What makes me sad now is that the church leadership has left LSU to suffer alone. If Dr. Hammill, a former GC Vice President and President of AU, found evidence in favor of evolution, what makes you think that we don’t have a problem bigger than LSU? The evidence for the old age of life will not go away no mater how many faculty are driven out of LSU. It is a tragedy for this Web site to over simplify the problem as it has.

    PS. There’s a lot of reading that needs to be done. Here is a related article written by Dr. Hammill.
    http://spectrummagazine.org/files/archive/archive11-15/15-2hammill.pdf

    Also, The Creationists, by Ron Numbers, is an important book for understanding this topic. Further, since the real challenges to a short chronology come from geology more than biology, the book Noah’s Flood, by Ryan and Pitman, is very understandable.




    0
    View Comment
  14. A Bible text recently came to mind when thinking about the situation at hand and those involved in it.

    “24 For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:

    25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever”
    I Peter 1:24,25.




    0
    View Comment
  15. Over and over again I see the phrase “Ussher’s chronology” from all these highly educated elite. For crying out loud it is “Bible chronology”! Try taking a half hour and add up the numbers in Genesis 5 and 11 (a little extra care is needed for Noah to Shem and Terah to Abraham but the necessary information IS there),then to make things simple, Galatians 3:17. 1 Kings 6:1 brings us to the 4th year of Solomon’s reign when the temple’s construction begins, being completed 7 years later which works out to exactly 3000 years from creation. Find out when Solomon reigned (can vary by a few years), add it on and here we are, 6,000 years from creation with no help from Ussher! The millenium becomes a sabbath and this unique time in which we live takes on new meaning. Sorry if this is off topic a bit but I see “Usshers chronology” so often and cringe!




    0
    View Comment
  16. Carl: What makes me sad now is that the church leadership has left LSU to suffer alone. If Dr. Hammill, a former GC Vice President and President of AU, found evidence in favor of evolution, what makes you think that we don’t have a problem bigger than LSU? The evidence for the old age of life will not go away no mater how many faculty are driven out of LSU. It is a tragedy for this Web site to over simplify the problem as it has.

    You yourself are a professor at an SDA institution. Yet, you believe in and support a long-age evolutionary model of origins on this planet.

    That’s a problem, and the problem is indeed a simple one. Regardless of the fact that the majority of mainstream scientists, and even many scientists who are teaching in SDA schools, agree with you, the SDA Church, as an organization, does not. The SDA Church organization has taken a very clear stand on a literal creation week as a fundamental doctrine which is reflected in the very name Seventh-day Adventist.

    Now, you may think the SDA Church is clearly mistaken in this view, but until the SDA Church “catches up” to your understanding of reality, you and those professors like you are in fact taking money from the SDA Church organization while directly undermining what that organization is paying you to teach and promote. It doesn’t matter if people like Hammill, Hare, and Numbers became convinced otherwise. The SDA Church, as an organization has not been convinced. Until it is convinced, you and those teachers hired by the SDA Church are being dishonest toward the Church in the taking of money while in the very process of undermining what the Church is paying you to do.

    If you were really honest with yourselves, you’d leave the employ of the Church to work for reform from outside of the Church while being paid by those who are already in agreement with your position – and there are many who would be very glad to pay you to teach your views.

    So far, the SDA Church is not one of these. And, if the SDA Church ever did “see the light” and support your position, officially, I would leave the SDA Church.

    You and those like you, I’m afraid, have fallen for a very clever but deception. The evidence of this deception is available, but you’ve not been able to grasp it. Until you do, it is simply wrong to continue to take money from the SDA Church while undermining the stated position of the Church. Very simple.

    Sean Pitman
    http://www.DetectingDesign.com




    0
    View Comment
  17. @Carl:

    Carl – thank you for sharing that bit of history.

    Also – thank you for givein us the example of men like P.E Hare who upon realizing that his views no longer matched the teaching of the Adventist Church – had the integrity to go to some institution where they did match.

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  18. BobRyan: had the integrity to go to some institution where they did match.

    Bob,

    The most fundamental spiritual value that I have learned in the Adventist church is to seek the truth no matter what. You are part of a tragedy when you think you can do that by driving out everyone who thinks otherwise than you do.

    Adventism has always been non-creedal. The preamble to our statement of fundamental beliefs opens the option for revisions. When you look into the process by which our fundamental beliefs have been established, you will find reasons why they should never be taken as finished.

    We have a choice between being more open to a variety of views or becoming another version of the Flat Earth Society. I vote for openness.




    0
    View Comment
  19. @Carl:

    Bob,

    The most fundamental spiritual value that I have learned in the Adventist church is to seek the truth no matter what.

    Carl – my hope and prayer is that your statement above is the “common ground” that all can agree upon.

    In fact it is that principle that is key to bringing many souls to the Adventist church in the first place.

    That is why I think it is important to stand for unpopular acceptance of the Word of God – in spite of the popular views in favor of the atheist scenario for origins that Darwin, Dawkins, Provine and Meyers promote.

    God is both Creator and Savior. As Creator – HE is the one who “in SIX days made the heavens and the earth the seas and all that are in them”.

    Surely you have to admit that His view of origins is not popular at all.

    Given that God is the makER — SCIENCE by definition (at least REAL science) is limited to studying that which God has made (Unless of course the atheists are right – and God did not actually make anything — so then in that case science is simply studying “what happens all on its own”).

    “As it turns out” – no scientist has ever shown that “life suddenly appears all on its own” and no scientist has ever shown “birds coming from reptiles” though many atheist evolutionists certainly “imagine that birds came from reptiles”.

    As it turns out – the genomes of eukaryote systems such as reptiles and birds – do not have the plasticity for the genome morphing stories being told by evolutionsts who engage in fictions about “birds coming from reptiles”.

    You are part of a tragedy when you think you can do that by driving out everyone who thinks otherwise than you do.

    In your view – was “Moses part of the tragedy” in dealing with Achan?

    In your view – was “Peter part of the tragedy” in dealing with Annanias and Saphira.

    In your view – was “Paul part of the tragedy” when he makes his 1Tim 5:20 statement about open rebuke for those in rebellion against God?

    In other words — where do you “draw the line” in that tragedy concept you identify?

    (we keep getting “dead silence” on this point from evolutionists)

    Adventism has always been non-creedal. The preamble to our statement of fundamental beliefs opens the option for revisions. When you look into the process by which our fundamental beliefs have been established, you will find reasons why they should never be taken as finished.

    As it turns out – I have read in great detail George Knight’s “history” of our fundamental beliefs. But even more interesting – I have also looked in detail at the part that Fritz Guy claims to have played in that process.

    Still a few points are readily apparent.

    #1. The SDA church had to form some kind of denominational statement – that identied the teachings of this denomination – just to keep every fruit nut and flake that wanted to travel about causing trouble – from claiming to also be “an Adventist evangelist”.

    The term “Adventist” had to actually “mean something” or we never would have made it past first base.

    Thus the notion of immovable “pillars of the faith” began to emerge. A concept that did negate the idea of having “more pillars” established over time.

    #2. When you speak of the Graybill preamble (or what some have called the “camel’s nose under the tent”) – you seem to suppose that it is designed to say “any of our beliefs may be negated pending some future vote”. But that is not exactly what it says. And besides that – the pro-evolutionist minority in the church is far from having the critical mass needed to make a change via “a vote”.

    #3. When you read 3SG 90-91 do you see the text there as drawing a “line in the sand”? — do you share that text with students when they begin to question Creation or when they begin to question evolutionism?

    We have a choice between being more open to a variety of views or becoming another version of the Flat Earth Society.

    Yes the “flat earth” is a favorite canard of atheists when they debate Christians. That is particularly the case when they are atheist evolutionists debating Creationists. However to date – no Christians are arguing for a flat earth.

    What Christians are arguing for is – GOOD science rather than what Colin Patterson called “NOT SCIENCE”. Patterson was one of the department heads at the British Museum of Natural history for much of the 20th century and even as an atheist evolutionist he observed that evolutionists telling “stories about how one thing came from another” based on the fossil record – were engaged in “stories easy enough to make up – but they are NOT SCIENCE”.

    How odd then – that some of our own fellow SDAs should be taking up the “NOT SCIENCE” banner and promoting it in our own schools.

    Don’t you think?

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  20. Dr. Stone: “Rich, Your Feb. 3 comment on boycotting the PUC is a great idea. Except for perhaps the Central California Conference, the PUC is in horrible shape regarding it so-called “leadership.” As I’ve stated before, we are the laughingstock of the world-wide SDA Church.”

    On Feb. 3 I spoke against boycotting any conference because I would pray and pay for the sincere with my tithe while praying and paying for God to, 1) convict and convert 2) remove the rebellious.
    God bless,

    Rich




    0
    View Comment
  21. @Carl: We do take the Bible as our creed, and you can’t disagree that currently the church’s official is based on a recent, six-day creation, which they think is biblical.

    Carl: You are part of a tragedy when you think you can do that by driving out everyone who thinks otherwise than you do.

    Whoa there! We live in a free society with no civil repercussions for leaving a church. The SDA church holds that at a fundamental level a recent, six-day creation is truth. It does not consider the evolutionary model to be true or biblical. However, if you disagree you are more than welcome to pursue what you believe to be true, but if you’re going to start proselytizing Adventist youth while on the SDA payroll to your own interpretation of truth which blatantly contradicts the position of the church, then you need to move on.

    It’s ludicrous to think you can be a part of any organization and actively promote beliefs that undermine their fundamental beliefs without any consequence. If you want to be absolutely free to proselytize your own beliefs, do it on your own time and dime.

    Here’s the reality of the situation right now Carl. SDA parents and students are not paying for an expensive SDA education to be taught we evolved from animals over millions of years. Until the tide changes, these professors have absolutely no right to take their money and proselytize their children.

    What kind of education system would we have if we allowed LSU to just do whatever it wanted with our money? Our kids grow up being taught God made the world in the recent past in six days, but once they get to our universities they’re taught that belief is part of the lunatic fringe and evolution is actually the truth. That’s crazy.




    0
    View Comment
  22. Actually, Shane, that’s a vast glossing over of the facts. First, Adventist children get told the world was made in six days just over six thousand years ago. Then they get told, well, you know what, the rocks were made a long time ago, but the life on those rocks, now you see, that’s what was made just over six thousand years ago. *pivot* Then they get told, actually, it’s looking like maybe it’s really ten to twelve thousand years ago. All the while, with each change and each step, those making the new suggestions are the spawn of the devil, promoting a lie set to deceive.

    The term cognitive dissonance has been bandied about here before. And I think that’s a VERY appropriate term. But the dissonance happens far sooner than I think most are willing to consider. It’s because the stories don’t gel, the hedging continues, and the language of blame and labeling resonates across decades of church history into the present. Kids aren’t getting confused over Biology classes at LSU, they’re getting confused because the language of blame and deceit NEVER changes, but the names of those who are blamed and the science does.




    0
    View Comment
  23. That LSU Senatorial Postmodernist Manifesto leaked, of all places, from Erv Taylor’s PostAdventistToday, pretty funny piece, actually, LOL. Serious students of postmodernism know that since Derrida’s derisory deconstructionism postmodernism’s main mode is whimsy. Nothing is absolute, chuckle chuckle, especially Genesis 1, chuckle chuckle. Seriously, folks, it could be a hoax, lighten up. Or old Erv’s idea of satire a la Sartre. By the same token, it can’t be taken too seriously. Not a laughing matter. So much for the half-time comedy break.




    0
    View Comment
  24. I’ve always resisted referring to LaSierra as “LSU” because where I come from those initials universally refer to Louisiana State University. Whenever I read “LSU” I think of those yellow helmets and yellow and purple uniforms, and the usually top-ranked football teams from Baton Rouge.

    But now I’m thinking that “LSU” is an appropriate designation for LaSierra. Because what they teach at LaSierra is pretty much indistinguishable from what they teach at the real LSU. LaSierra is just another public university wannabe, without the football team.




    0
    View Comment
  25. Shane Hilde: but once they get to our universities they’re taught that belief is part of the lunatic fringe and evolution is actually the truth. That’s crazy.

    Yes, that’s not a good situation. But maybe part of the problem is what they’re taught before they get to the university. I remember going to graduate school and making stupid statements because I didn’t no anything about geology. SDA education has always been afraid of geology and I suffered an inferior education because of it. Dr. Hammill refers to the problems that the GRI staff encountered in trying to educate SDA educators during a 1968 field trip: … the staff had to concentrate on helping the church understand some fairly simple concepts about geology. There were still quite a few teachers and church members who denied that dinosaurs had ever existed, or that glacial ice sheets had at several successive times covered large parts of North America and Europe.”

    Another interesting point that Dr. Hammill mentioned is that in the 1950’s, if you can believe it, the church had a policy “to the effect that the 6,000-year chronology need not be emphasized in Seventh-day Adventist publications.” This policy was reversed by Robert Pierson who “instinctively reacted against research data which looked like it might prove more than 6,000 years of earth history.”
    http://spectrummagazine.org/files/archive/archive11-15/15-2hammill.pdf

    Here’s a statement by Raymond Cottrell, a former Associate Editor of the Adventist Review and of the SDA Bible Commentary: “At a meeting of its Advisory Council more than twenty-five years ago [now 38 years ago] the director of the Geoscience Research Institute announced that a major project of the Institute in coming years would be to locate a world-wide flood in the geologic column. Have they found it yet? The church has devoted a considerable amount of time, effort, and money in a futile attempt to prove that a world-wide flood was more than an imaginary event based on a misreading of the Bible! It’s time that we took a realistic look at the weight of evidence.” (Unfortunately, I can’t find a Web link for his well documented paper which is titled “Extent of the Genesis Flood.”)

    You are providing a forum people to vent hostile statements whether or not they understand the issues well. I suggest that you have an obligation to provide a much broader range of information than I have seen posted so far.




    0
    View Comment
  26. While I’m not as familiar with our Geoscience division, there is a excellent non sda organization that teaches Creation based in Texas called The Institute for Creation Research. Icr.org. (lots of really good research-check it out) They have no problem with teaching creation and offer a graduate degree. There is ample evidence for belief in creation in all areas of science if you look for it. Many of the so called problems are now being resolved. It’s a shame we aren’t on the cutting edge of making that happen. Instead we are catering to the “worlds view of orgins”. Another intesting point is that our other universities seem able to teach literal creation. Why is it that only LSU teachers can’t do it? I think we know why. They don’t want to and it’s up to us to make sure they find a new audiance to teach.




    0
    View Comment
  27. Carl: You are providing a forum people to vent hostile statements whether or not they understand the issues well. I suggest that you have an obligation to provide a much broader range of information than I have seen posted so far.

    You mistake the primary purpose of this forum. This forum isn’t so much about debating the truth or error of theories regarding creation or evolution. This forum is about the issue of professors in SDA schools taking money from the SDA Church organization while teaching their students ideas that directly counter what the SDA Church organization currently stands for. That is a moral wrong. It is stealing from the Church.

    You argue that the SDA Church is not creedal, therefore anything goes essentially…

    This is a mistaken view. From very early on the founding fathers of the SDA Church quickly figured out that some sort of discipline or enforcement of church order and government was in fact necessary to prevent utter chaos and fragmentation. J.N. Loughborough and James White, while in initial opposition to church government, soon realized its necessity and started issuing “cards of commendation” only to those pastors and teachers who accurately represented the views of the church as an organization.

    Of course, those who were not considered to accurately represent the views of the early SDA Church did not receive “cards of commendation”. And what was the attitude of such persons? – according to Loughborough?:

    Of course those who claimed “liberty to do as they pleased,” to “preach what they pleased,” and to “go when and where they pleased,” without “consultation with any one,” failed to get cards of commendation. They, with their sympathizers, drew off and commenced a warfare against those whom they claimed were “depriving them of their liberty.” Knowing that it was the Testimonies that had prompted us as a people to act, to establish “order,” these opponents soon turned their warfare against instruction from that source, claiming that “when they got that gift out of the way, the message would go unrestrained to its `loud cry.’ ”

    One of the principal claims made by those who warred against organization was that it “abridged their liberty and independence, and that if one stood clear before the Lord that was all the organization needed,” etc… All the efforts made to establish order are considered dangerous, a restriction of rightful liberty, and hence are feared as popery.”
    – Loughborough, JN. Testimonies for the Church. p. 650. Vol. 1.

    The same thing is true now as it ever was. Any viable organization, to include church organizations, require some form of government and discipline within that government. If you are not in line with that government, you simply are not at liberty to represent that government – certainly not while taking money as a representative. You are free to leave at any time, but you are not free to stay on the payroll if you do not accurately reflect the decided position of the church government.

    And yes, I do know that you do not support the stated SDA view on a literal creation week. That much is quite clear. And, that’s perfectly Ok. I have no problem with people who oppose the notion of a literal creation week (such as the vast majority of mainstream scientists) – as long as they are not doing it while claiming to represent the SDA Church on the Church’s dime…

    Sean Pitman
    http://www.DetectingDesign.com




    0
    View Comment
  28. @Carl:

    Dr. Hammill refers to the problems that the GRI staff encountered in trying to educate SDA educators during a 1968 field trip: … the staff had to concentrate on helping the church understand some fairly simple concepts about geology. There were still quite a few teachers and church members who denied that dinosaurs had ever existed, or that glacial ice sheets had at several successive times covered large parts of North America and Europe.”

    Wonderful story. But that is not what is being debated. There is no “no such thing as dinosaurs” section of this topic.

    There is no “no such thing as glacial ice sheets or a mini ice age” being argued by SDAs here or anywhere — still I suppose it does make for a good annecdotal story.

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  29. @Carl:

    Here’s a statement by Raymond Cottrell, a former Associate Editor of the Adventist Review and of the SDA Bible Commentary: “At a meeting of its Advisory Council more than twenty-five years ago [now 38 years ago] the director of the Geoscience Research Institute announced that a major project of the Institute in coming years would be to locate a world-wide flood in the geologic column. Have they found it yet? The church has devoted a considerable amount of time, effort, and money in a futile attempt to prove that a world-wide flood was more than an imaginary event

    1. It would be nice to see the number of millions of dollars they put into that “research”.

    2. It is easy to see why Cottrell is a “former” editor in his reference to the Bible account of the flood as an “imaginary event”.

    Oh well – it is good to know that this is not the only age that sees problems with some goofy statements from prominent SDAs from time to time.

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  30. Carl:
    Dr. Hammill refers to the problems that the GRI staff encountered in trying to educate SDA educators during a 1968 field trip: … the staff had to concentrate on helping the church understand some fairly simple concepts about geology.There were still quite a few teachers and church members who denied that dinosaurs had ever existed, or that glacial ice sheets had at several successive times covered large parts of North America and Europe.”

    Carl, I find it difficult to believe, given what Ellen What wrote about antediluvian creatures, that a lot of Adventists in 1968 didn’t believe that dinosaurs had ever existed. But I am open to your correction on that one.

    As far as several successive times for glacial ice sheets covering large parts of North America and Europe, very obviously, if such successive times would require millions of years, there weren’t several successive times.

    Researchers at LSU could have the privilege of being at the cutting edge of some of these fields. If God said such and such through inspiration, then obviously that’s the way it is. Researchers at LSU could then look for evidence to support that position, whether it be repeated, rapid glaciation and glacier melting, or whatever. Prayerfully search for the evidence, and it will be found sooner or later, I would think.

    By the way, isn’t Hammill a skeptic? If so, he might not be a good authority on these questions.




    0
    View Comment
  31. Bob Pickle: By the way, isn’t Hammill a skeptic? If so, he might not be a good authority on these questions.

    Richard Hammill, former GC Vice President and President of AU, a skeptic? Please read what he has written. He was accused of many things that were not true, but the skeptic label might top them all.




    0
    View Comment
  32. BobRyan: It is easy to see why Cottrell is a “former” editor in his reference to the Bible account of the flood as an “imaginary event”.

    He is a “former editor” because he retired and later died. His integrity was outstanding and his scholarship was excellent. Please read what he wrote.




    0
    View Comment
  33. Sean Pitman, M.D.: You mistake the primary purpose of this forum.

    I certainly do not mistake your primary purpose. I simply find you to be irresponsible and deceptive. You want people to believe that the case is very simple and that the problem will be solved if we all line up with the fundamentals whether they are right or wrong. You are not correct.




    0
    View Comment
  34. Sean Pitman, M.D.: You argue that the SDA Church is not creedal, therefore anything goes essentially…

    Your argument by extention is pure nonsense. I have never argued that anything goes and I don’t believe such a thing. However, there are times when issues need to be re-examined, and this is one of them.




    0
    View Comment
  35. Carl: “Richard Hammill, former GC Vice President and President of AU, a skeptic? Please read what he has written. He was accused of many things that were not true, but the skeptic label might top them all.”

    Richard L. Hammill, formerly president of Andrews University and vice president of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, stated, “animals were living on the earth . . . millions of years ago before these [continental] plates separated. And, moreover, as I got to looking into the geologic column, I had to recognize . . . that the geologic column is valid, that some forms of life were extinct before other forms of life came into existence. I had to recognize that the forms of life that we are acquainted with mostly, like the ungulate hoof animals, the primates, man himself, exist only in the very top little layer of the Holocene, and that many forms of life were extinct before these ever came in, which, of course, is a big step for a Seventh-day Adventist when you are taught that every form of life came into existence in six days. . . . I had felt it for many, many years, but finally there in about 1983 I had to say to myself, That’s right. The steadily accumulating evidence in the natural world has forced a reevaluation in the way that I look at and understand and interpret parts of the Bible.” Speech at Association of Adventist Forums Convention, Seattle, WA October 13, 1989 Quoted in Hayward, “The Many Faces of Adventist Creationism: ’80-’95,” Spectrum 25 3 (1996). 27, 2B.

    If this is correct, ‘skeptic’ is the generous best. (Exodus 20:11; Isaiah 8:20)
    God bless,

    Rich




    0
    View Comment
  36. Sean, I just went to your site and watched the Cliff Goldstein video, and also checked out your new Mary Schweitzer video. You did a great job of editing together the 60 minutes interview and some other interviews. For people who are open to the truth, the Schweitzer discoveries blow the doors off of long-ages geology.

    Everone who hasn’t done so should check out this video:

    http://www.viddler.com/explore/Seanpit/videos/19/




    0
    View Comment
  37. Carl: “He is a “former editor” because he retired and later died.”

    Raymond Cottrell was born in 1911 and retired in 1977. Cottrell became the associate editor of the Adventist Review in 1957. He worked as associate editor of the Adventist Review until 1964. Cottrell retired in 1977. In 1993 he helped found Adventist Today, an editor, contributor, and “editor emeritus” of the same until 2003 when he died.
    God bless,

    Rich

    Cottrell, “The Untold Story of the Bible Commentary”, 37;
    “COTTRELL, Raymond Forrest”. Obituary in “At Rest” section of the Adventist Review March 13, 2003, p. 30 (414);
    “Raymond Cottrell”, an obituary in “Newsbreak” section. Adventist Review February 13, 2003, p. 21 (261))




    0
    View Comment
  38. Carl: “Your argument by extention is pure nonsense. I have never argued that anything goes and I don’t believe such a thing.

    What goes?

    Carl: “However, there are times when issues need to be re-examined, and this is one of them.”

    You admit the SDA church believes in a six-day literal creation as a represented church in harmony with Exodus 20:11. You are hopefully not thinking we haven’t taken a stand on the issue – the only other logical possibility.
    God bless,

    Rich




    0
    View Comment
  39. Carl: Your argument by extention is pure nonsense. I have never argued that anything goes and I don’t believe such a thing. However, there are times when issues need to be re-examined, and this is one of them.

    That’s just it. Who gets to decide when an issue needs to be re-examined? The SDA Church has examined this issue and still hasn’t changed its mind as an organization. You may disagree with this current decision of the SDA Church, but the fact remains that it has made a decision.

    In your argument that the SDA Church is not creedal, what then are you suggesting? – if not that “anything goes”? If you agree that the SDA Church should stand for something, upon what basis should it make decisions as an organization? You do realize that regardless of the decisions made, there will always be some who do not agree – who think that the Church needs to “re-examine” and change its official position on this or that issue?

    After a point, the Church has to take a stand regardless of who disagrees and support this stand with some sort of limitations on who it hires as paid representatives. There is simply no other workable option for any viable organization.

    I certainly do not mistake your primary purpose. I simply find you to be irresponsible and deceptive. You want people to believe that the case is very simple and that the problem will be solved if we all line up with the fundamentals whether they are right or wrong. You are not correct.

    I never said that the case for or against creationism or evolutionism was “very simple”. It isn’t simple at all. It took me many years of intensive investigation to come to my current understanding of the issues in play. I’m also not suggesting that one who does not agree with the SDA fundamentals simply cave into them. I’m suggesting that such a person do the honest thing and seek employment outside of the SDA Church in such a case – and not undermine the Church’s stated position on the Church’s dime.

    What does seem very very clear and simple to me is that taking money from any organization while undermining what that organization is paying you to do is a form of theft – – a clear moral wrong in anyone’s book.

    This is the main point of this website. Regardless of what you or I or anyone else thinks of the evidence for or against evolution or creation, this website is urging that the Church be consistent in what it claims are its “fundamental” positions. Saying that is stands for a literal 6-day creation while hiring teachers who believe and teach otherwise is inconsistent – even schizophrenic. The Church should move one way or the other in order to escape this schizophrenia. It should either decidedly support its stand on 6-day creation or remove this statement of fundamental beliefs from its list of what it supposedly stands for. That way, no one can accuse the Church or its schools of false advertising and deception. No one can have hard feelings when their children are educated in complete opposition to something like the 6-day creation week.

    One more thing this website stands for is transparency. If a school like La Sierra University is actually teaching a certain philosophy or perspective in its classrooms, then it should make this fact abundantly clear to future students and parents, as well as to the Church constituency at large. All involved have a right to know what is actually being taught to our young people. Such transparency is vital to any sort of real growth in the Church – – and it is the right thing to do for those who are paying good money for a particular product. They deserve to know what they are really getting.

    Nothing makes me angrier than to see someone being convinced that they are getting one thing for their money when they are really getting something very very different… That just isn’t right and no one should have to tolerate it.

    Sean Pitman
    http://www.DetectingDesign.com




    0
    View Comment
  40. Ron: “I expect our Adventist education system to show how science strongly supports short creation and a Master Designer”I would expect them to as well. The problem is that there is no convincing evidence of a short creation. The GC has spent millions of dollors on the Geoscience Research Institute in order to find evidence for a short creation, and in the last fifty years the effort has been an absolute failure. There just isn’t any evidence to teach. You can’t expect any biology teacher to teach information that doesn’t exhist.  (Quote)

    What are you smoking?

    For starters – “60 minutes” just broadcast the “65 million year old T-rex fossils with PROTEIN – REAL BLOOD VESSELS in it.!!!

    No evidence????! Wishful thinking on your part.




    0
    View Comment
  41. @Bob Pickle: Bob Pickle, I don’t know where you can find the full 60 minutes program. I saw the video at Sean Pitman’s site “detecting design”; he edited it together. He might be of more help to you.

    There’s an interesting article about protein sequencing of the soft dino tissue here: http://www.icr.org/article/4949/. Relates the following conversation between Jack Horner and Mary Schweitzer:

    When Mary was first working on this material, she called me up to say she had found osteocytes. I assumed she meant the spaces where the osteocytes would have been, which is what I suggested.

    “No, Jack, actually we have the cells and they have filipodia and they have nuclei.”

    “Mary, the freaking creationists are just going to love you.”

    “Jack, it’s your dinosaur.”




    0
    View Comment
  42. David Read: Bob Pickle, I don’t know where you can find the full 60 minutes program. I saw the video at Sean Pitman’s site “detecting design”; he edited it together. He might be of more help to you.

    I have a fairly detailed discussion of these dinosaur soft tissues and their protein sequencing at:

    http://www.detectingdesign.com/fossilizeddna.html#Fresh

    The full 60 Minutes video can be seen at:

    http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5658449n&tag=related;photovideo

    Hope this helps.

    Sean Pitman
    http://www.DetectingDesign.com




    0
    View Comment
  43. Sean Pitman, M.D.: I never said that the case for or against creationism or evolutionism was “very simple”. It isn’t simple at all.

    I was speaking of your alleged case against LSU, not the evolution/creation issue. You are demanding a very simple policy; Either fully support all fundamental beliefs or get out (of LSU). I am saying that there is no simple policy for dealing with something this complex. When people of the stature of Richard Hammill and Raymond Cottrell have raised honest questions about our traditions, I say it’s time to think it through, not rush to judgement. People who claim to search for truth must be tolerant of diverse opinions. Otherwise, you are likely to become locked in a stagnant set of traditions, and that’s exactly the accusation we bring against other religions.

    For a considerable time, church administration has use political power to stifle discussion of the issues that challenge our historical literal interpretation of Genesis 1-11. The sequence of three Faith and Science meetings several years ago were not well reported, and the reports were clearly biased. Also, the science participation was kept small enough that even a unanimous agreement of the science-educated participants would not have reached a majority.

    So, church administration has chosen to keep our members uninformed. Critical meetings dealing with science issues have been essentially closed. Now, you launch a Web site against LSU as if they are the real problem. I believe it is deceptive to create a Web site making it appear that the problem is as simple as a few errant professors at LSU.

    If the church has failed to deal with the science issues, and people like Hammill and Cottrell have raised unanswered questions, is it fair to single out LSU?




    0
    View Comment
  44. @Carl:

    I was speaking of your alleged case against LSU, not the evolution/creation issue. You are demanding a very simple policy; Either fully support all fundamental beliefs or get out (of LSU). I am saying that there is no simple policy for dealing with something this complex. When people of the stature of Richard Hammill and Raymond Cottrell have raised honest questions about our traditions, I say it’s time to think it through, not rush to judgement. People who claim to search for truth must be tolerant of diverse opinions. Otherwise, you are likely to become locked in a stagnant set of traditions, and that’s exactly the accusation we bring against other religions.

    How does “SIX days you shall labor.. for in SIX DAYS the Lord MADE…” fit into your proposal?? A “man made tradition” or a message from God?

    How does 3SG 90-91 fit into your proposal? Is merely mistaken human tradition or is it a message from God?

    For a considerable time, church administration has use political power to stifle discussion of the issues that challenge our historical literal interpretation of Genesis 1-11.

    Now there you have done everyone here a great service by exposing the point that the evolutionist agenda is not merely to discredit the creation account — it also seeks to discredit the “long-life” ages of man pre-flood, the world wide flood, the long ages of life of men that continued for a number of centuries after the flood, the tower of babel etc.

    The proposed agenda from evolutionist evangelists is to undercut so much of the Bible foundation that it would be foolish to imagine they would ever limit themselves to just the 7 day creation week central to the Sabbath Commandment.

    So the REAL question for our evolutionist evangelist friends is – on what basis is the entire denomination to toss out the Bible? Should the denomination go “belly up” because Hammil or Cottrel suggest that they do it? Is that how we determine doctrine these days?

    The sequence of three Faith and Science meetings several years ago were not well reported, and the reports were clearly biased. Also, the science participation was kept small enough that even a unanimous agreement of the science-educated participants would not have reached a majority.

    Under-reported is right. The church should have sounded the warning bell on this problem starting with that 1994 survey.

    So, church administration has chosen to keep our members uninformed. Critical meetings dealing with science issues have been essentially closed. Now, you launch a Web site against LSU as if they are the real problem. I believe it is deceptive to create a Web site making it appear that the problem is as simple as a few errant professors at LSU.

    I fully agree that the problem is bigger than LSU.

    But anyone who has carefully followed these web pages will not fail to notice a number of readers that have posted something like “yes but I am not convinced yet that LSU really is promoting evolutionism as you say. Maybe they are just reporting that it exists — not that it is actually the right answer”.

    So given that context it is extremely helpful to have a rogue example such as LSU breaking ranks and rushing headlong into the news and local papers shouting about how they are not going to teach no stinking creationist views in their classes (thanks to Bradley for example).

    Also you are right in that the church should have taken action long ago — and not just in regard to LSU. I think Walla Walla actually did have a “house cleaning” a few years back (as a historic example of one GC president and one Union president that were willing to step up and take action).

    But LSU makes a good case for the church finally “waking up” after all if the Administraters are too lax to “notice the problem” even when the biology professors are running to the press to tell them just how much they “believe” in evolutionism and just how much they “deny” the Bible account for origins — then when WILL those administrators ever wake up?!

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  45. Rich Constantinescu: Michael Adjei-Poku says, “my suggestion is that, we organize a boycott of the Pacific Union Conference and send our tithes elsewhere, perhaps to the Michigan Conference because they are doing a wonderful job in upholding what the SDA church stands for.”Let’s instead keep paying our tithe and pray for those in leadership who do want to do the right thing that they would have wisdom, skill and courage to do so. Withholding tithe from workers who may be sincerely doing things right with those who are not is taking the church reins into our hands instead of allowing God to take them in His. David didn’t agree with Saul, but he respected Saul’s anointing to leadership of the kingdom. I don’t think the ministers in church government are more guilty than Saul.God bless,Rich  (Quote)

    Different times, different circumstances demand altered approaches. Touching the Lord’s annointed is one thing. Joining forces with God’s annointed is another. Let us not forsake godly discernment. We must lend our support to those who demonstrate by their deeds and words that they are annointed, that they are clearly and irrevocably on the Lord’s side. There is no virtue or call to support those who cannot bring themselves to stand stiffly for principle. Our words are apparently not enough to move or impress administration. I feel certain that a drastic redirection of funds will give us the only effective means at our disposal to communicate our support for those who are decidedly on the Lord’s side.




    0
    View Comment
  46. What is the best thing, the greatest thing we can do for our leaders — pray for them or send them our tithe — when they fail to the most basic Biblical principles? Obviously, prayer and earnest supplication must be made to the Most High, so that a mighty angel will be sent from the throne of God so that the issue will stand forth to their minds with stark simplicity and clarity. This is the most wonderful thing we can do for them. Our tithe is by comparison and minor consideration, but it is the little we have, and perhaps God will multiply it’s effect and use the redirection of it to help simplify the “complex” issues at hand for the confused administrators.




    0
    View Comment
  47. Patrick: “Different times, different circumstances demand altered approaches.”

    Bible reference please.

    The Bible says, “And seek the peace of the city whither I have caused you to be carried away captives, and pray unto the LORD for it: for in the peace thereof shall ye have peace.” Jeremiah 29:7

    “For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” Matthew 6:21

    Patrick: “Touching the Lord’s anointed is one thing. Joining forces with God’s anointed is another.”

    Are there no forces working for God at the P.U.C. at all? Are all ministers in Michigan doing God’s will?

    Patrick: “We must lend our support to those who demonstrate by their deeds and words that they are anointed, that they are clearly and irrevocably on the Lord’s side.”

    Evidence please, that there no workers receiving tithe in the the P.U.C. who are God’s anointed.

    Jesus praised the widow who gave her last to the overflowing treasuries of the temple under leadership of the murderers of Jesus. (Luke 21:2-3)

    If there was ever a person who had the semblance of reason to withhold tithe and stop church attendance, it was Jesus of Nazareth. He didn’t.

    The Bible says, “Let all things be done decently and in order.” 1 Corinthians 14:40

    Patrick: “Our tithe is by comparison and minor consideration”

    Our tithe is connected with our desire to pray and work because where our money is, is our heart also. Matthew 6:21
    God bless,

    Rich




    0
    View Comment
  48. Sean Pitman, M.D.: This forum is about the issue of professors in SDA schools taking money from the SDA Church organization while teaching their students ideas that directly counter what the SDA Church organization currently stands for. That is a moral wrong.

    Sean,

    By that reasoning, I conclude that Luther must have committed a terrible moral wrong.




    0
    View Comment
  49. Carl: If the church has failed to deal with the science issues, and people like Hammill and Cottrell have raised unanswered questions, is it fair to single out LSU?

    I don’t think the Church has failed to deal with the science issues. The SDA Church is based on a belief in a certain type of biblical inspiration… regardless of the opinion of mainstream scientists.

    Church leaders like Hammill and Cottrell who have been convinced of the errors of certain doctrines held to be “fundamental” by the SDA Church are certainly welcome to their opinions. They just don’t have the automatic right to be paid for these opinions by the Church. Beyond this, the Church, as an organization, has actually considered their arguments and has come to a decision which opposes the views of Hammill and Cottrell.

    You argue that the Church hasn’t come to this decision with enough thought and careful consideration. You are also welcome to this opinion, but the fact remains that the SDA Church, as an organization, has indeed come to a decision.

    What is “simple” here is that a paid representative should be held accountable to the decisions of the organization – regardless of if you think that decision, or the process by which it was made, was correct. That’s how viable organizations work. Viable organizations simply do not stand by hiring employees who go about undermining the decisions made by the organization.

    If you don’t like the decision of the organization, you are perfectly free to go elsewhere. However, you do not have the moral right to continue to take your paycheck from the organized Church whose clearly stated goals you are actively undermining – – on the Church’s dime. You just don’t have that right… regardless of how “complex” you personally think the issue may be…

    But, you complain that it isn’t right to single out LSU. I agree. Any paid representative who is taking money from the SDA Church while going about actively undermining a stated fundamental position of the Church should not be kept in the employ of the Church…

    Sean Pitman
    http://www.DetectingDesign.com




    0
    View Comment
  50. Carl:

    Sean Pitman, M.D.: This forum is about the issue of professors in SDA schools taking money from the SDA Church organization while teaching their students ideas that directly counter what the SDA Church organization currently stands for. That is a moral wrong.

    Sean,

    By that reasoning, I conclude that Luther must have committed a terrible moral wrong.

    Nice try, but the Church of Luther’s day was the only option. One couldn’t simply leave the Catholic Church to challenge it from the outside free of severe civil penalties – likely death at the stake. There simply was no “outside” of the Church in Luther’s day. He had no option but to attack the moral wrongs of the Church from within.

    This is not the case today – thank God! Luther’s reformation helped to liberate civil government from Church authority. So, despite the constant comparisons of what we are doing in calling for transparency and consistency at LSU to the inquisition, this isn’t the inquisition by any stretch of the imagination. All are free to join or to leave the SDA Church at will without any fear of civil reprisals of any kind. Given the nature of the free civil society in which we live here in the great United States of America, there is no excuse for anyone to expect to get paid by the SDA Church while going about actively countering the most cherished of all fundamental positions of the Church – to include the very basis of the name Seventh-day Adventist!

    I’m sorry, but the call for consistency and transparency within Church schools isn’t remotely as “complex” as you wish to make it. The need for open transparency and a move away from cognitive dissonance within our Church schools is downright obvious and simple to the candid mind…

    Sean Pitman
    http://www.DetectingDesign.com




    0
    View Comment
  51. The last post says about two men Richard Hammill and Raymond Cottrell and that we should think it through when men “of this stature” have raised questions about our traditions. Sorry I don’t know these two men but they sound like they are important.

    But it’s not about them. What does Jesus say? In Matthew 19: 4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female. Maybe that doesn’t fly in the academic classroom, but LSU is supposed to stand for more than academics. It’s supposed to promote, teach, uplift what the Master said, what the great I AM has said in his word. What else did Jesus say? Mark 9:42
    And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.

    Translation: don’t teach impresionable young people wrong stuff.

    It’s what Jesus thinks that counts. Not what men think. Faith is taking what God wrote–without thinking. Because He–the great I AM–said so.

    And one more thing: do secular universities allow professors who believe in creationism/intelligent design to teach that in the classroom? Nope, they bounce them right out of there. So why is LSU so tolerant, so willing to be “pals” with evolutionists and teaching ToE?

    What about other universities like Liberty University? Or Oral Roberts University? What is their policy about allowing professors to teach ToE?Anybody know?

    ToE has problems (yet they teach it as fact) On the Toronto Star website, a while back, there was an article where the guy was saying that they found a hominid that led them to believe that monkeys has descended (with modification) from man!




    0
    View Comment
  52. @Rich Constantinescu:
    Rich, I think I take a bit different approach to tithe than what you do.

    Yes, I do believe it is God’s, and not ours. As such, I think it is important to return it to Him. Where we differ I guess, is how exactly to return it to Him, and what it means to bring it to His storehouse. You (and many like you, it seems) believe that the organized SDA church is THE ONLY storehouse. I believe it is ONE of the storehouses, but not the only one.

    Why? Because I think the Church Triumphant is not necessarily the same as the church militant, which implies that any person or group TRULY doing God’s work can be supported by the tithe, whether they are in denominational employment or not (because they are part of the church triumphant, and therefore part of God’s Storehouse).

    By contrast, even if a person is in denominational employ, but they are squandering the resources returned to them, it seems like it is our responsibility to withhold resources from them, because Christ said not to cast our ‘pearls before swine’ (or some such thing). This implies thoughtful responsibility, and not being blind followers or adherents. If God wanted the resources to totally go solely to the church, I think He would have taken away the individual responsibilty, and not made us individually stewards of the wealth He has bestowed on us.

    Anyway, those are my thoughts on the subject. Yes, doing all things decently and in order is appropriate too, but I think that can be done while withholding from those who are squandering the resources once available.




    0
    View Comment
  53. JohnB: “Yes, I do believe it is God’s, and not ours. As such, I think it is important to return it to Him. Where we differ I guess, is how exactly to return it to Him, and what it means to bring it to His storehouse.”

    The Bible says, “Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings. Ye are cursed with a curse: for ye have robbed me, even this whole nation. Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.”
    Malachi 3:8-10

    God tells us in the Bible what the storehouse is.

    Old Testament Revival

    “But Jehoiada the priest took a chest, and bored a hole in the lid of it, and set it beside the altar, on the right side as one cometh into the house of the LORD: and the priests that kept the door put therein all the money that was brought into the house of the LORD.” 2 Kings 12:9

    Storehouse = temple
    Keepers of storehouse = ministers of God’s people

    Old Testament Apostasy

    “A son honoureth his father, and a servant his master: if then I be a father, where is mine honour? and if I be a master, where is my fear? saith the LORD of hosts unto you, O priests, that despise my name. And ye say, Wherein have we despised thy name? Ye offer polluted bread upon mine altar; and ye say, Wherein have we polluted thee? In that ye say, The table of the LORD is contemptible.” Malachi 1:6-7

    “Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.” Malachi 3:8-10

    Storehouse = mine house = temple; cf. Mark 11:17
    Keepers of storehouse = keepers of the temple = ministers of the LORD

    Are ALL ministers in the P.U.C. unworthy of tithe? Are ALL ministers in Michigan worthy of tithe? What if Jehoida’s companions somehow were in apostasy as in Malachi’s time and it was withheld then as in Malachi’s time?

    New Testament Apostasy

    “But when the husbandmen saw him, they reasoned among themselves, saying, This is the heir: come, let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours.” Luke 20:14

    “And the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him; for they feared the people.” Luke 22:2

    “And he looked up, and saw the rich men casting their gifts into the treasury. And he saw also a certain poor widow casting in thither two mites. And he said, Of a truth I say unto you, that this poor widow hath cast in more than they all: For all these have of their abundance cast in unto the offerings of God: but she of her penury hath cast in all the living that she had.” Luke 21:1-4

    Treasury = Temple
    Not wicked priests receiving but God.

    New Testament Revival

    “Neither was there any among them that lacked: for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, And laid them down at the apostles’ feet: and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need. And Joses, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas, (which is, being interpreted, The son of consolation,) a Levite, and of the country of Cyprus, Having land, sold it, and brought the money, and laid it at the apostles’ feet.” Acts 4:34-37

    Storehouse = Church visible
    Custodians of the storehouse = Ministers

    Therefore in the Bible we see God’s storehouses and custodians, the church and the leadership, both in apostasy and in revival, where we are called to “cast in unto the offerings of God.” The visible church and leadership. (Acts 4:34-37)

    Does God have a visible church on earth today? Yes. Revelation 10-11; Revelation 14:6-12; Revelation 12:17.

    The remnant church today that keeps the commandments of God and has the faith of Jesus’ testimony is the Seventh-day Adventist church that came from bitter disappointment as did the Christian church. John 20:13; Revelation 10:10-11; Revelation 11:1; Daniel 7:13-14.
    God bless,

    Rich




    0
    View Comment
  54. Rich, here are a couple things to look at too:

    “There are only two places in the world where we can deposit our treasures–in God’s storehouse or in Satan’s, and all that is not devoted to Christ’s service is counted on Satan’s side and goes to strengthen his cause.” {6T 447.2}

    From this quote, God’s work (in any/all of its facets) is His storehouse. It is not limited to any one denomination (per se), but rather to God’s work at large, and to those really doing God’s work (in the broader context of His Church).

    “The woman saith unto him, Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet.
    Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.
    Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.
    Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.
    But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.” John 4:20-23

    This verse is speaking of worship, and indicates what God’s Church really is: it is composed of those who worship Him in spirit and in truth.

    Yes, the SDA church is an organization ordained by God to bring a last day message, and it is ONE of the avenues to return God’s money to His storehouse. However, it is NOT the ONLY avenue for doing that.

    “The tithe is set apart for a special use…. It is to be especially devoted to the support of those who are bearing God’s message to the world; and it should not be diverted from this purpose.–R. & H. Supplement, Dec. 1, 1896. {CS 103.2}”

    Again, according to this quote, those that are bearing God’s message to the world are a part of God’s storehouse, in its broadest sense, whether as part of the denominational employ or not.




    0
    View Comment
  55. JohnB: “There are only two places in the world where we can deposit our treasures–in God’s storehouse or in Satan’s, and all that is not devoted to Christ’s service is counted on Satan’s side and goes to strengthen his cause.” {6T 447.2}

    JohnB: “The tithe is set apart for a special use…. It is to be especially devoted to the support of those who are bearing God’s message to the world; and it should not be diverted from this purpose.–R. & H. Supplement, Dec. 1, 1896. {CS 103.2}”

    “Let none feel at liberty to retain their tithe, to use according to their own judgment. They are not to use it for themselves in an emergency, nor to apply it as they see fit, even in what they may regard as the Lord’s work. . . .

    “If our churches will take their stand upon the Lord’s Word and be faithful paying their tithe into His treasury, more laborers will be encouraged to take up ministerial work. More men would give themselves to the ministry were they not told of the depleted treasury.”- 9T 247, 249

    “You who have been withholding your means from the cause of God, read the book of Malachi, and see what is spoken there in regard to tithe and offerings. Cannot you see that it is not best under any circumstances to withhold your tithes and offerings because you are not in harmony with everything your brethren do? The tithes and offerings are not the property of any man, but are to be used in doing a certain work for God. Unworthy ministers may receive some of the means thus raised, but dare anyone, because of this, withhold from the treasury and brave the curse of God? I dare not. I pay my tithes gladly and freely, saying as did David, ‘Of Thine own have we given Thee.’

    “A selfish withholding from God will tend to poverty in our own souls. Act your part, my brethren and sisters. God loves you, and He stands at the helm. If the conference business is not managed according to the order of the Lord, that is the sin of the erring ones. The Lord will not hold you responsible for it, if you do what you can to correct the evil. But do not commit sin yourselves by withholding from God His own property. ‘Cursed be he that doeth the work of the negligently,’ or deceitfully. When persons declare that they will not pay their tithes because the means are not used as they think they ought to be, will the elder of the church or the minister sympathize with the sinners? Will he aid the enemy in his work? Or will he, as a wise man, endued with knowledge, go to work to correct the vile, and thus remove the stumbling-block? but, brethren do not be unfaithful in your lot. Stand in your place. Do not, by your neglect of duty, increase our financial difficulties.” – Special Testimonies, Series A, No. 1, pp. 27, 28 (Aug. 10, 1890)

    “And he looked up, and saw the rich men casting their gifts into the treasury. And he saw also a certain poor widow casting in thither two mites. And he said, Of a truth I say unto you, that this poor widow hath cast in more than they all: For all these have of their abundance cast in unto the offerings of God: but she of her penury hath cast in all the living that she had.” Luke 21:1-4
    God has a people.
    God bless,

    Rich




    0
    View Comment
  56. If you take on the title of SDA, you should pay your tithe monies to the organized SDA Church – otherwise, you really don’t believe that the organization of the Church itself is inspired by God and ultimately in God’s hands. It is not up to us to divert God’s money from the organization of His Church – if we in fact believe that the SDA Church organization is important to God.

    Sean Pitman
    http://www.DetectingDesign.com




    0
    View Comment
  57. I don’t think we should sidetrack this over to Tithe questions on “what is the store house of the Lord”. That subject has a lot of details that can be discussed – and has nothing to do with the evolution-vs-creation debate (unless of course it could be proven that no Union, no Conference supported creation). Thus there is always a place to give tithe.

    Having said that – Ellen White provided an example of giving a portion of her tithe directly to unfunded SDA ministries, and to unpaid retirees – and also commended fellow Adventists that did likewise.

    There was a 1980 executive committee decision that discouraged today’s Adventists from following that same path.

    But the point is – this is a large topic that would derail the focus if we dwell on it here.

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  58. BobRyan: “But the point is – this is a large topic that would derail the focus if we dwell on it here.”

    That is correct. Let’s find another solution for dealing with LSU besides withholding tithe.
    God bless,

    Rich




    0
    View Comment
  59. Connecting this back to the discussion of evolution vs creation, and the topic thread (deal with LSU): I was in no way suggesting withholding tithe. It is God’s. I do acknowledge BobRyan’s comment about Mrs. White’s example of using tithe to pay unfunded SDA ministries, and I still think that is still legitimate in spite of the 1980 Executive committee’s decision to discourage it.

    For those choosing to do this (re-directing tithe), it can be a significant means to influence the various leadership entities to act responsibly and rein in rogue institutions like LSU that have chosen to ignore established beliefs.

    And I’m sorry Sean, while I do agree with you on many things, a person’s choice to not return tithe through the organized church does not mean that they believe the organization is not inspired by God. It may mean that a person feels the organization has deviated from its God-inspired directives, and thus needs influence to re-direct it back to its historical roots.

    As an aside, there is also direction that tithe is a personal thing between a person and God, and is not to be compulsory in the sense that paying it should not be enforced by the church (that doesn’t mean it isn’t obligatory, but just not compulsory….and there is a difference…mainly, that the accountability is to God alone….which makes me wonder why the church makes it a test for employment, which is totally contrary to the directive by Mrs. White that it not be compulsory).




    0
    View Comment
  60. JohnB: Connecting this back to the discussion of evolution vs creation, and the topic thread (deal with LSU): I was in no way suggesting withholding tithe…For those choosing to do this (re-directing tithe), it can be a significant means to influence the various leadership entities to act responsibly and rein in rogue institutions like LSU that have chosen to ignore established beliefs.”

    Michael Adjei-Poku: “my suggestion is that, we organize a boycott of the Pacific Union Conference and send our tithes elsewhere, perhaps to the Michigan Conference because they are doing a wonderful job in upholding what the SDA church stands for.”

    “And the chief priests and scribes sought how they might kill him; for they feared the people.”
    Luke 22:2; cf. Luke 20:14

    “And he looked up, and saw the rich men casting their gifts into the treasury. And he saw also a certain poor widow casting in thither two mites. And he said, Of a truth I say unto you, that this poor widow hath cast in more than they all: For all these have of their abundance cast in unto the offerings of God: but she of her penury hath cast in all the living that she had.” Luke 21:1-4
    God bless,

    Rich




    0
    View Comment
  61. Rich, What should church members do if the church leadership will not rein in rogue institutions like LSU? What is happening at LSU is tragic, young and impressionable men and women are being led astray through the deceitful philosophies of men but the church leadership is not doing anything about it. The issue at LSU has been going on for years. Just imagine if this was the case of embezzelment or misappropriation of funds by someone at LSU, the board would be dragging its feet, as they are doing in this matter. Thanks.




    0
    View Comment
  62. Michael: “Rich, What should church members do if the church leadership will not rein in rogue institutions like LSU?”

    “There will be those among us who will always want to control the work of God, to dictate even what movements shall be made when the work goes forward under the direction of the angel who joins the third angel in the message to be given to the world. God will use ways and means by which it will be seen that he is taking the reins in his own hands.” PC 381.1

    1. Pray, study and memorize Scripture, self-examine, confess and repent, obey and win souls to Christ and His Word.
    2. Start a small group that does the same and pray short supporting prayers for at least 40 minutes for the Holy Spirit to bless members, churches, schools, hospitals, Conferences, Unions, Divisions, the General Conference. Ask God to please take the reins of each of our lives, the administrators, ministers, missions, members and schools into His own capable hands instead of pulling them away from our administrators into ours. I was praying in a group for this, asking God to convict, convert or remove any unwilling workers for Him in leadership when we were made aware of problems at LSU.
    3. Pray especially for GC delegates and faithful in responsible positions who have temptations and burdens of which those who do not have no comprehension. It was easy to criticize my Dad about the finer points of a better way of raising a family…until I had my own 3-4 kids. It’s easy to criticize someone we think is not moving fast enough but there is more to the church than LSU. Back them up, don’t tear them down. Keep paying tithe to the conference if you’re a member of a conference.
    4. Realize SDA Unions, not Conferences own schools such as LSU.
    5. Educate for the truth. Sign petitions for the truth and plead with administrators in the name of Jesus.
    A few suggestions.
    God bless,

    Rich




    0
    View Comment
  63. @Carl:

    You are the first person to post something non-simplistic on this website. Thank you for pointing out that science has not been well discussed and that SDA members in general have not been informed. I’m afraid your comment has not gotten any real consideration or honest argument. I appreciate you perspective. I think that the best thing for our church would be for science to be openly discussed and debates held, people allowed to speak about their findings the sources and their reasons. This is not a time for cut throat solutions, but for more open talk about science so each man and woman can decide for him or herself how she will interpret the Biblical account. It’s not simple and there is no simple solution. We must hear each other out. Everyone has the right to respectfully speak and be respectfully hear and respectfully responded to.




    0
    View Comment
  64. @Shane Hilde: I don’t think that the issue of science should bring up the question of church membership. If we are talking about professors teaching things that we do not believe, and the church has not made it a requirement for membership then we shouldn’t even be bringing it up, it has no place in the conversation. I call Shane on rule # 6 for not staying on topic.




    0
    View Comment
  65. @Debbie: Boycotting is not the best solution, it seems a little simplistic to think that by not sending our kids to SDA schools that teach things that we personally don’t agree with that our children will be undefiled by evolution. We might consider strengthening our children with extracurricular science vs. evolution buttressing to supplement their college pre-high school level education so they can stand when the winds of adversity come. Get more involved and stop blaming the schools and teachers for everything.




    0
    View Comment
  66. @BobRyan: There might be a problem with sweeping our college clean of published scientists. It’s a foundational part of our nursing and medical doctor program. And our nurses and doctors are an important part of our hospitals, medical missionaries and other forms of service that they provide.




    0
    View Comment
  67. @Carl: “Many Adventist scientists have either left the church or chosen to be quiet.” This statement cut me to the heart. How can our administration allow so many members to suffer because of this issue of science. Many more people are being lost or silenced over this point. And students are only confused because they, their teachers, and their parents are uninformed and that is the consequence of suppressing scientific research and it’s true findings. I hope that this issue will make people dig a little deeper and inform themselves on the issue instead of depending on quick fixes.




    0
    View Comment
  68. @Sean Pitman, M.D.: Sean you are an MD you know very well that even the most basic college level sciences can not find sufficient support to establish a Biology curriculum to produce world class doctors.
    “But, you complain that it isn’t right to single out LSU. I agree. Any paid representative who is taking money from the SDA Church while going about actively undermining a stated fundamental position of the Church should not be kept in the employ of the Church…”
    Sean it seems like everything is so black and white to you. Why do you insist on it being so simple, you of all the people posting here I would think would have the background to know just how complicated these issues are. What do you think will happen if these professors are eradicated from LSU? What message does your shape up or ship out give to young SDA’s? How would you like it if it was your job on the line and some people were oversimplifying a situation you were involved with. “The patient died, didn’t he, so there that proves he is a bad doctor. Doctors take the Hippocratic oath, and he obviously didn’t take it seriously, or the patient wouldn’t have died under his care. Fired!” I think you would very much like it if you were give a chance to tell your side of the story. And you would think it unjust if your boss just hung you out to dry. It’s always easier and simpler when it’s someone else’s job, reputation, beliefs we are attaching. If you were these professors and people were talking about you the way you are talking about them, how would you like for them to treat you. You must at least have dinner with these professor and listen to what they have to say before you can really begin to form some opinion about what they deserve. Several contributors on this forum are treating these professors like a lynching mob would an accused man, trying to kill the accused before the trial or trying to not even have a trial. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Sean please, at least consider it. I know you guys are all fired up about this and you have been thinking about it a lot. Eternity is at stake. You have a reputation to uphold. I know, I get it. But please consider they way you would like to be treated if you were in the wrong. Please be more cautious, tread lightly so that if you ever get into a fix and have to eat your words they are not so bitter.




    0
    View Comment
  69. Krisztina: @Carl: You are the first person to post something non-simplistic on this website.

    Krisztina: Everyone has the right to respectfully speak and be respectfully hear and respectfully responded to.  

    This first and last sentence of this post sadly represents the contradictory nature of Seventh-day Adventist Evolutionary logic. Many posters here welcome open discussion on this issue even 95 theses posted on the chapel of LSU to publicly debate in General Conference session as Luther was willing to do. The difference between the theses of Luther and Seventh-day Evolutionists are those of indulgences are not endorsed in the Bible but a six-day literal creation account is clearly (e.g. Genesis 1:31; Exodus 20:11; Revelation 14:7.)
    God bless,

    Rich




    0
    View Comment
  70. Krisztina said: If we are talking about professors teaching things that we do not believe, and the church has not made it a requirement for membership then we shouldn’t even be bringing it up, it has no place in the conversation.

    Membership has very little to do with the issue at LSU, if anything. I’m very surprised to read you’re willing to have anything taught that contradicts the fundamental beliefs of our church just as long as it’s not included in our baptismal vows.

    You should peruse the church manual again. All of the twenty-eight fundamental beliefs are included and new converts must know and understand them and purpose in their hearts by the grace of God to order their lives accordingly. Read the following excerpts starting on page 29:

    Thorough instruction in the fundamental teachings and related practices of the church should be given to every candidate for church membership before being baptized and received into church fellowship. Each person seeking admittance to the church should be informed of the principles for which the church stands.

    The minister’s work is not completed until he has thoroughly instructed the candidates, and they are familiar with and committed to all fundamental beliefs and related practices of the church and are prepared to assume the responsibilities of church membership.

    Prospective members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, before baptism or acceptance on profession of faith, should be carefully instructed from the Scriptures in the fundamental beliefs of the church as presented in chapter 3 (see p. 9) of this Church Manual.

    Candidates for baptism or those being received into fellowship by profession of faith shall affirm their acceptance of the doctrinal beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in the presence of the church or other properly appointed body.

    Baptismal vow #11:

    Do you know and understand the fundamental Bible principles as taught by the Seventh-day Adventist Church? Do you purpose, by the grace of God, to fulfill His will by ordering your life in harmony with these principles?

    Now that we know what the expectations are of those who become members let me add that those who are leadership carry a greater responsibility to uphold the beliefs of the church. Regardless of their personal beliefs, professors at a Adventist university should not be promoting beliefs that are contrary to a significant percentage of our core beliefs.

    With that said, here are the points of contention I have with the biology department at LSU.

    1. The evidence for a recent creation is not taught or promoted in any known biology course.

    2. The theory of evolution is the ONLY scientific worldview being promoted in the biology department that we know of.

    3. The professors themselves reject the church’s position, thus making them inadequate to to give due diligence to the evidence for a recent creation.

    4. Extreme cases of derision have occurred toward students who believe in creation on campus. For example, at the conclusion of a Breakout session at LSU (Feb. 2009) a group of about four students (creationists) asked the professor, who had just finished a talk negating a recent, six-day creation, on what basis then do we observe the Sabbath. This angered another biology professor in the front row. Things escalated into yelling. Yes, the professor was yelling at these students. He soon lost control and said, “Your kind of thinking drives planes into buildings!” Other words such as stupid and ignorant were directed toward them. Chris Olmo, one of the four, said, “I felt betrayed because I couldn’t even ask a question. If I ask a question they call me ignorant. We do believe in science we just don’t believe in evolution. How are you supposed to learn in that kind of environment.” This was an extreme, but there have been other incidents which could be labelled minor in comparison. Seventh-day Adventist students should feel free to express their beliefs without this kind of treatment.

    5. There is good experiential evidence that strongly suggests that the promotion of theistic evolution potentially leads to an agnostic or atheistic worldview.

    I’d prefer that no one is fired or compelled to resign, but if LSU administration doesn’t start providing support for these students by giving them the classes they’re paying for and creating an environment supportive of their beliefs without derision and professors who know and understand the evidence for creation then these professors should be fired for their non-complience in the above areas.

    This is simple Krisztina. Just about a whole department has rejected the church’s position on origins and has defiantly continued to promote the theory of evolution even after the board told them they were to uphold the church’s position. They either do what they’re paid to do or resign and find another place of employment, and if they don’t do that then they should be fired.

    What is your position on this? Are you in favor of evolution being promoted in Adventist universities? You’ve stated that this situation is complex or not black and white. How so? Breaking directives of your employer is complex?




    0
    View Comment
  71. @Krisztina: You seem to have a problem with simplicity. While I do not deny there are complexities in the world, I think we should be careful not to label things complex as justification for not resolving an issue. You skewed the issue even more when you said, “…it seems a little simplistic to think that by not sending our kids to SDA schools that teach things that we personally don’t agree with that our children will be undefiled by evolution.”

    This isn’t about personal beliefs. The Seventh-day Adventist church has s very clear position on creation and many of the professors have rejected it and are promoting evolution in its stead. So the problem that the church body has with LSU is it is not teaching what they are being paid for. You’re belittling the issue by describing it as a quibble between personal beliefs of church members and LSU. That’s not the situation at all.

    What does “stop blaming the schools for everything” mean? Who is blaming them for everything, and what is everything?

    You said: “We might consider strengthening our children with extracurricular science vs. evolution buttressing to supplement their college pre-high school level education so they can stand when the winds of adversity come.”

    While that is partially a good idea, you essentially said let’s supplement the lower levels of Adventist education so the can stand when the winds of adversity come once they attend our colleges and universities. Now we have to prepare and educate our kids to defend themselves for our institutions of higher learning? I don’t think that’s what you intended to say, but that is what you said. That is completely backwards and counterproductive to the continuity of Adventist education. I can just imagine a parent telling their kids, “We’ve got to get you ready and ground you so your faith isn’t destroyed when you attend one of our colleges.”

    We do have a responsibility. As you can see from this website, myself and others are taking it very seriously.




    0
    View Comment
  72. kriszti:

    church membership can & should be called into question. see the church manuel, chapter 13. what do you think the story in joshua 7:10-26 means? what do you think the bible commentary means on p. 1096 when it says: “the names of those who sin and refuse to repent should not be retained on the church books, lest the saints be held accountable for their evil deeds. those who pursue a course of transgression should be visited and labored with, and if they then refuse to repent, they should be separated from church fellowship, in accordance with the rules laid down in the word of God …. those who refuse to hear the admonitions and warning given by God’s faithful messengers are not to be retained in the church. they are to be disfellowshipped; for they will be as achan in the camp of israel — DECEIVED and DECEIVING. who, after reading the record of achan’s sin and punishment, can think it according to the will of God that those who do wickedly, refusing to repent, are to be retained in the church? to retain them would be an insult to the God of heaven.”

    oh! wouldn’t the current secular climate in our church cause “progressive adventists” to scream at the thought of disfellowshipping an “adventist” because they are teaching error & apostasy? LSU obviously doesn’t run under God’s plan of discipline. they have hired non-adventists & evolutionists to begin with, after all!

    my concern is for those who do nothing about this issue. who stand by & let error be taught. this is our test. and it seems the greater guilt rests on those who not only don’t do anything to speak against error, but presume to speak against those who are standing for right. it would seem their guilt doubles. in other words, be careful to study what you say & believe before you start talking without biblical grounds. we all have an influence for either good or evil (no in-between!), and God have mercy on you if your influence is cast on the wrong side. the right side is, of course, on that of the bible & spirit of prophecy.




    0
    View Comment
  73. Krisztina: Sean are you really asking people to leave the church?

    I’m asking those who claim to represent the Church on the Church’s dime to actually do what they are being paid to do – i.e., accurately represent the Church’s stated “fundamental” positions to the world. If a paid representative cannot do this, that person should resign or be let go from employment.

    You certainly wouldn’t expect the Catholic Church to continue to pay one of their own representatives to blast cherished Catholic doctrines from the pulpit or classroom – right? How about the Latter-day Saints? How about Coca Cola? – or any other viable organization? “A house divided against itself cannot stand” – right? Why then should anyone think the SDA Church should continue to pay people who are in fact doing just that? – attacking what the Church, as an organization, claims are its most fundamental “truths”?

    We are not talking about the imposition of civil penalties here, so please don’t bring up the usual comparisons to the inquisition. Such comparisons are only attempts at inflammatory red herrings that are really irrelevant. The case at hand is simply a matter of supporting a viable organization by only paying those to represent the organization that actually represent the organization. Not just anyone and everyone is qualified to be a paid SDA representative – regardless of his/her otherwise magnificent educational background and qualifications to get paid to work elsewhere.

    Beyond this, LSU is trying to hide the fact that many of its professors are directly attacking fundamental SDA ideals in their classrooms. At the very least you should be open and honest and transparent about what you are doing. Why try to hide this activity?

    I think even you would admit that parents, students, and the SDA Church membership at large have a right to know what they are paying good money to support. It is a moral wrong to make it appear that you are providing a particular product for purchase when you are actually delivering something quite different in practice. That’s called stealing – wouldn’t you agree?

    Now, I ask you, what’s so “complicated” about asking for openness and transparency from LSU? – at the very least? This request is downright obvious and simple to the candid mind. There is simply nothing complicated or difficult about it.

    What’s so difficult or complex about being open and honest?

    Sean Pitman
    http://www.DetectingDesign.com




    0
    View Comment
  74. Krisztina: You must at least have dinner with these professor and listen to what they have to say before you can really begin to form some opinion about what they deserve. Several contributors on this forum are treating these professors like a lynching mob would an accused man, trying to kill the accused before the trial or trying to not even have a trial. What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Sean please, at least consider it. I know you guys are all fired up about this and you have been thinking about it a lot. Eternity is at stake. You have a reputation to uphold. I know, I get it. But please consider they way you would like to be treated if you were in the wrong. Please be more cautious, tread lightly so that if you ever get into a fix and have to eat your words they are not so bitter.

    I have talked to the professors. I have spoken at LSU twice. I lived in the Loma Linda area for 11 years. I have first hand knowledge of what is taking place at LSU. This, together with the witness of LSU parents, students, and the LSU professors themselves is beyond question. The deliberate undermining of fundamental SDA doctrinal positions has been going on at LSU for decades. This is no exaggeration. I’ve been personally involved for over 5 years.

    As far as treating others as I would like to be treated, I guess I would love it if others would simply send me money regardless of anything I said or did. How about you? Care to support my personal bank account?

    You see, even if a person would want to be paid for doing his/her own thing, independent of the organization or client(s) which he/she serves and to which he/she is dependent for a paycheck, the reality is that payment is supposed to be the result of delivery of the specific product which is being paid for by the client. Anything else is theft from the client. That is, regardless of a person’s desire to be paid for the delivery of goods other than that desired, is a moral wrong.

    LSU is especially guilty of this moral wrong because of the fact that they are trying to cover up the actual product that they are delivering to students. They do not admit in their PR advertisements or on their website or anywhere else that I can find that most of their science and many of their religion professors believe in and actively promote theistic evolutionary ideas to their students – directly counter to the clearly stated views of their namesake, the SDA Church, on this fundamental doctrinal issue. This is very deceptive on the part of LSU.

    I myself would not think to deliberately steal either time or money from my employer. And, I would not think to deserve anything else but being let go if I did continue to deliberately do so. It just wouldn’t be rational of any employer to maintain and employee who will not do what he/she is being paid to do…

    Again, this isn’t personal. My words are not “bitter” against anyone on a personal basis just for believing differently than I do about doctrinal issues. Some of my best friends are agnostics and a few are determined atheists. And, I don’t think that such views are a basis for salvation since I don’t think knowledge or a lack thereof saves or condemns anyone in and of itself. Salvation is based on motive, the motive of love, not knowledge. It is how you use the knowledge you have that is important for salvation.

    Now, this isn’t to say that true knowledge is therefore irrelevant or unimportant. That’s not true at all. If it were true, I wouldn’t be contributing to websites like this one or my own website. True knowledge is the basis of conscious hope. Many may be saved who did not have a conscious realization of their bright future while living on this Earth. However, I think all would agree that having a conscious realization of our Hope in Jesus is very valuable to have here and now. This is why I work so hard on issues such as this…

    Sean Pitman
    http://www.DetectingDesign.com




    0
    View Comment
  75. @Krisztina:

    @Sean Pitman, M.D.: Sean you are an MD you know very well that even the most basic college level sciences can not find sufficient support to establish a Biology curriculum to produce world class doctors.

    A nice “spin” but the fact is that NO “world class doctor” relies on anything related to “birds come from reptiles” to do surgery or to diagnose diseases.

    Polluting science with atheist evolutionist fictions about origins is “not a way to improve science” nor is it the path to more “world class doctors”.

    The argument here has never been against biology, support for biology, or biology in connection with the medical profession.

    (Though we can all see how evolutionists might prefer that spin).

    Sean said
    “But, you complain that it isn’t right to single out LSU. I agree. Any paid representative who is taking money from the SDA Church while going about actively undermining a stated fundamental position of the Church should not be kept in the employ of the Church…”

    Krisztina said:
    Sean it seems like everything is so black and white to you. Why do you insist on it being so simple, you of all the people posting here I would think would have the background to know just how complicated these issues are. What do you think will happen if these professors are eradicated from LSU?

    Hmm I can think of a few things that would “happen”.

    1. Less “storytelling” about “birds coming from reptiles” instead of simply studying biology and what we “Really see” in the lab.

    2. Less bashing students who accept the Bible doctrine on origins.

    3. Less “modeling disguised infidelity” inside an SDA church. Less examples of apostasy being “modeled” from the front of the class room.

    4. Less focus on the goal of making LSU “the best public university education that SDA tuition, tithe and offering dollars can buy

    5. Less cases where parents AND students who complain (about “birds came from reptile” story telling being shoved down students throats) being brushed aside and complaints ignored.

    What message does your shape up or ship out give to young SDA’s?

    It provides a message about “limits” about “boundaries” about “a hedge of protection” about “there being a DIFFERENCE between PUBLIC university values and SDA institutional values” about “SDA fundamental beliefs NOT being in gross error” about the need for integrity when it comes to the bible doctrine on origins vs the overtly atheist evolutionist doctrine on origins being evangelized today in public universities.

    How would you like it if it was your job on the line and some people were oversimplifying a situation you were involved with. “The patient died, didn’t he, so there that proves he is a bad doctor.

    If that doctor were injecting the patient with “birds came from reptiles” koolaid instead of giving them an actual antibiotic.

    As it turns out – there were “one or two doctors” practicing in Nazi germany – exploring the idea of evolutionism on human test subjects.

    In fact there is even that idea going on with some of the Chimera work being done merging humans and animals at various levels.

    So “yes” evolutionism even corrupts the medical profession if left unchecked.

    It’s always easier and simpler when it’s someone else’s job, reputation, beliefs we are attaching. If you were these professors and people were talking about you the way you are talking about them, how would you like for them to treat you. You must at least have dinner with these professor

    Dinner is not the solution for what we know to be the “worst form of infidelity” in 3SG 90-91.

    How many professors do you know that would change their “belief” in evolutionism “over dinner”??

    What happened to innocent until proven guilty?

    If it is your claim that these professors have not yet admitted to teaching evolutionism “as the right answer” for origins – then may I suggest a few links and a bit more time with the source documents highlighted at this website?

    Sean please, at least consider it. I know you guys are all fired up about this and you have been thinking about it a lot. Eternity is at stake. You have a reputation to uphold. I know, I get it. But please consider they way you would like to be treated if you were in the wrong.

    The “birds came from reptiles” storytelling has been going on inside LSU and other Adventist institutions for more than 10 years. The problem here is NOT that pro-evolutionist evangelists have not had “enough time to reconsider” their efforts to destroy faith in the Bible and destroy the Adventist denomination in general.

    If someone is soooo far down a wrong course that all the efforts so far over more than 10 years have not motivated them to even stop for pause for reflection – then we are at a decision point – yes even a crisis point where decisive action is the ONLY answer.

    Paul addressed just such a situation in 1Cor 5 that ended up with a good resolution in 2Cor 2 because of the swift, clear and decisive action taken in 1Cor 5.

    Please be more cautious, tread lightly so that if you ever get into a fix and have to eat your words they are not so bitter.

    If we can put a stop to SDA students being yelled at by SDA professors just because the students choose to embrace critical thinking and to accept the trustworthy nature of the Bible.

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  76. @Shane Hilde:

    4. Extreme cases of derision have occurred toward students who believe in creation on campus. For example, at the conclusion of a Breakout session at LSU (Feb. 2009) a group of about four students (creationists) asked the professor, who had just finished a talk negating a recent, six-day creation, on what basis then do we observe the Sabbath. This angered another biology professor in the front row. Things escalated into yelling. Yes, the professor was yelling at these students. He soon lost control and said, “Your kind of thinking drives planes into buildings!”

    Other words such as stupid and ignorant were directed toward them. Chris Olmo, one of the four, said, “I felt betrayed because I couldn’t even ask a question. If I ask a question they call me ignorant. We do believe in science we just don’t believe in evolution. How are you supposed to learn in that kind of environment.” This was an extreme, but there have been other incidents which could be labelled minor in comparison. Seventh-day Adventist students should feel free to express their beliefs without this kind of treatment.

    If the student had BEEN in a public university instead of in a “disguised” public university “setting” they would have KNOWN what to expect.

    By providing that public university “experience” detailed in the quote above – only doing it behind SDA institution “doors”, we are sure to SHOCK unsuspecting students as in the above example.

    Some may think that is a “good thing” — I do not!

    Pampering the 3SG 90-91 “disguised infidels” in positions of leadership and authority might “seem like a good idea” to a few diehard evolutionist evangelists, but it is not the good thing they seem to imagine.

    Evolutionism provides a less-than-helpful multi-pronged attack on SDA beliefs that few other errors can equal.
    http://www.educatetruth.com/la-sierra-evidence/take-our-survey/comment-page-3/#comment-9194

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  77. I am puzzled by something: I hear several people mention tithe being used to support schools:
    “4. Less focus on the goal of making LSU “the best public university education that SDA tuition, tithe and offering dollars can buy” ”

    Is it true that tithe is being used this way?

    How do we approve that in light of counsel ginven directly on that:

    ” One reasons that the tithe may be applied to school purposes. Still others reason that canvassers and colporteurs should be supported from the tithe. But a great mistake is made when the tithe is drawn from the object for which it is to be used–the support of the ministers. . . .
    The tithe is the Lord’s, and those who meddle with it will be punished with the loss of their heavenly treasure unless they repent. Let the work no longer be hedged up because the tithe has been diverted into various channels other than the one to which the Lord has said it should go. Provision is to be made for these other lines of work. They are to be sustained, but not from the tithe. God has not changed; the tithe is still to be used for the support of the ministry.–9T 247-250.”

    So, is tithe really being used to support our schools? And if so, why?




    0
    View Comment
  78. Until this evening, I was unaware of the teaching of evolution at La Sierra. This is an SDA university, and is answerable to the church hierarchy, notwithstanding the principal of academic or administrative liberty. So many of our pillars stand on our belief that our Lord created everything on this earth in six literal days. The sabbath being one of those pillars. Parents are sending their kids to this school, assuming our beliefs are being presented and supported by like minded professors. Folks in Calif. are sending in tithes, a portion of which helps support this institution. What further apalls me is the dearth of scientific evidence that supports evolution. YES, DEARTH….There is a plethora of evidence for creation that is observable, testable, analytically computable, and affirming in our faith. This is a project for the laymen and women of our church, starting at ground roots levels. It calls for our leaders, from Jan Paulsen on down to address this issue quickly and to be held accountable for a quick resoulution. This is an SDA institution. If certain folks wish to speak against it or to espouse ideas not in keeping with our beliefs, they need to be promptly and loudly dismissed. These professors can then take their atheistic ideas and go to a public college where they belong. The bottom line is we either support our beliefs and our mission to make God known to all, without doing damage to his character or we wittle our mission and purpose as a people down. This is a most sad commentary and should never have been allowed to get this far. Monitoring our schools for scientific and theologic error IS NOT a hard thing to do. Ask the hundreds of parents who sent students to LSU and knew these things years ago. Were the higher ups listening?




    0
    View Comment
  79. @JohnB:

    I am puzzled by something: I hear several people mention tithe being used to support schools:
    “4. Less focus on the goal of making LSU “the best public university education that SDA tuition, tithe and offering dollars can buy” ”

    Tithe dollars pay for salaries in university religion department and the student deans.

    Tithe distribution
    a. Elementary Schools-Allocations of up to 30 percent of the total salaries and expenses of elementary principals and teachers in recognition of their role as spiritual leaders.

    b. Academies-The equivalent of the total support of academy Bible teachers, residence hall deans and principals.

    c. Colleges/Universities -An amount equal to the total cost of college and university Bible departments, residence hall deans, the presidents and deans of students.

    And since our friend Fritz Guy was leading the charge for evolutionism and Gay rights in the religion department — the point is that tithe dollars are in fact being “bent” to promote “a public University” goal instead of an Adventist one.

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  80. People send their children and money there assuming it teaches our beliefs. The tithe money supports people who support ToE. Not the biology teachers themselves but those others above them and to the religion professors who support them. And those above the university. I belong to a really good conf. CCC and I will continue to send my tithe even tho I know with heaviness in my heart that a share of my money is being misused. Why God has not yet cleansed these schools the way He did Battle Creek I do not know.




    0
    View Comment
  81. @BobRyan:

    Unless I am mistaken, Mrs. White specifically, unequivocally, unambiguously, and unmistakenly said that “Provision is to be made for these other lines of work (schools, canvassers, colporteurs, etc.). They are to be sustained, but not from the tithe.”

    So, again, why are we paying anyone (including deans, Bible teachers, and professors in the religion departments, etc.) with tithe money at a school? It is strictly forbidden! Rationalizations of this sort are of the same vein as Saul’s when he sacrificed at the delay of Samuel, and it is from his disobedience where we get the verse “To obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams….”

    Perhaps one of the reasons we are having such problems with professors teaching evolution at one of our schools has more to do with the fact we won’t follow the specific instructions we HAVE BEEN GIVEN OURSELVES, rather than with the teachers themselves distancing themselves from our fundamental doctrines.

    If we won’t do what we have been instructed (as a denomination), why should we expect them (professors) to do what they have been instructed (teach our beliefs)? Both are a form of rebellion, and the Church’s is worse because it is to be held to a higher standard!

    Tithe should NOT be used for schools in any form. It is for the support of the ministers preaching the Gospel. Period!




    0
    View Comment
  82. If we can put a stop to SDA students being yelled at by SDA professors just because the students choose to embrace critical thinking and to accept the trustworthy nature of the Bible.

    Hi Bob,

    This issue pops up again from time to time, and I would like to address it. While I agree that it would never be appropriate for a professor to personally belittle a student, I have heard only a couple of instances of such behavior related here. While I do not question the veracity of the student’s story, we do have a good grievance/resolution process here at LSU. I used it myself when I was a student at La Sierra in the late 1990s and was satisfied with the results. However, your statements seem to characterize this belittling as a common occurrence on the campus. That is not (and should not be) the environment cultivated among the faculty and staff here.

    From what I read in your posts, you are very concerned with critical thinking skills. However, critical thinking skills will not always lead all thinkers to identical conclusions; this is as it should be. The entire history of music theory is a testament to this fact, even when music was studied as a branch of physics. So, if a student’s critical thinking skills should lead them to accept a recent six day creation, how ought we to treat students whose critical thinking skills do not lead them to this conclusion? Are their critical skills to be considered flawed? By what do we measure this? Should we appeal to both a student’s faith as well as skill in critical thinking, and in what proportions? In my own Christian experience, I have needed to rely more on faith than on critical thinking in my understanding of God (indeed, faith is what bridges the gap between my knowledge and the unknowable). Some thoughts.

    Pax,

    David Kendall
    Adjunct Professor of Music
    La Sierra University

    P.S. Bob, as it has been suggested that I have a penchant for the formal and stylistic (or stylized), I have a suggestion to offer. I am generally able to detect emphasis and irony in writing. Thus, an extended use of quotes and words/phrases in capitals breaks the flow of the prose, as well as evoking the (internet) sense of a raised voice, making me less able to consider your points in an objective manner. I am sure you do not intend this. Just a bit of over-sensitivity on my part, likely stemming from grading thousands of essays.




    0
    View Comment
  83. It should be regarded as a heinous crime to indoctrinate our young people with doubts regarding the accuracy of the Biblical record and of inspiration itself. Are we honoring Jesus Christ as the Creator found in John 1:1-5? Are we calling darkness light? Who, then, is the Jesus of SDA evolutionists? Paul writes in Colossians 1:15-20 that Christ created all things. Are there constraints on His power? Jesus endorsed Moses’ writings and pointed His listeners/disciples to it without qualification. This very Jehovah communed with Adam and Eve, giving the assurance of a solution to the sin problem. Hebrews 1:1-3 gives us the foundation for His authority. And in Chapter 2:1: “Therefore we must give the more earnest heed to the things we have heard, lest we drift away.” This insidious evolutionary “higher learning” is only lowering students to the level of amorality, which unfortunately, is the reason for which many embrace atheism.

    As a former teacher in both the Southern and Central California Conferences, I recognized back in the ’60s that the issue is fundamentally one of lack of faith in Jesus’ counsels to us as a people. I dialoged this at length with then-Education Secretary of the Pacific Union, Elder Wilton Baldwin. He had tried for years to get an “experimental” school going somewhere in CA. There were serious problems in the school at which I was then head of the music department. Elder Baldwin told me that when it comes to a vote in Conference committees (ordained ministers), that support for the “blueprint” was not forthcoming. We could have been accredited by our own philosophy as stated in the Supplement to the Evaluative Criterion. But no, we chose instead to pander to unconverted tastes in entertainment, recreation, and social life. We are reaping the accommodations we have catered to.

    Joshua declared, “As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.” Where are the Caleb’s and Joshua’s? Who will arise like Nehemiah and contend with the “nobles of Judah?” Where are the Levites who stand against the worship of Baal? Where is the Phinehas who will stay the wrath of God? Where is the young David who will step in and sling for truth in defense of the honor of the God of creation whose name we profess to bear? Where is the young Jonathan with his armorbearer who will ascend the steeps to the heights of victory? Are we a people of conviction and purpose, or will we cower behind an ivory tower. . . . Loyal soldiers will hold up the banner of truth proclaiming the message of Revelation 14:6, 7, “For the hour of His judgment has come.”

    Humbly submitted, an elder in the LaGrange, GA SDA Church.




    0
    View Comment

Comments are closed.