Ron: @Ron Henderson:
That might send a mixed signal, since some may be holding their Tithe until the denomination takes a firm stand for truth, and freedom of thought, and against witch hunts, falsifications, and censorship.  

This may not sound nice but what you have written sounds just like the discourse the serpent had with Eve at the forbidden tree (knowledge of good and evil).

In case you have been reading your Bible please navigate to the chapter that tells us that even every thought must be brought captive to obedience to Christ. Freedom of thought outside Biblical parameters and loyalty to God is just a recipe for anarchy, rebellion and destruction.

2 Corinthians 10:4-6 (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) 5 Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ; 6 And having in a readiness to revenge all disobedience, when your obedience is fulfilled.

The Power of Intellect.–Intellect ennobled, purified, heaven directed, is the universal power to build up the kingdom of God. Intellect perverted, has exactly the opposite influence; it is a corrupting of the human power given in trust to be multiplied in earnest labor for good. It deceives and destroys. God has given sufficient endowments to make men capable and wise to carry forward, and strongly and graciously to represent, the Lord’s wonderful works to all those who love Him and obey His commandments (MS 63, 1900). {6BC 1105.7}

Satan cannot touch the mind or intellect unless we yield it to him (MS 17, 1893). {6BC 1105.8}

The devil will use your mind if you give it to him (MS 2, 1893). {6BC 1105.9}  

(Quote)

John Testerman: These young people, and there are a lot of them, need good role models in our schools, professors such as those at La Sierra, who are both good Adventists and good scientists, which means willing to follow where the evidence leads.

You seem to be advocating a form of schizophrenia. In other words, the SDA statement of fundamental beliefs is really irrelevant according to your argument here. In other words, it being a Seventh-day Adventist isn’t really based on what you believe as long as you are a good person and believe in God? How is that different from any other religious groups? – to include non-Christian religious groups?

SDAism isn’t based on blind faith. If your science and your religion are diametrically opposed, something is wrong with either your science or your religion. Useful religion is not schizophrenic like this. While you are correct in the seeming suggestion that a belief in a literal 6-day creation week is not a matter of salvation in and of itself (knowledge isn’t what saves a person – the motive of love does that), you are incorrect to think that this knowledge or understanding isn’t important. It is very important as far as the basis of the Gospel’s “Good News” or a solid hope in a very real and very bright future for us all…

Truly, if I became convinced of the scientific validity of mainstream evolutionary theories, I would immediately leave the SDA Church. I might still believe in a God of some kind, but certainly not the SDA view of God – - not even the Christian view of God.

I really don’t think you understand the implications of the ideas in play here…

Sean Pitman
http://www.DetectingDesign.com  

(Quote)

John Testerman: It seems as though the only goal is to keep young people in the church but what we believe may not be an issue salient to that goal given your statement. In other words, we want as many people to join and it doesn’t matter what you believe but the end will justify the means to keep you in the church or bring you here. Sounds more like a Universalist Church and not an Adventist Church.

Can we make up our minds. We are what we are. Why do we need to change what we are to be more popular though it does not agree with the Bible when the stated goals of our church is to stick with the Bible and the measuring rod with this as the ruler for all other things to be judged? Suddenly, we need to change who we are because people may leave? Then it isn’t our church–we will be someone else. Why not just have a group of people that do not agree with what the Seventh-day Adventist church believes start a church that believes whatever you want and go from there as opposed to change everyone else?

I am really fine with people believing whatever they want. The problem I have is that the Seventh-day Adventist Church states that it’s beliefs are based on the Bible. You can choose to joint this group or leave it freely. You can complain all you want about it’s beliefs. You can even try to explain a different view of scripture to everyone and see if they read it your way. In the end, it is still a group that is bound together with a certain set of common beliefs. If you don’t hold to them, you are free to not be a part of it or still associate if you would like. I think the issue from this website’s perspective and a lot of the people writing’s perspective is that if you are representing a group in a free country as a paid position whether a teacher or pastor, you should feel comfortable and in agreement with teaching their beliefs. If not, then you are stealing and lying and should find employment else ware.  

(Quote)

Maybe I should rephrase my statement: they (Educate Truth, Sean Pitman, David Assherick) are not asking teachers to even find employment else wear. They are asking LSU to be honest and publicize that this is what the teachers are teaching to students. I think that what a lot of us realize is that it would end up the same way essentially if they did as LSU’s main client base is till Adventist. I guess I could be wrong though. Educate Truth’s name lives up to that point as to make constituents aware of these facts. Seems like it has gotten some heat for it as well.  

(Quote)

@John Testerman:

John Testerman says:
February 1, 2010 I wonder if those who are in such a rush to get rid of science professors at La Sierra for teaching evolution, have considered that these professors might be performing a valuable role in keeping many of our most talented young people in the church? Large numbers of educated young Adventists worship God as their creator and redeemer as a matter of religious faith, but do not, however, try to turn their religious faith into scientific theories. They would like to be both Adventist Christians and at the same time practice good science–which means going where the evidence leads. They do not believe that scientific evidence for a very long history of life on this planet and the relatedness of all life conflicts with their relationship with God or undermines the Sabbath.

1. Those young people NEED someone who can carefully show them that Ex 20:8-11 is much easier to read and understand than the average Theistic Evolutionist would like to imagine.

2. Those young people NEED to be informed about the “inconvenient details” found in 3SG 90-91 so they can fully understand the motive and message behind what is called “disguised infidelity” and just how it damages about half dozen SDA beliefs.

3. Those young people NEED to be INFORMED about the CONFIRMED junk-science and exposed fraud history behind evolutionism.

4. Those young people NEED to be taught the skill of “critical thinking” so that they don’t simply swallow all the hype and marketeering being sold as “a kind of science” by evolutionists. Marketeering that even atheist evolutionists like Colin Patterson call “NOT SCIENCE”.

These young people, and there are a lot of them, need good role models in our schools, professors such as those at La Sierra, who are both good Adventists and good scientists

Which is what they WILL get at SDA schools OTHER than LSU. Any SDA school that knows enough to expose the junk-science religion of evolutionism STARTING with classes on critical thinking and the confirmed junk-science proven frauds central to evolutionism – will be a huge step from from the “sacrifice-all when evangelizing for evolutionism” model being used at LSU.

BUT if a few faithful SDA parents and students still choose to ignore this web site’s warnings and risk-all by sending students to LSU biology courses and pro-evolutionist religion courses — then what they WILL get from LSU that you cannot find in a public school – is a fully compromised faculty instructor promoting rank error — and being upheld by local university staff and faculty as a “a role model” that shows SDA students “how its done”.

The unbiased objective reader will find it more than a little “instructive” that this clear distinctive available only at LSU – is one key item that John zeros in on in his statement above!

Clearly we have at least ONE point that BOTH sides see clearly!!

in Christ,

Bob  

(Quote)

@Ron:

Ron says:
January 31, 2010 @BobRyan:

Actualy Bob, According to Mrs. White, the reason we developed schools is so that our science department could inform our theology department. One of her stated goals, was to counteract the influence of poorly educated “evangelists” who were teaching fanatacism.

I see. So the church diluted its focus on evangelism so that darwinist evolutionism could downgrade faith in God’s Word “sufficiently” and thus fulfill our mission as a church? Funny thing about that claim of yours — no quote, no reference to anything at all.

But as it turns out – I happen to have one for you –

I was then carried back to the creation and was shown that the first week, in which God performed the work of creation in six days and rested on the seventh day, was just like every other week. The great God in his days of creation and day of rest, measured off the first cycle as a sample for successive weeks till the close of time. “These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created.” God gives us the productions of his work at the close of each literal day. Each day was accounted of him a generation, because every day he generated or produced some new portion of his work. On the seventh day of the first week God rested from his work, and then blessed the day of his rest, and set it apart for the use of man. The weekly cycle of seven literal days, six for labor, and the seventh for rest, which has been preserved and brought down through Bible history, originated in the great facts of the first seven days. {3SG 90.1}

When God spake his law with an audible voice from Sinai, he introduced the Sabbath by saying, “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.” He then declares definitely what shall be done on the six days, and what shall not be done on the seventh. He then, in giving the reason for thus observing the week, points them back to his example on the first seven days of time. “For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day, wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.” This reason appears beautiful and forcible when we understand the record of creation to mean literal days. The first six days of each week are given to man in which to labor, because God employed the same period of the first week in the work of creation. The seventh day God has reserved as a day of rest, in commemoration of his rest during the same period of time after he had performed the work of creation in six days. {3SG 90.2}

But the infidel supposition, that the events of the first week required seven vast, indefinite periods for their accomplishment, strikes directly at the foundation of the Sabbath of the fourth commandment. It makes indefinite and obscure that which God has made very plain. It is the worst kind of infidelity; for with many who profess to believe the record of creation, it is infidelity in disguise. It charges God with commanding men to observe the week of seven literal days in commemoration of seven indefinite periods, which is unlike his dealings with mortals, and is an impeachment of his wisdom. {3SG 91.1}

Infidel geologists claim that the world is very much older than the Bible record makes it. They reject the Bible record, because of those things which are to them evidences from the earth itself, that the world has existed tens of thousands of years. And many who profess to believe the Bible record are at a loss to account for wonderful things which are found in the earth, with the view that creation week was only seven literal days, and that the world is now only about six thousand years old…. {3SG 91.2}

So is the quote above – an example of the “fanatacism” that you claim Ellen White was trying to get rid of in your rather wild claim above?

To put it directly to your point — I find your logic somewhat illusive in that you appeal to Ellen White – who has already given that bold statement above about “disguised infidelity”.

in Christ,

Bob  

(Quote)