Comment on LSU Professor Doubts Christ’s Divinity by Shane Hilde.
Apparently the debate above is not the only recorded evidence of Greer promoting the Unitarian position. In a documentary called “The Human Jesus” directed by Mark Dockery, he says:
Source: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8436256589572340879&hl=en#
To deny that he was a human being is to deny the historical evidences. The burden of proof should be on those who say he isn’t a human being. He was more than something else other than a human being to demonstrate that. Was he a great religious teacher? Did he claim to be messiah? Was he recognized as messiah? Within Jewish context those are very specific categories. Those are not the same as claiming to be God or being recognized as God or anything like that. so if one is interested in getting at the real Jesus there is every advantage to investigating the evidence that shows him very much in his biblical context not in his jewish context. Not as claiming anything like co-eternal, co-existence, with the Father, eternal pre-existence, all power, all those things. These are things which were bestowed on him. Various parts of these things. like it says all power is given to me in heaven and earth. He is given certain privileges but all of those powers privileges, and authorities are delegated. Even in the gospel of John they are all delegated by God to him. So I think that an advantage of taking Jesus in the strict exegetical sense from scripture is that you’re likely to get something very much closer to the actual Jesus rather then centuries of tradition about him. (19:48)
Greer continues at 45:52.
At 56:22 Greer responds to Isaiah 9:6 by saying, “In the context it seems obvious to a number of scholars that this is a reference to Hezekiah. And later on of course this was taken and adopted in a very homiletical sort of way by Matthew and applied to Jesus.”
If you want to dig for the truth of a thing and risk being at odds, risk being a free thinker. You know that has its advantages; it also has its social burdens at times. People don’t like being dissented from particularly in matters where they should be the most tentative because we can’t see these things, they’re often the most dogmatic. (1:33:10)
Here’s another one:
If one wants to think of Jesus as a divinely empowered hero, divinely empowered messiah, an anointed son, etc. all these things that have deep roots in the Christian tradition, then one is standing on very solid ground. If one wants to see Jesus as claiming that he is God, then one is on the short end of the stick evidence wise. (1:49:28)
For those within the Seventh-day Adventist Church who have forgotten what we believe, or Christianity for that matter, in regard to Christ, here is fundamental belief #4:
God the eternal Son became incarnate in Jesus Christ. Through Him all things were created, the character of God is revealed, the salvation of humanity is accomplished, and the world is judged. Forever truly God, He became also truly man, Jesus the Christ. He was conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary. He lived and experienced temptation as a human being, but perfectly exemplified the righteousness and love of God. By His miracles He manifested God’s power and was attested as God’s promised Messiah. He suffered and died voluntarily on the cross for our sins and in our place, was raised from the dead, and ascended to minister in the heavenly sanctuary in our behalf. He will come again in glory for the final deliverance of His people and the restoration of all things.
Here are the facts about Greer, a biology professor at La Sierra University:
1. Does not believe in the divinity of Christ.
2. Believes all life shares a common ancestry.
3. Teaches at LSU that Genesis 1 & 2 are allegorical.
Does this have any bearing on how he presents the evidence? You better believe it! I am very troubled that a non-Christian, claiming to be a Seventh-day Adventist, is promoting evolution as truth at a Seventh-day Adventist university. It’s one thing to be a non-Christian, but it’s entirely different to be a non-Christian yet claim to be Seventh-day Adventist. Can we really afford to pay church representatives like this?
How can we expect professors who believe and promote such blatantly contrary beliefs at our schools to “help you navigate issues of faith and science, in and out of the classroom, so that your faith in God is strengthened” as LSU claims its professors will/can do?
How many students are we willing to feed through these classes before action is taken? Apparently 100’s if not thousands!!
Shane Hilde Also Commented
LSU Professor Doubts Christ’s Divinity
This is it? From these remarks, you reach the damning conclusion that Lee Greer denies Christ’s divinity, and therefore you wish to “expose†him and subject him to public humiliation?
Professor Kent,
If after watching the documentary and the debate, you still come away with “This is it?” then there really is no sense in trying to discuss much of anything with you. People who believe Jesus was God don’t go on documentaries and argue to the contrary. Look at what he says here:
So if one is interested in getting at the real Jesus there is every advantage to investigating the evidence that shows him very much in his biblical context not in his Jewish context. Not as claiming anything like co-eternal, co-existence, with the Father, eternal pre-existence, all power, all those things. These are things which were bestowed on him.
In other words the real Jesus is not co-eternal, co-existence, with the Father, eternal pre-existant, and all powerful. In the documentary and debate he does not promote Jesus as God, but as merely human who did not have any power etc at all, but was just given some by the Father.
You really don’t think Greer thinks Jesus was not God?
Recent Comments by Shane Hilde
LSU student: ‘Apostates or Apostles’?
Defining just how we learn and how we teach, especially in the field of science at this institution is important. ‘Different people mean different things when they use the term evolution,’ said Dr. Gary Bradley, a professor of biology and genetics at La Sierra. He explained that for most conservative Christians, the word ‘evolution’ carries the usual anti-God connotation. However, for a scientist, the word represents the process by which all kinds of alterations and modifications happen in our world. Dr. Bradley believes that the Creator God designed the world with the ability for evolution to occur, and urges everyone to learn as much as they can about our Lord’s created universe. ‘There is abundant evidence that living things change. Thus evolution is well documented and well supported in the scientific world. It is unconscionable for a science student to remain ignorant of this fundamental aspect of life.’
What kind of evolution is Dr. Bradley speaking of when he says God designed the world with the ability for evolution to occur? Different people mean different things when they use the term evolution, says Bradley, but he doesn’t define what he means. This is exactly the type of vague, slippery language that is used in order to cloak what these professors believe and how they’re teaching evolution at LSU.
Indeed, the word “evolution” does mean many things to many people, so it suspect when Bradley makes his observation and then makes a vague, undefined comment about what he believes. Remember this is the same Bradley who was quoted in INSIDE Higher ED”
‘It’s very, very clear that what I’m skeptical of is the absolute necessity of believing that the only way a creator God could do things is by speaking them into existence a few thousand years ago,’ Bradley added. ‘That’s where my skepticism lies. That’s the religious philosophical basis for what I call the lunatic fringe. They do not represent the majority position in the Church, and yes I’m skeptical of that. But I want to say to kids it’s OK for you to believe that, but it’s not OK for you to be ignorant of the scientific data that’s out there.’
There is an obvious difference between what the Seventh-day Adventist Church views evolution and Bradley. LSU just doesn’t get it. Everybody already knows what’s going on there, but they continue to pretend otherwise.
Panda’s Thumb: ‘SDAs are split over evolution’
@krissmith777: Do mean like mainstream papers, written by evolutionists are exclusively peer-reviewed by evolutionists? Yes, I’m aware that there are creationists that write for mainstream journals and get published and perhaps there a small handful that peer-review too, but the percentage, I would guess, is very small. So small in fact that the point would be moot.
The journal is created by the Seventh-day Adventist Church, so I’d be surprised if it was being peer-reviewed by evolutionists
Panda’s Thumb: ‘SDAs are split over evolution’
@Alexander Carpenter: Great comment Alex! I’m trying to compare our journalism to an article you posted at Spectrum May 29, 2009, in which you, Bonnie Dwyer, and Jared Wright referred to David Asscherick as a “college dropout” twice in the same article (1). What was that all about? It was pretty obvious to your readership. A pathetic attempt to mislead and attack someone who actually supports and believes in the Seventh-day Adventist message. You then made the false assumption that he didn’t support Adventist higher education. I believe he took it upon himself to personally call you and point 10+ errors that were in the article. Do you remember that call Alex? Wow, that must have been embarrassing. Yes, we regret not contacting Dr. Ness before we posted his lecture, but at least we got the facts straight.
You’re really reaching with the old article hyperbole. I was personally aware of the article last year and I believe a few other readers here were too, because I remember it being posted in the comments. It’s particularly relevant now in light of the claims coming from PUC. Raising the “we’re creationists” flag high and mighty, when in actuality the impression these evolutionists had was quite different.
We average 32,000 hits per month. And that’s from this year. Sorry, people are still showing a very strong interest in this topic. Dwindling? Not by any amount worth clicking over here to leave a fish bowl comment. Come on Alex, you’re more connected to the church than this aren’t you? Your worldview in regard to origins is, aside from being unbiblical, a minority within the world church.
What’s ironic about the situation with PUC is that you work there and you’re not exactly a creationist. I wouldn’t be surprised if inwardly you’re ashamed to hear PUC ranting and raving about what a creationist Dr. Ness is and the rest of the biology department.
Sorry, you’re way off on this one. This issue is huge in the church and it’s not going away anytime soon. Chances are the underlying issues could cause a serious split, which is actually already occurring, in our church.
1. http://www.spectrummagazine.org/blog/2009/05/29/unravaling_witch_hunt_la_sierra_under_seige
Panda’s Thumb: ‘SDAs are split over evolution’
@Professor Kent: “Old news” is a bit relative in this case. Yes, this occurred two years ago, but the professors haven’t changed nor has the way they teach evolution.
Your last paragraph only proves my point. You make wild assertions about there being no evidence while ignoring the evidence being presented. For starters what do you say to the testimony of 70+ students in 2004? Or the testimony of three students in 2009? The statements from the professors themselves. The syllabi?
You baffle me Kent, you really do.
No evidence? Common on. I’d say I hope you’re joking, but you’re not. You really believe that.
Panda’s Thumb: ‘SDAs are split over evolution’
This is almost funny. The world quite easily sees how evolution is being taught in our own universities, but a small, but quite vocal group, just doesn’t get it. It seems, more often than not, that those who just don’t seem to see things for the way they are at LSU tend to be more sympathetic toward a hermeneutic that is contrary to the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
