@Professor Kent: Jeff, your refusal to deal with reality in …

Comment on LSU Responds to Issues Regarding Dr. Diaz and WASC by David Read.

@Professor Kent: Jeff, your refusal to deal with reality in this situation is exceedingly strange. You’ve admitted there was a problem at La Sierra, but bizarrely insist that it was magically solved as of 2009, when in fact AAA saw problems after that time, the Board of Trustees formed a creation-evolution study group to solve the problem after that time, a survey was conducted after that time and even La Sierra admitted it had a problem as of February 2011, and Lee Greer got himself fired for trying to solve the problem in 2011.

I don’t want to play games with you about the word “atheistic.” The problem is teaching mainstream origins science as a valid, factually supported theory of origins, rather than as a false theory. That problem has been ongoing for decades and continues unabated to the present moment.

David Read Also Commented

LSU Responds to Issues Regarding Dr. Diaz and WASC
@Professor Kent: Jeff, the messenger of the Lord for our time is Ellen White, and you should be familiar with her warnings regarding Lyellism and Darwinism. If not, some of the more pertinent passages are set out in chapter 7 of my book, “Dinosaurs — an Adventist View.”

In promoting an atheistic origins narrative in opposition to the biblical, Adventist view of a creation in six literal days a few thousand years ago, La Sierra is flagrantly disregarding the Lord’s messenger for our time. I should think this would be obvious to you.


LSU Responds to Issues Regarding Dr. Diaz and WASC
@Professor Kent: Jeff, obviously your tongue is planted firmly in your cheek, but I really do admire Wisbey as a tactician and strategist. He is way ahead of the laity (who aren’t really even in the game, because no one wants to believe how committed the Left Coast is to liberalizing the SDA Church), he easily outmaneuvered Ricardo Graham (who is a creationist but is hopelessly over his head with Randal), he eventually outmaneuvered the three capable creationist women on his board (and had them kicked off the board), he is way ahead of AAA (he has them utterly bamboozled), he managed to use the LSU-3 situation, which should have revealed to the larger church how liberal La Sierra is, to his advantage vis-a-vis his strategy to use WASC to loosen church control, and he managed to thwart Lee Greer’s attempt at compromise with Larry Blackmer, AAA and the NAD, and not only to thwart it but to use it to consolidate his power, by kicking 3 of the 4 board members who signed the Greer document off the board and eventually firing Lee Greer.

So you may ridicule Wisbey’s conspiratorial abilities, but I do not. I have a healthy respect for both his determination to liberalize La Sierra and the larger church and his ability to make it happen.


LSU Responds to Issues Regarding Dr. Diaz and WASC
It is self-evidently preposterous to claim that, because Gabe Diaz was baptized as an 11-year old, his current views are orthodox. And yet that is what Larry Becker does. Incredible!

I do want to address Larry Becker’s soothing words about the bylaw changes. Randal Wisbey is far too smart to try to get all of the church officers kicked off the La Sierra Board of Trustees. That might shake some important people out of their collective coma. He understands that he has to work incrementally to loosen the university’s ties to the church, and that is what he is doing.

But let us not minimize what a big step these bylaw changes really are. Under the current bylaws, the president of the Pacific Union is automatically the chairman of La Sierra’s Board of Trustees. He doesn’t have to be elected to that position; it goes with his office. Now, Ricardo Graham, if he disagrees with Wisbey on origins (and I am told he does) has been ineffective at overruling Wisbey and correcting the problem; Wisbey has been easily able to control him. But what if a new union president came into office, one who was opposed to Wisbey’s agenda and was strong enough to effectively resist Wisbey? That would be a huge setback for Wisbey and his Darwinistic, liberal agenda. But with these bylaw changes, that can never happen. That hypothetical new union president couldn’t even be elected chair of La Sierra’s board. Assuming that Pacific Union College doesn’t change its bylaws, the president of the Pacific Union will still be the ex-officio chair of PUC’s board and hence can never again serve as the chair of La Sierra’s Board of Trustees.

We are told that, under the proposed bylaw changes, the chairman must be a church officer, but that leaves several persons to choose from. The chairman must be elected by the board, and Randal Wisbey has been packing the board with liberals who he hopes will support his agenda. He flexed his muscles in late 2011, when he had three strong creationists and opponents of his agenda (Carla Lidner-Baum, Kathy Proffitt, and Marta Tooma) kicked off the Board of Trustees. The liberal board that Wisbey has put in place can easily vote for the most liberal of the several church officers who are on the board.

So the current bylaw changes are a major step toward “institutional autonomy” and away from church control of La Sierra. Moreover, Larry Becker’s press release notwithstanding, “institutional autonomy” has been WASC’s stated concern and the stated reason why WASC recommended bylaw changes for La Sierra. The purported conflict of interest posed by having one man chair both PUC’s and La Sierra’s boards was not a concern of WASC; it is a cover story put forward by La Sierra to divert attention from the fact that they are about to approve bylaw changes that loosen their ties to the Adventist Church. What we have here is WASC recommending bylaw changes to strengthen “institutional autonomy” and diminish church control, and La Sierra carrying out exactly that type of bylaw changes, hence setting a disastrous precedent for other regional accrediting bodies and other Adventist colleges.

This is a blueprint for how to separate every Adventist college from the denomination, and yet no one seems to be paying attention. What will wake denominational leadership up to the fact that our entire post-secondary educational system is about to be imperiled by a vote on February 21?


Recent Comments by David Read

La Sierra University gets 3-year AAA Accreditation
@Beatrice: Beatrice, I note that you have posted here a copy of your post at ADvindicate.com.

It’s interesting that you say that John Perumal replaced Lee Grismer as department chairman “a long time ago,” but the first news of that change was your own comment at ADvindicate a couple of days ago. There was no public announcement, and no news from any of the usual sources: the Review, ANN, Spectrum, ADvindicate, or Educate Truth. When I was researching my story, there was nothing on La Sierria’s official website to indicate that the chairmanship had changed; the website was not updated to reflect the change in chairmanship until after my article was posted at ADvindicate on October 17. Am I “lazy” if I don’t telephone La Sierra every couple of months and ask if Wisbey has had a change of heart and demoted the hardened Darwinist that he promoted to department chair two years ago?? I cannot help but wonder why this change in departmental leadership was a closely held secret until AFTER my article started making the rounds and being read by Adventist opinion leaders, but some mysteries will likely remain mysterious.

It’s hardly an excuse for wrecking the Adventist faith of those who take upper division biology courses at La Sierra that most students do not take upper division biology courses. But the information that has been provided by LSU students like Louie Bishop is that even a seminar science-faith course intended for a broad non-specialized student audience–specifically the one instituted in response to the 2009 controversy over the teaching of origins–was destructive of Adventist faith; LSU religion teachers, including John Webster who (at that time) was chairman of the religion department, told students that the Adventist hermeneutic was unhelpful, and that the Genesis narrative should not be taken literally as a description of the creation.

If AAA has witnessed a change of direction at La Sierra–and I very much doubt that–then it is up to them to say what they saw, and why they voted the way they did, in connection with their vote to extend Adventist accreditation for a further three years. There is a very public controversy about La Sierra’s blatant undermining of Adventist beliefs, and if AAA is, in the face of that controversy, going to certify that LSU is fulfilling its Adventist mission and upholding its Adventist identity, then AAA must publicly explain its vote, and justify it by outlining the changes that it observed.

You say that I “have not taken the approach Jesus advocated” and I assume that by that you are referring to Matthew 18. That passage does not apply. No one at La Sierra has wronged me personally; I have no personal stake whatsoever in the matter. The issue is that LSU is publicly undermining Seventh-day Adventist beliefs, and the response to that issue needs to be public. The relevant passage is 1 Tim. 5:20: “Those who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all, that the rest also may fear.” Please look at Testimonies, v. 2, pp. 14-16.

It is not my desire or goal to undermine unity in the church, but there can be no unity except on the basis of sound biblical truth. La Sierra has been sowing the seeds of a very profound disunity, as it has for a generation been training Adventist youth at an Adventist institution (AAA approved!) to lightly regard the word of God. It has been telling the Adventist youth entrusted to it that God’s claim to have created the world in six literal days and rested on the Sabbath day (Gen. 2:2-3; Ex. 20:11) is unsustainable nonsense. This can only lead to disunity on the most fundamental level, as one group, raised and educated in the SDA Church, has an entirely different conception of what the Bible teaches and God requires than another group also raised and educated in the church.

Lay people are under an obligation of conscience to see that those who live off the tithe uphold the religious mission of the church. One very highly placed Adventist official has instructed us to “hold them accountable,” and he is right. In the absence of a vigilant laity, the SDA Church will lapse into corruption as did the post-apostolic Christian Church.


LSU Removes Dr. Lee Grismer as Chairman of the Biology Department
@Paul Giem: Paul I will pray that you are right that there has been a sea change. But it will take more than a (until recently, covert) change in the biology dept. chairmanship to convince me of that.


LSU Removes Dr. Lee Grismer as Chairman of the Biology Department
@gene fortner: That’s a good list, Gene, but do not forget Arthur Chadwick (Ph.D, U. of Miami, geology/sedimentology) and Lee Spencer (Ph.D, biology/paleontology, Loma Linda) and Kurt Wise (Ph.D, geology, Harvard) and Marcus Ross (Ph.D, paleontology, U.R.I.).

The first two are Seventh-day Adventists and very strong creationists; the second two are creationists. Kurt Wise is a good friend of Art Chadwick and has come to SDA-sponsored events before.


LSU Removes Dr. Lee Grismer as Chairman of the Biology Department
It will be interesting to see how much power John Perumal will be given, and will exercise, in reshaping the biology department. He should have veto power over new hires, and he should be able to recommend whether contracts for untenured professors are renewed or not, and whether tenure is granted or not. Typically the academic dean or provost has some say over this as well, but the department chair’s power is considerable.


LSU Removes Dr. Lee Grismer as Chairman of the Biology Department
@Paul Giem: Paul, your theory is indeed very reasonable, but I don’t think it is correct. First, I have argued that WASC’s concerns about autonomy were solicited by Randal Wisbey so that he could get bylaw changes that would give him greater autonomy from the church. One key item of evidence that has become public is that in 2011 one of Wisbey’s minions, then LSU board member Lenny Darnell, recorded himself saying that he planned to write WASC and demand that WASC recommend and insist on changes to the board structure that would dilute the power of the church officers on the board:

http://advindicate.com/articles/2793.

Second, the bylaw changes Wisbey wanted were approved by the constituency back in May, so WASC has no grounds to complain about the lack of institutional autonomy, and has indicated that it is pleased with what was done:

http://advindicate.com/articles/2013/10/13/wasc-visiting-team-commends-la-sierra-for-revisions-to-university-governance-practices

My theory as to why this change of department chairmen has been so hush hush is that, 1) Wisbey didn’t want his liberal base to know that he had thrown any sort of bone to AAA; he wanted them thinking he had gotten an unconditional surrender from AAA, and 2) Wisbey doesn’t want the wider SDA Church to know that AAA thought there was anything wrong at La Sierra that needed changing, much less that the chairman of the biology department needed changing.