LSU student petition criticizes curriculum

UPDATED 4/30/11: Information from The Press Enterprise has been added to this article.

By Educate Truth Staff
Aug. 20, 2010

According to a Press Enterprise* article dated Saturday May 22, 1999, “A group of La sierra University students complained to the board of trustees Friday that certain required courses lack appropriate emphasis on Jesus and the Bible.” The petition was signed by 300 of La Sierra’s 1,400 students. In the article, senior history/political science major, Monte Bridges said, “Our biggest opposition is that it attacks what the school was founded on, which is the Bible. It says, in essence, that all religions are paths to the same truths. The problems is that Christ said ‘I’m the truth; I’m the way’ I’m the life.'” “We pay a lot of money for a Christian education and we’re not being given it,” Bridges said.

The LSU student paper, The Criterion, surveyed students and found 93 percent of the students opposed the core program of course requirements.

Then president, Larry Geraty, was also interviewed in the article:

Geraty said that although the university has students from more than 35 religions, its focus will always be in the Seventh-day Adventist tradition. The approach, he said, is scholarly, not Bible-study, as some students may have experienced in high schools. “It’s not like Sunday school,” Geraty said. “It’s not like family worship. I think it’s just a question of growing up. And that’s the whole reason why you come to college.”

Geraty said next year’s core courses will have more emphasis on the Seventh-day Adventist viewpoint but the course topics won’t change. “Anytime you introduce a new program, there are criticisms,” he said. “But we will take seriously the concerns of students.”

According to Steve Daily, the campus chaplain at the time, administrators have ignored students since the core classes were imposed in 1996. “The students haven’t been listened to,” he said. “They’ve been ignored.” “I think when that happens, there’s a problem,” said Daily.

The petition states the “C.O.R.E. Curriculum/University Studies program” at LSU is “unacceptable.” It goes on to list the “total unwillingness of administration to evaluate the program or survey student opinion, and the suppression of dissenting views relating to C.O.R.E.” as one of its eight reasons why the program should be dismissed:

Dear Alumnus,

We the students of La Sierra University have reached a crisis that calls for the desperate attention of all concerned parties. Due to the complete lack of respect on the part of the administration to listen and acknowledge the students and our complaints on the CORE curriculum, we have collectively gathered together to ask for help. In the last two weeks over three hundred student signatures (approximately one third of the student body) have been gathered to voice our deep concern. It must be stated from the start that this letter is only being sent out because of a desperate situation.

The petition that students signed, addresses eight issues. Stated on the petition are the more prominent reason for the dismissal of CORE. Your immediate attention to this matter is vital to ensure changes necessary in bringing this institution back to the Biblical principles that Adventist education was founded on. We believe that Adventist education is precious and rare and this letter is written in the hope that you will help to keep this alive. You can let your influence be felt by letting those in decision making positions know how you feel. It must be restated that your help in this matter is absolutely crucial to bringing about the changes desperately needed.

May God Bless you in every way!

[signatures]

Monte Bridges (History/Political Science)
Shawn Paris (Religious Studies/Pre-Seminary)
Manasseh Nwaigwe (Health Science/Pre-Med)
(300+ Students)

P.S. We can be reached at: FrustratedLaSierraStudents@usa.net

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH

We the undersigned students of La Sierra University find the C.O.R.E. Curriculum/University Studies program to be unacceptable for the following reasons:

1. Its misrepresentation of the Christian God, and total lack of emphasis on Christ and the Bible.

2. Its underlying humanistic (versus Christian) values and foundation.

3. Its emphasis that “religions are different paths leading to the same truth.”

4. The general inconsistency, unfairness. and incompetence of team teaching.

5. The general inability of credits to transfer in and out of the program.

6. The superficial, and liberal political content of the classes.

7. Subtle subversive attacks on Christianity and Monotheism.

8. The total unwillingness of administration to evaluate the program or survey student opinion, and the suppression of dissenting views relating to C.O.R.E.

*”La Sierra students criticize core classes” by Karen Joseph. Not archived online.

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

55 thoughts on “LSU student petition criticizes curriculum

  1. What a travesty that this cry for help wasn’t answered years ago! It seems that the faculty of LSU has more to answer for than I previously thought. It is pretty sad when the students have to fight the faculty to remain true to the principles that the University is supposed to be teaching them. In my judgment, the students are far and away more knowledgeable than the faculty. Shame, shame, shame on the faculty…and bravo! to the students for trying to right this horrible wrong. May God bless them wherever they are and whatever they are doing now.




    0
    View Comment
  2. It is amazing that in spite of the number of very liberal students that are enrolled at La Sierra, the faculty blows them away by being even more liberal than their students. Just look at the things that the faculty promote: evolution, homosexuality, dancing, and who know what else. [edit] The second coming cannot be very far away, just look at how quickly our church is falling apart. The shaking is happening right before our eyes. People get ready! Turn off the TV, the radio, get out your Bible and the SOP and study. Move out of the city and save your children from the evil that is attacking them from every direction. Take them to the country where they can commune with God in nature as the great people of the Bible did. Abandon La Sierra and let it take its course to destruction. God will take care of it. Take care of yourselves and your children.




    0
    View Comment
  3. It is amazing that in spite of the number of very liberal students that are enrolled at La Sierra, the faculty blows them away by being even more liberal than their students.Just look at the things that the faculty promote: evolution, homosexuality, dancing, and who know what else. [edit] The second coming cannot be very far away, just look at how quickly our church is falling apart.

    Yes, the LSU faculty and administration are, in general, very liberal compared to most other SDA institutions. Regarding your “who knows what else” I wonder myself! Anyone have any “inside” information?




    0
    View Comment
  4. Besides this 1999 petition regarding LSU’s C.O.R.E. program, there was also a petition in 2005 signed by almost 100 LSU students regarding the one-sided promotion of evolutionary theories in LSU’s science classes to the active suppression of the SDA perspective on origins by the upper division science professors…

    Sean Pitman
    http://www.DetectingDesign.com




    0
    View Comment
  5. I would be interested if the LSU Board ever got this letter and, if so, did they ever evaluate or investigate the alleged problems. Same for the Pacific Union Conference leadership.




    0
    View Comment
  6. The incriminating (I would use the word damning but will refrain) facts have piled to the size of a mountain. This is the largest elephant that I’ve ever seen! La Sierra’s past and present administration and whoever else holds positions of power and influence for LSU (legal counsel, majority of board members, conference officials, big donors perhaps?) are intent on persecuting (Louie Bishop) or demeaning, belittling, silencing or ignoring all those who try to raise a warning alarm, such as these 300 students in 1999, and 100 students in 2005, other students more recently who’ve tried to speak up, 3 current board members, those who’ve written letters, those who set up this website, many who speak out on this website, or anyone who’s not in line with their liberal agenda. Now, they’re trying to use WASC as leverage.

    The arrogance, the belligerence and selective deafness is astounding. What more can be done? If no one will heed the multitude of repeated, continued requests for La Sierra to realign with basic, fundamental SDA doctrines, then it is time for La Sierra to be consistent outwardly with its inside practices. As those unheeded 300 students expressed in their petition, enough is enough is enough. The controlling powers of La Sierra are determined that the faculty have unfettered “academic freedom,” and that no one will stop or even slow down this descent into total liberalism. Then so be it. As a self-governing, autonomous, non-denominational school, La Sierra needs to pay all employee salaries, health insurance and retirement benefits, purchase or pay rent for the buildings and the land and remove the SDA label.




    0
    View Comment
  7. So they had at least 400 students that had filed complaints before this recent round – and still they want to pretend that no students complain about their policies, beliefs and methods?

    How is that even possible?

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  8. So they had at least 400 students that had filed complaints before this recent round – and still they want to pretend that no students complain about their policies, beliefs and methods?How is that even possible?in Christ,Bob  

    How is it possible? By ignoring the facts and making up a “new” set of “truths.” Look at how LSU has spun this story so far! Total avoidance, smokes-screening, and closeting themselves from any form of responsibility!




    0
    View Comment
  9. The incriminating (I would use the word damning but will refrain) facts have piled to the size of a mountain…

    Susie, I agree with you–it’s time for some action from somebody. But who? I see nobody ready to take charge. Nobody in the administration, on the Board, at the Pacific Union headquarters, or even at the GC (SO FAR.)

    But, God has His timeline, and I think we’ll see some action at sometime relatively soon. God has a way of bypassing those who should be “in charge” and placing someone else to do His will. He has done it before, and I believe He’ll do it this time.




    0
    View Comment
  10. We have probably missed the point. No one has any authority to do anything about LSU. Once we see the picture, we can act accordingly. So there is no one we can call to account to challenge this institution. It has, no doubt, gone over to the world.

    LSU wants to maintain some credibility with “the church” for financial reasons. But I suggest that in the end, they get more money by way of Government grants than church financial support. Now which way do you think they will go?

    Now I don’t know any of this for sure. But the evidence seems almost overwhelming and since no one seems to be able to actually do anything, what other conclusion can a person come to?

    The main thing is this. What is happening at LSU will no doubt be repeated again and again in other SDA institutions. So I often say, “The church will get smaller, before it gets bigger.”

    Anyway, God don’t need money. He needs dedicated unrelenting individuals who will not be moved from our mission and commission to present our historic SDA message in its biblical context.

    The reformation was raised up to explain how we are not justifed by the law. But Adventism was raised up to explain how we are justified by the law. So there is a sense in which we are not, and a sense in which we are.

    Today the church has abandon our message and has now opted to simply explain how we are not justified by the law, with no qualifying explanation of how we are. With the implication that there is no biblical doctrine of justification by the law. We could ask, “What do they think the book of James is all about?”

    Well, I’ll close since Sean doesn’t want to “do” theology. But I think this is a real mistake since every concept of truth including origins is tied to biblical theology.

    Bill Sorensen




    0
    View Comment
  11. We have probably missed the point. No one has any authority to do anything about LSU. Once we see the picture, we can act accordingly. So there is no one we can call to account to challenge this institution. It has, no doubt, gone over to the world.

    Bill, I agree that LSU has gone over to the world, but do not agree no one has the authority to do anything about it. If you read the LSU website, it has the list of what the Board can do, and it CAN do a lot! I don’t have the paragraph number right now, but could get it.

    The fact is the Board has the authority and can do something, but it chooses not to. Why? Well, besides blaming Ellen White, Graham has not told us anything, preferring to make some “adjustments” in the curriculum, which have been a total failure!




    0
    View Comment
  12. For those who wish to see what the Board can actually DO, go to the LSU website, under “bylaws” pages 6-9. The Board has tremendous power to “do” lots, but chooses to do nothing. It can “discipline” and “discontinue” virtually the whole school, including the President, Provost, faculty, etc.

    Graham’s appeal to blaming Ellen White and other dead people for the delays in doing anything is pure baloney! He and the Board should be ashamed of themselves for not taking responsibility for this mess!




    0
    View Comment
  13. Ron said……

    “Bill, I agree that LSU has gone over to the world, but do not agree no one has the authority to do anything about it. If you read the LSU website, it has the list of what the Board can do, and it CAN do a lot! I don’t have the paragraph number right now, but could get it.

    The fact is the Board has the authority and can do something, but it chooses not to. Why? Well, besides blaming Ellen White, Graham has not told us anything, preferring to make some “adjustments” in the curriculum, which have been a total failure!” Ron Stone M.D.(Quote)

    What you said may be true Dr. Stone. None the less, as you have stated, they are not willing to do anything dynamic to correct the situation. But the main point is this, the SDA denomination has no authority over the board of directors. If this is the case, the school is independent of the SDA church.

    We could only wonder how many other SDA institutions are able to do the same thing? We know the denomination owns all the churches. So they can close and/or sell any church building they choose. And if they want to shut down any church, they can.

    LSU probably does not fit this scenario.

    Bill Sorensen




    0
    View Comment
  14. @Bill Sorensen, Wayne Matlock, on the WASC board thinks the denomination can do something. I also believe it can, but do not have “high hopes” that it will. The real underlying problem is the chronic deterioration of our SDA Church here in California, not only its leaders, but also the constituency.

    Is the GC willing to step in and do its job? I have my doubts. The problem, as we all see, is MORE than a few “rogue” Biology Profs. It is a chronic, planned, and well orchestrated deterioration of our SDA beliefs at LSU, not only in the area of teaching “evolution as fact” but in other areas, such as “gay marriage” etc. And, not only by the Biology Department. The Religion Department is also to blame, as is every administrator and teacher who has not spoken up about this matter.




    0
    View Comment
  15. The problem, as we all see, is MORE than a few “rogue” Biology Profs. It is a chronic, planned, and well orchestrated deterioration of our SDA beliefs at LSU, not only in the area of teaching “evolution as fact” but in other areas, such as “gay marriage” etc. And, not only by the Biology Department. The Religion Department is also to blame, as is every administrator and teacher who has not spoken up about this matter.

    And the Good Doc has barely scratched the surface. Many of the faculty listen to rock music, attend movies, wear short skirts and high heels, drink coffee, subscribe to satellite TV movie channels, go out to eat on Sabbaths, pull weeds in their gardens without gloves on, encourage others to have abortions, watch CNN, imbibe occasional alcohol, go swimming on the Sabbath, and despise Rush Limbaugh. Complete erosion of SDA morals. And, to top it off, some are even Seventh-day Adventist gluttons.

    Fortunately, they are not La Sierra Adventist University. Perhaps the La Sierrans and Riversidians in the region have by now forgotten that it’s a Seventh-day Adventist institution. That would be a good thing. We no longer need an Adventist university in that region anyway. Eventually, we’ve been told (don’t you remember?), the entire region will fall into the Pacific Ocean. There will be no more talk of evolution and gay marriage after that.




    0
    View Comment
  16. “Is the GC willing to step in and do its job? I have my doubts. The problem, as we all see, is MORE than a few “rogue” Biology Profs. It is a chronic, planned, and well orchestrated deterioration of our SDA beliefs at LSU, not only in the area of teaching “evolution as fact” but in other areas, such as “gay marriage” etc. And, not only by the Biology Department. The Religion Department is also to blame, as is every administrator and teacher who has not spoken up about this matter.”

    For some of us, Dr. Stone, we agree with your assessment. But we think it covers considerable more ground than Calif. The whole denomination is moving away from bible truth in more than one area as you have stated.

    Every true restoration demands some specific basis for reform. With Noah, it was the flood. Elijah denounced Baal worship and called for a return to the worship of the true God. John the Baptist called for specific repentance and stated several issues that needed correcting. Jesus presented Himself as the Messiah. Luther confronted the church with the meritorious cause being Christ alone for salvation.

    Adventism presented a final judgment according to works with the Sabbath an essential and primary issue.

    The point is this, to simply rehearse general principles of law and gospel will bring no reformation to the SDA church. It must be by way of specific issues such as the origins controversy. Dress and worship style. Ordination of women pro or con. These are “present truth” issues for the SDA church.

    The mark of the beast as being Sunday, state of the dead, second coming issues and the thousand year gap between the 2nd and 3rd coming are not “present truth” issues for SDA’s.

    At least most SDA’s concur with a unified understanding of these truths. But we think it is our duty to “warn the world” about these issues, (and it is), while we simply ignore our own departure from biblical concepts in the church.

    I would guess every man, woman and child will eventually be forced to decide between Christ and “the church”. Loyalty the Christ and loyalty to the church is not one and the same thing. As long as we think so, “the church” can get away with “murder” with no real accountability demanded.

    But again, we see every reform in this world’s history has been Christ vs. the “true church.”

    I still believe historic Adventism can be saved and perhaps “the church” remain intact. But only if enough people begin to demand accountability on some level in their local congregations. Some of us believe the message is infallible as God has given it to us. This does not mean “the church” is infallible, especially when we see it continually abandoning the message and moving farther and farther away from its implications and application in these last days.

    “Educate Truth” has some influence, but rather limited in light of the big picture. More people need to speak out, especially those who know what is happening is wrong. To sit in church week after week with no protest is to agree and endorse the apostacy. People like Batchelor and Assercheck need to be more vocal in their opposition.

    Well, that’s my opinion, anway. Too many people are going to be lost because we did not “cry aloud and spare not.” We are “our brother’s keeper” even if many are being educated to think otherwise.

    Bill Sorensen




    0
    View Comment
  17. Now if God can and will save “the church” it certainly will not be by some hocus-pocus magic that people apparently seem to visualize. “Oh, don’t worry, Bill, God will save His church”, is the idea some express. And my question is “And how will He do that?”

    If God could save by some hocus-pocus magic, then He certainly could have saved the Jews. Or the early church from Popery. The condition of success for the church is always by way of response to reproof and correction by the scriptures. And since “the church” today seems less than willing to respond to the bible, we could only wonder if “the church” is not in the process of commiting the unpardonable sin like previously chosen instrumentalities.

    Do we believe EGW when she wrote….

    “God is weighing our characters, our conduct, and our motives in the balances of the sanctuary. It will be a fearful thing to be pronounced wanting in love and obedience by our Redeemer, who died upon the cross to draw our hearts unto Him. God has bestowed upon us great and precious gifts. He has given us light and a knowledge of His will, so that we need not err or walk in darkness. To be weighed in the balance and found wanting in the day of final settlement and rewards will be a fearful thing, a terrible mistake which can never be corrected. Young friends, shall the book of God be searched in vain for your names?” {CCh 188.2}

    We should have no misgivings as to what she means by this phrase “weighed in the balances of the sanctuary”. It means lost and rejected. So we ask, “Does she ever apply this to the SDA church?” Here is what she said…

    ” In the balances of the sanctuary the Seventh-day Adventist church is to be weighed. She will be judged by the privileges and advantages that she has had. If her spiritual experience does not correspond to the advantages that Christ, at infinite cost, has bestowed on her, if the blessings conferred have not qualified her to do the work entrusted to her, on her will be pronounced the
    60
    sentence: “Found wanting.” By the light bestowed, the opportunities given, will she be judged. . . . ” {LDE 59.3}

    Were you aware of this statement? Do you understand what it means? Did she believe in some kind of “unconditional election” for the SDA church? I think not. So what are the implications of the statement? I think we already know. But we need to be aware of its fulfillment right before our eyes and do all we can to see that this conclusion can and will be avoided.

    She had great faith and hope for “the church”. But she was not blind to the possible reality of the SDA church eventually being disqualifed as the instrumentality to present the final message to the world.

    It is my conviction that the message itself is infallible because it is biblical. But the church is not and can easily be led astray when those in position of influence and authority abandon their obligation and duty to deal with apostacy until the apostacy is so strong, there is no hope of recovery in the church as in the Jews rejection of Christ and the early church rejection of the bible.

    I still have hope. But it is not blind faith and hope as many seem to think in their view of “the church” and its election to finish the work.

    After all, this fiasco at LSU is just one of many scenarios that most are not willing to even talk about, let alone act to correct the errors.

    Keep the faith

    Bill Sorensen




    0
    View Comment
  18. Hello all,

    I have generally refrained from dialogue here over the past several months: One, doing so was providing few (not least myself) with not much benefit; Two, it has been a massive sink for time, now more fruitfully filled with caring for a growing family.

    However, I heard about this old petition and thought I would mention a few things since I was there and involved.

    I agree that the petition is from the 1998-99 school year, when I was a young, impressionable freshman at LSU. However, I am quite certain that the petition, with a purported 300+ signatories, did not represent a third of the student population. There were many more than just a thousand students then, unless I am very much mistaken.

    There were two major issues during that term, as I recall. One was a dissatisfaction with the CORE curriculum (I did not take any of the CORE classes, except for CORE 101, the general introduction to LSU for freshmen, since I was in the honors program). Today, that basic curriculum is part of University Studies, and students take UNST courses in a number of broad categories. When I was a student at LSU, we could take classes in California literature, or on Opera, Comparative World Religions, and any number of other available offerings. My impression from taking and teaching such breadth courses at both LSU and in the University of California is that students generally see them as a barrier to their “real work”, meaning their particular degree track.

    The other issue was, as has been stated consistently on this forum, a fear of a creeping liberalism/secularism at the university. This was a fear that I shared as an incoming freshmen from relatively more conservative Arizona, and reflects to a certain extent an unreasonable stigma attached to a geographic region (California). If the signatures on the petition ever come to light, I am sure you will see my name on it. I even attended a board of trustees meeting with Monte Bridges, Shawn Paris and Manasseh Nwaigwe. I was friends with Shawn Paris and had breakfast with him many mornings. It might be useful and instructive to track some of these people down and ask them what they think now (I know where to reach Shawn). Some of them, and I include myself, later came to accept and embrace a University that required students to expand their boundaries of knowledge, and question received or conventional wisdom to find out if it was solid. This is why I am proud to teach at that same University, which provided me a safe environment to learn and grow.

    Let the example of this 11-12 year old petition serve as a reminder (or warning) to people who tend toward the un-thoughtful, that nothing is ever really erased on the internet. We should avoid writing anything that we would be ashamed to have our teenage children read a decade later.

    Pax,

    David Kendall, PhD
    Adjunct Professor of Music
    La Sierra University




    0
    View Comment
  19. For some of us, Dr. Stone, we agree with your assessment. But we think it covers considerable more ground than Calif. The whole denomination is moving away from bible truth in more than one area as you have stated.

    More people need to speak out, especially those who know what is happening is wrong. To sit in church week after week with no protest is to agree and endorse the apostacy. People like Batchelor and Assercheck need to be more vocal in their opposition.

    Bill, I agree with you regarding the “whole church” idea. [edit]

    As far as Pastor Batchelor is concerned, I personally know that Doug Batchelor (I attend his church) is fully supportive of our efforts here. He has spoken on this and other controversial topics many times, always taking God’s Word as the highest “truth” in contrast to the LSU philosophy of teaching human “wisdom!”

    Pastor Doug, because he actually preaches God’s Truth, is hated by many out here in our SDA Church in California. Why? Well, he and his staff have not backed down from the supporters of humanistic philosophies that we see prominent out here, both in our members and “leaders.”

    I issue my challenge again to the other literally MILLIONS of pastors, administrators, teachers and churchmembers in our denomination. Will YOU take a public stand for God’s Truth? The pitiful numbers involved so far is an embarrassment to our SDA Church!




    0
    View Comment
  20. Bill Sorensen wrote

    People like Batchelor and Assercheck need to be more vocal in their opposition.

    Ron Stone wrote

    As far as Pastor Batchelor is concerned, I personally know that Doug Batchelor (I attend his church) is fully supportive of our efforts here. He has spoken on this and other controversial topics many times, always taking God’s Word as the highest “truth” in contrast to the LSU philosophy of teaching human “wisdom!” Pastor Doug, because he actually preaches God’s Truth, is hated by many out here in our SDA Church in California. Why? Well, he and his staff have not backed down from the supporters of humanistic philosophies that we see prominent out here, both in our members and “leaders.”

    Sounds like you two need to be on the same page.




    0
    View Comment
  21. @David Kendall, PhD: I’m glad you could way in on this petition. I’ve contacted a few of the signees, but as of today none of them have responded. I have the original petition online. The scanned petition I have doesn’t have all 300 signatures, but a little over 170 if I remember correctly. You can view it here:

    http://www.scribd.com/full/36191246?access_key=key-2s73nsinocnfenf1qij

    Perhaps you could elaborate on the 8th concern listed on the petition:

    8. The total unwillingness of administration to evaluate the program or survey student opinion, and the suppression of dissenting views relating to C.O.R.E.

    It appears that this sentiment hasn’t changed in the last 11 years. This is not to say LSU has done this in all cases, but it appears to be a persistent problem.




    0
    View Comment
  22. Professor Kent says:
    August 29, 2010 Bill Sorensen wrote

    People like Batchelor and Assercheck need to be more vocal in their opposition.

    Ron Stone wrote

    As far as Pastor Batchelor is concerned, I personally know that Doug Batchelor (I attend his church) is fully supportive of our efforts here. He has spoken on this and other controversial topics many times, always taking God’s Word as the highest “truth” in contrast to the LSU philosophy of teaching human “wisdom!” Pastor Doug, because he actually preaches God’s Truth, is hated by many out here in our SDA Church in California. Why? Well, he and his staff have not backed down from the supporters of humanistic philosophies that we see prominent out here, both in our members and “leaders.”

    Sounds like you two need to be on the same page. Professor Kent

    Professor Kent,
    I live in the mid-west, (Kansas). In some ways,I suppose the church is more conservative here. But certainly not even close to the historic faith of our Fathers. All over the denomination, pastors are intimidated by various means if they are conservative. I suppose their job is one main issue that keeps them less than vocal even in what they know about these issues they disagree with.

    And of course, there is also a legitiment issue of “wheat and tares” to be considered in decision making. I am not suggesting the problem is always a cut and dried issue simple to diagnois and remedy.

    But to sit and do basically nothing to maintain the statis quo and hope the problem will solve itself is certainly no solution. Church politics is paralleled by civil government politics. How far are we from a power take over in America? Precisely because no one in authority has any moral character in America in the government. And many can not even understand what is basically wrong with America.

    No doubt, many are willing for someone to “stop the bickering” in America and do something. And isn’t this the same scenario in the SDA church?

    Individual accountability seems to be dead in both agendas, both civil and religious. After all, we are all basically still pretty comfortable both in the church and in the world. And none of us are going to like the situation in the near future. I’m not looking forward to it either in the SDA church or in American politics.

    Shocking developments will soon unfold and SDA’s are not ready for it. But could and should at least be aware that the present statis quo will not survive and we need to consider now, what side we will take as the issues become more intense, not less intense.

    True believers are going to be sacrificed by the church as the old argument “It is better to sacrifice some than see the whole denomination splintered”. It has already happened, but will intensify as the issues become more dynamic and demand action to preserve the church.

    Lay members don’t see it, believe it, or understand it. It is beyond their present mentality. The leaders will keep it “hush, hush” as possible. But eventually, it will simply “blow up” just as the crucifixion of Jesus caused an explosion heard around the world.

    LSU is neither the beginning, nor the end. It is simply somewhere in the middle. At some point, no doubt, every individual will necessarily stand alone and it may well be against “the church”.

    Remember this, Adventism began with the continual cry of her opposers that Adventism was a system of legalism. We have tried earnestly to shed this label and in order to do this, we have abandon our doctrine, message and commission. In short, we have abandon the bible.

    The label will simply be re-affirmed and applied to all true believers who are loyal to the faith and no one is more forceful and dynamic in applying this label today than liberal leaders who hold positions of influence and authority in the SDA church today.

    Martin Weber, editor of Mid-America Outlook, never publishes an issue that he does not continually and consistently attack conservative church members as legalists. Who’s the real enemy of Adventism? Inside, or outside? If you don’t like the label of “legalist”, you just as well abandon ship today. Trust me, you will be stuck with it whether you are one or not, as long as you support EGW and our historic bible message.

    Keep the faith,

    Bill Sorensen




    0
    View Comment
  23. I have an issue with the things being said here. Have anyone on this website ever seen the children that attend the La Sierra Campus? These teenagers/adults have done amazing things as Christians for the people in their community, faith, and as a campus family. The faculty is amazing and have only encouraged the students to develop and grow in their walk with God. Has anyone on this website realize the damage that is being done and will be done to the teenagers when they read this? I have talked to many people from La Sierra University and it is all hurtful to each and every one of them. But as a school family they have only grown closer to the Lord. Realize that La Sierra, although not as conservative as other adventist universities such as Southern, or Union, still have kids with hearts ready to cry out to the Lord. This school has only reached their hand out to everyone. Talk to our campus family… read La Sierra students and faculty testimonies. I am sad to read this all. But it only makes me want to stick closer to my LSU family.




    0
    View Comment
  24. @Shane Hilde:

    Hi Shane,

    As I suspected, I found my name on the petition. I can tell you that I had very little idea of what the petition was about at the time; at the least I had no particular dissatisfaction with the CORE curriculum (I thoroughly enjoyed the parallel honors curriculum). The concerns with secularism and pluralism that I mentioned earlier were prejudices I brought with me to the University; these were generally based on conversations I had with fellow students and friends who were disgruntled, rather than personal experiences of my own. This does not invalidate (or validate) the feelings of my friends and colleagues. However, feelings of a creeping secularism/pluralism/etc. are at all times highly subjective, being subject to times, places and changes in interpersonal relationships, worldviews and encounters with diverse populations (LSU is such a diverse population). Witness the progression of my own attitude through the intervening dozen years. I am as committed an Adventist as I was then; now I am just much better informed, educated and experienced. Keep in mind that the immaturity that many ascribe to our young students (due to the fact that there is a fear in allowing them to be exposed to “divergent” views) must exist in equal measure between those who are conservative and those who are progressive or liberal. Looking back on myself as an 18-year-old strongly conservative freshman at LSU, I freely admit my immaturity and impressionability. Remember, that knife cuts both ways.

    Regarding your specific question about the CORE curriculum:

    8. The total unwillingness of administration to evaluate the program or survey student opinion, and the suppression of dissenting views relating to C.O.R.E.

    I strongly respect the writers of this petition, some of who were good friends. However, we have no particular evidence for or against the assertion that the administration was unwilling to evaluate CORE, survey student opinion, or suppress dissenting views. As is certainly the case regarding the current controversy, there are many who conflate a lack of immediate action with an unwillingness to change or revise based on valid criticisms. As I have discussed elsewhere, I or any of my colleagues would never immediately change our curricula if it became controversial; to do so would be irresponsible. Rather, we weigh the concerns (and there will always be competing concerns from many quarters), seeking the best balance and the best educational outcomes for the students in our care. Lots of students may dislike a class or general educational program for a number of reasons valid or invalid, and we educators will make the best, most thoughtful decisions possible. Precipitous or “knee-jerk” reactions are more appropriate in politics, and not in education.

    So my response to your statement that this has been going on at LSU for a long time is that “this” (students expressing dislike or distaste for a course, a degree program, a professor or the administration) has probably been going ever since there was a University. I am sure I complained about any number of realities on campus, whether I understood them or not. I have had students complain about my own courses; generally that they are too difficult or include too much work. This is part and parcel of the university experience. I would strongly disagree that this “sentiment” is one that has not changed over the past 11 or 12 years at LSU, as I have spent all but one of those years on campus as either student or faculty. A number of sentiments have come and gone and different issues have come up. This is the way of all organizations, religious and otherwise.

    Pax,

    David Kendall, PhD
    Adjunct Professor of Music
    La Sierra University




    0
    View Comment
  25. Bill, You are so right about pastors being intimidated. By who? Mainly by the conference office! Yeh, I’ve spoken to a number of pastors, who, when made aware of what is happening, say they “can’t say or do anything” or else the Conference will come down on them. What Conference? Well, since I’m in California, it would be the Pacific Union Conference.

    Maybe this is not such a problem elsewhere? Anyone care to give their opinion?




    0
    View Comment
  26. @Ron Stone M.D.:

    Dr. Stone,

    Regarding intimidation, would you care to give some examples? And regarding the “conference office”, pastors are generally managed by their local conferences (i.e. Nevada-Utah, Arizona, Southern California) and not directly by the Union, unless someone can inform me of situations in which this is not the case.

    Finally, regarding the conference “coming down” on pastors, would we not agree that it is the work of the conferences to regulate and control the messages put forth by pastors who are employed by them? After all, this is what we insist the conference should do with the faculty and curriculum at La Sierra University.

    Pax,

    David Kendall, PhD
    Adjunct Professor of Music
    La Sierra University




    0
    View Comment
  27. Yes, the LSU faculty and administration are, in general, very liberal compared to most other SDA institutions. Regarding your “who knows what else” I wonder myself! Anyone have any “inside” information?

    Hi again Dr. Stone,

    On what in particular do you base your statement that the LSU faculty and administration are very liberal compared to other SDA institutions? A reading of the faculty positions papers and published research? Personal conversations with faculty members? Broad-based surveys of the student population? If these or other options have been pursued, I might place value on the assessment. But if the statement is based on assumptions, innuendo, or the projection of the impressions of a small percentage onto the whole, then it has less value. Regarding “inside information”, as I have stated elsewhere, I have been consistently on campus from 1998 (minus one year). However, I suspect that my “inside information” is not the kind of information you are looking for.

    Pax,

    David Kendall, PhD
    Adjunct Professor of Music
    La Sierra University




    0
    View Comment
  28. Dr. Stone,Regarding intimidation, would you care to give some examples?And regarding the “conference office”, pastors are generally managed by their local conferences (i.e. Nevada-Utah, Arizona, Southern California) and not directly by the Union, unless someone can inform me of situations in which this is not the case.Finally, regarding the conference “coming down” on pastors, would we not agree that it is the work of the conferences to regulate and control the messages put forth by pastors who are employed by them?After all, this is what we insist the conference should do with the faculty and curriculum at La Sierra University.Pax,David Kendall, PhD
    Adjunct Professor of Music
    La Sierra University  

    Yes, the local Conference offices, and their leaders, are also a big part of the problem. I’ve already mentioned Jim Pedersen of the NCC. I also have a pastor friend from the SCC who told me Larry Caviness told him that the SCC is supporting “No on Prop 8” and he should too.

    Last time I looked, the local conferences, and their leaders, were part of the Pacific Union Conference and a very BIG part of our problem out here.

    Regarding whether the Conferences should “come down on” pastors, I would say yes IF the pastors are teaching something that is clearly non-biblical. The problem out here in California is we have a leadership that believes largely in secular humanistic ideas such as “evolution as fact” “gay marriage” and the like.

    OR the leaders simply are so apathetic or liberal that they won’t do anything, even when a problem, such as LSU arises. Just about “anything goes” as far as our doctrines are concerned. And why not, aren’t all just different interpretations and equally valid?

    Would a conference President such as Jim Pedersen “come down on” an ordained SDA pastor who teaches “gay marriage?” Well, he (Pedersen” told me he wouldn’t. So, it depends on WHAT someone teaches and preaches.




    0
    View Comment
  29. I have been consistently on campus from 1998 (minus one year).However, I suspect that my “inside information” is not the kind of information you are looking for.Pax,David Kendall, PhD
    Adjunct Professor of Music
    La Sierra University  

    On the contrary, Dave, I would love to hear this. With your “inside information” you should be able to list dozens of faculty, staff, and administrators who supportive of our efforts to confront this problem, right?

    My question to you is why these faithful supporters at LSU, if they exist, have not stepped forward to confront the problems we are addressing here? Too busy? Don’t care? No backbone? Don’t “know” anything about it?




    0
    View Comment
  30. I have an issue with the things being said here.

    Carla, Why are you “anonymous?” With all your praise for LSU, one would think you would WANT to be actually known. Stand up and be counted!




    0
    View Comment
  31. We should see this apostacy as paralleled by the rebellion in heaven. No doubt some of the loyal angels asked God why He did not deal with Lucifer in a more dynamic way. Is there a reason?

    Yes, God knows it is imperative for sin to develop to a certain level that no one will say they did not know what the issues were. Just so, in the SDA church, this apostacy must continue until it is so obvious an attack on God and His kingdom, no one can say they did not understand the implication of the rebellion.

    And there is a sense in which God can do nothing about it and still maintain the free will responsibility of His created beings. Didn’t God know Satan would deceive a third of the angels? Yes. But all He could do was suffer the pain of knowing the outcome that all could eventually see what Satan was up to.

    Some things, God can’t do. And this is one of them. People who are eventually lost simply refuse to accept their accountability either for themselves or others under their influence. God won’t alter His kingdom and the rules of it for their sake or anyone else. To do so, would challenge His right to create free moral agents and this is the very heart of the rebellion and controversy between Christ and Satan.

    Satan claims God is solely responsible to preserve His created order and no created being should feel any pressure to maintain their existence. God created us, God should preserve us. There should be no law that could or would threathen our existence.

    People buy into Satan’s theory again and again and the final deception is universalism based on the idea that God will eventually save everyone, no matter what. This lie is so appealing and reflects the lie Satan told in heaven. Small wonder so many were deceived then, and no mystery why so many in this world of sin are more than willing to believe it as well.

    It is heart and soul of the present false gospel being presented even in much of modern Adventism. Few seem to have the spiritual preception to identify it and oppose it.

    The final judgment according to works is to remind us that we are ultimately responsible for our own destiny and salvation. No one wants to believe it, and you are called a “legalist” if you advocate and support it.

    So, we must endure the LSU fiasco and many more like it before it is all over. We don’t have to like it, or support it. And most of all, we need to understand the spirituality of it all. The loyal angels warned those being deceived of the outcome of apostacy. But there is a certain carnal logic to Satan’s theory and they wanted to believe it, and did.

    His logic is carrying many today. And it comes in many forms. Such as, “I have an issue with the things being said here. Have anyone on this website ever seen the children that attend the La Sierra Campus? These teenagers/adults have done amazing things as Christians for the people in their community, faith, and as a campus family. The faculty is amazing and have only encouraged the students to develop and grow in their walk with God. Has anyone on this website realize the damage that is being done and will be done to the teenagers when they read this? I have talked to many people from La Sierra University and it is all hurtful to each and every one of them. But as a school family they have only grown closer to the Lord.”

    And we can only ask, “In what way are they closer to the Lord?”

    Catholics do a “lot of good”. And many civic minded people “do a lot of good.” And Mormons “do a lot of good”. So what? This argument is meaningless. Our goal is to demand accountability to the word of God. We don’t ask “Do they do a lot of good?” As though this is reason enough to abandon the bible.

    Not everyone is deceived, nor will everyone be deceived. But “straight is the gate and narrow is the way…….” We know the rest of this scripture, don’t we?

    Jesus wants His people to stand firm. Even if it is only a few. And we are not to judge who in the end will see “the light” and join the true and loyal. None the less, we can identify apostacy and opppose it.

    Keep the faith

    Bill Sorensen




    0
    View Comment
  32. Bill, Avoidance of the real issue and “smoke-screening” with other issues (like “there are so many great students at LSU” as if this website was started to prove no “great students” attended LSU) is a tactic used by a few here to try to draw our attention off of the REAL issue.

    The fact that there ARE some great students at LSU should make all bible-believing SDA’s stand up and be counted in this effort.




    0
    View Comment
  33. @Faith:

    Faith says:
    August 21, 2010 What a travesty that this cry for help wasn’t answered years ago! It seems that the faculty of LSU has more to answer for than I previously thought. It is pretty sad when the students have to fight the faculty to remain true to the principles that the University is supposed to be teaching them. In my judgment, the students are far and away more knowledgeable than the faculty. Shame, shame, shame on the faculty…and bravo! to the students for trying to right this horrible wrong. May God bless them wherever they are and whatever they are doing now. Faith(Quote)

    As the information on LSU comes to the light of day – I think fewer and fewer of the students that “choose to go to LSU anyway” will be of the sort that would raise a dissenting voice when confronted with doctrinal apostasy. So one way or another – the incidents where complaints are raised by blind-sided students – will be fewer and fewer.

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  34. @Miss. Carla Anonymous: Educate Truth has never called into question the “amazing things” LSU students have done for their community and campus family. Educate Truth does not advocate the idea that the faculty are not amazing etc. either despite our disagreement with some are teaching the theory of evolution.

    Do you know why this website exists? Do you know why it has lasted this long and continues to exist?

    Despite there being wonderful students and faculty at LSU, there are some faculty and supportive administrators that continue to misrepresent what the Seventh-day Adventist Church believes to be truth by promoting ideas that blatantly contradict the biblical creation as fact. This cannot be rationally denied. I have personally sat through one of these classes. I have friends who have sat through these classes. I have syllabi and class presentations. I also have video from the one class that was supposed to address these issues, but ended up being a propaganda machine to promote theology that could easily embrace millions of years etc.

    Your comment misses the mark entirely. As if all these wonderful things about LSU somehow make their blatant misrepresentation of our church with our money trite thing.




    0
    View Comment
  35. With your “inside information” you should be able to list dozens of faculty, staff, and administrators who supportive of our efforts to confront this problem, right?

    My question to you is why these faithful supporters at LSU, if they exist, have not stepped forward to confront the problems we are addressing here? Too busy? Don’t care? No backbone? Don’t “know” anything about it?

    Hi Dr. Stone,

    As in courts of law, the accuser is responsible for proving the guilt of the defending party. The defending party, in contrast, is not necessarily required to produce evidence to prove his or her innocence. They may choose to do so, but being accused, either directly or through association with an institution, does not require one to “step forward” to address “the problem we are addressing here.” It reminds me a of speech by former President George W. Bush in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, in which he stated that “you are either with us, or you are with the terrorists.” I was teaching in Taiwan at the time, and my attitude was that I was not with him, and neither was I a terrorist. I had the unfortunate experience of seeing the invasion on my 23rd birthday; not a celebratory event. I am using this anecdote to illustrate that a lack of response from “dozens” of faculty and staff on either side of the issue does not prove anything.

    While it is oft implied that perceived silence in the face of accusation or opposition is an admission of guilt (from LSU administrators, to criminal defendants, to the entire world Muslim population), there may be many reasons not to respond. One is ignorance or unawareness of the issue. Another could be the sense that the issue is not important, or does not speak to pertinent topics. Still another may be an unwillingness to enter a debate in which some or all of the arguments do not possess intellectual coherence. Yet another reason, which is my reason for not entering into the substance of the debate (note that I have only posted on issues of fact, tone or fairness and not on the central argument), is that scholars may refuse to enter into a dialogue in which there is an arbitrary limitation on the terms of the debate.

    In this case, by reading and dialoguing with a number of posters, I am led to believe that in this issue there are only two choices. I am unwilling to enter the quagmire of a forced binary opposition, when there may in fact be other alternatives and options. To enter into such a rigged system makes it impossible to remain intellectually and morally consistent. In the months before the Iraq War, I refused to enter a forced binary system: to be either pro-war or a terrorist. Neither label applied to me, and so I could not in good conscience enter a debate that would force me to choose one of them. This is just one example, and a personal one, not intended to speak for any other LSU faculty member, or administrator.

    Pax,

    David Kendall, PhD
    Adjunct Professor of Music
    La Sierra University




    0
    View Comment
  36. @ Dave Kendall, You said you had some “inside information.” I would like to see it, right here on this website, for all to peruse, analyze, and evaluate.

    As far as providing “evidence” (a total smokescreen argument) you’re not on trial, so no “evidence” is needed, just your “inside info.”




    0
    View Comment
  37. @ Dave Kendall, You said you had some “inside information.”I would like to see it, right here on this website, for all to peruse, analyze, and evaluate. As far as providing “evidence” (a total smokescreen argument) you’re not on trial, so no “evidence” is needed, just your “inside info.”  

    Dave, Regarding “evidence” against LSU, Shane and Sean have provided lots. Or maybe you’ve not read, understand, or agree with it? Is that the problem?




    0
    View Comment
  38. And the Lord said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation. Gen 7:1.

    In the days of Noah, the wickedness of the world became so great that God could no longer bear with it; and He said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth” (Gen 6:7). But He pitied the race, and in His love provided a refuge for all who would accept it. He gave the message to Noah to be given to the people: “My spirit shall not always strive with man” (Gen 6:3).

    Noah was directed to build an ark, and at the same time to preach that God would bring a flood of waters upon the earth to destroy the wicked. Those who would believe the message, and would prepare for that event by repentance and reformation, should find pardon and be saved; but a continued resistance of the entreaties and warnings from God through His servant Noah would separate them from God, and as a result infinite mercy and love would cease its pleadings.

    The Spirit of God continued to strive with rebellious man until the time specified had nearly expired, when Noah and his family entered the ark, and the hand of God closed its door. Mercy had stepped from the golden throne, no longer to intercede for the guilty sinner.

    All the men of that generation were not in the fullest sense of the term heathen idolaters. Many had a knowledge of God and His law; but they not only rejected the message of the faithful preacher of righteousness themselves, but used all their influence to prevent others from being obedient to God. To everyone comes a day of trial and of trust. That generation had their day of opportunity and privilege while Noah was sounding the note of warning of the coming destruction; but they yielded their minds to the control of Satan rather than of God, and he deceived them, as he did our first parents. He set before them darkness and falsehood in the place of light and truth; and they accepted his sophistry and lies, because they were acceptable to them, and in harmony with their corrupt lives, while truth that would have saved them was rejected as a delusion.–Signs of the Times, April 1, 1886.




    0
    View Comment
  39. “If a worldly influence is to bear sway in our school, then sell it out to worldlings, and let them take the entire control; and those who have invested their means in that institution will establish another school, to be conducted, not upon the plan of popular schools nor according to the desires of principal and teachers, but upon the plan which God has specified.” — Counsels to Parents, Teachers and Students p. 88.3




    0
    View Comment
  40. “If a worldly influence is to bear sway in our school, then sell it out to worldlings, and let them take the entire control; and those who have invested their means in that institution will establish another school, to be conducted, not upon the plan of popular schools nor according to the desires of principal and teachers, but upon the plan which God has specified.” — Counsels to Parents, Teachers and Students p. 88.3  

    Brian, This “sell it out” is what most of us would like to avoid, at least I would. However, it may be necessary. The major problem we face is that, contrary to Ellen’s White’s time, we have many more within our SDA Church who don’t listen to her counsel or dismiss it as being old fashioned, out of date, inaccurate, or just pure baloney!




    0
    View Comment
  41. @Ron Stone M.D.:

    I

    Bill, You are so right about pastors being intimidated.By who?Mainly by the conference office! Yeh, I’ve spoken to a number of pastors, who, when made aware of what is happening, say they “can’t say or do anything” or else the Conference will come down on them.What Conference?Well, since I’m in California, it would be the Pacific Union Conference.Maybe this is not such a problem elsewhere?Anyone care to give their opinion?  

    Regarding whether this is a problem elsewhere, I want to go on record that the Alaska Conference has excellent leadership. And I believe that is the case in many other conferences as well. Our Conference President has written a series of articles in support of Biblical Creation and has made it clear that we stand on the Bible.

    Maybe you don’t see what is going on behind the scenes as each conference and their leadership attempt to do their part to educate the people and lead them back to the Bible.

    At the same time, conference leadership cannot demand obedience of all the members, and so a gentle touch is needed so that the “smoking flax” of faith will not be quenched.

    I agree with the purpose of this website, but I think some of the posters on here could use a dose of meekness and attitude adjustments. Your zeal to correct the problem would be better spent in actually doing something about it, rather than writing inflammatory injunctions and name calling.

    In more than one area of life, I have learned that it is better to withhold the words until you have the action to back it up. Jesus cleaned out the Temple; He didn’t just sit on the sidelines and criticize what was going on. So if you have the ability to influence the leaders (or the members who vote for them), do so.

    But sitting on the sidelines and saying “Doug Batchelor” and “David Asscherick” (or other leaders) should do something may be counter-productive.




    0
    View Comment
  42. Brian, This “sell it out” is what most of us would like to avoid, at least I would. However, it may be necessary. The major problem we face is that, contrary to Ellen’s White’s time, we have many more within our SDA Church who don’t listen to her counsel or dismiss it as being old fashioned, out of date, inaccurate, or just pure baloney!  

    I’m not sure the church listened to EGW in her day very well either. But we have been warned that the last work of Satan would be to make the Testimonies of none effect. (And I would say, the Bible as well).




    0
    View Comment
  43. I’m not sure the church listened to EGW in her day very well either.But we have been warned that the last work of Satan would be to make the Testimonies of none effect.(And I would say, the Bible as well).  

    Warren, I said “many more” at least here in California. I applaud the Alaska Conference and its President for taking a stand for God’s Truth. You’re correct that the Testimonies are practically “of none effect” in many areas in the Pacific Union Conference, either totally or simply through routine “lip service” references to them.




    0
    View Comment
  44. Dear Bill Sorensen (August 27)
    Your question: ” Is the General Conference willing to do it’s job? ” The GC has influence, but in fact cannot fire professors at La Sierra because they didn’t hire them. Neither do they regulate what happens there. That is the job of the LSU board of directors and the Pacific Union. Both the present GC President and the former one have made it very clear their stand on creation.




    0
    View Comment
  45. It seems obvious that the LSU Biology Department has no plans to change any time soon. I think the original function of this website was to inform the average Adventist of the concerns at La Sierra. Perhaps, now that that has been accomplished (if indeed it has) a shift in focus is in order. Perhaps it could become a site for sharing information that is helpful to creationists when confronted with evolution where ever they find it. It could include geological evidence, biological evidence and even evidence from outer space. We live in awesome times: new scientific material is being discovered daily. Just for example explore http://hubblesite.org and see all the beautiful pictures of stars, planets and space the Hubble Space Telescope sends to earth daily. There are so many fantastic discoveries, perhaps we could use the site better in a different way. Just a suggestion. I’ve really appreciated what has been accomplished through this site. Still it is easier to be “against” something than “for” something.




    0
    View Comment
  46. Thanks for bringing this item back into our memories. As we see, the “problems” at LSU have a LONG history, going back to when LSU became “independent.”

    Look who has led this place–Fritz Guy, Lawrence Geraty, and now Randall Wisbey! All liberal, progressives whose “world view” is to remake the SDA Church, starting with LSU into a secular, humanistic wordly institution.

    Is it any wonder we see LSU being led down the secular, humanistic “primrose path?!”




    0
    View Comment
  47. Ruth deGraaff: Perhaps it could become a site for sharing information that is helpful to creationists when confronted with evolution where ever they find it. It could include geological evidence, biological evidence and even evidence from outer space

    One of the arguments made by LSU is that no other SDA teaching institution is presenting a solution thus LSU has a right to be clueless as to how to conduct religion and biology courses in a way that supports the SDA view of origins.

    One function of this web site in the past has been to highlight various contributions by other SDA teaching institutions regarding this subject.

    It would be very helpful to have a section or thread where those programs are highlighted and perhaps details by a reprentative from the various universities. (getting out the “good news” as it were about our teaching institutions).

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  48. David Kendall, PhD: there may be many reasons not to respond. One is ignorance or unawareness of the issue. Another could be the sense that the issue is not important, or does not speak to pertinent topics. Still another may be an unwillingness to enter a debate in which some or all of the arguments do not possess intellectual coherence. Yet another reason, which is my reason for not entering into the substance of the debate (note that I have only posted on issues of fact, tone or fairness and not on the central argument), is that scholars may refuse to enter into a dialogue in which there is an arbitrary limitation on the terms of the debate.

    David Kendall, PhD
    Adjunct Professor of Music
    La Sierra University

    I would argue that since the music department at LSU is not in any way being accused regarding the subject of evolutionism, a more likely reason for your not making a case one way or the other about the promotion of evolutionism in the LSU departments dealing with biological sciences at LSU or the religion department at LSU, is that you are not familiar with those classes and so you have no way to judge whether the students who complain about them (the students who did attend the classes) were in error, or if professor Bradley was not telling the truth when he stated frankly the real truth about what was going on in the biology department at LSU.

    Certainly that is an option that one has to take seriously.

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  49. Brian Holland: “If a worldly influence is to bear sway in our school, then sell it out to worldlings, and let them take the entire control; and those who have invested their means in that institution will establish another school, to be conducted, not upon the plan of popular schools nor according to the desires of principal and teachers, but upon the plan which God has specified.” — Counsels to Parents, Teachers and Students p. 88.3

    Now that my friends is an “if thine eye offends thee…” quote of a most shocking nature!

    Brian has done well in highlighting the serious nature of the problem at hand.

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  50. Brian Holland: “If a worldly influence is to bear sway in our school, then sell it out to worldlings, and let them take the entire control; and those who have invested their means in that institution will establish another school, to be conducted, not upon the plan of popular schools nor according to the desires of principal and teachers, but upon the plan which God has specified.” — Counsels to Parents, Teachers and Students p. 88.3

    This “sell out” is actually happening today, in a very SLOW manner. Look at how LSU has become almost a secular institution, right before our very eyes!

    The idea that there are “many ways” to God (Oprah has said a “million”) is totally opposite to what Jesus said, and is completely unbiblical. The fact that Geraty endorses such as view, and states that the things LSU teaches are “not bible study!” (They certainly aren’t!)

    When you come to LSU, you gotta “grow up” and give up your previous “Sunday school” stuff (?)

    And this guy was appointed to “lead” LSU! Can you understand WHY we have the problems at LSU?




    0
    View Comment

Comments are closed.