“After paying 60,000 for our education we deserve to hear …

Comment on LSU student petition surfaces by BobRyan.

“After paying 60,000 for our education we deserve to hear this evidence”.

How sad that the students at LSU had to “petition” their SDA university to come up with at least “some” initiative in presenting science that affirms the events that actually happened IN nature instead of simply making up stories about “birds coming from reptiles”!

After all – you can pay a lot less than 60,000 to hear “birds come from reptiles” all day long in other schools.

How SAD that LSU would need to dismiss this evidence instead of being fully rebuked by it, and immediately reformed by it. It is evidence of their having turned a blind eye to the concerns of the students over this key issue. Did they think this deed would not come out into the light of day?

I pray that God will vindicate his people who choose reform over rebellion.

in Christ,

Bob

BobRyan Also Commented

LSU student petition surfaces
This petition from 2004 — and then this letter from 2004 (see link: http://www.educatetruth.com/la-sierra-evidence/former-lsu-student-letter-reveals-professors-agenda/comment-page-1/#comment-22376 ) tell me that Geraty, McCloskey and Fritz Guy were working a coordinated program that was so opposed to SDA values that the insightful Bible believing Christian students themselves were raising their hands in objection – and then being ignored.

in Christ,

Bob
====================================================

To stand in defense of truth and righteousness when the majority forsake us, to fight the battles of the Lord when champions are few–this will be our test. At this time we must gather warmth from the coldness of others, courage from their cowardice, and loyalty from their treason.–5T 136 (1882). {LDE 180.4}


LSU student petition surfaces

mary hilde says:
November 12, 2010 nice. it’s hard to believe there were actually 78 students six years ago who cared that evolution was being promoted. in 2009 it seemed there were only two or three who protested, and they have either left the school in disgust or have graduated after much duress. i wonder … are there any students left who care about biblical creation or has the school finally weeded them all out?

I am waiting for the rush of LSU students coming here and affirming a literal 7 day creation week less than 10,000 years ago who object to an SDA university proclaiming evolutionism as the right answer for the doctrine on origins and the explanation for the taxanomic order of genomes seen today. Those students will either claim that LSU is explicitly promoting the literal 7 day creation week less than 10,000 years ago as the “Real events that happened in nature” in their Biology and Religion classes – or they will say that they do not care whether LSU does that or not.

In the mean time while we wait – it is instructive that this thread dedicated to the atrocity of an SDA teaching institution ignoring the plea of its own students when the “petition” that SDA values and doctrines be taught an the SDA school — the “real focus” of some will be “how many people exactly were in attendance at the talk that Sean gave to that group of students”. As good a misdirection as any if you ask me.

in Christ,

Bob


LSU student petition surfaces

Even the SDA church, in writing the Fundamental Beliefs allows that we don’t have it all figured out yet.
“These beliefs, as set forth here, constitute the church’s understanding and expression of the teaching of Scripture. Revision of these statements may be expected at a General Conference session when the church is led by the Holy Spirit to a fuller understanding of Bible truth or finds better language in which to express the teachings of God’s Holy Word.”

The statement above is not an admission of a flaw in our doctrines. It is admission that we do not possess infinite knowledge. Thus it cannot be bent to mean “we are not realy sure if Jesus is the Son of God we are still looking into it to see if that is really true”. It also cannot be bent to mean “we are not sure if the Bible really says that God created the World in 6 days, or if the Bible can be trusted in that regard, or if a day is really a day – still looking into it”.

And that can be said for the other doctrines as well.

in Christ,

Bob


Recent Comments by BobRyan

Academic Freedom Strikes Again!

george:
By definition, I don’t believe in miracles or apocryphal, anthropomorphic stories about same.Why aren’t scientists observing them today if they occur?

Circular argument. If they were naturally occurring we would expect scientists to see that they are still occurring today. If they are singular events caused by an intelligent being – that being would be under no obligation to “keep causing world wide floods” as if “to do it once you must continually do it”. Armstrong went to the moon.. shall we argue that unless he keeps going to the moon so each new generation can see it … then it did not happen?

Your argument is of the form “all eye witness evidence to some event in the past is no evidence at all unless that event keeps repeating itself so we too can witness it”. Seems less than compelling.

“Could it be that science is better able to detect hoaxes and false claims?” As a rule for dismissing every eye witness account in the past – it is less than compelling. (even when that event cannot be repeated)

Evolutionists “claim” that dust, rocks and gas (in sufficient quantity and over sufficient time and a lot of luck) self organized into rabbits via prokaryote-then-eukaryote-then-more-complexity. But such self-organization cannot be “observed” today.

(What is worse – such a sequence cannot even be intelligently manipulated to occur in the lab)

By your own argument then you should not believe in evolution.


Academic Freedom Strikes Again!
@Sean Pitman:

Suppose you were at a crime scene … there is a tree limb on the ground and a bullet hole in the victim — “all natural causes”? or is one ‘not natural’? Those who say that nothing can be detected as “not naturally occurring in nature” – because all results, all observations make it appear that every result “naturally occurred without intelligent design” seem to be missing a very big part of “the obvious”.


Academic Freedom Strikes Again!

george:
Gentlemen,

What just God would allow an innocent child to be born guilty for the sins of a distant ancestor? …What if there was only One Commandment? Do Good. ‘Kant’ see a problem with that.

An atheist point of view is not often found here – but this is interesting.

1. God does not punish babies for what someone else did – but I suppose that is a reductionist option that is not so uncommon among atheists. The “details” of the subject you are commenting on – yet according to you “not reading” – is that humans are born with sinful natures. A “bent” toward evil. That is the first gap right out of the gate between atheism and God’s Word..

2. But still God supernaturally enables “free will” even in that bent scenario, the one that mankind lives in – ever since the free-will choice of the first humans on planet earth – was to cast their lot in with Satan and rebellion..(apparently they wanted to see what a wonderful result that poor choice would create). John 16 “the Holy Spirit convicts the world of sin and righteousness and judgment”. And of course “I will draw ALL mankind unto Me” John 12:32. (not “just Christians”). Thus supernatural agency promotes free will in a world that would otherwise be unrestrained in its bent to evil.

3.God says “The wages of sin is death” — so then your “complaint” is essentially “that you exist”. A just and loving God created planet Earth – no death or disease or suffering – a perfect paradise where mankind could live forever … and only one tiny restriction… yet Adam and Eve allowed themselves to be duped by Satan… tossing it all away. The “Just God” scenario could easily just have let them suffer the death sentence they chose. He did not do that… hence “you exist” – to then “complain about it”.

4. Of course you might also complain that Satan exists – and Satan might complain that “you exist”. There is no shortage on planet earth of avenues for complaint. But God steps in – offers salvation to mankind at infinite cost to himself – – and the “Few” of Matthew 7 eventually end up accepting that offer of eternal life. The rest seem to prefer the lake of fire option… sort of like Adam and Eve choosing disease and death over eternal life (without fully appreciating the massive fail in that short-sighted choice).

In any case – this thread is about the logic/reason that should be taken into account when a Christian owned and operated institution chooses to stay faithful to its Christian mission — rather then getting blown about by every wind of doctrine. Why let the alchemy of “wild guessing” be the ‘source of truth’ when we have the Bible?? We really have no excuse for that. As for science – we can be thankful that it has come as far along as it has – but no matter how far back you rewind the clock of our science history – we should always have chosen the Bible over wild guessing.


Newly Discovered Human Footprints Undermine Evolutionary Assumptions

Ervin Taylor:
Perhaps Dr. Pitman would enlighten his readers what on earth “the neo-Darwinian story of origins” might be. Darwin did not address origins.

Origins of what?? the first eukaryote??
Or “origins of mankind”??

Darwin himself claimed that his own false doctrine on origins was totally incompatible with Genesis and that because of this – Genesis must be tossed under a bus.

hint: Genesis is an account of “Origins” as we all know — even though “bacteria” and “amoeba” are terms that don’t show up in the text.

The point remains – Darwin was promoting his own religion on origins totally counter to the Bible doctrine on origins. He himself addresses this point of the two views.


Newly Discovered Human Footprints Undermine Evolutionary Assumptions

Ervin Taylor:
Here we go again.If the footprints upon close examination, are determined not to be from a hominim/hominid, I wonder if Educate Truth (sic) will announce that determination.Or if the date of the surface is determined to be much younger, will there be a notice placed on fundamentalist web-sites.If you believe the answer to these questions are yes, I have a big bridge that I would like to sell you for pennies on the dollar.

Here we go again … hope piled upon hope…no matter the “observations in nature” that disconfirm the classic evolutionary hypothesis

Reminds me of “What we still don’t know” by Martin Reese and Leonard Suskind