Comments on: Manipulated LSU Faculty Senate document tells false story

By: Eddie

Eddie — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 22:52:01 +0000

So Ron, good buddy, do you think we SDAs should spend as much of our time as possible digging up dirt on our leaders, teachers, physicians, etc., and telling the whole wide world on the world wide web about what we discover? Is that what being SDA is all about?

By: Eddie

Eddie — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 16:44:44 +0000

Ron, can you ever say anything POSITIVE about church leadership?

By: Rich Constantinescu

Rich Constantinescu — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 03:02:04 +0000

May God convict, convert or remove until they add too much upon themselves.
God bless,

Rich

By: Faith

Faith — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 00:58:22 +0000

I find it absolutely appalling that any SDA minister would question the Word of God concerning creation or anything else. To do this to betray their calling, their office, and their trust. Those who are in office in the GC have a responsibility to the general membership of the Adventist church. If they are such shaky Adventists themselves, they have no business leading anyone else. There is a passage in the writings of Ellen White that describes in horrible detail what will happen to ministers who lead people astray. They will be punished for what they are doing.
In Early Writings, in the chapter entitled “The Earth Desolated” we find this quote:

“The false shepherds had been the signal objects of Jehovah’s wrath. Their eyes had consumed away in their holes, and their tongues in their mouths, while they stood upon their feet.”–Early Writings pp.289-290

I think it would behove all the professors and ministers to remember this while dealing with this most important subject. As shepherds to the flock they carry a most solemn responsibility to be true to God’s truth. A fearful penalty awaits those who lead others astray.

Faith

By: BobRyan

BobRyan — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 15:06:44 +0000

Nanci

1. The Universities are “owned” by the Unions – not the General Conference.
2. The Union officers nominate the GC officers.

Those are the main obstacles.

In addition I hear that the GC itself is somewhat divided on this issue among its officers – though the president of the GC is strictly creationist as is the BRI and a number of other key players.

By: Nanci

Nanci — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 06:56:55 +0000

I know I’m not a scolar like some of you, but I don’tunderstand why the conferance can’t take action against these heretics & just get rid of the ?? If they have contracts, surely they have broken them by teaching against church/Bible beliefs.

By: Dev Mines

Dev Mines — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 02:29:27 +0000

Sean, AToday leaving out the date was shabby journalism, whether it was intentional or not. If it was a mistake, let’s see an explanation and correction from AToday, as any good publication would do. If a writer made such huge mistakes in accuracy more than a few times, they’d be fired. By the way AToday is acting, we can safely guess it was not a mistake. Has anyone there even taken a basic journalism class? They completely ignored one of the five questions a journalist is obligated to ask: who, what, where, how and WHEN. The fact that this date is important, and has the potential to spin the story in favor of AToday’s views, makes AToday look all the more shabby and deceitful. You can spin stories in journalism, obviously, but leaving out a crucial piece of information to form a “white” lie is shameful.

But no, it still doesn’t change the fact the faculty senate, whoever they may be, wrote a document supporting professors who promote evolution. Again, it makes me wonder if all the staff actually support this document, or there are a few vocal evolutionists pushing their agenda.

By: Shane Hilde

Shane Hilde — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 00:35:09 +0000

@Sean Pitman, M.D.: There was fraud in the reporting; whether it was done purposefully by AToday is unknown. It’s quite possible the document was sent to them like that.

My attempts to leave comments on their site, stating the document was actually published three months ago have been censored. They’re within their rights to do so, but I find it odd they’re keeping that information off AToday.

But this isn’t really about AToday’s journalism; it’s about LSU. And I agree with you Sean that in essence the omitted date really doesn’t change anything in relation to the rebellious spirit the document connotes. They haven’t changed in the least.

By: Sean Pitman, M.D.

Sean Pitman, M.D. — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 17:44:10 +0000

I personally don’t think the lack of the date on the document makes that much difference. The LSU senate still knew that many of their own science professors were promoting theistic evolution in their classes when they produced this resolution in support of these professors’ “academic freedom” to continue to directly undermine the stated fundamental positions of the SDA Church. I doubt that they are of any different opinion today…

Also, I wouldn’t accuse AToday of deliberate “fraud” based on a dropped date of publication from this article. There may be a very good reason why the date was forgotten. At least we should give the benefit of the doubt here before using such an inflammatory accusation for something that may have been a small non-deliberate non-calculating oversight…

Sean Pitman
http://www.DetectingDesign.com

By: Dev Mines

Dev Mines — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 16:25:34 +0000

This whole fiasco makes me wonder about the faculty senate. Who are they? Nine or 10 people? If so, that’s hardly representative of the entire staff. It’s obvious, whoever the faculty senate are, their personal views on creation influenced the writing of that document. No one who believes in the Bible and a recent creation would sacrifice this truth to support errant professors who are leading youth to destruction. Why? Because they also know we’re supposed to stand for truth, no matter the cost.

I doubt the faculty senate took a poll of all the teachers to see if everyone approved of such a stand as they made in this document. In essence, the faculty senate said they support professors no matter what they teach, and professors should be free to teach whatever they want at an SDA university. Sad! Not to mention completely wrong. Therefore, I think it’d be beneficial to know who these senate folks are, what they believe, and if their position is truly representative of the professors as a whole. If their position isn’t representative, then it’s time the rest of the faculty speak up. People tend to be spineless when it comes to confrontation, but now is not the time for fear or fainting hearts. We get the vocal evolutionists babbling on, that’s for sure! Where are the voices for creation at LSU? Creation, anyway? Any creationists out there?