NCSE Report: Adventist Education in the Midst of a Sea of Science

In the January-February 2012 edition of the Reports of the National Center for Science Education a featured article was published concerning the evolution/creation controversy involving La Sierra University and the Seventh-day Adventist Church at large:
Adventist Education NCSE Reports

Share on Facebook0Pin on Pinterest0Share on LinkedIn0Tweet about this on TwitterDigg thisShare on Google+1Share on Tumblr0Share on StumbleUpon0Share on Reddit0Print this pageEmail this to someone

169 thoughts on “NCSE Report: Adventist Education in the Midst of a Sea of Science

  1. True to form, those who go out from us who will turn out to be our worst enemies in the end. If everyone would just become like them, they wouldn’t feel so alone. This is a sad, sad, day…




    0
    View Comment
  2. So we don’t own La Sierra? The universities are not Adventist institutions? Then let us save hardship and send our children to less expensive schools close to home. This would be a strength to our local churchs and a physical and financial support to the parents who have been sacrificing everything to send their children to one of “our” schools. At least then the curriculum would not be expected to be friendly to our belief.




    0
    View Comment
    • @-Shining:

      I hate to burst your bubble, but even the churches we attend are not “owned” by the church. They are all 501(c)3 corporations, i.e. State entities under the guise of “our” church. All for being given “tax exempt” status by the “government”. My question is, who decided that we have to have a tax deduction for our “free will” offerings? Do you suppose that Moses gave a tax deduction for all the jewels, gold, etc. that were brought in? What about during Jesus’ time and Matthew was the tax collector, do you think he checked everyone’s 1040? NOT!

      As for our schools, the way things are is not how they were established through the SOP.




      0
      View Comment
  3. It is a sorry mess our church leaders have allowed to come to pass. It does not seem likely our church leaders will act in a way to lead us out of it.

    They created a “God size” problem and He alone will come up with the solution.

    We may not like the “how” of it. But we do need to be ready for any eventuality.

    Keep the faith

    Bill Sorensen




    0
    View Comment
  4. From the NCSE article:

    “LSU tried to pick between the two competing sets of compliance demands, with the result that the institution found itself in danger of having their carefully constructed pathway between the two come crashing down on them . . .”

    That’s rubbish. In fact, the liberal faction at LSU–most recently and most ham-handedly, Randal Wisbey–has actually been conspiring to use secular accreditation through WASC to separate LSU from the church. That isn’t my opinion; that is a fact.

    Perhaps the most ironic fact is that WASC hopes to re-organize LSU’s Board of Trustees to get rid of all the pastors who are ex-officio board members, but the strongest Adventists on the board were the three laywomen who Randal Wisbey arranged to kick off the board. I could pick a board of trustees composed entirely of non-Church employees who could fix the problems, whereas the union president and conference presidents on the board are clearly not up to the task.




    0
    View Comment
    • @David Read:

      Now, while I’m no fan of Pres. Wisbey, and while I agree that Wisbey has not been friendly to the SDA position on origins while president at LSU, I am not aware of the factual evidence that he was actually part of the conspiracy of the “four” who recorded themselves planning on how to separate LSU from the church.

      In short, where is this factual evidence that Wisbey, in particular, is trying to use WASC accreditation to separate LSU from the church? I would think that such evidence, if real, would be grounds for asking him to resign?

      Sean Pitman
      http://www.DetectingDesign.com




      0
      View Comment
      • @Sean Pitman: Sean, the idea of using WASC to separate LSU from denominational control is an idea in the ether, in the public domain, so to speak. Wisbey certainly did not have to be part of the “four” to know about, well understand, and begin to implement the strategy they discussed. Everyone knows about it. I’ve seen it discussed on Spectrum by two or three different people. I certainly hope it is ground for firing, but we’ll probably see.




        0
        View Comment
  5. Isn’t it interesting how, in this article, the church is illustrated as “cultish” by saying that our children are kept and taught from birth through university in sabbath school, VBS, etc. and then he says that only 50% are accepted into schools of higher learning. He doesn’t mention anything about the choice each one has to stay or go. I don’t know if T. Joe Willey is an Adventist or not (from Art Chadwicks comment it appears he is/was), but just knowing that he graduated from UC Berkeley says a lot.

    I am reminded of a statement that says “Science that is not in harmony with Him is of no value. He teaches us to count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus or Lord. This knowledge is the highest science that any man can reach.” BC vol. 6, p 1068

    I too, hope with Sean that it will inspire our leadership to do something, even if it is to cut our losses (meaning LSU and any others) and move on. “As is was in the days of Noah, so shall it be….”




    0
    View Comment
  6. The entire article has that particular sneering quality so familiar to anyone who has spent much time around certain Adventist universities. What a pathetic man– he obviously despised his own University for much of his career. All he wants at this stage is to be viewed as one of the clever people; as if anyone cared. Ironically, even as he attempted to caricature Ellen White; I found myself admiring her independence and insight. If only Adventists had the courage to stick with their Truths to the end. Honest secular readers will not be impressed.




    0
    View Comment
  7. Why do accrediting bodies have the right to force religious universities to teach what they demand they teach? Is it not a violation of religious freedom to demand that evolution exist as the only exclusive worldview? Why have we given scientists the role of Papel See?




    0
    View Comment
    • @Shayne: Shayne, that’s a good question. And the answer is, WASC is really on very thin ice demanding that a sectarian school teach against the beliefs of its denominational sponsor. And I think they understand that. La Sierra would be a very sympathetic plaintiff if it filed a lawsuit against WASC on First Amendment freedom of religion grounds, complaining to the court, “hey, WASC is abridging our freedom of religion and freedom of association rights.”

      So WASC is not trying to directly dictate on the level of teaching. The approach WASC is taking is a more oblique, indirect approach of “institutional autonomy,” meaning that they are saying that university must have certain freedom to operate regardless of denominational affiliation. So they are demanding changes in the make up of the Board of Trustees. The goal is the same: to allow the college, with the complete support of Randal Wisbey, to continue to teach Darwinism without having to answer to a Board of Trustees that might be sympathetic to traditional Adventist beliefs.

      Our colleges (with a few exceptions) are affiliated with the denomination at the union level, and the union conference presidents are ex-officio chairmen of the boards of the colleges. (So Ricardo Graham, by virtue of being president of the Pacific Union, is chairman of the Board of Trustees of La Sierra.) The conference presidents of the constituent conferences of a union are also on the board of a union’s college. Thus, church employees form the core of the boards of all our colleges, effectively giving control of the institutions to the church.

      Now, this is what WASC is saying is inappropriate; they want to change the structure of the board to have fewer church employees and more independent directors, which they are arguing will give the University more operational autonomy. (Unfortunately, Ricardo Graham made something of a misstep by directly forcing the “LSU Four” to resign. He should have gone through proper channels, and insisted that Wisbey do that. If Wisbey would not fire the four, Graham should have used his political skills to get a majority on the Board of Trustees to agree to fire Wisbey. The way Graham did it, going around Wisbey, just gave a nice lever to Wisbey and WASC to make the charge that La Sierra does not have enough autonomy, and the board must be changed.)

      Now, think about what happens if Wisbey and WASC are successful in forcing a change to the composition of La Sierra’s Board of Trustees: a precedent has been set, a blueprint has been drawn up for how to separate all of the Adventist colleges from denominational control. This is a very high stakes game; it is winner take all, all of SDA post-secondary education. I wonder if people realize how high the stakes really are.

      Now, I do not want to be too hard on our church leaders. The situation that we’re facing at La Sierra (and will face again and again and again in coming years) is greatly complicated by the fact that the Adventist church is now composed of constituencies at cross purposes. There’s a large constituency of non-believing, cultural Adventists who WANT Darwinism taught at La Sierra. That’s what they believe, and they claim to be Adventists, so why shouldn’t it be taught at an Adventist university? This constituency probably preponderates in the Pacific Union, which is why we have the situation we do at La Sierra. On the other hand, the larger church is still literal-week creationist, and we probably still preponderate in North America, and we don’t want Darwinism taught as truth in Adventist institution. So the leadership is being torn apart from two directions. I pity them.




      0
      View Comment
      • To my knowledge no one has done a survey here but perhaps the value- genesis would give us an indication. It at least shows what our k-12 kids are thinking. Does anyone have that available?

        -Shining




        0
        View Comment
  8. “Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge.” James 4:11




    0
    View Comment
    • @Eddie:

      Such passages in the Bible reminding us not to judge one another on a moral level, especially with regard to private “sins”, have nothing to do with making judgements regarding church order and government. The Bible is also quite clear in this regard – that those openly attacking or undermining the church, who will not listen to requests by the church for them to reconsider their subversive activity, should be removed from their positions of leadership and responsibility within the church (Matthew 18:17).

      Sean Pitman
      http://www.DetectingDesign.com




      0
      View Comment
  9. Certainly Randall Wisbey should be the first to be [asked to resign]. His incompetence at running an SDA institution in accordance to biblical principles is so obvious that only those already deeply ingrained in the secular system at La Sierra would think otherwise.




    0
    View Comment
  10. Shayne:
    Why do accrediting bodies have the right to force religious universities to teach what they demand they teach? Is it not a violation of religious freedom to demand that evolution exist as the only exclusive worldview? Why have we given scientists the role of Papel See?

    La Sierra is under no demand to teach “evolution as fact” as many other colleges and universities, SDA and non-SDA teach “about evolution” but do not teach it as factual. La Sierra WANTS to teach evolution as fact, and will do anything it can to keep on keeping on teaching it!




    0
    View Comment
  11. From the article

    The crisis over the biology program at La Sierra University (LSU) examined
    in Willey (2012) is one manifestation of the difficulties that arise when Adventist
    doctrine bumps up against science education in a church-run educational institution. This situation is not unique to LSU; many Adventist higher education schools face the same conflict between a valid contemporary science curriculum and adherence to the church’s doctrine on creation.

    1. The author assumes the salient point of his argument rather than proving it.

    2. Notice the “propaganda style” of writing used by the author where he assumes that his readers are willing to accept uncritically the idea that science that is not in direct opposition to SDA views on origin — is not valid science for the classroom.

    3. The author is careful to avoid the Bible statements on the 7 day creation week (in Ex 20:11 for example) and instead chooses to focus primarily on Ellen White as the source for a 7 day creation week. While you could argue that he is simply crafting his argument in such a way as to mislead the reader to the most extreme extent possible – it is also possible that as an Ex-SDA he is aware that the Bible actually supports our doctrines on origins and does not want his readers be aware of this weakness in his attack on SDAs.

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  12. I like the picture of SDA education in the midst of the sea of science – dividing the sea between the junk-science blind-faith stories found in evolutionism — vs real observed science based on repeatable observable facts in science.

    SDA education has no need at all to pander after atheist doctrines stating that “there is no god”. As a result – SDA education is left free to follow the data where it leads on the subject of intelligent design and young life.

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  13. Eddie: “Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge.” James 4:11

    So typical of the liberal agenda. The minute someone points out error, they are not supposed to judge. Poppycock! If no one “judged” anything we would all fall by the wayside. We are not to judge people’s souls–but by their fruits ye shall know them. That we can and should judge.

    It says in the Bible that we are to have nothing to do with a liar…doesn’t that mean we have to judge them to be a liar first? Hmmmm?




    0
    View Comment
  14. As far as the accreditation organizations are concerned, in my opinion, they should be told to take a flying leap at a rolling doughnut. 🙂 The church should be in full control of its institutions and in what is taught in the curriculum.




    0
    View Comment
  15. Eddie: It’s interesting how Holly Pham’s writing resembles that of Ron Stone. Same person or just coincidence?

    I do know Dr. Stone and have some of the similar opinions as he does. We are not the same person, however.




    0
    View Comment
  16. The spliting of the church began in a serious way after the Brinsmead/Ford scenarios. The church could not define its theology on the Investigative judgment, the nature of Christ, and several other fundamental bible doctrines.

    What followed was “Pluralism” that allowed any and all positions with no real challenge and/or discipline for false doctrine on any level. The Moral Influence Theory was typical of this non-action by the church. And it thrives in some areas today.

    We now have evolution in our schools. [edit] It is really doubtful that any unity will be forth coming until some viable split takes place and each side can and will define its positions.

    What we see is that a church and/or movement that can not and will not define itself soon has no identity to define. So, we have a major identity crisis in Adventism, and no one seems to know what to do about it or how to resolve it.

    The Sabbath has not yet been attack directly, only by implication. But how long will this remain in limbo? And when it does become an open issue, who will care enough to demand accountability in the leadership positions?

    Most SDA’s have been “bottle fed” their religion to the point that I think most will simply “go along and do whatever the church decides.”

    This has been the general response so far, and it doesn’t seem likely any future issues will be dealt with in any other way. The is the result of selling “unconditional election” for the church to church members. A few will eventually realize that such an idea is bogus and non-biblical.

    At some point, it will be time to “stand and deliver”. If not now, when?

    Keep the faith

    Bill Sorensen




    0
    View Comment
  17. You can’t dance with the devil without at some point his follow will hijack the lead and you will dance to his tune.

    “Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?” 2Cor. 6:14.

    If we must dance with the world and their unbiblical philosophies to obtain accreditation, do we then decry the results? Maybe we should rethink. . do we base our beliefs on the Word of God alone or are we to compromise with the “foolishness” of man’s reinterpretation of the Bible?

    Soon Job 42:5,6 will take on a fresh and relevant meaning. “I have heard of You by the hearing of the ear, But now my eye sees You. Therefore I abhor myself and repent in dust and ashes.” Something to think seriously about while it is “yet today”.




    0
    View Comment
  18. Re Charles Quote

    “I don’t believe we have “years”. Time is short. Prepare to meet Jesus.”

    Hello Charles

    From an Adventist perspective could you please expound upon why you think this is the case. What are the specific prophetic signs you are seeing?

    Your agnostic friend
    Ken




    0
    View Comment
  19. Ken
    You and I have been on this path before. The reason for my comment is that the earth is starkly fulfilling the prophecies of the Bible. I cannot create a “soundbite” to show what I am saying. All I can do is urge you to study if for yourself, if, indeed you are interested. If you do so, please do it with fervent prayer. If you honestly seek your Creator, you are guaranteed to find Him.

    Hebrews 11
    6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

    Ken, it is true. He IS a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. But you must have a genuine desire to know the truth. Just reach out in genuine faith. Make a promise to change your life if He does reveal himself to you. And if He does, don’t back out on your promise.

    I have no better advice to offer but will again say that time is short. I don’t know how old you are, but just look at how the world has changed in your lifetime. Read Matt 24.

    Read this book:

    http://www.whiteestate.org/books/gc/gc.asp




    0
    View Comment
  20. As a side note. Does anyone know if Hal Holbrook is now a SDA? He was in several secular movies and I assume was not even a Christian at that time.

    He now is a moderator on issues of creation and the Sabbath and I am sure some of you have seen him on HOPE channel and Amazing Facts doing his series.

    Let me know what you know.

    Bill Sorensen




    0
    View Comment
    • @Bill Sorensen:

      I notice that Bill gets two thumbs down – just for asking a question about Hal Holbrook! 😉 That is pretty funny!!

      As a possible hint regarding the answer to the question — Here is a quote from the Seventh-day site –

      The Seventh Day is aimed at a general viewing audience. That is why Hal Holbrook, a well-known actor, is the host and narrator. His face and voice are familiar to movie and television audiences. The majority of our guest experts are non-Seventh-day Adventists with expertise in our specific areas of interest. We believe that this, along with careful research and documentation, will help make our material credible to the viewing public.

      in Christ,

      Bob




      0
      View Comment
  21. I noticed that the author of this article was eager to give Ellen White credit (or was it blame?) for all of the beliefs that our denomination accepts. He leaves the reader with the impression that neither our Adventist pioneers, nor we today, have ever engaged in our own study. This is a common approach used be critics of Adventism and of Mrs. White. And it is false. Our beliefs were arrived at after intense Bible study, prayer, and prolonged discussion by many different people during the formative years of our movement, and most of us today agree to accept these beliefs only after we also have engaged in our own study and prayer. I thank God for giving us the prophetic gift of Ellen White, but the author of this article has distorted her role in our history.




    0
    View Comment
  22. Re Charles Quote

    “But you must have a genuine desire to know the truth. ”

    Hello Charles

    I do, but it is not restricted to sacred texts but rather the full spectrum of human inquiry.

    I have read the Bible as well as other sacred texts. I have also read Messenger of the Lord 🙂

    Might I in turn suggest you try Joseph Campbell’s four volume Masks of God. Fascinating read.

    When seeking the truth leave no stone unturned.

    Your agnostic friend
    Ken




    0
    View Comment
  23. Ken

    I cannot claim to have searched the realities of our existence from multiple views. I grew up in the SDA church in the 50s and 60s. The SDA message in those days was more “pure” or “conservative” than it is today. But the fundamental message is still (today) the same.

    In SDA elementary school, I learned about the flood of people who fled Europe to escape the persecution of the Roman system (“church”). I learned about the “Dark Ages” where millions were tortured and murdered for their faith by the Roman system. I learned about the 1260 years of horrible reign by this evil corrupt system that began with the establishment of this system in 538 and extended to 1798 when the pope was taken captive by Napolean to France – where he died. (This was known as the “deadly wound” of Rev 13:3) But it is a wound – not a death. So the text says that it was “healed”. Those who have carefully studied and understand this and other prophetic texts, can see that the healing has happened and we know by this and other prophecy that in due time, this pagan system of worship will rule the world again. Part of that is a “Sunday Law” (or laws) that enforce a false “Sabbath”. Adventists believe there will finally be an attempt at enforcement of Sunday (their mark of authority – in opposition to God’s mark of authority – the Sabbath).

    That is about all I can say in a short message. In the end, the world will polarize into two groups: Those who worship “the beast and his image” and those who worship the Creator. Rev 13:3 says “all the world wondered after the beast” (excepting the remnant).

    Okay my friend –
    I will not try to conduct an evangelistic campaign in this forum. But I attempted to answer your question. Sunday laws are again making ground in Europe. The unrest in the elements and peoples of the world are signs as well. The signs are stark and real to those of us who are watching. Others will “sleep” through it all.




    0
    View Comment
  24. Higher education can be a great blessing but it can be, and sometimes is, a greater curse. Jesus must have taken this into consideration when He chose His disciples, unschooled but teachable fishermen. Judas, the self-chosen disciple, had the “higher education” and it was he who thought he knew so much that sold the Master for thirty pieces of silver. It seems to me that evolutionary theories came into being for the purpose of degrading God’s creative power and doing away with the sign of that power, His holy Sabbath day. But the truly wise will not be fooled. No amount of machinations of man will succeed in perverting God’s Word to make it comply with their theories. The God who holds the sub-atomic particles and the universe together will have the last word and it will be the same as He wrote it in the Genesis creation account and signed and sealed it in His immutable Ten Commandments.

    “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the “seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work; you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates.

    For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.” Exodus 20:8-11 Blessings




    0
    View Comment
  25. Re Bob’s Quote


    I notice that Bill gets two thumbs down – just for asking a question about Hal Holbrook! That is pretty funny!!”

    Hi Bob

    I agree my friend. I just gave you and Bill a thumbs up on this neutral inquiry. I did some searching and couldn’t find out much about his religious background. I did read that he regularily attended the Methodist church of his late wife Dixie. That wpould seem to fit in with your comments on non Adventist spokesman. Methodists celebrate the Sabbath on Sunday don’t they?

    Your agnostic friend
    Ken




    0
    View Comment
    • @Ken: Re. the Great Thumb God, just one of the many begotten sons of the Great Goddess of Awards, of whom there is such a vast congregation of adherents, of whom many walk these very halls, is it not written, Man shall not live by thumbs up or down alone? (I can hardly wait: How many thumbs-up will this get?)




      0
      View Comment
    • @Ken:

      Methodists celebrate the Sabbath on Sunday don’t they?

      There is somewhat of a divide in the Christian church that rejects the 7th-day Sabbath of the 4th commandment. They either reject it by saying that the commandments themselves were nailed to the cross so we should not even be worrying about what they say — or they say that the 4th commandment was “edited” so that instead of referencing the “7th day” it now references “the first day”.

      But there are no credible theologians among non-SDAs arguing that they think the Jews were keeping Sunday at Sinai and so at Sinai it was “week day one” that was being observed as “The 7th day”.

      All Christians – SDAs and non-SDAs pretty much agree on the fact that Christ rose from the grave on the first day of the week (week day one) and that week day one is in fact Sunday. (Making Saturday the 7th day by unanimous agreement.)

      in Christ,

      Bob




      0
      View Comment
  26. Actually there is only one Sabbath day and that is the seventh day Sabbath. Sunday is the counterfeit sabbath of Baal worship on which the sun was worshipped. You cannot celebrate the Sabbath on Sunday, however, you can choose to worship on that day or any other day but it will not be Sabbath worship. This, I believe, underlies the creation versus evolution controversy, however it may be protested, but a controversy between Sunday worship and Sabbath worship is on the way such as the world has never seen and the groundwork is being laid. Blessings




    0
    View Comment
  27. Bill Sorensen: As a side note. Does anyone know if Hal Holbrook is now a SDA? He was in several secular movies and I assume was not even a Christian at that time.He now is a moderator on issues of creation and the Sabbath and I am sure some of you have seen him on HOPE channel and Amazing Facts doing his series.Let me know what you know.Bill Sorensen

    I spoke to a person at a booth (forgot which one) at the ASI convention in Sacramento this past summer about Hal Holbrook, since they had some of his DVD’s about the Sabbath on display. I was told he was hired through his agent for this job. This person told me Holbrook was not SDA. That’s about all I can tell you.




    0
    View Comment
  28. From Fox News –

    “NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory has landed robotic explorers on the surface of Mars, sent probes to outer planets and operates a worldwide network of antennas that communicates with interplanetary spacecraft.”

    “Its latest mission is defending itself in a workplace lawsuit filed by a former computer specialist who claims he was demoted — and then let go — for promoting his views on intelligent design, the belief that a higher power must have had a hand in creation because life is too complex to have developed through evolution alone.”

    “David Coppedge, who worked as a “team lead” on the Cassini mission exploring Saturn and its many moons, alleges that he was discriminated against because he engaged his co-workers in conversations about intelligent design and handed out DVDs on the idea while at work. Coppedge lost his “team lead” title in 2009 and was let go last year after 15 years on the mission.”

    Hmmmm




    0
    View Comment
    • @Charles: I have no doubt that Coppedge’s outspoken creationism led to his being fired by JPL. His creation/evolution news blog at “creation safaris” was one of the better ongoing creationists blogs on the internet.




      0
      View Comment
  29. The “rocket scientist” cannot accept that mankind just evolved by accident. A brilliant step in the right direction – a glimmer of wisdom.




    0
    View Comment
  30. Hi Charles

    Thanks for your fulsome reply, which I respect.

    It will be interesting to follow the enforced Sunday law issue, as I understand this is one of the Adventist prophetic signs of end times.

    Your agnostic friend
    Ken




    0
    View Comment
  31. Re Bob’s Quote

    “All Christians – SDAs and non-SDAs pretty much agree on the fact that Christ rose from the grave on the first day of the week (week day one) and that week day one is in fact Sunday.”

    Hi Bob

    I now appreciate the difference between a day of worship for some Christian denominations versus the Sabbath.

    Thanks

    Your agnostic friend




    0
    View Comment
  32. One theory is that there is no holy day after the cross. So, Sunday is not holy. It is just a common concensus and agreement to meet and worship on that day in honor of the resurrection.

    We could all meet on Wednesday if everyone agreed to it. And this is one reason “Sunday sacredness” has no impact on some who worship on that day.

    When the Sabbath/Sunday issues was stimulated by our pioneers, they came up with more than a few reasons not to keep the Sabbath holy as mandated in the 10 commandments.

    Bill Sorensen




    0
    View Comment
  33. Honest question. Do people believe that we should abandon accreditation and accept the consequences there in, or is accreditation still desirable? Is that too “worldly”?




    0
    View Comment
    • @Mack Ramsey:
      Accreditation is available for a great many schools today – run by Christian organizations, teaching intelligent design and yes even young life views of the world.

      But there is a movement from within some of these same Christian schools to try and force the universities to swallow evolutionism and use relationships already developed with cronies at the accreditation centers – to wedge blind-faith evolutionism into the schools.

      At least if LSU is any clue.

      in Christ,

      Bob




      0
      View Comment
  34. Re: Prophetic End Times

    Hi Charles

    I did a bit of research on the topic and found the following link, which I hope you will find useful. It is interesting how many times religious people have predicted the end of the world without it happening. Harold Camping was the latest sad example.

    Your agnostic friend
    Ken

    http://www.religioustolerance.org/end_wrl2.htm

    Your agnostic friend
    Ken




    0
    View Comment
    • @Ken:

      I don’t think Charles is predicting a specific time for the return of Jesus – only that the time is “short”. Although we are currently living in a time that is beyond all Biblical time prophecies (living on borrowed time in essence), it seems like this world is reaching a tipping point when it comes to a general decline in morality and moral values. There is a growing lack of interest in God and an increase in general depravity and selfishness.

      Jesus predicted this state of affairs and its general increase before His Second Coming (Matthew 24). There may be a “form of Godliness”, but a denial of its power during the last days (2 Timothy 3:1-5).

      In short, we can know that we are living in the “Time of the End” without knowing the precise time for the return of Jesus (Matthew 24:36).

      Also, when a righteous person dies, the next thing he/she sees is the Second Coming of Jesus. So, for each one of us individually, the Coming of Jesus is very near. We should always be ready…

      Sean Pitman
      http://www.DetectingDesign.com




      0
      View Comment
  35. Hi Sean and Charles

    Thanks for your perspectives, which I do not scoff but certainly question as it involves my fate as well.

    While I appreciate that Charles did not give a specific time he did allude to something less than years. That seems imminent, thus my questions about the tell tale signs as distinguished from past prophetic errors.

    I am reading voluminously about Daniel, Revelations and Adventist eschatology to get up to speed on end times. Interesting to say the least!

    Take care
    Your agnostic friend




    0
    View Comment
    • @ken: Reading voluminously! Great, but just WHAT are you voluminously reading? More than Wiki, I should hope. Or Spectrum. I’d recommend Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, especially John. Revelation? Even Daniel 9, that brought all this up? Later, is my advice. E.G. White? Go with “Desire of Ages.” In any case, God bless! You’ll need it, along with your trusty maieutics. And He will, if you want, even more than Plato did, though in a stiller, smaller voice than profs. Plato or Maieutics.




      0
      View Comment
  36. Sean said it well and I could not have said it better. A long, careful, deep study is very convincing. It is “near”. Problem is, when it comes, it is too late to “prepare”. The time for preparation is NOW.




    0
    View Comment
  37. Ken, like many prophetic movements, our dynamic seems to always be in the future.

    The Jews looking for their Messiah is classic of this scenario.

    Sad to say, when the “Messiah” did come, few accepted Him because of the general misunderstanding of the event and its meaning.

    The devil could not change the event. He could change the meaning. And this is why at least some of us have such a deep concern for the continual changing of the meaning of events surrounding the second coming.

    A major victory of the devil was when he was able to convince more than a few that 1844 had no significant meaning and some who still held to the event changed its meaning considerable from our historic understanding of the judgment of the church.

    In 2005 the Review published an article by Kevin Ferris,
    “What we really believe about the judgment”, (June, I think) where the real dynamic of the judgment was removed and a false gospel understanding was presented.

    It was supposed to be a viable presentation endorsed by those responsible for its publication. It did not reflect EGW’s view or the biblical view.

    In the end, if you can change the meaning of the event, you negate the event and its dynamic influence on those who hear it. As well as those who present it.

    If it is convoluted enough, after a few generations, the devil can actually come in the place of Christ and no one suspect he is the antichrist.

    I may be practically alone in this conclusion. But if the Jews became the “antichrst” force when Jesus came the first time, isn’t it more than possible that the SDA church could reflect the same outcome at the 2nd coming?

    I am convinced it will happen unless something radical and confrontational takes place in the church in the near future. The Mid America Union has now endored the ordination of women. Will this split the church? I don’t know.

    It may have a greater impact than the creation/evolution discussions. Simply because fewer people care one way or the other and indifference is easier to bring in a false spirituality than some blatant attack on biblical creation.

    Bill Sorensen




    0
    View Comment
    • Bill,
      I thought your reply made a lot of sense. The devil realizes he can’t change an event but he doesn’t need to if he can change the meaning such as the evolution theory. Genesis can stand but God’s seven-day creation falls exactly like the fourth commandment that is included in most faiths in the U.S. including Catholicism and there it will stay giving lip service but changing the meaning entirely. [edit]

      “Association with learned men is esteemed by some more highly than communion with the God of heaven. The statements of learned men are thought of more value than the highest wisdom revealed in the word of God. . .The men who parade before the world as wonderful specimens of greatness. .robe man with honor, and talk of the perfection of nature. They paint a very fine picture, but it is an illusion. . Those who present a doctrine contrary to that of the Bible, are led by the great Apostate. . .With such a leader expelled from heaven–the supposedly great men of earth may fabricate bewitching theories with which to infatuate the minds of men. (YI Feb. 7, 1895; FE 331, 332)




      0
      View Comment
  38. Faith:
    As far as the accreditation organizations are concerned, in my opinion, they should be told to take a flying leap at a rolling doughnut. The church should be in full control of its institutions and in what is taught in the curriculum.

    Accreditation should always be secondary, as should all things, to what God has stated. If an accreditation committee says we must do something against what God has plainly stated in the Bible, then we should not follow the worldly guidelines. This should rarely happen or be a problem, however.

    La Sierra is not told that they must teach “evolution as fact” or is it? Does anyone know for sure? There are many other Christian institutions which also do not teach “evolution as fact.”




    0
    View Comment
  39. Faith: So typical of the liberal agenda. The minute someone points out error, they are not supposed to judge. Poppycock! If no one “judged” anything we would all fall by the wayside. We are not to judge people’s souls–but by their fruits ye shall know them. That we can and should judge.It says in the Bible that we are to have nothing to do with a liar…doesn’t that mean we have to judge them to be a liar first? Hmmmm?

    So true. The liberals and progressives have their websites (AT and Spectrum) where they constantly tear down the SDA Church, Ellen White, Ted Wilson, Doug Batchelor, GYC, etc. and then state, most hypocritically, that we should’t “judge” thier beliefs.




    0
    View Comment
  40. Can somebody quote to me a statement from WASC or any other accrediting agency that LSU or any other SDA institution cannot teach the evidence for a recent creation and a worldwide flood?




    0
    View Comment
    • @Eddie:

      Eddie: Can somebody quote to me a statement from WASC or any other accrediting agency that LSU or any other SDA institution cannot teach the evidence for a recent creation and a worldwide flood?

      More specifically – can anyone show a case where WASC insisted that evolutionism be taught as science fact at LSU – apart from demands by LSU’s own agents themselves agitating for evolutionism?

      in Christ,

      Bob




      0
      View Comment
  41. David Read: In fact, the liberal faction at LSU–most recently and most ham-handedly, Randal Wisbey–has actually been conspiring to use secular accreditation through WASC to separate LSU from the church. That isn’t my opinion; that is a fact.

    Sean Pitman: In short, where is this factual evidence that Wisbey, in particular, is trying to use WASC accreditation to separate LSU from the church?

    Eddie: “Speak not evil one of another, brethren. He that speaketh evil of his brother, and judgeth his brother, speaketh evil of the law, and judgeth the law: but if thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge.” James 4:11

    Faith: So typical of the liberal agenda. The minute someone points out error, they are not supposed to judge. Poppycock! If no one “judged” anything we would all fall by the wayside. We are not to judge people’s souls–but by their fruits ye shall know them. That we can and should judge.

    It says in the Bible that we are to have nothing to do with a liar…doesn’t that mean we have to judge them to be a liar first? Hmmmm?

    Holly Pham: So true. The liberals and progressives have their websites (AT and Spectrum) where they constantly tear down the SDA Church, Ellen White, Ted Wilson, Doug Batchelor, GYC, etc. and then state, most hypocritically, that we should’t “judge” thier beliefs.

    I always considered myself a conservative until I started reading what some of you revel in writing. I’ve never had any quibbles with any of the 28 fundamental beliefs, so my views of church doctrines are probably as conservative as any of yours, but I honestly don’t get why some of you are so eager to point fingers and cast stones. I can now understand better why some people get so turned off by religion. Seriously, folks, do you really think God approves of all of this?




    0
    View Comment
    • @Eddie:

      Forgive me Eddie for being a bit confused here, but isn’t a judgment against those who make judgements itself a judgement? Aren’t you also making negative judgments here? chastising those in public with whom you disagree?

      You see, it is very difficult to avoid making judgements of any kind. The very statement that judgments should not be made is itself a judgment.

      In short, one can still make general “judgments” as to what is right and wrong on a practical or even a moral level while refraining from making judgements regarding the state of another’s relationship or status before God.

      Sean Pitman
      http://www.DetectingDesign.com




      0
      View Comment
  42. While I don’t recommend Spectrum material, everyone should read “The church of the Scattered Believers” by Loren Seibold

    It may not be totally accurate, but the subject matter is a necessary consideration for any SDA who has a concern for the future of Adventism.

    We may even ask, “Is God allowing the devil to destroy the SDA church?”

    Bill Sorensen




    0
    View Comment
  43. Even though T. Joe Willey is a true SDA basher, he even admits La Sierra is practically a secular institution in his recent comments over on Adventist Today.

    He states La Sierra has borrowed millions of dollars from the state of California to fund buildings with the guarantee that NO RELIGIOUS teachings will go on in these buildings.

    He didn’t say if the building housing the Religion Department was one of them.




    0
    View Comment
  44. I forgot to add that Willey says the La Sierra Science Building was financed by state funds, making it illegal to teach anything “religious” in it. Does this help explain why “evolution as fact” is taught and not anything about Creationism?




    0
    View Comment
  45. Bill Sorensen:
    “Like or Dislike: 1–4″

    One up and four down, Holly. Looks like someone “judged” you.

    Bill Sorensen

    Bill, I’m used to being “judged” for my standing up for Truth! Better to be “judged” wanting by secular worldlings than by God when the Day of Judgement comes.




    0
    View Comment
  46. Eddie: I always considered myself a conservative until I started reading what some of you revel in writing. I’ve never had any quibbles with any of the 28 fundamental beliefs, so my views of church doctrines are probably as conservative as any of yours, but I honestly don’t get why some of you are so eager to point fingers and cast stones. I can now understand better why some people get so turned off by religion. Seriously, folks, do you really think God approves of all of this?

    Yes, I DO think that God approves of those who stand up for His Truth and stand against secular, worldly philosophies such as Darwinistic evolution.




    0
    View Comment
  47. Re Wes’s Quote

    “In any case, God bless! You’ll need it, along with your trusty maieutics. And He will, if you want, even more than Plato did, though in a stiller, smaller voice than profs. Plato or Maieutics.”

    Hi Wes

    Thanks for the blessings.

    I have read the Bible and am looking at germane passages again. Thanks for the references.

    The inner voice I have heard since I was a little nipper asks: Why? The face in the mirror asks me are you good and if not what do you plan to do about it?

    I have a very close Christian friend, whom I am helping through a tough time, who thinks beyond a doubt that God is speaking to me. When I give her the agnostic alternatives she shakes her head in frustration and argues that goodness cannot come from within but only from God.

    I think you know me very well. especially the vanity of a recalcitrant agnostic. What do you think? Am I listening to my own egocentricity or a ‘Higher’ voice?

    Your agnostic friend
    Ken




    0
    View Comment
    • @ken: “I think you know me ….What do you think? Am I listening to my own…or a ‘Higher’ voice?”

      What a question! I recuse myself — on grounds of (1) knowing you too well – I’ve been reading you voluminously for 2 years now and know you as well as Ronnie Eddie Ervy Taylor – and (2) having absolutely no clue. I know your question marks; I don’t know …you. Only God knows …you. I don’t even know whether your question (yet another one) was serious. If it was, you’re asking the wrong man. Ask God.

      Alas, hey, I don’t know myself. Not really. Your friend Plato is said to have said (Wiki says lots of Greeks said it), Know thyself. Waytogo, Plato, but the more one knows oneself the more one knows that one does not know oneself, not really, any more than Eonic Creation knows God. Like, only God knows if I personally really, truly, at core, enjoy being whimsical and droll (as would be the obvious judgment, no doubt widely and rightly held), more than being insightful much less at all helpful. All I know is that I do not know myself and that I do want to know God, who does know me, and …you. All I know is, let’s you and me go read John again, in our bunker-bomb shelter in the grandstands, or on that park bench in Pugwash. (I’m on chapter 4, again, hearing Jesus talking to that really sassy lady, she sounds like a fun girl to talk to, a little like Ken, and He knows all along what she is thinking.)




      0
      View Comment
  48. The sassy lady in John 4 tries to dig up a debate with Christ drawing Him into the ages old feud between Samaritans and Jews over the right place to worship.

    Interesting answer Christ gave; “you know not what you worship – we know whom we worship, salvation is of the Jews”. That was not the dime-a-dozen soft soap response that many of today’s politically correct might prefer.

    Then Christ proves his prophetic insight by revealing the lady’s past to her. That was a kind of proof she could not deny.

    Just as doubting-Thomas got the scars-in-hands proof he was looking for.

    If the only people that became Christians were those who had a visible interview with Christ as did those two – there would have been zero Christians by the second century.

    As Acts 17 demonstrates – the Christian message about a condemned man rising up from the dead and returning to heaven as God – was not acceptable to the Greeks – nor was it popular with the Jews (as we see in Acts 13).

    Without the miracles and the power of the Holy Spirit — they had zero chance of getting that one off the ground.

    John says – (in John 16) that the Holy Spirit “convicts the WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment”.

    In John 12:32 – Jesus said that He would “draw ALL mankind unto Me” (meaning Himself).

    And of course in Romans 1 Paul declares that even the evidence God places in nature “leaves mankind without excuse”.

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  49. Demonic existence and Science –

    I was visitig an old man yesterday who told me of his experience with an Ouija Board. He was playing with it with his little grandaughter. “Grandma” was in the kitchen with a bathrobe on. They asked Ouija if anything was in her pocket. It spelled out h-o-r-s-e. They checked her pocket and sure enough – there was a little plastic toy horse in her pocket. Then she went into another room and replaced the horse with a piece of paper. They asked it again – and it spelled out “paper”. There is a reasonable explanation for such ability and activities. It is accurately explained by the scriptural accounts of God’s work, the rebellion of Satan, and the fall of Satan and his rebellious followers from Heaven.

    So how does the “scientist” evolutionist explain the “paranormal” world that we know exists around us but that we are unable to detect with physical science? Even with our abilities to measure and use many things unseen (such as radio waves) why can we not understand the unseen world that we live in?

    The foolishness of a “scientist” who believes he in his greatly limited understading, can deny the existence of an all-powerful Creator is baffling to me. How can such intelligence be so (hmmm-looking for the right word) “idiotic”?

    In recognizing his own limitations of understanding, mankind will demonstrate his highest intelligence. It is called “faith” – acknowledgement that we cannot know more than God intends for us to know.

    Sabbath has come to where I am as I write this. I honor my Creator on this day and I thank Him for giving life to me and for the promise that it can be eternal.

    Happy Sabbath everyone.




    0
    View Comment
  50. Hi Wes

    Yes the question was a serious one and your answer forthright.

    I suspect the voice in my head, my conscience or lack thereof, is mine and mine alone. Can’t say I’ve ever heard God speaking to me that I am aware of although I can’t say It doesn’t. That is not to say I don’t have self perceived transcendental or spiritual momemts, I do. But from whence do they emnanate: from within or without? How does one empirically decide for oneself or others? The ole epistomological ‘brain in the jar’ conundrum.

    So if we can’t really know ourselves, or even know if God does speak to us or others, where does that leave us fellers? With you wonderful, all abiding, comforting, Krebs Cycle supporting, FAITH, and me questions. And that is fine good friend.

    Ken




    0
    View Comment
  51. I just read something in “Thoughts From the Mount of Blessing” and wanted to share it here. I think it is profound to the general topic of this BB.

    Page 96

    Jesus said, “Consider the lillies of the field, how they grow.” The graceful forms and delicate hues of plants and flowers may be copied by human skill, but what touch can impart LIFE to even one flower or blade of grass? Every wayside blossom owes its being to the same power that set the starry worlds on high. Through all created things thrills one pulse of life from the great heart of God. The flowers of the field are clothed by His hand in richer robes than have ever graced the forms of earthly kings. And “if God so clothe the grass of the field, which today is, and tomorrow is cast into the oven, shall He not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?”




    0
    View Comment
  52. Sean, Faith and Holly, I quite agree with you: I am indeed a hypocrite, a judgmental sinner deeply in need of a savior.

    I believe in a God of love. I love the SDA Church. I love our educational institutions. I love our leaders, including administrators, educators and pastors. I love all 28 fundamental beliefs. I love the Bible. I love the account of Creation and I love God’s creation. I believe all SDA employees should support the church and its doctrines. I believe theistic evolution should not be taught as fact in any SDA institution. I believe in church discipline by the appropriate methods sanctioned by the church.

    Although some of you have labeled me as a liberal, I’m actually quite conservative in my views of the church and its doctrines. I regularly record Doug Batchelor’s program and often watch it on the Sabbath. He has been my favorite preacher since I first watched all of his Net 99 programs. I love Clifford Goldstein’s books–my favorite is “A Pause for Peace.” I love our prophetess and I believe she was divinely inspired. I may not agree with everything conservatives say, but it doesn’t stop me from listening to what they have to say.

    I recognize that our leaders and employees are flawed, some more so than others. Our church has always had and will always have both liberals and conservatives, some of whom agitate to divide and conquer the church. It is the heart that accepts or rejects the truth, the Holy Spirit that convicts of truth, and only God who knows the true motives of each individual. Who am I to judge who should and should not be publicly disciplined on the world wide web?

    I am not–I repeat, I am NOT the one who is attacking the SDA church! I have never publicly criticized a GC vice president, LSU, WWU, PUC, GRI, the presidents of SAU and LSU, the previous president of PUC, individual professors at LSU and PUC, individual scientists at GRI, various pastors and chaplains, and various students who have valiantly defended their institution and professors. A few who have been criticized here have confided with me how deeply hurt and betrayed they felt. Should I not feel compassion toward them?

    As I have previously stated, it irks me when SDAs publicly criticize my friends and my church on the world wide web, where anybody can read what is written. I don’t know why it bothers me so much. Something about it strikes me as being unfair and unjust. Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe it’s the Devil needling me and I’m on the wrong side. Maybe I should just join the chorus here by condemning all the liberals, evilutionists, teachers of junk science, badventists and Seventh-day Darwinians who are striving to take control of the church. I am, after all, a professor on a SDA campus. I know what some of my more liberal colleagues believe and I could easily name them, expose their beliefs, and condemn them for their heresy. Is that what you want me to do? Is that what God wants me to do?

    But somehow I admire those who restrain from fighting back when they are attacked. I admire our church leaders for refusing to publicly condemn each other on the world wide web. And I admire our agnostic friend Ken, who appears to hold a grudge against none, and treats all with the utmost love, courtesy and respect. I admire them for their wisdom, diplomacy, tactfulness and integrity. I could be wrong, but I think they are all motivated by love, the kind of love that I want to be motivated by as well. A love that comes only from God. Why should I not want to emulate them?

    So why is it that some of you view me as the enemy? What have I done wrong? Is it wrong of me to defend my church when I feel it is under attack? Is it wrong of me for not joining you in condemning heretics?




    0
    View Comment
    • @Eddie:

      That’s what I’m doing – defending my church when it is under attack by those who have long been undermining its core principles, goals, and ideals within our own schools and some local church groups – on the church’s dime.

      More subtle approaches have not worked. Personal pleadings and warnings have not worked. Requests from the church leadership have not worked. Eventually, the fact that our own young people are being misled to question and doubt the church’s position on origins, within our own schools, needs to become general knowledge so that parents and students can make informed decisions. Only by this very public method has this serious problem been brought to the forefront of attention within our church where something is starting to be done about it.

      At the very least, parents, students and the church membership at large are much more aware of this problem because of the efforts of those who have contributed to this website…

      Sean Pitman
      http://www.DetectingDesign.com




      0
      View Comment
    • @Eddie:

      Eddie: I believe theistic evolution should not be taught as fact in any SDA institution. I believe in church discipline by the appropriate methods sanctioned by the church. … Is it wrong of me for not joining you in condemning heretics?

      After decades of abuse and mismanagement LSU is experiencing public exposure to what it has been doing behind the backs of the parents, constituents and alumni supporting that institution with gifts, offerings, tuition and tithe dollars.

      And there are voices that even so would be raised to argue that we do nothing – but let the normal channels that have already failed for so long a time address the problem “in some way” (without actually looking at the reason that the problem has not been solvable by those channels already by this point in time).

      There is a group of evolutionists (some inside and some outside of the church) arguing that we do nothing to bring this out in the open – after so long a time of the problem festering and various administration levels ignoring or promoting it. Some of our creationist brethren choose to join them on that point — but “should they”??

      Here are some inspired points to consider –

      “Ministers who are preaching present truth should not neglect the solemn message to the Laodiceans. The testimony of the True Witness is not a smooth message. The Lord does not say to them, You are about right; you have borne chastisement and reproof that you never deserved; you have been unnecessarily discouraged by severity; you are not guilty of the wrongs and sins for which you have been reproved.” {3T 257.2}

      “If God abhors one sin above another, of which His people are guilty, it is doing nothing in case of an emergency. Indifference and neutrality in a religious crisis is regarded of God as a grievous crime, and equal to the very worst type of hostility against God” (3T 281

      “Those who have been nearly all their lives controlled by a spirit as foreign to the Spirit of God as was Achan’s will be very passive when the time comes for decided action on the part of all. They will not claim to be on either side. The power of Satan has so long held them that they seem blinded and have no inclination to stand in defense of right. If they do not take a determined course on the wrong side, it is not because they have a clear sense of the right, but because they dare not.” {3T 271.2}

      Skepticism and unbelief are not humility. Implicit belief in Christ’s word is true humility, true self-surrender” (DA 535).

      Are we really so weak and incapable now that we cannot stand up in the face of this Prof-Bradley style challenge to the church made via published statements in “Inside Higher Education” – where he boldly admits to the press – the tactics that have been used behind the backs of parents and alumni at LSU?

      in Christ,

      Bob




      0
      View Comment
  53. @Eddie, We are not attacking our SDA Church, but defending it [edit].

    Please listen to Pastor Harold White’s sermon on the SacCentral.org website from March 17. It is audibly accessible online.




    0
    View Comment
  54. Our bible class on Wed. night is reading through the Great Controversy. This weeks chapter is “A Warning Rejected”.

    I don’t know a chapter more descriptive of the SDA church today than this one. It is always good to re-read this book occasionally. Especially from the middle onward. Read this chapter and see for yourself.

    By the way, thanks, Bob, for those clear statements that especially apply to the church today. Not withstanding unbelievers who give massive affirmation to each other concerning their spirituality.

    Bill Sorensen




    0
    View Comment
  55. Re Charles Quote

    “Every wayside blossom owes its being to the same power that set the starry worlds on high.”

    Hi Charles

    Profound and poetic, no matter how that mysterious power accomplishes its goals.

    Your agnostic friend
    Ken




    0
    View Comment
  56. Sean Pitman: That’s what I’m doing – defending my church when it is under attack by those who have long been undermining its core principles, goals, and ideals within our own schools and some local church groups – on the church’s dime.

    Holly Pham: We are not attacking our SDA Church, but defending it [edit].

    Do you believe God wants me to report here the names of my liberal colleagues in SDA institutions who are undermining the church so that SDAs can become better informed? If so, would I be sinning by refusing to do so?




    0
    View Comment
  57. Eddie:
    Do you believe God wants me to report here the names of my liberal colleagues in SDA institutions who are undermining the church so that SDAs can become better informed? If so, would I be sinning by refusing to do so?

    Whether or not you report these people is up to you. The facts remain that Shane, Sean, and many others such as myself believe it IS our duty to warn others, which may include conference officials, of what they believe are issues that are undermining our SDA Church. This is what Pastor Harold White did at the Sacramento Central SDA Church. This is what Doug Batchelor did two years ago. Others are also involved.

    If you don’t want to be a part, then please don’t try to tell us WE can’t.




    0
    View Comment
  58. Eddie said…..

    “Do you believe God wants me to report here the names of my liberal colleagues in SDA institutions who are undermining the church so that SDAs can become better informed? If so, would I be sinning by refusing to do so?”

    Evidently, Eddie, EGW considered defense of truth more important than someone’s reputation…..

    ” A Time To Protest–When there are men in the church who love riches more than righteousness, and who stand ready to take advantage of their fellow-men by unjust dealings, shall we make no protest? And when men standing in the position of leaders and teachers work under the power of spiritualistic ideas and sophistries, shall we keep silent, for fear of injuring their influence, while souls are being beguiled? Satan will use every advantage that he can obtain to cause souls to become clouded and perplexed in regard to the work of the church, in regard to the word of God, and in regard to the words of warning which He has given through the testimonies of His Spirit, to guard His little flock from the subtleties of the enemy.”–Manuscript 72, 1904, p. 6. {ChL 62.1}

    She named more than a few in her day who were undermining bible Adventism. Even some people who were close friends of her and James.

    While she was always desirous of being “redemptive”, she would never compromise truth for the sake of anyone’s reputation and influence and put her on influence and reputation on the line more than once to defend the faith.

    One place she stated, “Truth is more precious than all beside.”

    Hopefully, we will concur and follow her example in defense of truth. Sacrificing our own influence and reputation if necessary, just as she did.

    Bill Sorensen




    0
    View Comment
  59. My sense is that WE (myself included) as a church are NOT fulfilling our unique mission, given us by our Creator.

    What is that unique mission? It is proclamation of all three of the “Three Angel’s Messages” to a doomed world. Such a proclamation would quickly bring great persecution by the powers of evil and the end would come. We are the “Laodicean” church. As prophecied, we are “luke-warm”. We fear the consequences of proclaming “in a loud voice”.

    We have delayed the end by our laodicean state. 150 years have passed. How much longer? One way or another, this work will be finished. Look to the “signs”. They are all around.

    Brothers and Sisters: The end is near.




    0
    View Comment
  60. Eddie, I too have worked in one of our universities for a long time, hence not using my real name. Here is my question for you. You say you love the church. I accept that. I also accept that you love the young people that are the future of our church.

    To whom is your alligience? If you sit back and watch a cancer eat at our system and do nothing, are you not at least partially guilty for not doing something? If an innocent young person attends one of our universities and loses their faith or eternal life and you know that professors and administrators are teaching or perpetuating error, are you not partially guilty because you knew and did nothing?

    Adventist politics as usual got us to where we are today. “I can’t judge”, “it’s not my place”, “I might hurt someone’s feelings”, “surely someone higher up than me should fix this problem”, “the’re my friend or relative”, etc, etc, etc. We placed our trust in administrators to keep us on the straight pathway, and the did the evil thing, took the paycheck and did NOTHING. Step by step, decade by decade, overlook after overlook, one youth apostasy after another, and we are where we are today.

    God does not judge you or me for those past events that we couldn’t do anything about. He judges us for NOW, the things we can fix. Are the right things always easy? No. Is doing right a test? Often it is. Read the Bible and see how many times choosing right over wrong was a test. Jesus is coming soon and the people of this last generation are being tested. Are we going to do what is right, tho the heavens fall, or number ourselves with those that gloss over sin and repeat the things I said above (Adventist politics as usual)? This IS the shaking brother! What kind of character do you have? Do you care more for the innocent Sophomore General Biology student who is struggling with his faith in God, or your friend the Professor who is teaching error?

    These are uncomfortable times. They call for bold action.




    0
    View Comment
  61. Re Judging one another

    Toleration of fellow Christians: St. Paul commented on the range of beliefs among Christians. The situation bythe middle of the 1st Century CE was not unlike the variety of beliefs and practices seen among Christian denominations today. He called for intra-faith harmony. Paul urged believers to be tolerant of others who may follow different dietary rules, or hold religious services on a different day. He recommends that believers avoid doing anything that might make a fellow believer stumble in this faith.
    Romans 14:1-23 “Receive one who is weak in the faith, but not to disputes over doubtful things. For one believes he may eat all things, but he who is weak eats only vegetables. Let not him who eats despise him who does not eat, and let not him who does not eat judge him who eats; for God has received him…One person esteems one day above another; another esteems every day alike. Let each be fully convinced in his own mind…But why do you judge your brother? Or why do you show contempt for your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ…Therefore let us not judge one another anymore, but rather resolve this, not to put a stumbling block or a cause to fall in our brother’s way.” (NKJ)

    Hope this helps.

    Your agnostic friend
    Ken




    0
    View Comment
    • @Ken: What edifying, beatific quotes! A moment of silent meditation. Amen.

      Now then. Actually, there’s more in there, in the Bible, right there in the Pauline part, in Romans. Read on. Read his other epistles. Especially Corinthians, both 1 and 2.

      Nobody is more emphatic and unmistakable than Paul, especially about love. Take 1 Cor 13. It is classic; it is transcendent; it is pure poetry. It is inspired. Nobody has said it better, ever, nor could anybody, poet, pastoral theologian, philosopher-blogger, sainted or Nobel’d. Amen.

      And in his next breath nobody has instructed more clearly, if inconveniently but not incongruously, that those brethren who have taken to dissing the gospel as originally preached be eschewed, with love. In fact, the first part of 1 Cor. Is an urgent, almost panicked judgment of one such sinning Corinthian and of the church for accommodating him, no bones about it. To thus censure, with as much certainty as charity, is mainly why Paul wrote that epistle, called “first Corinthians” (today it would be, could well be, EduTruth.) By the way, Second Corinthians is mainly relief – you can just hear Paul sighing mightily — over the Corinthians’ repentance, and a loving exhortation to reinstate the sinner. How glorious that Paul was thus moved, for if 1 Corinthians hadn’t been written, we wouldn’t have chapter 13.

      Meanwhile, how are things in Gloccamorramesh?




      0
      View Comment
  62. Holly Pham: The facts remain that Shane, Sean, and many others such as myself believe it IS our duty to warn others, which may include conference officials, of what they believe are issues that are undermining our SDA Church. This is what Pastor Harold White did at the Sacramento Central SDA Church. This is what Doug Batchelor did two years ago.

    I have two questions:

    1. Did Pastors White and Batchelor actually post the names and sins of others on a website? If so, please provide the website address so I can see it for myself.

    2. If a student (think of your child) at a SDA institution is caught cheating on a homework assignment, or smoking a cigarette, or drinking alcohol, should the student’s name and sin be posted on the institution’s website so that parents and students will be better informed about what is happening at the institution? If not, why not?




    0
    View Comment
  63. <a class="bibly_reference" rel="Revelation 14:12" title="Read Revelation 14:12" href="http://bib.ly/Re14.12">Rev 14:12</a>: If you sit back and watch a cancer eat at our system and do nothing, are you not at least partially guilty for not doing something? If an innocent young person attends one of our universities and loses their faith or eternal life and you know that professors and administrators are teaching or perpetuating error, are you not partially guilty because you knew and did nothing?

    First, although I know of some professors on my campus who have liberal views on various subjects, I don’t know for certain that any of them actually promote their views as “truth” to students. I have learned that some professors on my campus are theistic evolutionists, but none of them teach a course in which the subject is discussed in the classroom. I have privately quizzed students on my campus who take courses from professors who teach the subjects of creation and evolution, and am told to my satisfaction they get a fair treatment from both sides of the issue and that the professor is either biased toward creationism or, at worst, neutral (which, by the way, contradicts what some posters have asserted here at Educate Truth). If I knew that a professor was promoting theistic evolution in the classroom, I would wield whatever influence I could muster (which isn’t much) with the administration (but not in the classroom or on a website) to have the professor removed from teaching the course.

    Second, professors who refuse to publicly condemn heretical colleagues shouldn’t be accused of “doing nothing.” Do you seriously think any student would respect a professor who publicly criticizes a colleague in the classroom or on a website? I can think of many, many, many positive and better ways in which a professor can counteract the negative influences of a wayward colleague, such as being a concerned and trusted advisor, sharing the love of God in the classroom and in the office, praying with a student, encouraging students to maintain their faith, sharing evidence that bolsters their faith, etc. Young people respond better to positive reinforcement than negative reinforcement. And positive reinforcement should not be dismissed as “doing nothing.”

    Finally, I would like to know whether anybody here believes it is appropriate, ethical, professional and morally justifiable for a professor to publicly criticize another professor in the classroom or on a website.




    0
    View Comment
  64. @Eddie, I would consider it “morally justifiable” for a professor to criticize another professor if the other professor was teaching against our SDA Church beliefs, in an SDA institution. I would think it imperative for him/her to do it.

    As to where such a critique should be done is subject to discussion. I personally would have no problem on a website, school newspaper, etc.




    0
    View Comment
  65. “2. If a student (think of your child) at a SDA institution is caught cheating on a homework assignment, or smoking a cigarette, or drinking alcohol, should the student’s name and sin be posted on the institution’s website so that parents and students will be better informed about what is happening at the institution? If not, why not?”

    Eddie, there is a whole lot of difference between young people who are immature and still growing spiritually and emotionally, and professors who are leaders, teachers, and mentors. Like it or not, leaders are held to a little higher standard than students. Young people should want to go to our schools because they want to follow our principles. If they are rebellious and thumb their nose at our rules, then they should be dismissed. If they are accepting of correction and change their ways, that’s growth and maturing, and what we want.

    Leaders and professors, who are mature, and who sign contracts and agree to support their employer are a whole different situation and should be outed for the evil that they do. In private industry employees that work against their company are fired, and even prosecuted.

    Don’t tell me that Dr. Bradley and his associates in the Biology Department didn’t know what they were doing. And don’t tell me that Dr. Guy and his associates in the Religion Department don’t know what they are doing supporting gay marriage against our church’s beliefs.

    The only reason this has happened is because the conservatives of our church have been asleep while the fox got into the henhouse. WE ARE AWAKE NOW. And we are not going to let our beloved church be trashed any longer.




    0
    View Comment
  66. <a class="bibly_reference" rel="Revelation 14:12" title="Read Revelation 14:12" href="http://bib.ly/Re14.12">Rev 14:12</a>: Don’t tell me that Dr. Bradley and his associates in the Biology Department didn’t know what they were doing. And don’t tell me that Dr. Guy and his associates in the Religion Department don’t know what they are doing supporting gay marriage against our church’s beliefs.

    I have never once defended the promotion of theistic evolution or gay marriage by any professor. I believe such individuals should not be promoting such views in an SDA institution, and should resign or be fired if they insist on subverting SDA theology in the classroom. However, naming them and criticizing them online is a kick below the belt and well below my personal ethical standards of Christian demeanor.

    I think Educate Truth has done the church a service by pointing out that theistic evolution is being promoted in the Biology Department at LSU, but by publicly naming and blaming individuals–including many who don’t even work at LSU–and allowing others to assault their character, many SDAs (including conservative SDAs) feel that Educate Truth’s scorched earth policy has violated God’s principles of human decency and respect. I am not alone. Many people, including non-Christians such as our friend Ken, believe it is morally unethical and uncivil to publicly criticize individuals in online websites, even though it happens all the time. That’s exactly the kind of behavior I expect from the Westboro Baptist Church, not the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

    I have done my duty in expressing my concerns about the situation at LSU in writing to the relevant authorities and in prayer to God. Likewise I have done my duty in expressing my disdain for cyber bullying of individuals, which I’m convinced does the church more harm than good. I doubt any neutral individual who reads this website would conclude that SDAs love their fellow brothers and sisters in Christ any more than our agnostic friend Ken. It saddens me to think that many SDAs love each other less than agnostics and atheists.




    0
    View Comment
    • @Eddie:

      Did Jesus never call anyone out by name who was actively and publicly opposing his people or his message? What about the Biblical authors in general? – the Bible never calls anyone out, who held a position of high public responsibility, by name, for millions to see over thousands of years, for attacking God’s people or his truth? What about the founding fathers/mothers of the SDA Church? – they never called anyone out by name who was actively and publicly and beligerantly attacking the church from within? – especially when it came to those who held positions of high responsibility within the church? And, what about you? Again, are you not publically calling out and reprimanding the efforts of specific individuals? You could contact me privately about your concerns. But no! You evidently feel the need to make public statements against me and my efforts? – without even identifying who you are? How is this not inconsist with your own advice?

      Look, I appreciate your motive. I think your motive here is pure and noble… highly commendable in fact. And, if there had been any other way I would have been glad to keep this thing at LSU as low key as possible. It is just that everything else I could think of had already been tried over many years of effort. Nothing helped. It also would not have helped to simply publisize the fact that science and even religion professors at LSU were/are attacking the Adventist position on origins without producing any specific evidence to this effect. Without presenting detailed evidence, nothing would have happened.

      I’m sorry, but when you or anyone else takes on a public position of responsibility and you act in that position in a very public manner against the organization that hired you, you must be called out in like manner if you refuse to listen to any efforts of the leadership to reform your actions in line with the wishes of the organization you were hired to represent.

      The Adventist Church at large needs to become aware of issues like this so that the decades of subversive activity against the church by one of our schools can finally be dealt with. And, if not effectively dealt with, at least generally publisized so that potential parents and students considering LSU will not be deceived into thinking they are purchasing one thing when they are actually recieving something very different for their money.

      If LSU and/or the Adventist Church leadership cannot or will not provide this information to our church family at large, or act in a decided manner to address such problems, I will at least sound the warning to all who are willing to listen… to the very best of my ability (Ezekiel 33:6).

      Sean Pitman
      http://www.DetectingDesign.com




      0
      View Comment
    • @Eddie:

      Eddie: I have never once defended the promotion of theistic evolution or gay marriage by any professor. I believe such individuals should not be promoting such views in an SDA institution, and should resign or be fired if they insist on subverting SDA theology in the classroom

      Ok – so you are addressing both the problem and the remedy as it stood over 15 years ago.

      But given that now – after so long a time – that solution has for these many years “escaped them”.

      In fact it goes so far that when that solution is implemented in a school far to the north of LSU – then those expelled are invited to join in the circus at LSU.

      And when parents and students complained they were denied, mislead or merely dismissed as a tiny minority.

      What is your suggestion for the solution now? Continue to keep it all under wraps and hope that in some future decade it will fix itself?

      You know what they say about continuing to repeat the same mistake year after year – yet hoping for different results…

      in Christ,

      Bob




      0
      View Comment
  67. Re Wes’s Quote

    “Take 1 Cor 13. It is classic; it is transcendent; it is pure poetry. It is inspired.”

    Thanks Wes

    I have attended many weddings where this was read as advice to the to be betrothed. Even though you and I are getting old this passage never does, does it?

    Here is another favourite of mine from The Prophet by Kahil Gibran. Hope you enjoy it.

    “Let there be spaces in your togetherness, And let the winds of the heavens dance between you. Love one another but make not a bond of love: Let it rather be a moving sea between the shores of your souls. Fill each other’s cup but drink not from one cup. Give one another of your bread but eat not from the same loaf. Sing and dance together and be joyous, but let each one of you be alone, Even as the strings of a lute are alone though they quiver with the same music. Give your hearts, but not into each other’s keeping. For only the hand of Life can contain your hearts. And stand together, yet not too near together: For the pillars of the temple stand apart, And the oak tree and the cypress grow not in each other’s shadow.”
    ― Kahlil Gibran, The Prophet

    Your agnostic friend
    Ken




    0
    View Comment
    • @ken: It’s fun, our polkas and waltzes, me piping pointless metaphors, you bunny-hopping around eternalities.

      But seriously, it’s mainly Dr. Pitman’s no-nonsense, back-to-earth, solid posts that count. Edifying. Like his of March 22, 2012 at 4:20 am, to Eddie, who does a pretty shimmy himself. His posts deserve more than a thumbs up. The icon to click should be Durer’s Praying Hands.

      That Sean can work such gems for EduTruth in between lymph node biopsy reports (which, take it from a pathologist, requires as much expertise and wisdom and fluency as arguing a case before the Supreme Court or advocating a balanced budget; I’d sure like to read one), is thanks to more than just God-given brilliance, it must be his God-given mission. Someone had to do it.

      Meanwhile, back in Gibranomesh, what’s up, Ken? A poem, (It’s these my mind can’t stop flipping out, as yours pops agno questions.)

      With each frayed thread it’s clearer
      That a mere thumbs-up
      Is not for Pitman’s posts enough.
      Better icon, praying hands by Durer.




      0
      View Comment
  68. Maybe you all should heed the advice of your prophetess Ellen White:

    “If a man makes a mistake in his interpretation of some portion of the Scripture, shall this cause diversity and disunion? God forbid. We cannot then take a position that the unity of the church consists in viewing every text of Scripture in the very same light. The church may pass resolution upon resolution to put down all disagreement of opinions, but we cannot force the mind and will, and thus root out disagreement.” (MR 11, 266)

    What do you think Sean?




    0
    View Comment
    • @Rhododendron:

      This is fine when you’re talking about disagreements over non-fundamental issues among those who aren’t being paid to represent the church’s primary goals and ideals. However, when you’re talking about leaders in the church teaching and/or preaching against fundamental goals and ideals of the Adventist Church while on the payroll of the church, you have an entirely different situation.

      The church has no part to play in trying to control what people believe. However, the church does have a part to play in who it should or should not hire as a paid representative. If an individual no longer believes in the goals and ideals of the church organization, that’s fine. It is just that such an individual can no longer effectively represent the church as a pastor or teacher and should resign his/her position.

      Along these lines, Mrs. White was very clear. She strongly supported the concept that those who attack the church’s primary goals and ideas, the “pillars of the church”, must be removed from their positions of responsibility within the church…

      Sean Pitman
      http://www.DetectingDesign.com




      0
      View Comment
  69. Eddie: Even if it was your spouse or son?

    If a relative of mine was undermining our SDA beliefs, in public or in a position of authority, I would have no problem with crticizing them on a website.




    0
    View Comment
  70. @ Sean, Thank you for your great answer to Eddie. All those who are not ready to defend our SDA standards should get out of the way and let those, such as many here, get on with it.

    It is time, as Ellen White and even the Jefferson Airplane once said, “It’s Time to Wake UP!” and “Meet It.”




    0
    View Comment
  71. “If LSU and/or the Adventist Church leadership cannot or will not provide this information to our church family at large, or act in a decided manner to address such problems, I will at least sound the warning to all who are willing to listen… to the very best of my ability (Ezekiel 33:6).”

    Sean Pitman

    I know that some don’t agree with you, Sean, on the method you have used to expose the issues publicly. But at least some of us are happy that you are at least doing something to make known publicly to anyone who wants to know, the issues concerning LSU.

    It is interesting to see the total inconsistency of those who think the church should not discipline anyone who teaches contrary to the majority understanding of any doctrine. And not only teach contrary to it, but expect to continue to get paid to do so.

    This idea is totally absurd and can only lead to chaos and complete confusion. While we have a major identity crisis in the church, such who support the progessive and liberal agenda want us to have no identity at all.

    I believe the church will get a lot smaller before we eventually “finish the work” God has given us to do. And its seems probable that far more will join us from without than will remain loyal from within.

    You and I don’t agree on a number of things, including some creation/evolution issues and how to defend the faith. But we agree that “the faith” must be defended if we hope to remain identifiable on any level as we near the end.

    So, keep on challenging, and some of us will support the challenge agenda. If we can’t define who we are and what we believe, we just as well “throw in the towel” and join the eccumenical movement and be done with it.

    Bill Sorensen




    0
    View Comment
  72. ” I believe such individuals should not be promoting such views in an SDA institution, and should resign or be fired if they insist on subverting SDA theology in the classroom. ”

    Eddie, you state perfectly where we are today. We have professors that are teaching directly contrary to our stated beliefs in multiple areas and are subverting our church’s beliefs as paid church employees. They don’t seem to be the least bit interested in resigning. The administrators are too cowardly to fire these errant professors, and so here we are. What do you suggest we do next. Ignore it. We have been doing that for decades and we can all see that doesn’t work. Please suggest the next course of action. The problem needs to be fixed, right?

    As members of His church, God holds us each responsible for its health and well-being. How about this quote from Sister White.

    “If God abhors one sin above another, of which His people are guilty, it is doing nothing in case of an emergency. Indifference and neutrality in a religious crisis is regarded of God as a grievous crime and equal to the very worst type of hostility against God.” —Testimonies, vol. 3, page 281.




    0
    View Comment
  73. In the days of Elijah, there were established the “schools of the prophets”. These were the models of SDA schools, in their beginning. Where could we look today to see a school modeled after these schools? What would they teach? Would they be preparing young people to earn generous salaries for a long life on this earth? Or would they train them to finish the work of the 3 angels messages and thus bring an end to the circumstances here?

    What have others done in the past to model the schools of the prophets? What about the Waldenses? Would any of these school have been able to carry the accreditation of the worlds’s institutions?

    The bottom line is: How long do we as SDA people believe that we have left on this earth? Really! True, we don’t know the “day nor the hour”… but can we not know that it is near? “Even at the door”?




    0
    View Comment
  74. @Eddie, Regarding your “scorched earth” remark, nothing of the kind is being done here. We are not “scorching” anything, but “weeding” out what we see as heretics, apostates, and others who,in positions of authority, either don’t care or actually support (silently) these people.

    And, please don’t repeat the “wheat and tares” analogy, which has nothing to do with people defending Church standards, as has been stated before.




    0
    View Comment
  75. Eddie: I have never once defended the promotion of theistic evolution… I believe such individuals should not be promoting such views in an SDA institution, and should resign or be fired if they insist on subverting SDA theology in the classroom…

    This site claims it promotes accountability for, I assume LSU and the church and its leadership, yet to who is this site accountable too? None~nota.

    It operates outside the church and the God given structure outlined in the book of Acts. It neither supports nor is accountable to that given structure. It has actually fostered opposition against said structure.




    0
    View Comment
  76. “Finally, I would like to know whether anybody here believes it is appropriate, ethical, professional and morally justifiable for a professor to publicly criticize another professor in the classroom or on a website.”

    Let me phrase this from the prospective of a parent.

    If Satan was coming into your child’s classroom to lead them astray by teaching your child to distrust the beliefs of their church and to substitute the prevailing beliefs of the humanistic world, would you sit by and worry about political correctness, or would you jump in and do whatever is necessary to protect your own child?

    Eddie, the majority of the bloggers on this site are not professional educators. They are parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, and concerned friends. They don’t have any interest in the political correctness between disagreeing professors, or how they do or don’t disagree with each other. What these people want is for their children to be well educated, and for their child to be loyal to God and the church.




    0
    View Comment
  77. Rhododendron: Maybe you all should heed the advice of your prophetess Ellen White:“If a man makes a mistake in his interpretation of some portion of the Scripture, shall this cause diversity and disunion? God forbid. We cannot then take a position that the unity of the church consists in viewing every text of Scripture in the very same light. The church may pass resolution upon resolution to put down all disagreement of opinions, but we cannot force the mind and will, and thus root out disagreement.” (MR 11, 266)What do you think Sean?

    Please provide the entire letter or manuscript, so we may read the paragraph and the surrounding material and know what Ellen White was specifically speaking about.

    For example, if a Conference President one day happens to send out a memo stating, “I think the Sabbath is actually not important, and it is not necessary for pastors in my Conference to hold church services on Saturday”

    Do you think we should “do nothing” and simply let any “new idea” be allowed to be taught, preached, and endorsed?




    0
    View Comment
  78. @Rhododedron, I noticed you used the word “your” propetess. Is Ellen White YOUR prophetess also?

    If not, why would you care about her or how we “follow” her advice?




    0
    View Comment
  79. Maybe you all should heed the advice of your prophetess Ellen White:
    “If a man makes a mistake in his interpretation of some portion of the Scripture, shall this cause diversity and disunion? God forbid. We cannot then take a position that the unity of the church consists in viewing every text of Scripture in the very same light. The church may pass resolution upon resolution to put down all disagreement of opinions, but we cannot force the mind and will, and thus root out disagreement.” (MR 11, 266)
    What do you think Sean?

    Rhodo, it is probably better to look at EGW’s work around the teaching of error within Battle Creek to get an idea of how to handle the current problems with professors in our colleges and universities. What is happening today is VERY public, involves impressionable young minds, and is promoted by PhD’s. We are not just dealing with inexperienced church members who are trying to find their way within Adventism. We are dealing with men who know what they are doing, and have been subverting our beliefs for DECADES! ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. It’s time to fix the problem.




    0
    View Comment
  80. Something we heard in a sermon last Sabbath

    “God’s purpose in giving the third angel’s message to the world is to prepare a people to stand true to Him during the investigative judgment.

    This is the purpose for which we establish and maintain our publishing houses, our schools, our sanitariums, hygienic restaurants, treatment rooms, and food factories. This is our purpose in carrying forward every line of work in the cause.—Manuscript 154, 1902, 4. (“Instruction to Men in Positions of Responsibility,” October 24, 1902.) {1MR 228.2}

    Ok so as of 1902 this denomination had a unique purpose and mission for institutions like LLU. At no point did we ever strive to have them become the best public universities that SDA tithe, offering and tuition dollars could buy.

    Our reason for diverting much-needed resources to building colleges was not because we had the mission of “better calculus” or “better chemistry” etc (as if we found the non-SDA schools to be deficient in that area).

    But we DID have an idea or two about the perfect integration of our bible-based world view and science. The early SDAs were opposed to wild speculation in opposition to both the creation and the God of creation and opposed to the increasingly popular idea of adding that speculation as a “required” foreign body to be mixed in with science.

    How then – has it come to this present LSU situation?

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  81. Eddie: First, although I know of some professors on my campus who have liberal views on various subjects, I don’t know for certain that any of them actually promote their views as “truth” to students. I have learned that some professors on my campus are theistic evolutionists, but none of them teach a course in which the subject is discussed in the classroom. …

    Second, professors who refuse to publicly condemn heretical colleagues shouldn’t be accused of “doing nothing.” Do you seriously think any student would respect a professor who publicly criticizes a colleague in the classroom or on a website?

    1. Your first paragraph describes a scenario where NO Theistic evolutionism at all is being promoted. If LSU was confined to that context – Professor Bradley could never have made the frank and honest statements to the contrary that he made to higherEducation on that subject.

    Furthermore – no student could have complained about blind-faith evolutionism promoted as if it were true and this whole website would not even exist.

    2. Your second point addresses the issue of the LSU scenario where professors are going behind parent’s backs – promoting theistic evolutionism “and proud of it”.
    But not so proud apparently as to want it known among the parents.

    You appear to argue that exposing those people would not be a respectable thing to do. Certainly I would agree that it is not politically correct – but is it really something we should not respect? Lets apply some critical thinking to that subject.

    I assume that as an SDA educator you are well informed on the famous – much published “no longer consent to listen” statements about Battle Creek.

    For years our physicians have been trained to think that they must not give expression to sentiments that differ from those of their chief. [Reference is here made to Dr. J. H. Kellogg, for many years the medical superintendent of the Battle Creek Sanitarium.—Compilers.] O that they had broken the yoke! O that they had called sin by its right name! Then they would not be regarded in the heavenly courts as men who, though bearing weighty responsibilities, have failed of speaking the truth in reproof of that which has been in disobedience to God’s Word. …

    My message to you is: No longer consent to listen without protest to the perversion of truth.

    Unmask the pretentious sophistries which, if received, will lead ministers and physicians and medical missionary workers to ignore the truth. Every one is now to stand on his guard. God calls upon men and women to take their stand under the blood-stained banner of Prince Emmanuel. I have been instructed to warn our people; for many are in danger of receiving theories and sophistries that undermine the foundation pillars of the faith. {1SM 196.2-196.4}

    Could this be spelled out any clearer than the above statement?

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  82. If you are on an SDA campus and are aware of professors promoting blind-faith theistic evolutionism (which is in essence – false religion) – then consider this.

    Larry Blackmer is the North American Division Education Secretary. Ask him for a copy of his remarks (his vision for SDA educators) as given in his meeting with LSU faculty – (and even taped by the much discussed LSU-Three).

    Ask that he present those same views to the faculty of your school.

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  83. John J.: This site claims it promotes accountability for, I assume LSU and the church and its leadership, yet to who is this site accountable too? None~nota.

    It operates outside the church and the God given structure outlined in the book of Acts. It neither supports nor is accountable to that given structure. It has actually fostered opposition against said structure.

    We are accountable to GOD above all else, not to the Church structure or anyone or anything else. Do you believe Shane, Sean,and the rest of us who support ET are doing anything wrong? Please specify, and at least I will do my best to explain it to you.




    0
    View Comment
  84. Eddie, Rhododendron and John J.,

    If I may submit, you guys (and gal?) are like flies trapped in a car, vainly beating your wings against the windshield.

    The simple reality is this: you are not going to change the way ET supporters think and write. It’s just not going to happen.

    You guys are right to suggest that open criticism of individuals on a podium in front of the entire world is morally and ethically deplorable. This website does indeed operate outside of the church. The church, in fact, will never, ever, ever, ever, ever embrace this form of influence or correction because it knows that this approach goes against everything Jesus Christ represented. There are appropriate ways of dealing with such issues, but the approach of this website will never be deemed appropriate by the elected church leaders. Never.

    The modus operandi of Educate Truth unquestionably contradicts the general PRINCIPLE of Matthew 18 and I Corinthians 6, which makes clear that issues of disagreement among church members should not be aired beyond the church, which inescapably brings disfavor upon the church. ET supporters here, beginning with Sean Pitman, insist that these chapters offer only POLICY, which does not apply to the situation they seek to address. But their view is fatally flawed and opposed by the official position of the SDA church, as set forth in the SDA Bible Commentary and in the SDA Church Manual.

    The PRINCIPLE of Matthew 18 and I Corinthians 6 cannot be dismissed: we are counseled to take up our differences privately, then within a small group, and finally within the church. Nowhere are we instructed to take our grievances before the entire world, and it is ludicrous to suggest that both Jesus and Ellen White did so. We are NOT to use tactics that employ public humiliation, which ultimately make the church look bad to people like Ken and others who are shocked at the lack of civility in so-called Christian discourse.

    The day the SDA church leadership officially embraces cyberbullying and cyberharassment as a means to an end will surely signify Bill Sorensen’s predicted demise of the church. Fortunately, we will never see that day. Ever. The church leadership will never stoop to such a deplorably low level. Never. Ever. And I praise God for the flawed but wise leaders we have in place today who refuse to endorse Educate Truth’s uncharitable tactics.

    Let the smear campaign resume. I want no part of it.




    0
    View Comment
    • @Christina:

      It is interesting to me that those who are most ardent in arguing that no disagreements within the church should be publicly aired or brought before the church body in general find themselves free to do the very same thing themselves – to publicly call me out, by name, as being responsible for grave wrongs and damage to the church. And, they do this without speaking to me privately about the issue or asking the church leadership to do so either (and usually without using one’s real name).

      Come on guys, at least be consistent in your interpretation of Matthew 18… and consider also that Matthew 18 is talking about private personal sins – not the issue of pastors and teachers openly attacking the church from within on the church’s dime. Such activity was publicly address by Mrs. White, the other founding fathers of the early SDA Church, the early Christian church (St. Paul minced no words in this regard), the reformed Christian church (as in Martin Luther’s 95 theses being publicly nailed to the castle church doors in Wittenberg) and even Jesus himself who used some of the strongest language in the Bible to publicly address those who were destroying the church of His day from within (Matthew 23:27, Matthew 23:33, John 8:42-44, etc)…

      Sean Pitman
      http://www.DetectingDesign.com




      0
      View Comment
    • @Christina:

      Christina: Eddie, Rhododendron and John J.,

      You guys are right to suggest that open criticism of individuals on a podium in front of the entire world is morally and ethically deplorable. … this approach goes against everything Jesus Christ represented. … the approach of this website will never be deemed appropriate …
      ET supporters here, beginning with Sean Pitman, insist that these chapters offer only POLICY…their view is fatally flawed and opposed by the official position of the SDA church

      The modus operandi of Educate Truth unquestionably contradicts the general PRINCIPLE of Matthew 18 and I Corinthians 6

      In 1Corinthians 5 we have the church openly rebuking a case of sin in the camp.

      In 1Cor 6 we see the instruction NOT to take fellow church members to court – the very thing that the now famous “three” at LSU are doing with their own church – the very thing that you and others do NOT complain about. And even more the promoters and supports of T.E. at LSU seek to manipulate the WASC against the church in support of their own agenda. A classic violation of the 1Corinthians 6 principle.

      And in the case of your post above – we see you publicly condemning fellow church members thus negating the apparent point you are trying to make (or at the very least demonstrating it to be insincere).

      As for public condemnation of an SDA teaching institution – I offer the case of Battle Creek – “Exhibit A” (as already posted here)

      in Christ,

      Bob




      0
      View Comment
  85. 1 Timothy 5:19-21 is appropriate here (emphasis addded):

    “Do not receive an accusation against an elder except from two or three witnesses. Those who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all, that the rest also may fear. I charge you before God and the Lord Jesus Christ and the elect angels that you observe these things without prejudice, doing nothing with partiality.”

    So is Ephesians 5:11,12:

    “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them. For it is shameful even to speak of those things which are done by them in secret.”




    0
    View Comment
    • @A Servant:

      Exactly. That is also what you find in 1Corinthians 5. And so now in the case of what 3SG 90-91 calls the “worst form of infidelity” we see the problem that has festered for decades in darkness in the special case of LSU – being exposed to the light of day.

      in Christ,

      Bob




      0
      View Comment
  86. Christina, I find it so interesting that people like you are so quick to wag your finger at the conservatives on ET about publicly confronting the EVIL at LSU and quote scripture about how to do it, while you ignore the same council you give. Perplexing!

    Do you believe that God created the earth in 6 literal 24 hour periods? [edit] Do you believe in our Biblical 28 fundamental beliefs? Do you think that a parent of a college aged young adult should be able to send their child to an SDA college or university and be confident that the professors there (paid by the church) are going to help build the young person’s faith in God and the SDA church?

    I would like to read your answers to these questions.




    0
    View Comment
  87. @Christina, Thank you for having “no part” of our concerns. It is people like you who are a major part if the problem. We will continue to do what is correct and right regarding these issues, while those who have no concern for our SDA Church do nothing.

    As regards the “smear campaign” Shane and Sean have presented the issues fairly, correctly, and truthfully. The proof of this is in the constant ad hominem attacks on them from Spectrum, Adventist Today and a few other sources. I encourage them and others to continue as long as we need.




    0
    View Comment
  88. @Christina, As numerous others have done, you use anonymity to hide your proclamations. What is your true identity? Are you afraid to reveal it? If so, why?




    0
    View Comment
  89. John J.: This site claims it promotes accountability for, I assume LSU and the church and its leadership, yet to who is this site accountable too? None~nota.

    It operates outside the church and the God given structure outlined in the book of Acts. It neither supports nor is accountable to that given structure. It has actually fostered opposition against said structure.

    John J., you bring up an interesting point. There are plenty of great self-supporting institutions that support our church. Consider Weimar, Young Disciples, etc. Educate Truth is another example of a self-supporting group. It is composed of loyal church members who are working to support and prevent the war on our our church’s beliefs.

    The paradox is that the destructive element is coming from within the church, from those that call themselves Seventh-day Adventists, but who don’t subscribe to the beliefs of the SDA Church, and want to tear down those beliefs.

    Sean and Shane are Adventist patriots and will be regarded as heros to the church for their bold and decisive action.




    0
    View Comment
  90. Sean Pitman wrote “It is interesting to me that those who are most ardent in arguing that no disagreements within the church should be publicly aired or brought before the church body in general find themselves free to do the very same thing themselves – to publicly call me out, by name, as being responsible for grave wrongs and damage to the church. And, they do this without speaking to me privately about the issue or asking the church leadership to do so either (and usually without using one’s real name).

    Even a 5-year-old would recognize the moral distinction between someone who publicly engages in name-calling and bullying versus someone who defends the ones who called names and bullied. Yet Dr. Pitman, with his advanced degrees, chooses to obfuscate.

    Dr. Pitman wrote “Come on guys, at least be consistent in your interpretation of Matthew 18… and consider also that Matthew 18 is talking about private personal sins – not the issue of pastors and teachers openly attacking the church from within on the church’s dime. Such activity was publicly address by Mrs. White, the other founding fathers of the early SDA Church, and the early Christian Church, and even Jesus himself…

    So now Dr. Pitman conviently dismisses PRINCIPLE and proclaims innocence by declaring POLICY, much like on would expect of a 5-year-old name-calling bully. Where in scripture or in Ellen White’s writings does one see an attempt by Jesus or the prophetess to shame others publicly and behind their backs, in front of believers and unbelievers alike, to harm their reputations and enforce behavioral change?

    Hint: nowhere. Dr. Pitman obfuscates by drawing the wrong parallels.

    The official SDA leadership will never stoop to Educate Truth’s tactics, and all SDAs should be proud of that.




    0
    View Comment
    • @Christina:

      Even a 5-year-old would recognize the moral distinction between someone who publicly engages in name-calling and bullying versus someone who defends the ones who called names and bullied. Yet Dr. Pitman, with his advanced degrees, chooses to obfuscate.

      Where have I engaged in “name calling” against anyone? Please do reference where I have done so…

      What I see myself as having done is very much the same as what I’m sure you see yourself as doing – publicly defending those who have had no defense. I’m defending Adventist students and parents against the ardent and persistent attacks, by LSU professors of both science and religion, against the primary goals and ideals of the Adventist Church. I have no need for name calling or personal attacks. I’m simply presenting the facts as they really are and pointing out that this situation is not in line with the fundamental Adventist position on origins. I do this, yet again, in defense of those who have been defenseless for decades at LSU, who have had no voice, who have been overpowered and bullied by professors who hold their futures, their careers, in their hands.

      Through many years prior to making this issue public, I spoke directly at LSU trying to encourage changes to take place there. I wrote numerous letters to and had several phone and personal conversations with the leadership of LSU as well as with the leaders of the local conference, union, division, and even to the General Conference President about these issues – all without any effect. Finally, I saw no further option but to warn parents and students and the church body alike of what has been happening at LSU for decades. All deserve to know. There is simply no reason why our young people should not be defended against such strong internal attacks by some very public method – just as you see yourself doing here with your public attacks against what you see as some kind of grievous wrong.

      So now Dr. Pitman conviently dismisses PRINCIPLE and proclaims innocence by declaring POLICY, much like one would expect of a 5-year-old name-calling bully. Where in scripture or in Ellen White’s writings does one see an attempt by Jesus or the prophetess to shame others publicly and behind their backs, in front of believers and unbelievers alike, to harm their reputations and enforce behavioral change?

      Where have I done anything behind anyone’s back? As far as I know, I’ve been very upfront and open about what I’m doing and what my concerns are for our schools.

      Mrs. White was just as open and forthright over her concerns with the rebellious schools of her day, such as Battle Creek. She publicly warned parents not to send their children there. Regarding the education at Battle Creek she wrote, in no uncertain terms:

      I was shown that it is Satan’s purpose to prevent the attainment of the very object for which the college was established. Hindered by his devices, its managers reason after the manner of the world and copy its plans and imitate its customs. But in thus doing, they will not meet the mind of the Spirit of God. – EGW, 5T, p. 22-23

      And, as already noted, Jesus used very strong language, in public forum, to address the attacks on the church of his day from those leaders on the inside (Matthew 23:27, Matthew 23:33, John 8:42-44, etc)…

      Consider also the founding fathers of the early Christian church (St. Paul minced no words in this regard). The early church fathers publicly called out those who were attacking the church as a warning to all not to follow their advice or example. Along these lines consider also, yet again, the passages found in 1 Timothy 5:19-21 and Ephesians 5:11,12

      Also, consider the reformed Christian church and what the fathers of the Christian reformation called out in public as wrongs against the people of God (as in Martin Luther’s 95 theses being publicly nailed to the castle church doors in Wittenberg).

      The official SDA leadership will never stoop to Educate Truth’s tactics, and all SDAs should be proud of that.

      I happen to know that a number of the leaders of the SDA Church regularly refer to the information on this website and have used this information to act, in a positive manner, to address the problems at LSU that have long been swept entirely under the rug…

      While things may not be happening at the pace that many would like, positive things have happened and are happening which would never have happened without the impetus initiated by this website.

      Of course, if you know how things could/can be done better, I’m all ears…

      Sean Pitman
      http://www.DetectingDesign.com




      0
      View Comment

Comments are closed.