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

Please follow and like us:
1
271
37

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

  1. 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
  2. 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
  3. “Those who are sinning rebuke in the presence of all, that the rest also may fear.”

    And who is “all?” Is any sin among us to be subject to public exposure and ridicule? To whom did Jesus say, “Let him who is without sin throw the first stone?”




    0
    View Comment
    • @Christina:

      There’s a difference between “ridicule” and pointing out serious errors of action by leaders within the church. I do not support or use personal ridicule or personal pejorative attacks. However, I most certainly do support the calling out of those paid representatives of the church who have long gone around openly and publicly attacking the primary goals and ideals of the church – despite the efforts of many to address these issues by numerous private appeals.

      Sean Pitman
      http://www.DetectingDesign.com




      0
      View Comment
  4. Rev 14:12 (who will remain anonymous like me) asked

    Do you believe that God created the earth in 6 literal 24 hour periods?

    YES, DEFINITELY

    Do you believe in our Biblical 28 fundamental beliefs?

    YES, ALWAYS AND FOREVER

    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?

    YES, ABSOLUTELY

    I’m not defending any wrongs that might have been committed, as you wrongly assumed. I’m simply pointing out the gross violation of Christian principles and ethics in using the world wide web to publicly bully and punish others–behind their backs no less–especially when it makes Christians like you who claim to be representatives of the SDA church look so cold and calloused and judgmental.

    You, sir or madam, do not reflect the values and behavior of Jesus Christ or my beloved church. If you are an SDA employee, I suggest you resign your position since you are going against the stated policies of the church’s manual. Your behavior at this website is reprehensible. Have you no conscience?




    0
    View Comment
  5. Sean and Shane are Adventist patriots and will be regarded as heros to the church for their bold and decisive action.

    Funny. The majority of the church’s leaders (a number of whom have been vilified by Educate Truth) will never see it this way. Most would agree the 5-year-old bully on a playground is bold and decisive, but hardly representative of the church’s patriots.




    0
    View Comment
  6. Christina,

    “…If you are an SDA employee, I suggest you resign your position since you are going against the stated policies of the church’s manual. Your behavior at this website is reprehensible. Have you no conscience?…”

    Do you have the same suggestion for the professors at LSU who teach contrary to our Fundamental Beliefs and cause our young people to lose faith in God and the Bible? Are you going to ally yourself with those that destroy the faith of young people?




    0
    View Comment
  7. Sean and Shane are Adventist patriots and will be regarded as heros to the church for their bold and decisive action.

    I agree 100%! The proof we ARE making progress is the continual ad hominem attacks on Shane, Sean, and ET itself, from Spectrum, Adventist Today, and from usually anonymous poster here on ET.

    I fully support Shane and Sean and the amazing work they are doing!




    0
    View Comment
  8. Christina:
    Sean and Shane are Adventist patriots and will be regarded as heros to the church for their bold and decisive action.

    Funny. The majority of the church’s leaders (a number of whom have been vilified by Educate Truth) will never see it this way. Most would agree the 5-year-old bully on a playground is bold and decisive, but hardly representative of the church’s patriots.

    So, how many church leaders have you polled to get your results? My guess is not any or very many. Please submit your data, so that we may analyze and verify your conclusion.

    I have personally spoken to a number of “Church leaders” including pastors and evangelists. They all said they supported ET, and many read it on a relatively regular basis to see what’s going on.




    0
    View Comment
  9. Christina,

    Both sides think they are right in the methods being used to deal with the problem. But we must all remember, just because we think we are right, does not make it so.

    So, neither yourself and those who agree with you are necessarily right in your evaluation. Neither does it prove true for the other side.

    One think we do know for certain, nothing was being done substancially to correct the problem until some people like Shane and Sean exposed the problem to the church community in general.

    So, you are free to use any method you think will bring results. Some of us think the methods now being used here on this forum will have the best chance to see any substancial action to correct the problem.

    And it may well be that the problem is now so intense, there is no method, period, that will bring any viable results in harmony with the traditional SDA position on creation. And this applies to several other fundamental SDA bible doctrines.

    Bill Sorensen




    0
    View Comment
  10. Sean Pitman: I do not support or use personal ridicule or personal pejorative attacks.

    I seriously doubt a vice president of the GC, the president of SAU and a former president of PUC would agree with you.




    0
    View Comment
    • @Sterling:

      Sterling:
      I seriously doubt a vice president of the GC, the president of SAU and a former president of PUC would agree with you.

      The president of SAU may not be entirely inline with either the GC 2010 vote on FB #6 rewrite or the direction of this web site – that is a given.

      The GC has many Vice Presidents and the fact that one of them might differ with the views of this web site is not as shocking as some might imagine. Division on this subject goes to the GC level. That is a given.

      The past presidents of PUC include pro-theistic-evolutionists – how difficult is it to imagine that one of them might differ with some of the views on this web site?

      We have stated many times that elements arguing for and defending T.E. include not only the T.E’s themselves – but also creationists who reject the 3SG90-91 view that this is the worst form of infidelity and that action should be taken to stop it from being established inside Church teaching institutions.

      in Christ,

      Bob




      0
      View Comment
  11. Holly Pham: What is your true identity? Are you afraid to reveal it? If so, why?

    Like Christina, I too accept all fundamental SDA beliefs. But Eddie, Christina and others are wise not to reveal their true identity, for if they did there is little doubt, based on the past, that their reputations would be tarnished here at ET.




    0
    View Comment
  12. Good evening Christina,

    Since we do not know each other, and (as far as I know, have never met), I would like to believe that there is an underlying sincerity in your concern. You do raise an important question. When should wrongs be pointed out publicly, and when should they be addressed privately?

    It seems to me that this question is well answered in the first verse of Scripture I shared. The replying post only quoted one verse, but I posted three verses in order to show the context.

    Here is the first part of what I posted before:
    ——————————————-
    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.”
    ——————————————-

    The passage clearly says that we should not pay attention to criticisms of church leaders, with the exception that we should if two or three witnesses attest to the wrong. The following verse relates directly to the previous one; ***leaders who are at fault*** ought to be rebuked before all, in public, so that those who followed these leaders will not follow them to do wrong things.

    I personally could present more than two or three witnesses to the major facts that Sean and company express concern about; thus, it is appropriate for concern to be publicly expressed.

    In addition, Jesus followed this principle when He publicly rebuked Peter for unwittingly attempting to dissuade Him from His mission:

    “But He turned and said to Peter, ‘Get behind Me, Satan! You are an offense to Me, for you are not mindful of the things of God, but the things of men'” (Matthew 16:23).

    “But when He had turned around and looked at His disciples, He rebuked Peter, saying, ‘Get behind Me, Satan! For you are not mindful of the things of God, but the things of men'”(Mark 8:33).

    Incidentally, let’s assume that Matthew 18 did apply here. Remember that private confrontation is only the first step of Matthew 18. I have first-hand knowledge that this first step has been taken *many* times over the last 10 years with LSU administrators. Read the ANN archives if you find this hard to believe. The second step is to take others with you to help solve the problem. This too has already been done. Now we are at the third step, in which case the matter must be told to the church. My observation is that Sean’s conduct in operating the website is fully consistent with phase 3 of Matthew 18, telling this problem to the church, where we currently are in the process. If the first phase and second phase are OK, is there something wrong with the third phase?

    I’d sincerely like to hear your prayerful response.




    0
    View Comment
  13. Re Bill’s Quote

    “But we must all remember, just because we think we are right, does not make it so.”

    Hi Bill

    Bravo my friend. There is nothing wrong with holding strongly convicted positions as long one recognizes one could be dead wrong. The trick is to treat those who hold opposite viewpoints with compassion, tolerance, and, might I venture, Christian charity.

    Your agnostic friend
    Ken




    0
    View Comment
  14. @ A Servant, Well stated! Indeed, the FIRST step should be direct, private conversation. I can tell you from personal experience that it usually does not work, and as you stated, further methods must be employed, as Shane, Sean, and the many here have recognized and done.




    0
    View Comment
  15. Sterling: Like Christina, I too accept all fundamental SDA beliefs. But Eddie, Christina and others are wise not to reveal their true identity, for if they did there is little doubt, based on the past, that their reputations would be tarnished here at ET.

    Please tell me how your reputation would be tarnished. For standing up for God’s Word? For standing against secular, non-biclical ideas?

    If that represents being tarnished, I WANT to be tarnished!




    0
    View Comment
  16. On a whim, I showed this thread to a non-Adventist friend this afternoon, and asked what they thought once finished reading it. But before I got to that point, about 20 minutes later, I amused by the occasional remark and contorted faces. I heard statements like “What’s La Sierra University” (which I had to clarify) and “Oh my God” (repeatedly), and there was some pronounced head-shaking.

    When finished, my friend said, “Do these people call themselves Christians?” I asked which ones. She said the ones that were attacking La Sierra University and defending the right to say anything they felt inclined to about other Christians. I nodded, and said, “oh yes, most definitely.” She just looked at me and said, “You’re a Seventh-day Adventist, aren’t you?” I said yes. She then shook her head and said, with a very concerned look on her face, “seriously, you’re in the wrong religion. Who would ever join such a church?”

    We then had a lengthy conversation. By the end, I think it’s possible she would sit down at an Adventist church, but I’m not so certain. You guys created quite the impression! Keep up God’s magnificent work on the web, EducateTruthers!

    By the way, I’m no heretic. I’ve voiced my concerns privately to Sean Pitman previously, as have many others. You folks misjudged and mischaracterized someone once again. Congratulations on your gracious, Christ-filled spirit and humility. I’ll sign off once and for all and let you folks continue to abuse me and others with your sword of truth. You’ll have your reward one day.




    0
    View Comment
    • @Christina:

      I actually agree with you on one level. I most certainly agree that a public forum is not the most ideal place to air any form of the church’s dirty laundry. However, at some point for certain important issues one is left with little choice but to use less than ideal methods to address very important issues within the church. For example, I’m sure Martin Luther wished there were some less public way to effectively address the significant problems of the church of his day rather than to nail his 95 Theses to the most public forum available – the front door of the Castle Church at Wittenberg. Likewise, I very much wish there were some much more private and inconspicuous way to effectively address the active and long-standing attack on the church from within one of our own universities. Unfortunately, I was unable to think of any other way (which had not already been tried).

      If you know of another way, by all means do share it with me…

      You’ll have your reward one day.

      You certainly sound gracious and Christlike to me 😉

      How about at least giving me the benefit of the doubt as far as my motive and possible ignorance is concerned before passing moral judgment? How about at least pardoning me as far as Jesus did when He said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.”? – Luke 23:34

      But, perhaps, I’m beyond all hope? My doom is sealed? – for trying to protect Adventist young people in our own schools from the unending attacks on Adventism from within – from our own hired professors?

      Oh, and by the way, while I get many anonymous E-mails and even hand written letters on occasion (which I do not read unless they are signed) I’ve only been privately contacted by a handful of individuals who’ve identified themselves and who’ve expressed concerns about the effect of this website. As far as the one’s who’ve actually identified themselves, all have been male (as far as I recall). So, I assume your private message must have been anonymous?

      Also, you should know as well as anyone (and should explain to your friend in case she is not aware) that public comments to the articles posted to any discussion website like this do not necessarily represent the perspective and/or goals of the managers/owners of this website. The attitudes of many commenters certainly do not reflect my own positions or attitudes. What then should I do? – block all comments with which I personally disagree? – including yours?

      Also, you’ve failed to respond to my most sincere question as to how the issue at LSU should have been dealt with? How would you have dealt with the problem? What, specifically, would you have done? I’m really interested in any useful advice along these lines…

      Sean Pitman
      http://www.DetectingDesign.com




      0
      View Comment
  17. Christina’s first post was ostensibly out of concern for how the effort to deal with apostasy at LSU would appear to non-SDAs and the need not to have the problem seen by those outside the SDA church.

    Christina: issues of disagreement among church members should not be aired beyond the church, which inescapably brings disfavor upon the church.

    Then we get this post which appears to cast doubt on the supposed point of genuine interest mentioned in her first post.

    Christina: On a whim, I showed this thread to a non-Adventist friend this afternoon, and asked what they thought once finished reading it. But before I got to that point, about 20 minutes later, I amused by the occasional remark and contorted faces.

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  18. Well, Sean, I can’t think of a better method of cleansing the church of apostates than what you’re doing here. Identify them, describe their sins, harass and humiliate them until they eventually resign their jobs and withdraw their membership from the SDA Church–or, better yet, simply fire them from their jobs, excommunicate them from church membership, and ban them from all things SDA, including social events and online forums. After all, they’re way too proud and stubborn to ever listen to those of us who are striving to purify the church. Like Holly says, it just doesn’t do any good. We don’t want them to ever corrupt our children again, so we should learn a lesson from the Jehovah’s Witnesses: don’t socialize with or even talk to them. Like James Dobson always says, love must be tough! And who cares what any non-SDAs think about us? We’re the remnant! We’re the ones who are going to be saved, not them!




    0
    View Comment
    • @Sterling:

      As I’ve explained many times before, the maintenance of church order and government (i.e., only hiring those paid representatives who will actually represent what they are being paid to represent) has nothing to do with salvation.

      These are not moral judgments. These are practical judgments regarding the maintenance of church order and government. One does not have to be SDA to be saved you know. However, one does need to be SDA to be an effective leader or paid representative of the SDA Church.

      If you don’t believe in the SDA message, that Ok, just don’t expect to get a paycheck from the SDA Church while you go about undermining the basic goals and ideals of the church. Try working for an employer who has goals and ideals more in line with your own.

      Also, no one is arguing for the exclusion of anyone from basic attendance and worship with us in our churches. Anyone who actually wants to fellowship with us is welcome. Many of my best friends are not members of the SDA Church, a number are even agnostic and a few are pretty ardent atheists. Yet, we get along just fine and occasionally these same friends of mine come to my church with me to support something I’m doing.

      You see, the problem here isn’t over basic socialization or diversity in worship. The problem is over paid representatives of our church attacking the church on the church’s dime. That’s the main issue here. No organization of any kind can long tolerate such subversive activity coming from within…

      Sean Pitman
      http://www.DetectingDesign.com




      0
      View Comment
  19. Christina, you “signed out” but I hope you’re still reading this.

    I hope that you had the opportunity to tell your neighbor Paul Harvey’s “rest of the story” to go with the Educate Truth website and this thread.

    I hope you told him/her:

    1. The SDA church has 28 Fundamental beliefs.
    2. The SDA church has CHURCH-OWNED colleges and universities that employ professors who are CHURCH EMPLOYEES.
    3. Those professors sign contracts that ask them to support their employer, THE SDA CHURCH.
    4. Certain professors are teaching contrary to their employers Fundamental Beliefs.
    5. That these SUBVERSIVE activities have been going on for a long time.
    6. That the professors who have been responsible for this controversy have NOT convened conferences to publically declare their disagreement with church beliefs, but instead UNDERHANDEDLY targeted to the most vulnerable population of the church, our YOUNG PEOPLE.
    7. ADMINISTRATORS should have done their job and dealt with this as a part of their job, but they didn’t. They instead swept it under the rug, either out of cowardice, political correctness, or because they agreed with the rebellion.

    AND THE LAST
    8. Only AFTER all of the previous 7, loyal church members have done the last thing they can do, bring this out in the light of day.

    I believe that makes Sean and Shane heros for standing up for the truth.




    0
    View Comment
  20. <a class="bibly_reference" title="Read Revelation 14:12" href="http://bib.ly/Re14.12" rel="Revelation 14:12">Rev 14:12</a>:
    Christina, you “signed out” but I hope you’re still reading this.

    I hope that you had the opportunity to tell your neighbor Paul Harvey’s “rest of the story” to go with the Educate Truth website and this thread…

    A great summary of the problem, as we have discussed over the past several years. But, where are we now? Stuck with the same old system. And the same will go on until more proactive measures are taken.

    We need more [who] are not afraid to speak up, in contrast to the vast majority of SDA’s. I pray we will have more of these people participate on this website and in their local churches, Conferences, etc.




    0
    View Comment
  21. Sterling:
    Well, Sean, I can’t think of a better method of cleansing the church of apostates than what you’re doing here…

    Your [comments] contained some truth, along with some false ideas, such as “shunning” members, which has never been mentioned as far as I can see.

    So what is your method? Please explain in detail what you would do. Instead of what you call “harass” and “intimidate” what methods would you substitute?

    Also, please tell us why you think your methods are better than those used by Shane, Sean and other members of ET.




    0
    View Comment
  22. Sterling: Well, Sean, I can’t think of a better method of cleansing the church of apostates than what you’re doing here… ban them from all things SDA, including social events and online forums.

    “Ban them from online forums”?

    Is it your claim that SDA evolutionist professors teaching evolutionism in our schools are being banned from this forum?

    Is it possible that this is a valid charge to be made against EducateTruth?

    I have seen them invited to participate – but have not seen them banned.

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  23. It seems to me that Sean completely misrepresents the complaints by Christina, Sterling and others. They are not objecting to the paycheck issue, which seems to be Sean’s incessant comeback to each complaint. They are objecting to a torched earth approach here that is clearly an inappropriate method of church discipline and order. The church should never conduct its busines of discipline and order through public proclamations, such as newspaper ads and billboards that denounce individuals and their convictions. There are more appropriate means for this, and you people should take seriously your divine obligation to protect the reputation of the church.

    There’s no question that the Educate Truth approach casts Adventism in the worst possible light. I have to agree with Christina that the Adventist church leadership will never officially condone this approach. In fact I’m surprised they have not officially condemned it. I imagine they have not done so out of fear of the way you people would go after them. Fear motivates. It’s the wrong motivation.

    I’m sure you people will click “dislike” and treat me as if I don’t believe in YEC (I do) and the requirement that Adventist faculty teach the Adventist position (I do). If you haven’t noticed, there are lot of individuals who agree with your position but disagree with your tactics, and you uncharitably treat them as the enemy, which they are not. They’re on you side with the key issue! You people should rethink what you write, for as Christina pointed out eloquently, others view your comments and criticisms as very unchristlike. And they most certainly are.

    Have a good sabbath.




    0
    View Comment
    • @MiddleGround:

      Again, I agree that the public confrontation of this website is not the most ideal method given any other more private method that would have actually worked. However, what else would you have done that has not already been tried to substantively address the long-standing and entrenched problem at LSU? I’d really like to hear some other reasonable approach to this problem that has not already been tried without any effect…

      I’m sorry, but you guys seem to me to be more concerned about the reputation of teachers and institutions than you seem to be over the undermining of the faith of the youth of our church or the very long standing and determined attacks on various fundamental goals and ideals of the SDA Church – the SDA position on origins in particular.

      Again, I ask you, why is it such a problem to publicly declare, in no uncertain terms, what parents and students can expect from our own schools? – especially given the great personal cost involved for most parents who send their children to our schools? Shouldn’t our primary concern be for them? How can such an effort to inform parents, students, and the church membership at large rationally be referred to as a “scorched earth policy”?

      If our schools cannot proudly and publicly proclaim the honest truth of what they are teaching our young people, we obviously have a real problem. I don’t think it is right for individuals or institutions to hide behind arguments for Adventist privacy over what we actually teach in our schools while they attack the very fundamentals of Adventism, on the Church’s dime, for decades. It’s time for this sort of thing to stop.

      If you have a better idea on how to get this done, I’m all ears…

      Sean Pitman
      http://www.DetectingDesign.com




      0
      View Comment
      • @Sean Pitman:

        Sean Pitman: However, what else would you have done that has not already been tried to substantively address the long-standing and entrenched problem at LSU? I’d really like to hear some other reasonable approach to this problem

        That is the question – often asked — never answered.

        Those arguing against this last-ditch method of addressing a problem that has festered many years beyond it’s time – appear to much prefer “more of the problem” rather than “a public solution” because in their eyes 3SG90-91 is dead wrong when it labels T.E. the worst form of infidelity.

        The Battle Creek solution eluded the politically correct timid administrivia of its time, and so also has LSU’s solution escaped leadership for many years. Now – just as in the case of Battle Creek – the solution has to go public – letting the church members themselves decide the matter by encouraging leaders to take bold decisive, effective action.

        in Christ,

        Bob




        0
        View Comment
  24. MiddleGround: There’s no question that the Educate Truth approach casts Adventism in the worst possible light. I have to agree with Christina that the Adventist church leadership will never officially condone this approach. In fact I’m surprised they have not officially condemned it.

    Just as they did in the case of Battle Creek???

    crickets..crickets…

    in Christ,

    Bob




    0
    View Comment
  25. I have been following this forum for quite a long time now. I have not yet seen anyone who appeared to win an argument here.

    Time is so very short. It seems that hardly anyone on this forum recognizes the lateness of time. We are on the threshold of Jesus next coming.

    The world is now in the “time of trouble”. Some of us have not been directly hit by it yet. But look around the world and see the signs. In Europe there are “Sunday Laws”. In much of the world, there is starvation and decimation of populations by disease. We are seeing more frequent calamities and they are increasing in severity.

    NOW is the time to seal our relationship with HIM. Witness of this to everyone you can. Help them find a relationship with the Holy Spirit and He will lead them to the truth. Pray, Pray, and Pray.

    I wish you a blessed Sabbath day.




    0
    View Comment
    • @Charles:

      It is true that this is not the place to see an argument “won”. It is merely the place to find a good list of the details behind each side of the argument and then make up one’s own mind on the subject.

      in Christ,

      Bob




      0
      View Comment
  26. From this weeks SS lesson – (Sunday)

    “…if you believe the world began by chance, you most likely believe it will end that way, as well. This view doesn’t really leave much hope for those in between such a beginning and such and end, does it?”

    I love the song –
    “We have this hope that burns within our hearts…”




    0
    View Comment
    • @Charles:

      The author had a good focus on the damage done to Christianity if one tries to marry it to blind-faith evolutionism.

      Interestingly – Darwin, Dawkins, Provine and Meyers all appear to agree on that point as well.

      in Christ,

      Bob




      0
      View Comment
  27. For a moment, Christina sounded like a sincere, loving Christian who was concerned about ET’s approach to solving problems. Then she went and undid her “loving” persona. Why, if she thought that ET’s approach was a disgrace to her church, would she go and show it to a nonSDA? Why would she solicit the opinion of someone who I would think she would be hoping to influence to accept the SDA truths that she claims to love so much? It doesn’t compute.

    Sean and company, I encourage you to keep on in your role of “watchmen on the wall.” We need to know in what direction to guide our children, and if certain places promote anti-SDA beliefs, I want to know in order to avoid sending my children to those places. I’ve already lost one child to evolution theory, and would hate to lose any more through ignorance of what is going on in our schools.

    Thanks for sounding the alarm.




    0
    View Comment
  28. BobRyan: “Ban them from online forums”?Is it your claim that SDA evolutionist professors teaching evolutionism in our schools are being banned from this forum?Is it possible that this is a valid charge to be made against EducateTruth?I have seen them invited to participate – but have not seen them banned.in Christ,Bob

    I agree Bob. I would like Sean and Shane to personally INVITE the professors to come online to discuss their viewpoint, in a public forum, for all to comment on and reply to.
    I would also like the leadership at La Sierra, La Sierra Board, the SECC, SCC,and the Pacific Union Conference to be invited to participate as well.




    0
    View Comment
  29. Sean and company, I encourage you to keep on in your role of “watchmen on the wall.” We need to know in what direction to guide our children, and if certain places promote anti-SDA beliefs, I want to know in order to avoid sending my children to those places.I’ve already lost one child to evolution theory, and would hate to lose any more through ignorance of what is going on in our schools.

    Thanks for sounding the alarm.

    I agree completely. When our leaders do not do their job as “Watchmen” we need others, like Shane and Sean to step up. If our leaders had been doing their job, none of this would have been necessary.




    0
    View Comment
  30. 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
  31. 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
  32. 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
  33. 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
  34. 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
  35. 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
  36. 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
  37. 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
  38. 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
  39. 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
  40. @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
  41. 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
  42. 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
  43. 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
  44. Sean&#032Pitman: 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&#032Pham: 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
  45. 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
  46. 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
  47. 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
  48. 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
  49. 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
  50. @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
  51. 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
  52. 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
  53. Bill&#032Sorensen: 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
  54. 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
  55. 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
  56. 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
  57. 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
    • @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
  58. 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
  59. 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
  60. 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
  61. 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
  62. 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
  63. 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
  64. 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
  65. 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
  66. 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
  67. 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
  68. 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
  69. 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
  70. 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
  71. 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
  72. 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
  73. 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
  74. 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
  75. 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
  76. “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
  77. 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
  78. ” 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
  79. 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
  80. 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
  81. 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
  82. @ 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
  83. John&#032J&#046: 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. 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
  85. @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
  86. 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
  87. 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
  88. “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
  89. @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
  90. &#060a&#032class&#061&#034bibly&#095reference&#034&#032rel&#061&#034Revelation&#032&#049&#052&#058&#049&#050&#034&#032title&#061&#034Read&#032Revelation&#032&#049&#052&#058&#049&#050&#034&#032href&#061&#034http&#058&#047&#047bib&#046ly&#047Re&#049&#052&#046&#049&#050&#034&#062Rev&#032&#049&#052&#058&#049&#050&#060&#047a&#062: 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:

      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
    • @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

Comments are closed.