1. Macroevolutionists believe in a cruel god who does not …

Comment on Perspectives from alleged LSU students by Bob Pannekoek.

1. Macroevolutionists believe in a cruel god who does not care about the suffering that goes on within the framework of the survival of the fittest over millions of years. One has to be gullible to believe in a God who takes millions of years to achieve something and is not able to speak things into existence. By “things” I mean to include such phenomena as physical, mental, moral and spiritual awareness. I regard a god of evolution as lacking in power and not worthy of worship.

2. Professors who shout at students when they are asked straight forward, for example, about the Sabbath not having a solid biblical basis in the light (darkness) of evolution, are no doubt suffering from a feeling of shame for being a Seventh Day Adventist, and from feelings of both inadequacy and insecurity; and as such are driven by false emotion.

3. Having a high academic qualification does neither give one a monopoly on logic nor the right to say that he/she is the only one who can understand and interpret literature and scientific evidence.

4. If certain educated people believe that the Adventist Church is wrong and has always been wrong in her core beliefs, I would like to know why they want to stay with this erring church. Are they hoping to persuade the majority to change ship? Surely, there are churches who would be glad to see the Adventist ship (Church) go under. If the Adventists have unity of belief other churches are in danger of losing their members; Adventist disunity is their only hope for survival!

5. There are other core beliefs are being questioned today: Marriage between a man and a woman only; the substitutionary death of Christ; the personhood of the Holy Spirit; the Investigative Judgement; the 2300 and the 1260 days; and so forth. I would like the University teachers to come out in the open and declare precisely with which pillars of the Adventist faith they disagree.

6. The professors in question are silent about their beliefs in evolution offering no evidence in these posts. I suppose reasons could be given for that. However, the ridiculous claim that the majority of Adventists in the USA believe that the Church is wrong about origins needs to be substantiated before it can be taken seriously.

Recent Comments by Bob Pannekoek

Board requests progress reports from LSU administration
It seems true that the Bible says nothing direct about chromosomes, new species, genetic mutation and so forth. However, can it not be said that after the Flood nature was interfered with by the results of sin?
If God were responsible for natural selection and development, He would be responsible for the suffering of mankind and animals that goes together with this theory: mankind deforms and kills mankind and animals eat and kill each other. The fittest survive. Isn’t a God who needs evolution a person who lacks in power: not much wiser and no more powerful than we are? Is a God who uses experimentation and suffering to develop nature, hence, not knowing where things are going, worthy of worship? Is God Love or is He not?

Board requests progress reports from LSU administration
@BobRyan: Hi Bob, I can’t agree more! People who do not want to see intelligent design won’t see it. It takes humility. Romans 1 is attacked on several fronts and those who refuse to read it as it reads have an inadequate view of the majesty of God: see Rom 1:22,23 “Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things.” (ESV)
The popular view today is to go by what man imagines: he/she tries to put God in a box and define Him. A little humility would not go astray but put one on the right path which is what God says! For those interested have a look at verses 25 and 26. Clearly, theistic evolutionists are serving the creature rather than the Creator. They are so caught up in their fantasies that it is impossible for them to see what nature indicates. And so very vocal minorities who want to try and say that God does not mean what He says arise. They do not want to distinguish between the natural and the unnatural: there are none so blind as…….

Board requests progress reports from LSU administration
@Harold Peters:
Sorry! I suppose the term “rambling on” was not very kind and I should have said no more than that in my opinion deviation from the purpose of this website takes the pressure off those professors who are deliberately teaching students a tunnel-vision-view as regards the way the world came into existence.
In relation to tithing my family operates the same as yours and we can testify to always being blessed abundantly, without fail.

Board requests progress reports from LSU administration
The strategy to digress is a good way to kill the topic which I thought had to do with ‘science’ professors teaching evolution at LSU. Well done Erv!
What a pity for those and their consorts who are rambling on about tithe paying and female pastors that they are almost totally irrelevant.
In my view it is always best to concentrate on one issue at the time. Once one major problem has been solved others are likely to be resolved also. So why not simply say goodbye to people who are undermining our Church’s teachings? I am sure that other protestant churches will welcome them with open arms as people who in their estimation have finally seen the “truth”! Could money be the problem? Let’s not forget that God owns everything and that the University being sued for unfair dismissal is a non-issue.

Board requests progress reports from LSU administration
As has been said before by certain astute minds ‘teaching evolution only’ reveals a certain weakness.
Any professor whose IQ is hopefully above the average human level should be able to understand that the lack of an alternative theory constitutes a serious weakness. I have taught a little Science to tertiary level students and never found it difficult to teach what I was required to teach. I simply used to say: this is what evolutionists and that is what creationist teach. I feel that our students should know what evolution is all about but more so what creation is all about. Is it really necessary to explain everything?
I have looked at evolution carefully and the more I read about it the more flaws I detect in the theory. The more I study the creation story the more sense it begins to make to me.
So what is the fuss all about? Who are the professors who exclusively teach evolution and exclusively ridicule creation? Are they infiltrators placed in their jobs by the Adversary through other churches? Are they sincere and no more than misguided? Are they directed by pre-conceived notions? Are they afraid of being ridiculed by worldly evolutionists?
To argue that evolution is pure science is adopting a silly position as most of what evolution teaches is based on assumptions and conjecture. If a professor cannot take me to a laboratory and demonstrate evolution several times his opinion is worthless.
I would like to see this forum open up a debate with these professors. I believe they would be defeated in argument without any difficulty. I suppose they would not have the courage to enter this kind of debate as deep down they know that they are undermining the SDA Church’ postion and accept salaries without deserving them.