Where is this statement in the video You can find it …

Comment on Video show LSU undermining church doctrine by Shane Hilde.

Where is this statement in the video

You can find it at 00:42:14.

what exactly does the “the first” refer to?

He’s referring to the different schools of interpretation.

If he “attacked the authority of the Bible,” then please tell me why he stated that the Adventist church could meet every threat that evolution poses to five fundamental Adventist interpretations of scripture…

He proposes that the conflicts that Adventists object to if evolution is true can “BE MET AND THERE ARE VARIOUS OPTIONS FOR US TO DEAL WITH EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESES APPARENT THREATS.”

One of his options is changing how we look at Genesis. It’s not a historical record of what happened. He then offers the temple theology up as an example. Obviously the church’s current understanding of Genesis can’t meld the theory of evolution with Scripture, so it’s not very useful.

Shane Hilde Also Commented

Video show LSU undermining church doctrine

I just don’t think it is ethical to post videos of a professor’s lecture without the professor’s consent.

I have difficulty understanding how any of the professors could be ignorant of the fact that they were being filmed by the university media department. It’s possible though they didn’t see the camera, and it’s possible the university did not obtain their permission. But here we are, they were filmed and the university media department willingly relinquished copies to a number of people who requested them.

I disagree that the way the videos are currently posted is unethical. This class is at the center of a huge controversy, how could they not expect what they would say would eventually get out and be critiqued.


Video show LSU undermining church doctrine
@Geanna Dane: I didn’t say Webster was yelling. Why would you ask that? Is it because everything in the quotations is caps? Ya, I don’t like the all caps, but it takes too long to change. It’s a cut and paste job from the transcript of the video.


Video show LSU undermining church doctrine
@Geanna Dane:

I wish you would pay more attention to the content of the video.

I agree that we should use “all methods of interpretation consistent with what Scripture says of itself.” There might be some aspects of mythological, figurative, and realistic that can that are consistent with what Scripture says about itself. I’m just going to address figurative and realistic since Professor Kent already pointed out that neither Webster or the SDA Church adhere to the mythological method.

Here are the points of contention that I have with figurative and realistic:

During his presentation, Webster puts up a slide of the four methods along with their qualities. Here is what was under figurative:

” GENESIS TO BE TAKEN AS RELIGIOUS ‘CLASSIC’, POETRY, NARRATIVE, INSIGHTFUL STORY.”

The Seventh-day Adventist Church has always understood Genesis 1-11 to be depicting literal events. The Genesis account of creation is not just a figurative story.

Here is what was under realistic:

“GENESIS TO BE TAKEN A THE SOPHISTICATED THEOLOGY/PHILOSOPHY/COSMOLOGY/WORLDVIEW/OR EVEN ‘PROTO-SCIENCE’ OF THE ANCIENT ISRAELITES, RESULTING FROM THEIR ENCOUNTER/REJECTION/REVISION OF THE GREAT COSMOLOGIES OF THEIR TIME (PARTICULARLY THOSE OF THE BABYLONIAN AND EGYPIAN EMPIRES), IN LIGHT OF THEIR OWN UNDERSTANDING OF GOD, FORMULATED IN RESPONSE TO THEIR CONVICTION OF THE ACTUALITY OF THE SELF-REVELATON OF GOD IN HISTORICAL TIME AND SPACE.”

These two aspects of realistic and figurative both undermine the Seventh-day Adventist’s understanding of Genesis and our official position on creation and the Word of God. The philosophical and theological presuppositions of both of these methods are in opposition to FB #1 and FB#6.

Here is what Webster says about these two methods:

“THE FINAL TWO, THAT I THINK MAY BE HELPFUL, IS WHAT I WOULD CALL A FIGURATIVE READINGS, USING LITERARY-CRITICAL METHODS.

WHERE WE TRY TO SEE THE BIBLICAL TEXTS IN THE CONTEXTS OF OTHER PARTS OF SCRIPTURE.

AND WHAT’S GOING TO COME NEXT IS GOING TO BE ONE EXAMPLE, I THINK, OF THIS KIND OF WAY OF READING OF SCRIPTURE.

AND IT’S MUCH MORE USEFUL AND FRUITFUL.

AND UH IT SUGGEST TO US THAT UH THE OPENING CHAPTERS OF GENESIS MIGHT NOT REALLY BE ABOUT HOW THE WORLD CAME INTO BEING. BUT MIGHT BE ABOUT HOW WE UNDERSTAND THE WORLD AS GOD’S DWELLING PLACE AS THE TEMPLE OF GOD.”

The two methods that clearly undermine our understanding of Genesis 1 and 2 are “helpful,” according to Webster. He explains that the temple theology is “one example” of how to read the Scriptures. Mind you he didn’t even promote the church’s position or advocate our interpretation. None of the professors did. He then suggests doubt in our interpretation by suggesting that the “opening chapters of Genesis might not really be about how the world came into being.”

Note also that using capital letters in your posts is equivalent to yelling – not usually needed to make your point.


Recent Comments by Shane Hilde

Elder Graham: “Why I Support La Sierra University”
@MLB: The article was written before Ted Wilson was elected. Despite personally knowing his views on creation from conversations with him, I’m disappointed that he’s taken this long to mention them. Perhaps he has published them else where and I am unaware.

I like what he says here:

As constituents of this union, you deserve accurate information.

That’s exactly one of the reasons Educate Truth exists, because LSU is being dishonest about their biology department.

And they are committed to making whatever adjustments might be necessary to provide the best Seventh-day Adventist Christian education possible.

Really? How can he say that when LSU has done absolutely nothing to address what is happening in the biology classroom? Even their attempt with the biology seminar class was a utter failure.

If his his two goals are all we are to expect then the board will have accomplished virtually nothing. There should be more than respect and support for the biblical creation account. It should be taught and promoted.

If anything happens at LSU to address the situation, it would not surprise me if it was because of out side intervention. The Board isn’t addressing anything.


La Sierra University Continues Deceptive Spin Tactics

Maybe the solution is for two streams of thought to be taught: conventional biology and creation science. Allow the existing professors to teach evolution and bring in creation scientists to teach the latter. That way there is no need to fire anybody or sanction LSU.

What do you think of that idea.?

Sean may give his own answer but I would like to jump and share what I think are some key points in regard to your suggestion.

We’re not dealing with preferences, flavors, likes, or dislikes. The SDA Church believes that what the Bible says is the truth. So when when LSU biology professors “only discuss” (new word from LSU) the theory of evolution as the truth, then we have a big problem. Teaching both world views is not the answer, because it is allowing plurality on a foundation issue. If you don’t stand for anything, you stand for nothing and that’s essentially was plurality boils down to.

The theory of evolution should be taught, but not as the truth. We don’t believe it’s the truth so why would we pay professors to teach it as such.

If the professors do not want to be supportive of the Church in this particular issue by promoting the biblical creation account, then there really isn’t any other alternative, but to fire them or ask them to resign.


Andrews University statement on creation
First of all, we’re not asking that the theory evolution not be taught. You have been misinformed on this point. The problem is how it is presented. They teach it as the truth. This is misrepresenting the church’s postion and contradictory to the Bible.

This statement from the LSU biology department is nothing but misleading and bordering being an outright lie. It boggles my mind how they can claim not to promote the theory of evolution when it’s the only world view that is presented as truth. Absolutely no evidence has been found or presented by LSU that demonstrates that the church’s position is favorably promoted, if at all, in the biology courses taught. Yes, the theory of evolution is discussed, but many times as if it were true. This has been documented for over a year. When the professors believe the theory of evolution is truth and exclude promotion of the biblical world view as being true, then they are in fact promoting the theory of evolution. Unless they can show that they are promoting a recent, literal six-day creation, they are promoting the theory of evolution when they exclude other world views as being “lunatic” like one professor labeled those who believe in the biblical creation.

Keep in mind that many of the biology faculty personally believe in long ages of life on earth and common ancestry. This is not a secret. They also do not believe that Genesis 1 & 2 depicts literal events that occurred in the recent past. This is why we have never seen statements from the department saying we believe and support the church’s position in a recent, literal six-day creation. All they can say is that they believe God the Creator is the source of all life.

This is nothing more than a continuation of LSU’s deceptive advertising practices.


Dr. Geraty clarifies his “Challenge” to literal 6-day creationism
This statement from the LSU biology department is nothing but misleading and bordering being an outright lie. It boggles my mind how they can claim not to promote the theory of evolution when it’s the only world view that is presented as truth. Absolutely no evidence has been found or presented by LSU that demonstrates that the church’s position is favorably promoted, if at all, in the biology courses taught. Yes, the theory of evolution is discussed, but many times as if it were true. This has been documented for over a year. When the professors believe the theory of evolution is truth and exclude promotion of the biblical world view as being true, then they are in fact promoting the theory of evolution. Unless they can show that they are promoting a recent, literal six-day creation, they are promoting the theory of evolution when they exclude other world views as being “lunatic” like one professor labeled those who believe in the biblical creation.

Keep in mind that many of the biology faculty personally believe in long ages of life on earth and common ancestry. This is not a secret. They also do not believe that Genesis 1 & 2 depicts literal events that occurred in the recent past. This is why we have never seen statements from the department saying we believe and support the church’s position in a recent, literal six-day creation. All they can say is that they believe God the Creator is the source of all life.

This is nothing more than a continuation of LSU’s deceptive advertising practices.


Mrs. White: “Don’t send your children to…”
@Adventist in High School: You’re missing the point. The Seventh-day Adventist Church believes that God created the heaven and earth in six days, within the recent past (about 6,000 years). They believe Genesis gives an accurate depiction of this event. So the problem isn’t that our youth are merely being presented with a false theory, it’s that they’re being presented the theory as if it were truth. I would also add that the biblical/church position is not promoted at all, if it’s even mentioned at all.

These professors are taking our money and misrepresenting our faith to hundreds, thousands of students. When an employee finds that he can no longer uphold the beliefs of the institution and teach them properly, he should consider teaching for an institution that is more conducive with his belief system or be fired.