Video show LSU undermining church doctrine

These videos were anonymously sent to Educate Truth. In the interest of transparency, we are posting them here for you to review and critique.

Keep in mind the president of La Sierra University was made aware of the contents of these classes in Nov. 2009. Compare the statements from these videos with those made in LSU’s advertisement in the Pacific Union Recorder.

UPDATE: Warren C. Trenchard requested that his lecture be removed from Educate Truth. He told Educate Truth that if his lecture was not taken down he would take whatever action necessary to make sure it was.  He claimed that it was unethical and illegal to have this video posted without his express permission – permission he was not willing to grant to Educate Truth or even to the one(s) who produced the video.  He did not provide additional reasons for his request.

In this video, Dr. Webster says that a literal interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2 is “not particularly helpful,” and suggests that higher critical methods of interpretation may be helpful.

The following is a short 3 minute expert from the lecture showing Dr. John Webster explaining how the Genesis account shouldn’t be taken too literally.

.

Later on, during this same lecture, Dr. Warren Harvey Johns of Loma Linda University, concludes his final thoughts regarding Genesis along the lines of “temple theology” where the creation week described in the Bible is simply a culminating or inaugural week celebrating the vast periods of creation that came before (similar to a graduation ceremony).

Please note that the ardent young-life creationist Warren Leroy Johns, though having a similar name,  is very much opposed to the views of Warren H. Johns as presented in this video clip…

[The rest of the video of these two lectures has been pulled until it can be properly edited to meet the requirements of Fair Use Law.]

Syllabus by louiebishop64

Please follow and like us:
6
273
37

229 thoughts on “Video show LSU undermining church doctrine

  1. I support the intent of this website. Employing the copyright law to coverup Evolution teachings which is against the reason why Adventist educational institution are established is morally wrong and an obstruction of evidence. Copyright law is usually applied against monetary damage, unjust enrichment and other punitive damages. The people who volunteer on this website, I assume are not being paid or they do not solicits funds.

    We need proofs if there is concern. What this website has offered so far is to protect the eternal salvation of our students and probably provide commercial ads and popularity to the Darwinian professors. These professors could easily find job elsewhere.

    May your tribe increase, Sean and the Student who was disciplined for daring to challenge the higher education academic freedom.(in biblical term “deception”). Academic deception.

    With much prayer, Lito Guines

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  2. Dr Webster argues against the Historical grammatical method that the Adventist Church uses – in his opening comments on the 4 methods.He then tells us that the “Figurative” or the “Realistic” (What would an anthropologist say) methods are far more helpful than the one the Adventist Church uses to define its doctrines.In fact his “realistic” lable would have been more accurately labeled “humanism101″ since he describes it as nothing more than “what would an anthropologist say”. Not sure why he called it “Realistic”.in Christ,Bob  

    You’re correct, Bob, although I would use the term “Secular Humanism 101.” This is what is being taught at LSU.

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  3. @Jim: The problem about claiming that tuition was paid for the material is problematic also: The professors who, if the charge is true, are teaching contrary to Adventist doctrine are stealing money from an institution they do not support by teaching what supporting teachings they are not supposed to support.

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  4. @Jim: Those who get caught doing wrong always try to cloud the issue. The issue is not permission to post the lectures, it is what will sacrificing tithe paying members do when they see professors at our schools to teaching Biblical and scientific errors? And as a tithe paying church member you better be teaching our fundamental beliefs or go work somewhere else. This is not judgmental it is practical. Oh and by the way I think all of the lectures ought to be publicly available to the stake holders that are funding them. Our schools are in serious trouble and need to reform or the storm that is coming will make Battle Creek look like a camp fire.

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  5. Pingback: Educate Truth - Evolution vs Creation at La Sierra University

  6. The argument against posting portions of class lectures because it is “stealing,” and students paid good money to attend the classes is just plain silly. Students get academic credit, and that’s what they really paid for, because all the information is available elsewhere for free.

    Furthermore, most classes may be “audited” for a nominal fee, without receiving credit.

    The issue is more one of “fair use,” as defined by copyright law. The brief videos above appear to fit the criteria.

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  7. @Bill Garber:

    Don’t be patronizing. Babies smile when they pass gas; it’s no sign of wisdom. With the passing of time, some characters only worsen. You will indeed see where all this leads, with deepest regret, unless you embrace God’s foreknowledge and the teachings (not just your favorite) of his prophet. He who sits in judgment of God’s Word, that Word shall judge him the same.

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  8. @Shane Hilde:

    Unethical? Look who’s talking! Turn the tables, will you? It is the PROFESSOR who has breached trust.

    “Therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops” Luke 12:3

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  9. @Jim:

    Shane’s a HERO; not a hypocrite.

    (I’ll bet that’s your favorite, oft quoted Bible text.)

    I suppose you think Ellen White plagiarized, too?

    Is that the best you can do–threaten a law suit? Then I guess the REAL issue stands uncontroverted: Professors teaching heresy. [edit]

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  10. @Stephen Vicaro:

    You believe in creation. What kind? A literal, 6-day creation? With Lazarus and many healings, did Jesus impart life instantly by His Word, or did it require a long time to take effect? …same power at work in the beginning. When He comes in glory, will your corrupted body be changed in the twinkling of an eye, resurrected with a shout, or left to evolve for, say, a thousand years?

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  11. After watching the videos above of Biol 111A. I have come to othe same conclusion that I came to at the beginning of this debate: It is better to send my child to UCR where they will learn evolution from atheistic evolutionists than to hear this drabble from Adventist professors that parce everything in the Bible to harmonize to their current scientific theory.

    At least then I can reasonably explain that the theory of evolution is the off-spring of atheistic thinking and not the contrived massaging of the Holy Word. It is much more difficult to explain why these men parce the words of Genesis 1 and believe in evolution than it is the average UCR professor.

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  12. Roger, You’re absolutely right. Why spend tens of thousands of dollars to attend a pseudo-SDA university when you can get the same humanistic philosophies a few miles down the road, for thousand LESS.

    The profs at UCR and other secular universities will also not try to “reinterpret” the bible in their classes to rationalize their views.

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  13. It is better to send my child to UCR where they will learn evolution from atheistic evolutionists than to hear this drabble from Adventist professors that parce everything in the Bible to harmonize to their current scientific theory.

    The profs at UCR and other secular universities will also not try to “reinterpret” the bible in their classes to rationalize their views.

    I can’t speak to UCR, but I took a world literature course from a community college. We were required to read the first two chapters of genesis, and then we listened to a blistering criticism of those chapters. The professor’s voice dripped with mockery and contempt. I could see anger on the faces of some of my classmates, none of whom I knew personally, but there was no point in challenging the views of this know-it-all. It really opened my eyes to critically reevaluate my beliefs, and I had no one at the college to turn to. No one.

    At this point in my college career, I have taken a lot of classes at a community college, even more at a major state university, and a good number at several Adventist colleges including La Sierra. Apart from this nasty literature professor, I heard no spiritual talk whatsoever at public universities. I occasionally heard biology faculty speak among themselves about creationists, and they used language that can’t be repeated here. These faculty were nice to me personally, but there’s no question how they felt about my beliefs. I mustered the courage to share my beliefs and they politely listened, but I could tell from their expressions they thought I was an idiot to believe such things. When I pointed out some objectionable material in a geology course that I took, this professor countered me firmly and effectively and made me regret voicing my alternative views. I didn’t have fellow Christians to hang out with or date while at these secular institutions. Yes, they saved me a lot of money, but I felt alone with God much of the time while my academy friends were at Adventist colleges. Many of my secular friends just wanted to party, which was a scene I wanted no part of.

    At Adventist colleges, including La Sierra, there was a very warm and supportive Christian atmosphere. Many classes began with prayer. I didn’t hear any teaching of evolution as fact, not even in the few biology classes I took at La Sierra. Most of the students were very sincere Christians who lived their faith and for whom issues of origins were the furthest thing from their mind (and they took no classes in which they could have been “lead astray”). I developed wonderful friendships and dated some terrific Adventists who would have made a fine spouse had I chosen to go that direction. I went to church with my friends and could talk about deep religious issues much more pertinent than six days and 6,000 years. No one in my group of friends though much of anything about six days and 6,000 years, except that some of these are now quite angry about the treatment of La Sierra by many of you (word gets around).

    I don’t understand why anyone would call for the closure of an Adventist college or even to suggest that students would be better off going to a secular school. There are many individuals like me who greatly valued their experiences at Adventist colleges. Most students never take a course where they are confronted with issues of origins. Origins is not the holy grail of Christianity and should not be for Adventism. Some of you seek to destroy the many positive experiences of thousands of young Adventists who are completely unaffected by the evolution-creation debate. I was impressed by what Dr. Osborn had to say. Recent studies suggest that relationships, not doctrines, are most likely to help retain young people in the church. I totally believe that. Rather than forcing faculty to sign statements of doctrinal belief, perhaps a better approach would be to screen faculty who understand how to relate to students and encourage their faith building. I took classes from quite a few such faculty.

    I don’t understand the fixation on this one issue and the hatred toward an entire school based on the unfortunate actions of a very few individuals. Thank you for reading this with an open mind.

    In His arms,

    GD

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  14. So, no big deal right? Since most are not affected nothing needs to be done for those that are?

    I didn’t say either, Sean. I respectfully pointed out that it was unnecessarily cruel, in my humble opinion, to shut down a university (as some have argued), ship it to Europe (as one individual suggested), or tell parents to send their children elsewhere when so many students have no exposure to the lies and theft that you have diligently brought to our attention and receive blessings from an Adventist college that are very difficult to get from a secular college.

    Why is it that I can’t say even one acceptable thing here? No one should object to anything I’ve written in the past few posts above this one. Can’t you simply say, “Thank you Geanna for sharing your experiences and views. You raise some valid points.”

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  15. So, no big deal right?Since most are not affected nothing needs to be done for those that are?
    Sean Pitman
    http://www.DetectingDesign.com  

    Exactly Sean. You are probably aware that this is an extremely common argument, “Not everyone is affected, harmed, doing this, etc.” The idea that nothing should be done until “everyone” is affected or whatever is totally ridiculous! Simply a way to avoid doing anything at all.

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  16. Sean,

    Thank you for your concerns about the education of Adventist young people and for trying to find solutions to save them from losing their faith. We need them and they need us.

    Thank you for attempting to share with Adventists your understanding of the overwhelming evidence that supports our belief in God, the Bible, Genesis, 6 days, 6,000 years, the spirit of prophecy, the nonexistance of the flying spaghetti monster, and the like. It’s refreshing to know that faith is not enough.

    Thank you for bringing the importance of “transparency” and “on the church’s dime” to our attention. Your concepts are like manna to the faithful.

    Thank you for pointing out individuals and institutions by name, and making clear to us how they continue to undermine the fundamental values and beliefs of our church and how our administrators have utterly failed to correct them. They must surely be a part of the much-anticipated omega apostasy.

    Thank you for taking so much time to correct those of us who disagree with you. Perhaps there is hope for us after all.

    Thank you for adhering so vigorously to what you believe to be God’s will for your life. We admire your fidelity to your stated positions and family and spiritual values.

    Thank you for defending the faith of those who do not understand or agree with your views but still believe in many of the same spiritual truths that you do. We can only hope that they too can find their way to the kingdom of God.

    Thank you for being so patient and respectful toward those who hold to different views than you do. Your example will perhaps inspire these individuals in ways that only God can understand.

    May God bless you abundantly.

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  17. Geanna, Your idea that because there may be some “good things” going on at LSU, we should not continue to press for correction of what many consider to be “bad things” is not logical.

    Should we wait until LSU is totally “bad” until we correct something? I certainly hope not!

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  18. @ Geanna (I’m belatedly responding to a statement on May 16, since the principle is still relevant)

    There was once division and rancor among the the inhabitants of heaven. A leader stirred up a spirit of divisivness. Eventually, God’s body of believers was rent apart.

    This is written to demonstrate that there should be no division among God’s people because a divided house will fall and that pleases Satan.

    The corollary, judging by other statements by Deanna, would presumably be that God should have acceded to Satan’s requests so that the angelic host would not be “rent apart.”

    Is this what you mean, Geanna?

    If not, how is your illustration of the war in heaven applicable to the current situation, in your view? (I don’t deny that it’s applicable, but your manner of referencing doesn’t seem to fit the context.)

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  19. @Inge Anderson:

    I think Geanna considers Shane and I to be the divisive ones. She doesn’t seem to consider that perhaps the actions of LSU are divisive. Several LSU professors in both science and religion departments have been in direct long-standing and open rebellion against the stated goals and ideals of the SDA Church. Despite the concerted efforts of many to privately address and turn the course of LSU, there has been strong resistence and even outright denials of the obvious truth of the situation. Yet, Geanna pins the blame for division, not on LSU, but on those who are striving for increased transparency from our schools and to correct the fundamental division that is already there and has been tearing the Church apart for decades…

    I’m sorry Geanna, but if you really value the experience you have had in SDA schools, as compared to your public school education, you should be supporting us on this issue – not attacking us for producing increased transparency here. After all, without some sort of resistance to what is taking place in schools of ours like LSU, there would be no school for you to attend that would be significantly better than the secular schools you attended where professors were obviously scornful of your “ludicrous” beliefs in the literal Genesis narrative – to include a literal creation week.

    This very same thing has long been taking place at LSU, especially in the upper division science classes. For decades now LSU science professors have openly scoffed at the literal SDA interpretation of the Genesis account – publicly discounting such a nonsense position as equivalent to believing in something like a “flat Earth”…

    And you’re attacking us for our efforts to maintain what you admittedly value so much?!

    I believe your focus and passion are misplaced…

    Sean Pitman
    http://www.DetectingDesign.com

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  20. I don’t think there is anything any of you truly wish to hear from me. It doesn’t matter how nice or agreeable I am, everything gets interpreted from an extreme point of view that I am seldom able to anticipate. If I have misplaced anything, it has been my time spent here. I agree on many issues about the message, but I don’t share the personal vendetta and punitive approach that others articulate here.

    I wrote a very nice, very sincere reply to Sean, thanking him for the many positive things he does for the church. There was no anger or sarcasm in the message. I don’t know why it has not been approved for posting yet, but he is welcome to treat and interpret the message as he wishes. I’ve made my peace and I am finished for good.

    Good-bye

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  21. @Geanna Dane:

    I wrote a very nice, very sincere reply to Sean, thanking him for the many positive things he does for the church. There was no anger or sarcasm in the message.

    You really don’t see how anyone who has read many of your posts would reasonably interpret much of your reply here (@Geanna Dane) as being the least bit sarcastic?

    Anyway, all the best to you. Again, my father remembers you and your family fondly from your time at BMA and wishes you well. I think he even baptized you if I am remembering correctly?

    I just want to say before you go that, if nothing else, you certainly got people thinking and talking on this forum. ; )

    Sean

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  22. @Geanna Dane:

    I don’t think there is anything any of you truly wish to hear from me.

    Actually, Geanna, I believe you’ve been good for this blog. It gets boring when everyone is in total agreement. In a discussion, mind sharpens mind, and, if we are open to it, we can clarify our own thinking in the process.

    You’ve asked some good questions and brought up some valid points. Please don’t take it personally when we don’t just swallow them whole. 😉

    As for your note to Sean – I read it first without seeing your name, and thought that someone was offering high praise, not altogether undeserved. And then I saw your name at the top and figured that it could be read very differently too.

    You’ve used sarcasm in the past, so it’s really hard to know when you appear to say something out of character with past statements and actually mean it.

    We’ve grown rather fond of you here and will really miss you if you leave…

    Heaps of blessings,
    Inge

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  23. BobRyan said:

    On the other hand – the evidence of a pro-evolution scorched-bible policy in both the religion and biology departments at LSU is pretty hard to ignore as we saw here.http://www.educatetruth.com/la-sierra-evidence/lsu-cant-deny-the-facts/comment-page-1/#comment-16275

    Thus pointing to the problem that LSU professors themselves admit to –

    So this places biology and religion majors at LSU at “highest risk”.

    It places other students “at risk” only as they are required to take courses in those departments as “electives” and then only to the extent that professors in those departments feel inclined to “indoctrinate for evolutionism” even in the 101 and 201 level general coursework. So who knows how often that might be?

    @Geanna Dane:

    On the other hand – many LSU students know nothing about this “evidence” and are completely unaffected by it. Geanna Dane(Quote)

    True – many of the art, history, business, chemistry, math, education majors etc could be oblivious to what is being taught in the biology and religion departments if they do their best to avoid those departments outside of electives, do not talk to other students who are neck-deep into those departments and are not overly influenced by the much more prevalent “I am not an evolutionist but evolutionism is no big deal after all we teach that it is fact here, nobody should care if it is promoted by our universities or not” crowd.

    Ellen White has an interesting comment on the general idea.

    What astonishing deception and fearful blindness had, like a dark cloud, covered Israel! This blindness and apostasy had not closed about them suddenly; it had come upon them gradually as they had not heeded the word of reproof and warning which the Lord had sent to them because of their pride and their sins. And now, in this fearful crisis, in the presence of the idolatrous priests and the apostate king, they remained neutral. 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 280.3}

    in Christ,

    Bob

      (Quote)

    View Comment
  24. Thus if we had a religion department teaching the immortality of the soul, praying to the dead, infant baptism and straight Calvinist arbitrary selection — one “could” argue that since only the upper division classes included this information ‘it is no big deal’.

    If LSU biology science departments entered into religious areas other than origins and “belief” in evolutionism, embracing the way that Tesla combined spiritualism with his “science” for example — but confined that apostasy to just upper division courses – we “could argue” that most studenst at LSU would not be affected by it directly so ‘take no action’.

    But if administrators really took such a hands-off no-concern attitude towards their job – then soon we would have an LSU goal of “being the best public university that Adventist tuition, tithe and offering dollars can buy” and nothing more.

    in Christ,

    Bob

      (Quote)

    View Comment

Leave a Reply