Faith & Science Sabbath School examines LSU’s apology

Ken: Did God intend to make souless animals very close in genetic makeup to ourselves?

The Bible defines a soul as a combination of “dust” and God’s breath of life (Gen. 2:7). When we die, our bodies return to dust and the breath of God returns to Him (Ecc. 12:7). In Ecc. 3:19 it says, “Man’s fate is like that of the animals; the same fate awaits them both: As one dies, so dies the other. All have the same breath; man has no advantage over the animal.” The Bible does not teach humans have spirits that continue to exist after death. Neither do animals. I believe the word “soul” in the Bible always refers to a living person. My point is the Bible does not teach the concept of soulessness.

It appears God used the same building blocks to create animals and humans. The different between us and them is that we were created in the image of God (Gen. 1:26).

Faith & Science Sabbath School examines LSU’s apology
@Professor Kent: Is is possible to fine some evidence for most anything? If I only have some evidence supporting creation, and there is a mountain of evidence in favor of evolutionary processes, then on what basis would I continue to believe in creation?

Professor Kent: they actually exemplify heroically the historical-grammatical hermeneutic of Sola Scriptura–taking God at his word rather than forcing God to pass a test of science.

A key thing to remember though is these men you’re talking about already assume the Bible to contain a historical account of creation and that it is true and reliable. But let’s back up a bit and ask, why do they believe the biblical creation account is true?

There are many people who have not arrived at the conclusion that the Bible is a divinely inspired book. How do you convince them the biblical creation is true? If all you have is some evidence to present against a mountain, how can we expect them to accept our belief?

There’s no need for loaded rhetoric such as “public scorn.” We’re talking about leadership positions within an organization, so there’s really no need to make it appear personal.

There’s absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to employ professors who are faithful to the beliefs of the church. It should be standard practice.

Faith & Science Sabbath School examines LSU’s apology

ken: What happens when science contradicts the existing worldview? Does the worldview then change?

When empirical evidence contradicts our world view, it would seem natural to change our world view based on the evidence. I’m suggesting that this is easier said than done. Does it happen? Yes.

ken: Doesn’t often science change the existing worldview rather than be subject to it? Was Darwin’s theory based on his religious upbringing or his empirical observations of nature? Did he not have go against the worldview he was raised within?

Perhaps I was a little too strong in saying science is always subject to our world view, but my point was that our world view has incredible power over our interpretation of the data. In the end it seems that your world view must be altered before you begin to interpret the data different in many cases.

La Sierra University Hires Another Darwinist
ADvindicate has also published an article about LSU and Raul Diaz that expands on a few details.

http://advindicate.com/?p=2625

A little-known history about Belief 6
@Eddie: The Bible does not specify an age of accountability (to my knowledge), but the Israelites considered the age of 12 to be the turning point. I wouldn’t base a theology off of tradition though. Also, it’s not our place to judge what happens to those who have not been able to make a decision.

Perspectives from alleged LSU students
@Blodgett: Was there a comment you’d like to add?

At La Sierra, Biology Faculty Affirms Importance of Teaching About Creation in Curriculum
@David Read: And perhaps not something Christ would do. I can understand your frustration though. I’ve been on the verge of quitting this whole thing many times. I’ve been guilty of letting that frustration control and influence things I shouldn’t have said.

I have to remind myself to look at the big picture. In the end all those who are not supposed to be in the church will be sifted out. I pray I am not one of them.

Board of Trustees Addresses Curriculum Proposal
I know from talking to a couple of reporters from Press Enterprise and Inside Higher Ed that Randal Wisbey was effective in shutting down communication between any outsiders and the biology faculty. It appears he made himself the only channel of communication between the board and biology faculty.

I emailed Larry Becker about what bylaw the board members broke that was worthy of dismissal, and I have yet to hear a response from him.

I would also note that board members at other universities appear to be free to talk to the faculty.

Another interesting point. He removes three board members for trying to work on the problem and come up with a solution, and then turns around sort of embraces what they’re doing. He can’t publicly condemn it because everyone can see, whether you agree with what they wrote or not, that it’s a significant step for the faculty to be speaking to the church.

Did he forbid the document from being published? No. If you’re really excited about seeing the biology department making advancements in solving the issue, why are you removing the people who are making that happen. He never did anything like that.

What has Wisbey done to address and fix this issue? Nothing. He’s dragged it out, lied about what’s been happening, and told everyone involved to shut up or get in trouble. What on earth is he trying to do?

Who knows, he might even be a part of the underground movement to sever LSU from the church by using WASC as the big hammer. It’s obvious from one former board member, there was interest in using WASC to manipulate the situation.