Comment on UNST/UHNR 404B Syllabus (LSU) by Frank L..
Bob, your comments are too often judgmental, rude, ignorant, and slanderous. Ben Clausen of GRI, Kevin Nick of LLU, and Paul Bucheim of LLU all accept the Biblical account on origins; I know these people personally and can vouch for that. How instructive to the unbiased observer your term “unbalanced” is and should be applied.
Recent Comments by Frank L.
I’m but one of many Loma Linda University scientists, so I speak only for myself and not for others. As you probably recognize, most of us Adventist scientists refuse to engage this fray for the reasons you, Professor Kent, pauluc, and others have pointed out. The dialogue at this site lacks professionalism and is filled with frequent misunderstanding and animosity.
As you are learning, there is little to nothing you can say to convince others here that their understanding of “evolution” (simply put, biological change) is weak or lacking. Moreover, the tolerance of many visitors here to the word and the many concepts associated with it will never change. Open-mindedness is as absent here as tolerance and basic levels of courtesy.
In spite of this dilemma, the Adventist church remains the home of many faithful believers who encounter what matters most–a close relationship with our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. Within the church you will find heartwarming, encouraging, condescension-free fellowship if you look for it.
Private: BIOL 111: Genomes and their Evolution
Am I the only one who noticed the copyright at the bottom of Dr. Greer’s slides? These appear to be standard slides made for a textbook, which most textbook publishers now provide gratis to teachers. Many teachers use these slides, as they are a great complement to the text and make lectures much easier to prepare.
I guess copyrights are no longer to be respected in the internet age, even by Christians.
If I were teaching the class, I would certainly use the textbook slides, but I would also make verbal statements regarding points where students should be encouraged to disagree with textbook material.
Letter to Press Enterprise Editor
Shane – I was correct that Steve Daily had written more, but it was at a different link from what you provided (http://www.pe.com/localnews/inland/stories/PE_News_Local_S_lasierra06.47b3990.html) and was a comment in response to the intial Press-Enterprise story:
“Concerning “Evolution Controversy” at LSU 11-6-09: I find it sad and tragic that La Sierra University has taken a course that has betrayed its own constituents in a manner that is both hypocritical and totally lacking integrity. While the University strongly claims to be an “Adventist Christian” school, receives large sums of money from the Adventist Church, and assures the parents of their students who are sacrificing to pay expensive University tuition that they are getting a good “Adventist education,” LSU deliberately employs faculty who aggressively and overtly undermine and oppose this mission. This has been going on for more than a decade and it is not unique to the discipline of Biology or the subject of evolution. I taught and pastored on the campus for nearly twenty years and was devastated to see how those with a postmodern agenda came into power in the late 1990s and not only made a mockery of Orthodox Adventist teaching, but orthodox Christian teaching as well (See Press Enterprise “La Sierra Students Criticize CORE Classes” May 22, 1999 pp. B-1, B-6). Students were being taught in required freshman classes that Jesus was not God, that God is not a personal Being, that Monotheism is the worst and most dangerous of all religions, and many other views that were a complete betrayal of orthodox Christianity. All of this was done while the University paraded itself in its PR publications as a loyal Adventist school. I am in no way a fan of Adventist fundamentalism, but ironically, La Sierra University has fueled fundamentalism in the church like no other force by its willingness to allow extreme liberals to run the school. They have put other SDA universities at risk and made them vulnerable to unnecessary witchhunts because of their own irresponsible and indefensible course of action. It is my hope and prayer that the board asks some very hard questions on November 12, and demands some much needed changes.”
The letter suggests that your obsession with science teaching is but a small concern. If his claims are correct, your website should be addressing instead the nature of Jesus.