Comment on The Reptile King by Sean Pitman.
Can someone please tell me how Dr. Grismer was actually hired by LSU?
Dr. Grismer was brought to LSU by Lawrence Geraty, retired president of LSU who also subscribes to theistic evolutionism as the true model of origins:
LSU Science professors hired under Dr. Geraty:
Larry McCloskey: Full professor and biology department chair in 1996
Lee Grismer: Biology faculty member since 1994
http://www.lasierra.edu/departments/biology/faculty.html
In response to questions from concerned individuals as to why he hired theistic evolutionists like Dr. Grismer to teach at LSU Dr. Geraty wrote:
“I know he’s a creationist in terms of origins but believes God has used evolution as one of his processes since.”
In this way, together with his own careful wording and interpretation of FB#6, Dr. Geraty somehow saw himself clear to tell all who called him with questions of concern that, “All LSU professors are creationists and in full support of the Adventist position on origins.” – a true statement in only the most deceptive sense of the term.
It is largely for this reason that the General Conference is now looking to modify the wording of Adventist Fundamental Belief #6 to include the concept of a truly literal creation week. For far too long those like Dr. Geraty have been less than forthright in their use of the current wording of FB#6 – using the current wording as a loophole to allow for the promotion of theistic evolutionism in our schools.
Please also refer to the following article:
Dr. Geraty clarifies his “Challenge†to literal 6-day creationism
Sean Pitman Also Commented
The Reptile King
Hermeneutics vs. Epistemology
The problem with Phil Brantley’s views is that he really doesn’t deal with epistemology – i.e., how he knows that the Bible is really the Word of God to begin with. Until he does that, there really is no rational basis to blindly accept the Bible as the Word of God over and above the claims of any other religious text – like the Qur’an or the Book of Mormon.
Hermeneutics, the science of determining what an author was trying to say, is not the same thing as epistemology – the science of determining that what the author was trying to say is actually true. Hermeneutics and epistemology go hand-in-hand, but they are not the same thing. Brantely consistently confuses these concepts.
In short, one is forced to make critical choices when one is deciding between competing options. I feel that Brantley has chosen the Bible largely because he was born into Christianity rather than because he has spent much time critically thinking about why he believes what he believes or how he is able to know what he thinks he knows.
It is also for this reason, or so it seems to me, that Brantley fails to understand basic scientific methodology and how it can be universally applied. He is inconsistent in his views and applications of the methods of science and philosophy – and therefore of religion as well. He really doesn’t know why he believes anything. He doesn’t understand the methodology or the logical basis for his epistemology in any realm of thought – except to follow the conclusions of those he considers to be authorities in various disciplines without any real personal understanding of his own that he can put into his own words.
As far as Professor Kent, he is simply trying to have his cake and eat it too. He is only consistent in speaking out of both sides of his mouth…
Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com
Anyway, some of us (I am a distant relative of the accused) are more confirmed in the church than ever precisely as a result of not only Dr. Pitman’s attitude, and that of this site, but the facts and evidence he perseveres in presenting.
I really appreciate being part of your family too. Thanks Wes. Hope to see you next week if you’re around…
Sean
You overestimate my influence with cousins, uncles, and aunts! Besides, some of them left, because of what seemed to them the science against the Biblical model of origins, before I was born. It seems kinda hard, therefore, to pin it on my attitude – though some do say I was a pretty ornery baby 😉
Sean
Recent Comments by Sean Pitman
After the Flood
Thank you Ariel. Hope you are doing well these days. Miss seeing you down at Loma Linda. Hope you had a Great Thanksgiving!
The Flood
Thank you Colin. Just trying to save lives any way I can. Not everything that the government does or leaders do is “evil” BTW…
The Flood
Only someone who knows the future can make such decisions without being a monster…
Pacific Union College Encouraging Homosexual Marriage?
Where did I “gloss over it”?
Review of “The Naked Emperor” by Pastor Conrad Vine
I fail to see where you have convincingly supported your claim that the GC leadership contributed to the harm of anyone’s personal religious liberties? – given that the GC leadership does not and could not override personal religious liberties in this country, nor substantively change the outcome of those who lost their jobs over various vaccine mandates. That’s just not how it works here in this country. Religious liberties are personally derived. Again, they simply are not based on a corporate or church position, but rely solely upon individual convictions – regardless of what the church may or may not say or do.
Yet, you say, “Who cares if it is written into law”? You should care. Everyone should care. It’s a very important law in this country. The idea that the organized church could have changed vaccine mandates simply isn’t true – particularly given the nature of certain types of jobs dealing with the most vulnerable in society (such as health care workers for example).
Beyond this, the GC Leadership did, in fact, write in support of personal religious convictions on this topic – and there are GC lawyers who have and continue to write personal letters in support of personal religious convictions (even if these personal convictions are at odds with the position of the church on a given topic). Just because the GC leadership also supports the advances of modern medicine doesn’t mean that the GC leadership cannot support individual convictions at the same time. Both are possible. This is not an inconsistency.
