Professor Kent: What did you mean by this statement: “Do you really …

Comment on Why Orthodox Darwinism Demands Atheism by Roger Seheult.

Professor Kent:

What did you mean by this statement:

“Do you really believe that science can verify a supernatural event? ”

I guess if you believe that a supernatural event CAN happen, are you saying that no science can detect this? videotape? audiotape?
What is your definition of “supernatural” Is it anything that happens that we don’t have an explaination for at our current level of understanding in 2010?

Roger Seheult Also Commented

Why Orthodox Darwinism Demands Atheism
Sean Said:

“Those who disagree are welcome to their opinions. However, they are not welcome to expect, much less demand, a paycheck from the SDA Church to promote their opinions on the Church’s dime. Such a position is not a “witch hunt”, as you put it. It is simply a matter of practicality for any viable organization. No organization can long afford to pay those who go about publicly undermining the primary goals and ideals of the organization…”

Exactly. Don’t confuse this with dis-fellowshiping. Come to church all you want. Just don’t speak for an organization that you completely disagree with.

There is no recourse to this line of reasoning because it is so sound. This sort of thing happens in organizations all the time. The only way to criticize it is to hyperbolize it to make it look like we want them out of the church and rid of forever (or something like that such as a witch hunt). If you don’t agree with the church’s fundamental beliefs, do the right thing and step down. Cabinet members or politicians do this all the time – and they are considered noble (not witches).

Why Orthodox Darwinism Demands Atheism
Professor Kent said:

“…its hyperbole like this that gives the impression of a well-organized witch hunt”

“more of the usual character assassination that is so frequent at this website.”

I guess calling us witch hunters falls out of the definition of character assassination.

Bottom line: When leaders in our church directly oppose one of our most important fundamental beliefs of our faith, we have every right to question them on it especially when this belief has not changed in over 100 years and they took jobs in our universities in full knowledge of it. It brings to question their intellectual honesty especially in full light that there are plenty of other jobs in the public and private sector where they would be completely free to persue their beliefs – yet they chose to remain in the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Enough with the “witch hunt” analogy. This isn’t colonial America and the Seventh-day Adventist Church isn’t the only game in town. If you don’t accept, we aren’t going to leave you our in the cold, or starve, or burn you at the stake. We have every right to control the message that our church sends and education that our children receive. If you don’t agree, come to church, sit next to me in the pew, I’ll even wash your feet every 13th Sabbath but don’t expect, however, to be teaching in our Universities.

Recent Comments by Roger Seheult

Faith without Evidence: Are we really a bunch of ‘Flat Earthers’?
There are too many of them. Where do I start.
Mary Schweitzer’s T-rex.

That’s just off the top….
wait another one –
Walter Veith….
wait more….

Faith without Evidence: Are we really a bunch of ‘Flat Earthers’?
Ad hominum attack means that no other better arguments were available at the time of writing. I win.

Southern Adventist University opens Origins Exhibit
@Ervin Taylor:

I literally have not logged on to this website in years. It looks like the same arguments are going back and forth which means that if you haven’t been able to solve them by now, you aren’t going to convence each other of your points. What is really amazing to me and anyone intersted in the topic, however, is the tone of the comments, which usually reveal the maturity of the writer especially if they include absolutes:

“vast majority of scientifically-informed Adventists will thank Dr.Kent ”

“this misnamed web site”

“Dr. Kent has done a masterful job”

These are usually tip-offs to a lot. Also, it makes me wonder that if Sean Pitman is so ill-informed, and he operates on such a mis-leading web site, why does the good Dr. Taylor waste his time coming to this website, reading the material and then commenting on it? In fact I can bet that Dr. Taylor has spent more time on this web site then I have in the last year – and that speaks volumes about what Dr. Taylor really thinks of this website – perhaps the good Dr. Kent as well.

The Metamorphosis of La Sierra University: an eye-witness account
Again, the question is begged: Why would they work so hard to change the university rather than just leave and go where universities already believe the way you do? Dare I say that there lies a larger conspiracy that transcends LSU and that may be going on at your local SDA instituation? Again, why the push over a generation to change a whole university and to denude it of its fundamentals?

Educate Truth’s purpose and goals
Most of the blogs that are critical of this site aren’t interested in what this site is really out to do. They simply want to demonize it ergo Alinsky’s rule of indetify, demonize, and marginalize. Hence their cherry picking from the comments for their own purposes.

Thanks for the recap though.