Geanna Dane. I see nothing wrong with the current …

Comment on Wisbey talks about LSU and what he wants you to know by Roger Seheult.

Geanna Dane. I see nothing wrong with the current tone of the debate. It is intersting to study debates between denominations 100-200 years ago. For instance between protestants and catholics and different protestant churches. This happened all the time. And the funny thing was that no one took the debate personally but understood it as an exchange of ideas. Much like today when two lawyers go to court to battle each other in the worst terms only to go after to a bar and talk like old friends. If you want to exchange ideas in the court of public opinion especially when the stakes are as high as the future of the church you had better expect people with definiet ideas and not take there view points personally. I’ve be called all sorts of things on other web sites – this site is pretty benign (could it be that this is the first site that you have exchanged in???). Go to talk origins or others for a more pernicious discussion.

To qoute from a Catholic website regarding an old article discussed therin:
“Keep in mind that in 1893, political correctness had not been invented yet. Some readers may whince at the tone of the article. It would do well to note that having principles and the convictions to articulate them was a more admired characteristic in those days,”

I wish we had more of that today.

Roger Seheult Also Commented

Wisbey talks about LSU and what he wants you to know
What about all those vegetarians too Ron, Is unclean a code for something else in the Bible ? I wonder how many of the theistic evolutionists in our chruch are vegetarians and more importantly why? Ellen G. White? Perhaps they would say that science backs them up. Really? Has it always? Will it in the future?

It’s intersting that the health message was correct at a time when the science didn’t agree with it as well. That didn’t stop us as a church from going along. Aren’t we glad that we believed the word on that?


Wisbey talks about LSU and what he wants you to know
I think most people have made up their minds about what’s going on a LSU. The ones that have not probably have not seen nor heard the lectures. This will only be a matter of time. Unfortunetly, as time progresses more and more students will go on to doubt the Inspired Word as a result of the teaching going on in the class called Bio 111A. This class, in my opinion, is more dangerous than any Evolution class I ever took at UCR. It is a class where a non literal reading of the Bible is advanced – where open interpretation is the rule so that difficulties can be explained away. It is more threatening because the only thing more dangerous than a wolf to a herd is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.

This is the precise reason why I would never send my children to such a school. It is one thing to openly attack the standard of my beliefs (Bible)as is done every day in the public school system. It is quite another to systematically erode that standard from within by religating the interpretation of the Holy scriptures to the whim of a few professors with an agenda.


Wisbey talks about LSU and what he wants you to know
@Geanna Dane:

[edit] Let’s keep the discussion going about what’s going on and not about “who done me wrong.”


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. https://www.swau.edu/dinosaur-research-draws-world-wide-acclaim-inspires-new-tv-series
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:

Examples:
“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.