Milton, I’m no fan of GRI, but it is quite …

Comment on Silence of the Geoscience Research Institute by David Read.

Milton, I’m no fan of GRI, but it is quite a stretch to say that it “consistently denies a short age model.” It does no such thing. The most that can be said is that GRI is currently unwilling to criticize radiometric dating methods. They just shrug their shoulders and say, “we don’t see anything obviously wrong with it.”

As to your contention that they should look for another job now that Ted Wilson is GC president, you’re forgetting that Wilson has already been on the board of GRI for several years and has said he cherishes that board membership and has no intention of resigning his seat now that he is GC president. Presumably, Wilson already knows what is going on at GRI. I mean, I would hope he knows, as long as he has been on the board! Why would he now suddenly decide that he needs to clean house?

My fear for Ted Wilson is just the opposite. I fear he may see the current state of affairs at GRI as fine and normal, whereas I think it needs considerable improvement.

David Read Also Commented

Silence of the Geoscience Research Institute
I think GRI is a disappointment, not just with regard to the LaSierra controversy but more generally. The denomination has never gotten a good return on its investment in GRI. One of the early directors, Richard Ritland, became a long-ages advocate. The current director seems deeply troubled by radiometric dating. For a variety of reasons, GRI has not developed into a dynamic apologetics ministry, like “Answers in Genesis” or even ICR, nor a strong research institution.

GRI does some good things. I really like the internet news roundup: It also hosts field trips, publishes the journal “Origins”, and publishes and emails a short quarterly newsletter (latest edition here: (I note that back issues of “Origins” don’t seem to be accessible through the website anymore, whereas in they were just a couple of years ago.)

My impression is that science and apologetics are two very different enterprises, and that scientists tend to be poor at apologetics, which is more of an argumentative attorney-like function. My suggestion would be to split the research function from the apologetics functions. Let the current group continue to do research and publish “Origins,” but establish another ministry to do apologetics, field trips, teacher and pastor training, general reader publications, and the website. Let Jim Gibson continue to head up the research branch but recruit someone else to head up an apologetics ministry.

Recent Comments by David Read

The Reptile King
Poor Larry Geraty! He can’t understand why anyone would think him sympathetic to theistic evolution. Well, for starters, he wrote this for Spectrum last year:

“Christ tells us they will know us by our love, not by our commitment to a seven literal historical, consecutive, contiguous 24-hour day week of creation 6,000 years ago which is NOT in Genesis no matter how much the fundamentalist wing of the church would like to see it there.”

“Fundamental Belief No. 6 uses Biblical language to which we can all agree; once you start interpreting it according to anyone’s preference you begin to cut out members who have a different interpretation. I wholeheartedly affirm Scripture, but NOT the extra-Biblical interpretation of the Michigan Conference.”

So the traditional Adventist interpretation of Genesis is an “extra-Biblical interpretation” put forward by “the fundamentalist wing” of the SDA Church? What are people supposed to think about Larry Geraty’s views?

It is no mystery how LaSierra got in the condition it is in.

The Reptile King
Professor Kent says:

“I don’t do ‘orgins science.’ Not a single publication on the topic. I study contemporary biology. Plenty of publications.”

So, if you did science that related to origins, you would do it pursuant to the biblical paradigm, that is pursuant to the assumption that Genesis 1-11 is true history, correct?

The Reptile King
Well, Jeff, would it work better for you if we just closed the biology and religion departments? I’m open to that as a possible solution.

The Reptile King
Larry Geraty really did a job on LaSierra. Personally I think it is way gone, compromised beyond hope. The SDA Church should just cut its ties to LaSierra, and cut its losses.

As to the discussion on this thread, round up the usual suspects and their usual arguments.

La Sierra University Resignation Saga: Stranger-than-Fiction
It is a remarkably fair and unbiased article, and a pretty fair summary of what was said in the recorded conversation.