@Kevin Paulson: I appreciate your attempt to answer some of my …

Comment on PUC Professor: The Noachian Flood was just a local flood? by Brandy Radoias.

@Kevin Paulson:

I appreciate your attempt to answer some of my rhetorical questions from earlier, but with all due respect, the answers you provided are not ones that I have not pondered at length–sometimes ad nauseam–myself many times before. I will not go into too much depth regarding my personal philosophies/beliefs/faith, but let’s suffice it to say that there is room in my heart and mind for the possibility of a creator God AND the scientific laws by which our world is governed almost irrefutably. The logistics of the matter are not important to me; I believe in God (on most days) and I believe that natural selection as a theory has great merit (is it not possible for an omnipotent God to have set such a process in motion? Or, since you appear to regard the process as “brutal” and “merciless”, is it not possible for it to have been just another result of sin?) Ultimately, I am personally open enough to the mysteries of the divine that “having the answers” is not at the top of my list of priorities. What can knowing the “real” duration of the creation process or the “real” age of the Earth contribute to a person’s faith in Christ? I leave the “knowing” to the experts, earthly and otherwise.

I make no secret of the fact that my Adventism is mostly cultural rather than religious, and that in fact I find certain principles upheld by the SDA Church to be, at best, antiquated, and at worst, oppressive. Perhaps I should have led with this bit of information, so as to enable you to promptly deem me a “lost cause” and move on.

Finally, I disagree with you on this last part:

It is for this reason that one cannot believe in the Christ of Scripture and still believe in evolution. This is why there is no room in the Seventh-day Adventist Church for one who teaches and believes in Darwinian macro-evolution.

I don’t believe an institution of higher education, regardless of its denominational slant, should concern itself with the personal beliefs of its employees whatsoever, nor are said personal beliefs even relevant in a science classroom setting, whatever they are. In my opinion, a science professor is merely required to teach the science, and the fact that Dr. Ness is fair enough to present both sides of the issue at PUC (and as a former student of his, believe me, he does) is sheer graciousness on his part.

Brandy Radoias Also Commented

PUC Professor: The Noachian Flood was just a local flood?
@Kevin Paulson,

At the risk of straying even farther away from the original topic of this post, I must ask, again: how do YOU explain the process of natural selection in the natural world?

You are holding strong with your views on natural selection, yet you never answered my question. And while we’re on the subject, I don’t really understand what you are trying to prove by invoking examples of the many ways Darwinist principles have failed in human societies. No one is disputing that fact, including most atheists. This is why we differentiate between the natural world and the rational world, both of which humans are a part. Did God not create us with the necessary equipment to rule over the fish in the sea?

To answer your question, I am willing to accept the authority of the Bible while also taking into consideration the fallible nature of the humans who have interpreted, authored and compiled it. You say that “all must be tested by the objective measure of God’s written counsel.” I would add that all must also be tested by the subjective measure of Christ’s teachings.

PUC Professor: The Noachian Flood was just a local flood?
@Kevin Paulson,

As I said before, I do not wish to go into too much depth regarding my personal beliefs, so I’ll decline to respond to your assessment/evaluation of what you regard to be the validity of my faith (which, by the way, is astonishingly thorough and definitive considering how little you know about me or my faith); on that matter, I will simply say that I, like you and everyone, have the a right to a worldview of my choosing, and whether or not you approve of my brand of Adventism/Christianity is, quite frankly, immaterial. But thank you for rhetoric, which led me to ponder a new question: Can the SDA Church excommunicate members based solely on their beliefs?

I do want to address one erroneous assumption you made about me:

You say you believe in God “on most days” and that you are willing to allow God to have set in motion the process of natural selection which you acknowledge to be brutal and merciless.

If you go back and read my last comment, you will absolutely not find my alleged acknowledgment that the process of natural selection is indeed brutal or merciless. I frankly am hard-pressed to see how one could misinterpret my words so drastically. In fact, I do not think natural selection as it exists in the wild is all that brutal or merciless. Or perhaps you believe that, had original sin never occurred, all of God’s creatures would still be living in perfect harmony with one another, multiplying ad infinitum?

I assume you know that the historical consequences of believing in this means of natural progress, and in applying it to the human experience, have been grotesque.

I am so perplexed by this argument. No member of rational society, of which I consider myself a part, is suggesting that the process that governs the world of beasts should ever be applied to humans, and you won’t find many intelligent atheists, let alone Christian humanists, who will use natural selection as an excuse for the truly merciless and brutal behavior of HUMANS.

Just out of curiosity, what is your take on the origin of the natural selection process in the natural world? You don’t appear to reject that it exists, so I’m wondering how you explain it.

It is clear where your ideas and perspective have led you.

Careful there, Pastor. Judge not lest ye be judged.

Such clarity only serves to further demonstrate the incompatibility of such educational methods as those you defend with the goals and purposes of authentic Adventism.

What exactly is this “authentic” Adventism of which you speak? Is it Adventism as it is prescribed by and trickled down from the higher echelons of the GC? Is it the Adventism of 1863? I’m genuinely curious to hear your thoughts.

PUC Professor: The Noachian Flood was just a local flood?

The issue with PUC is not evolution but rather their lax perspective on Adventist lifestyle choices.Our campus is rampant with a large variety of forms of affection, from students whom ‘make out’ to individuals whom are under blankets on the glass areas through out the campus.Sabbath observance is loose to say, at best – students are often found studying, working, playing video games or other activities which not acceptable for Sabbath.Other examples are abound, PUC is perhaps as liberal as LSU and it is hurting our perspective on Adventism.  

Interesting that you, Student, opinionated as you seem to be, choose to shroud your apparently low opinion of PUC in anonymity. What are you afraid of? Perhaps you think you will get into trouble with the administration for criticizing what you see as their poor leadership (for based on your purported intimate knowledge with the goings-on of the campus, I can only assume you are currently in attendance there)? Please let me assure you that PUC is not in the habit of taking disciplinary action against students for speaking their mind in a non-threatening or dangerous way, and it is certainly not the Stasi-style administration that you seem to wish it were. which ironically seems to be the core of your problem with the school. That is the core of your beef with them, isn’t it? Its failure to monitor and police the student body into making “Adventist lifestyle choices”? Perhaps you would prefer an establishment that forces its students into going to church every Sabbath or implements a strict no-touching policy (which, by the way, was the case in my Adventist boarding high school). Perhaps the job description of the dormitory RAs should be expanded to include random room invasions seeking to expose and bring to justice those students who engage in videogaming and other “unacceptable” Sabbath activities. Perhaps it would give you more conviction in your personal choices to know that they aren’t really choices at all but merely rules that must be followed. I’m just spitballing here, because I honestly don’t know what your thought process was in writing a post like that. But please do me a favor and ask yourself if any of it sounds like reasonable procedure for adult college students, SDA or otherwise.