@Martin Schratt: Your personal beliefs may be all well …

Comment on The hinge of our faith by Shane Hilde.

@Martin Schratt: Your personal beliefs may be all well and good or dead wrong. In regard to the issue with LSU, your beliefs are irrelevant and here’s why: Because it’s all about what the Seventh-day Adventist church believes and wants taught in their member funded universities. As a body of believers we have decided we believe in recent, six-day creation. The church does not believe in the theory of evolution. Perhaps a time will come when the subject is up for discussion and possible change, then all these debates about creation vs. evolution would have some value, but in regard to this issue they don’t.

Shane Hilde Also Commented

The hinge of our faith
@Ron:

You said: Unfortunately, be [sic] supporting this web site that is exactly what you are doing.

Judgment of their actions should not be confused with moral judgement.

You said: That is the whole point of this web site, to harrangue and attack our teachers and to force Shane’s rigid views on the whole church.

You’re wrong Ron, and here is why you are wrong. First, the whole point of the website is publicize what LSU was been attempting to suppress for decades. Our goal is stated on the About page:

There are biology professors at La Sierra University who believe and teach evolution as the preferred scientific worldview. There have been many private attempts in the past to address this issue, but each time it has been swept under the rug. Since all private attempts have failed in enlisting LSU’s help, EducateTruth.com has taken the issue public. This allows students and parents to make informed decisions, and also creates awareness in the church. There must be total transparency.

Who the teachers are is irrelevant to the issue at hand. I am very critical of what they are doing, and will continue to be so until they leave or LSU declares open endorsement of the theory of evolution.

In regard to forcing my force “rigid views on the whole church,” what views are you talking about? I have made it clear this website endorses the churches official and majority accepted belief in a recent, six-day creation. You obviously disagree with the church’s interpretation of Genesis and that’s fine not a big deal; however, if you were seeking employment within the church that put you in a position to promote your non-SDA views, then I would adequately oppose your hiring.

You said: Part of what makes us Adventists is our belief that everyone should study the Bible for themselves, and that no one should be compelled, except as they are convicted by a clear line of reasoning.

In order stay a viable organization it is important that we maintain cohesiveness in our beliefs. It’s one thing to personally disagree with the organization, but it’s another to seek employment in a university to proselytize Adventist students to your personal interpretations.

You said: You are trying to force people to go against their own reason and conscience. That is never the way God operates.

Ron, really? Last time I checked being employed in the SDA church was voluntarily done. The church’s position is public, and there can be excuse for not knowing the church’s stated belief in a recent, six-day creation. It’s not a secret that was suddenly sprung upon these professors. They are more than welcome to find an employer that supports their views. Oh, and there won’t be any civil punishment if they leave.

The Inquisition has got to be one of the most cliche comparisons SDA evolutionists use to defend their right to proselytize their beliefs in the Adventist universities. They exhibit total disregard for our beliefs and the reason we financially support our universities, and then cry foul the moment we call them to be responsible to what we’re paying them to teach.

That would be the equivalent of me seeking employment at McDonald’s but always slipping in vegie burgers. My manager says, Hey, what are you doing?

I think vegie burgers are better.

He says, I don’t care, you’re paid to serve beef burgers.

Oh, you’re just forcing your rigid views on me.

He says, Please! Get out of here. You’re fired!

And that would be the end of my career. I’m flabbergasted that you and others seem to be promoting this pluralistic homogenization with the accepted and stated beliefs of our church.


The hinge of our faith
@Bravus:

First, I want to make the point that when someone uses the term “sola scriptura” its intended meaning is not every single injection ever made in the Bible should be followed. It simply means that the Bible is the only infallible and inerrant authority for the Christian faith, and that it contains all knowledge necessary for salvation and holiness.

In regard to the punishments that are mentioned in Leviticus, I think a five points can be made to help clarify why Christians no longer stone adulterers and sabbath breakers.

1. God directly ruled and communicated with them through Moses.

2. God’s presence was manifest in the pillar of fire they saw every night while they were out in the wilderness. To sin in the presence of God like that would be almost unthinkable.

3. The result of sin is death. The exact occurrence of when the consequence occurs makes no difference.

4. Not every instance of adultery was punished with stoning.

5. Paul said: “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross” (Col. 2:14). The penalties of the Law of Moses were without question “contrary” to us. These penalties were done away with when Christ died on the cross, along with all the ceremonial laws which would have included, Do not wear clothes of wool and linen woven together (Deut. 22:11). Now the injunctions such as do not commit adultery and remember the sabbath continued on in the ten commandments, which are not against us, but still allow us to recognize sin.

There was never an injunction to keep slaves. I’m not sure why you listed that. God never commanded us to have slaves.

It’s dangerous to build a whole doctrine just on one verse, and we’re only given one verse in 1 Cor. 11:5,6 that says women should cover their head when they pray and prophesy. I think he is bringing out the contrast that is to be maintained between the sexes, in light of current customs, as they take part in church services. My understanding of the cultural at that time was that woman covered their head to indicate they were married, but also as a matter of modesty. However, we should not judge a woman who covers her head if she feels convicted by the Holy Spirit. There is certainly no harm in it, but given the lack of evidence I don’t think it would be prudent for our church to compel or teach its female members to follow this injunction.

In regard to women speaking in church, Paul said: “For God is not a God of disorder but of peace. As in all the congregations of the saints, women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says” (1 Cor. 14:33, 34).

I believe the answer to this injunction is found in the following verse: “If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.”

Such a procedure would prevent unseemly interruptions in the service of worship. This makes even more sense when we take into consideration that men and women did not sit together in church.

Those are my thoughts on why we (Christians) don’t practice the things you listed.


The hinge of our faith
@Bravus:

No-one at all in the whole world follows every single word of the Bible; therefore, the whole Bible is not inspired and should not be followed.

Did I adequately summarize your argument? I don’t think your conclusion logically follows your premise.

Just because there is biblical support for why Christians do not practice every command given, does not negate the inspiration of the Bible.

Now I haven’t read the instances your put out yet, but I’ll take a look at them right now.


Recent Comments by Shane Hilde

Elder Graham: “Why I Support La Sierra University”
@MLB: The article was written before Ted Wilson was elected. Despite personally knowing his views on creation from conversations with him, I’m disappointed that he’s taken this long to mention them. Perhaps he has published them else where and I am unaware.

I like what he says here:

As constituents of this union, you deserve accurate information.

That’s exactly one of the reasons Educate Truth exists, because LSU is being dishonest about their biology department.

And they are committed to making whatever adjustments might be necessary to provide the best Seventh-day Adventist Christian education possible.

Really? How can he say that when LSU has done absolutely nothing to address what is happening in the biology classroom? Even their attempt with the biology seminar class was a utter failure.

If his his two goals are all we are to expect then the board will have accomplished virtually nothing. There should be more than respect and support for the biblical creation account. It should be taught and promoted.

If anything happens at LSU to address the situation, it would not surprise me if it was because of out side intervention. The Board isn’t addressing anything.


La Sierra University Continues Deceptive Spin Tactics

Maybe the solution is for two streams of thought to be taught: conventional biology and creation science. Allow the existing professors to teach evolution and bring in creation scientists to teach the latter. That way there is no need to fire anybody or sanction LSU.

What do you think of that idea.?

Sean may give his own answer but I would like to jump and share what I think are some key points in regard to your suggestion.

We’re not dealing with preferences, flavors, likes, or dislikes. The SDA Church believes that what the Bible says is the truth. So when when LSU biology professors “only discuss” (new word from LSU) the theory of evolution as the truth, then we have a big problem. Teaching both world views is not the answer, because it is allowing plurality on a foundation issue. If you don’t stand for anything, you stand for nothing and that’s essentially was plurality boils down to.

The theory of evolution should be taught, but not as the truth. We don’t believe it’s the truth so why would we pay professors to teach it as such.

If the professors do not want to be supportive of the Church in this particular issue by promoting the biblical creation account, then there really isn’t any other alternative, but to fire them or ask them to resign.


Andrews University statement on creation
First of all, we’re not asking that the theory evolution not be taught. You have been misinformed on this point. The problem is how it is presented. They teach it as the truth. This is misrepresenting the church’s postion and contradictory to the Bible.

This statement from the LSU biology department is nothing but misleading and bordering being an outright lie. It boggles my mind how they can claim not to promote the theory of evolution when it’s the only world view that is presented as truth. Absolutely no evidence has been found or presented by LSU that demonstrates that the church’s position is favorably promoted, if at all, in the biology courses taught. Yes, the theory of evolution is discussed, but many times as if it were true. This has been documented for over a year. When the professors believe the theory of evolution is truth and exclude promotion of the biblical world view as being true, then they are in fact promoting the theory of evolution. Unless they can show that they are promoting a recent, literal six-day creation, they are promoting the theory of evolution when they exclude other world views as being “lunatic” like one professor labeled those who believe in the biblical creation.

Keep in mind that many of the biology faculty personally believe in long ages of life on earth and common ancestry. This is not a secret. They also do not believe that Genesis 1 & 2 depicts literal events that occurred in the recent past. This is why we have never seen statements from the department saying we believe and support the church’s position in a recent, literal six-day creation. All they can say is that they believe God the Creator is the source of all life.

This is nothing more than a continuation of LSU’s deceptive advertising practices.


Dr. Geraty clarifies his “Challenge” to literal 6-day creationism
This statement from the LSU biology department is nothing but misleading and bordering being an outright lie. It boggles my mind how they can claim not to promote the theory of evolution when it’s the only world view that is presented as truth. Absolutely no evidence has been found or presented by LSU that demonstrates that the church’s position is favorably promoted, if at all, in the biology courses taught. Yes, the theory of evolution is discussed, but many times as if it were true. This has been documented for over a year. When the professors believe the theory of evolution is truth and exclude promotion of the biblical world view as being true, then they are in fact promoting the theory of evolution. Unless they can show that they are promoting a recent, literal six-day creation, they are promoting the theory of evolution when they exclude other world views as being “lunatic” like one professor labeled those who believe in the biblical creation.

Keep in mind that many of the biology faculty personally believe in long ages of life on earth and common ancestry. This is not a secret. They also do not believe that Genesis 1 & 2 depicts literal events that occurred in the recent past. This is why we have never seen statements from the department saying we believe and support the church’s position in a recent, literal six-day creation. All they can say is that they believe God the Creator is the source of all life.

This is nothing more than a continuation of LSU’s deceptive advertising practices.


Mrs. White: “Don’t send your children to…”
@Adventist in High School: You’re missing the point. The Seventh-day Adventist Church believes that God created the heaven and earth in six days, within the recent past (about 6,000 years). They believe Genesis gives an accurate depiction of this event. So the problem isn’t that our youth are merely being presented with a false theory, it’s that they’re being presented the theory as if it were truth. I would also add that the biblical/church position is not promoted at all, if it’s even mentioned at all.

These professors are taking our money and misrepresenting our faith to hundreds, thousands of students. When an employee finds that he can no longer uphold the beliefs of the institution and teach them properly, he should consider teaching for an institution that is more conducive with his belief system or be fired.