Shane said: “These biologists at LSU assassinated their own character by …

Comment on The ANN Highlights LSU’s Dr. Lee Grismer – An Evolutionary Biologist by Faith.

Shane said:

“These biologists at LSU assassinated their own character by remaining at an institution they were undermining. They were being dishonest and essentially stealing from parents who thought their kids were receiving an Adventist education. They robbed us, and the administration is party to it.

Your ludicrous accusations are the equivalent to blaming the shopper who identified a store employee slipping cash into their pocket from the register for all the problems the employee is going through.”

Sorry, Prof Kent, but I totally agree with Shane. This website has done an invaluable service to the church by letting the members know what is going on in our church-sponsored institutions. Something we all have every right to know. Shane and Sean did not make this situation, they merely reported it. This situation has been going on for 25-30 years now and Educate Truth has not been around for more than a couple of years to the best of my knowledge. So how could this site possibly be responsible for any of this? It’s entirely illogical.

My guess is that any Professor who wants to teach truth is avoiding LSU (and perhaps other like institutions) because they know that the faculty is corrupt, the program is corrupt, and those who try to do the right thing are often persecuted for their efforts.

You may have noticed I am anxious for action on this rather than just rhetoric.

I sincerely thank Educate Truth for dragging this stinking carcass out into the open so it can be dealt with for once and for all. I pray someone who has the courage will do this very soon to stop the bleed.

Faith Also Commented

The ANN Highlights LSU’s Dr. Lee Grismer – An Evolutionary Biologist
Prof Kent:

How do you figure that this site keeps biology profs with integrity out of LSU? Any professor that is following the Bible, supporting creation, and the SDA church has nothing to hide and nothing to fear.

When you say “quality” applicants, just how do you judge their credentials?

As far as I am concerned, it is far more important that these professors have a firm grasp on the teachings of creation and the teachings of the Bible than any credentials the world can offer. If that had been the criteria used as a guideline for hiring, we wouldn’t be in this mess now. And that goes for all our SDA institutions.


The ANN Highlights LSU’s Dr. Lee Grismer – An Evolutionary Biologist
Eddie said:
Faith, I just dug up my certificate of baptism from the 1970s and on the back it lists only 13 “baptismal vows.” Not one mentions a belief in a literal six-day creation week only 6000 years ago. In fact, none of the vows even mentions belief in a creator!

I beg to differ with you, Eddie.

Let’s look at #5 and #6–

5. I believe that the Bible is God’s inspired Word, and that it constitutes the only rule of faith and practice for the Christian.

6. Loving the Lord with all my heart, it is my purpose, by the power of the indwelling Christ, to keep God’s law of Ten Commandments, including the fourth, which requires the observance of the seventh day of the week as the Sabbath of the Lord.

I realize that in this present day of doubt and unbelief some people may think I am being nit-picky here, but I believe the Bible–the whole Bible–beginning with Genesis 1:1. Evolution in any of its ugly forms refutes the Bible as a collection of fairytales at best, and lies at worst.
Therefore, to believe in evolution is to reject the Bible as the Truth.

The Sabbath is based on the fact that God rested on the 7th day (from Creation, remember) and hallowed it for a memorial of Creation forever. If you believe in evolution that is all out the window. Yet–and this is extremely important–the Sabbath is the dividing line between the saved and the lost. Because by keeping the Sabbath we acknowledge the Lord as our Creator.

So you see, Eddie, those two precepts are violated when the member begins to believe in Evolution as the truth. So, yes, the member then has broken his vows.

I am not saying that we should bar people from attending church if they are quietly and agreeably behaving themselves, whether or not they are members. However, we are told that those that break their vows are to be disfellowshiped–their names removed from the books.

I can’t see why this is such a big deal. Think about it. Having your name removed from the earthly books is nothing compared to what is happening in the heavenly books. You can tap dance around this issue all you want, but you aren’t fooling God with all your fancy stepping. He is the one that ultimately makes the decision as to who is and who is not His.

Anyone who openly believes in evolution brings disgrace upon God. They are ultimately saying, “God didn’t mean what He said in His Holy Word (that He miraculously preserved all these years, by the way). Its a fairytale and not to be taken seriously. We now know (courtesy of a non-Christian man’s total imagination) that God’s story is all a myth and anyone who believes it is just plain uneducated.”

Does that sound like loyalty to God? God says if you (the generic you) don’t acknowledge Him here on earth, He won’t acknowledge you before His Father in Heaven.

Kind of serious stuff, don’t you think?

Personally, I take great joy in acknowledging God as my Creator and I don’t care a fig if that makes me look like an uneducated moron to the world. The world isn’t my guideline at all. And I am sorry for anyone who even considers what the world says as more important than what God says. That is what evolutionists are doing. All their attempts at trying to marry truth and error will not avail them of salvation. And all their education isn’t going to save them in the end, either.


The ANN Highlights LSU’s Dr. Lee Grismer – An Evolutionary Biologist
Prof Kent said:
“I’m a lifelong young-earth creationist (based to no small extent on faith in God’s word). I don’t doubt that there are some individuals who might be evangelistic in their desire to see theistic evolution established in the Church, so I share your concern.”

I am glad to hear that you believe as I do, yet I am puzzled as to some of the posts you have put up on this site if this is so. I am also puzzled as to why you would want to keep the wolves in the fold, so to speak.

You seem to be having some difficulty seeing that Creation and belief in the Bible as God’s Holy Word are such basic beliefs in the SDA church that if either of them is not fully accepted and supported, the member is not fully committed as an SDA–or even a Christian, for that matter. Taking his name off the books is a mere formality. He has already taken himself out of the church. Whether or not he warms a pew every Sabbath, his heart is not fully surrendered to God.

Let me make myself clear here. I am not suggesting we investigate anyone. I am referring here to those who openly declare their unbelief. Anyone who believes in evolution in its accepted forms (including theistic evolution) is basically calling God and His word a liar. In my book that constitutes blasphemy. I believe God. I believe His word. I love God, and I want to serve Him with my whole heart. James talks about a double-minded man and I think that applies quite well to the theistic evolutionist.

Do I care about the person in error? Of course I do. I would love to see everyone on earth saved–just as I am sure God would as well. But you and I both know that is not going to be the case.

Satan is working hard to get us all so he won’t have to burn for our sins. He knows time is short and he is working overtime to ensnare us. And he can use what God cannot–deception. I know that there must be some pretty convincing deceptions out there for SDA professors to be so deeply convinced. As far as I am concerned, anything or anyone that contradicts God and His word is immediately rejected. We are to test things by the scriptures–not by so-called scientific information. If the professors had done this in the first place, this whole mess wouldn’t have come about.

It is very similar to Eve questioning God’s word at the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. Satan told her that God wasn’t telling the truth. Instead of contradicting him with what she knew of the Lord, she questioned if it may not be so. Isn’t it ironic that Satan has gained entrance to the church yet again through the pursuit of knowledge?

BTW, I do know the church went through growing pains. But I also know that God cleared it all up for them in time. Don’t forget that these people all came from other denominations and sometimes had to unlearn what they were taught all their lives before they could learn the truth. Many times God is gentle with us when we encounter drastic change in our lives.

I do have a bit of a problem with your date of 1980, however. I was taught from a child about the Trinity…and, trust me, that was long before 1980. (Perhaps that was a typo?) Perhaps it was only that it was adopted then formally to clarify things because someone started to question our belief. Wouldn’t surprise me. In any case, I believe that the term “Trinity” was the issue as the founding pioneers did not want people to become confused with the Catholic definition of trinity which is really wierd.

In conclusion, I pray we will all fully surrender ourselves to God for there is no other way to be saved.


Recent Comments by Faith

Changing the Wording of Adventist Fundamental Belief #6 on Creation
And you are correct, Sean, PK must consider where his influence is going–for God or against Him.


Southern Adventist University opens Origins Exhibit
Mr Taylor,

After reading your comment above, I must say PK isn’t the only one in that boat.I would make some comment as to how I really feel about you, but I know Sean will only delete it and you won’t benefit from my insight anyway–seeing as Sean is more concerned about other people’s feelings than you seem to be.

How you have the nerve to come to this website and call us all a bunch of morons (which is really what you are doing) is beyond me. You and your cronies are the ones drowning in error. Anyone who dares to accept man’s opinions over the Bible or SOP isn’t to be trusted to define truth for anyone.

Too straight-forward in my comment? Trust me, I have restrained myself admirably. If you only knew….


Southern Adventist University opens Origins Exhibit
Further to my comment on skeptism and our professors, I’ve got to tell you that I found Prof Kent to be extremely annoying in his comments on EGW. He seems to think that she is an embarrassment to the church when she speaks on Science.

Personally I find people who dis her to be the embarrassment to the church. I really don’t see how they dare to contradict and mock God’s prophet. By doing this they undermine a lot of our church’s beliefs to outsiders as well as church members. God will hold them accountable for that.

Furthermore, David’s unpublished manuscript plus other books I have read on archaeology have reported skeletons of the type that EGW mentions. Also found were artifacts such as huge iron bedsteads made for and buried with kings of huge stature.

Just because you haven’t done your research, PK, don’t jump to the conclusion the evidence isn’t there. It’s there, all right, and you make yourself look a little foolish for not knowing about it.


Southern Adventist University opens Origins Exhibit
David Read said:

“Ellen White’s statements about larger antediluvian life forms are well attested with regard to many different types of flora and fauna. They’re not even controversial…

Hi David,

As you know, I took advantage of your kind offer and I read your manuscript as well as I purchased 3 of your books, one for me, one for my sisters, and one for the church library. It took me a week to finish the book, and I and my sisters are very impressed with it. My one sister calls it “one incredible book”. It has answered a lot of the questions we had on the subject of evolution vs creation science, and, yes, I believe we (you and I and my sisters) are on the same page in our beliefs. We have immensely enjoyed discussing the various aspects of the subject as we read. It makes perfect sense to us.

I still have a couple of questions–new ones will probably always keep popping up–but I would say you have covered the subject admirably. Thanks so much for this book.

I agree with Elder Wilson, this is something every Adventist should read. In my opinion it should be used as required reading for science courses. It is exactly the way I would want science courses in the universities to treat the Creation/evolution debate in the classroom. And if the professors at LSU and the other SDA institutions would do this we wouldn’t be constantly losing our young people and, for that matter, our professors, to skeptisism.

Thank God someone has the courage to publish the truth and expose error.

God Bless you, David.


Southern Adventist University opens Origins Exhibit
Hi Sean and Bill,

I am wondering if the difference of opinion here is due to varying definitions of the word ‘science’. As we all know there is true science and there is worldly psuedo-science.

If Bill’s understanding of ‘science’ in this case is actually worldly psuedo-science, then he is correct in not wanting any truth to be compromised with it.

From Sean’s post, I believe he is referring to true science, which is definitely part of our beliefs on origins and is well supported by the Bible and SOP, as Sean admirably demonstrated.

Not having seen the exhibit myself, I cannot comment on whether or not they are mixing psuedo-science into it. (Perhaps a few of you posters out there can see the exhibit and report back to us.) Knowing the general philosophy of SAU, I would be surprised if they did.

Their goal is “to provide scientific evidence that substantiates the Bible’s account of creation.” Sounds good to me.
They also say: “Religion and science don’t need to be at odds.” And that is true when you are referring to true science, which I believe they are.

However, I do understand Bill’s reaction in that these days when people use the word ‘science’ without qualification it so often means evolutionary pseudoscience, that we tend to be suspicious.

I think, Bill, that in this case we don’t need to worry. I believe SAU’s heart is in the right place and I am so glad that at least one of our institutions is willing to stand up and be counted on the side of Creation, even though they will probably draw much criticism from the ‘scientific’ community as well as from the TEs in their own church.

God bless them for their fidelity to Him. And may God strengthen them to meet the onslaught that is most likely to follow, is my prayer for them.