Source: Adventist Today
Update 2/2/10: It has been brought to our attention that the original date of November 6, 2009, is missing from the La Sierra University Faculty Senate’s resolution, as reported above. Erv Taylor, our publisher asked me to post the Senate’s resolution. Since no date came with it I assumed that it was very recent. This is a good lesson not to assume anything when it comes to posting on the AT site. As the online editor of Adventist Today, and on behalf of the AT staff, we sincerely apologize for any misunderstanding this may have caused. We will continue to improve on our commitment to publish or post only that which represents our efforts to reach the highest standards of journalistic excellence and integrity, as stated in our Guiding Principles. I stand by that commitment. For any questions or inquiries related to this matter, please contact the publisher, Erv Taylor, at erv.taylor@atoday.com
Sincerely
Marcel Schwantes
Online Editor, Adventist Today


February 3, 2010
There you go. I figured this relatively minor oversight probably wasn’t deliberate on the part of Schwantes… and I believe her.
But, this still doesn’t change the fact that the LSU Senate is clearly making a statement in support of “academic freedom” for professors to be able to teach their students ideas that directly undermine the fundamental ideals of the SDA Church – on the Church’s dime. That’s the real issue here. Let’s not get sidetracked on little stuff…
Sean Pitman
http://www.DetectingDesign.com
(Quote)
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
17
3
February 3, 2010
Sean, Marcel Schwantes is a him. I know him well. And I am certain that if anyone intentionally removed the date of the resolution, which seems unlikely, it was done before it reached Marcel’s hands.
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
10
2
February 3, 2010
It’s nice to hear from Marcel, but we really need to hear from Erv. Marcel has made it clear that Erv personally asked to have the document posted.
Was Erv Taylor responsible for the missing date?
Erv has told me that he does not control the content of AToday. Marcel’s statement suggests otherwise.
Erv should bow out of any journalistic efforts on the evolution at LSU issue due to his extreme conflict of interest, since he himself has been a guest lecturer promoting evolutionary thought in at least one LSU classroom.
And Erv has provided plenty of evidence that he should no longer be permitted to be the publisher of a journal that uses the trademarked term “Adventist” as part of its name. But apparently the AToday board is controlled by individuals who are either sympathetic to or apathetic about Erv’s anti-Adventist and anti-Bible views.
(Quote)
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
19
8
February 3, 2010
Ah, sorry Marcel for the gender confusion (I once knew a girl named Marcel) – change comment to “I believe him!” ; )
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
10
1
February 4, 2010
After further reflection, I think what I wrote above is too pointed. My apologies for that.
Still, Marcel referred to AToday’s “efforts to reach the highest standards of journalistic excellence and integrity.” I do think that if “integrity” means “integrity,” and if “Adventist” in Adventist Today means “Adventist,” then that means that there will promptly be an overhaul of the AToday board and a change of publisher.
Otherwise, in Marcel’s comment, “integrity” doesn’t mean “integrity,” and “Adventist” doesn’t mean “Adventist.”
I also think that someone from AToday ought to make clear who removed the date in question. Apparently AToday is censoring that question over on their site, even though censorship is something they claim to be opposed to.
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
10
4
February 5, 2010
I take issue with shabby journalism, but at least they apologized. It still doesn’t excuse AToday’s obvious bias & agenda — that’s also shabby journalism. I also take issue with people calling themselves Adventist when they’re not. It’s sad that such theological liberals are in places people notice them, like at AToday. I’d say, “oh well, someday they’ll get their just reward” for promoting views against Biblical doctrine and the SDA church and just leave it at that, but these folks are taking hundreds of people with them. If you’re going to be lost, fine. But it’s a shame when a lost person is vocal about what they believe, dynamically dragging others to their spiritual death. Shame on Erv and AToday.
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
12
4
February 5, 2010
That came out kind of wrong. What I meant to say was that if you choose to be lost, that’s one thing, but to preach or teach theology not in accordance with the Bible, you will eventually lead others to destruction, as well as yourself. I didn’t intend to say anyone in specific was lost or not. Just that people “with no light in them” are dragging people down.
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
12
5
February 7, 2010
“The path of men who are placed as leaders is not an easy one. But they are to see in every difficulty a call to prayer. Never are they to fail of consulting the great Source of all wisdom. Strengthened and enlightened by the Master Worker, they will be enabled to stand firm against unholy influences and to discern right from wrong, good from evil. They will approve that which God approves, and will strive earnestly against the introduction of wrong principles into His cause.”–Prophets and Kings, p. 31.
“The greatest want of the world is the want of men,–men who will not be bought or sold; men who in their inmost souls are true and honest; men who do not fear to call sin by its right name; men whose conscience is as true to duty as the needle to the pole; men who will stand for the right though the heavens fall”.–Education, p. 57.
I applaud the decision of the board and the statement they gave out–but will this be followed by action? If so, when–and what kind of action will it be? And will other Adventist colleges or Universities also be included (by the folks in a position to do something there) before things reach this stage in them?
Where are the men (and women) in places of influence who are willing to call sin by it’s right name and cleanse the “camp” of that “abominable thing” before any more of our young people are led astray? (What secular company would tolerate one of it’s employs undermining it’s core beliefs–and all companies have certain guidelines their workers must embrace and promote–and still pay them a salary?) “Academic Freedom” cannot take president over “Academic Integrity!” If these teachers truly believe in evolution–which is certainly their privilege–they should go teach where it is accepted. It seems to me the height of outright dishonesty to come in and accept wages from the sacred tithe while trying to undermine one of the core beliefs of our church. Why do we tolerate this???
(Quote)
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
14
2
February 7, 2010
As we enter another week, many will be preparing to celebrate an historic event–the birthday of Charles Darwin. Set aside a little time to tip your hat on February 12th to the man who made this website possible.
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
4
15
February 15, 2010
@Bob Pickle:
Ok,ok, Bob, give a rest on the date thing !! Marcel applogised. What does it matter anymore ?? Maybe it came that way, who cares ? This isn’t the crux of the problem. Now your other charges-if you can proove them-should be looked into !
(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1
7
February 15, 2010
@Lydian Belknap:
AMEN !!
(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1
7
February 19, 2010
In my honest opinion it sounds more deliberate. I have lately been visiting their site and have found it very disturbing. They post articles that are unChrist-like and more of the world– like posting a movie review on AVATAR and a certain Pastor twisting the Bible’s point on the Roman Catholic Church and to doubt EGW writings and the Bible.
I’m sorry but the Adventist Today had not lived up to the SDA’s calling. Sad to say their main office is also found in LSU. If they really want to show that they stand by the SDA FB, they should not post stuff that insinuates doubt and promote worldly things. They tickle our senses but leads us further away from God– this is not what the Adventists need today. Why not focus on the Bible and how the prophecies are being fulfilled in an SDA’s life each day and not use the world’s pattern of journalism.
I thank this site for upholding the truth and fighting for what is right though the heaven’s fall. God bless Educate Truth and more power.
(Quote)
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
19
6
February 19, 2010
If they continue posting articles like Pastor Loren Seibold’s [Letting Roman Catholics Off the Hook]… they should as well drop their name. This article is also anti-SDA and insinuates doubt on EGW and Bible prophecies. Is that we call SDA journalism? The people behind Adventist Today is also responsible in posting these articles, they should know better. It shows that they don’t know where they stand and what principles govern them. Sorry but it makes me think there might be conspiracy behind all AToday has been doing for they misrepresent the SDA church. I hope they change their ways and not only to apologize –for the harm has been done.
(Quote)
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
18
6
February 19, 2010
It would appear that I haven’t raised the date question here since February 4. But I don’t think it should be given a rest.
AToday prides itself in being independent media, in not promoting a particular view or doctrine or agenda of the Adventist Church. But for AToday to engage in censorship of the simple question of how the date got deleted raises a lot of questions.
We’re talking about a document that Erv Taylor requested to be posted on AToday’s site, and any kind, simple question about the missing date gets censored from their site. They won’t allow the question to be posted. Why not, and who made that decision?
The fact that Marcel directs all further questions to Erv also seems to contradict Erv’s previous assertion that he as executive publisher does not control the content of AToday’s publications.
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
13
9
February 24, 2010
Ron, I think this is what we call ‘infiltrated’. They are SDA by name but by their works we can see their aim is to confuse, cause doubt and discourage SDA people and make us look bad… and they call it “journalism?”… I call it sabotage–the enemy is at work! Why would LSU be mad at Educate Truth when it is telling the truth and AToday has been attacking the SDA all along. I think LSU is covering them up. We should be on guard for EGW has warned us that these people may even be preaching in our pulpits and would be leaders in our organization. I think LSU has been attacked from within. I hope Educate Truth expand their scope in addressing issues not only evolution but also that which attack our faith in God and the Bible… and LSU would be a good start. God bless and more power!
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
13
7
February 24, 2010
Ronnie M.D.–I agree with you completely. LSU IS covering up and has been for years, even before Wisbey got there. Lawrence Geraty is at least as bad as Wisbey. What’s bothers me is that these guys are still promulgating their liberal baloney, not only at LSU and beyond, but on TV, such as LLBN! Check it out for yourself. Even Desmond Ford is on LLBN! WHY I wouldn’t contribute a “plug nickel” to that station.
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
12
8
February 24, 2010
Ronnie M.D.–”Preaching in our pulpits” is absolutely correct. Tim Mitchell, Senior Pastor at the Pacific Union College Church, is an endorser of “gay marriage” and marriage between anybody “human.” Check it out on asolemnappeal.org. Hey,he’s not the only one. We got at least 7 more so-called SDA pastors endorsing the same. I have notified numerous Conference officials about this matter, including Jim Pedersen, President of the NCC and Don Schneider, and Ricardo Graham. Their answers? We aren’t gonna do anything!
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
12
7
February 24, 2010
Thanks Ron. We are really in the end times. This has been predicted by EGW and thus it really shows the warning is actually from God. I’m glad the Bible is clear that we should not depend on our leaders for our faith but only on Jesus Christ. I’ll take note of these people and I hope they change when there is still time. Thanks, your posts have been very helpful. God bless!
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
10
6
February 24, 2010
Ron, would you be a little more specific as to what these leaders actually communicated, or did not communicate to you. Surely they didn’t really say, ‘We aren’t gonna do anything.’
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
6
5
February 24, 2010
I don’t care what their answer was – if it is true that even one pastor is promoting the abominations of Lev 18 regarding the gay agenda – that should result in an immediate attempt to help that pastor understand the basics of Bible exegesis — followed immediatly by the choice to either accept the Bible teaching on this subject or look into being a pastor for another denomination.
There was a time not 2 years past when I was telling a large group of non-SDAs that “NO denomination has fallen into the apostasy of endorsing the gay agenda without FIRST denying the authority of scripture and swallowing the lie of evolutionism” — and when I said that – I was typically making a favorable point about Christian denominations that did not go down that slippery slope.
in Christ,
Bob
Time for
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
10
6
February 25, 2010
Bob,
I have been working on the frontlines of ministry in a non-Adventist context for the last 18 years. I have worked with a myriad of Christian and non-Christian faiths during that time. I know all too well how the road to apostasy is paved with higher critical/theistic evolutionary intentions. I have debated many main-line church leaders on this very point. When I was in the M.Div program one of the sponsored seminarians I knew began to spout the pro-gay theology he had never shed from his non-Adventist undergrad experience. His sponsoring conference terminated his sponsorship (something I whole heartedly agreed with even though I liked the guy) and he went off to teach English in Korea.
I’m sorry Bob but I am compelled to hold us to a higher standard than ‘the end justifies the means.’ Quoting conference administrators as saying something they never said, exagerating their comments, saying they said something, when they never really said anything – is not excusable; no matter how culpable they may be. If we are going to hold them to a high standard then we must be willing to hold ourselves to one.
By the way, I’ve been over the list of endorsers on ‘a solemn appeal’ 3 or 4 times now and I can’t find a Tim Mitchell anywhere.
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
4
6
February 25, 2010
Popped back in to see where the discussion had got up to. Apparently it’s stuck on a loop of ‘Adventists who are not exactly like {me} are not Adventists at all and are bound for perdition’. It’s broadened out from creation/evolution to homosexuality and as broad as ‘liberal theology’ generally. I’m sure we’ll get to health care and liberal politics soon too: or is that already implicit? Hey “Educate Teabaggers!”
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
11
13
February 25, 2010
Agreed. My point was that actions speak louder than words — if those pastors are really in that level of apostasy – those administrators need to be doing a lot more than just talking.
in Christ,
Bob
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
9
5
February 25, 2010
I think that if you ignore enough of the substance and details in the issues being raised you could gloss it all over with a dismissive “sounds to me like people here are just complaining that someone is different from me”.
What kind of dark ages straying from the path could not happen under that kind of discernment??
Would there be any limit??
in Christ,
Bob
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
12
7
February 25, 2010
If I cared enough I’m sure I could copy and paste a dozen or more statements with that particular effect, though not in those words, of course. ‘Fraid I really, really don’t, though. If people can see it, they can see it in the existing posts where it is and don’t need me to point it out. If they can’t, pointing it out won’t help.
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
8
9
February 26, 2010
hmm another “I don’t actually have the data to support my latest accusation” post from Bravus??
How “unnexpected”.
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
9
5
February 26, 2010
Another complete failure to comprehend what the post actually said from Bob? Ditto!
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
7
9
February 28, 2010
Victor, I have tried to answer your questions above, but evidently Shane has deleted them, since he doesn’t want me “naming names” and telling the truth about what is going on “behind closed doors” in our conferences and in our academic centers such as LLU and LSU. Shane thinks I’m “too inflammatory” which is simply pure baloney, since HE’S the one who started this site to (as we all know) “clean house” at LSU, as we SHOULD be doing!
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
5
6
February 28, 2010
Ron why are you so angry with Shane? You should be thanking the guy for allowing you to post here. He just wants you to be more congenial and there is nothing wrong with that. Name calling is not in good taste. We were all taught that when we were young.
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
6
6
March 1, 2010
I’m certainly not “angry” with Shane. He has my full support, but I find it very hypocritical that he doesn’t like my critical posts, when the whole website is “critical” in a very antagonistic way toward LSU and its anti-biblical direction, as I believe it should be. Posting “generalized” ideas without specifics is not the way to understand the true problems at LSU. Maybe he and you think so, but I don’t.
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
5
7
March 2, 2010
Bob Ryan, As for your Feb 24 comment on the infiltration of the “gay agenda” into Christianity and our own SDA Church, I listed some of the SDA Pastors from “asolemnappeal” that STILL endorse the gay agenda, “gay marriage” and marriage for anyone that is “human” but Shane evidently doesn’t want this, already public, information spread to this website. Why not?! It represents simply another way Satan has of “infiltrating” our Church. The LSU chaplain, Sam (“Hey Everybody”) was or is still also “on board” on this heresy.
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
5
8
March 2, 2010
Perhaps because this site is specifically focused on issues of origins, rather than on any and every complaint of those whose energy is focused on defending the church by attacking it?
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
8
4
March 2, 2010
Defending the Church by attacking heretics and those who either directly support them or indirectly tolerate them IS one of the reasons for this site.
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
3
9
March 2, 2010
Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition! Our three weapons are. . .
(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
3
2
March 2, 2010
As mush as I agree with you on the homosexuality issue, this isn’t the forum for it.
(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
5
4
March 3, 2010
Shane, Limiting the heresies in our Church to only “evolution as fact” is the wrong way to go in your battle. The problem is MUCH DEEPER than just “evolution.” Maybe you don’t see it or agree with it, but it will become apparent in the future, as both LLU and PUC are well on the way to become similar to LSU in their “rogue” attitude toward God’s Truth and our SDA biblical principles. Other problems are festering “under the surface” and behind closed doors, gay marriage being just one of them. If you want to keep your head in the sand, go ahead!
(Quote)
Hot debate. What do you think?
6
8
March 5, 2010
I do agree with Ron. Evolution is just at the tip of the iceberg. If we really want to have the truth and educate everyone… I hope you open a forum section which every issue could be tackled. [Just a suggestion]
(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
3
2
March 8, 2010
Bob Ryan, Your Feb. 24 comment about the gay agenda within our SDA Church is very relevent. When I personally asked President Graham, at the Market Street Church whether the Board was going to do “the right thing” my “answer” was, please get out of the way so my wife and I can leave! So much for accountability from our “leaders!”
(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
0
4
March 8, 2010
Ron -
Your comment reminds me of something that I think applies to both cases equally -
(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
1
1
March 8, 2010
Ron, why do you make so many vitriolic attacks against church leaders? Does love abide in your heart? It embarasses me that SDAs can be so nasty to each other in public venues.
(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
5
1
March 8, 2010
Eddie, My attacks are not “vitriolic” unless you consider facts and truth “vitriolic.” My first love is for God and His Word. I do love our leaders, even though I “attack” many of them for not standing up for biblical truths and our SDA biblical beliefs. I also praise those who seem to be standing 100% for God’s Truth, such as Jerry Page, Doug Batchelor, Mark Finley, etc.
I have invited those whom I have been accused of “smearing” to come on board and either deny what I’ve stated or simply defend what they’ve said and done, or NOT DONE. You don’t see any, so far, and I don’t think you will. As I’ve stated, they all have their “protection” in their closeted positions at the Conference offices or academic buildings!
(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
0
5
March 8, 2010
Ron, I’m sorry–I didn’t realize that pointing out the faults of our leaders on publicly accessible websites was a Biblical belief. I realize our leaders vary in their commitment to upholding SDA biblical beliefs, but always believed it was better to take my concerns to the Lord on my knees in prayer than to try to convince everybody in a public venue that so-and-so and so-and-so and so-and-so are or aren’t doing such-and-such and such-and-such and such-and-such. But perhaps I’m mistaken–maybe I should try to dig up dirt on as many of our leaders, professors, physicians, etc., as I can–and let everybody know about it.
(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
2
1
March 9, 2010
Eddie, Your “head in the sand” attitude is exactly what Sam Pipim describes in his books about many of our leaders. Sam also, many times, mentions specific people, as I believe he should. He even publishes their names in his books. All my concerns were taken PRIVATELY to each person BEFORE I “went public.” The strategy of all of them was just to either ignore me or try to avoid my questions. They probably thought I would just “go away” and shut up. Well, I didn’t. It’s your type of attitude they LOVE!
(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
0
3
March 9, 2010
Eddie, BTW, my wife and I DO take our concerns to the Lord, each night, on our knees. Along with our taking ACTIONS on our feet and on our computers!
(Quote)
Like or Dislike:
0
4