Comment on LSU Board news release and actions by Christiane Marshall.
There are many thoughtful comments and I don’t want to be redundant. I do feel that the real issues are not being addressed. The documents are phrased diplomatically. However, I was hoping for a more direct approach. Since this is an Adventist university, the subject here should not even be an issue.
Here are my thoughts:
Creating cookie cutter courses would not lend itself to true science or faith. All of the courses that are offered in our institutions should be infused with our faith. The Creator should be integrated and woven throughout our thinking and teaching. It should be a natural process in the life of a Christian professor.
If a professor does not agree with our stand on this very essential position, we should respectfully request that they teach elsewhere. There are hundreds of sincere creationist scientists who have been “expelled” from secular universities. Perhaps our universities might consider these individuals for teaching positions.
It appears that much thought has gone into the development of the above documents. However, they are disappointing. The problem has NOT been addressed. The study group recommendations are distractions. They will frustrate those of us who feel strongly that something needs to be done. These documents trumpet a clear message that the board believes nothing of substance needs to be done. Christiane Marshall
Recent Comments by Christiane Marshall
Eugene Shubert: I thought my explanation was sufficiently clear. I believe that God imputes the open sins of Seventh-day Adventists to the entire church. Didnâ€™t you notice the relevance of my Spirit of prophecy references? Where is your rebuttal?
Thank you so much for informing me of this universal principal! I now consider it my duty to inform all Adventists of their need to corporately repent of your evil surmisings and grotesque innuendos.
Private: BIOL 111: Genomes and their Evolution
I just posted this but it disappeared. If two end up showing up, please delete one!
Just to make some things clear: Our church does not have a hierarchy. We have administrators who do just that: administrate. We have a very democratic church. The constituency makes the decisions. This takes time as it should. Leaders in our church are evident in that they lead. Doug Bachelor and others certainly fit in that category.
Eugene, you also made this innuendo: “Can the vast majority of Seventh-day Adventists repent of their approval of evolutionism, pan-Gnostic Adventist spiritualism and popery in the Church?” I’ve seen a lot in my years as an Adventist. Our churches are hopefully evangelistic centers where non-believers and nominal Adventists will hopefully find their way. But I have never seen approval of the beliefs you mention in any place I have been in 27 years in the church. (Obviously, we are here on this forum because Evolution is being approved of in this place, but again, this is a specific area, not the ‘vast majority.’)
Yes, we are Laodicea (that includes you and includes me) and there is complacency, but not to the degree that these things would be approved of by the ‘vast majority’. If you have seen it, then don’t broadcast that it is prevalent in the church at large. Don’t hurt the faith of new and potential believers with the poison of your bitterness. Pray for those afflicted with sins that lead away from Christ. And please keep in mind that bitterness is one of those sins that lead away from our Redeemer.
Private: BIOL 111: Genomes and their Evolution
Bob Ryan, Your most recent post sums things up well and certainly clarifies what appeared to be a controversy in the past couple of days. See now, we actually agree! (The issue I tried to address was a sweeping generalization made on this forum that went way beyond the borders of LSU–that I consider to be part of a chronic bearing of false witness within our church.) Thanks for this post!
Jonathan Smith: 10) Therefore, I propose that we get a measure, if possible, to be passed at the next GC session to the effect that the offenders, along with the leaders in the chain of command, be removed from office.
Jonathan, I’m a bit out of the loop as regards to where this is in the process and how the GC process itself works. Each person mentioned in the resolution would have had to first been approached personally within the context of Matthew 18 before brought before the GC. But it is something to prayerfully consider.
[I think I’ve been misunderstood here. My comments regarded a Christlike and Biblical process and not specifically the issue at hand.]
Shannon: I agree that many leaders are responsible for the state of the church but there are many that are working, honest and holy men that up until recently have been unaware of the state of things. Even in this situation there is an appropriate way to do things and going publicly around dragging people and things through the mud is not reasonable for Christians to do. We do have a higher calling in church discipline to. Because of this, the leaders have to approach this in a certain wayâ€“especially if there are those that are obstructing it actively.
Shannon, This is the essence of what I’m trying to say. I’m done with this conversation as these men apparently think that I am saying something totally different. I have seen first hand how faithful workers can be rammed into the ground and made useless by false accusations. It is the spirit of the accusatory writing by those who are not prophets that urges others on to find the sin in the church and ‘purge’ it. Unfortunately, they do not follow a biblical process and too often end up throwing stones at the ones who are working using Christ’s methods. The accusations are usually so bizarre and groundless that it is easy for an outsider to see a mob mentallity. You are correct that there are many who are faithful. Unfortunately, some very talented individuals have left the work because the stone throwing crippled them. Sometimes they come limping back because they are dedicated. So this is my last post. If they want to make assumptions about me, so be it.