@George: I think your particular statement here says that LSU …

Comment on LSU responds to Michigan Conference by Sean Pitman.

@George:

I think your particular statement here says that LSU Biology professors should “do what the church says”. There is a difference between employer and church, strictly speaking. It appears to me LSU is saying that they ARE doing what the church says, that they are following FB6. As shown here on this website, FB6 was “watered down” to be open to exactly this, and then it passed global church approval. If you want to use the “do what the church says” rationale, it seems to me you’d need to revise FB6 first.

Don’t you know? FB#6 is not the only official statement of the SDA Church, as an organization, on the subject of creation. Please review the official decision of the General Conference Executive committee on this issue:

Whereas belief in a literal, six-day creation is indissolubly linked with the authority of Scripture, and;

Whereas such belief interlocks with other doctrines of Scripture, including the Sabbath and the Atonement, and;

Whereas Seventh-day Adventists understand our mission, as specified in Revelation 14:6, 7, to include a call to the world to worship God as Creator,

We, the members of the General Conference Executive Committee at the 2004 Annual Council, state the following as our response to the document, An Affirmation of Creation, submitted by the International Faith & Science Conferences:

1. We strongly endorse the document’s affirmation of our historic, biblical position of belief in a literal, recent, six-day Creation.
2. We urge that the document, accompanied by this response, be disseminated widely throughout the world Seventh-day Adventist Church, using all available communication channels and in the major languages of world membership.
3. We reaffirm the Seventh-day Adventist understanding of the historicity of Genesis 1-11: that the seven days of the Creation account were literal 24-hour days forming a week identical in time to what we now experience as a week; and that the Flood was global in nature.
4. We call on all boards and educators at Seventh-day Adventist institutions at all levels to continue upholding and advocating the church’s position on origins. We, along with Seventh-day Adventist parents, expect students to receive a thorough, balanced, and scientifically rigorous exposure to and affirmation of our historic belief in a literal, recent six-day creation, even as they are educated to understand and assess competing philosophies of origins that dominate scientific discussion in the contemporary world.
5. We urge church leaders throughout the world to seek ways to educate members, especially young people attending non-Seventh-day Adventist schools, in the issues involved in the doctrine of creation.
6. We call on all members of the worldwide Seventh-day Adventist family to proclaim and teach the church’s understanding of the biblical doctrine of Creation, living in its light, rejoicing in our status as sons and daughters of God, and praising our Lord Jesus Christ—our Creator and Redeemer.

____________________

As a response to the “An Affirmation of Creation—Report”, this document was accepted and voted by the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventist Church Executive Committee at the Annual Council in Silver Spring, Maryland, October 13, 2004.
http://www.adventist.org/beliefs/statements/main_stat55.html

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com

Sean Pitman Also Commented

LSU responds to Michigan Conference
Another Distressed Student wrote (on the Spectrum Blog):

“I have heard Creation preached often! So many of us so-called ‘products’ of LSU are creationists! And many of us have studied in the sciences at LSU.”

http://www.spectrummagazine.org/blog/2010/06/03/la_sierra_mother_writes_review#comment-54704

Indeed, general creationism is preached at LSU. But when was the last time you ever heard literal 6-day creationism preached or actively promoted at LSU? – in either the religion or science departments? I bet is has been a fairly long while…

Come on now, at the very least LSU should be open and honest about what type of creationism is being promoted at LSU – certainly not the type promoted by the organized SDA Church as a foundational pillar of the SDA faith…

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com


LSU responds to Michigan Conference

Getting a pass for attacking just one fundamental belief…

From the Spectrum Blog:

http://www.spectrummagazine.org/blog/2010/06/03/la_sierra_mother_writes_review#comment-54582

Where in the posts on the FB page are there any testimonies about how LSU influenced students to favorably regard the fundamental beliefs of the SDA Church on the topic of a literal 6-day Creation of all life on this planet? Anyone?

Mrs. Webster’s letter, as well as the FB page defending LSU, are both missing the entire point of the current conflict with LSU. The point isn’t that LSU isn’t religious or supporting certain ideas of God and creation in general. The point is that LSU is directly attacking and undermining a very specific view of creation that the SDA Church, as an organization, holds to be a foundational pillar of the unique SDA belief system – – the literal 6-day creation week.

This particular view of a literal 6-day creation week is so fundamental to the SDA Church that it is reflected in the very name of the Church – Seventh-day Adventists.

So, should LSU get a pass when it comes to undermining and attacking this fundamental SDA doctrinal position of the Church because of all the other good things it is doing? Hmmm? I, for one, don’t think so. If a school wishes to carry the name of any organization, it should, at the very least, reflect *all* of the *fundamental* goals and ideals of that organization… not just most of them…

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com


LSU responds to Michigan Conference
@Bill Sorensen:

Since you are censoring dialogue like the liberal forums, I won’t post here anymore. Your duplicity is the same as theirs. In fact worse. They accused me of attacking individuals as their excuse. You can’t even use that as an excuse.

You are simply wrong, and won’t admit it.

I gave you my personal E-mail to continue your efforts to enlighten me if you so choose, but it seems like you only want to present your arguments in forum…

We did not set up this forum to go around attacking people as evil. It is difficult enough to point out that another is in serious error without adding to that the accusation of a deliberate rebellion against God – something that only God himself can know with regard to such doctrinal issues. That simply isn’t the purpose of this website – to judge the hearts of people.

I may be wrong here, but if so, I am sincerely and honestly wrong. I cannot admit something that I do not honestly see.

I perceive that you yourself are honest and sincere in your beliefs. I think you are mistaken, seriously mistaken and causing damage to the cause, but I don’t think you are necessarily responsible for the damage since you seem to be honestly unaware of your errors. If you think it best to no longer post here, that’s fine. We’ll struggle along without you… somehow ; )

Sean Pitman
www.DetectingDesign.com


Recent Comments by Sean Pitman

After the Flood
Thank you Ariel. Hope you are doing well these days. Miss seeing you down at Loma Linda. Hope you had a Great Thanksgiving!


The Flood
Thank you Colin. Just trying to save lives any way I can. Not everything that the government does or leaders do is “evil” BTW…


The Flood
Only someone who knows the future can make such decisions without being a monster…


Pacific Union College Encouraging Homosexual Marriage?
Where did I “gloss over it”?


Review of “The Naked Emperor” by Pastor Conrad Vine
I fail to see where you have convincingly supported your claim that the GC leadership contributed to the harm of anyone’s personal religious liberties? – given that the GC leadership does not and could not override personal religious liberties in this country, nor substantively change the outcome of those who lost their jobs over various vaccine mandates. That’s just not how it works here in this country. Religious liberties are personally derived. Again, they simply are not based on a corporate or church position, but rely solely upon individual convictions – regardless of what the church may or may not say or do.

Yet, you say, “Who cares if it is written into law”? You should care. Everyone should care. It’s a very important law in this country. The idea that the organized church could have changed vaccine mandates simply isn’t true – particularly given the nature of certain types of jobs dealing with the most vulnerable in society (such as health care workers for example).

Beyond this, the GC Leadership did, in fact, write in support of personal religious convictions on this topic – and there are GC lawyers who have and continue to write personal letters in support of personal religious convictions (even if these personal convictions are at odds with the position of the church on a given topic). Just because the GC leadership also supports the advances of modern medicine doesn’t mean that the GC leadership cannot support individual convictions at the same time. Both are possible. This is not an inconsistency.