Like or Dislike: 1  1

Like or Dislike: 1  2

Like or Dislike: 1  2

Larry Blackmer: Adventist World Oct 2009 Article material
Those of us in the NAD Office of Education believe we should not ask parents to pay tuition at an Adventist school and then provide that school with anti-theistic, evolutionary-based, secular textbooks for children to study. Although we can produce teacher materials that will “teach around evolution,” the students and parents are still receiving the textbooks and are reading the material as factual. We will include in the new Adventist series a thorough discussion of the theory of evolution, yet the lessons will bring students back to the Bible as the ultimate authority.

Apparently 2009 was a good year for Adventist leadership to come out with some public statements on what is and is not supposed to be happening in our schools – by being very specific about the topic of evolution.

Larry Blackmer – March 14 2010
@Larry Blackmer:

Let me say it so there is no misunderstanding: I support La Sierra University. There are things that happen on that campus, as on EVERY campus, that I might wish were different. No school is perfect. But to engage in an on-going attempt to publicly destroy the reputation of the school and the individuals trying to work their way through the issues is only playing into the hands of the one trying to destroy us all. There are many, many, many loyal, faithful, God-fearing men and women on the campus of La Sierra University. Students are finding God there and gaining an education that they will use in building up God’s kingdom. Painting the entire school as a hotbed of liberal, anti-Biblical philosophy is wrong and hurtful. La Sierra is working to address the issues that have been raised.

Blackmere appears to argue that if we expose the fact that LSU biology and religion departments are evangelizing SDA students into the camp of evolutionism – then we are accusing them of promtoing “liberal, anti-Biblical philosophy ” and that we should be careful not to paint the entire school for that problem that is being addressed by the LSU board in the case of a couple of key LSU departments. Surely we can all agree not to accuse the Bible believing staff and faculty at LSU of promoting evolutionism if in fact what they are doing – is everything they possibly can to expose the problem, to get leadership to address, to warn students and parents about it … etc.

But at this very web site we have seen a few of those from LSU who claim that they are Bible believing creationists arguing that the evolutionist agenda at LSU is really not that bad, and nothing should change because academic freedom is more important that the sin of promoting what Ellen White calls the “Worst form of infidelity” from within Adventists Schools.

The objective unbiased reader engaged in the process of critical thinking – immediately notices a few glaring facts about Larry Blackmer’s participation in this process.

1. He is strongly critical of Educate Truth’s efforts to bring awareness to the general SDA public, regarding the degree to which evolutionism is being promoted under Larry Blackmer’s watch – “as the right answer for the doctrine on origins” in both LSU biology and religion departments.

2. He avoids entirely – the question of how this problem has been able to go on unnaddressed for so many years under his watch.

3. He avoids entirely – the question of just what is being done at LSU to stop the ongoing work to promote evolutionism on that campus as can be seen by the staff, material, coursework still available today – under his watch.

4. He avoids entirely the seriousness of teaching what Ellen White calls “the worst kind of infidelity” from within our own school, and done so under his watch.

5. His views have now been coopted/hijacked (or rightly used by?) AToday to defend the policy of evolution at LSU – but that fact appears to be fine as compared to the complaints made here by Larry Blackmer for EducateTruth simply printing what Larry actually said.

6. He makes an accusation about his comments taken out of context – but then never shows just how that was done – comparing what was printed here – to the text of his actually comments so as to actually give the weight of evidence to his accusations against Educate Truth. Surely Blackmer is very eager to have critical thinking skills taught in our schools – so surely he would not want the reader simply to swallow “Accusation after accusation” as a kind of “proof” that the accusation was true. If such methods were adopted – non-Adventist critics could simply declare success over the existing mountain of “accusations” they make about Adventist doctrines and history.

7. This site contains testimony from other parents and students who in past years made their complaints known – and they were simply dismissed by the powers that be at LSU. Does Larry Blackmer expect the reader to “believe” that the LSU board efforts to even discuss this problem at this late stage is due to “something else” besides the pressure from fully documented evidence resulting in public awareness of the problem that has been facilitated by this very web site?

in Christ,

Bob

Like or Dislike: 4  3

Like or Dislike: 1  1

Shane Hilde says:
April 10, 2010

@Sean Pitman, M.D.: I concur with your comments. I would also add that Blackmer’s LONG comment was removed because of all the private drama he was throwing in which we had previously worked through privately.

Indeed. What is also ironic is that the LSU website would never post commentary of their articles from the likes of you or me. I dare say that Educate Truth is far far more open to publishing opposing opinions than is LSU…

Really, we are all about transparency here at EdTruth. We simply don’t need to sequester information from the opposition. The more of it the better actually. We are grateful for the significant opposition we’ve received to date because without it this issue would never have gone as far as it has. Erv Taylor and Larry Becker have contributed more than most to the success of the main goals of EdTruth – to the significant transparency on these issues that has been generated over this past year at LSU. For that we are most appreciative

Sean Pitman
http://www.DetectingDesign.com

Like or Dislike: 4  2

Response to EducateTruth Website article of March 13, 2010

My comments to the Michigan educators and published on the EducateTruth web site have been taken seriously out of context. The webmaster of EducateTruth emailed me within 48 hours of my comments upset about things he had heard that I said at the meeting that he felt were directed at him. I spent considerable time explaining to him the context of my remarks. Yet he has decided to take selected comments and publish them as part of an ongoing campaign to denigrate La Sierra University. Let me share the same comments I shared with him.

La Sierra University was just one of many issues discussed with the Michigan educators. I prefaced my comments by saying that while there have been things that have happened at La Sierra that I am not happy with, a much more serious issue is how some church members have related to the issue. We are all brothers and sisters in Christ. I believe strongly that we need to support each other and lift each other up, not cannibalize each other.

As Ellen G. White wrote so powerfully, “But how often do professed Christians, by their lack of self-control, open the door to the adversary of souls! Divisions, and even bitter dissensions which would disgrace any worldly community, are common in the churches, because there is so little effort to control wrong feelings, and to repress every word that Satan can take advantage of. As soon as an alienation of feeling arises, the matter is spread before Satan for his inspection, and the opportunity given for him to use his serpent-like wisdom and skill in dividing and destroying the church. There is great loss in every dissension. Personal friends of both parties take sides with their respective favorites, and thus the breach is widened. A house divided against itself cannot stand. Criminations and recriminations are engendered and multiplied. Satan and his angels are actively at work to secure a harvest from seed thus sown. Worldlings look on, and jeeringly exclaim, ‘Behold how these Christians hate one another! If this is religion, we do not want it.’”
The Church’s Great Need, By Mrs. E. G. White, RH, March 22, 1887

I feel betrayed by this website. I have explained the context of my remarks, yet you have taken my remarks and used them in a way that demonstrates exactly what I was speaking against.

I spoke of academic freedom, a vitally important core value on university campuses. I deeply believe that our Adventist universities are the place to discuss controversial topics, including evolution. Our institutions of higher learning MUST teach the concepts of evolution in our science classes. But I believe it should be done in the context of a Biblical, Adventist worldview. I believe our professors should explain the concepts that are held by the world, but also point our students back to the Bible and spiritual values.
There are those that will say that the Bible is not a science book and should not be treated as such. The point is, What do you see as the basis of truth–the Bible or science? I commented that too many times we take academic freedom to mean that “I can say anything I want and no one has the right to question that.” Let me be clear: I believe that in our schools. our parents and students deserve a broad discussion of the issues, including evolution. But we should also bring our students back to the core values of the church.

Regarding WASC accreditation- there was a behind-the-scenes conversation with an official of WASC in which he expressed concern over the church exerting control over La Sierra, particularly in the area of creation/evolution. That conversation was the basis for my comments.

Now let me again be very clear: La Sierra had its WASC visit March 1-3 of this year and it was very successful! WASC evaluates a school on educational effectiveness based on the school’s mission and goals. I answered a question about what would happen if WASC did withdraw accreditation. It was a hypothetical question, and the answer would apply to ANY university or college. My answer was not in any way intended to suggest that WASC was considering a withdrawl of accreditation. Through the questions that were asked of me, the discussion went down a road that was not intended.

Let me say it so there is no misunderstanding: I support La Sierra University. There are things that happen on that campus, as on EVERY campus, that I might wish were different. No school is perfect. But to engage in an on-going attempt to publicly destroy the reputation of the school and the individuals trying to work their way through the issues is only playing into the hands of the one trying to destroy us all. There are many, many, many loyal, faithful, God-fearing men and women on the campus of La Sierra University. Students are finding God there and gaining an education that they will use in building up God’s kingdom. Painting the entire school as a hotbed of liberal, anti-Biblical philosophy is wrong and hurtful. La Sierra is working to address the issues that have been raised. In the campaign of attack against La Sierra, too many people have adopted the current standards of the world, showing an incivility and lack of love that is the opposite of what our Lord desires. We cannot in God’s name destroy each other, no matter how important we believe our cause to be. I ask you to examine your hearts and words and to take seriously this question: What part of this website follows Philippians 4:8?

Let me come back to my original point. We are sons and daughters of God, His children, brothers and sisters in Christ. We need to find ways to support each other and to build up the body of Christ. Followers of the Carpenter of Nazareth with the nail-scarred hands do not use their own hands to throw grenades at each other.

Let us pray together for humility, for gentleness of spirit, and for the love and grace of our Lord Jesus Christ to be seen in our lives and words each day.

Larry Blackmer,
NAD Vice President for Education

Like or Dislike: 3  6

Like or Dislike: 2  2

On April 8th, 2010 Nathan Schilt says (at Adventist Today):
http://www.atoday.com/content/educate-truth-perhaps-elaborate-spoof-turned-ugly

The LSU response to the Review article, which I just read, provides enlightening perspective, particularly on the degree of editorial control exercised over at educatetruth. In view of the fact that they apparently do carefully control the content of posts on their website, I think the editors have no choice but to accept reponsibility for the inflammatory vitriol which Erv has pointed out. The extremist goals of educatetruth have been evident for a long time. However, I have not been particularly impressed, until now, that there is a serious character and integrity problem with those behind the agenda. Since educatetruth censors what it finds offensive, the fact that it publishes vile rhetoric in furtherance of its mission should make its organizers and sponsors crimson with shame. As is often the case with extremists, the odious nature of their agenda is being exposed by the rhetoric they find acceptable to advance it.

You take the statements of LSU’s PR guy, Larry Becker, at face value. The truth is, as far as I’m aware at least, that there is very little editing of the comments of posters to Educate Truth aside from those automated edits for language (swear words and the like), length, spam, etc. Contrary to Becker’s assertions, EdTruth does not edit comments just because they are supportive of LSU. In fact, EdTruth welcomes such comments and there have been many such comments posted – to include those of Erv Taylor and Becker himself on many occasions.

In short, I have no idea where Becker got his ideas from regarding the editing of EdTruth, because he is way off base – to the point of deliberate slander for political purposes.

Also, neither Shane or I support many of the comments posted on EdTruth by various commenters. In fact, I personally find many of them quite appalling – on both sides of this issue. Yet, as with the postings on the Adventist Today website, we feel it important to allow freedom of expression for those with wide-ranging opinions on the issues at hand to be expressed in the comment sections of EdTruth.

What is somewhat ironic here is that, so far, I have been blocked from responding to the latest Erv Taylor tabloid-style article by the Adventist Today moderators on the Atoday website (listed above).

LSU expresses disappointment that the article did not contain more infomation from LSU’s perspective. I suspect educate truth wishes the same thing for its side.

This also isn’t true. Shane and I are very happy with the response of the Adventist Review and think they did a very fine job reporting this issue in a very even-handed and succinct manner. I personally think it very courageous of the AR to publish such an article. I was very surprised when I read it for the first time – shocked actually. David Asscherick told me that he felt the same way when he read the article for the first time. I might even have to start subscribing to the AR if they are going to start publishing relevant articles like this instead of the usual milk-toast stuff.

Considering the quotidian drone of advocacy news reporting from most of the mainstream print media, I thought the Review showed remarkable restraint in not overtly siding with those who seek to have Church doctrine vindicated in our science classrooms.

I think you miss the point of the AR article…

Sean Pitman
http://www.DetectingDesign.com

Like or Dislike: 4  1

@Chris CHAN:

I have followed this issue at LSU for a long time now and one thing bothers me and that is :

Why don’t we get the position DIRECTLY from the Professors of Biology at LSU to state their position.

We get comments from everybody else EXCEPT the principals involved. Once we get their position documented in a straight forward manner, then we can see whether their actions and their words agree. From that, we can come to our own conclusions.

On the contrary – Greer is on public video denouncing the divinity of Christ.

Bradley has gone to the press delcaring his — I teach that the Bible is wrong – message.

And we have posted their own course work here.

AND we have guest speakers within their evolution-promoting-biology courses like Erv Taylor, making comments on this site explicitly stating his promotion and beliefs in evolution.

What more did you want as “evidence” coming straight from the sources themselves?

That part of the problem is not the difficult segment. It is “what to do about it” that is the challenge for SDA administrators and informed church members.

in Christ,

Bob

Hot debate. What do you think? 8  2