Comment on Michigan Conference takes substantial action in LSU conflict by Faith.
I would have to disagree with many of you. While taking a strong stand against something that they believe in, the Michigan Conference is risking the futures of any student of a Michigan Conference employee by refusing to honor their previous subsidy commitment. Perhaps they feel students will choose to transfer to another Adventist college or University, but having done this myself, I know that any previous class credits will NOT be accepted by every college and they will have to start over.
Elizabeth:
I find it difficult to understand why you would put academic concerns ahead of spiritual ones. Ok, so the worst case scenario is that the students may have to start over in a different institution. Is that so awful? It is far better for them to start over than be exposed to teachings that will destroy their faith. The Lord will bless them for it. Besides, why could we not appeal to the other institutions to accept the LSU credits for a short time in this emergency? Any institution who is working for the Lord would consider this, I am sure.
What’s more, threatening to pull tithe and sending it to another conference will only hurt those in the community it is meant to help. Does one school’s actions make it alright to refuse to continue God’s work in that area? I understand that you feel a stand is necessary, but at what cost? Are these actions in line with the Adventist doctrine you are so strongly trying to hold on to? I fear that this is only going to cause a division in the church, something which Paul did everything in his power to prevent.
On the subject of tithing considerations, I am sorry that withdrawal of tithing support will affect other areas of the ministry in the Southern California Conference. On the other hand, this will also magnify the pressure put to bear on the SCC to right this situation. Something has to be done to cut out this cancerous heresy. And a split in the church is already known to be in the works…it is called “the shaking”, and I have no doubt this issue is a part of it.
I fear that the faith in the children of the church must be so low, that you cannot allow them to hear anything but what you want them to hear. What are you going to do when they leave school and are out in the real world, and hear opinions that differ from your own? God wishes us to think for ourselves, question, and formulate ideas. Without this we would not and could not learn. I also think that by doing this we can discover God for ourselves, and develop a true relationship with him, rather than one force fed to us by our parents and the church. Elizabeth Wilson
The argument you put forward regarding the children of the church thinking for themselves is sheer nonsense. It has been used over and over to support the teaching of heresy. These children are not in the higher education institutions to figure things out for themselves. They are paying to be taught what is right and true. Your little theory has been blown out of the water long ago by the obvious result of cutting these young people adrift in the stormy seas of heresy. Open your eyes. The result of this has been so many young people becoming confused and losing their faith. When you are young, and you are sent to learn from your professors, you tend to believe what you are being taught. Few know enough to question what they are taught. And this situation is magnified when the professors involved ridicule and persecute those students who do question their teachings.
The point of their attending university and college is that they come to learn from those who supposedly already know what is right and true. Putting the young into an institute of learning and telling them to think for themselves when heresy is being taught and truth suppressed is stacking the deck against them.
First you teach them what is right and true so that they have a foundation to evaluate all subsequent information that life is going to throw at them. You wouldn’t take a college grad and immediately make him a surgeon, would you? Of course not; he hasn’t had the education he needs to operate safely. Same principles apply here.
Table of Contents
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.
