Comment on PUC responds by Brian.
Why is the promotion of evolution in our colleges so surprising to everyone? It is the logical ending to the path that our schools have been traveling for years. In order to really change this outcome we are going to have to change their entire path.
Our schools were originally designed to create missionaries. The training for an occupation was a secondary aspect to this primary goal. Hence the colleges original names: Emmanuel MISSIONARY College, Southern MISSIONARY College, the College of MEDICAL MISSIONARY EVANGELISTS, etc.
This purpose has been largely lost. The primary goal now is for an occupation and the missionary aspect is a distant second or is not even existent. Everything that compromises their primary goal will be eventually jettisoned. Hence the change in their names; the original names made transferrability more difficult to other colleges.
Follow the money…
Which is more conducive to getting a job in the scientific field, creationism or evolution? Obviously, evolution is the way to go. Creationism will be abandoned, it is just a matter of time. Some colleges will succumb more quickly than others depending on circumstances and their constituency.
Any college that tries to get back to the original purpose will have a very difficult time. Very few Adventists are even interested in going to a college for a missionary purpose, and if they are, then the vast majority are going to the independent colleges; Weimar, Ouachita Hills, etc. Any strong change in direction would most likely bring about a severe loss of students. The largest portion of young SDAs go to college now to get a job and to find a spouse, not to be trained to be MISSIONARY doctors, nurses, teachers, accountants, etc. but rather to be “normal” doctors, nurses,teachers and business people.
We can try to get our colleges to stop promoting evolution, and indeed I think we should, but we must realize that this is merely treating a deadly symptom, like a high-fever. Even if this effort is successful, we must realize that it is not a cure for the disease.
Table of Contents
Recent Comments by Brian
Michigan Conference vs. LSU – Right Wing Politics or Truth in Advertising?
@Ervin Taylor:
Ervin Taylor:
It would be interesting to determine how much of the quoted paragraph in Prophets and Kings EGW “adapted” or “borrowed” from a previous author. I believe everyone is now aware of how much EGW used other writer’s ideas and word phrases in her publications.
It really doesn’t matter even if the entire section was a direct “borrowing.” (Originality is a man-made test, you won’t find it in the Bible). The question is rather, is it truth?
So Erv, do you go by the old adage used in debates everywhere; “If you don’t like the message, attack the messenger”?
Michigan Conference vs. LSU – Right Wing Politics or Truth in Advertising?
@David.
While the scenario you portrayed is entirely plausible, and one could even argue probable, it is also however, reading into the motives (unfavorably at that) of others. While it is entirely proper to judge wrong actions, I would like to remind that it is also not good to judge the motives of others, no matter how plain they may seem to us.
Michigan Conference vs. LSU – Right Wing Politics or Truth in Advertising?
@Faith:
Faith, you totally misunderstood me. Read what I said carefully. I stated that “Unbelieving members” (which I am not a part of), see the church as a democracy. Please reread.
Michigan Conference vs. LSU – Right Wing Politics or Truth in Advertising?
Unfortunately, “Unbelieving Members” of the Adventist church (I don’t like the labels of “Liberal” or “Progressive”. In many ways I am both Liberal and Progressive) see the church as a democracy. Hence, all you need to do in the democratic process is to get the numbers on your side and you can thus legitimately change church policy and doctrines.
“Believing Members” of the church (I don’t like the label “Conservative” either. In many ways I am not Conservative), on the other hand, hold to the idea that there is a absolutely reliable “Constitution” consisting of divinely inspired writings that supersedes all decisions by people that are contrary, whether those decisions are by the majority or minority.
The church has been over this ground before during the days of the kings of Israel. We have the same arguments in principle with just new faces for both the people and the issues.
Revisiting God, Sky & Land by Fritz Guy and Brian Bull
Sean’s article is mark on.
