Re Ron’s QuoteA “day” didn’t really mean an actual 24-hour …

Comment on Creation Debate in the Seventh-day Adventist Church by Ron Stone M.D..

Re Ron’s QuoteA “day” didn’t really mean an actual 24-hour day.
Dear RonAnd thus 2300 days didn’t really mean 2300 days. See the double standard here when it comes to literal interpretation, Ron?Regards

So, Ken are you saying the “evening and the morning” day in Genesis is NOT a literal day? What is your reasoning for it not being so? The Ten Commandment “days” are not literal earth days? The Sabbath a not a real earth day?

NO? Then please inform us how, why, and where we “fundamentalists” are wrong in assuming these ideas to be true.

Ron Stone M.D. Also Commented

Creation Debate in the Seventh-day Adventist Church

And as for the fact that his solution is also that of our Lib SDA – “Seventh-day Darwinists”? – Well Ken has the defense “I am an agnostic” but what excuse do the seventh-day darwinists have?in Christ,Bob  

What excuse? Well, I’ve heard them say that they have a more recent “Present Truth.” Much more recent than that ancient backwater Ellen White!

Creation Debate in the Seventh-day Adventist Church
Warren, Ken knows there is no “double standard.” He persists in trying to use the straw-man argument, used by many liberal SDA’s, that since everything in the bible may not be “literal” then NOTHING is literal.

As an “agnostic” Ken wouldn’t really believe anything in the bible anyway, since God is not actually “proven” to exist. If I didn’t believe someone even existed, why would I want to believe anything He supposedly “spoke” either directly or indirectly?

Creation Debate in the Seventh-day Adventist Church

The part that should be impressive to an agnostic – is that the Dan 2, Dan 7 and Dan 8 predictions are made centuries before the events themselves take Christ,Bob  

Bob, Don’t unbelievers have a term to dismiss and marginalize all that prediction and prophecy stuff? Vaticinium Ex Eventu?

Recent Comments by Ron Stone M.D.

My Goal for La Sierra University

The reason the LaSierra situation has gone uncorrected so long is that most of our administrators have exactly the sort of political instincts that Dan Jackson has. They are politicians and consensus builders; they want to keep the peace and make the trains run on time. But the circumstances call for men of principle, hard men who are willing to stand for the right “though the heavens fall,” i.e., regardless who is offended and loudly complains.

Dave, I agree with you. Jackson’s trying to play on “both teams” is not going to go well for him.

Unfortunately, politics is the “SOP” of many of our SDA officials, Jackson being just one. “Political instincts” are the rule, instead of actually doing what is “right” according to what we know in God’s Word.

Bradley, Beach and Kaatz retain attorney

Shane Hilde: Think big fish: LSU or the Seventh-day Adventist Church.Graham might not have followed procedure with these men, but I don’t know what the procedure is. I’ve read what the process is in the faculty handbook, but I don’t know if that applies to administrative positions which are at will employees. If it does apply to them, then it appears the process was not followed.

Trustees book says, in 6,9,F, that the Trustes may “discontinue” virtually anyone working at the university.

Does that mean to “fire” or to “force their resignation? Seems like it does.

My Goal for La Sierra University

GMF: If what has been reported about Jackson is correct it is very troubling. Also, one can only wonder why he was selected as the NAD President.I’ve seen a thing or two which made me wonder about Jackson but this report, if true, has to be the worst. May the Good Lord help us!

Jackson was selected to replace Don Schneider, who was also very “passive” in his approach to this problem.

Besides telling Wisbey to “love Jesus” Jackson did virtually nothing.

My Goal for La Sierra University
Sean, Great summary and analysis of the current situation. Another good review of this matter is in the Jan-March 2011 Elders Journal. It also goes into the 2004 evaluation and recommendations, as you have quoted.

Bradley, Beach and Kaatz retain attorney
How about a “class action” suit against anyone and everyone who has heard the tape or has heard OF the tape?