Ron Stone M.D., do you seriously believe that publicly criticizing …

Comment on LSU Board says ‘we apologize’ by Eddie.

Ron Stone M.D., do you seriously believe that publicly criticizing leaders by name is going to help solve the problem? Do you believe it is God’s mission for your life to publicly criticize church leadership? When one of your patients fails to lose weight, do you go online to publicly goad the patient?

Eddie Also Commented

LSU Board says ‘we apologize’
Sean wrote:

What they are teaching needs to be public knowledge that is well known and knowable by all.

So what do you want, a webcam in each classroom–so people can freely learn what others pay tuition dollars for?

your effort to support the secrecy that has been taking place at LSU

Excuse me. I have never supported secrecy at LSU. I have repeatedly stated my oposition to megaevolution being taught as the truth at LSU. I even wrote privately to church leaders BEFORE this website ever appeared. I was initially pleased when I first saw this website–until I quickly realized it was being used to attack individuals, including many who have no association with LSU. I have a number of friends who have been slandered here and a few have been so upset they were nearly in tears–and yet nobody ever apologizes.

It amazes me how often this forum’s “Comment Guidelines” are ignored: “Personal attacks and inflammatory behavior will not be tolerated… No belittling of individual members, their character, or their motives.” I remain indignant.


LSU Board says ‘we apologize’
Most SDAs regard Ellen White as a prophet. If she received an inspired message from God to publicly rebuke the college and its professors, who am I to argue with her? However, I seriously doubt anybody reading this forum considers any respondents here to have been divinely inspired to publicly criticize either institutions or individuals.

I have no problem with publicly pointing out the presence of sin in an institution or among church leaders, as long as it is done honestly, respectfully and constructively, in a manner that does not intentionally inflict undue division and harm to the organized church. However, I strongly feel it is a violation of the spirit of the 6th commandment to publicly do so with individuals, including leaders, regardless of whether the sin is private or public. It’s often referred to as the “golden rule” (Matthew 7:12, Luke 6:31).


LSU Board says ‘we apologize’
Bill Sorenson said:

Modern Adventism is becoming a real “sissy” religion. No personal accountability by leaders of themselves individually, or corporately.

With due respect, I disagree. The church has a formal process for accountability, and it does not include public rebuke on the web and other jihadist-like activities (e.g., punching authors who write for Spectrum).


Recent Comments by Eddie

Changing the Wording of Adventist Fundamental Belief #6 on Creation

SDA Bio Prof: The Bible makes multiple falsifiable prophecies about Nebuchadnezzar conquering Egypt, yet history never records it happening. Does this mean the Bible is effectively falsified?

Sean Pitman: Egyptians had a strong tendency not to record their losses… only their victories.

Sean, does that mean YOU personally believe Babylon conquered Egypt, just as predicted by two prophets? In the absence of any empirical evidence? If the Egyptians didn’t record their losses, why wouldn’t the Babylonians have recorded such a stunning victory?


Southern Adventist University opens Origins Exhibit

Holly Pham: One of the things that has always concerned me is that, according to what I’ve read, birds and reptiles have completely different forms of respiratory systems (flow-through vs. bellows) How is this explained by evolutionists?

Evidence from the vertebrae of non-avian theropod dinosaurs suggests that they, too, possessed unidirectional flow-through ventilation of the lungs. So, according to evolutionary theory, it evolved first in “primitive” non-avian theropods rather than in birds, and comprises one of many shared derived characters supposedly linking birds with more “advanced” theropods. However, I don’t think there is any evidence or even a hypothesis for a step-by-step process of HOW it evolved. Here is a reference:

http://www.ohio.edu/people/ridgely/OconnorClaessensairsacs.pdf


Southern Adventist University opens Origins Exhibit
@Bob Helm: Bob, if you send me an e-mail at sdabioprof2@gmail.com I will send you a pdf file of a 1991 article published by Chatterjee in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 332:277-342, titled “Cranial anatomy and relationships of a new Triassic bird from Texas.”

Curiously his description is based only on cranial anatomy. I don’t think he ever published an analysis of its postcranial anatomy.


Southern Adventist University opens Origins Exhibit

David Read: Eddie, ecological zonation will yield the same basic order that you’re pointing to: invertebrates appear before vertebrates; fish appear before amphibians; amphibians appear before reptiles; reptiles appear before mammals; reptiles appear before birds, etc.

It could, and it’s the best creationist explanation, but it doesn’t explain why flowering plants were absent from lowland forests. Or why so many land plants appeared before mangroves, which today occur strictly in the intertidal zone. Or why no pre-flood humans have been found. Or, if Sean is correct that the flood ended at the K-T boundary, why many modern groups of birds and mammals (including marine mammals) which first appear during the Tertiary were not buried by the flood.

David Read: The fact that something appears before something else in the fossil record is not proof than anything evolved into anything else.

True.

David Read: You seem to be complaining that God has not made the fossil evidence compulsory, i.e., so clear that no reasonable person can possibly doubt it. And if God hasn’t made the evidence skeptic-proof, then the skeptic is God’s fault, God is responsible for the skeptic.

I’m not complaining. I’m merely pointing out that the evidence can be interpreted in different ways by honest people. And I’m relieved to see that even you don’t think the evidence is crystal clear.

David Read: Only people of faith can be saved, that is, only people who are willing to trust God and put away doubts can be saved.

I agree.


Southern Adventist University opens Origins Exhibit

David Read: Those tracks are so obviously bird tracks that the fact that some scientists want to assign them to “birdlike theropods” is itself a very useful teaching tool as to how the model creates the data.

David Read: That the model actually creates the data is one of the hardest concepts to get across, not only to lay people but even to the scientists themselves.

How does the model affect the data? Data don’t change and they shouldn’t change. It’s the interpretation, not the data, that is affected by the model.