BobRyan said: On the other hand – the evidence of …

Comment on Video show LSU undermining church doctrine by BobRyan.

BobRyan said:

On the other hand – the evidence of a pro-evolution scorched-bible policy in both the religion and biology departments at LSU is pretty hard to ignore as we saw here.http://www.educatetruth.com/la-sierra-evidence/lsu-cant-deny-the-facts/comment-page-1/#comment-16275

Thus pointing to the problem that LSU professors themselves admit to –

So this places biology and religion majors at LSU at “highest risk”.

It places other students “at risk” only as they are required to take courses in those departments as “electives” and then only to the extent that professors in those departments feel inclined to “indoctrinate for evolutionism” even in the 101 and 201 level general coursework. So who knows how often that might be?

@Geanna Dane:

On the other hand – many LSU students know nothing about this “evidence” and are completely unaffected by it. Geanna Dane(Quote)

True – many of the art, history, business, chemistry, math, education majors etc could be oblivious to what is being taught in the biology and religion departments if they do their best to avoid those departments outside of electives, do not talk to other students who are neck-deep into those departments and are not overly influenced by the much more prevalent “I am not an evolutionist but evolutionism is no big deal after all we teach that it is fact here, nobody should care if it is promoted by our universities or not” crowd.

Ellen White has an interesting comment on the general idea.

What astonishing deception and fearful blindness had, like a dark cloud, covered Israel! This blindness and apostasy had not closed about them suddenly; it had come upon them gradually as they had not heeded the word of reproof and warning which the Lord had sent to them because of their pride and their sins. And now, in this fearful crisis, in the presence of the idolatrous priests and the apostate king, they remained neutral. If God abhors one sin above another, of which His people are guilty, it is doing nothing in case of an emergency. Indifference and neutrality in a religious crisis is regarded of God as a grievous crime and equal to the very worst type of hostility against God. {3T 280.3}

in Christ,

Bob

BobRyan Also Commented

Video show LSU undermining church doctrine
Thus if we had a religion department teaching the immortality of the soul, praying to the dead, infant baptism and straight Calvinist arbitrary selection — one “could” argue that since only the upper division classes included this information ‘it is no big deal’.

If LSU biology science departments entered into religious areas other than origins and “belief” in evolutionism, embracing the way that Tesla combined spiritualism with his “science” for example — but confined that apostasy to just upper division courses – we “could argue” that most studenst at LSU would not be affected by it directly so ‘take no action’.

But if administrators really took such a hands-off no-concern attitude towards their job – then soon we would have an LSU goal of “being the best public university that Adventist tuition, tithe and offering dollars can buy” and nothing more.

in Christ,

Bob


Video show LSU undermining church doctrine
On the other hand – the evidence of a pro-evolution scorched-bible policy in both the religion and biology departments at LSU is pretty hard to ignore as we saw here.

http://www.educatetruth.com/la-sierra-evidence/lsu-cant-deny-the-facts/comment-page-1/#comment-16275


Video show LSU undermining church doctrine

I wonder why it is that some would want to call into question the fact that the earth was not created in six days? That is to say, not evolutionists, but others such as what you present that want to interpret this verse in such a manner that the earth was a ball of nothingness. Why is it important to make this an issue?
It seems that those who teach evolution want to make the animals millions of years old as well as the earth. So, if it is carbon dating, I don’t see that anything is gained by this interpretation. The main concern in this discussion is that there were six literal days when God created the things on this earth, including man. And He rested on the seventh day, the Sabbath. This is the truth that has been perverted by the professors at La Sierra and supported by the president and faculty and allowed to continue by the La Sierra Board of Trustees and the Pacific Union.

That is a good point. The glaring issue at LSU is that they flatly deny the Genesis 1 account – denying that all life originated on earth in 6 literal days – denying the Law of God itself in Ex 20:8-11, denying the reliability of God they choose instead the “birds came from reptiles” fictions of atheist evolutionists.

And oh – by the way – the Sun and the moon were created on day 4.

in Christ,

Bob


Recent Comments by BobRyan

Academic Freedom Strikes Again!

george:
By definition, I don’t believe in miracles or apocryphal, anthropomorphic stories about same.Why aren’t scientists observing them today if they occur?

Circular argument. If they were naturally occurring we would expect scientists to see that they are still occurring today. If they are singular events caused by an intelligent being – that being would be under no obligation to “keep causing world wide floods” as if “to do it once you must continually do it”. Armstrong went to the moon.. shall we argue that unless he keeps going to the moon so each new generation can see it … then it did not happen?

Your argument is of the form “all eye witness evidence to some event in the past is no evidence at all unless that event keeps repeating itself so we too can witness it”. Seems less than compelling.

“Could it be that science is better able to detect hoaxes and false claims?” As a rule for dismissing every eye witness account in the past – it is less than compelling. (even when that event cannot be repeated)

Evolutionists “claim” that dust, rocks and gas (in sufficient quantity and over sufficient time and a lot of luck) self organized into rabbits via prokaryote-then-eukaryote-then-more-complexity. But such self-organization cannot be “observed” today.

(What is worse – such a sequence cannot even be intelligently manipulated to occur in the lab)

By your own argument then you should not believe in evolution.


Academic Freedom Strikes Again!
@Sean Pitman:

Suppose you were at a crime scene … there is a tree limb on the ground and a bullet hole in the victim — “all natural causes”? or is one ‘not natural’? Those who say that nothing can be detected as “not naturally occurring in nature” – because all results, all observations make it appear that every result “naturally occurred without intelligent design” seem to be missing a very big part of “the obvious”.


Academic Freedom Strikes Again!

george:
Gentlemen,

What just God would allow an innocent child to be born guilty for the sins of a distant ancestor? …What if there was only One Commandment? Do Good. ‘Kant’ see a problem with that.

An atheist point of view is not often found here – but this is interesting.

1. God does not punish babies for what someone else did – but I suppose that is a reductionist option that is not so uncommon among atheists. The “details” of the subject you are commenting on – yet according to you “not reading” – is that humans are born with sinful natures. A “bent” toward evil. That is the first gap right out of the gate between atheism and God’s Word..

2. But still God supernaturally enables “free will” even in that bent scenario, the one that mankind lives in – ever since the free-will choice of the first humans on planet earth – was to cast their lot in with Satan and rebellion..(apparently they wanted to see what a wonderful result that poor choice would create). John 16 “the Holy Spirit convicts the world of sin and righteousness and judgment”. And of course “I will draw ALL mankind unto Me” John 12:32. (not “just Christians”). Thus supernatural agency promotes free will in a world that would otherwise be unrestrained in its bent to evil.

3.God says “The wages of sin is death” — so then your “complaint” is essentially “that you exist”. A just and loving God created planet Earth – no death or disease or suffering – a perfect paradise where mankind could live forever … and only one tiny restriction… yet Adam and Eve allowed themselves to be duped by Satan… tossing it all away. The “Just God” scenario could easily just have let them suffer the death sentence they chose. He did not do that… hence “you exist” – to then “complain about it”.

4. Of course you might also complain that Satan exists – and Satan might complain that “you exist”. There is no shortage on planet earth of avenues for complaint. But God steps in – offers salvation to mankind at infinite cost to himself – – and the “Few” of Matthew 7 eventually end up accepting that offer of eternal life. The rest seem to prefer the lake of fire option… sort of like Adam and Eve choosing disease and death over eternal life (without fully appreciating the massive fail in that short-sighted choice).

In any case – this thread is about the logic/reason that should be taken into account when a Christian owned and operated institution chooses to stay faithful to its Christian mission — rather then getting blown about by every wind of doctrine. Why let the alchemy of “wild guessing” be the ‘source of truth’ when we have the Bible?? We really have no excuse for that. As for science – we can be thankful that it has come as far along as it has – but no matter how far back you rewind the clock of our science history – we should always have chosen the Bible over wild guessing.


Newly Discovered Human Footprints Undermine Evolutionary Assumptions

Ervin Taylor:
Perhaps Dr. Pitman would enlighten his readers what on earth “the neo-Darwinian story of origins” might be. Darwin did not address origins.

Origins of what?? the first eukaryote??
Or “origins of mankind”??

Darwin himself claimed that his own false doctrine on origins was totally incompatible with Genesis and that because of this – Genesis must be tossed under a bus.

hint: Genesis is an account of “Origins” as we all know — even though “bacteria” and “amoeba” are terms that don’t show up in the text.

The point remains – Darwin was promoting his own religion on origins totally counter to the Bible doctrine on origins. He himself addresses this point of the two views.


Newly Discovered Human Footprints Undermine Evolutionary Assumptions

Ervin Taylor:
Here we go again.If the footprints upon close examination, are determined not to be from a hominim/hominid, I wonder if Educate Truth (sic) will announce that determination.Or if the date of the surface is determined to be much younger, will there be a notice placed on fundamentalist web-sites.If you believe the answer to these questions are yes, I have a big bridge that I would like to sell you for pennies on the dollar.

Here we go again … hope piled upon hope…no matter the “observations in nature” that disconfirm the classic evolutionary hypothesis

Reminds me of “What we still don’t know” by Martin Reese and Leonard Suskind