Sean: My understanding as well is that the LSU issue has …

Comment on The SECC stands for something by Shannon.

My understanding as well is that the LSU issue has been going on for 7-10 years. Doug Batchelor’s sermon just happened–there seems to be no movement or behind the scenes documentation of working with the Pastor toward a Christian conclusion to this issue. Now suddenly, the SECC is throwing the explosion out there.

On the other hand, the people working with LSU on Educate Truth have had issues and worked for peaceful and behind the scenes resolution for 7-10 years. The opponents to this issue call for them to sit down again due to the fact that they have not handled it in a Christian matter according to Mat 18 or are bashing the subject/issue and it should have been handled more delicately.

Now, the contrast seems to be obvious to me. It’s okay if we do it but not if you do it! In fact, that NAD President said in effect you have to remember you cannot just go in with a sledge hammer and crack heads. But this is how they are okay approaching Doug Batchelor. Just depends on who you are?!

Maybe it is just me though?

Shannon Also Commented

The SECC stands for something
That does seem to be the case of one of the situations if you take the extreme of one perspective but there are many, many more. . . . Parents who’s children went to LSU believing in God and came out agnostic. Students who complained because they didn’t like the class material. Students who didn’t complain and just toughed it out. Adults who have talked to faculty and administrators about these issues–it is not just one student as you imply with the SECC that has a beef because of his grade–you grossly exaggerate! However, I’m sure that if it were an A student, there would still be some excuse–“It is just one student, or they were just a complainer trying to control the class.” In then end, the believe presupposes the answer. To illustrated this. I’m sure my current statement will not convince you either.

In the end, it is not an accusation–it is a fact that the teachers in question are teaching evolution. They are–why are we arguing this. Then Peter–you imply that the Bulletin states this openly. This does not. It in fact dances around the idea that science is taught in a supportive Christian environment but does not clearly state that it is fundamental or not. Given that a significant portion of LSU’s constituents find this an important issue one way or the other due to the fact that it is a private SDA school–it should be stated outright. In fact, I support that no SDA institution should teach anything that does not support church fundamental beliefs–if you feel differently–I am fine with that as long as you teach somewhere else but don’t take a paycheck. You may want to try and work with the church to change understanding of Biblical doctrine before you actively try and undermine them. That is not consistent with church unity or Biblical council.

The issue still is basically down to the merits of evolution in our church and ordination of women. They are both issues of importance. Similar requests for action have been requested from both sides. I don’t see much difference. Just because there was a different trigger or you are claiming one, you claim to be more righteous–that does not make sense.

The SECC stands for something
I have to say. I am glad they did but that is not material to my point that one of the main arguments I see is that people pushing things like this are not loving and are being divisive. They say this in and of itself by these techniques are wrong.

Now I see them used by the same people and cheered. You don’t see the issue there? If the techniques are okay then, can’t we just argue about substance? I think that is why technique was brought up–substance at this time doesn’t hold too well. . . . At this moment, our church doctrine says God did it in 6 days and they are working for a church school. Academic freedom really only applies to public school issues.

Recent Comments by Shannon

Dr. Ervin Taylor: ‘A truly heroic crusade’
Carl and Sean,
Great summary Sean!
Carl, I do not think that Sean’s point is that he was trying to prove 6000-10,000 years. He was trying to decided which was more tenable–the traditional Biblical understanding of Genesis or the more Evolutionary from a Scientific perspective. Given the evidence, he feels that the weight is further from the ultra long–both take as certain amount of faith in the end. You just start with having to decide between the 2 ideas–Short or really long–I don’t think that there is a third choice religiously or scientifically out there at this moment.

My feeling is that it is always going to be nice to see some evidence but in the end, you will have to decide in faith. That is what you will do with the science or with the religion. Right at this time, I think we are all going to have to chose if we are going to make a religion out of science or not. If not, I think we better stick with what the Bible says and it is pretty straight forward to me. Then, it will always be nice to get a little back up from the science but we don’t have to.



PS–The Bible advises not to sleep with your neighbor’s wife. If society said otherwise, and 99.9% of experts said it was okay, would you do it? Some things we just will get wrong.

Dr. Geraty clarifies his “Challenge” to literal 6-day creationism
Shane: Thank you. You comment was better worded than I could have explained. promoted on 3ABN
Michael: When you become an apostle or prophet–you can write letters–long ones– of discipline with strong language even as necessary. A lot of people use this as the norm to be able to talk to strangers and acquaintances the same way they would discipline their children when they have not established any status for this or knowledge for the other party to base any ability to judge or respect. More than likely the other will react negatively. This is not the case for the majority of us and will not be. When or if you obtain leadership in our church this may change for you but until that time you may not be able to instruct as such. The funny thing about the internet is that there is no way of telling as I said before so you have to assume the other person has no idea so the best to do is act as such with kindness and explanation.

Examples: “Where do I begin?” “poor bible student and quite ignorant of church history.” “Really?”

Maybe, maybe you were just being just a little defensive. Do you think the evolutionists will go any easier on you? Especially if you are trying to tell them they are of the devil.

Your quote of Timothy with exposure of sin before the church to reduce the chance of having it happen again–how would you go about that if you were in charge. I know a personal friend that had that happen to them–they left the church for many years–they were brought before the church and asked to confess their sin before the whole congregation at church. Yes, it was a sin. There was no 2 ways about it. So in front of a church filled with people a 16 year old girl told how she got pregnant out of wedlock! It is this type of misinterpretation of scripture that hurts people, their understanding of God and our church! Sin has to be handled and removed correctly–a leader should have the responsibility to confess to the church a public issue or sin. A 16 year old with a private sin may best need to deal with a few people at a time and specifically confess and ask forgiveness to the family she lives with and maybe the one of her significant relationship. promoted on 3ABN
Justin: You are obviously biased. I’m sorry you see it that way. I did use the Bible and did not insinuate that Micheal did not know what he was talking about. I’m glad you are happy about being right though. It is nice to feel that way. . . . promoted on 3ABN
Michael: You have no idea who I am or what my education is. The internet on a discussion site is no place for long explanations and arguments. Basic quotes and beliefs are simple for explanation or understanding. More will not get the job done in this format. Making judgments as to education and ignorance is usually comparative and not too accurate. My statements were made on the other hand off of your ongoing aggressive and demeaning use of wordage in our discussion and discussion with others that don’t happen to agree with you.

You may find that the world will all be much less smart that you if you use agreement with you as the criteria. There are a lot of people that use this as a criteria by the way and I have been treated badly by many of them. Some of them are probably much smarter that you and me put together. Just because of that does not make them right or any more believable.

Respect truly comes as a result of the ability to be respected.