Better yet – let the people know that the Pacific …

Comment on LSU’s public relations man calls Educate Truth ‘attack website’ by BobRyan.

Better yet – let the people know that the Pacific Union leadership has chosen to hire lawyers to go after GC administrators who might dare to criticise LSU — if that is what is actually going on!!

This thing cannot be turned on it’s head – if the facts are allowed to come out into the light of day.

in Christ,

Bob

BobRyan Also Commented

LSU’s public relations man calls Educate Truth ‘attack website’

Larry Blackmer: Adventist World Oct 2009 Article material
Those of us in the NAD Office of Education believe we should not ask parents to pay tuition at an Adventist school and then provide that school with anti-theistic, evolutionary-based, secular textbooks for children to study. Although we can produce teacher materials that will “teach around evolution,” the students and parents are still receiving the textbooks and are reading the material as factual. We will include in the new Adventist series a thorough discussion of the theory of evolution, yet the lessons will bring students back to the Bible as the ultimate authority.

Apparently 2009 was a good year for Adventist leadership to come out with some public statements on what is and is not supposed to be happening in our schools – by being very specific about the topic of evolution.

Larry Blackmer – March 14 2010
@Larry Blackmer:

Let me say it so there is no misunderstanding: I support La Sierra University. There are things that happen on that campus, as on EVERY campus, that I might wish were different. No school is perfect. But to engage in an on-going attempt to publicly destroy the reputation of the school and the individuals trying to work their way through the issues is only playing into the hands of the one trying to destroy us all. There are many, many, many loyal, faithful, God-fearing men and women on the campus of La Sierra University. Students are finding God there and gaining an education that they will use in building up God’s kingdom. Painting the entire school as a hotbed of liberal, anti-Biblical philosophy is wrong and hurtful. La Sierra is working to address the issues that have been raised.

Blackmere appears to argue that if we expose the fact that LSU biology and religion departments are evangelizing SDA students into the camp of evolutionism – then we are accusing them of promtoing “liberal, anti-Biblical philosophy ” and that we should be careful not to paint the entire school for that problem that is being addressed by the LSU board in the case of a couple of key LSU departments. Surely we can all agree not to accuse the Bible believing staff and faculty at LSU of promoting evolutionism if in fact what they are doing – is everything they possibly can to expose the problem, to get leadership to address, to warn students and parents about it … etc.

But at this very web site we have seen a few of those from LSU who claim that they are Bible believing creationists arguing that the evolutionist agenda at LSU is really not that bad, and nothing should change because academic freedom is more important that the sin of promoting what Ellen White calls the “Worst form of infidelity” from within Adventists Schools.

The objective unbiased reader engaged in the process of critical thinking – immediately notices a few glaring facts about Larry Blackmer’s participation in this process.

1. He is strongly critical of Educate Truth’s efforts to bring awareness to the general SDA public, regarding the degree to which evolutionism is being promoted under Larry Blackmer’s watch – “as the right answer for the doctrine on origins” in both LSU biology and religion departments.

2. He avoids entirely – the question of how this problem has been able to go on unnaddressed for so many years under his watch.

3. He avoids entirely – the question of just what is being done at LSU to stop the ongoing work to promote evolutionism on that campus as can be seen by the staff, material, coursework still available today – under his watch.

4. He avoids entirely the seriousness of teaching what Ellen White calls “the worst kind of infidelity” from within our own school, and done so under his watch.

5. His views have now been coopted/hijacked (or rightly used by?) AToday to defend the policy of evolution at LSU – but that fact appears to be fine as compared to the complaints made here by Larry Blackmer for EducateTruth simply printing what Larry actually said.

6. He makes an accusation about his comments taken out of context – but then never shows just how that was done – comparing what was printed here – to the text of his actually comments so as to actually give the weight of evidence to his accusations against Educate Truth. Surely Blackmer is very eager to have critical thinking skills taught in our schools – so surely he would not want the reader simply to swallow “Accusation after accusation” as a kind of “proof” that the accusation was true. If such methods were adopted – non-Adventist critics could simply declare success over the existing mountain of “accusations” they make about Adventist doctrines and history.

7. This site contains testimony from other parents and students who in past years made their complaints known – and they were simply dismissed by the powers that be at LSU. Does Larry Blackmer expect the reader to “believe” that the LSU board efforts to even discuss this problem at this late stage is due to “something else” besides the pressure from fully documented evidence resulting in public awareness of the problem that has been facilitated by this very web site?

in Christ,

Bob


LSU’s public relations man calls Educate Truth ‘attack website’

@Chris CHAN:

I have followed this issue at LSU for a long time now and one thing bothers me and that is :

Why don’t we get the position DIRECTLY from the Professors of Biology at LSU to state their position.

We get comments from everybody else EXCEPT the principals involved. Once we get their position documented in a straight forward manner, then we can see whether their actions and their words agree. From that, we can come to our own conclusions.

On the contrary – Greer is on public video denouncing the divinity of Christ.

Bradley has gone to the press delcaring his — I teach that the Bible is wrong – message.

And we have posted their own course work here.

AND we have guest speakers within their evolution-promoting-biology courses like Erv Taylor, making comments on this site explicitly stating his promotion and beliefs in evolution.

What more did you want as “evidence” coming straight from the sources themselves?

That part of the problem is not the difficult segment. It is “what to do about it” that is the challenge for SDA administrators and informed church members.

in Christ,

Bob


LSU’s public relations man calls Educate Truth ‘attack website’
It also means that a key argument used by evolutionists to protect the efforts to evangelize for evolutionism at LSU has fallen by the wayside.

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