@Adventist in High School: as an Adventist, I cannot agree …

Comment on Students and alumni sing LSU’s praises by BobRyan.

@Adventist in High School:

as an Adventist, I cannot agree with a mindset that labels incorrect another’s view simply because you are in disagreement with it

Ok – in my previous post I suggested that AdventistStudent might be a pro-evolutionist educator teaching in one of our undergrad schools — I take that back now.

in Christ,

Bob

BobRyan Also Commented

Students and alumni sing LSU’s praises
Spectrum has published a blog by one of the LSU constituents – a letter that was possibly sent to the Adventist Review – complaining that the Review revealed the controversy at LSU to their readership.

http://www.spectrummagazine.org/blog/2010/06/03/la_sierra_mother_writes_review#comment-54374

A number of responses to the LSU crisis from pro-evolution supporters (or at least defenders) seems to take the form “yes but there are nice people at LSU”.

As might have been predicted – the letter sent to the review did not mention the “actual” issue that was reported in the Review article – it just insisted that the Review understand that “there are nice people” at LSU.

As Geraty said “if they could just see our faces”.

in Christ,

Bob


Students and alumni sing LSU’s praises
@TC Tan:

As an SDA residing in Singapore, I have met other SDAs who made me aware of this LSU issue. I’ve been following the developments and want to express my solidarity with those who stand simply on God’s Word. While we all appreciate how modern education has been able to enrich our lives, we realized that all true education is an unveiling of God’s truth in nature – not the other way around. God bless His Church   (Quote)

This raises another point worth mentioning. From the discussion on the web site it sometimes “appears” that when you walk into a church in North America you find an evenly split group of creationists vs evolutionists.

But that is not the case by far!! In fact the vast majority of Adventist congregations in North America would be shocked to find that even ONE of our universities is preaching evolutionism as if it were true. You would be hard pressed to find the tiny minority of them that actually think evolution might actually be a good idea!

No doubt – LSU is the flag ship of that majority-wanna-be group and LSU is not the only place you will find an evolutionist or two, but they have a long way to go before they win the hearts and minds of Seventh-day Adventists even in North America – let alone the world church.

in Christ,

Bob


Students and alumni sing LSU’s praises
Notice that in these dicussions – the only students that get whacked by LSU SDA professors – are the students who dare to believe in creation.

Not once have we seen anyone claim that the school placed them on probation, or is filing legal action against them – because they take an all-for-evolutionism view of the world.

By contrast – we do see a lot of heat being put on the Creationist students.

And so – this site is placing some attention on SDA professors that promote evolutionism from their “pulpits” and who appear to be intolerant of SDA students that believe in the Adventist doctrine on origins “instead”.

Then the annonymous “AdventistStudent” claims that he/she has the need to not let anyone know much about them (as IF they are one of the evolutionist SDA professors getting exposed by this web site).

I find that curious – because so far Adventist students that “believe in” evolutionism as the right answer for the doctrine on origins – have not gotten any bad-reviews from the SDA science teachers (either creationist or evolutionist science teachers). No not even one example of it so far.

Curiouser and Curiouser 😉

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