For real education reform, take a cue from the Adventists

So should Adventist biologists teach evolution as the best explanation for life. NO!. I mean, scientists DON’T have an agreed upon explanation for how life began. And they never will. The odds are way too stacked against a random process creating life. Read Dembski or Behe or Meyer for some thoughtful critique of naturalistic evolution. (I hope these authors are required reading for Adventist biology students.) We do need to teach the basics of evolution so that students don’t hear the arguments for the first time from hostile sources.

Well the good news is that ALL of our universities do teach the basics of evolutionism in science courses – in fact even our elementary and Academies do it. Because as you point out – students need to know that this kind of by-faith-alone belief system exists and that they will need to understand the concepts though they need NOT “believe” the alchemist storytelling about “birds coming from reptiles”.

But few if any of our teaching institutions have lept off the cliff of by-faith-alone evangelism for evolutionism as the right doctrine on the origins of all complex genomes seen today – in the way that LSU has to this day. (Ala Prof Bradley, Greer, Grismer, Guy with guest appearances by Taylor) and the oh-so-essential support of Larry Geraty while doing it.

in Christ,

Bob

---

For real education reform, take a cue from the Adventists

These are leaders in Adventist academic institutions that are attempting to circumvent the work that has been done in the past 150 years. These are educated and professional individuals that are acting in direct conflict with the contract that they had to sign when they accepted the position.
As leaders we do not arbitraily get to decide that we no longer agree with the church doctrine so we can change what we do and how we handle things.
There is plenty of scripture that says exactly what will happen if we continue in this vain.

Indeed. In 1Cor 5 Paul blames the church for not taking swift action in such cases.

In the example we have with Achan – God blames Israel for not taking swift action against Achan.

As we see in

Neutrality in Religious crisis: condemned

In the full light of the sun, surrounded by thousands,–men of war, prophets of Baal, and the monarch of Israel,–stands the defenseless man, Elijah, apparently alone, yet not alone. The most powerful host of heaven surrounds him. Angels who excel in strength have come from heaven to shield the faithful and righteous prophet. With stern and commanding voice Elijah cries: “How long halt ye between two opinions? if the Lord be God, follow Him: but if Baal, then follow him. And the people answered him not a word.” Not one in that vast assembly dared utter one word for God and show his loyalty to Jehovah. {3T 280.2}

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}

Failure to act decisively – the very worst type of hostility against God.

Corporate Guilt Principle: Explained

I saw that many souls will sink in darkness because of their covetousness. The plain, straight testimony must live in the church, or the curse of God will rest upon His people as surely as it did upon ancient Israel because of their sins. God holds His people, as a body, responsible for the sins existing in individuals among them. If the leaders of the church neglect to diligently search out the sins which bring the displeasure of God upon the body, they become responsible for these sins. But to deal with minds is the nicest work in which men ever engaged. All are not fitted to correct the erring. They have not wisdom to deal justly, while loving mercy. They are not inclined to see the necessity of mingling love and tender compassion with faithful reproofs. Some are ever needlessly severe, and do not feel the necessity of the injunction of the apostle: “And of some have compassion, making a difference: and others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire.” {3T 269.2}

Some feel they have the luxury of turning a blind eye to problems even if those problems are called in 3SG 90-91 the “worst form” of infidelity.

Well we live in a free will universe.

To each his own.

But as for me and my house – we will serve the Lord.

in Christ,

Bob

---

Supreme Court Decision on Church Employment Case

Mack Ramsy:: : but the one thing we know for certain is that it was designed to change. There are so many back up and redundancies designed to make whatever changes that DNA faces to be profitable for the organism, or if their deleterious to ensure they don’t damage the subsequent generation (yes there are very complex methods for doing this) The immune system in fact does it intentionally.

BobRyan:
Obviously the references above to “designed” and “intention” could not be overlooked by the objective unbiased reader applying a bit of critical thinking to the topic. And so my response below merely states the obvious point of agreement on a part of that post.

No wonder the application of a bit of critical thinking just then – demands that we conclude from your remarks above – that you are an example of an evolutionist that is strongly in favor of Intelligent Design. I too favor I.D.

Mack Ramsy:
Obviously the references abov

I don’t believe in ID as it’s traditionally defined. I believe that God created a system designed to evolve.

BobRyan:
Obviously the references abov
In your earlier statement you claimed that system was designed with “redundancy and backup” features. That is not something rocks, gas and water could ever do – hence the term “Intelligent Design”.

But perhaps you have access to more highly advanced rocks, gas and water?

Also you mention “intention” as if the immune system was deliberately designed with an end goal in view.

As it turns out – it is those “intention” and “Intelligent Design” aspects (so key to your response above) that are at the very heart of I.D. enabled science were we have the freedom to “follow the data where it leads” even if it leads to a conclusion in favor of design that does not fit atheist dogma about there “being no god”.

how odd then that you seem to later back pedal on your prior observation.

Thus you seem to be in somewhat of a self-conflicted position at the moment.

At least given the content of your statements about “intent” and “backup systems” and “redundancy” designed into the systems themselves (even to the point of “error correction” as we see in the case of nucleic polypeptide amino acid chains and their chiral orientation).

Of course all that just gets us back here
http://www.thebranch.org/videos/Creation_Calls.mov

Mack&#032Ramsy: My language in this forum is not formal. Try not to get caught up in semantic issues.

Out of curiosity is that statement supposed to provide a solution to just how it is that something “not designed” is able to exhibit unique design characteristics such as “back up systems” – “redundancy” – error correcting mechanism and an “immune system with intention” regarding a specific outcome or goal?

No doubt the study of biology most definitely shows us that such things are present “in nature” based on “observations in nature” – and so you are right to state it as you did.

So if you are then going to double back and reject what you just affirmed – what do you have by way of “explanation” for such a self-conflicted course?

Reaching for a solution of the form – “Pay no attention to my actual words if they do not serve to deny I.D.” does not provide as satisfactory resolution to the problem as you may have at first supposed.

in Christ,

Bob

---

Strumming the Attached Strings
@David Read:

Erv Taylor is not “afraid” to post here – but he is “Afraid” to have well thought out views posted on AToday that do not flatter his agenda.

That was not news right?

in Christ,

Bob

---

Michigan Conference vs. LSU – Right Wing Politics or Truth in Advertising?
@John J.:

John&#032J&#046: The fact remains, any decision direction or policy made by a church, conference, union or GCEC can be reversed or changed by those they serve.

Agreed and the fact that the constituency are not voting to reverse it – is a sign that this is not merely the views of the Administration in Michigan.

As for hierarchy – there is no doctrinal authority in the administrators.

And as for administrative hierarchy – the GC leadership has no authority to dismiss rogue teachers which is one of the reasons that this particular meltdown at LSU seems to go on and on and on. It slows at times and it speeds up at other times – but the fire is not simply put out.

in Christ,

Bob

---

A “Christian Agnostic”?

ken:: Let’s continue shall we. You posit that Adam and Eve were producing telomerase as adults as a result of eating fruit from the tree of life. Would you agree that the production of adult telomerase was a direct result of the environment or did the gene(s) affecting production of the a enzyme as adults mutate in their progeny?

1. I never stated whether the fruit from the Tree of Life provided the telemerase enzyme or simply provided a trigger enzyme/protein that caused Adam and Eve to produce Telemerase. Either way the end result was the same.

2. The salient point is that we have a known mechanism that affects the aging of cells starting with new borns.

This is simply “observation in nature” given in response to your question about an observed mechanism in humans for the 900 year life span the Bible mentions.

BobRyan:
It is hard to “do the study” without having them under observation.

1. But it is not hard to see the gradual decline in ages over time.

2. It is not hard to see the Bible declare that access to the Tree of Life was the determining factor.

3. It is not hard to see that even in humans today – the ability remains for us to produce telemerase – but we quickly lose that ability.

4. It is not hard to see what effect that has on the telomeres of infants.

The list of knowns for this mechanism are far more impressive than the “I imagine a mechanism whereby static genomes acquire new coding genes not already present and functioning in nature and that this happens for billions of years”.

Ken: Hi BobWe are making good progress!Thanks for your admitting thaf we do not have Adam and Eve or their progeny under observation to do the study.

My pleasure.

Let’s look at the empirical results of your observation. There is no physical evidence that the progeny or descendants lived to 900 years, right? Thus there is no physical evidence that the tree of life provided longevity through the increased production or activation of telermerase right?

There is evidence that a mechanism does exist whereby access to an enzyme would in fact affect the aging process of human cells.

That mechanism is observed in nature to be related to the enzyme Telemerase.

There is a ton of evidence that food contains enzymes and proteins and that the human body can produce enzymes in response to the presence of trigger proteins and enzymes.

It is irrefutably true that humans still today produce telemerase in the case of infants just before birth. Impossible to deny it – though you seem to want to go down that dead end road.

You asked about the “mechanism” that can be observed today that would account for long ages of life recorded in the Bible.

You now seem to be pulling the classic “bait and switch” asking for the video of the people living for long ages before the flood.

Nice try —

As I said before – your method is along the lines of grasping at straws in a true “any ol’ exuse will do” fashion.

in Christ,

Bob

---

SDA Darwinians compromise key church doctrines
Rev 21 does not say the planet has no light – it says the City has no NEED of light from the Sun.

The inconvenient deatils point to the fact that the New Earth will have a Sun and Moon but the New Jerusalem will have eternal day due to the light of God’s presence.

This is not the hard part.

in Christ,

Bob

---