Comment on It’s about authority by David Kendall, PhD.
@Cheng
Now I have noticed that a lot of people keep wondering why evolutionary professors and faculty refuse to leave LSU. I give my two cents from experience in always going through public school:
The issue is pride.
By leaving voluntarily, these professors and faculty members will symbolically be succumbing to defeat. In their own minds, they cannot allow such a thing to happen because it would prick their status. Remember that many folks build reputations not upon prayer, but prestige and achievement.
One issue I take with the statement regarding LSU professors “refusing to leave” is that the sense of “refuse” here evokes images of tenured academicians tenaciously holding on to positions in the face of widespread and sustained pressure to resign. I do not think that “a mere website forum full of human criticism” proportionally qualifies as widespread and sustained pressure. It is also unreasonable to expect officials at any level to resign if any pressure is applied; if that were the reality, no position at any level or context could remain filled for long. If a student of mine is dissatisfied with a grade they receive in my class and subsequently calls for my resignation, I will certainly “refuse” to leave unless and until proper procedures and protocols are followed through.
The second issue I take with the above-quoted statement is its assumption that professors’ decisions to stay at LSU are founded in pride and a reticence to “prick their status”, not to mention a reputation not built on prayer. This assumption puts thoughts into the minds and intentions into the hearts of these professors in an entirely inappropriate manner. It may have been an experience gained at public school, but it does not necessary transmit to LSU, or a different public school for that matter.
My two cents to contribute affirm that the colleagues with which I associate have lives and reputations both founded solidly in prayer.
If what you teach is truth, then how can anyone even begin to fight it? Wouldn’t God bless it and multiply it without the help of a doctrinally “wrong†institution such as the SDA Church?
People fight truth all the time. Jesus warned us that “in this world, you will have trouble” and so a lack of opposition is not a guarantee of Divine favor. Outward appearances may be deceptive, and it is difficult to determine how and in what forms God may choose to bless any endeavor. We have the entire “dark” middle ages to illustrate this: biblical truth, as we Protestants see it, certainly did not prosper in a worldly sense.
This would be the equivalent of me going into a university of the society of Jesus, becoming a converted Jesuit, and then preaching the Protestant Reformation as valid.
A side note only: my wife is both Jesuit university-educated, and a Seventh-day Adventist. Being a Jesuit is not something you are necessarily “converted” into, rather it is a religious order within the greater Catholic Church, like the Dominican, Franciscan and Augustinian Recollect orders. I am acquainted with a number of Jesuit priests and institutions through my academic research.
Pax,
David Kendall, PhD
Adjunct Professor of Music
La Sierra University
Table of Contents
Recent Comments by David Kendall, PhD
Clifford Goldstein: Seventh-day Darwinians, Redux
@Hope Sekulic
Goldstein, not to long presented a talk at Weimar Institute. I watched him talk, He appeared perplexed his subject of presentation was all mixed up and confusing. It had not foundation and point. He was jumping from subject to subject, he was moving all over the platform, scratching his head, looking in to his I-phone or what ever it was in his hand, passing up and down with a disruptive spirit.
I was sad to see him so discordant and so disorganized in his talk.
Hope,
Are you suggesting that Goldstein’s difficulties in speaking at Weimar are a result of Satan sowing discord and confusion in the church generally, or an attack on him specifically? I was not sure.
Read and see Who are the Wolfs in the Sheep’s skin and where they like to graze.
I am familiar with the theories stating that Jesuit infiltrators are everywhere, seeking to destroy the church. An SDA pastor friend of mine had his church’s website “denounced” by the “Adventist Liberation Front.” I am familiar with Fr. Alberto Rivera’s testimony that the Jesuit order is the wolf in sheep’s clothing. Interestingly, I get testimonies from a number of friends who have left the SDA church asserting that Adventism is the wolf in sheep’s clothing. Which am I to believe, as both sides have equally heart-wrenching horror stories to tell? Maybe both of them, or maybe neither. I am friends with a number of Jesuit and other Catholic priests through my research in the Philippines (my wife is Jesuit-educated), as well as very many Adventists of different backgrounds (having been a life-long SDA in Arizona, Southern California, Taiwan and the Philippines). I have to say in all honesty that when I look for Christ-centered attitudes, kindness and service towards one’s fellow man, I have often noted these attributes to be significantly stronger among the Catholic priests. Some have told me that this is their deception, their apparition as Satan as an angel of light. However, I have only Christ’s statement, to know them by their fruits. This does not cause me to want to leave my church, but rather expect it to be better; to bear sweeter fruit.
Pax,
David Kendall, PhD
Adjunct Professor of Music
La Sierra University
Dr. Geraty clarifies his “Challenge” to literal 6-day creationism
@BobRyan
unbiased objective readers
objective unbiased reader
Bob,
I have made this query before, but as I have noticed your increased use of the above term (and related variants) both here and in other forums, and I ask again: Who is this unbiased objective reader? How does this reader remain objective and free from bias? I understand that you are using the phrase as a rhetorical device to impart value to your arguments and responses vis-a-vis opposing arguments; by appealing to a supposed authority (objectivity). The only truly objective authority to which we can appeal is God, and as none of us can claim that identity, I am unsure as to the reasoning behind your continued and consistent use of the term.
@Ron Stone, M.D.
Professor Kent, You’re right–there is no point in your “sharing†anything here, as you are pointedly shot down whenever you do! Good bye!
Dr. Stone,
This statement does not, to my mind, seem to be a very efficient process toward convincing others of the rightness of your position. It is this very type of discourse that proves to non-Adventists, non-Christians, and other interested observers that our faith and the commands of Christ to love one another are of a low priority in our everyday lives. I am asking my delegate to the GC session to call for a broad-based, civil, open and honest discussion on origins in the Adventist church, without polemics, threats, and un-Christian language. This is the very minimum we should expect of ourselves and of others who call themselves by Christ’s name.
Pax,
David Kendall, PhD
Adjunct Professor of Music
La Sierra University
Catholic School Fires Math Teacher for Expressing Atheistic Views
Geanna,
I encourage you to go get a PhD, if you can find a good, supportive department (and some funding, hard to come by these days, at least in California), either inside of or outside of the SDA system. I found all of my graduate work to be incredibly rewarding and I strongly recommend it to my own students, though they should always be prepared to open their minds and question their assumptions, despite what others have warned about the dangers of such a route (reading infidel authors, engaging in philosophical debates in the religious sphere, etc.).
One suggestion for working at an SDA institution is to prepare a syllabus and approach a department chair and offer to teach an introductory class, a lab or something else in an adjunct capacity. Working for the church is likewise very rewarding (but not usually in a monetary sense!), though a bit less so in the current environment. Having the privilege of helping to guide and mentor students in an Adventist Christian environment (just as I was in turn guided and mentored) is enough for me. Go for it!
Pax,
David Kendall, PhD
Adjunct Professor of Music
La Sierra University
Dr. Geraty clarifies his “Challenge” to literal 6-day creationism
@Former LSU Student
I am interested in when you attended LSU, because it sounds like you must have been there around the time I was a student (1998-2002). I remember the land sale, etc. that you mentioned, though I may have been serving as a student missionary in Taiwan (2002-2003) when the sale was final. I also do not know what floor of Sierra Towers you lived on (I was on 2nd floor from 1998-2001, then South Hall), but my experiences there, as well as everywhere else on campus, were very different from yours.
Also, not to be confrontational, but it would not be wise to suggest that Dr. Geraty served at LSU due to his inability to perform in the public, secular academic world (if that is what you were suggesting). A cursory glance at his CV will show that he would be a very big fish in any pond.
Pax,
David Kendall, PhD
Adjunct Professor of Music
La Sierra University
Clifford Goldstein: Seventh-day Darwinians, Redux
@ Kevin Paulson
David Kendall seems to view the “teasing out†of various viewpoints in the present controversy as a harmless exercise–the necessary full airing of a particular concept in the name of fairness. This is fine if we are talking about human theories and philosophies or some debate in the secular realm (e.g. politics).
Pastor Paulson,
I did not mention that the “teasing out” of viewpoints is either a harmless exercise or that it is done in the name of fairness or for any other reason; I said simply that this is what scholars do as part of a venerable (or venerated) academic tradition.
In matters spiritual we are not dealing with the harmless interchange of ideas, where any number of varied conclusions might be embraced with innocence.
No mention was made of embracing varied conclusions, be they innocent or otherwise, but rather I advised that “we should keep in mind that philosophers and other scholars often discuss and theorize concepts at great length without necessarily espousing those concepts as truth.”
Do you consider certain lines of inquiry to be off-limits? What kinds of scholarship should be forbidden when our primary concern is the salvation of our souls? Is the very knowledge of “wrong ideas and wrong practices” that which can and will lead to eternal damnation? What do you propose we do about this?
Pax,
David Kendall, PhD
Adjunct Professor of Music
La Sierra University
