Você está na página 1de 4

January 1, 2010

Re: Darwinism at La Sierra University:

An Open Letter to:

Elders Jan Paulsen, Don C. Schneider, Ricardo Graham


12501 Old Columbia Pike
Silver Spring, MD 20904-6600 USA
Telephone: 301-680-6000

Dear Elders Paulsen, Schneider, and Graham,

As you know, the concern for the teachers and leadership of La Sierra University (LSU)
continues. Despite several direct requests from Elder Paulsen and the leadership of the
General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists to promote SDA fundamentals in all classrooms
within SDA schools, 1, 2, 3 many of the science professors at LSU continue to promote
mainstream evolutionary thinking as the true story of origins.4, 5 Beyond this, these same
teachers are currently telling their students that those who believe in a literal 6-day creation
week are part of a "lunatic fringe" within the SDA Church - even noting their position in
interviews with secular journals.6

LSU has had several board meetings to discuss this issue. While they have reaffirmed their
support of the fundamental SDA doctrine on a literal creation week, they have done nothing to
address the active promotion of Darwinism and theistic evolution within LSU classrooms. So
far, what they have recommended is that an extra freshman class be added to introduce
students to the conflict between the SDA perspective on origins and mainstream science and
have asked the Association of Adventist Colleges and Universities to form a "study group" to aid
in the establishment of a viable curriculum to support the call of the General Conferences
Executive Committee regarding a scientifically rigorous affirmation of a historical belief in a
literal, recent, six-day creation week.7, 8

While we wait for this "study group" to produce what LSU considers to be a viable curriculum in
support of the request of the organized SDA Church, a request presented years ago in 2004,
what is going to be done in the meantime? - business as usual? - with the modern synthesis
view of evolution being taught as fact in "SDA" classrooms? - along with continued scoffing at
the ludicrous notion of a literal 6-day creation week at LSU? How is it that this situation is being
tolerated by the organized SDA Church regarding the education of generations of its own young
people? - students who are being sent with great personal sacrifice to our schools by parents
and constituents who think they are obtaining a real "SDA" education for their children?

Parents are actually being told, by LSU, that they are currently getting the very best that
Adventist education has to offer. Randal Wisbey, president of LSU, has assured us, in the same
manner of his predecessor, Lawrence Geraty, that, "All of our biology professors believe in the
creator God whose handiwork is on display in the natural world." 9 Geraty himself, while he was
president of LSU, publicly sided with self-styled "progressive Adventism" - to include support for
the idea of life existing and evolving on this planet for hundreds of millions of years of time. He
also strongly supported the conversion of retired GC vice president Richard Hammill from the
outdated notions of a literal creation week in recent history to an evolutionary model of origins
over vast periods of time.10 This explains why so many evolutionary scientists have been hired
by LSU over many years. While both Geraty and Wisbey argue that these professors still
believe in a Creator God, they fail to point out that many at LSU believe in a different sort of
Creator than is presented in the SDA fundamentals and that these teachers are telling their
students that God created life on this planet over hundreds of millions of years of time using
slow, painful, evolutionary mechanisms of random mutation and natural selection.

LSU has also published a very misleading video of a biology student describing how she was
aided in her conversion to Adventism by the science professors at LSU who helped to establish
her faith in God and to see him in his creation. Regarding the teaching of evolution at LSU, this
biology student says:

"The way that they approach evolution is that this is how it is, this is what it is, a
theory, and you don’t have to believe it. But, it’s good to know about it so you can argue
the creationist view. Because, if you’re ignorant about something, it’s really hard to argue
the opposite. So it's just informative mainly.11

From this testimony many have concluded that LSU professors are almost apologetic about the
idea that evolution could be anything more than a mistaken but popular theory and that the SDA
view of creation is the true explanation of origins. However, this contrasts deeply with the stated
views of long time LSU professor Gary Bradley. In a recent interview with Inside Higher Ed,
Bradley said he wasn’t going to present the theory of evolution to only dismantle it for students -
- and went on to call those who believe in a literal creation week that took place only a few
thousand years ago the “lunatic fringe.” 6 Obviously, the theory of evolution is not a mistaken
"theory" for Bradley and many of his colleagues; and they do not present it as such to their
students - nor have they for decades at LSU.

Despite the testimony of this student to the contrary, the reality at LSU is that the science
professors themselves do not simply teach about the theory of evolution, but actively promote it
as the gospel truth in their classrooms. They do not question it or present any countering data
or apologetic arguments. They also do not present any evidence or arguments in favor of the
SDA perspective on origins in their classroom notes or presentations nor do they invite other
guest presenters to do so. These facts are backed up by overwhelming evidence in the form of
notes and handouts, the personal testimony of numerous students and parents over the years,
and, more importantly, the direct testimony of the outspoken LSU professors themselves.

Larry McCloskey in his Biology 112 course notes writes:

There is nothing “theoretical” about the evidence supporting evolution. The research
about evolution is ongoing and continues to support and refine Darwin’s original ideas.
No data have been found to refute the idea. It is the single unifying explanation of the
living world, and nothing makes much, if any, sense outside of this unifying theory.5

Lee Greer in his current BIOL 111: Genomes and their Evolution, writes:

As a species humans have only been around about 200,000 years and have low
within-species genetic variation. ..
The genes encoding various globin proteins evolved from one common ancestral
globin gene, which duplicated and diverged about 450-500 million years ago.4

Greer also publicly supports the idea that the Genesis account is allegorical and internally
inconsistent - a description of at least two conflicting accounts of creation, neither of which
conforms to what is known about physical reality through scientific investigation.

Randal Wisbey himself publicly questions the viability of the SDA perspective on origins without
offering any apologetic arguments in support. On November 21, 2008, Wisbey gave a speech
for the Adventist Society of Religious Studies, titled “Nurturing the Adventist Mind.” In his
speech, he explained how Adventists can integrate “Adventist thinking” with a “vast array of
intellectual disciplines.”

One example of how the church needs this integration is in the vexing issue of the
relation of Adventist thinking to the natural sciences as pertains to the history of life on
planet Earth. On the one hand, for more than a hundred years Adventists have believed
that “the book of nature and the written word shed light upon each other. They make us
acquainted with God by teaching us something of the laws through which He
works” [White]. On the other hand, we recognize that “creationists do not have an
adequate explanation” for “radiometric dates of many millions of years… The most
difficult question is probably the apparent sequence of radiometric dates, giving older
dates for lower layers in the geologic column and younger dates for upper
layers” [Gibson].
What Adventist colleges and universities can do is to provide a supportive
environment and conceptual assistance not only to their students but also to the whole
church in addressing this issue effectively by reexamining our understanding of both the
“book of nature” and the “written word.” In the process, Adventist colleges and
universities can be examples of thinking faithfully.

In support of allowing paid SDA representatives to teach fundamentally diverging opinions,


Wisbey quotes J.N. Loughborough in his 1861 statement regarding the issue of Church order
and government:

The first step of apostasy is to get up a creed, telling us what we shall believe. The
second is to make that creed a test of fellowship. The third is to try members by that
creed. The fourth is to denounce as heretics those who do not believe that creed. And,
fifth, to commit persecution against such.9

Wisbey fails to reference Loughborough in his 1907 work, The Church, Its Organization, Order
and Discipline. Although originally opposed to such constraints, it was John Loughborough,
together with James White, who first started to realize the need for some sort of internal
enforcement of Church order and discipline - i.e., a Church government.

"As our numbers increased, it was evident that without some form of organization,
there would be great confusion, and the work could not be carried forward successfully.
To provide for the support of the ministry, for carrying on the work in new fields, for
protecting both the church and ministry from unworthy members, for holding church
property, for the publication of the truth through the press, and for other objects,
organization was indispensable."12

Of course, those who were not considered to accurately represent the views of the early SDA
Church did not receive "cards of commendation". And what was the attitude of such persons? -
according to Loughborough?:

Of course those who claimed "liberty to do as they pleased," to "preach what they
pleased," and to "go when and where they pleased," without "consultation with any one,"
failed to get cards of commendation. They, with their sympathizers, drew off and
commenced a warfare against those whom they claimed were "depriving them of their
liberty." Knowing that it was the Testimonies that had prompted us as a people to act, to
establish "order," these opponents soon turned their warfare against instruction from that
source, claiming that "when they got that gift out of the way, the message would go
unrestrained to its `loud cry.' "
One of the principal claims made by those who warred against organization was that
it "abridged their liberty and independence, and that if one stood clear before the Lord
that was all the organization needed," etc… All the efforts made to establish order are
considered dangerous, a restriction of rightful liberty, and hence are feared as popery."13

Yet Wisbey thinks to quote Ellen White in support of "progressive" Adventism:

There is no excuse for anyone to take the position that there is no more truth to be
revealed, and that our expositions of the Scripture are without error.9, 14

Wisbey fails to note that although Ellen White does indeed use the phrase “unity in diversity," 15
and stated that “Instructors in our schools should never be bound about by being told that they
are to teach only what has been taught hitherto," 16 she also maintained that the landmarks and
pillars of Adventist truth were to remain. Concepts that impact the science of geology which she
“was shown” to be identified as permanent include the concept of six literal, empirical,
historical 24-hour days of creation, culminating with a literal 24-hour Sabbath day of rest, and
that life on Earth was non-existent before the literal creation week described in Genesis.17

She also writes that no one is to go ahead or fall behind the current leading of God in the
understanding of the Church as an organized body and expect to remain a recognized part of
that body.

God is leading out a people, not a few separate individuals here and there, one
believing one thing, another that. Angels of God are doing the work committed to their
trust. The third angel is leading out and purifying a people, and they should move with
him unitedly. Some run ahead of the angels that are leading His people; but they have to
retrace every step, and meekly follow no faster than the angels lead… 18

How are such faculty and administrators who think themselves so "progressive" in advance of
the foundational pillars of the organized SDA Church on such basic fundamental issues going to
be remotely capable of "bringing our young people home at the end of the day?",2 as Elder
Paulsen put it, if they don't really believe in or see evidence for the home message to begin
with? Ultimately, is there to be no real accountability to the organized SDA Church for what is
presented as "truth" from either pulpit or classroom? - by paid representatives supported by
God's own monies in the forms of tithes and offerings?

The viability of the SDA Church, as an organization, and the developing minds of a generation
of SDA young people, is largely in your hands. Who knows whether you have not attained to
your positions of great responsibility for such a time as this?

Sincerely,

Sean Pitman, M.D.


Arthur V. Chadwick, Ph.D., Professor of Geology and Biology at Southwestern Adventist
University
Earl M.J. Aagaard, Ph.D., Professor of Biology, retired

Você também pode gostar