January 1, 2010

Re: Darwinism at La Sierra University:

An Open Letter to:

Elders Jan Paulsen, Don C. Schneider, Ricardo Graham12501 Old Columbia PikeSilver Spring, MD 20904-6600 USATelephone: 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 theGeneral Conference of Seventh-day Adventists to promote SDA fundamentals in all classroomswithin SDA schools,

1, 2, 3

many of the science professors at LSU continue to promotemainstream evolutionary thinking as the true story of origins.

4, 5

Beyond this, these sameteachers are

currently

telling their students that those who believe in a literal 6-day creationweek are part of a "lunatic fringe" within the SDA Church - even noting their position ininterviews with secular journals.

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 toaddress the active promotion of Darwinism and theistic evolution within LSU classrooms. Sofar, what they have recommended is that an extra freshman class be added to introducestudents to the conflict between the SDA perspective on origins and mainstream science andhave asked the Association of Adventist Colleges and Universities to form a "study group" to aidin the establishment of a viable curriculum to support the call of the General ConferencesExecutive Committee regarding a scientifically rigorous affirmation of a historical belief in aliteral, recent, six-day creation week.

7, 8

While we wait for this "study group" to produce what LSU considers to be a viable curriculum insupport 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 synthesisview of evolution being taught as fact in "SDA" classrooms? - along with continued scoffing atthe ludicrous notion of a literal 6-day creation week at LSU? How is it that this situation is beingtolerated by the organized SDA Church regarding the education of generations of its own youngpeople? - students who are being sent with great personal sacrifice to our schools by parentsand 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 thatAdventist education has to offer. Randal Wisbey, president of LSU, has assured us, in the samemanner of his predecessor, Lawrence Geraty, that, "All of our biology professors believe in thecreator God whose handiwork is on display in the natural world."

Geraty himself, while he waspresident 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. Healso strongly supported the conversion of retired GC vice president Richard Hammill from theoutdated notions of a literal creation week in recent history to an evolutionary model of originsover vast periods of time.

This explains why so many evolutionary scientists have been hiredby LSU over many years. While both Geraty and Wisbey argue that these professors stillbelieve 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 usingslow, painful, evolutionary mechanisms of random mutation and natural selection.LSU has also published a very misleading video of a biology student describing how she wasaided in her conversion to Adventism by the science professors at LSU who helped to establishher faith in God and to see him in his creation. Regarding the teaching of evolution at LSU, thisbiology student says:"The way that they approach evolution is that this is how it is, this is what it is, atheory, and you don’t have to believe it. But, it’s good to know about it so you can arguethe creationist view. Because, if you’re ignorant about something, it’s really hard to arguethe opposite. So it's just informative mainly.

From this testimony many have concluded that LSU professors are almost apologetic about theidea that evolution could be anything more than a mistaken but popular theory and that the SDAview of creation is the true explanation of origins. However, this contrasts deeply with the statedviews 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 fewthousand years ago the “lunatic fringe.”

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 scienceprofessors themselves do not simply teach

about

the theory of evolution, but actively promote itas the gospel truth in their classrooms. They do not question it or present any countering dataor apologetic arguments. They also do not present any evidence or arguments in favor of theSDA 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 researchabout 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 theliving world, and nothing makes much, if any, sense outside of this unifying theory.

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 lowwithin-species genetic variation. ..The genes encoding various globin proteins evolved from one common ancestralglobin gene, which duplicated and diverged about 450-500 million years ago.

Greer also publicly supports the idea that the Genesis account is allegorical and internallyinconsistent - a description of at least two conflicting accounts of creation, neither of whichconforms to what is known about physical reality through scientific investigation.Randal Wisbey himself publicly questions the viability of the SDA perspective on origins withoutoffering any apologetic arguments in support. On November 21, 2008, Wisbey gave a speechfor 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 therelation of Adventist thinking to the natural sciences as pertains to the history of life onplanet Earth. On the one hand, for more than a hundred years Adventists have believedthat “the book of nature and the written word shed light upon each other. They make usacquainted with God by teaching us something of the laws through which Heworks” [White]. On the other hand, we recognize that “creationists do not have anadequate explanation” for “radiometric dates of many millions of years… The mostdifficult 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 supportiveenvironment and conceptual assistance not only to their students but also to the wholechurch in addressing this issue effectively by reexamining our understanding of both the“book of nature” and the “written word.” In the process, Adventist colleges anduniversities 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. Thesecond is to make that creed a test of fellowship. The third is to try members by thatcreed. The fourth is to denounce as heretics those who do not believe that creed. And,fifth, to commit persecution against such.

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 internalenforcement 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 churchproperty, for the publication of the truth through the press, and for other objects,organization was indispensable."

Of course, those who were not considered to accurately represent the views of the early SDAChurch 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 theypleased," 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 andcommenced 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, toestablish "order," these opponents soon turned their warfare against instruction from thatsource, claiming that "when they got that gift out of the way, the message would gounrestrained to its `loud cry.' "One of the principal claims made by those who warred against organization was thatit "abridged their liberty and independence, and that if one stood clear before the Lord