This can play both ways. The administration that asked for resignations will one day have their own private conversations recorded and then the tables will be turned! Remember: this is the electronic age and nothing is private any longer.

When private conversations now are made subject to public resignations, G.C. Big Brother is watching and listening to every move! The Thought Police is next--if not already in operation.

Things couldn't get any more bizarre than this.

Here's the question, I'm wondering about, Elaine:

Was it publicly acknowledged that the meeting with church officials was going to be recorded? Was somebody planning to use that recording against church administration, and ended up hoisted by his own petard? Good questions to ask before you assume that it was administration invading privacy. The recording was voluntarily sent around.

Terry

@ Professor Kent - I'm not sure it's illegal if it accidentally gets circulated hither and yon. By the sounds of it, the one who made the recording had no idea he was circulating it. But there is some question, in my mind, about whether or not the recording he thought he was circulating was made with the express consent/knowledge of those being recorded. Look at the recent Twitter scandal. If the photos had been sent out accidentally, there's just no way of gathering up all the pieces again. Nobody is to blame except the one who distributed the information accidentally. There is no legal culpability, I wouldn't think.

Professor Kent,

Lenny Darnell didn't know he had recorded the meeting with his friends. My question is what was Lenny doing at the meeting when it was only for faculty and staff. Isn't he a board member? Were board members invited? According to the LSU news release they weren't. Perhaps he wasn't even supposed to be there.

Shane

Stupidity is no cause for resignation - the church quite likely has others in respected and responsible office who have done bizarre things and survived.
however the sharing (via carriage) of a private conversation may have legal consequences - as may acting on information so received. This is not over!

It is a vast right-wing conspiracy, NOT! These people do not need any conservatives going after them and their actions, they are their own worst enemies. When is the religion department going to do a similar restructuring? The shaking that was spoken of by EGW is fully underway. The sides are forming quickly. There are those who want to be loyal and obedient to God's word and church, and those that are wanting to join Satan's rebellion and refuse to surrender their personal thoughts and actions to the Holy Spirit. Which side are you going to be on? It is still not to late to make a decision for obedience.

Wow..I love how people from the GC think they're Christ. I'm "SURE" they "NEVER" spoke bad about anyone else. You know all those stories we hear about how controlling the Mormon church is and about how they'll "kill" you if you speak against their church...this is the direction the SDAs are going...DOWN WITH RICARDO GRAHAM!!!!

LSU admin must now be expecting a visit from the FBI - this gets interesting!

This is straight politics...Oh, so you wanna talk bad on me, huh?! You're FIRED! AND YOU'RE FIRED! AND YOU ARE FIRED!!! Ya, sounds like Christians to me...might as well be Catholic.

TERSE NOTE to RIcardo Graham, Ted Wilson, and everyone in between
"Grace is the gospel. To preach it and not practice it is to fail to understand it"

Elaine, I still have the same question: was there any expectation on the part of those involved in the original meeting that *they* were being recorded? Was it an open- or closed- door meeting? Who did the illegal recording here? You might be right, but I'm have an unsettling feeling that someone was caught by his own attempts to be underhanded.

Terry

It seams to me that we are more concern about technicalities then the real issue hear. This make me wonder now if Lenny Darnell ask Dan Jackson permission to record the conversation in the first place?

LSU board should be the one watching its back now, its members could soon turn on each other.

We keep pointing our finger at the Pope as the AntiChrist...maybe it's really Ted N. C. Wilson and Ricardo Graham...I mean, they only want to control the thoughts of their underlings, right? Sounds pretty cultish to me

LSUAlumnusWithoutASpace, you speak truth man. That is exactly what I'm thinking. The GC was just looking for an excuse to get rid of these guys...Like I've been saying for years, It's not the responsibility of the University to teach us WHAT to think, but instead HOW to think. The GC doesn't want us to think at all....I mean, how can you "fire" your Biology Professor of the Year (Bradley was voted BY ALL THE BIOLOGY STUDENTS OF LA SIERRA the 2010-2011 Biology Professor of the Year)?! AGAIN, the GC doesn't care about its students...they only care about their own agenda.

GC=Animal Farm by George Orwell...with the FAT PIGS at the top

"What he heard in that private conversation that wandered, but included foul language, references to alcohol consumption and unflattering comments being made about board members, administrators, and church leaders—led Blackmer to request a transcription of the recording."

So---references to alcohol consumption and unflattering comments about the hired archy equals dismissal??? The administration from now on must be verrrry careful of what they say, as they can be assured it will be recorded. What's sauce for the goose.....I have personally heard conference employees say some very "unflattering" remarks about their superiors. Fair warning: Big Brother is not only watching you, but is now recording your every word.

Imgonnatroll:

Really, how are you being in the slightest bit constructive? Please stop posting like a middle school kid and come up with something a little more intelligent. Please.

Sincerely,

Terry Porter

Agreed!

The only person that can disgraced some one is your self and your own actions. Some day truth will see the light of day. The path to recovery is pave with accounting of our own mistakes, owning to them and stop blaming others.

Wasn't the private home conversation the one that brought about the dismissals? Or, was it the meeting with the administration? If the first, all the parties to the conversation would have had to give their permission before it would be made public. Otherwise, there are legalities to be considered, according to California statutes. in any other university, this would be a non-event, but academic freedom in SDA schools is an oxymoron.

Mr. Porter,

Stop being stupid.

1. If Darnell's recording of the meeting was "illegal" why didn't the Pinheads notify the proper authorities immediately when it came into their possession?

2. Did the Pinheads have to listen to the complete tape to determine it was "illegal"?

3. Have the Pinheads notified any local, state, or federal agency claiming "illegal" activity?

Whoops,

Forgot.

You can't fix stupid.

Apologies.

Well only God can judge, and if the GC are on a witch hunt or if these guys have said something really bad then they will have to face up to their actions. We can stress ourselves out over church politics, and I won't deny that there is some very shifty behaviour from people who should know better or are seen as men of God......but at the end of the day we are all human and we all make mistakes. What can we do to change these people, well the only solution that I have is that we pray like our lives depend on it for our church presidents, administrators, employees etc, that God's way will prevail and not politics. Getting angry and frustrated is only bad for our mental health, focus on your own relationship with God. He had promised to bring about good in all our mess ups.

God bless us everyone.

"I have seen ugly church politics. For those of you who think these men resigned to keep the recording from being broadcast, you are deluding yourselves. Knowing the recording had already been passed around "the SDA hierarchy" they certainly would have expected the LSU board to have heard it already. They chose to resign to keep the GC from continuing it's witch hunt at LSU, simple as that."

BINGO. DING-DING-DING-DING! I was going to go there, but I thought I wouldn't have to. Although really, for people who are convinced things are as they seem, it's not likely anything can be said to get them to consider otherwise...

Now you're asking the right questions Hopeful. Follow the rabbit trail if you dare, it only gets uglier the deeper you go...

Lack of church discipline has been so egregious that there are effectively two Adventist churches, and, as Ed suggests, they don't have enough in common to stay together. Time for a divorce.

Here you go again! No matter what info is brought to light it is 'untrue' 'really about evolution' 'big bad GC and SDA church' 'evil LSU' you guys don't care about truth you just can't stop nit picking.....it is like an addiction! Does it make you feel superior and like such a righteous person?????

Elaine, you need to check the california code....current one.......

Can you imagine how the wives and children of these men feel...they need compassion and prayers. These men were 'found' out by their own choices and can only blame themselves. I was not at the meeting, I have not heard the tape, and I am not appointed their judge and jury.

Time to get over condemnation and try to practice the love that being christian stands for. If you are not claiming to be a christian then why do you bother with this site?????

I find those of you who are so full of vitriol against the SDA denom and institutions the pathetic ones. If only you could be asked to resign!

Why not devote all your negative energy towards trying to civilly help change things.

In the initial recording, IF all present knew of and consented to the recording, it was legal. In this situation, if that was NOT the case, then the person making the recording can be tried under California law. I don't recall whether there is a fine for doing this, but you can receive a jail term of up to a year in California for doing that.

Now, the part where they went to the home and the recording continued, is also illegal because it was a private conversation and nobody consented to this. My guess is that the person who made the recording forgot to turn off the recording device, but once he discovered it, to avoid legal problems for himself (and assuming that the first meeting was legal), then he should have erased the remaining parts of the recording and said nothing.

If you accidentally record someone in a public place but they are not the objective of the recording, it is not illegal as stated under the California statute. But if they are the intended person to be recorded and they do not know it is happening, then the person doing the recording can be prosecuted.

Much as I dislike what was obvious being said by these individuals, people will make mistakes, and had they given more thought to what they were saying, perhaps they would not have said it. However, it is my thinking that they do have legal recourse against the person who made the recording and made it public, and possibly against the school. This cannot be prosecuted under federal statues, but it can be prosecuted by the local D.A. and the individuals recorded without their knowledge could also privately sue the person who made the recording for invasion of property and loses that occurred as a result. This could prove to be a very expensive lesson for him and the school because this was something that he did in his position as a representative of the school (the initial meeting). My guess is that the school talked to a lawyer about this ahead of time and probably gambled that they might win a case. But I would not bet on it. Under California law, I think they will lose.

Spectrum is reporting here that "After the meeting he and three friends—Jeff Kaatz, LSU vice president of development; Jim Beach, LSU dean of the College of Arts and Sciences; and Gary Bradley, professor of biology—went to a private home where they continued their conversation about the LSU meeting while watching the Los Angeles Lakers play the Denver Nuggets in an NBA basketball playoff game. What the four friends did not realize is that the phone recorder continued to run during their discussion.

"The next day Darnell shared the recording he had made of the Jackson/Blackmer meeting with several people including an LSU faculty member and Spectrum."

This sequence does not sound accurate. First the meeting in the university church with Jackson and Blackmer lasted more than an hour...something like an hour and half or even two hours. If the phone was left on that entire time it would record perhaps another half hour walking or driving to the home of a faculty member to watch a basketball game. The conversation by four fans of the Lakers (during two hours of game time) would be spotty and illogical if conversations moved to Jackson/Blackmer. That makes up about four hours or so of recording on a cell phone. And then presumably before sending off this recording it was given to Spectrum and an LSU faculty member. Why didn't Spectrum or the LSU faculty catch the swearing or whatever it was to bring down the house around these four individuals? Somehow the recording had to be transferred from cell phone to a computer file, where anyone with common sense checks to see if the recording got across the divide faithful from front to back.

I'm guessing that both the sequence is not accurate and the mechanism used for recording that went back to the GC was not through a cell phone. The recording did not take place during a Lakers game but under quieter conditions. Instead, it makes sense that the Jackson/Blackmer was recorded as a separate event on a cell phone and could have been played back afterwards to the four to keep fidelity of what was said by Jackson and Blackmer. And that a recording device like what a newspaper journalist uses or small tape recorder passed around to record input from the observers of the Jackson/Blackmer meeting. The four wanted to pass "constructive" input to the GC leadership through this recording. But unbeknownst the conversation was in two parts. The first conversation was planned with the ambition to deliver responses from three individuals in leadership roles at the University...Gary Bradley was the dean at one time. And then and here is stupid mistake.

The recorder was "turned off" or thought be turned off. And the four continued talking about how they really felt about university and board leadership in the maze of recent events transpiring around the AAA setback (which had everything to do with how biology was taught at LSU). The recording device was put away in the pocket thinking it was turned off. During this time a bottle was uncorked (making a signature sound) that now remained on the recording with the unflattering comments. This entire recording was sent back to the General Conference without the conversants knowing that the recording contained two parts, a "constructive" and "destructive" segment. That Darnell did not listen to the recording before he sending it off, but the GC heard the entire recording, including the cork popping. They hired a professional transcriber as the voices would be hard to make out and this damaging evidence exploded in the minds of GC leadership and was sent westward as fast as possible....to create resignation letters for all four individuals. Check it out and correct the story...it cannot be correct as described here. My construction is derived from certain facts that disagree with the Spectrum story as currently told. And I could be wrong or missing some details, but certain features of the current description do not fit forensically together.

Cheers and blessing to Spectrum for shining a light in a dark corner....

tjoe

This is a sad, sad day for me and I suspect for anyone who cares about LSU, these outstanding educators whose careers were devoted to the nurturing and education of 1000's of young minds (including mine), and for that matter the future of the SDA church . I am not surprised by the official position, but it hardly seems Christ-like to me.

"...was there any expectation on the part of those involved in the original meeting that *they* were being recorded..."

Good question.

"Initial taping of the meeting was illegal."

Wouldn't surprise me if all parties agreed as it's not an uncommon scenario in a meeting where high quality recollection is required, but we don't know. It could have been done illegally.

"I am pointing out (I'll try to go slowly here) that if anybody did anything illegal, it might ("might" suggests a *possible* scenario) have been those who accidentally recorded themselves at the end of a possibly illegal recording."

And I will point out (trying to go slowly) that readers should consider that these circumstances do not appear to constitute a legal recording of the private conversation - and that publicising the contents of a non-legal recording of a private conversation is also a criminal offence. Blackmer and Graham should probably discuss their actions with a lawyer.

Why did they listen to the whole tape? Because by the time it reached them, it was known that there was a lot of material on the tape that they ought to listen to.

Try thinking it through a little more. Why did the first listener listen to the whole tape, when it was clearly punctuated by a drive and then private conversation?

Cliff Goldstein is known to make heated and derogatory statements about people.

I have heard from a very reliable source of a number of ordained pastors who have directed foul language to their superiors - some in non-private situations.

They all still have jobs.

Release the transcripts so we can see what really happened.

I hate the lying that is going on saying this has nothing to do with the La Sierra teaching controversy. It has everything to do with it. The context is that a private meeting with university staff and Division/GC people had just taken place that was all about the situation. The four men had an even more private conversation about that meeting just afterwards. They were discussing the meeting. They weren't being profane or drunken. Division/GC heavies have leaned on the Union President/La Sierra Board chairman and the guys have been threatened.

If the controversy about biology teaching wasn't taking place and high handed tactics of Division/GC weren't giving in to the whiners (Educate Truth, et al) the firings would not have happened.

What on earth is a pastor doing being the Board Chairman of a university. This is ridiculous!

So, these people are being fired by being human and having been fired irregardless of their office/duties of the university but by their natural behavior?

What happened to our accepting of others as Jesus accepted us where we are/were in our lives? The 12 disciples were not the perfect bunch of people however Jesus still accepted them and gave them a duty to continue sharing his ministry/gospel. So, why should these leaders/professors be held by any different standard? To err is to human, right? What happened to the forgiveness of others and still be accepted just as Jesus does with us is the Christian way of life?

Joe, the Spectrum story appears to be accurate. The recording does span multiple hours, and was almost certainly made with a cell phone or similar device (probably in the individual's pocket during the private conversation). One can hear the Blackmer-Jackson meeting, the individual driving in a vehicle to someone's home, a lengthy conversation with the basketball game in the background, and the individual's departure in a vehicle. You are right, however, that portions of the dialogue were indeed intended to be constructive. I'm guessing that because of its length, the recording was not checked first before sharing.

I'm stopping with this. The only reason I decided to listen was to learn how "sinful" the conversation was and whether it merited the level of condemnation I'm seeing here (by some) and at Educate Truth. I am offering comment only because I'm stunned by how the tape was used to force the resignation of these men, who did nothing morally wrong by sharing their personal frustrations (and apparently at least one drink--though I couldn't identify this in the recording) with each other in a private venue. I think it's appropriate for someone to say something that offsets the excessive speculation, so I have chosen to do so--while at the same time NOT feeling at all good about having listened to the tape (I don't know these people). I hope the transcript and recordings do not circulate further.

In all frankness, I wish Educate Truth, Spectrum, and Adventist Today would have the decency to discontinue all comments on this debacle. We don't need the flames fanned further. Let's give people a chance to heal and move forward.

And let me add: there is NO QUESTION these individuals had no idea their conversation was being recorded, or would be made public. As Dr. Bradley pointed out, this was nothing other than a horrendous mistake, and the Church is NOT better today because of it.

This is honestly ridiculous. I cannot be an Adventist if this is what Adventism stands for. A little bit of harsh criticism and private alcohol consumption should not be grounds for immediate termination, especially right before graduation. If La Sierra were to fire every person who had ever criticized an adventist leader or consumed a glass of alcohol, the number of LSU faculty and staff would be reduced to about 5-10% of what it is now. Way to shoot yourselves in the foot La Sierra; Lebron James, Octomom, and even Lindsay Lohan or Paris Hilton could have handled the situation in a more intelligent fashion.

These four individuals have all given copious amounts of time and energy to make La Sierra University a great school. I hope they take their skills to a better institution, where their talents and hard work can be more appreciated.

Don't misunderstand grace. It does not promote and protect evil.

Here is what I don't get:

Aaron, the high priest for the whole nation of Israel when Moses went up the hill totally repudiated God and built a golden idol. And what does God do? He has Moses give him a firm spanking and Aaron remains high priest. That is grace!

In Adventism, some leaders who have a much less prominent role in the church, in a private conversation express their frustration with some of the leaders of the church because they feel (rightly or wrongly) that those leaders are doing great damage to a school they love. The response by church leadership is not at all redemptive or grace filled. Instead they are fired.

Oh dear Jesus, you must be weeping today.

In the grip of grace.

Steve Moran

The 4 employees were cornered. ... Instead they were given 2 options on the spot.

Ethically, if not legally (and presuming the description of the situation is accurate) it does seem to fit the definition of blackmail : "Resign - or we publish."

Elaine's comment is pure speculation. Elaine does not know the content of the tapes. Resign or reveal indicates it was not small talk being bandied about... It was not Big Brother recording, it was Little Bro doing it without permission. Just like Weiner, he got caught by his own stupidity. If you don't know how to turn off the recording don't share it with "friends". Those friends share too. The fearsome foursome deserve all they got. It is interesting that those who side with the theistic evolution crowd are so eager to impugn the reputation of leadership. Your colors are showing.

Steve Moran

I agree that is grace, but let me add what Ellen White and the Bible had to say, "'The Lord was very angry with Aaron to have destroyed him.' Deuteronomy 9:20. But in answer to the earnest intercession of Moses, his life was spared; and in penitence and humiliation for his great sin, he was restored to the favor of God" (PP 323).

Penance and a changed life is what happens when grace enters the life. I don't think this situation compares with what happened with Aaron.

Shane

Without mentioning any names because of potential legal issues....Spectrum readers know that this affair could have serious consequences (see Wendell Slattery's comments above). The following account uses some literary license to protect the "innocent."

Without a lawyer or legal representation on Friday an LSU faculty received a telephone call which requested him to come to the president's office (immediately). The faculty put down the telephone and walked across campus thinking, "I wonder why the president wants to talk to me?" Entering the office the faculty member encounters Ricardo Graham LSU board chairman and university attorney Hanson. He suspects there is trouble ahead.

The conversation begins by playing a portion of a recording and the faculty is asked, "Is this your voice on this recording? At this point the faculty's mind runs through a recent lecture by Harvard professor Michael J. Sandlin "Justice What's the Right Thing to do?" He decides no matter the cost I will tell the truth. Further in the interrogations he is asked, "Were there open bottles of alcoholic beverages in the room? The faculty says "No." (Which was true.) Then the board chairman wants to know if the sound on the recording is of a popping cork opening a wine bottle? The faculty's mind quickly runs through several possible answers, but only one is correct. He could have said, "No" not to my knowledge, that is Mountain Dew or some other beverage noise (You've all been in situations when your mind explores alternative explanations under similar circumstances, right?) But no, this faculty prides truth-telling, that is why he has never covered up the fact that when he teaches biology he tells the students about the whys and wherefores about evolution that explains why humans continue to adapt their immune systems to face continuing changing threats from bacteria and viruses, etc. Without evolutionary adaptation we'd all be dead after two or three generations.

So he admits it was the sound made by uncorking a wine bottle. "Did you drink any wine?" the board chairman asks. The faculty knowing that a head must eventually roll decides to go mum and keep quiet and says, "I will not admit or deny that I drank any wine on this occasion." And then he turns to attorney Hanson and requests a hearing. He is hoping that this will stop the interrogation, or slow it down.

The board chairman then tells the faculty that they plan to play the entire recording to the LSU board and that the board is likely to fire him whether he admits to drinking wine or not....since only recently and just barely his teaching contract had been renewed. The faculty quickly decides, since it might be possible to confine head rolling procedures to only one faculty and since he barely passed muster recently, it was time for him be the fall guy. Besides, it was going to happen eventually anyway, the way discussions whiff around the air at LSU. He was aware that apparently AAA leadership left a two page document on the president's desk after their last review that recommended a house cleaning of the department. And so he admitted he drank a small glass of wine.

That was when the resignation letter was pushed across the desk for him to sign and maybe he thought... "This could end the suffering of all the common opinions against teaching science." Perhaps the investment of one head was all that was needed.

After signing, he earnestly plead for grace and restitution similar to that offered to individuals at LSU who carried on with extramartial affairs and after exposure continued with the university. But this opportunity was denied. He left the office thinking to himself that he had responded to an Internet ad seeking someone willing to be killed and eaten. But now maybe the university could recover from the misrepresentation made by a few discontents on the blogsphere against the university who for the last two year have been completely naive about science and how he and his colleagues have helped students who come to LSU inadequately exposed to critical thinking during high school and gain a better understanding how science is employs empirical evidence about life processes.

What would you have done standing there with overwhelming forces against you from both past and present humiliating accusations?

I hope the faculty rises to the occasion and seeks equilibrium in the university. They understand each other better than any other members of the family. An affirmative answer against this sort of thing, at least now, requires the faculty to take a step towards justice: What is the right thing to do?

tjoe

I posted that before I read Joe Willey's excellent post. This is indeed stomach churning. In the 90s, there was a religion faculty member who had an affair with a student and eventually married her and had a child. It was long after most students were well aware of the situation that he left the school.

La Sierra is well known for being the only Adventist university to conduct research. It has a new science facility, and was finally gaining some respect. No more.

Shane, perhaps you are right, but a few things:

- Aaron again rebelled suggesting that his repentance was not all that sincere.

- You have to go to Ellen White (which I am ok with) to get repentance, because in Exodus 32 there is zero repentance by Aaron. He only makes excuses.

- Because Moses as being of even higher authority asked God to restore Aaron, God did so. Taking both Scripture and Ellen White it was Moses act of intercession not anything that Aaron did that caused God to allow Aaron to continue with no punishment. Where was that equivalent act by the administration? Where was their redemptive action? Where was their "earnest intercession"?

- Why do you assume the 4 involved were not repentant after being caught?

In the grip of grace.

Steve Moran

Steve, Moran, 3,000 Israelites were killed because of what Aaron did. Stop using that story as an example of "grace."

It's too bad people don't look into Eric Anderson at Southwestern Adventist University before this school closes! He may be the President now, but he has destroyed many innocent teachers, families and students by his unChrist like leadership. It's truly a sad day in our church. :(

Mr. Parker:

I had to laugh when I re-read the sentence you quoted. I should probably hire a proof reader to peruse my thoughts before I click the "send" button, especially after cutting and pasting and changing my mind a few times:

RE: "I am pointing out (I'll try to go slowly here) that if anybody did anything illegal, it might ("might" suggests a *possible* scenario) have been those who accidentally recorded themselves at the end of a possibly illegal recording."

It is, at best, a terrible sentence. So let me get to the point I was making, and hopefully this will help you understand what I was attempting to say.

1. I was addressing the constant insinuations (on the threads related to this incident) that the GC had done something illegal - that they had quietly recorded a private conversation. As the day wore on, it became quite clear that this was not the case.
2. The "illegal" recording was made by one of the four. My question was whether those in the meeting knew they were being recorded. They would then be the "anybody" who did "anything illegal" in the above sentence. My thought: they may be the only ones who actually did any illegal recording - not of themselves, but of the private meeting.
3. The accidental recording, of course, couldn't possibly be construed as illegal. Their "innocent" basketball/wine/naughty word discussion would have been inadvertently attached to the end of a recording that may have been illegal.

The point, once again: if someone made an illegal recording, it wasn't the GC, the NAD, or the Pacific Union. It might, however, have been the fabulous four.

The use of that recording might be another question all together. But if administration had accidentally walked in on an adulterous affair - or any other activity not in keeping with denominational standards - would they be powerless to call for a resignation? Just because the information came to them inadvertently? I doubt it.

I know you believe those you disagree with to be stupid, but please, stretch a little and try on another perspective. Just for the fun of it. See if someone else might have a point. It can offer an exciting and refreshing alternative to one's everyday existence.

Hopefully, this should help clear up the head scratching.

Sincerely,

Terry Porter

Ah Elaine, it must be the SDA Patriot Act...
What is new anyway? We all knew that some heads would roll down the hill. It was only a matter of time, wasn't it?
Just wait: More to come!

Now is probably a good time to close the book on whether the recording was made or obtained legally. It's truly horrifying to see that a private recording has been used to destroy four careers, but the recording itself isn’t the work of secret GC spies. The firings, however, are the work of spineless administrators bending to the will of sycophants who run divisive and self-serving little websites. (For those of you joining us from Educate Truth, a “sychophant” is not an ill pachyderm).

As much as I love the church, I don’t love everything it does. One reason why people are quick to assume this is blackmail is because, well, blackmail is unfortunately par for the course when delicate HR situations arise. If they’re not crafting some scheme to let somebody who really did do something wrong (an inappropriate relationship with a student, for instance) quietly transition to some job on the other side of the country, they’re tossing four guys into a lion’s den dressed in Lady Gaga’s summer line of meat-based couture to make sure the kitties get their vittles this time. Hopefully, this practice will receive some serious attention, because although the recordings may not be illegal, the blackmail may be…and even if it isn’t, it is very disheartening to know I need to keep my lawyer on speed-dial in case my boss calls me into the office because somebody youtube’d a video of me square dancing.

Some rocket scientist a few posts back said Bradley and crew “deserve what they got.” How do you figure that, exactly? What if your boss saw you tweet “cold Dr. Pepper after work”, called you into his office, and said, “Mr. Mark M. Words, with behavior like that, I have no choice but to let you go. Burger King is just not the place for People Like You”? The “leadership” has done a bang-up job impugning their own reputation without any of us theistic evolutionists so much as lifting an opposable thumb. (and congrats on using “impugn”, by the way!)

And from the “When Did We Get To 1844” department…since when is adultery in the same category as drinking alcohol? Did God post a new commandment on Facebook, because I’m totally friends with Him and I didn’t see it and I’m SOOO going to go pissed if it’s broken again. Yes, we know it’s in the contract, but come on – does anybody really think it’s worth canning somebody over this? It’s not like they were plotting to destroy an entire department (and possibly an entire university) over a simple difference of opinion or listening to Yanni or anything like that.

Now that the anger has had a chance to simmer, perhaps it’s time to move on to some specific requests that would make things right. Here’s the first draft of my list:

1. A public apology. That’d be a good start. Just a simple, “gosh, that wasn’t really Christ-like, now, was it? We really blew it there. Sorry guys.”
2. A public acknowledgement that the whole mess starts and end with the evolution issue.
3. A promise to formulate a rational approach to this whole evolution mess. You can keep calling us Sodom (or is it Gomorrah? I can’t never keep it straight), but let us educate those of us SDAs who want sciences classes with actual science. Let LSU carve out niche (hey, even communist China has “capitalism zones”). We’ll even put a warning in the bulletin if necessary.
4. Get those Educate Truthers to go build a church or a dam or a well or something somewhere so they can put all of this manic energy to better use.

In other news, Lenny’s invitation to poker night has been revoked. Permanently.

Inside Higher Ed
"Blasphemy of a Different Kind"
June 15, 2011

Things have gone from bad to weird at La Sierra University.

The university, which is affiliated with the Seventh-Day Adventist Church, has been dealing in recent months with a controversy over the teaching of evolution that has its Adventist benefactors threatening to withdraw its religious accreditation — and the $4 million per annum that comes with it. Now the university faces a scandal in which a trustee, a vice president, a dean, and an adjunct professor were asked to resign over a recording made, purportedly by accident, of the four men talking informally about the church and university leadership....

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/06/15/accidental_recording_leads...

What I don't understand is why the details of this mess were even released. I think that this sensitive situation would have been better handled if everything was conducted behind closed doors, and only behind closed doors. Releasing this to Spectrum and the rest of the Adventist community only adds fuel to fire and makes the situation much worse for the the parties involved and the ones close to them.

I guess stirring up a big controversy like this was the only way for somebody to get their gossip fix without breaking the Sabbath. Then again, it seems like everything related to Adventism these days involves gossip. Oh religion...

It was Darnell who recorded the conversation (who probably did not inform Dan Jackson and Larry Blackmer) and it was him who released the recording publicly. If there is anybody who could get sued, it could be Darnell.

If California does not allow recording without prior consent then:

The school and faculties (who were in the meeting with Jackson and Blackmer) could sue him if he did not inform that he was recording the April 21 meeting.

Kaatz, Beach, and Bradley could sue him for getting them fired and not telling them that he was recording (it appears as accidentally) their conversations.

and possibly NAD against Darnell for leaking a meeting (April 21) dialogue.

all in all, i think the recording bit Darnell back in the foot since i believe that Darnell was trying to ruin Jackson and Blackmer's reputation.

There was some bad-mouth joking, which is (unfortunately too) commonplace among Christian conversation, and some surprisingly mild vulgarity--nothing shocking.

Nice to know, once again, that Inside Higher Ed has picked up the story (as they did several years ago). We can thank Educate Truth for making the SDA Church and its administrators the laughingstock of Christianity. The Educate Truth crowd will continue to praise God for all this wonderful attention, and the GC will continue to tolerate and be manipulated by those who employ cyberbully tactics. And things will only get worse as the story unfolds further, especially if the injured parties lawyer up.

@logic4hire: What thickly spread misinformation. Now... address the key fact: Church appointed leaders acted on illegally recorded information.
Unfortunately, however it happened, the request for resignation was wrong, ill informed, extremist, and potentially legally liable.

@ Still concerned:

you are pretty technical eh? you would rather pick on the small details and ignoring the larger picture to fit your narrow agenda.

let me ask you this, if a rapist accidentally recorded himself raping a 12 year old girl, should they throw out that evidence in court because that rapist did not ask permission from the 12-year, or her parents to record the rape?

now, what if the rapist decides to broadcast that recording and releasing it to his friends and to the press? that becomes public property.

Darnell recorded the April 21 meeting (we don't know if he had permission) and also recorded Kaatz, Beach and Bradley later that day. He then releases it to the public. Now, which do you think is more appropriate for LSU or Educational Board to do?

A. pursue a criminal case against Darnell for recording the April 21 and thus the recording will be made public and thus embarrassing all 4 personnel (they ultimately didn't want it public) . in the end, i am pretty sure they would end up getting fired if they went along this route.

B. LSU decides to give the personnel a dignified exit by either giving them an option to resign instead of pursuing criminal court action, allowing the recording to get public (it was public already in the first place) or firing them after everyone finds out about the recording. by allowing them to resign, these individuals will minimize the stain in their resume so that they could find a job and get the benefits for being employed by LSU. if they were fired, a lot of those benefits would disappear in the thin air and their resume would certainly hurt their chances of getting employed elsewhere.

which do you think was better?

can you please tell me another way to twist the story so that you could keep on hating on the LSU administration or the SDA organization?

So, Darnell illegally recorded a faculty meeting. He then forgot to turn the recorder off. He then decided to distribute the recording (not realizing what he was doing). Lots and lots of people got it. The administration listened and told the folks, "Listen, we can play this for the board, and you can answer their questions--or you can resign and save yourself that embarrassment." All four agreed that they'd rather resign than answer questions from the board about it.

Can't see how the administration did anything illegal or immoral or unwise here. Does seem like a lot of people here have a lot of animus for the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

It's obvious that a glass of wine, some bad-mouth, and criticism of administrators have been used as a strategy to distract people from some other "real issue". Many will fall for this strategy and will keep focusing on those peripherals, thus not touching the "real issue".

Jesus drank wine, said a few things that offended others, and certainly criticised administrators. He was not even a vegetarian! But was never asked to "resign"...

Resign? No! Those people at LSU were fired in a disguised manner. For what reason? Certainly because of some "other issue". Who can't see that? It's so obvious!

It seems that, under the fire of the KGC, LSU will soon cease to be an University, it will become just another SDA TLTC (Taliban LikeTraining Camp).

Go Ted, Go!

frank7: You got it right!!!

La Sierra will not be broken, although we may be bruised.

paragraph deleted - website editor

The dedicated professors and staff who believe in LSU and share their lives, hearts and minds with the students and university community are still there. They will not be shaken or broken. They have integrity and courage, as do many of the students, alumni and supporters. We love this school and what it stands for. The stronger the attacks the more courage we will muster and the more we will stand together. A few parapets have been dislodged, but the foundations and walls are still strong.

Our commitment is to a God bigger than Adventism, to truth that is far grander and more transcendent than 28 prescribed beliefs, to authentic transformative action in a world rather than an inward self-focus. Our Adventism is valued but not worshipped, learned from but not prescriptive. We empower people to face a complex world, not retreat to an insular community. While aiming high we know we are not perfect - and that is ok.

Be strong and courageous, La Sierra and friends. This is not the end, but the birth pains of new beginnings and new phases.

Anyone who doesn't see this as mishandling and bad administration of an issue is misguided. Especially for the three who were illegally recorded. Clearly Darnell should have been asked to resign...but the other three should have been protected by their administration and by ALL of the rest of us who have made off handed remarks in private....."let he who is without sin".

Apparently this was clearly used by the administration as an opportunity to gut the bio department, without thought given to the basic issue in the case. Do we use illegally recorded conversations as a means to take jobs away from people. Clearly the answer from the administration is YES....that being the case, whats to stop others from illegally recording private conversations between themselves and Administrators with the intent of releasing any private gaffs and insults and mistakes that come up to discredit them and embarrass them and to ultimately cost them their jobs.

The board needs to think hard on this. This is unchristian behavior by our leaders, we should all be deeply ashamed of them all.

I'm puzzled by all this. Twist and turn all you want on legal questions and privacy questions or even kindness questions. The fact is that these guys put their bosses in a situation where they couldn't do anything but what they did. Might have done it nicer, sure—that's always true. But they knew the situation. Can you imagine the reaction of SDA parents when it came time to choose a school, if the administration had said, "Yes, they broke the rules, for which a student gets expelled, but that's OK: we're compassionate." This is still a conservative church, in the 28 Fundy Beliefs and LSU handbook.

This isn't the same question as whether the rules are right. Should we less strict about alcohol? That argument can be made. Should people be forgiven a little venting of anger at dumb administrators? Probably. Is the church worse off for losing these guys? Definitely. Is this all entangled with other grudges against LSU? Absolutely. Should the board member have his butt kicked for being the guy who recorded and released this? I sure think so. But honestly, people, what universe are you living in if you think that their supervisors had much of an option here?

GC Bug Brother as you put it elaine did not do the recordings. One of the individuals who resigned did but did not know it was still on. So there is another text that is in place here--By your own mouth you will be condemned. The fact that you think that one day those who are in office will be brought down is sad. Your comments belie some inner issue or hurt you have with the church.

To all participants in the present discussion:

I am certain a case can be made that this matter could have been handled with greater wisdom and grace. But I must wonder about the claim that this constitutes an invasion of privacy if in fact one or more of the disciplined ones were themselves responsible for either recording the conversation in question and/or distributing the recording to others. Perhaps, in a strictly legal sense, all participants should have given their consent to the recording before it was passed around. But the fact remains that whoever leaked the recording was most assuredly not some agent of church administrators or of some conservative "cabal" out there seeking to confirm the worst about La Sierra University.

The reference in an earlier post to what would likely happen if school or church administrators had accidentally stumbled onto evidence of an adulterous affair on the part of an employee, is appropriate to consider. Most if not all such assignations happen in private or semi-private settings, and often when they are discovered, it is not by deliberate sleuthing on the part of the discoverer, but in some unintentional manner. Perhaps an appropriate parallel to the situation in quesiton might be if one having such an affair in the privacy of his/her home took photographs of a compromising nature and then shared them with others. When something that occurs in a private setting is deliberately shared with the outside by one or more of the participants, is it in fact still private?

I remember the Senate Watergate hearings of 1973, when Nixon aide Alexander Butterfield disclosed the existence of the White House taping system, which in the end disclosed evidence that forced President Nixon to resign. A member of the Committee staff, upon hearing Butterfield's revelation, exclaimed, "The President bugged himself."

That seems, at least to some extent, to have happened here.

God bless!

Pastor Kevin Paulson

They said in the end that it is going to be the ones who we look up to the most who are going to turn on us and are no longer going to be followers of Christ. We will be surprised at who these people will be, pastors, teachers, presidents of GC and all those in between. We aren't going to know who to trust, so we can only trust ourselves anymore. Maybe that time has come. People out in California are more laxed about what they wear and what they eat and what they say and do than anywhere in the North America that I have noticed. The farther East you go in the USA the more the are following God's word and I mean North East, not Washington DC area. This whole thing is disappointing and it kinds of gives you a bad taste in your mouth that you can't trust anyone. As far as making them sign a resignation, there is this verse that says: "Those who are without sin cast the first stone." The GC needs to actually practice what they preach. I've seen a lot of people leave the church because they have been criticized and the people who pretend to practice what they preach are practicing anything at all except judgement on others. People need to take a good look at themselves before they start judging someone else for whatever it is they have done and the church has found out about it. No one is perfect and no one is without sin and therefore, no one should be judging anyone else for what they do and with friends like those involved, who need enemies!!!!!

I don't know who said something well, but they did. Maybe Juanita Escobar comes closest.

...and the most entertaining comment award goes to – YOU! Thank you.

There are some legal issues here that remain rather shocking:

1. Even though the recording was being made by one of themselves, none of the 4 were aware the recording was being made. Thus it seems by CA law, it remains an illegal recording.

2. The release of the recording was made in ignorance and unintentional was still made without consent. One can presume that if the 4 had known the second meeting was recorded that they would not have authorized its release. The use of an unauthorized recording is illegal by CA law.

3. The transcription of and public dissemination of this recording is what is truly shocking and malicious. The actions of this(these) person(s), who no doubt thought they were "shining the spotlight of accountability", must be legally investigated.

"I have never known a single Seventh-day Adventist who believes, or has ever believed, that only Adventists will go to heaven."

Then you're in willful denial. I've known many.

Pr Kevin said "The reference in an earlier post to what would likely happen if school or church administrators had accidentally stumbled onto evidence of an adulterous affair on the part of an employee, is appropriate to consider. Most if not all such assignations happen in private or semi-private settings, and often when they are discovered, it is not by deliberate sleuthing on the part of the discoverer, but in some unintentional manner. Perhaps an appropriate parallel to the situation in quesiton might be if one having such an affair in the privacy of his/her home took photographs of a compromising nature and then shared them with others. When something that occurs in a private setting is deliberately shared with the outside by one or more of the participants, is it in fact still private?"

Kevin, we are not talking about an adulterous affair at all. We are not talking of anything equivalent of someone taking photos of non-married-to-each-other people having sex or being naked or whatever. There is no comparison to what you are referring to and what took place with the four stooges. Your analogy sucks! Sorry. At least you're a step closer to reality than the person comparing the situation with the analogy above where someone is raping someone and takes photos and accidentally sends them out. But you're reasoning is still far from wise, fair, clear, logical or reasonable.

Patti Cottrell Grant - Wed, 06/15/2011 - 09:44

Once again it appears that vengeful and short-sighted GC leadership has carelessly squandered a priceless opportunity to present to the world a true picture of how God deals lovingly with his all-too-human children. Instead of offering these men the opportunity for forgiveness and redemption they were blindsided and backed into a corner and threatened with shame if they did not resign immediately. No chance to repent, no chance to learn from this Kafkaesque play, no chance to salvage decades of sacrificial service lovingly given to the gospel of Christ. Just Wham! Off With Their Heads! Is this what Jesus would do?

Patti, this paragraph and everything else you wrote captures so eloquently and gently my personal reaction to this mess. Thank you for sharing. I wish we ALL could email your message verbatim to the Church's leadership at various levels. I'm going to do it myself.

You'd think if Blackmer considers himself such a good Christian and all, he'd 1) remember all the times he'd said stuff about HIS superiors and think "there but for the grace of God..." and 2) bend over backwards to avoid seeming to be vindictive based on an affront to his ego. The very fact that he himself was mocked means that, as a matter of integrity, he should probably have refrained from demanding resignations just to avoid the appearance of abuse of power.

Too bad he didn't say: "Look, I've said things myself I'd be embarrassed to have made public, and we've all blown off steam about the boss in private. You just goofed with the recording. So forget about it. Shoo, get out of my office." His public esteem would now be in the stratosphere.

They mightn't say it outright, but they sure act like it.

When I was a child and teenager we were repeatedly taught that at the end times, in the time of trouble, God's true followers would come out of the Babylon churches as they saw the light of the Sabbath Truth and would join the Remnant church in belief and practice. Not necessarily getting baptised because the time would be short and the conditions shocking, but in spirit, belief and action all God's true people would come to that point just before Jesus came back. Then all us true believers , the new and the old, would be caught up in the clouds to be with Jesus, the original seventh-day adventist forever. This was mainstream Adventism in the region where I grew up. Got it in churches, church schools, sabbath schools, campmeetings, family worships and many sabbath lunch discussions.

Jesus talk of "other sheep I have that are not of this fold" was taught us to mean that Jesus had them in other churches that weren't Seventh day Adventist ones, but that when the light was presented to them they would unhesitatingly and unquestioningly accept and join with the remnant people.

LSU Alumnus,

I was making an observation. LSU, in the past, has usually posted news releases on ther website. I realize not all were released for the public, but that faculty or staff shared the emails. But I think there was at least one news release that went directly to Spectrum. I can't find it on LSU's website. Perhaps you can direct me to it. It's the one where they repsonsd to Bradley's email.

what do you have to do to get fired these days?

You didn't know when you become an employee of the Adventist church you're hired for life? It would seem that with all the "What would Jesus do" being scooped out like vanilla icecream. If LSU policy says employees can't drink and the result is possible firing, then these guys are completely responsible for what happened to them.

We wouldn't be where we are today with this whole fiasco if we had heeded what we learned back in the good old days where black was black and white was white and truth was truth unadulterated by falsehoods.

THE LITERAL TRUTH

Posted December 3rd, 2009 by Ervin Taylor

http://69.89.30.254/content/literal-truth

Ervin Taylor Introductory Comment: From time to time, I receive materials which, upon reflection, it seems should be shared with those who read this blog. Such materials serve as a window through which we can all better understand the great challenges that the SDA administrative clergy have in maintaining balance in the Adventist Church in North America.

The following is by a Mr. Ron Spencer of Portland, Oregon. He describes himself as "a devout member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church who has studied deeply into the relationship of science and faith." He states that he is also a long-time reader of both Adventist Today and EducateTruth.

He noted that when he visited EducateTruth he was "appalled at the anemic position taken by those who developed that web site. The dangers from science FAR TRANSCEND the teachings of Charles Darwin! In the following short paragraphs, [Mr. Spencer states that he will] outline that threat and what we need to begin to do TODAY in Adventism to remedy the situation. Call it a Modest Proposal, if you will." By the way, he addressed his email to "Elder Taylor." In the interest of accuracy, I should explain that I was ordained many years ago as a local church elder.

---

Science was a very big deal back in the late 1950s.

Those were the days of the Red Scare and Sputnik, and from the top echelons word had come down: "Democracy needs better scientists to stop the Red Tide."

So my earnest little (5'1") Adventist school teacher followed orders from Washington and introduced us early to Pythagoras, Euclid, Einstein, Galileo, Newton, and a footnote or two on Charles Darwin.
Darwin was the Great Satan, so to speak, but some of the others were dangerous, too. Pythagoras, we were told, "worshipped numbers" and "did not believe men should marry women (the word "homosexual" was not used, of course).

Einstein too was shown to be dangerous. We were warned that Einstein's ideas "teach that the universe is billions of years old." That Einstein was of Jewish descent explained it, of course. Satan was using him to destroy faith in Jesus. So my stalwart little teacher said little about Einstein, except that his views were nonbiblical and therefore dangerous. But I still got a kick out of his smile, in pictures.

She told us that Galileo was heroic, for he had stood up against that great menace, the Roman Catholic Church. But his views on gravity were troubling, as were Newton's. For if the sun was not literally created until the Fourth Day of Creation, how could the earth have been rotating around it in literal evenings and mornings of time?

If the stars were not created until the Fourth Day, how was the earth held in space for three full days? The Newtonian concepts of immutable gravity were clearly at odds with a literal interpretation of Genesis 1, and the teacher warned us not to accept their views as the "best explanation."

She said that more probably, the Throne of God in Orion is the Center of the Universe, and that the earth was held in place by God in this way, until He created the solar system and the rest of the universe. "This is a better explanation, and Ellen White's writings support it," she smiled. I was convinced.

Then, very quietly, in a conspiratorial stage whisper, she warned, "Some Adventist scientists are saying that the sun, moon, and stars were not created on the Fourth Day, but became visible that day. These are dangerous thoughts. The Bible says clearly, 'God made' the sun, moon, and stars that day. That means that the universe as we know it did not exist until the Fourth Day. Only God, heaven, and the earth existed until that moment. We simply cannot accept, as Adventists, that the universe has existed for billions and billions of years."

Then she explained an alternative theory that I accepted then, and still hold today. It's all so logical: "When God created the universe, before the entrance of sin, light obviously traveled much, much faster than it does today. Sin slowed light down. That's always the nature of sin."

What a relief! Certainly God inspired the thinking of this wonderful little lady!

She went on to tell us, "God will not allow sinful man to walk on the moon. Mrs. White has told us that sin will not be allowed on other planets. So if you ever hear that man has reached the moon, don't believe it, any more than if your dead grandfather appeared by your bed at night. Satan wants to deceive us, and he will try to fool us by making it appear that man has reached the moon."

Sure enough, Satan did just that about 10 years later. I have been surprised by how many Adventists have been deceived. But I had been forewarned by that little angel of light, my second-grade teacher. July 20, 1969 was the Great Hoax of the Century.

I have remained firm in my faith, though many so-called conservative Adventists now believe that the universe is many billions of years old; that the sun, moon, and stars simply became visible, on the Fourth Day of Creation, and that Orion is neither the center of the universe nor the probable seat of God's throne.

Most now have been led astray by Einsteinian views, including the myth of moon landings.

How can Jesus return to gather us to heaven while so many of the very elect are so deceived? Our universities must help return us to the earlier days when our belief in the literal truth of the Bible was absolute.

I am not a scientist or academician, so what I say, I say modestly. Here is my proposal:

1. Teach Adventist students in our schools that modern science is riddled with fallacies and deceptions.

2. Publish science texts that cast serious question on the views of Darwin, Einstein, Galileo, and Newton, and that prove that the lunar landing did not actually occur.

3. Terminate and if possible disfellowship any Adventist teacher who at any time allows for the possibility that these men's views have any valid content whatsover.

4. Develop a coherent scientific explanation, based on the Bible record, to offer a true picture of how (1) the speed of light has slowed down dramatically, since the introduction of sin, (2) how God—not matter—is the ultimate gravitational force in the universe, and (3) how Darwin's views, junk DNA, and Carbon decay can all be explained within a 6,000-year time frame by showing how the incidence of mutations and carbon decay have accelerated since the entry of sin, in direct and inverse proportion to the downgrading of the speed of light.

I would be happy to spearhead this effort, though I lack traditional scientific credentials. But I am a fairly smart guy, as you can tell by my writing, and I'm not clueless. I believe that I have been called to stand in the breach at such a time as this, in defense of the literal truth. I am calling on Adventist scientists to stand up at such a time as this and lead the charge!

Even so, come Lord Jesus!

Ron Spencer
Portland, Oregon

I wish Shane was not so determined to get his hands on the recordings, as he clearly has nefarious intentions. I have listened to the recordings, and again, so far as I can tell, the most damning remarks were made about other people, and these were on the whole no worse than what I see posted near-daily by the godly SDAs at Educate Truth. What's clear in my mind is that the resignations were forced because the individuals engaged in the conversation did not wish to have their private remarks about others (some in jest) made public.

I once found some online comments made about Shane's shenanigans as an undergraduate (including an unseemly radio show that he hosted) and some very unflattering remarks that his wife posted to an online blog (remarks that were later sanitized). Naturally, I saved them. We all engage in activities and utter comments from time to time that we would love to take back. What troubles me is when sinners demand that other sinners be held up for public contempt and ridicule as if they themselves are innocent by comparison.

Professor Kent
Professing Christ until the whole world hears

LSU Alumus - tell us more!

What happened to termination being the end result in a documented process of unfruitful "progressive discipline?"

Dear Deirdre:

What you say you were taught regarding the faithful coming out of Babylon at the end of time, and accepting the Advent message, I fully believe and endorse. But that is hardly the same as saying only Seventh-day Adventists will be saved. I fully accept--because it is Bible-based--our classic teaching that the world in the last days will be tested over the distinctive truths we hold as a people. But uncounted millions will be resurrected to life and taken to heaven at the coming of Jesus who have never heard the name Seventh-day Adventist.

God bless!

Pastor Kevin Paulson

Ron,

I do believe that you've got a future in writing for The Onion, that was a great read!

I think though, that you missed a bit by using actual paragraphs instead of the deadly wall of text.

I can think of a lot of people who are losing in this situation, and not a single one who is winning. How has any of this been constructive?

Lots of glass houses with rocks flying through...

Frank

Shane, of course this is about what you've been on about. It is all in the context of LSU being hammered big time about it all. The recordings were about it, the meetings were about it, the disillusionment of the men was about it. Your mob are gloating because you've finally got the chief culprit who's hide you've been after for years and for some reason he could never be nailed. But now he is. Get real and wake up!

Go ahead & derail us Shane. Derailing away from the big picture is already the EducateTruth way. This time it may be worth it.

its an Adventist school. The thought police are already in full force. I'm not saying its wrong. It just goes with the territory, a territory I choose not to play in.

Kevin
Of course nobody got to the moon.Made the American public happy to think they did but
that was the con of the century.They even had trouble with Appollo 13 what a coincidence.

Why are you Yanks so gullible ? You have been lied to by your government over and over again
but you still swallow the spin hook line and sinker. Sheesh! as JR Layman used to say.

Hmm, a plagiarizer does have no shame.

Gary Bradley wrote:
"Needless to say, I am devastated. I feel like my very soul has been ripped from my body. My entire life since I began teaching 46 years ago has been dedicated to Adventist education. I’m not ready to quit and I grieve the loss of the classroom where I have had such rewarding interactions with the wonderful people who are my students. I have many important projects underway here now and many other people will be inconvenienced by my sudden departure. I can only say that I am deeply sorry and will try my utmost to earn redemption".

I have nothing but the deepest sympathy for Gary Bradley. It was during his tenure as dean of the College of Arts and Science that I was employed as full professor after having similarly served at three other SDA institutions of higher learning. He was easy to talk to and I sensed no threat or ill will in my relationship with him as dean. We collaborated on an important project. Although he and I once debated and disagreed on the issue of science, creation and faith, we did it openly and with candor and respect.

I can identify with the sense of devastation Dr. Bradley must feel because I, too, have had the most rewarding professional experiences in the classroom and in other creative professional activities I was passionate about. Although my departure from LSU after several fulfilling years was under different circumstances and on transparently spurious grounds, the sense of loss can produce similar effects until one begins to dream new dreams and pursue new and rewarding goals. In my case the precipitating factors had to do with a flawed process, predetermined and benign neglect, and a certain administrative cowardice - not on grounds of incompatibility, incompetence or insubordination. In any case the effects could be devastating, at least temporarily.

I definitely do not share the view expressed by some conservative associates of mine that "what goes around comes around". That, to me, comes close to a diabolic wish. All too often, though, it is the silence that can be most haunting. As Martin Luther King said: "in the end we will remember, not the words of our enemies, but the silences of our friends".

Its always sad and regrettable that in times of personal and professional crisis, however culpable one may be, there is little room for redemption on the human level. I commiserate with Gary and with Jeff, who I happen to appreciate, and wish them all the best. Properly handled, this could signal a new beginning of something even more rewarding. After taking a long glance back, its probably time to reassess and look ahead.

Under California law the recording of a private conversation without our documented consent by all persons recorded is an eavesdropping felony. Transcribing, or passing on a copy of an illegally obtained conversation is also a criminal act. Accidental recording does not provide an exception.

What distortion of ethics allowed Ron Graham to use a feloniously acquired transcript to foce out faculty perceived as opposing Ted Wilson's campaign to return Adventist higher education to pre-seminary Bible education?

I would personally enjoy the prospect of these leaders being questoin by law enforcement. Can the use of illegal information be used to force a resignation?

This is fascinating, especially as someone interested in privacy law.

With a friend like Lenny Darnell, who needs enemies?

Now, when you said:

“…when something bad happens to LSU that's unrelated to what Educate Truth is about, the website and those associated with it naturally get blamed…”

…were you really still clinging to the ridiculous notion that Bradley et al. weren’t fired specifically because of EducateTruth? That it wasn’t the salacious, ignorant, ridiculous claims over on ET (and by ETs such as yourself) that set in motion the freight train? I can understand you may be lying here to us about what you truly feel – after all, you’ve consistently demonstrated a disconcerting disregard for honesty to this point – but I want to know what you and your fellow ETs are really discussing over your cups of Postum. Remember – glasses of wine don’t fire people. Spineless administrators blackmailed by little people with absurd websites fire people.

Oh, but I’m just so bursting with questions after reading some of the recent posts. Such as…

Where is the evidence that the four thought the recording was incriminating? “Choosing to resign” (I think I just sprained one my fingers making those air quotes…I’ll show you which if I get the chance) instead of having the recording “released” in no way indicates they considered the recording incriminating. It implies, instead, that they felt resigning would serve some entity (likely the university, the students and the church) better than not.

Why are we still taking about the recordings? As I understand it, there is a recording made of a professional meeting, at a place of business (the university), ostensibly for personal purposes. I could see some sort of flimsy argument made that this might be against the LSU’s policy (although no mention of that has been made, and it is highly unlikely that such a policy exists at an educational institution)…but I would doubt if this falls under precisely the same statute. The second part of the recording, had it been made intentionally, would absolutely be illegal without consent of all parties. As it is, however, the recording itself is not illegally obtained – but by the same measure, it is not likely admissible in a court of law as evidence. Whether or not the university requires their HR decisions to withstand this standard of law is another question for another time, however. But let’s put to rest once and for all the legality of the entire recording, eh? Nothing underhanded or illegal likely to be found in recording a professional meeting in a place of business, and nothing illegal about recording yourselves accidently at home. Where is the indication that Darnell released the first part of the recording publicly? Sharing it with members of your institution is not the same as “releasing publicly.” Leaking the recording to Spectrum—as somebody with hurt feelings and a vendetta against Bradley appears to have done—DOES qualify as “releasing publicly.”

And seriously guys – first adultery, now rape? You are comparing a sip of alcohol to rape? Who taught you to argue…Sarah Palin? Nobody is “hating” on LSU or the SDA church. We’re “hating” the inconceivably poor way a few specific individuals turned a non-issue into a firestorm, destroying lives and turning LSU into a warzone…all because a few childish ignoramuses at EducateTruth declared jihad against rational thought.

It was also asked rhetorically… “what do you have to do to get fired these days?” Ducking and weaving behind a technicality and pretending to be righteous might work with the other mental patients over at ET, but it doesn’t cut the mustard here. Do you know any of the other proscribed behaviors contained in the contract each employee signs? How about the contract you signed as a student? How about the contract you signed to get your driver’s license? I’d say, 40+ years of exemplary service should pretty much outweigh a sip of wine, but you clearly disagree. And that makes you wrong. Being wrong seems to come naturally to you, and you’ve raised it to an art form. It’s important to be good at something, so I feel happy for you.

I scrolled down a bit to find this nugget…”I read Bradley's interview … There were a few unpardonable sins in that interview, they were in hard print…” Unpardonable sins? First of all, that’s a theologically technical term I don’t suspect you intended to use. Beyond that, however, I can’t imagine what he could have said in an interview that any rational SDA could consider “unpardonable.” I can see someone saying they disagree. I can even see somebody wondering to themselves, “should he be teaching at an SDA university?” But since when is it a sin to hold a belief that differs from your own? Fortunately, this caustic 11th century mentality is only found in isolated pockets of the SDA church these days…otherwise, I’d have turned in my EGW decoder ring years ago.

Last but not least—remember that none of the four were fired for not following God’s word. God never said not to drink wine or poke fun at your superiors (in fact, as noted, those behaviors have the “God Stamp of Approval”). We’re talking about violating the rules of the church. And woe be to those who place them both on the same plane.

This story, though I do not know the details, is only sad, with no winners - all are loosers. If this is the "remant church" acting int he context of the "world", it is widely astray from "the mind of Christ" and its mandate to "love our enemies". That is a radical challenge! Christ knew that we all live in the world, and testified in the records of his life, as we know it, that we are all heirs of the divine, though with imperfecttion. And, no one of the implicated in the LSU massacre can, by any reasonable definiton, be described as "enemies". They have all devoted their wole life, wisdom, competence, and passion to service for the SDA church, reserving a reasonable right to disagree on some issues. Who can blame them?

It bothers me that some of them are seeking "redemption" - from the ecclesiastical establishment?

So far, the official SDA reponse has been a massacre, without the courage of responsible leaders to stand up and the publicly tell why and who were responsiblefor these firings. I have searched official SDA internets pages and the story is absent.... why? Even LSU does not give an explanation. Thanks to Spectrum we are informed.

This wole story is reminicient of the 80's when I was a student at Newbold College. The methods used here reminds me of teachers hiding in the bushes, when some of us drove to London to listen to Desmond Ford. It seems that this is a repetions of those times - it will destoy the church. Has Educate Truth,and its likes, invaded the SDA arena? It is not a sustainable path - it will lead to exlusion and sectarianism - and this is not the legacy of Jesus Christ.

Ole

Strike 4 for the Adventist Taliban-qaeda.

They're still pussyfooting around but have the mindset.

.

FUCK YOU ALL. and LSU.

please, i am just exercising my right or freedom of speech. any attempt to discredit or delete this comment would be equivalent to LSU administration forcing those 4 faculties to resign. most of you agree that LSU was acting like a Nazi for going after the 4 guys for behavioral problems they chose to do. I guess you guys will also support me when Spectrum will clamp down on me for such language and delete this comment.

i am pretty sure most of you would support my display of freedom. i am also pretty sure my right/freedom trumps over any magazine/website policy just as the behavioral rights of the four ex-faculty trumps the policies of Adventist/LSU employment.

One of many questions yet to be answered is, in which capacity was Ricardo Graham acting when he asked for the resignations?

Was he the Chairperson of the LSU board (which is a more than somewhat conflicted role, see as he's also on PUC's board as the chair) or was he acting as the conference president as the mouthpiece of GC guy Ted Wilson?

These are my observations:

1. The discipline meted out to the four individuals is disproportionate to the various offenses they committed.
2. The explanation offered for the forced resignations—that they are not related to the “biology controversy”—is pretextual.
3. I think that because La Sierra was recently disparaged by the Adventist Accreditation Association and is now under a cloud, Elder Graham made the judgment that he had no politically-feasible alternative available to him.
4. Many of the normal protocols for addressing misbehavior in a Seventh-day Adventist institution are no longer workable at La Sierra. Because any indiscretion at La Sierra can and probably will be publicized by the aggressive critics of the University, Christian principles of redemption, mercy, and proportionality will, often out of necessity and with regret, be disregarded in favor of minimizing public relations blowback.
5. The AAA board’s disparagement of La Sierra was a terrible blunder that has brought shame and reproach upon the Seventh-day Adventist Church. By not providing any information with a sufficient degree of specificity regarding what La Sierra did wrong or what changes La Sierra should make, AAA has hamstrung the University. It is revealing that statements made during the faculty meeting with Elders Jackson and Blackmer, coupled with the following conversation of the four individuals, reflects extraordinary uncertainty about what La Sierra and its science teachers should do.
6. The AAA board’s improvident decision to grant La Sierra a mere provisional term of accreditation up to the end of 2012, in defiance of the AAA site committee’s recommendation, ensures that a heightened atmosphere of stress and tension will continue to plague La Sierra during the next eighteen months. Furthermore, because there can be no finality to the controversy until AAA bestows its blessing, the controversy will continue to rage during that time period, to the detriment of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

I think one of our highly-respected Church leaders at the GC, NAD, or AAA should write an essay setting out in a formal way his or her views on what an Adventist university science teacher should teach in the classroom. I do not understand why there is not one solitary leader in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, which possesses the oracles of truth and extols the courage of Daniel and other biblical heroes, who is willing to publicly share his or her written and comprehensive opinion on this matter.

Spectrum! why are you deleting my comment!!!!!

you are acting just like LSU!

although i said 1 vulgar word and criticized quite a few people here, my comment should not be deleted even though your website has comment policies. most of the people here will support me in that my choice to said vulgar words is a freedom of speech and trumps your website policies!

just like the choice of the four faculties to use vulgar language, drink alcohol, and criticized plenty of LSU employees which ultimately broke their employment contracts, their freedom trumps LSU's policies!

most of everyone here agrees that LSU committed a wrong by forcing them out, Spectrum also committed a wrong by deleting my vulgar comment

Brantley is right. The Journal of Adventist Education could be such a place for a leading thinker and educator (Gordon Bietz?Andreason? a dozen others? joint presidents?) to address thoughtfully and directly the issues and impact on Adventist higher education, accreditation bodies, and LSU's and Adventist institutions and the eudcational system's reputation among peer institutions. What impact will the AAA provisional accreditation have on ratings in the U.S. New & World Report's rankings? These are typically voted on by other institutions.

I appreciate Brantley's thoughtful comments and observations.

This is an example of what happens when a centralised bureaucracy in a highly hierarchical organisation gets caught up in. The guys at the top are in a no-win situation. Whatever they say or do is going to backfire.

The system creates and generates the leaders. The system traps itself increasingly (as the church grows, diversifies and enters the '20th century') and the type of leaders it has created and generated have few avenues to extricate themselves or deal wisely and well with 18million members, thousands of institutions, ... and all the troubles surrounding them. Worse still, La Sierra is in their back door. The whinging American complainings and Adventist Taliban don't care too much what happens in Timbuktu in Woopwoopland a million miles away. They attack close to home and blast their venom through the heartland of Adventism where the biggest dollars come from and the greatest vested interests. This is all just down the road from the GC Headquarters so they are close at hand in a global sense and can't keep away from it all.

This is just the beginning. Until the church finds a way to reform it's nature it will keep tripping over itself more and more.

There is only one way to fix the present crisis.

Close down all science at Adventist institutions except for medical science and chemistry labs.

It really does not matter whether or not the GC is listening. God already is listening to everything we say and sees all that we do. The consequences to rejecting Him are far greater then these resignations. Think about it.

Wise words from Jan Paulsen for this time:

http://spectrummagazine.org/blog/2008/04/07/paulsens-call-freedom-fighte...

Adventists should be know as "freedom fighters," Paulsen said -- "not the violent brand, but those who work not only for people who share our point of view, but for everyone, regardless of their beliefs."

He cited the church's efforts to promote religious liberty around the world and added, "I want the public to think of Adventists as the strongest supporters of freedom -- freedom to think, freedom to hold convictions and freedom to communicate them."

Of the convictions held by Adventists, Paulsen said the church's commitment to education and healthy living are two ways Adventists can influence the public sphere by offering something relevant rather than something divisive.

During discussion that followed Paulsen's comments, other church leaders made similar observations. "There have been times in the past when the only time the public saw us was when we were either asking for money or trying to convert them," said Gary Krause, director for the church's Office of Adventist Mission. "I think we should always have that ambition to lead people to Jesus, but unless people see that we care for them even if they never decide to become Seventh-day Adventists, we will never be seen as the caring church."

Allan Handysides, director of the church's department of Health Ministries, said church members must steer clear of a "culture of negativity" that leads to "killjoy religion" instead of a "ministry of healing."
"People are more concerned with who we are than with who we say we are," Handysides added during his comments on the role of health in church outreach. "Evangelism only lets them see what we want them to see. But witness, whether we like it or not, allows them to see who we truly are."

People should see Adventists as peacemakers, but not people who dodge defending the rights of others, Paulsen said, noting the church's failure to respond to the Rwandan genocide. "Silence in the face of evil is complicity in what is wrong," he said. "Let us speak from the pulpit and show from our actions that we oppose anything that instills hatred or inflames violence."

Paulsen then urged church leaders in particular to "avoid tainting the church" with so much as the "aroma of partisan politics." Adventists must be "people of integrity" in a time when "corruption of all kinds dominates headlines."

"I want Adventists to be known as honest people who teach and practice morality, people with the highest ethical standards, people who speak out against greed and against the self-serving attitudes that do so much damage to society," he said.

Shane,

"Legal or illegal doesn't matter. It was disseminated by one of them. It would be more accurate to say it was Lenny Darnell's fault. He's the one completely responsible."

Incorrect. It was not disseminated by Darnell. It was passed on to an individual who transcribed it and disseminated it. Legal issues should surely be explored. The church needs to understand, even if by lesson from the world, that invasion of privacy is simply Pope-ish.

"Joe Willey on Wed, 06/15/2011 - 17:37"

Succinct truth in print.

The real reason for SdA's mantra of "religious freedom" can best be witnessed by attending a trial court when the SdA church is a defendant.

Mr. Willey,

I'm going to fall out of my chair after I type this because I can't remember the last time, if any, saying or typing this:

AMEN (Apologies for the lack of decorum for shouting.)

Yes, thank you.

1:28:42

Kaatz: So did you learn anything listening to all that crap?

Darnell: You have to study your enemy. Ya, I learned Blackmer speak out of every side of his mouth as he can. I learned that Jackson's a sheik(?), a eunuch. There's nothing he's going to do except spread peace and love.

The four thought what was recorded was pretty incriminating.

You seem to be speculating.

Legal or illegal doesn't matter. It was disseminated by one of them. It would be more accurate to say it was Lenny Darnell's fault. He's the one completely responsible.

Actually, it does matter - especially if you claim Darnell was completely responsible, and especially if someone other than Darnell further disseminated the private portion of the recording, which appears likely to be the case. Legality doesn't hinge on your dismissal of legal concerns. That subsequent act of dissemination quite probably violates at least one law.

I think one of our highly-respected Church leaders at the GC, NAD, or AAA should write an essay setting out in a formal way his or her views on what an Adventist university science teacher should teach in the classroom. I do not understand why there is not one solitary leader in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, which possesses the oracles of truth and extols the courage of Daniel and other biblical heroes, who is willing to publicly share his or her written and comprehensive opinion on this matter.

Why reinvent the wheel? One of our highly respected church leaders has already written an essay setting out her views on the relation of science and Scripture in the context of Adventist education:

"Since the book of nature and the book of revelation bear the impress of the same master mind, they cannot but speak in harmony. By different methods, and in different languages, they witness to the same great truths. Science is ever discovering new wonders; but she brings from her research nothing that, rightly understood, conflicts with divine revelation. 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."

"Inferences erroneously drawn from facts observed in nature have, however, led to supposed conflict between science and revelation; and in the effort to restore harmony, interpretations of Scripture have been adopted that undermine and destroy the force of the word of God. Geology has been thought to contradict the literal interpretation of the Mosaic record of the creation. Millions of years, it is claimed, were required for the evolution of the earth from chaos; and in order to accommodate the Bible to this supposed revelation of science, the days of creation are assumed to have been vast, indefinite periods, covering thousands or even millions of years."

"Such a conclusion is wholly uncalled for. The Bible record is in harmony with itself and with the teaching of nature. Of the first day employed in the work of creation is given the record, 'The evening and the morning were the first day.' Genesis 1:5. And the same in substance is said of each of the first six days of creation week. Each of these periods Inspiration declares to have been a day consisting of evening and morning, like every other day since that time."

I doubt any of our current cautious and prudent church leaders would presume to improve on the essay that begins with the above-quoted paragraphs.

Shane,

If I were you I would stop your posting and delete what you have posted from any place you have posted. There is much more going on than you can possible imagine, and I am guessing your every online action is being recorded. The law is pretty clear and you could be liable for significant damages.

Does anyone know if each individual act of sharing an illegally obtained recording counts as a felony? If one individual plays it for another individual, are they both up against a felony, or only the individual who played it? If you are listening to it, but didn't know the history of how it was acquired (i.e. you didn't know it was without consent) are you still in felony territory?

BTW, all the people commenting that it is Darnell's problem are missing the point: His pals are not going to sue him, they will sue the others if they committed crimes. Darnell didn't knowingly seek to cause harm with it, the others did. There is a legal difference.

@David Reed

What we need are actual SDA approved class lectures in all science subjects. You know, like what do we teach in geology and biology, (physics too for that matter, what with all the constants that need to change to fit YEC). I.e. we need an actual workable scientific model we can teach.

EGW didn't remotely provide any such, as I'm sure you are aware. Nobody has. The problem with this is that you can't possibly get even all the really conservative science teachers to agree on this, because any given one will find something too nutty for them in any one of the given nutty theories that will need to be adopted.

So instead, the GC (and the likes of ET) bash the science teachers, but don't have a clue what they should be teaching.

I'm having a hoot reading all this broohaa!

Thanks all!!

The irony is that they were told to resign or this would be publicized. Now they resigned and it was still publicized. Doesn't look like anything was that big a deal. What a mess.

Since the book of nature and the book of revelation bear the impress of the same master mind, they cannot but speak in harmony.

As Galileo reputedly said "and yet it moves".

Just as I expected, Shane and his wife, Mary, are determined to do everything they can to demonize and publicly humiliate not just La Sierra University and certain of its faculty, but other Church leaders as well who have not cowtowed to their demands. As Alex Carpenter has pointed out, they are attempting to publish transcripts they are making of the private conversations.

If you believe these two individuals should be by the SDA Church for making a public mockery of the Church's leaders and its institutions through cyberbullying, I think it's time to share your convictions directly with Church leadership, from their local church on up:

Pastor Bob Atteberry, Beaumont SDA Church:
Ricardo Graham, President, Pacific Union Conference:
Daniel Jackson, President, North American Division:

By the way, courteous and respectful letters are always the most effective.

Like Shane and Mary, we also believe in freedom of speech and transparency, but we also believe in basic human decency and in the loving spirit of Jesus Christ. It's time to see Educate Truth shut down, which I suspect will happen by the end of the week.

From Educate Truth

mary hildeJune 15, 2011 at 10:11 pm

Yes, God is good, and he has already won! As refreshing as it is to have this evil exposed, we also have more reason to pray for these poor guys & the rest of the LSU staff & administration involved in this trash. Hope is not lost for them until they’re dead & God is long suffering & full of mercy. We must pray more!

It is ironic in a way. The end of the world is just about upon us and we sit here and argue things like this. Most Interesting. Somehow it reminds me of the California state legislature a couple of years ago when the budget crisis was getting going. One of their big issues was that they were arguing over a declawing law for cats rather than deal with the budget. Are we rather comparable in a way? Just wondering!

free-man - Wed, 06/15/2011 - 22:48
Legal or illegal, that may be debated, but I thought this is a Christian institution where differences among fellow members are resolved by the high standard of love. Christian authority ought to solve all differences in love and never as personal retaliation. Once more evil has brought to light its fruits. It is a shameful fact that authority is difficult to manage and...do not call it "moral responsibility", because then things should have been handled differently. I worked 20+ years in the SDA educational institutions and have seen over and over again, in Europe and Latin America, how the inconvenient people have been separated from the Church by abusing authority (same attitude around the world), and then, after the damage was done, the community was asked to pray for "them and their families". What a hipocritical, irreflexive act of costumary thinking. If the defendants resigned voluntarily, why do we have to pray for them? If they were forced, under threat of decharacterizing them in front of the board and rest of the community, prayers do not help, it is a gross abuse of God's intentions to human being. I call this "culture" not religion, and less spiritual uplifting. To the leaders of the Church, change your sense of medieval authority, the Church is going to change, people are better educated, there is more knowledge today, and we do not want to feel that what happened to Galileo is going to be passed to the SDA Church, or any church in the XXI century. In the Spanish community people use to say (I translate) "he who has a strow tail, do not get close to the fire"; maybe one (or who knows how many) of the so called leaders in the GC will be next.
***************

The above statement is very true! People have no idea how this kind of treatment and abuse of power hurts not just the family's but the whole church, because we all have family or friends that have experienced this unChristlike treatment from administrators in the SDA Church.

It suprises me that a class action has not been taken against the insitution for all the irreparable damages against family members within our church from people who have been forced to resign or fired wrongfully....People are told not to "sue" but the insitution is lawyered up and no one is allowed to talk about the spouses, children and families that have dedicated their life to the church, to find themselves thrown out because of a hidden agenda within an organization. It is truly sad! There are more wounded bodies scattered within our church because of people who have been placed into leadership positions that do not have the love of Jesus in them. Southwestern Adventist University Leadership has left many wounded faculty and staff as well as students, friends and family members. Who wants to send there children to schools that treat their own co-workers in this manner? Why doe's not the church stop and realize that they have created a MONSTER by treating people who work, dedicate their lives serving it's own, to be chewed up and spit out just because? Do they not understand that when they do this to the least of these, they are doing it to Him? Not only that, the institution protects it's own. What is that? It protects a system, but not people? Who makes up the system? All of us! We are killing our ownselves.....SAD
I am not giving an opinion regarding the situation at LSU, because I do not know the facts, but I can say there is something deeply wrong with how people in the church destroy family's by placing people in administration who are not qualified or who seem have power and control issues. When will we wake up to realize that we cannot throw people away, we are not trash, we are children of the King of the Universe....He did not throw us out!

Hey David, perhaps Elders Jackson and Blackmer should have invited you to attend the meeting so that you could recite those Ellen White quotations and resolve the controversy.

I can picture the scene: Elder Jackson asks in a low voice, "Elder Read, what shall be done?"

Elder Read opens the book and recites the quotations with a grave and solemn timbre. He pauses for affect. The room is hushed. Everyone is stunned with amazement.

Someone in the room exclaims, "What? We have never heard this before! If only we had known about this fount of wisdom that the eminent Elder Read has poured out on our behalf, this controversy would have never occurred."

So the meeting is adjourned. And the statecraft of Elder Read is celebrated on various websites. And someone on one of those various websites writes an open letter to Elder Ted Wilson demanding that Elder Mark Finley's employment be terminated. Elder Finley has promoted the view that nature is broken because of sin and no longer perfectly reflects truth. His view is unfavorably contrasted with the quotations uttered by Elder Read, which state in part, "Since the book of nature and the book of revelation bear the impress of the same master mind, they cannot but speak in harmony."

And so a new controversy erupts. And someone asks Elder Read, "Elder Finley is a pretty persuasive guy. He recites other Ellen White quotations in support of his position. I thought you solved all of our problems. So what do we do now?"

And so Elder Read responds, "Maybe it might be a good idea if a highly-respected Church leader writes an essay setting forth his or her comprehensive position regarding what science teachers in an Adventist university science class should teach."

Spectrum eyes are being kept extremely busy at the moment. 10s of thousands of post in a couple of weeks. I hope you are paid well!

I happen to have known all four at one point or another. I was a fellow student with two, and was fortunate to have been a student of one and a colleague of two for 8 years. I am a better man for having known them all.

George O:

I hope you had understood the humorous analogy (apparently you didn't).
It's the 21st century, and here we are still discussing what certain teachers can/cannot teach at a University! This is just ridiculous and childish. But many enjoy doing that!

It's sad that adventists (must be correctly pronounced AD-ventists...) can't change the mentality of "central command" working in ways to shape and control the way members think. Freedom of thinking is not that popular among the "people upstairs". Has never been! Threats and fear have been persistently used as tools of manipulation of public opinion in church.

By the way, what about switching the center of attention/interest from what those 4 individuals said in a private setting to what was the real issue at that first meeting?
It seems that not much is known, but there must have been a good reason for someone to record it. What was the main issue being discussed?
I am just guessing, but we may be surprised with the facts. Who knows? Worth to be explored more in depth, to check why someone had a reason to even record the event.

jf,

"Only the guilty/ashamed hide..."

Incorrect. The oppressed and marginalized hide.

This situation with the resignation of the professors is disappointing to say the least. It is even more disappointing that a Board Member would record the meeting hoping that something could be brought against the leadership of the church. But, the activity recorded "by mistake" says to me, how can a person(s) claim to be an SDA and use alcohol, curse, and denigrate the ones who are writing the paycheck is beyond me. In this post-modern society I know many think that the only truth is the truth they determine for themselves, consequently, each person stands on his/her own. However, the Bible, which we claim to follow does have definitive truths based on God's instruction. Consequently, this discussion must deal with Who's truth are we going to follow, post-modern man's or Gods.

"It is even more disappointing that a Board Member would record the meeting hoping that something could be brought against the leadership of the church."

This is pure speculation. You have no idea why the recording of the first meeting was made.

"Our goal is to foster community through conversation. This website is the online companion to SPECTRUM, a journal established to encourage Seventh-day Adventist participation in the discussion of contemporary issues from a Christian viewpoint, to look without prejudice at all sides of a subject, to evaluate the merits of diverse views, and to foster intellectual and cultural growth."

I don't know how many of you have taken the time lately to examine the goal of Spectrum and see if is been met? I like several aspects of Spectrum. I like the fact that is a open forum and you can discuss and express your opinions of just about anything and you wont be label for it with some exceptions. For some, this web page is the only community they have come to know or belong to. Its encouraging to see so many ideas flock this website and participants of all faiths, but to label this platform Seventh-day Adventist it's a little narrow minded, taking the fact that a great number of ex-Adventist, non-Adventist, want-to be Adventist, dominate the posts, ideas, viewpoints and some times "official", "historical", "conservative "(or however you may call them) Seventh-day Adventist viewpoints are label, ridicule and treated with prejudice without given the opportunity to look into there side of the subject or express its own self. The "Christian viewpoint" that see things through is subject to many interpretations in this forum, but I would like to see equal opportunity of ideas if you claim to be a Seventh-day Adventist forum with a "SPECTRUM" wide enough to fit "official ideas".

Phil, there's no conflict between the Ellen White quote Education and what Mark Finley wrote in the Review In fact, Finley wrote something very similar: "The same God who revealed Himself in the truths of Scripture has revealed Himself in the natural world."

In fact, Mark Finley is "one of our highly-respected Church leaders at the GC" and his recent article does speak to the issue of what should be taught in an Adventist classroom:

"Our understanding of biblical realities shapes our view of the world around us. While we may not always be able to fully explain every detail of the available scientific data, our interpretation of that data is informed by our understanding of Scripture."

In other words, we interpret the data of science according to our Biblical worldview, not according to the naturalistic, essentially atheistic, assumptions by which mainstream science interprets the data. You've elsewhere argued that Adventist professors in Adventist colleges should employ mainstream science's naturalistic assumptions to interpret the data, but that view has apparently been rejected by "one of our highly-respected Church leaders at the GC."

Hmmm... I'm wondering which side of the line would our church leaders be when... Jesus was clearly committed the act of blasphemy for claiming he was God... the prostitute was caught in the act of having sex with a married man...

David,

Did Ellen White not have a "limited understanding of the natural world"?

I guess she must have had a complete understanding of the natural world then. I don't know of anyone else who could claim that they fully understood the natural world.

Interesting!

Tim

I just find it so absurdly hypocritical and disingenuous how the conservatives moan and cry over the 'house' conversation transcripts. "Oh", they lament, "how could these SUPPOSED Adventist men speak badly about their superiors like that - how could they be so critical and MEAN to to others in the church?!'

Really? Are you kidding me with this? The conservatives are renowned for the verbal disembowelments that take place at potlucks and Sabbath dinners in private homes. A deer thrown into a river swarming with piranha has a better chance than a teacher, pastor or administrator who doesn't tow the right-wing party line with these people. It happens in local churches ALL THE TIME. Fundamentalists not only shoot the wounded, they cannibalize the body after. It wasn't enough for them to have Des stripped of his credentials, they had to demonize him and assassinate his character right into the ground for good measure. Nothing like a good kick to the groin of a fallen man, is there? And they are going to sit there and get all self-righteous and smug by decrying these individuals for venting off a little steam in a private discourse? WHATEVER.

So please, spare me this ridiculous display of taking the moral high ground. I mean, read Mary Hilde over on Educate Truth bloviating her finger-wagging condemnations on these four men, completely oblivious to the feeding frenzy that takes place over there on that website constantly, ignoring the eviscerated, scattered carcasses of professors, administrators and pastors who don't fall into (their) line whom they ripped to pieces in print. It's enough to make one ill.

Tim-Clement, eveyone has a limited understanding of the natural world, including Charles Lyell and Charles Darwin, and their latter-day acolytes. But Adventists believe that Ellen White was inspired by the same One who inspired the Bible, the One whose understanding of the natural world is not limited, because He created it.

Wow!

Truly sad...

1) The lack of love...
2) The lack of respect and process...
3) The "right ones" are not better than the ones "who are wrong"... The "right ones" will only be right when they display the spirit of compassion, mercy, grace and love that distinguish the work of God from the corporate mentality...

The devil is causing all of this...
God is in pain... God weeps...
God is finishing the work around the world through others who are passionate about sinners, poverty, and lost people, not systems, institutions and power!

We should be praying that the mission of the church would be revealed by God to us... The hearts and the minds of people are more important than the administrative agendas and the "I gatcha ya" mentality... It's really sad!

Tim-Clement, I'm saying that the statements that I quoted were inspired, and therefore convey more than merely human knowledge.

David - thank you for your clarifications.

Peace.

Tim

This is a terribly sad moment for our church and Avdentist education. So many careers ruined and the faith of many shaken. We need to keep our eyes on Jesus, allow and celebrate differences and treat each other as we would like to be treated. For every Adventist who has been to movies on Friday night, eaten bacon, used coarse language or been unfaithful, this moment deserves perspective. Educational freedom and church maturity has suffered here.

David Read believes in inerrancy.

Does "inspired" mean inerrant? Any EGW expert will tell you "NO."

As always, LSUAlumnusWithoutASpace, I heart your comments. Thank you for voicing my own thoughts so eloquently and entertainingly. :)

I would like to think there is one individual who could put an end to the Educate Truth debacle: Elder Ted Wilson. If he has the courage, he could personally communicate with Hilde and Pitman, telling them that he expects their website to shut down for the sake of the Church and to calm the war that they have incited.

Professor Kent - Sadly, I suspect that the only reason that the GC has paid any attention whatsoever to Education Truth's myths about education at LSU is because Ted Wilson and his cronies are the ones in charge. I think they have swallowed ET's lies hook, line and sinker, and that explains why they are behaving in this fashion.

By Proud LSU Alumnus
"The Bible is not made less valid by a non-literal interpretation of the Genesis story - if it is simply an allegory to illustrate that God is the creator of all things and that He loves us and wants relationship with us, and redeems us from sin and death, it is still just as true and perhaps even more beautiful. The Bible and evolution don't have to be incompatible - it's only our small-mindedness ("I can't possibly be wrong! Ellen White can't possibly be wrong!") that makes it seem so."

First let me say that I am against any witch hunt as well. I abhor it from a progressive SDA point of view.

However, I must still side with being a staunch creationist. Is the physical matter of the world older than we think? I believe there is even biblical evidence to show that it could be. However, I must point out the fallacy of your above statement, LSU Alumnus.

The Bible and evolution (at least in regards to denying the special creation of man) IS incompatible. The concepts of 'sin' and 'death' are completely interwoven around the concept of special creation. The bible writers made this crystal clear. If they were wrong on special creation, they are also, by default and semantic and exegetical logic and reasoning, wrong about the fall of man, sin, death by sin, and the restoration of the body to an incorruptible immortal. Such concepts were created and a direct result BECAUSE of the special creation of man.

Genesis 1 is not a textual island that can be removed from the scriptures and have all other concepts stand firm. It is the foundation of the house of cards that all rational exegesis is based on.

Any other rationale for trying to explain the concepts of sin, death, and restoration is deluded.

You can believe in God, even God as a creator, and believe in evolution. You cannot believe in evolution and the bible, and the concepts of the scriptures regarding sin and salvation and the scope of salvation history.

Anyways, I digress from the converstation.

There have been comments to the effect that Adventists are claiming that the speed of light has changed. Another person made the assertion that there is no evidence whatsoever that this has ever happened.

In actuality, I recall reading in a science journal in the last year that measurements taken by a group of astronomers does suggest that some of the basic laws of physics have indeed changed over time, but they were a bit uncertain whether that was actually the case. This would affect the speed of light. Thus, there may actually be something to that idea, though it is far from proven. The significance of it and what applicability it would have to radioactive dating is also very uncertain.

I find it rather strange that Adventist would be saying that the speed of light has changed, however, because Ellen White makes it abundantly clear that there was creation prior to the creation week of earth's history, which certainly seems to go against the idea that time has been compressed in some way or another so that the apparent long ages would actually represent just a short time. Ellen White's own statements clearly imply that the age of the universe is much older than the time that has elapsed since the creation week of Genesis 1.

Darrel C -

Thank you for your comments. I apologize - I was unclear. I happen to be an Adventist who believes in both creation and evolution. I believe that God used evolution as a means to create - and thus I obviously don't believe that creation had to have occurred within 6 literal days or the Bible is somehow invalidated. I believe the Genesis story was written to tell us not so much about HOW creation occurred, but WHO created us and WHY. In that sense, the Bible and evolution are not mutually exclusive.

Amen! I have a dear friend who was a geology major at LSU (then LLU, La Sierra Campus), was NOT taught evolutionary theory in his science classes, and when he got out into the "real world" discovered he was woefully underprepared and a laughingstock. He is now an atheist.

To Proud LSU Alumnus. That is strange. There is a way that this can be done and still be in keeping with the church's teachings on creationism and without moving to theistic evolution. When I was studying for my degree in biology at Union College in the 1970s, I was taught that creation according to the Bible record was the correct explanation and that evolution was not the correct explanation. But I was taught the facts of evolution so that I understood it and could deal with it out in the real world. I have taken additional courses in geology since then and found that my preparation was not thorough, but was adequate to deal with it. Of course, I learned more in the geology classes, a subject which I very much enjoyed. I hope someday to take more courses in it. At Union College I was also taught the strengths and weaknesses that were then known in both theories, which I think is important. I found that helpful and wonder if this is still being done in our colleges. It would appear that is not the case.

Had I ended up working in a professional capacity in the biology field, I would have been reasonably well prepared to deal with the evolution. Of course, to do so, I would have had to have gone to graduate school, but I think my background would have been sufficient.

One day, an independent movie producer will be able to bring to us a new movie on the life of TW, titled, "Honey, I shrunk the church".