Author Topic: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion  (Read 18200 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

colporteur

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 6404
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #20 on: April 14, 2013, 02:24:14 PM »
 There is a rapid shifting taking place. More and more those who wish to shift the order of things are taking the next step. Not all go to the same place at the same time but either they repent of their confusion or eventually they will all end up at the same place in terms of accepting homosexuality. No one is static. We are moving one direction or the other either slowly or rapidly. It seems that as the Holy Spirit is being withdrawn on one hand and poured out on the other the movements both directions are more rapid.
It's easier to slow a fast horse down than to get a dead one going.

LindaRS

  • Moderator
  • Posts: 5177
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #21 on: April 14, 2013, 06:41:34 PM »
It seems that as the Holy Spirit is being withdrawn on one hand and poured out on the other the movements both directions are more rapid.

In fact, we have been told that it will be rapid:

All the scenes of this life in which we must act a part are to be carefully studied, for they are a part of our education. We should bring solid timbers into our character building, for we are working both for this life and eternal life. And as we near the close of this earth's history, we advance more and more rapidly in Christian growth, or we retrograde just as decidedly.
O Lord, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps. O Lord, correct me, but with judgment; not in thine anger, lest thou bring me to nothing. Jeremiah  10:23-24

Larry Lyons

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 1629
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #22 on: April 14, 2013, 10:03:03 PM »
I was talking today with a friend in my local church about La Sierra and the recent article by Louie Bishop. My friend happens to be the uncle of Steve Daily who was an Adventist pastor, and I think was a chaplain or youth minister at La Sierra.  I'm not sure if he still is an Adventist pastor. I hope not, unless he has had a drastic turnaround. Anyway my friend said that Steve told him several years ago that it wouldn't be long before our colleges and universities would be no different than the secular ones. It appears that his prediction is coming true. But I believe that even now in our schools there are still faithful ones, administrators, teachers and students who have not bowed the knee to Baal.

Bernard 3

  • Regular Member
  • Posts: 5
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #23 on: April 19, 2013, 01:54:23 PM »
It is interesting to read how accurately the situation today is described in the book "OMEGA II  God's Church at the brink"   P.O. BOx 308  Glenville  CA 93226/USA by Lewis R.Walton

The methodical uprising and deviation from the teachings of many presented in it, performs on today before our eyes.

jjeanniton

  • Guest
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #24 on: May 06, 2013, 01:54:17 PM »
Recently while speaking with a conference president he claimed we do not have enough light on the WO issue and therefore the conference has no position on it. However he was quick to compare Mrs. White's credentials as being the same as ordination. Therefore the conference indeed has an unofficial position. I stated that we have enough light but let's look at the fruit of WO. Churches that now ordain homosexuals first ordained women. The president replied, "now you are equating women with homosexuals and that will make them mad." I answered, " I am not equating women with homosexuals. What I am saying is that when we step off the Bible platform the natural thing to do is take another step away."

The president stated incorrectly twice. First he, did away with the ordination issue and said I/we equate women with homosexuals and then he claimed that I/we equate ordaining women with ordaining homosexuals. Neither is true but the first error is the more grievous because the first accusation is claiming that one equates what God has created (women) with a lifestyle that Satan has created.

It is interesting that "pastor Famarisaran", in her sermon at La Sierra, recently linked very closely WO, homosexuality, and God being a women. WE do not need to link such deviations together. All one needs to do is listen to what comes out of the horse's mouth.

When we do not hold the Bible to be our guide, but begin to explain that culture demands such and such, it opens the door to anything. Not all will go to the same place, but there is nothing to stop anyone from going anywhere once the Bible is set aside for any reason. Many who support the making of women, leaders over men, have no desire to ordain homosexuals. Others do.

In this topic we are pointing out that La Sierra University has been a leader in the move to make women leaders of men. And, we have pointed out that they do not hold the Bible in high esteem. To the contrary, they on many points of doctrine reject the Bible. What is called "higher education" is understood by many to be a leading cause of the moral fall in society. I am speaking of secular education. But, sadly, when we examine religious colleges and universities, we find that they sadly share much in common. It may come as a surprise to some, that many religious schools are accredited by the same body as the schools in the world. They share the same standard in many respects.

There is a rapid shifting taking place. More and more those who wish to shift the order of things are taking the next step. Not all go to the same place at the same time but either they repent of their confusion or eventually they will all end up at the same place in terms of accepting homosexuality. No one is static. We are moving one direction or the other either slowly or rapidly. It seems that as the Holy Spirit is being withdrawn on one hand and poured out on the other the movements both directions are more rapid.

These things got me thinking. It is because there is a fundamental maxim of jurisprudental interpretation that Semper praesumitur pro sententia - the presumption is always in favor of the sentence, has been evaded by these evangelical "feminists" often by denying the "reason" for the precepts found in the Bible.

I have discovered that moral laws have their own built-in protection against the kind of "hermeneutics" that makes it possible to support homosexuality just by virtue of one's advocacy of women's ordination!

If a precept contains a premise that is presumed to be the natural and proper reason, and that premise is conceded to be true; and the peculiar terms and provisions of that precept can be deduced from good and necessary inference from the TRUTH of that premise: then this is an irrefutable proof that the Bible DOES substantively say what is said in those peculiar terms and provisions of that precept.

And even if the peculiar terms and provisions of that precept can not yet be deduced from good and necessary inference – the presumption must still be in favor of the peculiar terms and provisions of that precept as they read at face-value (and everything that can be deduced from good and necessary inference from those terms and provisions at face-value and/or the premises used as the natural and proper reason for them). Or else we can prove ANYTHING we like, and destroy the general applicability of virtually EVERY moral law that we please! 

And when it comes to the so-called "sacraments" - Baptism, the Lord's Supper: these so-called sacraments are of that species of Divine Law known as Positive Divine Institution.

Where it concerns "sacraments" and other positive institutions Christ has seen fit to ordain for standing perpetual use among Christian Churches, an Anglican author in 1828 by the name of Rev. Jeremy Taylor wrote that:

[Link removed by moderator]

"…All institutions sacramental and positive laws depend not upon the nature of the things themselves, according to the extension or diminution of which our obedience might be measured; but they depend wholly on the will of the Lawgiver, and the will of the Supreme, being actually limited to this specification, this manner, this matter, this institution; whatsoever comes besides it hath no foundation in the will of the Legislator, and therefore can have no warrant or authority. That it be obeyed or not obeyed is all the question and all the variety. If it can be obeyed it must, if it cannot it must be let alone. The right mother that appeared before Solomon demanded her child; half of her own was offered, but that was not it which would do her any good, neither would she have been pleased with a whole bolster of goat's hair, or with a perfect image of her child, or with a living lamb; it was her own child which she demanded: so it is in the divine institution; whatsoever God wills that we must attend to; and therefore whatsoever depends upon a divine law or institution, whatsoever is appointed instrumental to the signification of a mystery, or to the collation of a grace or a power, he that does any thing of his own head, either must be a despiser of God's will, or must suppose himself the author of a grace, or else to do nothing at all in what he does, because all his obedience and all the blessing of his obedience depends upon the will of God, which ought always to be obeyed when it can, and when it cannot nothing can supply it, because the reason of it cannot be understood, for who can tell why God would have the death of His Son celebrated by bread and wine? why by both the symbols? why by such? and therefore no proportions can be made, and if they could yet they cannot be warranted."

And more importantly,

[Link removed by moderator]

"§18. 2) All positive precepts that depend upon the mere will of the lawgiver (as I have already discoursed) admit no degrees, nor suppletory and commutation; because in such laws we see nothing beyond the words of the law, and the first meaning and the named instance, and therefore it is that in individuo which God points at, it is that in which He will make the trial of our obedience; it is that in which He will so perfectly be obeyed, that He will not be disputed with, or enquired of why and how, but just according to the measures there set down; so, and no more, and no less, and no otherwise. For when the will of the lawgiver is all the reason, the first instance of the law is all the measures, and there can be no product but what is just set down. No parity of reason can infer any thing else, because there is no reason but the will of God; to which nothing can be equal, because His will can be but one. If any man should argue thus, Christ hath commanded us to celebrate His death by blessing and communicating in bread and wine; this being plainly His purpose, and I finding it impossible to get wine, consider that water came out of His side as well as blood, and therefore water will represent His death as well as wine, for wine is but like blood, and water is more like itself, and therefore I obey Him better, when in the letter I cannot obey Him; he, I say, that should argue thus, takes wrong measures, for it is not here to be enquired which is most agreeable to our reason, but which complies with God's will, for that is all the reason we are to enquire after."

Plainly, a Divine Positive Institution is that law of God which cannot be justly and fairly deduced from good and necessary inference from the nature of things, the moral law of God, or any other expressly enacted Divine law. In Positive Institutions, it is not our right to "reason" about what we should do or why we should do it, but must yield strict, minute, exact, blind, unquestioning obedience to the specific and particular explicit terms and provisions of that particular precept.

If the principles concerning the very CONCEPT of a positive institution had not been so exact, precise, and austere and strict and severe as they truly are, well then the positive institutions of God would have NEVER had this built-in protection against the kind of "hermeneutics" that the neo-gnostic pepuzian collyridian feminists are using, that just by virtue of advocacy of women's ordination, those very same hermeneutics will lead to the advocacy of homosexuality! When God requested of Moses to build a tabernacle for Him, He didn't leave it to Moses or anybody else to infer any acceptable pattern thereof from the already antecedent prevailing laws, much less the moral nature and reason of things: but He gave specific particular directions for that particular case, so particular that in fact they had no precedent at all for them in even the already antecedent prevailing Divine laws - much less the moral nature and reason of things! He didn't say, whether it be right or rational or just or charitable to build it! He did'nt say "build it any way you KNOW is right or rational or just or charitable to build it" - but, "See that thou build ALL things EXACTLY and PUNCTILIOUSLY according to the pattern I showed thee in the Mount!" Not "whether or not they have any precedent at all for it in the prevailing antedcent Divine Laws", but "GO AND OBEY ME AT ONCE WITHOUT QUESTION!"

In due time, if possible, I shall insert another post concerning the role of women in the church, and note the attacks that the most conservative enemies of this feminist neo-pepuzian movement of Women's ordination have always been launching against the Seventh Day Adventist Church, yea especially against Ellen G White where it concerns women speaking in public MIXED assemblies for religious purposes!

Richard Myers

  • Servant
  • Posts: 39537
  • A glorious sunset teaches of trust and faith.....
    • The Remnant Online
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #25 on: May 06, 2013, 05:47:33 PM »
Juan, share with us what you know about the  feminist neo-pepuzian movement. Most of us are unfamiliar with it. What is pepuzian?
Jesus receives His reward when we reflect His character, the fruits of the Spirit......We deny Jesus His reward when we do not.

jjeanniton

  • Guest
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #26 on: May 07, 2013, 09:45:18 AM »
The Pepuzians were a second-century set of Gnostics who advocated the entry of women into the clergy!

The Church Father St. Jerome, notes poignantly in 350 to 400 AD, how nearly every heresy spread by means of certain silly women promoted to such positions of honor among the heretics as to be ordained to the clergy! Exactly the goal of these women's ordination advocates! The heretics were more disorderly in their conduct in public worship!

Tertullian wrote against them! For example, among heretics who profess to be Christians!

The Prescription against Heretics, chap. 41

Quote

§1. “I must not omit an account of the conduct also of the heretics-how frivolous it is, how worldly, how merely human, without seriousness, without authority, without discipline, as suits their creed!!

§2. To begin with, it is doubtful who is a catechumen, and who a believer; they have all access alike, they hear alike, they pray alike-even heathens, if any such happen to come among them! "That which is holy they will cast to the dogs, and their pearls," although (to be sure) they are not real ones, "they will fling to the swine!"

§3. Simplicity they will have to consist in the overthrow of discipline, attention to which on our part they call brotherly! Peace also they huddle up anyhow with all comers;

§4. for it matters not to them, however different be their treatment of subjects, provided only they can conspire together to storm the citadel of the one only Truth! All are puffed up, all offer you knowledge! Their catechumens are perfect before they are full-taught!

§5. The very women of these heretics, how wanton they are! For they are bold enough to teach, to dispute, to enact exorcisms, to undertake cures-it may be even to baptize!!!


And also notice that this was at a time when the early church did not allow women to speak out at all in formal worship services! Whereas I have evidence that if 1 Corinthians 14:34/35 is limited to just formal worship services, assuming that it is permanent and universal exactly as written, and permanently and universally forbids women from speaking out in church: then women cannot vocally and audibly participate in mixed adult Sabbath (Sunday) School Classes with men in them whenever the congregation does the class as one single class without dividing up into smaller classes! Women who and audibly participate in such mega mixed adult Sabbath (Sunday) School Classes with men in them (whenever the congregation does the class as one single class without dividing up into smaller classes) are just as guilty as those heretics who had the audacity to suffer their women to speak and preach and teach in Church! Or else 1 Corinthians 14:34/35 is not permanently and universally binding exactly as written!

Quote


§6. Their ordinations, are carelessly administered, capricious, changeable! At one time they put novices in office; at another time, men who are bound to some secular employment; at another, persons who have apostatized from us, to bind them by vainglory, since they cannot by the truth!


§7. Nowhere is promotion easier than in the camp of rebels, where the mere fact of being there is a foremost service!

§8. And so it comes to pass that today one man is their bishop, tomorrow another; today he is a deacon who tomorrow is a reader; today he is a presbyter who tomorrow is a layman! For even on laymen do they impose the functions of priesthood!!”



In the early "Christian" Era (100 - 500 AD) the Peputians, Collyridians, and Montanists routinely allowed women to be ordained to the clergy, yea, to the priesthood (cf. Epiphanius, De hær., xlix, 79)!

These women ordination advocates of today, and the Spiritualists of the 19th century are only reviving this distinctive heretical mark of the Peputians, Collyridians, and Montanists!

All of the heretical villainous misdeeds outlined by Tertullian in §1 - §4 and §6 - §8 are utterly at variance with the third angel's message!

Richard Myers

  • Servant
  • Posts: 39537
  • A glorious sunset teaches of trust and faith.....
    • The Remnant Online
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #27 on: October 29, 2013, 10:18:32 AM »
Does it surprise anyone that the video posted in the fist post of this topic is no longer available? There are those who are not willing to stand by what they teach.
Jesus receives His reward when we reflect His character, the fruits of the Spirit......We deny Jesus His reward when we do not.

ltvvaughn

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 713
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #28 on: October 29, 2013, 01:14:50 PM »
The reasoning behind removing the video may be that Ryan Bell has been removed from his office as pastor and he was the one who permitted this to occur.  They may be trying to distance themselves from Bell.  Too little too late as far as I'm concerned.  As was stated, if Famarisan (sp ?) is still teaching the problem has not been dealt with, only covered up.

LtV
LtV
If we can't be united in Truth . . . we dare not unite at all!

Richard Myers

  • Servant
  • Posts: 39537
  • A glorious sunset teaches of trust and faith.....
    • The Remnant Online
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #29 on: October 29, 2013, 07:28:21 PM »
She is more than a teacher. It  may be hard to believe, but she is a teacher of "religion". "She is an Adjunct Professor of Religion and Philosophy and the Director of the Women's Resource Center at La Sierra University. She is also the director of their honors program." I would say that she is deeply involved in the leadership at La Sierra.
Jesus receives His reward when we reflect His character, the fruits of the Spirit......We deny Jesus His reward when we do not.

Ed Sutton

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 2212
    • Ed Sutton Blogger Profile
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #30 on: October 29, 2013, 09:40:32 PM »
Direct copy of words.

Advindicate website

http://advindicate.com/articles/3029   March 25, 2013  David Reed

Quote
On February 22, 2013, Trisha Famisaran, who is assistant professor of philosophy and theological studies and director of the honors program at La Sierra University, preached a sermon at the Hollywood SDA Church, where Ryan Bell is the pastor, titled, “Repenting of Patriarchy and Heterosexism.” Actually, as I think about it, “preached” sounds awfully patriarchal, and I'm not sure what Professor Famisaran delivered can rightly be called a sermon; let's say she gave a talk. This wondrous event was recorded and uploaded to YouTube, so please do not imagine yourself to be under any obligation to take my word about these goings on. Watch the video:

http://youtu.be/sqQMl-Qn36k

Quote
I gather from the video that the Hollywood Church was in the midst of a series called “The five dead deadly sins of the church,” two of which are patriarchy and heterosexism.

Hollywood ChurchRyan Bell, after a brief but obligatory session of self-flagellation for being a white male, notes that this is the season of Lent. It seems the Hollywood church has adopted the liturgical calendar. If you are a conservative Adventist, it might come as a shock to find Lent being observed in a Seventh-day Adventist Church. Like many Roman Catholic customs, Lent has pagan roots, originating in “weeping for Tammuz” in the ancient Babylonian religion. (Ezek. 8:14-15) Biblical Christianity does not set aside any particular time, other than right now, to repent of sins. (Heb. 3:15; Acts 8:36) But stranger doctrines yet will be heard this February morning.

On the Hollywood Church's Face book page, and in the bulletin for February 22, Ryan Bell quoted Anaïs Nin the French-born authoress most famous for her erotica. Trisha Famisaran also quotes Ms. Nin approvingly at the start of her, um, talk. Anaïs Nin was not famous merely for her fictional erotica, she was famous for her non-fictional diaries which record numerous extramarital affairs, including affairs with high profile personalities such as Henry Miller (himself a writer of obscene material), Edmund Wilson, Gore Vidal and Otto Rank. At one point, Ms. Nin managed to be married to two men at once, Hugh Guiler and Rupert Pole, making her a bigamist. But if you are Ryan Bell or Trisha Famisaran, who better to quote on an Adventist Church's Face book page and Sabbath morning bulletin than the feminist, adulterous, bigamist, pornographer, Anaïs Nin?

It seems Professor Famisaran was at Hollywood church the previous week to view the film “Seventh-Gay Adventist,” and claims to have been involved with that project from the beginning. Since we are expected to repent of heterosexism, Famisaran helpfully provides a definition of that sin: “Heterosexism is the belief that to be straight is to be within the norm and if you're anything but straight, then you're somewhere on the outside and then subject to discrimination.” Notice that this sin that we're expected to repent of isn't defined as hatred of someone because of their sexual orientation; if it were, I'd agree that we should repent of that. But, no, the sin of heterosexism is believing that heterosexuality is normal and homosexuality is abnormal.

Now, around 95 to 97% of the population are heterosexual, heterosexual intercourse has a necessary biological purpose without which humanity would become extinct, and there is universal religious approval for heterosexual marriage. By contrast, only about 3 to 5% are homosexual, homosexual sex has no biological purpose, and it is almost universally condemned by the world's religions. By whatever definition you prefer—statistical, biological, or religious—heterosexuality is is “within the norm” and homosexuality is not. Heterosexuality is normal; homosexuality is not. But among liberal Adventists, it is considered a sin to see the world as it actually is.

If you believe that God inspired the Scriptures, then it seems that God might need to repent of the sin of heterosexism. God has pronounced homosexual acts an “abomination” (Lev. 18:22) and has prescribed the death penalty for male-on-male sodomy (Lev. 20:13). Such abominable acts are also frowned upon in the New Testament. Paul denounces homosexuality as something that results from idolatry and willful refusal to acknowledge God (Rom. 1:24-28), and warns that those who do such things will not inherit the Kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-11) and will be subject to judgment under law (1 Tim. 1:9-10). But Bell, Famisaran and other liberal Adventists don't cotton to all that bible-thumpin'. They know better. After all, La Sierra theologian John Jones has closely studied all these passages and concluded that none of them actually means what it says.

Transitioning seamlessly from the “sin” of heterosexism to the “sin” of patriarchy, Ms. Famisaran asserts that patriarchal societies excuse rape of females just because they are women. But rape is and has always been designated a crime in traditional societies; in fact, female sexual virtue and purity is at a higher premium the more traditionally patriarchal a society is.

It is at this point that we learn that Ryan Bell changed the lyrics of the morning's hymn so that God is referred to as “mother” rather than “father.” “Not every church could pull that off,” says Prof. Famisaran. Or would want to. Jesus taught us to address God as “our father.” (Mat. 6:9; Luke 11:2) Scripture sometimes attributes feminine qualities to God (Isaiah 49:15; Hos. 13:8; Mat. 23:37; Luke 13:34) but never refers to God as “mother,” only ever as “father” or in the masculine pronoun. (Matt. 28:19; John 5:19; 16:13) We should never change the way we address God in order to conform to contemporary culture. That Bell, Famisaran and other liberal Adventists dare to do so shows that they are more enthusiastic about feminist, post-patriarchal culture than about following Scripture's example and Christ's express instructions about how God shall be addressed.

Professor Famisaran launches into a long screed against patriarchy. There isn't a hint of a biblical justification for her animus against patriarchy (“rule of the fathers”) because, of course, Scripture endorses patriarchy from Genesis to Revelation. God ordained patriarchy as part of the created order; Adam was created first and Eve was created as Adam's helpmate. After the Fall, God intended for Adam's headship over Eve to preserve a harmonious institution of marriage. (Gen. 2:18-25; 3:16; 1 Cor. 11:3,7-10; 1 Tim. 2:11-15). There is no hint that this family order is changed in the New Testament; to the contrary, Paul makes clear that “rule of the fathers” is still in effect in the Christian era for Christian believers. (Eph. 5:22-33; Col. 3:18-19; 1 Peter 3:1) There is plentiful evidence that God intends a patriarchal order for his Church as well as for Christian homes. (Mark 3:13-19; Luke 6:12-16; Acts 1:12-23; 1 Tim. 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-9; 1 Tim. 3:4)

It is bold rebellion to take that which God has established and call it “sin.” “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.” Isaiah 5:20. We've reached the time that Paul warned Timothy about, “when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.” 2 Timothy 4:3-4.

Next, Professor Famisaran confides that she is fond of a certain pop song by one Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta, better known by the stage name, “Lady Gaga.” Lady Gaga's elaborate stage shows feature themes of bondage and sadomasochism. The three central themes that shape Lady Gaga's music videos are sex, violence, and power. (According to Wikipedia, that is—I confess to not being a fan.) Lady Gaga reportedly “has the knack of sending rape-like fantasies—in songs and videos that double as catch club hits—to the top of the charts.” Famisaran's favorite Gaga song is “Born this Way,” in which Ms. Germanotta sings:

I'm beautiful in my way 'Cause God makes no mistakes I'm on the right track, baby I was born this way

Don't be a drag, just be a queen * * * 'cause baby you were born this way

No matter gay, straight, or bi, Lesbian, transgendered life, I'm on the right track baby, I was born to survive.

Professor Famisaran interprets this piece, correctly I think, as being a call for the differently oriented to embrace their homosexual orientation. (As an aside, Famisaran proudly relates how, after viewing the film “Seventh-Gay Adventist,” her three year old son said, “momma, when I'm older I can be a mommy like you.” Great.)

There you have it. Lady Gaga has solved the age-old nature vs. nurture controversy: The differently oriented were “born that way.” And that settles it for Trisha Famisaran, professor of theological studies and director of La Sierra's honors program. Those of you who think La Sierra needs freedom from effective church control so that it can be an elite liberal arts college with high academics, here's what you've ended up with: a professor who quotes Lady Gaga as an authority on genetics, psychiatry, and developmental psychology.

The rest of the, um, talk was about the book of Job as interpreted by the Benedictine nun Joan Chittister. I think. Frankly, I zoned out. Oh, wait a minute, something else just caught my attention. In commenting on I Corinthians 12:12-31, which is about how different members of the body of Christ have different spiritual gifts, Professor Famisaran states, “It is God who creates the diverse parts, just as She thinks they should be.” That was the professor's parting comment.

Then Ryan Bell got up and gave a short homily over the communion table complaining of the border fence between California and Mexico. Then he prayed over the wine, implying that not only Christ but also women, gays, lesbians, and the transgendered “knew the cost” and had “paid the price” for something or other.

STOP THE PRESSES

I wrote this column over the course of four days, and finished it on Sunday, March 24. On Monday, March 25, Ryan Bell posted on his web page informing his friends and church family that “the Southern California Conference administration [has come] to the conclusion that they cannot trust me to lead this church as a Seventh-day Adventist Church. . . . they feel that my leadership has led our church outside the accepted framework of Seventh-day Adventism. We have not been able come to an understanding about these things and so my denominational employment will end on or about April 1, 2013” (emphasis added).

If you've come with me this far, you'll have no difficulty understanding how Larry Caviness and the SCC administration made the decision they made. Ryan Bell is a graduate of conservative, self-supporting Wiemar College, and has been an Adventist pastor for 22 years, but, as Bell writes, “sometimes people grow in ways that are incompatible with the institutions they have been a part of.” Bell's personal journey has taken him beyond the parameters of even very liberal Seventh-day Adventism. I suspect that the SCC's decision to fire Ryan Bell was not based solely upon “Repenting of patriarchy and heterosexism;” Bell had long been promoting the “social gospel” (leftist political activism) in place of the actual gospel, and his flirtation with Catholic liturgy is jarring. I would imagine that February 22nd's abomination was the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back, the final nail in the coffin.

This article was to have highlighted how startlingly bold the liberal faction in our church has become. But—praise the Lord!--the piece turned out instead to illustrate how liberal Adventists can press their luck too far, even in liberal Adventist “jurisdictions” such as the Southern California Conference. Those of us who are prone to pessimism, even defeatism, can take heart at this welcome development. All is not lost, and we do ourselves and our cause a disservice when we talk as though it is.

Of course, the La Sierra situation remains unrectified. La Sierra is still turning out radicals like Trisha Famisaran who, at the HMS Richards Divinity School, are teaching religion to the next generation of Adventists. If we are not vigilant, that generation will come to populate the conference administrations and executive committees, and although Famisaran's neo-pagan effluvia smells noxious to us, it might smell sweet to them. We have much work to do, but there is hope.
 

Grateful for Psalms 32 and Titus 2:10 - The divinity of Christ is acknowledged in the unity of the children of God.  {11MR 266.2}

Mimi

  • Regular Member
  • Posts: 27796
  • www.remnant-online.org
    • The Remnant Online
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #31 on: October 29, 2013, 09:49:19 PM »
Thank you, Mr. Sleuth! It does work!  :)
  For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven. Psalm 119:89 

Richard Myers

  • Servant
  • Posts: 39537
  • A glorious sunset teaches of trust and faith.....
    • The Remnant Online
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #32 on: March 25, 2016, 10:08:17 PM »
This will not surprise many here, but it may cause some to question what is happening at La Sierra. "As for myself, I am agnostic about belief in God, which emerges from my views on language and the limits of knowledge." Ms. Trisha Famisaran. March 25, 2016.
Jesus receives His reward when we reflect His character, the fruits of the Spirit......We deny Jesus His reward when we do not.

Wally

  • Senior Moderator
  • Posts: 5284
  • Romans 8:35, 38, 39
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #33 on: March 26, 2016, 03:43:59 AM »
Why was a self-described agnostic was ever on the staff of La Sierra?  This sheds light on the situation there, and may help explain why they could allow evolutionists into the biology dept.  Ms. Famisaran also claims that "Many doubters, agnostics, and post-theists, however, need the church in order to continue ministering and being ministered to."  Well, they certainly need ministering to, but I would not want them "ministering" to my kids.  These kind only plant seeds of doubt in the minds of impressionable young people.
So likewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants:  we have done that which was our duty to do.  Luke 17:10

colporteur

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 6404
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #34 on: March 27, 2016, 09:59:37 AM »

 Ms. Farisaran is the one was invited by then Hollywood pro homosexual SDA pastor  ( now atheist)( Ryan Bell) to spew out a message of nonsense promoting in one hour both WO and homosexuality. During her "sermon" she was so nervous so as to come across as though she could have a nervous breakdown.
It's easier to slow a fast horse down than to get a dead one going.

Richard Myers

  • Servant
  • Posts: 39537
  • A glorious sunset teaches of trust and faith.....
    • The Remnant Online
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #35 on: March 27, 2016, 11:25:27 AM »
Yes, it is the subject of this topic.  :)   See first post.
Jesus receives His reward when we reflect His character, the fruits of the Spirit......We deny Jesus His reward when we do not.

colporteur

  • Full Member
  • Posts: 6404
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #36 on: March 27, 2016, 11:35:53 AM »
Yes, it is the subject of this topic.  :)   See first post.

I was just bringing that current. Some may not go back and read all the posts.
It's easier to slow a fast horse down than to get a dead one going.

Richard Myers

  • Servant
  • Posts: 39537
  • A glorious sunset teaches of trust and faith.....
    • The Remnant Online
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #37 on: March 28, 2016, 08:18:50 AM »
Good thought, cp. All need to watch the video in order to understand how far La Sierra has fallen.
Jesus receives His reward when we reflect His character, the fruits of the Spirit......We deny Jesus His reward when we do not.

Richard Myers

  • Servant
  • Posts: 39537
  • A glorious sunset teaches of trust and faith.....
    • The Remnant Online
Re: La Sierra University, Leader in Rebellion
« Reply #38 on: November 06, 2016, 10:17:26 PM »
The following interview with Dr. Lawrence Geraty was done on June 26, 2010 the day after Elder Wilson was elected and before Elder Ted Wilson's sermon, which thrilled our hearts. I was thinking that his election was good, but was still attempting to get information from others who knew him. Our hopes were confirmed as I listened to Dr. Geraty share his thoughts, thoughts from one who knows Ted Wilson very well. Ted Wilson lived in the Geraty home when attending Andrews as a seminary student. 

This video has been restricted to the private "SDA" area til today.



geraty1    On election of Elder Ted Wilson and thoughts on creation

geraty2    Creation discussion regarding Spirit of Prophecy

Jesus receives His reward when we reflect His character, the fruits of the Spirit......We deny Jesus His reward when we do not.