Satan And Science

[cinepro]

What this brings me to is the deep dark question. Can science itself be manipulated by the Devil and would be know if it was?

I'm having some trouble following some of the (scattershot) comments in this thread, and I think part of the problem is that "science" is too general. As has been pointed out, "science" can refer to many, many different things.

It would probably be immensely helpful jskains if you made your theory a little more specific.

Specifically, can you offer some hypotheticals on how the Devil would or could manipulate "science", and even better, do you have any suspicions on it actually having happened? If so, under what circumstances and which theories?

Edited May 18, 2011 by cinepro

[Walden]

If you speak with God, then your qualifications are pretty good.

I think there are too many crackpots (that even apologists would classify as crackpots) that have professed to speak to god that know nothing, or very little, of god, to make your above statement substantial.

[bookofmormontruth]

I think there are too many crackpots (that even apologists would classify as crackpots) that have professed to speak to god that know nothing, or very little, of god, to make your above statement substantial.

Yet, it only takes one who truly does speak with G-d to be the Prophet for the world. Wonderful isn't it?

[Brian 2.0]

Yet, it only takes one who truly does speak with G-d to be the Prophet for the world. Wonderful isn't it?

I agree with this. The harder question is how do you determine who that person/persons is?

Edited May 18, 2011 by Brian 2.0

[LeSellers]

I agree with this. The harder question is how do you determine who that person/persons is?

One becomes a prophet himself. (See Moroni 10:4~5, James 1:5.)

The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

Lehi

[jskains]

I'm having some trouble following some of the (scattershot) comments in this thread, and I think part of the problem is that "science" is too general. As has been pointed out, "science" can refer to many, many different things.

It would probably be immensely helpful jskains if you made your theory a little more specific.

Specifically, can you offer some hypotheticals on how the Devil would or could manipulate "science", and even better, do you have any suspicions on it actually having happened? If so, under what circumstances and which theories?

Archeology comes to mind. It's a 2D view of a 3D issue and it is easy for someone to be swayed from one interpretation to another. Also Astrophysics. I think we make a lot of determinations for a massive universe from a tiny rock and I can't help but believe there is a lot of politics and interpretations in the results of the data. It's influencing those interpretations that I think could be Devil inspired.

JMS

[bookofmormontruth]

I agree with this. The harder question is how do you determine who that person/persons is?

It can be a hard question, but it doesn't have to be.

If there truly is a Prophet who speaks to G-d then we as His children have the right to know.

The best and simplest example to know of a Prophet is the Book of Mormon.

[Walden]

Yet, it only takes one who truly does speak with G-d to be the Prophet for the world. Wonderful isn't it?

Agreed, one just must be careful of who they consider a prophet who speaks with god....many of the "crackpots" that I mentioned had a number of followers who were completely convinced that there prophet spoke to god.

I don't want to derail the thread with this line of questioning, I just wanted to bring up a point that just becasue one thinks he is speaking with god (as jeff k mentioned as the criteria for credentials/qualification regarding knowledge of religious "sciences) doesn't make him necessarily an expert on god.

[Jeff K.]

I think there are too many crackpots (that even apologists would classify as crackpots) that have professed to speak to god that know nothing, or very little, of god, to make your above statement substantial.

I did not speak of professing to speak with God, that is a different issue.

1-If God exists

2-If you speak with God

Then your qualifications regarding religion are impeccable.

[Eldwynn]

I think we make a lot of determinations for a massive universe from a tiny rock and I can't help but believe there is a lot of politics and interpretations in the results of the data. It's influencing those interpretations that I think could be Devil inspired.

JMS

Have you ever been involved in any discovery in Astrophysics? Or is this just tin foil hat speak. If you have studied astrophysics and find that their conclusions are wrong due to their influencing of the data, then by all means- PROVE IT. You don't have to have a degree to prove someone wrong in physics. You don't even have to be popular, your assumptions just have to be good.

But when I read what you wrote, you may as well have said "erm, I don't understand astrophysics, so they are probably fudging data... and yah, the devil is behind it"

These people (even if they do talk to Satan) are not nearly as unreasonable as you are implying. Point out the flaw in their methods, and criticize them properly. Anybody is allowed to do science. That is what makes it so beautifully different from mormon theology- which in thus far is only allowed to be done by white old men(unless it's personal theology, which is a nice way of saying "well maybe god said that to you, but it doesn't mean anything to the rest of us").

Edited May 18, 2011 by Eldwynn

[thesometimesaint]

Eldwynn:

Your personal beliefs are irrelevant. I personally don't care for Country Music, but that does mean it isn't a legitimate art form, with people highly skilled in its production.

What you are exploring is the unknown, which is not the same thing as supernatural.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/supernatural

[bookofmormontruth]

Have you ever been involved in any discovery in Astrophysics? Or is this just tin foil hat speak. If you have studied astrophysics and find that their conclusions are wrong due to their influencing of the data, then by all means- BECOME AN ASTROPHYSICIST AND PROVE IT.

But when I read what you wrote, you may as well have said "erm, I don't understand astrophysics, so they are probably fudging data... and yah, the devil is behind it"

These people (even if they do talk to Satan) are not nearly as unreasonable as you are implying. Point out the flaw in their methods, and criticize them properly. Anybody is allowed to do science. That is what makes it so beautifully different from mormon theology- which in thus far is only allowed to be done by white old men(unless it's personal theology, which is a nice way of saying "well maybe god said that to you, but it doesn't mean anything to the rest of us").

In the same light, how about you take your own hypocritical advice and "properly criticize" our beloved Prophets instead of making cheap shots by calling them "white old men"?

[Brian 2.0]

Have you ever been involved in any discovery in Astrophysics? Or is this just tin foil hat speak. If you have studied astrophysics and find that their conclusions are wrong due to their influencing of the data, then by all means- PROVE IT. You don't have to have a degree to prove someone wrong in physics. You don't even have to be popular, your assumptions just have to be good.

But when I read what you wrote, you may as well have said "erm, I don't understand astrophysics, so they are probably fudging data... and yah, the devil is behind it"

These people (even if they do talk to Satan) are not nearly as unreasonable as you are implying. Point out the flaw in their methods, and criticize them properly. Anybody is allowed to do science. That is what makes it so beautifully different from mormon theology- which in thus far is only allowed to be done by white old men(unless it's personal theology, which is a nice way of saying "well maybe god said that to you, but it doesn't mean anything to the rest of us").

I'm not sure he was saying that the scientist are purposely fudging data or knowingly saying things that aren't true to deceive. I think he was saying that scientist do have to look at data and make conclusions about it, and there could be different conclusions made sometimes based upon that data, and I think he is arguing that Satan could "inspire" those scientist to see conclusions that are against the truth. Much like the HG can inspire men to see the truth of something, Satan can inspire men to think of a theory or something that is untrue.

I don't believe that, myself, I just think the poster you are responding to wasn't meaning that scientist are doing it maliciously.

[Eldwynn]

Eldwynn:

Your personal beliefs are irrelevant. I personally don't care for Country Music, but that does mean it isn't a legitimate art form, with people highly skilled in its production.

What you are exploring is the unknown, which is not the same thing as supernatural.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/supernatural

Hmm so are you saying that I am wrong? That people besides the prophet can have truths revealed to them about the church? 14 year old boys, African Americans, women etc. that god could reveal to them some truth about our physical universe, and that you would take them seriously- in the present day? I have not heard that before.

Because I know well that modern science will allow all of them to participate in discovering the nature of the universe. Hey, look at Stephen Hawking.

Edited May 18, 2011 by Eldwynn

[Eldwynn]

In the same light, how about you take your own hypocritical advice and "properly criticize" our beloved Prophets instead of making cheap shots by calling them "white old men"?

Criticize them about what? Nothing they say is "official doctrine" anyways- and it's all subject to my interpretation (Oh when Brigham Young told the story about Noahs ark, he obviously meant it as a METAPHOR, you silly boy: well excuse me for taking it seriously).

Their thoughts about evolution, Noah's Ark, the beginning of the universe and time, do not come from God (as many people on this forum have jumped up and down telling me) but are just their personal opinions on matters. Even first presidency messages are only intended for the time period in which they were alive (so they say). Lately, prophets avoid the domain of science more and more. This was not always so: but it is today. No official position? Just who exactly is it that you are talking to? Why did God have no problem telling Moses how he created the earth, but he won't tell President X?

The funny thing is, I have never heard a prophet express the same thing. "Oh yeah sure, Joseph Fielding Smith was wrong about Evolution and Adam and all that, but I am right about homosexual marriage".

Edited May 18, 2011 by Eldwynn

[thesometimesaint]

Eldwynn:

I have no problem with 14 year old boys, African Americans, women etc., having inspiration even revelation from God concern their area of responsibility.

I greatly admire Steven Hawking, but when he talks of God, he is out of his area of expertise, and responsibility. Do you call a plumber to do open heart surgery on your body? After all it is just plumbing? Do you call a heart surgeon to do your house plumbing. After all it is still just plumbing.

[Eldwynn]

I'm not sure he was saying that the scientist are purposely fudging data or knowingly saying things that aren't true to deceive. I think he was saying that scientist do have to look at data and make conclusions about it, and there could be different conclusions made sometimes based upon that data, and I think he is arguing that Satan could "inspire" those scientist to see conclusions that are against the truth. Much like the HG can inspire men to see the truth of something, Satan can inspire men to think of a theory or something that is untrue.

I don't believe that, myself, I just think the poster you are responding to wasn't meaning that scientist are doing it maliciously.

Wow what a conundrum. It's amazing technology works at all. How do we know that Bernoulli's equation wasn't inspired by Satan!!

[Eldwynn]

Eldwynn:

I have no problem with 14 year old boys, African Americans, women etc., having inspiration even revelation from God concern their area of responsibility.

I greatly admire Steven Hawking, but when he talks of God, he is out of his area of expertise, and responsibility. Do you call a plumber to do open heart surgery on your body? After all it is just plumbing? Do you call a heart surgeon to do your house plumbing. After all it is still just plumbing.

So Prophets have never- and will never- be experts on the origins of the Universe? Because god did not create it? Interesting.

The fundamental difference is that the plumber COULD become a heart surgeon. Can I become the prophet?

Likewise, anyone can do science- so his criticism was not fair. However, only one person can receive truths from god (presumably) and if some 14 year old boy claims to talk to god in a forest- he is definitely wrong.

Edited May 18, 2011 by Eldwynn

[thesometimesaint]

Eldwynn:

I think what he is addressing is bias. Everyone has a bias, and most of us have more than one.

The advantage of science is that while individual scientist do have bias. It is highly unlikely for them all to have the same bias.

[bookofmormontruth]

Criticize them about what? Nothing they say is "official doctrine" anyways- and it's all subject to my interpretation (Oh when Brigham Young told the story about Noahs ark, he obviously meant it as a METAPHOR, you silly boy: well excuse me for taking it seriously).

Their thoughts about evolution, Noah's Ark, the beginning of the universe and time, do not come from God (as many people on this forum have jumped up and down telling me) but are just their personal opinions on matters. Even first presidency messages are only intended for the time period in which they were alive (so they say). Lately, prophets avoid the domain of science more and more. This was not always so: but it is today. No official position? Just who exactly is it that you are talking to? Why did God have no problem telling Moses how he created the earth, but he won't tell President X?

The funny thing is, I have never heard a prophet express the same thing. "Oh yeah sure, Joseph Fielding Smith was wrong about Evolution and Adam and all that, but I am right about homosexual marriage".

Of course, take no responsibility for your cheap shot, but I am glad to see you decided to capitalize G-d.

"you silly boy" is just creepy and I am sorry to break the news, but homosexuality will never be accepted by G-d.

[jskains]

Eldwynn, is there a need for your condesending replies?

JMS

[Eldwynn]

Of course, take no responsibility for your cheap shot, but I am glad to see you decided to capitalize G-d.

"you silly boy" is just creepy and I am sorry to break the news, but homosexuality will never be accepted by G-d.

Cheap shot to who? To G*d, or to the prophets? If I made the universe, the last thing I would worry about is if people are capitalizing my name.

Edited May 18, 2011 by Eldwynn

[bookofmormontruth]

Eldwynn, is there a need for your condesending replies?

JMS

Of course there is a need for that is all he can bring to the table. Oh, and irrelevant cheap shots.

[Eldwynn]

Eldwynn, is there a need for your condesending replies?

JMS

I will work on my prose from this point forward.

Edited May 18, 2011 by Eldwynn

[Eldwynn]

Of course there is a need for that is all he can bring to the table. Oh, and irrelevant cheap shots.

How exactly was it irrelevant? Can everyone do Mormon theology or not?