Cloning And The Church

[Calm]

I don't ever see the day when mankind has cloned a human, when considering the alternative way to make human beings, why spend so much time, cash and effort?

I think there are plenty of people out there that are narcissistic enough to desire a minime to mold into the person they wish they actually were, they might see it as a second chance at life or a literal extension of themselves...may even think about it like a repeat of their childhood with 'foreknowledge' about how things will turn out. Of course, if this is what they think, they are not taking into account (perhaps they don't believe) the contribution of the individual and unique spirit that would be associated with their clone.

I can see others who want a child that is wholly theirs and belongs to no one else in any way possible.

I can also see a potentially immoral practice of creating a clone solely for the medical benefits of having extra organs, blood, etc. that will not require any rejection drugs to use, such as has been portrayed in numerous books and movies.

Edited July 6, 2013 by calmoriah

[Brian 2.0]

When I was doing some work for the COB in 1982, this issue (among other related issues about technologically-assisted human reproduction, and even human-animal chimera) was being studied for policy purposes. Based on what ended up in the handbook not long after, I believe that yes, this clone would have a spirit and be subject to all the requirements for salvation and exaltation.

I would love to know the results and doctrinal implications of human-animal chimera!

It would be great to know if the Army of Centaurs that North Korea is working on have human spirits or not. It might make it easier to kill the invading half-man half-horse soldiers if I knew they didn't have a spirit.

[EllenMaksoud]

I am quite sure that cloning is possible right now. It is also possible to fertilize a human egg with material from another female, so scientifically speaking, males are not necessary. I do not know if a female, female zygote has been brought to full term.

So far, only fear of a moral maelstrom over such actions are all that hold them back, not the technology. I would not be surprised at all if both have been secretly done.

[Bikeemikey]

I am quite sure that cloning is possible right now. It is also possible to fertilize a human egg with material from another female, so scientifically speaking, males are not necessary. I do not know if a female, female zygote has been brought to full term.

So far, only fear of a moral maelstrom over such actions are all that hold them back, not the technology. I would not be surprised at all if both have been secretly done.

Male stem cells can make an egg now also (as well as sperm).

And there goes the myth that homosexuals can not procreate.

[canard78]

I'm not sure how we can know at this point whether Heavenly Father will send spirits to manmade bodies. But clearly, if He does, they would be the same as any spirit body. I tend to think that He will not.

Really? What will make them move their pudgy little fingers then?

[EllenMaksoud]

Male stem cells can make an egg now also (as well as sperm).

And there goes the myth that homosexuals can not procreate.

Strangely Science always drives belief. Should it not be the other way around? Have we dull humans misunderstood Heavenly Father that badly?

[canard78]

I can also see a potentially immoral practice of creating a clone solely for the medical benefits of having extra organs, blood, etc. that will not require any rejection drugs to use, such as has been portrayed in numerous books and movies.

That's indeed a terrifying concept.

If they grew only organs (a beating heart), would that organ get a spirit? Or would a full humanoid that was 'grown' but never 'woken' have a spirit?

Freaky thoughts...

[Bikeemikey]

Strangely Science always drives belief. Should it not be the other way around? Have we dull humans misunderstood Heavenly Father that badly?

Belief is predicated on the limits of our knowledge, as our knowledge grows the things that need to be believed in shrink. Belief functions in the absence of knowledge.

[Stone holm]

So if a clone was ever created and acted and seemed human you would concede it had a soul.

Can you imagine our Church ever taking the position that a living human being did not have a soul? I can't imagine the Church ever endorsing human cloning, but also cannot imagine them ever saying that a cloned person had no soul.

[Bikeemikey]

Can you imagine our Church ever taking the position that a living human being did not have a soul? I can't imagine the Church ever endorsing human cloning, but also cannot imagine them ever saying that a cloned person had no soul.

Especially with scriptures by your works shall ye know them. But this is the church that (unofficially) claimed blacks were fence sitters... That's dangerously close to "soulless".

[Calm]

Or would a full humanoid that was 'grown' but never 'woken' have a spirit?

I have read a story that had fully grown bodies that had genetic or surgerical alterations that rendered them pretty much nonsentient, IIRC. And of course the 'vat' version that kept the body in a comatose state.

[Calm]

Belief is predicated on the limits of our knowledge, as our knowledge grows the things that need to be believed in shrink. Belief functions in the absence of knowledge.

I am not sure of that....because as our knowledge grows, surely the possibilities that we can imagine also grow...perhaps the number of things to believe in keeps pace with the number of things that we "know" (I put that in quotes not to diminish that knowledge, but just to indicate at times we are certain we know something when it is in reality a belief).

[Calm]

But this is the church that (unofficially) claimed blacks were fence sitters...

I really would like to see quotes from significant church leaders that taught this since BY repudiated it quite early (no neutrals in heaven). That some or even many members believed this (perhaps even a majority at times) doesn't mean it was ever taught across the pulpit by anyone with authority. Folklore isn't automatically unofficial church teachings. They can just as easily be urban legend type of things, etc.

It is possible that the idea of blacks as fencesitters was the LDS version of an imported (from former faiths of converts) belief that blacks were soulless or had nonhuman souls. If so, to appear in our faith would not require it to have come from any authoritative source.

Considering the prevalence of the idea, I would not be surprised to hear of some authority that taught it, I just don't recall any myself at this time and am wondering if BY managed to squash that idea at least among the leadership.

Edited July 6, 2013 by calmoriah

[EllenMaksoud]

Belief is predicated on the limits of our knowledge, as our knowledge grows the things that need to be believed in shrink. Belief functions in the absence of knowledge.

Sadly I agree with you. Some have used this variability in belief to dispute the existence of God. I suggest that it is men who concoct belief systems and it is God who speaks through science. It used to be thought that Leprosy was some sort of evil. Now we know it to be a fungus. I think the next big frontier in science is genetics and cloning. Perhaps we will begin to have scientific knowledge about where the soul comes from.

There is something in Jewish thought, though I can not remember it with much accuracy. Some how men gain so much knowledge that they can make a clay statue live. At first it says Master, then it says equal, then it says Slave. The theme of one of man's creations taking over the world is in evidence in movies like "Matrix" and "I robot".

Though I doubt that many think of it, what some believe is the disintegration of humanity, could be merely education by God?

[Stone holm]

I really would like to see quotes from significant church leaders that taught this since BY repudiated it quite early (no neutrals in heaven). That some or even many members believed this (perhaps even a majority at times) doesn't mean it was ever taught across the pulpit by anyone with authority. Folklore isn't automatically unofficial church teachings. They can just as easily be urban legend type of things, etc.

It is possible that the idea of blacks as fencesitters was the LDS version of an imported (from former faiths of converts) belief that blacks were soulless or had nonhuman souls. If so, to appear in our faith would not require it to have come from any authoritative source.

Considering the prevalence of the idea, I would not be surprised to hear of some authority that taught it, I just don't recall any myself at this time and am wondering if BY managed to squash that idea at least among the leadership.

BRM said it in his infamous Mormon Doctrine, but I know of no one who has argued that any human lacked a soul. And even BRM conceded that the blacks would get the Priesthood in the Millenium. I think a more interesting question is posed by Asimov as to whether artificial intelligence may ever advance to the point where the existence of a soul comes in question.

[EllenMaksoud]

Can you imagine our Church ever taking the position that a living human being did not have a soul? I can't imagine the Church ever endorsing human cloning, but also cannot imagine them ever saying that a cloned person had no soul.

The idea of a pre-existence is supported in the Bible, Jeremiah 1:5 Before I formed you in the womb I knew you ...

And I do not think the knowing is one way.

[Calm]

I think a more interesting question is posed by Asimov as to whether artificial intelligence may ever advance to the point where the existence of a soul comes in question.

A very interesting question indeed....especially since our faith contains the possible concept that the earth itself has a spirit. Edited July 6, 2013 by calmoriah

[Calm]

BRM said it in his infamous Mormon Doctrine

i could have sworn he just claimed they were less valiant, which is not the same thing. Will have to go check now. add-on: not in my copy which is post 1978.

JFS:

“There were no neutrals in the war in heaven. All took sides either with Christ or with Satan.”

I find it hard to believe that BRM contradicted JFS. Edited July 6, 2013 by calmoriah

[Brian 2.0]

A very interesting question indeed....especially since our faith contains the possible concept that the earth itself has a spirit.

Brigham Young taught that after God became mortal again as Adam, the next step in his god hood progression was to become the spirit in the earth. All spirits in their exaltation will go through an Adam experience, a Christ experience, and an Earth experience.

I'm just kidding of course, but I could see the this idea kick around in the late hours of the school of the prophets.

[Calm]

Found this that has him teaching the "less valiant" not neutral/fencesitters:

According to Christiandefense.org, LDS Apostle Bruce R. McConkie wrote: “Those who were less valiant in pre-existence and who thereby had certain spiritual restrictions imposed on them during mortality are known to us as the negroes. Such spirits are sent to earth through the lineage of Cain, the mark put upon him for his rebellion against God, and his murder of Abel being a black skin. . . . Noah's son married Egyptus, a descendant of Cain, thus preserving the negro lineage through the flood. ... the negro are not equal with other races where the receipt of certain spiritual blessings are concerned. ... " (Mormon Doctrine, 527-28; 1966 orig. ed., changed in the current ed.; emphasis added).

OTOH, it makes the claim that JFS taught in 1931 the fencesitter concept, but lacks a quote.

http://www.phillytrib.com/newsarticles/itemlist/tag/Bruce%20McConkie.html

Anyone have access to the alleged "treatise"? add-on: it is The Way to Perfection, going to check my copy of that now. I am pretty sure it is the "less valiant" and not neutral/fencesitters though. If so, it seems like his quote has been twisted to mean something that it was never intended to by members and now critics repeating the claim.

add-on and on: yep, it specifically teaches "no neutrals in heaven" on page 105 and it is an edition that has an inscription to my grandmother dated 1936 so I highly doubt that has been altered from the original 1931 edition.

Edited July 6, 2013 by calmoriah

[Calm]

So my CFR still stands to anyone that can point to a church leader who has taught the fencesitter/neutral in heaven concept. I am very curious about this now.

Edited July 6, 2013 by calmoriah

[Duncan]

So my CFR still stands to anyone that can point to a church leader who has taught the fencesitter/neutral in heaven concept. I am very curious about this now.

Elder Orson Hyde taught it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mormon_folklore

some on that list I disagree with FWIW!

[Stone holm]

So my CFR still stands to anyone that can point to a church leader who has taught the fencesitter/neutral in heaven concept. I am very curious about this now.

Have to find my version, am fairly certain he said neutrals.

[Calm]

Elder Orson Hyde taught it

Do you have a quote from him? There is nothing on the site that says this, even the cite disagrees with it:

Stewart, John J. Mormonism and the Negro Salt Lake City, Utah:1960 Bookmark--This book discusses and then dismisses this common pre-1978 belief, which was regarded as contrary to Church doctrine that there were no neutrals in the War in Heaven

[Calm]

Found a quote, this is the closest to saying there were neutrals:

While none in the Church saw fit to question the connection of the Negroes to Cain or Ham, it did occur to several that if men were not responsible for Adam’s transgressions, the restriction on the Negro could not consistently be attributed solely to his genealogy. As early as 1844 Orson Hyde had explained the status of the “accursed lineage of Canaan” in terms of the preexistence:

At the time the devil was cast out of heaven, there were some spirits that did not know who had authority, whether God or the devil. They consequently did not take a very active part on either side, but rather thought the devil had been abused, and considered he had rather the best claim to government. These spirits were not considered worthy of an honorable body on this earth…. Now, it would seem cruel to force pure celestial spirits into the world through the lineage of Canaan that had been cursed. This would be ill appropriate, putting the precious and vile together. But those spirits in heaven that lent an influence to the devil, thinking he had a little the best right to govern, but did not take a very active part any way, were required to come into the world and take bodies in the accursed lineage of Canaan; and hence the Negro or African race.93

Several years later Orson Pratt also attempted to explain why “if all the spirits were equally faithful in their first estate,” they “are placed in such dissimilar circumstances in their second estate,” and concluded, “Among the two-thirds who remained [after the Devil was cast out], it is highly probable, that, there were many who were not valient [sic] in the war, but whose sins were of such a nature that they could be forgiven….”94 Hyde and Pratt were primarily concerned with an explanation of the debased status of the Negro race in these early speculations, and not specifically with the priesthood.

http://signaturebook...rary.org/?p=445

Ugh

Edited July 6, 2013 by calmoriah