bu11fr0g Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 Have the scientific findings over the past thirty years supported or hurt the Church's claims of truth and revelatory knowledge?
boulder257 Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 I believe they have added more questions than they have answered, but that seems to be the case with anything as we learn more. I don't think that science necessarily has had an adverse affect on the Mormon faith.
thesometimesaint Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 I see science as largely neutral when it comes to LDS beliefs. 1
David T Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 (edited) I think the earth has a powerful voice that cries out truth. It's only relatively recently that we've developed the tools and understanding to hear the earth's testimony. I do believe that dedicated scientists can indeed serve as an Aaron - a spokesman - for the earth, and they do - when speaking as scientists, and not as philosophers/theologicans. General Authorities have often stated that they believe increase in technological advances and understanding is directly related to the spirit being poured out. I believe that the earth's witness - and the witness of our own biology - stands as an additional witness of Truth to go side by side with the scriptures. (And yes, even some of the most militant atheistic scientific proponents express wonderful data and explain it extremely well, but then then go on to head out of their scientific stewardship to interpret the theological ramifications of that data based on what often appears to be a woefully lacking understanding of many religious options and ideas. I'm looking at you, Dawkins! It's important to be able to separate their scientific reporting and conclusions from their theological application. They are generally far more qualified in the former, and not very much so in the latter - although there are definite exceptions). Hawking is an athiest, but I find his reporting of the wonder of the universe awe-inspiring, and enhances and nuances my appreciation for the entire divine master plan. I actually think it's a sacred duty to be educated, and to learn what science reveals about the world around us. I love President Uchdorf's recent affirmation of the principle in D&C 88: "For members of the Church, education is not merely a good idea—it’s a commandment. We are to learn “of things both in heaven and in the earth, and under the earth; things which have been, things which are, things which must shortly come to pass; things which are at home, things which are abroad.” It's sort of useless to say, "We have all of these things under the earth, and they're telling us these spectacular, awe-inspiring things about the way the world works, but it conflicts with my paradigm, so it must be the evidence that is wrong, and not my opinion." As President Uchtdorf went on to explain in another lesson, "Brothers and sisters, as good as our previous experience may be, if we stop asking questions, stop thinking, stop pondering, we can thwart the revelations of the Spirit. Remember, it was the questions young Joseph asked that opened the door for the restoration of all things. We can block the growth and knowledge our Heavenly Father intends for us. How often has the Holy Spirit tried to tell us something we needed to know but couldn’t get past the massive iron gate of what we thought we already knew?" Edited August 23, 2013 by David T 3
ZelphtheGreat Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 All religion will eventually have to come to the realization that if they really want truth they have to go with Science. Science is never wrong. Anything postulated is subject to proofs and testing and re-testing. Many things are thrown out as 'scientifically proven' when they are actually theories put forth in an attempt to explain what is not known or understood. Once tested and checked, reviewed and studied the theory becomes accepted. At this time it is accepted but subject to revision and change as new information comes out and is discovered. Most religious thought is based on observation and too often on wishful thinking. From definitive statements made by religious leaders who have little or no knowledge about the reality of what they are saying we get dogmatic idiocy - statements made without the testing the Scientific method provides. Thus, the universe revolves around the Earth and so many other notions that come from it. If religion is true it will not be at odds with science.
thesometimesaint Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 Science is always tentative. We just develop better ways to explain what we see. We believe all that God has revealed, all that He does now reveal, and we believe that He will yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God. If science is true it will not conflict with true religion. Ultimately science and religion will be reconciled, but I don't expect that reconcilliation any time sooon.
Buzzard Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 On another, ostensibly non-religious board I post to that is very secular and left-leaning, the atheists were cackling about how we are discovering other planets likely to hold life, and that religious folk would lose their basis for being "special" in the universe. I posted the quote from Moses about God creating worlds without number, which did seem to throw them off their game for at least a few minutes.The secularists have their stereotypes of us just as I am sure we have our stereotypes of them. 1
Questing Beast Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 Have the scientific findings over the past thirty years supported or hurt the Church's claims of truth and revelatory knowledge?Hurt, if you are a literalist. If you take "revealed truth" to be largely interpretive and inspirational, rather than empirical, dealing with the metaphysical part of existence rather than the mortal, then science cannot possibly hurt any of that. But if your religious faith is dependent on physical proof/evidence of a historical and scientific reality nature, then all earlier revealed religion is hurt by today's discoveries.... 1
CV75 Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 Have the scientific findings over the past thirty years supported or hurt the Church's claims of truth and revelatory knowledge?It's not the findings, but the people, that either support or reject the Church's claims.
Ahab Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 Have the scientific findings over the past thirty years supported or hurt the Church's claims of truth and revelatory knowledge?Supported, although not everybody has interpreted the science correctly. Take our Church's claim that God reveals truth through personal revelation, for example. With the scientific method of discovery we can see that he does. The scientific method:1. Choose an idea and/or problem to research.2. Hypothesize using if/then and/or cause/effect statements.3. Experiment to test hypotheses.4. Examine results of the experiment(s).5. Record procedures so the experiment(s) can be duplicated.6. Share what has been learned. CHEERS !
cdowis Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 I see science as largely neutral when it comes to LDS beliefs. Well they have discovered some things that are "interesting" -- other solar systems with planets, a "diamond" planet, the universe is organized into a hierarchial structure, the universe is infinite but countable (not just the number of the sands on the sea, but each grain of sand represents a galaxy), formation of a solar system and planets. Like BOM geography, does not prove anything but puts the scriptures into context. 1
thesometimesaint Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 Supported, although not everybody has interpreted the science correctly. Take our Church's claim that God reveals truth through personal revelation, for example. With the scientific method of discovery we can see that he does. The scientific method:1. Choose an idea and/or problem to research.2. Hypothesize using if/then and/or cause/effect statements.3. Experiment to test hypotheses.4. Examine results of the experiment(s).5. Record procedures so the experiment(s) can be duplicated.6. Share what has been learned. CHEERS ! God is not a falsifiable idea. Science by definition can not posit any God or Godlike force. 1
Ahab Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 God is not a falsifiable idea. Science by definition can not posit any God or Godlike force.That one's easy. God is a word we use to refer to the most supreme kind of being in all of existence, and through science we can see that there has to be one out of all that there are which is more supreme than all of the others. Poof ! Your false idea has now been refuted through science.
cdowis Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 God is not a falsifiable idea. I guess Dawkins and Hitchens did not get the memo.
thesometimesaint Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 Well they have discovered some things that are "interesting" -- other solar systems with planets, a "diamond" planet, the universe is organized into a hierarchial structure, the universe is infinite but countable (not just the number of the sands on the sea, but each grain of sand represents a galaxy), formation of a solar system and planets. Like BOM geography, does not prove anything but puts the scriptures into context. Lots of interesting stuff. The Scriptures tell us God has made worlds without number. It is probably a very big number, but a number none the less. The Sciptures also tell us that God didn't tell Moses much of anything not concerning this earth.
SeekingUnderstanding Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 (edited) It's not the findings, but the people, that either support or reject the Church's claims.I think the problem is more about determining what the Church's claim's are. To my knowledge the church doesn't have a place where you can go and determine what is an official claim and what is not (with some exceptions). For example what are the church's claims regarding organic evolution? What are the church's claims on death before the fall? What are the church's claims on the age of the earth? What are the church's claims on the origin of the universe? There are many in the church (including former prophets) that will tell you that the earth is young, there was no death before the fall etc. Are these the official church claims? Members in good standing at BYU teach the truth of evolution, an old earth etc, all under the direction of the board of trustees headed by the first presidency. Do these views represent official church claims? Edited August 23, 2013 by SeekingUnderstanding
thesometimesaint Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 That one's easy. God is a word we use to refer to the most supreme kind of being in all of existence, and through science we can see that there has to be one out of all that there are which is more supreme than all of the others. Poof ! Your false idea has now been refuted through science.Do you know what a non-falsifiable idea is in science?http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Falsifiability.html That is a religious idea not a scientific one. IE; We know there are several different types of suns. Do we measure supremecy by size/age/energy output? What factor(s) would you use? Our sun is neither largest/oldest/nor anywhere near the biggest in enegy output of other stars in this galaxy, let alone other galaxies. I don't know what you mean by "poof! ". Does it mean a dismissive exclamation of contempt? I don't know what you used, but you did not use science.
thesometimesaint Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 I guess Dawkins and Hitchens did not get the memo. They probably didn't get it or they ignored it if they did.
thesometimesaint Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 I think the problem is more about determining what the Church's claim's are. To my knowledge the church doesn't have a place where you can go and determine what is an official claim and what is not (with some exceptions). For example what are the church's claims regarding organic evolution? What are the church's claims on death before the fall? What are the church's claims on the age of the earth? What are the church's claims on the origin of the universe? There are many in the church (including former prophets) that will tell you that the earth is young, there was no death before the fall etc. Are these the official church claims? Members in good standing at BYU teach the truth of evolution, an old earth etc, all under the direction of the board of trustees headed by the first presidency. Do these views represent official church claims? The Churchs' clams are found in the Scriptures. Not necessarily in the public or private ruminations on those Scriptures by one or a few individuals regardless of position in the Church.
Ahab Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 Do you know what a non-falsifiable idea is in science?http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Falsifiability.html[/quote] I think I understand the gist of the idea, and I can think within those parameters. That is a religious idea not a scientific one. IE; We know there are several different types of suns. Do we measure supremecy by size/age/energy output? What factor(s) would you use? Our sun is neither largest/oldest/nor anywhere near the biggest in enegy output of other stars in this galaxy, let alone other galaxies.It is both a religous idea and a scientific one, too, and we can measure supremecy by any reasonable standard. I was thinking in terms of intelligence, particularly, but we can use some other standard such as wisdom or the ability to do the most good. I don't know what you mean by "poof! ". Does it mean a dismissive exclamation of contempt?I meant it as a dismissive exclamation. The idea that there is no God is a false idea which can easily be proven false through science. I don't know what you used, but you did not use science.Then what do you call it when you observe different kinds of beings while seeing that one is more supreme than all of the other kinds of beings? Even if we were limited to seeing only the kinds of beings we now have on this planet, we would still be the ones we regard as the "God" kind because we are more supreme than any other kind of being in all of the existence that we can observe.
CV75 Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 I think the problem is more about determining what the Church's claim's are. To my knowledge the church doesn't have a place where you can go and determine what is an official claim and what is not (with some exceptions). I think those exceptions are the only things that count, really, and getting those answered set the stage for every and any other worthwhile endeavor. For example what are the church's claims regarding organic evolution? What are the church's claims on death before the fall? What are the church's claims on the age of the earth? What are the church's claims on the origin of the universe? I don’t think the Church really needs to have an “official” claim for these things. The covenants and the Gift of the Holy Ghost, and what we do with them, are what the Church is fundamentally all about. There are many in the church (including former prophets) that will tell you that the earth is young, there was no death before the fall etc. Are these the official church claims? Members in good standing at BYU teach the truth of evolution, an old earth etc, all under the direction of the board of trustees headed by the first presidency. Do these views represent official church claims?I think such views represent the Church’s support of science being a worthwhile endeavor.
SeekingUnderstanding Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 I think those exceptions are the only things that count, really, and getting those answered set the stage for every and any other worthwhile endeavor. I don’t think the Church really needs to have an “official” claim for these things. The covenants and the Gift of the Holy Ghost, and what we do with them, are what the Church is fundamentally all about. I think such views represent the Church’s support of science being a worthwhile endeavor.I completely agree. Yet others (Bruce R McConkie and Joseph Fielding Smith probably among them) certainly feel otherwise.
CV75 Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 There are many in the church (including former prophets) that will tell you that the earth is young, there was no death before the fall etc. Are these the official church claims?Sorry, I neglected to adress this one. Whether they are official or not, they are evidently not of the variety that can be easily determined, but such is also evidently the case for things spiritual as well as scientific. So people will make varying determinations. Whatever a prophet says is best taken in good faith as having a spiritual application that we can access by the Gift and power of the Holy Ghost.
CV75 Posted August 23, 2013 Posted August 23, 2013 I completely agree. Yet others (Bruce R McConkie and Joseph Fielding Smith probably among them) certainly feel otherwise.They may (I do not know them!); at any rate, that is their preogative. And I'm sure they would rather we keep our covenants out of our own tetsimony than rely on their rationale for keeping those covenants.
Recommended Posts