Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 Or it could just be someone who is interested in knowing what Mormons think about this.I doubt that. I am willing to bet this person is here to challange what we believe.
mfbukowski Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 Perhaps I will open a thread to discuss that later, although you are welcome to post a link to the LDS articles of faith here if you have one for my knowledge.I think you are measuring fruitfulness in terms of potential for conversion, however I see the advancement of scientific knowledge as a fruitful endeavor, and if beliefs about the fall are not articles of faith, and thus presumably not likely to take one away from faith in the LDS church I see no harm in such fruitful dialog even trying to imagine it from your perspective.Many of us see evolution as a fruitful way to see the world, many do not, and then there is intelligent design. If you would just cut to the chase, you will get to your "dialogue" a lot quicker
mfbukowski Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 Here is the doctrine on the age of the Earth:Agreed.
jkwilliams Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 I doubt that. I am willing to bet this person is here to challange what we believe. If he hasn't figured this out by now, Mormons believe all kinds of different things about Adam and Eve and the Fall. The church doesn't take an official position on the age of the earth and, aside from some unfortunate stuff in the CES Old Testament manual, has no official position about evolution. So, what exactly is there to challenge?
mfbukowski Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 Official LDS publications and curriculum date the "Fall" to ~4,000BC. We have no idea how long Adam and Eve were in the Garden before that. It could have been two weeks. It could have been a billion years.Disagree.
mfbukowski Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 (edited) Or it could just be someone who is interested in knowing what Mormons think about this.There you go being nice, and reasonable again. Party pooper! Well I have said my piece- have fun all! Edited October 9, 2013 by mfbukowski
Kenngo1969 Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 Hmmmm- fundie or atheist? Anyone taking bets?Since science appears to be his "god," I'll say, "Atheist."
ERayR Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 The idea that there was no physical death prior to human involvement in world history is, well, nuts (excuse me ... a little bit off the wall ... or, unbelievable). In order for man/woman to be here at all, there had to have been a gradual, a natural, an evolutionary path. That clearly took millions of earthly years. Its not that definite.
mfbukowski Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 bummer. I love eating at Dic key's. And I tend to get the 3 meat plate. I just can't win.We have a place nearby that makes pastrami pizza, complete with cheese, tomato sauce, pastrami, pickles and mustard. To die for! Literally!!
WmLaw Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 (edited) Sweet some one that is coming here to teach all of us rubes the truth. I mean after all this suggests that none of us have thought critically about the OT.I apologize if i've offended you or anyone else. I was speaking of my own opinions and experiences. Edited October 9, 2013 by WmLaw
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 We have a place nearby that makes pastrami pizza, complete with cheese, tomato sauce, pastrami, pickles and mustard. To die for! Literally!!Mmmmmmm That sounds really quite nice.
BCSpace Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 Here is the doctrine on the age of the Earth:Agreed. Guess what? That statement is also newer than some of the socks in your bottom drawer.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 I apologize if i've offended you or anyone else. I was speaking of my own opinions and experiences.I am just giving you crap. I know what you were talking about. BUt thanks for the apology.
Mola Ram Suda Ram Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 If he hasn't figured this out by now, Mormons believe all kinds of different things about Adam and Eve and the Fall. The church doesn't take an official position on the age of the earth and, aside from some unfortunate stuff in the CES Old Testament manual, has no official position about evolution. So, what exactly is there to challenge?You might not know that I generally do give people the benefit of the doubt. Time will tell and we will all know what he is really doing here.
Kenngo1969 Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 Perhaps I will open a thread to discuss that later, although you are welcome to post a link to the LDS articles of faith here if you have one for my knowledge. ... http://mormon.org/beliefs/articles-of-faith Happy to oblige! (You're welcome. )
mfbukowski Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 Since science appears to be his "god," I'll say, "Atheist." Yeah, that's what I was hoping. As a former one myself, I have the same problem ex-mo's have- you can leave the "church" of atheism but you can't leave it alone. Oh well. I really am gone. Real life beckons
mfbukowski Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 What are you disagreeing with?Same thing you disagreed with- that the OT timeline is presently doctrinal, or ever was.
newyorkerRM Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 When Adam first walked the earth is a difficult question to answer because like others have pointed out, we don't know how long he was in the garden. Official church doctrine does put time of the fall around 4,000 bc and also states death didn't the world until the fall. Personally, this is a hard topic for me because of course it isn't hard to look around and see that death has been going on for much longer than that ...I've held artifacts and bones in my hands that are much older than that and I recently saw this article on live science that they have discovered a human jaw bone that is around half a million years old. ( http://www.livescience.com/26916-serbian-hominin-jawbone-discovered.html). Of course this kind of topic isn't necessarily pertinent to our eternal salvation, but I personally feel that the fall had to have happened a lot earlier than is usually thought. I do believe Adam and Eve are real people as Adam is going to return to restore keys in the last days, he has to be more than just an allegory. Having said that, some of the story in Genesis seems to be allegorical in nature, to teach us, which is a common teaching tool used through out the scriptures.
jkwilliams Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 Same thing you disagreed with- that the OT timeline is presently doctrinal, or ever was. Anything in church publications has been through Correlation review and is thus considered consistent with doctrine.
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 Guess what? That statement is also newer than some of the socks in your bottom drawer. You that cannot be as no "pair" survives that long unless you are speaking of the singles.
Bill “Papa” Lee Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 Anything in church publications has been through Correlation review and is thus considered consistent with doctrine.No smiley face...J
jkwilliams Posted October 9, 2013 Posted October 9, 2013 No smiley face...J Nope, just a statement of fact. How's it going, old friend? It's good to see you after so long.
danieldemol Posted October 9, 2013 Author Posted October 9, 2013 To what end?Anyway I have no idea how long ago Adam lived. My testimony is not built upon such trivial matters. I believe he was real and that the events described in the scriptures took place maybe not exactly as it is laid out. Do I think the times lines are accurate? I am not sure. Does that matter much? I remained unconviced that it does.To the end of advancing scientific knowledge.I'm not sure how much you consider "that much" to be, after all, it is not a matter of salvation per se (not from my perspective at any rate), however, in the spirit of, "If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things" it is in my view, worth discussing, as I see see seeking scientific knowledge as being virtuous and praiseworthy.
danieldemol Posted October 9, 2013 Author Posted October 9, 2013 Depends, is that in the garden or out?Sorry I overlooked this question, please answer for both, individually or together as you prefer
Recommended Posts