Survey To Evaluate False Doctrine Among Membership

[Rob Osborn]

Duane Jeffery...pro evolutionist,,,NCSE member...

Had a few conversations with him over the years. Pretty stubborn guys they are there at BYU, their way or the highway.

[canard78]

Well, Science is not God. The flood happened, it was a global catastrophe and we have the word of God as testimony of its happening

And sometimes God talks in metaphors that are "more express" even though they are not the reality (D&C 19:7)

[Rob Osborn]

And sometimes God talks in metaphors that are "more express" even though they are not the reality (D&C 19:7)

I agree in some instances. The flood however was a global flood event. To say it was anything less is a mockery of God and scripture.

[ERayR]

False Doctrine = anything that does not agree with the way I understand it.

[canard78]

I agree in some instances. The flood however was a global flood event. To say it was anything less is a mockery of God and scripture.

Was it? How do you know this? I'm impressed with how certain you are.

Are we talking a "covering Everest" scale? Who took the kangaroos to Australia?

[JLHPROF]

False Doctrine = anything that does not agree with the way I understand it.

 

That is so what people people believe!

 

Except for those who believe that False Doctrine = anything that correlation says isn't approved.

[Rob Osborn]

Was it? How do you know this? I'm impressed with how certaoin you are.

Are we talking a "covering Everest" scale? Who took the kangaroos to Australia?

Well, for starters the global flood is the true doctrine of our church. Covering Everest? Global flood advocates do not believe that Mt. Everest existed until after the flood- it was upthrust along with all other mountain chains after the flood. I am sure someone similar to the Jaredites packed up ship and set sail for Australia with a bunch of animals thousands of years ago. In the Old Testament it speaks of the barrier God made after the flood so that the waters would never again cover the entire earth. These barriers are the mountains and valleys.

6 Thou coveredst it with the deep as with a garment: the waters stood above the mountains.

7 At thy rebuke they fled; at the voice of thy thunder they hasted away.

8 They go up by the mountains; they go down by the valleys unto the place which thou hast founded for them.

9 Thou hast set a bound that they may not pass over; that they turn not again to cover the earth. (Psalms 104:6-9)

In other translations (New American Standard Edition) it goes-

You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters were standing above the mountains. At Your rebuke they fled, 7 At the sound of Your thunder they hurried away. The mountains rose; the valleys sank down 8 To the place which You established for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass over, 9 So that they will not return to cover the earth.

[thesometimesaint]

Was it? How do you know this? I'm impressed with how certain you are.

Are we talking a "covering Everest" scale? Who took the kangaroos to Australia?

 

The story says high hills. So it is anyone's guess how high is high. There is even less evidence for no mountains than for all that water.

BTW 100 million years ago the Appalachian mountains were as high as the Rockie Mountains are now.

 

[Stargazer]

http://www.sciencealert.com.au/news/20120406-23443.html

 

 

Now, THAT was cool!

[canard78]

Well, for starters the global flood is the true doctrine of our church. Covering Everest? Global flood advocates do not believe that Mt. Everest existed until after the flood- it was upthrust along with all other mountain chains after the flood. I am sure someone similar to the Jaredites packed up ship and set sail for Australia with a bunch of animals thousands of years ago. In the Old Testament it speaks of the barrier God made after the flood so that the waters would never again cover the entire earth. These barriers are the mountains and valleys.

6 Thou coveredst it with the deep as with a garment: the waters stood above the mountains.

7 At thy rebuke they fled; at the voice of thy thunder they hasted away.

8 They go up by the mountains; they go down by the valleys unto the place which thou hast founded for them.

9 Thou hast set a bound that they may not pass over; that they turn not again to cover the earth. (Psalms 104:6-9)

In other translations (New American Standard Edition) it goes-

You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters were standing above the mountains. At Your rebuke they fled, 7 At the sound of Your thunder they hurried away. The mountains rose; the valleys sank down 8 To the place which You established for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass over, 9 So that they will not return to cover the earth.

Thanks for your reply. It seems entirely illogical to me. Have you really thought this through?

Do you really think the billions of diverse animals some only found on a single island in the middle the ocean were really taken there 4-5000 years ago by people on boats??

Edited November 24, 2013 by canard78

[thesometimesaint]

Thanks for your reply. It seems entirely illogical to me. Have you really thought this through?

Do you really think the billions of diverse animals some only found on a single island in the middle the ocean were really taken there 4-5000 years ago by people on boats??

 

I guess he believes in Super Evolution.

[Stone holm]

It isn't just frogs. You take plants and animals out of their ecological niche they die.

That is not necessarily true. Sometimes they do the opposite. In VT we have been fighting invasive species for years.

[thesometimesaint]

 Introduction of any species into a compatible niche has been going on forever. That being said there are good reason you don't find Gibbon Monkey's in the Arctic ocean

Edited November 24, 2013 by thesometimesaint

[Rob Osborn]

Thanks for your reply. It seems entirely illogical to me. Have you really thought this through?

Do you really think the billions of diverse animals some only found on a single island in the middle the ocean were really taken there 4-5000 years ago by people on boats??

I have thought it through from every angle it completely makes sense. The only matter of dispute that science can claim is the process of dating things.

If one can believe that Jaredites made sealed ships, filled them with animals of many kinds, including fish and the honey bee then of course it would make sense God did this same exact thing with other groups.

Think about this- why would the Jaredites have to take animals with them? Especially why the honey bee? It was because the land of North America, fresh from water draining off it, was pretty much void of life..

[thesometimesaint]

I have thought it through from every angle it completely makes sense. The only matter of dispute that science can claim is the process of dating things.

If one can believe that Jaredites made sealed ships, filled them with animals of many kinds, including fish and the honey bee then of course it would make sense God did this same exact thing with other groups.

Think about this- why would the Jaredites have to take animals with them? Especially why the honey bee? It was because the land of North America, fresh from water draining off it, was pretty much void of life..

 

There are numerous ways of using science to measure age of objects. While they all have some tolerances we have to deal with. To cling to the wrong idea that they are orders of magnitude wrong is just plain silly.

 

I have no problem(s) with the Jaredites. It is not claimed that they carried two, or is it seven, of every type of animal on board. There were plenty of wild bees in the America's. The European Honey Bee, which JS was familiar with, didn't appear in the America's until 1622. When it was brought over by the English.

[omni]

I have thought it through from every angle it completely makes sense. The only matter of dispute that science can claim is the process of dating things.If one can believe that Jaredites made sealed ships, filled them with animals of many kinds, including fish and the honey bee then of course it would make sense God did this same exact thing with other groups.Think about this- why would the Jaredites have to take animals with them? Especially why the honey bee? It was because the land of North America, fresh from water draining off it, was pretty much void of life..

Are you insinuating that all animal life on the American continents came from those initial animals brought by the Jaredites? This of course would include bears, cougars, pumas, moose, and buffalo just for starters?

[Rob Osborn]

Are you insinuating that all animal life on the American continents came from those initial animals brought by the Jaredites? This of course would include bears, cougars, pumas, moose, and buffalo just for starters?

No, I am just stating that the Jaredites brught animals with them because the land lacked in that area perhaps.

[canard78]

I have thought it through from every angle it completely makes sense. The only matter of dispute that science can claim is the process of dating things.

If one can believe that Jaredites made sealed ships, filled them with animals of many kinds, including fish and the honey bee then of course it would make sense God did this same exact thing with other groups.

Think about this- why would the Jaredites have to take animals with them? Especially why the honey bee? It was because the land of North America, fresh from water draining off it, was pretty much void of life..

Are you, what's known in forum parlance, a WUM? (Wind up merchant)

You really believe that the Jaredite barges were not only the populants of all human life on north/south America but also the source of animal life?

It's a really good job your barmy theory is supported by so many of the animals in the old and new world being obviously the same. Oh wait... They're not at all.

Having said that, I bet it's really fun having you in a Sunday school class. Do you also know the location of Kolob and perhaps the real reason for the priesthood ban? (pssst... whatever you're thinking is probably wrong).

If you are a WUM, well done, job done. I'm wound up.

[Rob Osborn]

Are you, what's known in forum parlance, a WUM? (Wind up merchant)

You really believe that the Jaredite barges were not only the populants of all human life on north/south America but also the source of animal life?

It's a really good job your barmy theory is supported by so many of the animals in the old and new world being obviously the same. Oh wait... They're not at all.

Having said that, I bet it's really fun having you in a Sunday school class. Do you also know the location of Kolob and perhaps the real reason for the priesthood ban? (pssst... whatever you're thinking is probably wrong).

If you are a WUM, well done, job done. I'm wound up.

I never said it was the source for animal life, just some of the source.

[ERayR]

 Introduction of any species into a compatible niche has been going on forever. That being said there are good reason you don't find Gibbon Monkey's in the Arctic ocean

 

Yep they can't swim very well.

[Calm]

I never said it was the source for animal life, just some of the source.

If the Jaredites were the only people to come before the Lehites, how else did the land mammals get there?

[cinepro]

Word of God heard, interpreted, transcribed, transmitted, translated, and interpreted again.   Communication involves a whole range of processes and it is best not to ignore the implications of what happens along the way, even if it means giving up the satisfaction of believing that God has parked his own understanding between my ears.

 

Duane Jeffery has a helpful survey here:  Noah's Flood: Modern Scholarship and Mormon Traditions.

 

https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/wp-content/uploads/sbi/articles/134-27-45.pdf

 

FWIW

 

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

 

That's a great article, but in any debate over "doctrine" in the LDS Church, I think it's pretty well accepted that whoever is first to cite a Sunstone article loses.

[cinepro]

 

I assume you believe that the days of Peleg the earth divided physically, not nationally.  If so, what prevented the oceans from becoming superheated (and destroying a good portion of its life forms btw...I accidentally killed off my frogs in my aquarium when the thermometer broke and cause the water to become bathtub warm...the topical fish just got hyper active, but frogs went belly up) during that Catastrophic Plate movement?

 

 

 

 

If he does believe that, he's in pretty good company...

 

 

(4-22) Genesis 10:25. Was the Earth Divided in the Days of Peleg?

“The dividing of the earth was not an act of division by the inhabitants of the earth by tribes and peoples, but a breaking asunder of the continents, thus dividing the land surface and creating the Eastern Hemisphere and Western Hemisphere. By looking at a wall map of the world, you will discover how the land surface along the northern and southern coast of the American Hemisphere and Europe and Africa has the appearance of having been together at one time. Of course, there have been many changes on the earth’s surface since the beginning. We are informed by revelation that the time will come when this condition will be changed and that the land surface of the earth will come back again as it was in the beginning and all be in one place. This is definitely stated in the Doctrine and Covenants. [D&C 133:18–20 is then cited.]” (Smith, Answers to Gospel Questions, 5:73–74.)

 

LDS Institute Old Testament Study Manual

[cinepro]

Here's what the D&C Manual says.  "In the mouth of two or three witnesses" indeed...

 

 

D&C 133:23–24. Will the Continents Be Rejoined?

Genesis indicates that in the early history of the world the land masses were united. Moses recorded that one of the great-great-grandsons of Shem was named Peleg (a Hebrew word meaning division) because “in his days was the earth divided” (Genesis 10:25). Many scholars have passed this reference off as meaning some sort of cultural or political division, but modern prophets have taught that this statement should be taken literally.

 

An article published early in the history of the Church under the direction of the Prophet Joseph Smith stated: “The Eternal God hath declared that the great deep shall roll back into the north countries and that the land of Zion and the land of Jerusalem shall be joined together, as they were before they were divided in the days of Peleg. No wonder the mind starts at the sound of the last days!” (“The Last Days,” Evening and Morning Star,Feb. 1833, p. 1.)

 

President Joseph Fielding Smith wrote: “If … the earth is to be restored as it was in the beginning, then all the land surface will again be in one place as it was before the days of Peleg, when this great division was accomplished. Europe, Africa, and the islands of the sea including Australia, New Zealand, and other places in the Pacific must be brought back and joined together as they were in the beginning.” (Answers to Gospel Questions, 5:74.)

 

In an introduction to a book on continental drift, a scientist writes:

 

“Formerly, most scientists regarded the earth as rigid and the continents as fixed, but now the surface of the earth is seen as slowly deformable and the continents as ‘rafts’ floating on a ‘sea’ of denser rock. The continents have repeatedly collided and joined, repeatedly broken and separated in different patterns, and, very likely, they have grown larger in the process.

 

“This scientific revolution, as others before it, was long in the making, but it was not until the late 1960s that it began to succeed. At a meeting of the world’s geophysicists in August of 1971, it was made clear that the notion of continental drift, which had been heresy only a few years before, had become the orthodoxy of the great majority.” (Continents Adrift,preface.)

Though the time of this division of the land is placed much earlier by scientists than by the biblical chronology, the idea of one land mass is widely accepted. This revelation in Doctrine and Covenants 133 declares that sometime in the future that geographical unity will be restored.

 

LDS Institute D&C Study Manual

Edited November 25, 2013 by cinepro

[Stone holm]

That's a great article, but in any debate over "doctrine" in the LDS Church, I think it's pretty well accepted that whoever is first to cite a Sunstone article loses.

Aw that's harsh, is that akin to Godwin's Law?