Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

The Creation, The Fall, Evolution...sunday School Discussions?


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

As we've come back around to to our cycle of studying the Old Testament in Sunday School, LDS all over the world have been learning about The Creation and The Fall these past few weeks.

 

The lessons are pretty good at presenting traditional LDS teachings on the subject and trying to cut a wide berth around issues of physical death before the Fall, pre-Adamites, evolution being used in the creation process and other sticky issues.  I suspect the tendency for scientifically inclined LDS is to keep their mouths shut and just enjoy (or at least endure) the lessons. 

 

We even had one sister (a former seminary teacher) bring up the concept that the Earth was in orbit around Kolob before the Fall, at which point it "fell" to its current position between Venus and Mars in our solar system.   Obviously, the idea that this happened is preposterous to anyone with even a cursory knowledge of astronomy, but we even have actual rocket scientists in our class (who work for NASA at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena), and they just kept their mouths shut.

 

There is also the recently reiterated (p.280) teaching that Adam's fall took place around 4,000BC (or 6,000 years ago).  Even this simple teaching totally contradicts fast amounts of knowledge in several fields of science dealing with the history of the Earth and humans.

 

This is one of those cases where I most enjoy the contrast between the ideas and discussion I find online here, and what I hear in Church on Sundays.  It's like two totally different universes.   Those LDS who hew to the teachings of the Church don't seem afraid to defend their positions here online, but do any of the scientifically-oriented LDS who so creatively reinterpret LDS teachings online ever dare speak up in Sunday School? 

Edited by cinepro
Posted (edited)

As we've come back around to to our cycle of studying the Old Testament in Sunday School, LDS all over the world have been learning about The Creation and The Fall these past few weeks.

 

The lessons are pretty good at presenting traditional LDS teachings on the subject and trying to cut a wide berth around issues of physical death before the Fall, pre-Adamites, evolution being used in the creation process and other sticky issues.  I suspect the tendency for scientifically inclined LDS is to keep their mouths shut and just enjoy (or at least endure) the lessons. 

 

We even had one sister (a former seminary teacher) bring up the concept that the Earth was in orbit around Kolob before the Fall, at which point it "fell" to its current position between Venus and Mars in our solar system.   Obviously, the idea that this happened is preposterous to anyone with even a cursory knowledge of astronomy, but we even have actual rocket scientists in our class (who work for NASA at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena), and they just kept their mouths shut.

 

There is also the recently reiterated (p.280) teaching that Adam's fall took place around 4,000BC (or 6,000 years ago).  Even this simple teaching totally contradicts fast amounts of knowledge in several fields of science dealing with the history of the Earth and humans.

 

This is one of those cases where I most enjoy the contrast between the ideas and discussion I find online here, and what I hear in Church on Sundays.  It's like two totally different universes.   Those LDS who hew to the teachings of the Church don't seem afraid to defend their positions here online, but do any of the scientifically-oriented LDS who so creatively reinterpret LDS teachings online ever dare speak up in Sunday School?

Would you and your scientifically inclined friends find it equally impossible to believe that Enoch, by the almighty power of God, was able to do the flowing?

13 And so great was the faith of Enoch that he led the people of God, and their enemies came to battle against them; and he spake the word of the Lord, and the earth trembled, and the mountains fled, even according to his command; and the rivers of water were turned out of their course; and the roar of the lions was heard out of the wilderness; and all nations feared greatly, so powerful was the word of Enoch, and so great was the power of the language which God had given him.

21 And it came to pass that the Lord showed unto Enoch all the inhabitants of the earth; and he beheld, and lo, Zion, in process of time, was taken up into heaven. And the Lord said unto Enoch: Behold mine abode forever. (Moses 7)

Edited by teddyaware
Posted (edited)

As we've come back around to to our cycle of studying the Old Testament in Sunday School, LDS all over the world have been learning about The Creation and The Fall these past few weeks.

 

The lessons are pretty good at presenting traditional LDS teachings on the subject and trying to cut a wide berth around issues of physical death before the Fall, pre-Adamites, evolution being used in the creation process and other sticky issues.  I suspect the tendency for scientifically inclined LDS is to keep their mouths shut and just enjoy (or at least endure) the lessons. 

 

We even had one sister (a former seminary teacher) bring up the concept that the Earth was in orbit around Kolob before the Fall, at which point it "fell" to its current position between Venus and Mars in our solar system.   Obviously, the idea that this happened is preposterous to anyone with even a cursory knowledge of astronomy, but we even have actual rocket scientists in our class (who work for NASA at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena), and they just kept their mouths shut.

 

There is also the recently reiterated (p.280) teaching that Adam's fall took place around 4,000BC (or 6,000 years ago).  Even this simple teaching totally contradicts fast amounts of knowledge in several fields of science dealing with the history of the Earth and humans.

 

This is one of those cases where I most enjoy the contrast between the ideas and discussion I find online here, and what I hear in Church on Sundays.  It's like two totally different universes.   Those LDS who hew to the teachings of the Church don't seem afraid to defend their positions here online, but do any of the scientifically-oriented LDS who so creatively reinterpret LDS teachings online ever dare speak up in Sunday School?

Please forgive me. After posting the previous post (just above), I realized the reason why the Lord was able to carry the city of Enoch millions of light years away to the throne of God is because a city is a lot lighter to transport than a whole planet.

Edited by teddyaware
Posted

Those LDS who hew to the teachings of the Church don't seem afraid to defend their positions here online, but do any of the scientifically-oriented LDS who so creatively reinterpret LDS teachings online ever dare speak up in Sunday School? 

 

No, just because someone else is sharing their weird theory is no reason for me to do likewise.

Posted

As we've come back around to to our cycle of studying the Old Testament in Sunday School, LDS all over the world have been learning about The Creation and The Fall these past few weeks.

 

The lessons are pretty good at presenting traditional LDS teachings on the subject and trying to cut a wide berth around issues of physical death before the Fall, pre-Adamites, evolution being used in the creation process and other sticky issues.  I suspect the tendency for scientifically inclined LDS is to keep their mouths shut and just enjoy (or at least endure) the lessons. 

 

We even had one sister (a former seminary teacher) bring up the concept that the Earth was in orbit around Kolob before the Fall, at which point it "fell" to its current position between Venus and Mars in our solar system.   Obviously, the idea that this happened is preposterous to anyone with even a cursory knowledge of astronomy, but we even have actual rocket scientists in our class (who work for NASA at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena), and they just kept their mouths shut.

 

There is also the recently reiterated (p.280) teaching that Adam's fall took place around 4,000BC (or 6,000 years ago).  Even this simple teaching totally contradicts fast amounts of knowledge in several fields of science dealing with the history of the Earth and humans.

 

This is one of those cases where I most enjoy the contrast between the ideas and discussion I find online here, and what I hear in Church on Sundays.  It's like two totally different universes.   Those LDS who hew to the teachings of the Church don't seem afraid to defend their positions here online, but do any of the scientifically-oriented LDS who so creatively reinterpret LDS teachings online ever dare speak up in Sunday School? 

 

I think above all, or at least a very important aspect of Mormonism, is to not disturb the appearance of unity. If one draws undue attention to oneself as a "questioner" of "safe" doctrine or proponent of non-typical "theories", one is likely to be covertly labeled as one who stirs things up rather than keeps the status quo.  

 

Interesting that in these days when we really need quality explanations for all of these questions regarding the Fall, the age of the earth, etc., etc., there seems to be no one who can give us the answers. 

 

Makes one wish we had a prophet of God like in the olden days doesn't it?

Posted

As we've come back around to to our cycle of studying the Old Testament in Sunday School, LDS all over the world have been learning about The Creation and The Fall these past few weeks.

 

The lessons are pretty good at presenting traditional LDS teachings on the subject and trying to cut a wide berth around issues of physical death before the Fall, pre-Adamites, evolution being used in the creation process and other sticky issues.  I suspect the tendency for scientifically inclined LDS is to keep their mouths shut and just enjoy (or at least endure) the lessons. 

 

We even had one sister (a former seminary teacher) bring up the concept that the Earth was in orbit around Kolob before the Fall, at which point it "fell" to its current position between Venus and Mars in our solar system.   Obviously, the idea that this happened is preposterous to anyone with even a cursory knowledge of astronomy, but we even have actual rocket scientists in our class (who work for NASA at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena), and they just kept their mouths shut.

 

There is also the recently reiterated (p.280) teaching that Adam's fall took place around 4,000BC (or 6,000 years ago).  Even this simple teaching totally contradicts fast amounts of knowledge in several fields of science dealing with the history of the Earth and humans.

 

This is one of those cases where I most enjoy the contrast between the ideas and discussion I find online here, and what I hear in Church on Sundays.  It's like two totally different universes.   Those LDS who hew to the teachings of the Church don't seem afraid to defend their positions here online, but do any of the scientifically-oriented LDS who so creatively reinterpret LDS teachings online ever dare speak up in Sunday School? 

 

Since I am of the belief that most scientific "knowledge" is questionable and constantly being revised, and since I am also of the belief that God can't lie, I am more inclined to believe the scriptural accounts over science.  I am definitely NOT a scientifically-oriented LDS.

Just because "the idea that this happened is preposterous to anyone with even a cursory knowledge of astronomy" doesn't prevent God from actually executing it.  He knows more than we do.

 

If God revealed to Joseph Smith that the earth fell from where it was near Kolob or that Adam and the first humans were on the earth 6000 years ago, then I don't really care what science has to say.  I prefer to sit back and wait for the word of God to be vindicated in the end and science to be corrected.  I mean, after all, it was only 550 years ago scientists thought the world was flat and the sun revolved around the earth.  Imagine what scientific "knowledge we will have discarded in the future.

And meanwhile God's eternal truth will continue.

Posted

As we've come back around to to our cycle of studying the Old Testament in Sunday School, LDS all over the world have been learning about The Creation and The Fall these past few weeks.

 

The lessons are pretty good at presenting traditional LDS teachings on the subject and trying to cut a wide berth around issues of physical death before the Fall, pre-Adamites, evolution being used in the creation process and other sticky issues.  I suspect the tendency for scientifically inclined LDS is to keep their mouths shut and just enjoy (or at least endure) the lessons. 

 

We even had one sister (a former seminary teacher) bring up the concept that the Earth was in orbit around Kolob before the Fall, at which point it "fell" to its current position between Venus and Mars in our solar system.   Obviously, the idea that this happened is preposterous to anyone with even a cursory knowledge of astronomy, but we even have actual rocket scientists in our class (who work for NASA at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena), and they just kept their mouths shut.

 

There is also the recently reiterated (p.280) teaching that Adam's fall took place around 4,000BC (or 6,000 years ago).  Even this simple teaching totally contradicts fast amounts of knowledge in several fields of science dealing with the history of the Earth and humans.

 

This is one of those cases where I most enjoy the contrast between the ideas and discussion I find online here, and what I hear in Church on Sundays.  It's like two totally different universes.   Those LDS who hew to the teachings of the Church don't seem afraid to defend their positions here online, but do any of the scientifically-oriented LDS who so creatively reinterpret LDS teachings online ever dare speak up in Sunday School?

Apparently, this Feb 2002 Ensign article is lost on some who don't even have a cursory knowledge of the gospel:

http://www.lds.org/ensign/2002/02/the-origin-of-man?lang=eng

Posted

Would you and your scientifically inclined friends find it equally impossible to believe that Enoch, by the almighty power of God, was able to do the flowing?

13 And so great was the faith of Enoch that he led the people of God, and their enemies came to battle against them; and he spake the word of the Lord, and the earth trembled, and the mountains fled, even according to his command; and the rivers of water were turned out of their course; and the roar of the lions was heard out of the wilderness; and all nations feared greatly, so powerful was the word of Enoch, and so great was the power of the language which God had given him.

21 And it came to pass that the Lord showed unto Enoch all the inhabitants of the earth; and he beheld, and lo, Zion, in process of time, was taken up into heaven. And the Lord said unto Enoch: Behold mine abode forever. (Moses 7)

If you were not there to witness the fulfillment of this event, we can only guess. He lived in an area with significant earthquakes. the timing of which worked to his advantage. We can read the stories in the scriptures, but we must rely on science to explain them. What is written rarely matches what actually occurred due to a limited vocabulary, and the use of rhetoric and exaggeration to teach a gospel principle. 

Posted

If you were not there to witness the fulfillment of this event, we can only guess. He lived in an area with significant earthquakes. the timing of which worked to his advantage. We can read the stories in the scriptures, but we must rely on science to explain them. What is written rarely matches what actually occurred due to a limited vocabulary, and the use of rhetoric and exaggeration to teach a gospel principle.

Why no mention of the city of Enoch being transported to heaven? I guess that was an exaggeration as well. Welcome to the wonderful world of a Gospel devoid miracles. Sweet!

Posted

Why no mention of the city of Enoch being transported to heaven? I guess that was an exaggeration as well. Welcome to the wonderful world of a Gospel devoid miracles. Sweet!

By that same token, why no records of such miracles today? Welcome to the wonderful world of a Gospel devoid of miracles. 

 

Why don't you, through the scriptures, tell us how this occurred? How many people? were there any buildings? 

Posted

By that same token, why no records of such miracles today? Welcome to the wonderful world of a Gospel devoid of miracles. 

 

Why don't you, through the scriptures, tell us how this occurred? How many people? were there any buildings?

Got me stumped with this one because I have no idea what you're talking about. Aren't you the one who requires scientific evidence, while I'm the one who relies of the voice of the Spirit?

Posted

, generally speaking, the scientific approach (when done right) is going to be superior to the non-scientific approach.

 

Agree with everything you say except perhaps this...this would depend on what you are applying it to. There are many things the scientific approach can't help us with...it can't tell me what my experience with reading books to my grandkids is like or what I think when going on a date with my husband...or what I experience when praying. There is a huge part of our experience that science has little to say about. It is definitely better at measuring and explaining sciency things though.
Posted

Agree with everything you say except perhaps this...this would depend on what you are applying it to. There are many things the scientific approach can't help us with...it can't tell me what my experience with reading books to my grandkids is like or what I think when going on a date with my husband...or what I experience when praying. There is a huge part of our experience that science has little to say about. It is definitely better at measuring and explaining sciency things though.

 

While that might describe the current boundaries of "science", I think we might be surprised with the future...

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/18/how-does-prayer-meditation-affect-brain-activity_n_1974621.html

Posted

While science may be able to measure parts of our experiences...such as what is happening physically, until it gets to the point it can start mind reading and being able to predict with precision that I will laugh at a particular moment with my grandchild or feel an urge to hug one of them because she gave me a crooked smile with her twinkling eyes that look like they could dance right off her...I doubt it will have much to say about the parts that matter most to me.

Posted

Makes one wish we had a prophet of God like in the olden days doesn't it?

Prophets in the olden days didn't have the answers to these kinds of questions either.
Posted

While science may be able to measure parts of our experiences...such as what is happening physically, until it gets to the point it can start mind reading and being able to predict with precision that I will laugh at a particular moment with my grandchild or feel an urge to hug one of them because she gave me a crooked smile with her twinkling eyes that look like they could dance right off her...I doubt it will have much to say about the parts that matter most to me.

 

What religion does that?

Posted

Makes one wish we had a prophet of God like in the olden days doesn't it?

Prophets are there to teach us the basics. Then we become prophets and learn the rest on our own (ie the fun way). Then once everyone is learning it the prophet reveals the rest.

If the rate if revelation in the church as a whole is slowing (not sure if it is) it is because revelation on the individual level is slowing.

Posted

As we've come back around to to our cycle of studying the Old Testament in Sunday School, LDS all over the world have been learning about The Creation and The Fall these past few weeks.

 

The lessons are pretty good at presenting traditional LDS teachings on the subject and trying to cut a wide berth around issues of physical death before the Fall, pre-Adamites, evolution being used in the creation process and other sticky issues.  I suspect the tendency for scientifically inclined LDS is to keep their mouths shut and just enjoy (or at least endure) the lessons. 

 

We even had one sister (a former seminary teacher) bring up the concept that the Earth was in orbit around Kolob before the Fall, at which point it "fell" to its current position between Venus and Mars in our solar system.   Obviously, the idea that this happened is preposterous to anyone with even a cursory knowledge of astronomy, but we even have actual rocket scientists in our class (who work for NASA at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena), and they just kept their mouths shut.

 

There is also the recently reiterated (p.280) teaching that Adam's fall took place around 4,000BC (or 6,000 years ago).  Even this simple teaching totally contradicts fast amounts of knowledge in several fields of science dealing with the history of the Earth and humans.

 

This is one of those cases where I most enjoy the contrast between the ideas and discussion I find online here, and what I hear in Church on Sundays.  It's like two totally different universes.   Those LDS who hew to the teachings of the Church don't seem afraid to defend their positions here online, but do any of the scientifically-oriented LDS who so creatively reinterpret LDS teachings online ever dare speak up in Sunday School? 

 

I do wish Gospel Rumor teachers would learn that sometimes it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and remove all doubt.

Posted

Since I am of the belief that most scientific "knowledge" is questionable and constantly being revised...

 

JLHPROF,

 

You are too intelligent to be making statements like this.  Science is all around us and is immersed in almost every aspect of our lives.  Do you question the science that allowed you to write your post, or the science that was used to cure an illness you may have had?  What about the science that allowed man to walk on the moon or level an entire city with one bomb?  I think too often in the church we can hear the word science and instantly become skeptical, getting caught up on evolution or the big bang theory without realizing those concepts represent just a small fraction of the big picture.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...