Scott Lloyd Posted February 19, 2014 Posted February 19, 2014 True, as long as people understand that the article does not establish anything about the Book of Mormon, and realize even if it becomes the established scientific wisdom -- it actually can then be used to throw doubt on future findings in the Americas of such genes because it stands for the proposition that the gene mixing occurred before they crossed the land bridge. I doubt that we will ever be able to definitively prove the B of M through Science or disprove it either in that manner.I doubt it as well, as that would obviate the need for faith, and a purpose of mortal probation is to learn to walk by faith.
thesometimesaint Posted February 19, 2014 Posted February 19, 2014 "The Bible claims Pi is exactly 3" Reference please (out of interest, not incredulity) I Kings 7:23-26, describing a large cauldron, or "molten sea" in the Temple of Solomon: He made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten cubits from rim to rim and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits to measure around it. Below the rim, gourds encircled it - ten to a cubit. The gourds were cast in two rows in one piece with the Sea. The Sea stood on twelve bulls, three facing north, three facing west, three facing south and three facing east. The Sea rested on top of them, and their hindquarters were toward the center. It was a hand breadth in thickness, and its rim was like the rim of a cup, like a lily blossom. It held two thousand baths. (NIV)
thesometimesaint Posted February 19, 2014 Posted February 19, 2014 I Kings 7:23-26, describing a large cauldron, or "molten sea" in the Temple of Solomon: He made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten cubits from rim to rim and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits to measure around it. Below the rim, gourds encircled it - ten to a cubit. The gourds were cast in two rows in one piece with the Sea. The Sea stood on twelve bulls, three facing north, three facing west, three facing south and three facing east. The Sea rested on top of them, and their hindquarters were toward the center. It was a hand breadth in thickness, and its rim was like the rim of a cup, like a lily blossom. It held two thousand baths. (NIV)
thesometimesaint Posted February 19, 2014 Posted February 19, 2014 (edited) http://creation.com/does-the-bible-say-pi-equals-3The whole "pi" being incorrect in the bible (by God) is a faulty argument by evolutionists and atheists to discredit the bible. I get tired of it as most just pass along what they hear and not look into the truth for themselves Only Biblical literalists believe in a inerrant Bible. LDS are not Scriptural literalists. SEE Articles of Faith 8: We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly. Edited February 19, 2014 by thesometimesaint
Rob Osborn Posted February 19, 2014 Posted February 19, 2014 Only Biblical literalists believe in a inerrant Bible. LDS are not Scriptural literalists. SEE Articles of Faith 8: We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly.Kind of interesting that youhave no real rebuttal to the link I put up.
thesometimesaint Posted February 19, 2014 Posted February 19, 2014 Kind of interesting that youhave no real rebuttal to the link I put up. The rebuttal is the same Bible you are using. Believe me there are plenty more mistakes in the Bible. Simply waving your arms and saying it is only Atheists that find them in the Bible is FALSE. Even the LDS recognize them.
Rob Osborn Posted February 19, 2014 Posted February 19, 2014 The rebuttal is the same Bible you are using. Believe me there are plenty more mistakes in the Bible. Simply waving your arms and saying it is only Atheists that find them in the Bible is FALSE. Even the LDS recognize them.You been running all over the boards far too long saying all this stuff about how the bible wrongly defines pi yet when pressed you run away.
thesometimesaint Posted February 19, 2014 Posted February 19, 2014 You been running all over the boards far too long saying all this stuff about how the bible wrongly defines pi yet when pressed you run away.YOU Where have I run away? I Quote "I Kings 7:23-26", describing a large cauldron, or "molten sea" in the Temple of Solomon: He made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten cubits from rim to rim and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits to measure around it. Below the rim, gourds encircled it - ten to a cubit. The gourds were cast in two rows in one piece with the Sea. The Sea stood on twelve bulls, three facing north, three facing west, three facing south and three facing east. The Sea rested on top of them, and their hindquarters were toward the center. It was a hand breadth in thickness, and its rim was like the rim of a cup, like a lily blossom. It held two thousand baths. (NIV) To make it simple for you "rim to rim" on a circular shape is diameter, and "measure around" is circumference. Multiplying diameter by 3 does NOT give you circumference. It is 3.14.... to at least 100 trillion decimal places. Those ancient Hebrews had no idea of decimals but used ratios instead borrowed from the Egyptians. They were doing the best they could with the measuring instruments that they had. I don't blame them. I do blame people who should know better than to take every word in the Bible as literally true by our understanding of words. I have directly answered every one of your claims. If that is your idea of what "running away" is. You definitely have an idiosyncratic definition of the words.
Rob Osborn Posted February 19, 2014 Posted February 19, 2014 Where have I run away? I Quote "I Kings 7:23-26", describing a large cauldron, or "molten sea" in the Temple of Solomon: He made the Sea of cast metal, circular in shape, measuring ten cubits from rim to rim and five cubits high. It took a line of thirty cubits to measure around it. Below the rim, gourds encircled it - ten to a cubit. The gourds were cast in two rows in one piece with the Sea. The Sea stood on twelve bulls, three facing north, three facing west, three facing south and three facing east. The Sea rested on top of them, and their hindquarters were toward the center. It was a hand breadth in thickness, and its rim was like the rim of a cup, like a lily blossom. It held two thousand baths. (NIV) To make it simple for you "rim to rim" on a circular shape is diameter, and "measure around" is circumference. Multiplying diameter by 3 does NOT give you circumference. It is 3.14.... to at least 100 trillion decimal places. Those ancient Hebrews had no idea of decimals but used ratios instead borrowed from the Egyptians. They were doing the best they could with the measuring instruments that they had. I don't blame them. I do blame people who should know better than to take every word in the Bible as literally true by our understanding of words. I have directly answered every one of your claims. If that is your idea of what "running away" is. You definitely have an idiosyncratic definition of the words. Not even close. You say the bible cant be relied upon because they cant even get pi right. You fail to address the real issues. So let me ask- How perfect must they have gotten it so that atheists are believers? Is it the hundredth point right of the decimal or the tenth or possibly the thousandth? Us bible believers don't take it literally on how they wrote the description of the bowl as far as coming down to the perfect exact centimeter. Was Noah's ark exactly to specifications or was it averaged up or down? I highly doubt it was exactly, to the inch, the dimensions given. Besides that it is going to change length in the heat and cold/ humidity. Just give the whole "pi" thing up, none of us think they had "pi" wrong.
thesometimesaint Posted February 19, 2014 Posted February 19, 2014 Not even close. You say the bible cant be relied upon because they cant even get pi right. You fail to address the real issues. So let me ask- How perfect must they have gotten it so that atheists are believers? Is it the hundredth point right of the decimal or the tenth or possibly the thousandth? Us bible believers don't take it literally on how they wrote the description of the bowl as far as coming down to the perfect exact centimeter. Was Noah's ark exactly to specifications or was it averaged up or down? I highly doubt it was exactly, to the inch, the dimensions given. Besides that it is going to change length in the heat and cold/ humidity. Just give the whole "pi" thing up, none of us think they had "pi" wrong. Where did I ever say that the Bible can't be relied upon because they cant even get pi right. My Bible never claims to be a science book, and my geometry book never claims to be Scripture. Why must you conflate the two to the detriment of both? Heck I'd be happy if the Bible claimed it was 3 and a little bit. But it doesn't. I'm reasonably sure that you wouldn't like being lumped in with this group of believers.Pastor Peter LaRuffa, "If somewhere within the Bible, I were to find a passage that said 2 + 2 = 5, I wouldn't question what I'm reading in the Bible. I would believe it, accept it as true, and then do my best to work it out and understand it." Why would I be out to convince Atheists to become believers using science? I have no idea as to how that would be done. I'm perfectly content to let my God tell me why he did something, and let my science tell me how he did it. "None"? You greatly exaggerate your self importance. Moreover your appeal to Ad Populum is a logical fallacy. Pi has been repeated been shown to not equal exactly 3. 1
Stone holm Posted February 24, 2014 Posted February 24, 2014 Not even close. You say the bible cant be relied upon because they cant even get pi right. You fail to address the real issues. So let me ask- How perfect must they have gotten it so that atheists are believers? Is it the hundredth point right of the decimal or the tenth or possibly the thousandth? Us bible believers don't take it literally on how they wrote the description of the bowl as far as coming down to the perfect exact centimeter. Was Noah's ark exactly to specifications or was it averaged up or down? I highly doubt it was exactly, to the inch, the dimensions given. Besides that it is going to change length in the heat and cold/ humidity. Just give the whole "pi" thing up, none of us think they had "pi" wrong. Do you really want to go to Noah's Ark account? That whole story makes the pi thing look truly miniscule.
thesometimesaint Posted February 24, 2014 Posted February 24, 2014 Do you really want to go to Noah's Ark account? That whole story makes the pi thing look truly miniscule. And I won't even get into talking snakes.
Rob Osborn Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 Do you really want to go to Noah's Ark account? That whole story makes the pi thing look truly miniscule. Yeah, the whole world laughed at Noah...and then the rains came down. And, well...we know who got the last laugh. 1
BCSpace Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 Yeah, the whole world laughed at Noah...and then the rains came down. And, well...we know who got the last laugh. Yeah, Noah got to ride the waves during the filling of the Black Sea and his herds were saved at the same time.
BCSpace Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 "The Bible claims Pi is exactly 3" I don't think the Bible is claiming that. I'd say it's merely rounding things off. Most artisans and craftsmen understood, without having the derivation, that the ratio was approximately three. One can make a fairly accurate circle that way with only a little fudging. 1
iriemon Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 Jonah the Prophet had the same problem and became petulant and resentful about it. Apostasy in ancient Israel and even today has often followed from inability to accept continuing revelation. Moreover, when anger enters in, the Holy Spirit is grieved and will not stay Your using as a reference, a fable about a guy who lived in a fish for 3 days? Wow.
iriemon Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 I'm both amused and confused by the contention on these issues. If you believe the BOM is a true account and contains important teachings does it really matter what the "evidence" shows? New evidence is still being discovered in this day and age where we think there is nothing else to be found. Yet recently there have been some amazing finds of cities and structures never before seen. I was just reading today where Joseph F. Smith attended a two day Book of Mormon geography conference that was held at Brigham Young Academy on May 23-24, 1903, when he said "...the idea that the question of the city (of Zarahemla) was one of interest certainly, but if it could not be located the matter was not of vital importance, and if there were differences of opinion on the question it would not affect the salvation of the people; and he advised against students considering it of such vital importance as the principles of the Gospel." The same applies to DNA. If you accept the claim of the BOM, which is that it IS literal history, then the evidence will follow. Simply finding a hiddin city somewhere is not going to suddenly change the landscape. THe evidence is too overwhelming in every other area. DNA, Archeological, Linguistic, etc. The fact that the evidence shows that the western world was settled over 10,000 years ago, dismisses the literal claims of a Global food, 6000 year old earth, and jew settling the new world 1500 years ago. Apologists keep holding out for that one discovery that will be a game changer. Hasn't happened.
Rob Osborn Posted February 25, 2014 Posted February 25, 2014 Yeah, Noah got to ride the waves during the filling of the Black Sea and his herds were saved at the same time. Hardly.
DaddyB Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 The Church should have stayed very far away from this. Now its dabbling in the "arm of flesh"- the understanding of man. I agree with the guys post for the most part.The church and prophets from all ages have dabbled in the arm of flesh in this same way. That is the way God wants it. That is why he admonishes us to seek learning from the best books of the world. He wants us to reason things out in our minds after research and study and then come to him. This article by the church is only providing the answers that science has found thus far. It does not claim to be revealed truth from God, because God has chosen not to speak on such topics. He wants us to work things out for ourselves on this and many other things. This whole issue has nothing to do with the truth claims of the Book of Mormon anyway. It is the most correct book only in spiritual matters. It just doesn't provide enough information of geography, animals, implements of war or race issues for either side to prove their positions. A nice summary of the DNA issue can be found at this link. http://mormonchallenges.org/book-of-mormon-11-no-jewish-dna/ 1
Rob Osborn Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 The church and prophets from all ages have dabbled in the arm of flesh in this same way. That is the way God wants it. That is why he admonishes us to seek learning from the best books of the world. He wants us to reason things out in our minds after research and study and then come to him. This article by the church is only providing the answers that science has found thus far. It does not claim to be revealed truth from God, because God has chosen not to speak on such topics. He wants us to work things out for ourselves on this and many other things. This whole issue has nothing to do with the truth claims of the Book of Mormon anyway. It is the most correct book only in spiritual matters. It just doesn't provide enough information of geography, animals, implements of war or race issues for either side to prove their positions. A nice summary of the DNA issue can be found at this link. http://mormonchallenges.org/book-of-mormon-11-no-jewish-dna/The problem is though that when we let science decide everything then we get removed cleanly away from all that is true with God's word- we cease to exist as a religion. If the Church allows science to become their go to guy then it isn;t no time before we have that very science telling us that God doesn;t exist or that BoM peoples weren't real- its all mythical.
thesometimesaint Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 I don't think the Bible is claiming that. I'd say it's merely rounding things off. Most artisans and craftsmen understood, without having the derivation, that the ratio was approximately three. One can make a fairly accurate circle that way with only a little fudging. I'd be happy if it claimed to be 3 and a little bit. Those ancient Hebrews probably didn't know about decimals or much about improper fractions. So I don't fault them. I do fault those whom claim biblical infallibility.
thesometimesaint Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 The problem is though that when we let science decide everything then we get removed cleanly away from all that is true with God's word- we cease to exist as a religion. If the Church allows science to become their go to guy then it isn;t no time before we have that very science telling us that God doesn;t exist or that BoM peoples weren't real- its all mythical. I've never allowed science to decide everything. I fully retain my belief in God and use science to describe whatever process he used. Mythical doesn't mean not real. IE; King Arther of Round Table fame probably existed. The stories of what he did like the Lady in the Lake not so much.
Rob Osborn Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 I've never allowed science to decide everything. I fully retain my belief in God and use science to describe whatever process he used. Mythical doesn't mean not real. IE; King Arther of Round Table fame probably existed. The stories of what he did like the Lady in the Lake not so much.Do me a favor- go to www.LDS.org and type in the search box "Mythical" and you will come up with "no" doctrine concerning any historical event in our doctrine clear back to Adam and Eve. Why? Because none of our doctrine is "mythical" Why? Because "mythical" doesn't mean truth and people in general associate "myth" with something not true. If you will please type in the search box for mythical you will note that everything brought up with how the Church uses the word is to refute those who say our Savior or people like Noah were mythical.
thesometimesaint Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 (edited) Do me a favor- go to www.LDS.org and type in the search box "Mythical" and you will come up with "no" doctrine concerning any historical event in our doctrine clear back to Adam and Eve. Why? Because none of our doctrine is "mythical" Why? Because "mythical" doesn't mean truth and people in general associate "myth" with something not true. If you will please type in the search box for mythical you will note that everything brought up with how the Church uses the word is to refute those who say our Savior or people like Noah were mythical. I'm perfectly comfortable with mythology. Anyone can believe anything they want. However when that mythology claims as fact something that is testable by science then by definition it is falsifiable. IE; Do axeheads normally float on water? The Bible claims they do. Even you can test that idea. No they don't. Is it possible that God caused one axehead to float on water? Sure. but don't hold your breath until it happens again. Edited March 7, 2014 by thesometimesaint
Rob Osborn Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 I'm perfectly comfortable with mythology. Anyone can believe anything they want. However when that mythology claims as fact something that is testable by science then by definition it is falsifiable. IE; Do axeheads normally float on water? The Bible claims they do. Even you can test that idea. No they don't. Is it possible that God caused one axehead to float on water? Sure. but don't hold your breath until it happens again.There is no part of LDS doctrine that is mythology. You may tend to think so- but that only exists in your mind. The Church makes very clear that they do not teach nor promote their doctrine as mythology.
Recommended Posts