Jump to content

The Wide Spectrum Of Ga Views On Evolution


Recommended Posts

http://www.sciencemeetsreligion.org/lds/lds-history-evolution.php

 

Personally, I don't see the need for a conflict between the idea of evoution and the scriptural accounts. Conflict only seems to come when we try to make evolution a world-view (Neo Darwinianism) or take the scriptural accounts as literal.

 

St. Augustine (around 400AD--not a GA (duh)) clued into the dangers of an overly-literal interpretation of scripture (from St. Augustine's De Genesi ad Litteram I, xix, 39):
 

Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he hold to as being certain from reason and experience.

Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason?

Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion.
 


And here's one from James E. Talmage:

 

Let us not try to wrest the scriptures in an attempt to explain away what we cannot explain. The opening chapters of Genesis, and scriptures related thereto, were never intended as a text-book of geology, archaeology, Earth-science or man-science. . . . We do not show reverence for the scriptures when we misapply them through faulty interpretation.

 

 

For me, it's the covenants that bring Mormons together, not idealogies. When I read the scriptural creation accounts from the lens of covenants it makes much more sense to me vs. trying to only interpret it literally.

Link to comment

Interesting quotes.  Thanks for sharing.  I like your idea of covenants bringing Mormons together.

 

I was poking around on Google Books the other day and found an address from Talmage to some Utah Valley teachers in 1890.  http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Theory_of_Evolution.html?id=QTJOAAAAYAAJ.  (search "The Theory of Evolution: A Lecture Dellivered Before the Utah County Teachers' Association at Provo City, March 8, 1890" if that link doesn't work.)

Link to comment

http://www.sciencemeetsreligion.org/lds/lds-history-evolution.php

 

Personally, I don't see the need for a conflict between the idea of evoution and the scriptural accounts. Conflict only seems to come when we try to make evolution a world-view (Neo Darwinianism) or take the scriptural accounts as literal.

 

St. Augustine (around 400AD--not a GA (duh)) clued into the dangers of an overly-literal interpretation of scripture (from St. Augustine's De Genesi ad Litteram I, xix, 39):

 

And here's one from James E. Talmage:

 

 

For me, it's the covenants that bring Mormons together, not idealogies. When I read the scriptural creation accounts from the lens of covenants it makes much more sense to me vs. trying to only interpret it literally.

If everyone agreed, then someone would not be necessary.

 

Darwinism is sort of critically debunked, however an approximation of Evolution explains some things. My caveat would be that there is someone behind that curtain running things, as in the "Wizard of Oz", which in my estimation is one of the sharpest blendings of religion, fantasy and evolution ever. :)

Link to comment

If everyone agreed, then someone would not be necessary.

 

Darwinism is sort of critically debunked, however an approximation of Evolution explains some things. My caveat would be that there is someone behind that curtain running things, as in the "Wizard of Oz", which in my estimation is one of the sharpest blendings of religion, fantasy and evolution ever. :)

 

If everyone agreed it would be a rather dull and dreary world.

 

From the smallest cell to the largest Blue whale Evolution is an established fact. It is interesting to me that anytime we approach the limits of our knowledge some feel this need to invoke God into it.

Link to comment

If everyone agreed it would be a rather dull and dreary world.

 

From the smallest cell to the largest Blue whale Evolution is an established fact. It is interesting to me that anytime we approach the limits of our knowledge some feel this need to invoke God into it.

I am reminded of Psalm 14:

1{To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.} The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.

2The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.

3They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

4Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread, and call not upon the LORD.

5There were they in great fear: for God is in the generation of the righteous.

6Ye have shamed the counsel of the poor, because the LORD is his refuge.

7Oh that the salvation of Israel were come out of Zion! when the LORD bringeth back the captivity of his people, Jacob shall rejoice, and Israel shall be glad.

 

And, I do not dispute the role of human brilliance as long as we see that it is God that put that human and his brilliance there.

 

I have not studied Napoleon.  Though I was once told that he indirectly prevented England from giving Americans a huge flogging in the war of 1812.

Link to comment

I am reminded of Psalm 14:

1{To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.} The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.

2The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.

3They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

4Have all the workers of iniquity no knowledge? who eat up my people as they eat bread, and call not upon the LORD.

5There were they in great fear: for God is in the generation of the righteous.

6Ye have shamed the counsel of the poor, because the LORD is his refuge.

7Oh that the salvation of Israel were come out of Zion! when the LORD bringeth back the captivity of his people, Jacob shall rejoice, and Israel shall be glad.

 

And, I do not dispute the role of human brilliance as long as we see that it is God that put that human and his brilliance there.

 

I have not studied Napoleon.  Though I was once told that he indirectly prevented England from giving Americans a huge flogging in the war of 1812.

 

 I don't have a problem with God. However I do think we limit ourselves when we attribute things to God, and refuse to study further. IE; The Black Death of the Middle Ages wasn't because God was pissed at humans. It was because of a bacteria, poor sanitation, general ignorance, along with a fair amount of superstition mixed in.

 

The US tried to stay out of the Napoleonic Wars. Britain saw any support(real or imagined) for Napoleon as an assault on British interests. The US declared war on Britain in 1812 over trade disputes, the impressment of US Navy Sailors into the British Navy to fight Napoleon, and the support of hostile Indian tribes  They burnt the US capital and were finally driven off by Andrew Jackson in the battle of New Orleans after a peace deal was signed.

Link to comment
If everyone agreed it would be a rather dull and dreary world.

 

 

Reminds me of one of my favorite quotes from Freeman Dyson:

 

Diversity is for me the chief source of beauty and value, in the natural universe around us, in the governance of human societies, and in the depths of our individual souls. The profusion of stars and galaxies in our skies, the profusion of bugs and beetles in our gardens, and the profusion of human genius in our arts and sciences, all proclaim that God loves diversity.

 

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

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