What The Church Dna Essay Teaches Us

[Opinion Slayer]

I've never heard of such prediction and would love to see the source but even if it is true that "Prediction" is irrelevant. It is a completely different subject to the doctrine of baptism of the earth which you denied. And it's not like he is the only prophet that taught this doctrine in fact I don't know of a prophet that hasn't taught it or supported it.

 

Brigham Young opined about people living in the sun but just because he said that it doesn't mean that his doctrinal teachings should be disregarded. The universal flood and baptism of the earth is not a theory taught by the prophets it is a doctrine and I would like to see anybody find a statement by a prophet that says otherwise on that subject.

 

Scientist proclaim that the polar caps are melting because of man made creations when in reality the farts of cows have done much more damage. I could spend all day showing scientific theories that have been proven to be wrong... But if you don't want to accept that doctrine that's your prerogative. It's too bad this site spends more time and energy on scientific theory than  it does on doctrine taught by the prophets.

 

BTW I believe in science until it contradicts doctrine.

[Opinion Slayer]

Joseph Fielding Smith also predicted that man would never be in space or on the moon. His source of knowledge never changed. He never changed that position until presented with an American flag that had been there. Science 1; Apostle of God 0.

 

BTW I still consider him a very good man and Apostle of God, but am not tied to everything he ever said. He was the Prophet when I joined the church. So in a way he is my prophet.

I've never heard of such prediction and would love to see the source but even if it is true that "Prediction" is irrelevant. It is a completely different subject to the doctrine of baptism of the earth which you denied. And it's not like he is the only prophet that taught this doctrine in fact I don't know of a prophet that hasn't taught it or supported it.

 

Brigham Young opined about people living in the sun but just because he said that it doesn't mean that his doctrinal teachings should be disregarded. The universal flood and baptism of the earth is not a theory taught by the prophets it is a doctrine and I would like to see anybody find a statement by a prophet that says otherwise on that subject.

 

Scientist proclaim that the polar caps are melting because of man made creations when in reality the farts of cows have done much more damage. I could spend all day showing scientific theories that have been proven to be wrong... But if you don't want to accept that doctrine that's your prerogative. It's too bad this site spends more time and energy on scientific theory than  it does on doctrine taught by the prophets.

 

BTW I believe in science until it contradicts doctrine.

[MormonFreeThinker]

FYI Joseph Fielding Smith's Doctrine of Salvation was published when he was President of the Quorum of the 12 and 18 yrs after when he was the prophet he never recanted or changed his doctrinal view from the many books written by his hands or compiled by other prophets and that's because the source of his knowledge never changed (D&C 93:24) The flood was universal when Noah was alive, it was universal when Joseph Fielding Smith was alive and it's still universal today!

 

Prophets know a lot about the Gospel, not necessarily a lot about geology (some do). 

Show me an official church statement that says the Flood was global. Show me. 

 

In the past, church leaders taught that the Lamanites were the principle ancestors of the American indians, but the new Church essay teaches us that the Lamanites were only a small fraction. 

 

Doctrine of Salvation is not canon, see the Church's definition of doctrine that is published. 

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

 

So show me a direct official church statement that declares the flood was Global, can't find it?

Edited May 8, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[Opinion Slayer]

Prophets know a lot about the Gospel, not necessarily a lot about geology (some do). 

Show me an official church statement that says the Flood was global. Show me. 

 

In the past, church leaders taught that the Lamanites were the principle ancestors of the American indians, but the new Church essay teaches us that the Lamanites were only a small fraction. 

 

Doctrine of Salvation is not canon, see the Church's definition of doctrine that is published. 

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

 

So show me a direct official church statement that declares the flood was Global, can't find it?

If the scriptures and  teachings of prophets in this dispensation is not enough for you. I feel sad for you. There are dozens of gospel principles that the church has not made an official statement  that it teaches. If you don't want to believe in an universal flood go ahead but if you think that an official statement is required for every gospel principle taught by the church to be true I feel even worse for you.

 

My position is based on scriptures and teachings of latter-day prophets with an emphasis on PROPHETS PLURAL not singular. Like I said earlier find me a prophet that didn't teach universal flood? That principle has been taught by dozens of the prophets in our time specifically by some of the greatest doctrinal minds of this dispensation and that is irrefutable. I may not find an official statement by the church with a nice font letter head but I can find dozens and dozens of prophets teachings the universal flood and you can't find me one single one that teaches the opposite. Best of luck to you, if you need an official statement from the church on every doctrine you are going to need it! 

[MormonFreeThinker]

My position is based on scriptures and teachings of latter-day prophets with an emphasis on PROPHETS PLURAL not singular. Like I said earlier find me a prophet that didn't teach universal flood? That principle has been taught by dozens of the prophets in our time specifically by some of the greatest doctrinal minds of this dispensation and that is irrefutable. I may not find an official statement by the church with a nice font letter head but I can find dozens and dozens of prophets teachings the universal flood and you can't find me one single one that teaches the opposite. Best of luck to you, if you need an official statement from the church on every doctrine you are going to need it! 

 

"There are dozens of gospel principles that the church has not made an official statement that it teaches"

The gospel principles are taught very clearly in the scriptures, but the Global Flood interpretation is not that clear. The new church essays prove that the interpretation of church leaders is not always right. Have you read them? 

http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_history/Gospel_Topics_essays

"teachings of latter-day prophets with an emphasis on PROPHETS PLURAL"

Most church leaders used to believe that the Lamanites were the principle ancestors, we now know the Lamanites were only a small fraction. 

 

"That principle has been taught by dozens of the prophets in our time"

Really? I can find far more statements about gospel principles. 

http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_science/Global_or_local_Flood/Statements

 

Yes, the world of Noah was destroyed, only Noah and his family were saved, I agree. The world of the Nephites was also destroyed. In the Book of Mormon, "whole Earth" means "all the land"

3 Nephi 9:11 And it came to pass that there was a voice heard among all the inhabitants of the earth, upon all the face of this land, crying:

Helaman 14:27 "that darkness should cover the face of the whole earth for the space of three days"

3 Nephi 8:17 "And thus the face of the whole earth became deformed, because of the tempests, and the thunderings, and the lightnings"

Alma 36:7 "whole earth did tremble beneath our fee" 

3 Nephi 1:17 "all the people upon the face of the whole earth from the west to the east, both in the land north and in the land south, were so exceedingly astonished" 

Edited May 8, 2014 by MormonFreeThinker

[thesometimesaint]

 

I've never heard of such prediction and would love to see the source but even if it is true that "Prediction" is irrelevant. It is a completely different subject to the doctrine of baptism of the earth which you denied. And it's not like he is the only prophet that taught this doctrine in fact I don't know of a prophet that hasn't taught it or supported it.

 

Brigham Young opined about people living in the sun but just because he said that it doesn't mean that his doctrinal teachings should be disregarded. The universal flood and baptism of the earth is not a theory taught by the prophets it is a doctrine and I would like to see anybody find a statement by a prophet that says otherwise on that subject.

 

Scientist proclaim that the polar caps are melting because of man made creations when in reality the farts of cows have done much more damage. I could spend all day showing scientific theories that have been proven to be wrong... But if you don't want to accept that doctrine that's your prerogative. It's too bad this site spends more time and energy on scientific theory than  it does on doctrine taught by the prophets.

 

BTW I believe in science until it contradicts doctrine.

 

 

May 14, 1961 - Apostle Joseph Fielding Smith announces to stake conference in Honolulu:

"We will never get a man into space. This earth is man's sphere and it was never intended that he should get away from it. The moon is a superior planet to the earth and it was never intended that man should go there. You can write it down in your books that this will never happen".

 

Of course you can believe anything you want. But be aware that just because you believe it doesn't make it a fact. IE ; Water has weight. Enough water in the air to cause a Global Flood of many feet over the highest mountains would crush Noah and every living thing beyond recognition.

[readstoomuch]

Opinion Slayer

So when my 13 year old came to me a few years ago to ask about dinosaurs and evolution, what would you have told her? Would you have been as dogmatic to her as you have been with me?

[Calm]

He never changed that position until presented with an American flag that had been there. 

If you mean publicly, perhaps…but I seem to recall him being asked by a reporter before being given the flag and admitting he was wrong.

 

I suspect he changed his mind pretty much as soon as they reached the moon itself, if not sooner.  I don't think he had to wait until the flag was given to him.

Edited May 8, 2014 by calmoriah

[thesometimesaint]

If you mean publicly, perhaps…but I seem to recall him being asked by a reporter before being given the flag and admitting he was wrong.

 

I suspect he changed his mind pretty much as soon as they reached the moon itself, if not sooner.  I don't think he had to wait until the flag was given to him.

 

I have no idea as to what he did privately. But always admired him when he publicly admitted to being wrong on his public statements. Now if politicians were such.

[ERayR]

I use inane examples as a model for what some have claimed as scientific truth. Science isn't a club. It is merely a tool to observe the natural world and make logical consistent predictions based on those observations. Over hundreds of years using many thousands if not millions of observations we can make logical consistent predictions that burning hydrogen in the presence of oxygen always produces water, at the atomic/molecular level it has to do with electron attraction sharing to make a stable molecule. There has never been a confirmed case where that process produced anything but water including elephants.

 

We have to define what acceptable limits are or we do get anything but good logical consistent predictions. IE; Ptolemy made predictions for a geocentric solar system of the sun and 4 planets revolving around the earth. That idea held for some 1400 years. Bruno, not a scientist, predicted a heliocentric solar system. He didn't have the tools to convince anyone of his observations and was burned at the stake for it. Copernicus had the tools but because of fear of religion kept quiet. Galileo had the tools and didn't keep quiet. He paid a heavy price because of religion, but eventually was vindicated, and today we largely follow, with minor variation, his theory of a heliocentric solar system.

 

Thankfully we don't burn people at the stake anymore. But some, even here, do get equally silly idea that Fred Flintstone rode around on a coconut eating dinosaur some four-five thousand years ago.

 

Science is a club.  Acceptable results are defined and the limits are defined to accept only that which produces those results.

 

I highly doubt that anyone believes Fred Flintstone was real but there are those of the science club who still figuratively burn at the stake those who question their interpretations.

[ERayR]

Joseph Fielding Smith also predicted that man would never be in space or on the moon. His source of knowledge never changed. He never changed that position until presented with an American flag that had been there. Science 1; Apostle of God 0.

 

BTW I still consider him a very good man and Apostle of God, but am not tied to everything he ever said. He was the Prophet when I joined the church. So in a way he is my prophet.

CFR that he didn't change his opinion until presented with that flag.

[ERayR]

BTW I believe in science until it contradicts doctrine.

 

A very sensible approach.  Just be careful whose interpretations you are using for either one.

[Rob Osborn]

Prophets know a lot about the Gospel, not necessarily a lot about geology (some do). 

Show me an official church statement that says the Flood was global. Show me. 

 

In the past, church leaders taught that the Lamanites were the principle ancestors of the American indians, but the new Church essay teaches us that the Lamanites were only a small fraction. 

 

Doctrine of Salvation is not canon, see the Church's definition of doctrine that is published. 

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/approaching-mormon-doctrine

 

So show me a direct official church statement that declares the flood was Global, can't find it?

Here you go-

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/gs/flood-at-noahs-time

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/bd/noah

https://www.lds.org/topics/noah?lang=eng&query=noah+and+the+flood

https://www.lds.org/friend/1994/06/noah?lang=eng

[thesometimesaint]

http://cpms.byu.edu/MP/research.html

So the Church's flagship school is teaching false doctrine? You better inform the First Presidency of their heresy.

Edited May 8, 2014 by thesometimesaint

[Rob Osborn]

http://cpms.byu.edu/MP/research.html

So the Church's flagship school is teaching false doctrine? You better inform the First Presidency of their heresy.

Thats why we go to "church" to learn the truth in doctrine and not "college".

[thesometimesaint]

Thats why we go to "church" to learn the truth in doctrine and not "college".

 

We believe in truth wherever it is found.

Brigham Young

 

 

Also The Lord instructed Joseph Smith and each one of us to seek both spiritual and secular knowledge, to learn of “all things that pertain to the kingdom of God, that are expedient for us to understand; of things both in heaven and in earth, and under the earth; things which have been, things which are, things which must shortly come to pass” (D&C 88: 78–79). Therefore, we should not be hesitant to pursue knowledge, in all the fields of endeavor, including fields of scientific injury.

[ksfisher]

including fields of scientific injury.

 

Hopefully the pursuit of truth won't take us that far

 

[Rob Osborn]

We believe in truth wherever it is found.

Brigham Young

 

 

Also The Lord instructed Joseph Smith and each one of us to seek both spiritual and secular knowledge, to learn of “all things that pertain to the kingdom of God, that are expedient for us to understand; of things both in heaven and in earth, and under the earth; things which have been, things which are, things which must shortly come to pass” (D&C 88: 78–79). Therefore, we should not be hesitant to pursue knowledge, in all the fields of endeavor, including fields of scientific injury.

And if scientific inquiry doesn't line up at all with church doctrine we are belief bound, or should be so, to hold the prophets and their holy words to be the the truth. So, in the case of human evolution and the flood we are belief bound to hold the holy prophets as teaching us the truth and not the world.

[Opinion Slayer]

 

 

Opinion Slayer

So when my 13 year old came to me a few years ago to ask about dinosaurs and evolution, what would you have told her? Would you have been as dogmatic to her as you have been with me?

 

 

Since you asked, I would have told her  the truth, that they existed. As far as evolution is concerned if you are equating evolution = We came from monkeys or anything else I would say that is false. If you are equating evolution = It took the Lord billions of years to create the perfect environment for his children so that He may bring to pass their immortality and eternal life I would say the latter.

[readstoomuch]

Opinion Slayer,

Well, I did tell her that dinosaurs existed and my take of evolution that is like your latter choice (for the most part). JFS wrote that the earth was 7,000 years old though. So, I am confused again. I don`t really care what you want to believe, you are entitled to it and I am going to go and speak in my ward on Sunday regardless of what any one else believes. I am also not afraid of science and I always temper it with what the prophets have taught and what I learn at Church. I just don`t get where you and some others are coming from. Mormons are not anti-intellectual and it is okay for an apostle or prophet to have said something that was their own opinion. They did the best they thought at the time and it didn`t pan out. Dogmatics don`t go well or make the Church look good IMO.

Edited May 9, 2014 by readstoomuch

[joebob2986]

Congratulations on liking a prophet of God's teachings, I guess after 60 years of serving as an apostle and prophet of God he might know the doctrine much better than most. But Like his father the prophet Joseph F. Smith and his uncle Joseph Smith Jr, they did not acquire their knowledge from a laboratory. They acquired their knowledge through the power of pure revelation from their Maker. But just like archeologists today that scoff and mock Joseph for the pearl of great price because it doesn't add up to what they now know so will scientists continue to theorize different views of the flood but it will not change the truth the prophets have received.

 

FYI Joseph Fielding Smith's Doctrine of Salvation was published when he was President of the Quorum of the 12 and 18 yrs after when he was the prophet he never recanted or changed his doctrinal view from the many books written by his hands or compiled by other prophets and that's because the source of his knowledge never changed (D&C 93:24) The flood was universal when Noah was alive, it was universal when Joseph Fielding Smith was alive and it's still universal today!

  Well after 60 years Joseph Fielding Smith may have known alot.  But what about James E. Talmage, he knew a lot after all those years, and alse David O. McKay, he was prophet to an older age than everyone other than President HInckley.  ANd both Talmage and McKay preferred the local flood view over the global flood view.  There is a room for disagreement here without inferring that others reject the prophets, not all prophets have held the same view as Joseph Fielding Smith.  

[Opinion Slayer]

Onion Slayer,

Well, I did tell her that dinosaurs existed and my take of evolution that is like your latter choice (for the most part). JFS wrote that the earth was 7,000 years old though. So, I am confused again. I don`t really care what you want to believe, you are entitled to it and I am going to go and speak in my ward on Sunday regardless of what any one else believes. I am also not afraid of science and I always temper it with what the prophets have taught and what I learn at Church. I just don`t get where you and some others are coming from. Mormons are not anti-intellectual and it is okay for an apostle or prophet to have said something that was their own opinion. They did the best they thought at the time and it didn`t pan out. Dogmatics don`t go well or make the Church look good IMO.

It's actually Opinion Slayer LOL. What do you mean for the most part? Either you believe that the earth is billions of years old or you don't? There is no middle ground. And why are you confused about the earth being baptized by full immersion and a global flood when that's what Joseph, Brigham and many of other prophets like JFS who held all the keys taught? The ensign is publication of the church and it has always taught a global flood like the scriptures describe. I'm confused that you don't know that. Did you actually think that JFS was the only prophet that held all the keys to teach that? What, did you think I made that doctrine up? I have only testified of it. The global flood and the age of the earth are two completely different subjects so why are you trying to put them together? You think being dogmatic is being anti-intellectual? LOL let me ask you this, is teaching that Jesus Christ being the only way to salvation dogmatic? Or that the lds church is the only church to hold the keys to the kingdom and the Lords priesthood dogmatic? How about unless you are born of the water and of the spirit you cannot enter the kingdom of God, is that anti-intellectual? If you think the gospel is a buffet that you pick and choose I feel sorry for you. Baptism is full immersion! You want to call that principle dogmatic go ahead because you would be right. 

 

I believe the earth to be billions of years old because I understand math and that the Lords reckoning of time is very different than ours. Abraham describes it the periods of time beautifully... BTW 6000 years in the Lords reckoning of time = billions of years in ours. It's called the fall because the earth fell from Gods presence and it will be rolled back to his presence when the Lords work is done after a short season once the millenium is completed. Good luck on your talk!

[Opinion Slayer]

  Well after 60 years Joseph Fielding Smith may have known alot.  But what about James E. Talmage, he knew a lot after all those years, and alse David O. McKay, he was prophet to an older age than everyone other than President HInckley.  ANd both Talmage and McKay preferred the local flood view over the global flood view.  There is a room for disagreement here without inferring that others reject the prophets, not all prophets have held the same view as Joseph Fielding Smith.  

The church has always taught baptism by full immersion, the earth being baptized and a global flood in their publications but if you don't want to believe that it's your choice.

[MormonFreeThinker]

The church has always taught baptism by full immersion, the earth being baptized and a global flood in their publications but if you don't want to believe that it's your choice.

 

So where is the giant space lake or baptismal font? Even Adam was baptized by that method, and by someone else. God the Father?

 

But okay, even if the flood was a baptism, the entire Earth didn't have to be covered by an ocean. 

Look at this mountain, completely covered by water, not an ocean. 

 

Thanks for ignoring the Noah article, it says the Flood was a symbol of baptism. 

[ERayR]

We believe in truth wherever it is found.

Brigham Young

 

 

Also The Lord instructed Joseph Smith and each one of us to seek both spiritual and secular knowledge, to learn of “all things that pertain to the kingdom of God, that are expedient for us to understand; of things both in heaven and in earth, and under the earth; things which have been, things which are, things which must shortly come to pass” (D&C 88: 78–79). Therefore, we should not be hesitant to pursue knowledge, in all the fields of endeavor, including fields of scientific injury.

 

I use this quote too, but it doesn't mean to accept it all unequivocally.