Rodeo Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 Does Mormon theology actually require a belief that our Heavenly Father created the Universe? It requires that God did organize them at least to the extent of the visible planets, sun and moon. It also requires that God planned and carried out the creation on this earth so that life could exist. It also requires that God carried out the creation of all life under his planning and direction.
77623091143 Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 So called smart peopel can be the stupidist people of all. Educated does not me correct. It just means a lot of money to read alot of boring books instead of enjoying life.
Calm Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 "read alot of boring books instead of enjoying life."Well, that explains a lot. 2
Brian 2.0 Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 So called smart peopel can be the stupidist people of all. Educated does not me correct. It just means a lot of money to read alot of boring books instead of enjoying life.I've found that uneducated people can also be quite stupid sometimes. Perhaps even more often than educated ones.
Stone holm Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 It requires that God did organize them at least to the extent of the visible planets, sun and moon. It also requires that God planned and carried out the creation on this earth so that life could exist. It also requires that God carried out the creation of all life under his planning and direction.I don't know about that, in fact I am not sure that is correct. Seems to me Mormon theology, unlike most Christian dogma suggests life existed prior to our Heavenly Father's Creation and that those prior creations may exist within this universe.
Hamba Tuhan Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 Seems to me Mormon theology, unlike most Christian dogma suggests life existed prior to our Heavenly Father's Creation and that those prior creations may exist within this universe. Heavenly Father was 'created'???
Hamba Tuhan Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 (edited) So called smart peopel can be the stupidist people of all. Educated does not me correct. I discovered whilst working on my own PhD that there are two kinds of people who succeed in obtaining advanced degrees: the truly intelligent and the doggedly stubborn. Most, including me, fall into the latter category. Amongst the stubborn, some are reasonable bright, and others are just thick. Edited September 9, 2014 by Hamba Tuhan
The Nehor Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 So called smart peopel can be the stupidist people of all. Educated does not me correct. It just means a lot of money to read alot of boring books instead of enjoying life. Most of the educated like the books they read. I know I do. 1
Stone holm Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 Heavenly Father was 'created'???Not His Intelligence, but it seems to me that the implication is He was born as was His Heavenly Father. 1
thesometimesaint Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 Theres nothing loaded about it. You either believe God was part of the creation and that it was because of His actions that life came about or you believe God was not part of the creation and that life starts on its own regardless of what He does. Which is it? I believe in God.
Rodeo Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 I believe in God. So do I. Do you believe he planned and carried out the creation?
Stone holm Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 Theres nothing loaded about it. You either believe God was part of the creation and that it was because of His actions that life came about or you believe God was not part of the creation and that life starts on its own regardless of what He does. Which is it?God may be a part of Creation, and life may start on its own as well. Why do you see it as an either or?
Guest Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 So do I. Do you believe he planned and carried out the creation?Sounds a little like you are given TSS a test...let me know if he passes.
Rodeo Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 God may be a part of Creation, and life may start on its own as well. Why do you see it as an either or? LDS doctrine teaches that God planned and carried out the creation which was the sole reason for our existence. As such LDS teachins also believe that without God there could have been no creation. You cant have it both ways.
Rodeo Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 13 And if ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is no righteousness. And if there be no righteousness there be no happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness there be no punishment nor misery. And if these things are not there is no God. And if there is no God we are not, neither the earth; for there could have been no creation of things, neither to act nor to be acted upon; wherefore, all things must have vanished away. (2 Nephi 2:13) 1
thesometimesaint Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 LDS doctrine teaches that God planned and carried out the creation which was the sole reason for our existence. As such LDS teachins also believe that without God there could have been no creation. You cant have it both ways. LDS doctrine is that God planned and carried out the creation which was the sole reason for our existence. Exactly how he did that is NOT part of LDS doctrine. The LDS priori is that there is a God. I agree with LDS doctrine. Now putting on my science hat I can not posit any God or Godlike force onto science and have it still be science. IE; I Know what 2+2 equals. I have no clue as to what 2+2+God equals.SEE
thesometimesaint Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 13 And if ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is no righteousness. And if there be no righteousness there be no happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness there be no punishment nor misery. And if these things are not there is no God. And if there is no God we are not, neither the earth; for there could have been no creation of things, neither to act nor to be acted upon; wherefore, all things must have vanished away. (2 Nephi 2:13) SEE Teleological Argumenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleological_argument
Rodeo Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 SEE Teleological Argument http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleological_argument You can choose to believe the scriptures or deny them. We can decide where and from what we establish our belief system. The Book of Mormon is one of the most correct truthful books on the earth.
VideoGameJunkie Posted September 9, 2014 Author Posted September 9, 2014 I believe the scriptures because I don't see how you can make them up. Especially Joseph Smith, I don't see how he could have made up the BOM and D&C. It's too well written to be made up.
Rodeo Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 LDS doctrine is that God planned and carried out the creation which was the sole reason for our existence. Exactly how he did that is NOT part of LDS doctrine. The LDS priori is that there is a God. I agree with LDS doctrine. Now putting on my science hat I can not posit any God or Godlike force onto science and have it still be science. IE; I Know what 2+2 equals. I have no clue as to what 2+2+God equals. SEE Wishy-washy again. You say you believe he planned and carried it out but yet deny he was the reason for life to come into existence. Perhaps I am wrong here but it seems like you desperately want to believe in the tenants of intelligent design but not to the point where it conflicts with your scholarly knowledge of naturalism. Am I wrong? Just trying to get a feel for where you really stand.
Ahab Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 LDS doctrine teaches that God planned and carried out the creation which was the sole reason for our existence. As such LDS teachins also believe that without God there could have been no creation. You cant have it both ways.Your portrayal of our doctrine is a little garbled. For us to be able to exist we needed a Father to beget us, otherwise we would not exist. And lo and behold we do have a Father, which is how we got our existence. And our existence began even before we were beget by our Father in heaven, because part of him is in us and has always been a part of him just as he was a part of his parents, who are also our parents before him.Thus, life doesn't ever begin and has always been just perpetuated by each kind of being in existence however each kind of being perpetuates itself.
Brian 2.0 Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 LDS doctrine teaches that God planned and carried out the creation which was the sole reason for our existence. As such LDS teachins also believe that without God there could have been no creation. You cant have it both ways. As powerful beings with machines like bulldozers... we can create a mountain. Natural processes also can create a mountain. They aren't mutually exclusive. "As such LDS teachings also believe that without God there could have been no creation" s -- is this taught specifically?
thesometimesaint Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 Wishy-washy again. You say you believe he planned and carried it out but yet deny he was the reason for life to come into existence. Perhaps I am wrong here but it seems like you desperately want to believe in the tenants of intelligent design but not to the point where it conflicts with your scholarly knowledge of naturalism. Am I wrong? Just trying to get a feel for where you really stand. Yes you are wrong. Where I really stand is that I'm so ignorant of so much that it is like comparing my thimbles worth of knowledge to the vast oceans of my ignorance. Science is a limited way of looking at our world/universe. That means we purposefully limit our explanations to what is observable. IOW controlling all the variables.God and/or Godlike forces are outside of our ability to control for in science. That is why I continually use the example from math. Because God in omnipotent there is no way to determine what 2+2+God equals. 2+2 would still equal 4 whether there is a God or not.
Brian 2.0 Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 2+2 would still equal 4 whether there is a God or not. Well... Mormon Steven R. Covey declared via the laws of Synergy that 1+1=3, 4 or more!
thesometimesaint Posted September 9, 2014 Posted September 9, 2014 Well... Mormon Steven R. Covey declared via the laws of Synergy that 1+1=3, 4 or more! Synergy is fine as long as it is used in biology. .
Recommended Posts