thesometimesaint Posted March 10, 2015 Posted March 10, 2015 Years ago I had a longstanding dialogue with Steven Peck from BYU. He informed to me that he does not know where or possibly how the Creator fits in with the creation and that perhaps God himself was the product of nature. I have also had dialogue with Duane Jefferies years ago who also was at BYU and at that time on the board for the NCSE. He informed me that his positions were not in line with church leaders. I have come to know that BYU is worldly in such teachings, no different than the next. So a conversation we're not privy to somehow makes science wrong?SEE http://www.lds-mormon.com/evolutn1.shtml NCSE on Theists in ScienceSEE http://ncse.com/rncse/18/2/do-scientists-really-reject-god So the Mormon Church leaders are unaware of or are duped by science? Yet they find sufficient money, time, energy, to build one of the best Paleontology museums in the world.SEE http://geology.byu.edu/museum/content/paleontological-research
Rob Osborn Posted March 10, 2015 Posted March 10, 2015 (edited) So a conversation we're not privy to somehow makes science wrong?SEE http://www.lds-mormon.com/evolutn1.shtmlNCSE on Theists in ScienceSEE http://ncse.com/rncse/18/2/do-scientists-really-reject-godSo the Mormon Church leaders are unaware of or are duped by science? Yet they find sufficient money, time, energy, to build one of the best Paleontology museums in the world.SEE http://geology.byu.edu/museum/content/paleontological-researchJust google my name and Steven's name. Its not hard to see that we have had a myriad of discussions over the years. Its also not hard to search and find Peck's position on "if" God fits into his own creation.BYU teaches the same worldly dogma as any other university when it comes to evolution. Just because it is "BYU" doesnt mean it represents church teachings. That is one reason they have their evolution packet available so that they can inform students what the church really teaches and how they differ in that respect. Part of the reason they teach evolution at BYU is to be an accredited school.The NCSE is against God, plain and simple. They dont want any part of him in public view or thought. Edited March 10, 2015 by Rob Osborn
Rob Osborn Posted March 10, 2015 Posted March 10, 2015 Some fun quotes from Joseph Smith (https://www.lds.org/manual/teachings-joseph-smith/chapter-22, whole chapter is fun):Certainly LDS are not atheistic evolutionists but it is nonetheless well within the realm of our currently revealed theology to accept evolution. Reject evolution if one must, but at least please get the science right (e.g. speciation has been observed) and correctly represent the realm of acceptable possibilities within our theology (e.g. http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Evolution). As for me and my house, we will endeavor to accept the blessings of knowledge God gives to man with gratitude and appreciation. And if we believe too much, so be it (for men will certainly make errors). Nonetheless, the fruits of the theory of evolution have been a boon to mankind (e.g. http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/pigliucci.html).Atheism has been creeping into the church for some time. The teaching of Darwinian evolution has been just one of those atheistic teachings creeping into the church. One thing we can rely upon is the actual prophets and apostles to set us straight and tell us the lies of evolution and even print those beliefs in church publications making it out doctrine. The problem is that LDS continue to accept mans teaching over Gods.
thesometimesaint Posted March 10, 2015 Posted March 10, 2015 Atheism has been creeping into the church for some time. The teaching of Darwinian evolution has been just one of those atheistic teachings creeping into the church. One thing we can rely upon is the actual prophets and apostles to set us straight and tell us the lies of evolution and even print those beliefs in church publications making it out doctrine. The problem is that LDS continue to accept mans teaching over Gods. No; just your misinterpretations of it.
Nofear Posted March 10, 2015 Posted March 10, 2015 Atheism has been creeping into the church for some time. The teaching of Darwinian evolution has been just one of those atheistic teachings creeping into the church. One thing we can rely upon is the actual prophets and apostles to set us straight and tell us the lies of evolution and even print those beliefs in church publications making it out doctrine. The problem is that LDS continue to accept mans teaching over Gods. Inasmuch as men try to portray evolution as a complete and whole theory, that is incorrect. It is also a strawman as far as LDS theology goes. Our species spans the cosmos and mortal forms like unto ours inhabit countless worlds. And it is true that evolution, unguided and blind cannot account for this theology. There are repeated statements from the brethren that affirm consistency with that position. Of that i suspect we can agree. That nonetheless does not remove from us insight into the workings of our mortal coils and that of our fellow creatures. And that insight, guided by the scaffolding of the theory of evolution, has wrought great good to humanity. Because some abuse the tool and make it to workings unintended, does not make the tool itself false. It is ever the ploy of the Adversary to corrupt the revelations of God. In doing so wicked men wreck evil upon the world and misguided believers rejects the blessings of light to avoid even the appearance of corruption and thus play the role of fools to the unconverted who nonetheless have eyes enough to see the revealed truths. Affirm the truths we can all agree upon (e.g. first paragraph). Beyond that we play a stumbling block and hinder the work. 1
Rob Osborn Posted March 10, 2015 Posted March 10, 2015 Inasmuch as men try to portray evolution as a complete and whole theory, that is incorrect. It is also a strawman as far as LDS theology goes. Our species spans the cosmos and mortal forms like unto ours inhabit countless worlds. And it is true that evolution, unguided and blind cannot account for this theology. There are repeated statements from the brethren that affirm consistency with that position. Of that i suspect we can agree. That nonetheless does not remove from us insight into the workings of our mortal coils and that of our fellow creatures. And that insight, guided by the scaffolding of the theory of evolution, has wrought great good to humanity. Because some abuse the tool and make it to workings unintended, does not make the tool itself false. It is ever the ploy of the Adversary to corrupt the revelations of God. In doing so wicked men wreck evil upon the world and misguided believers rejects the blessings of light to avoid even the appearance of corruption and thus play the role of fools to the unconverted who nonetheless have eyes enough to see the revealed truths. Affirm the truths we can all agree upon (e.g. first paragraph). Beyond that we play a stumbling block and hinder the work.Darwinian evolution is such a following of misguided believers.
Rob Osborn Posted March 10, 2015 Posted March 10, 2015 No; just your misinterpretations of it.Perhaps you could kindly show where or how the Creator fits into his creation.
thesometimesaint Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 (edited) Perhaps you could kindly show where or how the Creator fits into his creation. You make it too easy.SEE https://www.lds.org/scriptures/pgp/abr/3?lang=eng Edited March 11, 2015 by thesometimesaint
Robert F. Smith Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 .................................................. The NCSE is against God, plain and simple. They dont want any part of him in public view or thought.What part of NCSE on Theists in Science (http://ncse.com/rncs...ally-reject-god) don't you understand, Rob?
Teancum Posted March 11, 2015 Posted March 11, 2015 Atheism has been creeping into the church for some time. The teaching of Darwinian evolution has been just one of those atheistic teachings creeping into the church. One thing we can rely upon is the actual prophets and apostles to set us straight and tell us the lies of evolution and even print those beliefs in church publications making it out doctrine. The problem is that LDS continue to accept mans teaching over Gods. It is a good thing that evolution is creeping into the Church. The LDS Church claims to accept truth no matter where from and evolution sure seems to hold up to a standard of truth at least based on evidence. As for the apostles and prophets setting us straight on the "lies of evolution" where have they done so please do show? More so it seems that they say they really don't know how God did it and give no opinion for or against it. By the way apostles and prophets are men so anything they say is still from a man. LDS Apologists constantly argue the LDS prophets and apostles are not infallible, mix in their own opinions with a lot of what they say and seem to get things wrong at times.
Rob Osborn Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 What part of NCSE on Theists in Science (http://ncse.com/rncs...ally-reject-god) don't you understand, Rob?Oh, let me guess- how about when was the last time that science has acknowledged God in the creation? I am not talking about scientists personal beliefs, I am talking about the faceless beast we call "science" that evolutionists worship. Because this beast truly exists nad has its own set of rules to worship, one can quietly worship and acknowledge God, but dont dare mention him in public or you get trashed by the beast. They have worked it now so that even the word "god" is a religion and must be banned from the publics view. The NCSE can hide all they want in their sheeps clothing but we all know they are just hungry wolves waiting to devour any and all that try to include God in any context dealing with science.
Rob Osborn Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 It is a good thing that evolution is creeping into the Church. The LDS Church claims to accept truth no matter where from and evolution sure seems to hold up to a standard of truth at least based on evidence. As for the apostles and prophets setting us straight on the "lies of evolution" where have they done so please do show? More so it seems that they say they really don't know how God did it and give no opinion for or against it. By the way apostles and prophets are men so anything they say is still from a man. LDS Apologists constantly argue the LDS prophets and apostles are not infallible, mix in their own opinions with a lot of what they say and seem to get things wrong at times.Read the 1909 statement, then we shall discuss
bdouglas Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 Oh, let me guess- how about when was the last time that science has acknowledged God in the creation? I am not talking about scientists personal beliefs, I am talking about the faceless beast we call "science" that evolutionists worship. Because this beast truly exists nad has its own set of rules to worship, one can quietly worship and acknowledge God, but dont dare mention him in public or you get trashed by the beast. They have worked it now so that even the word "god" is a religion and must be banned from the publics view. The NCSE can hide all they want in their sheeps clothing but we all know they are just hungry wolves waiting to devour any and all that try to include God in any context dealing with science. You need to learn the difference between thoughtful, reasoned posts, and rants. Most of your posts are rants. However, I'll admit that you are entertaining.
Rob Osborn Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 You need to learn the difference between thoughtful, reasoned posts, and rants. Most of your posts are rants. However, I'll admit that you are entertaining.I learned long ago with dealing with this subject that you call it straight truthfully or nobody takes you seriously. Some subjects you just have to firmly address head on.
Rob Osborn Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 http://creation.com/how-religiously-neutral-are-the-anti-creationist-organisations
Robert F. Smith Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 Oh, let me guess- how about when was the last time that science has acknowledged God in the creation? I am not talking about scientists personal beliefs, I am talking about the faceless beast we call "science" that evolutionists worship. Because this beast truly exists nad has its own set of rules to worship, one can quietly worship and acknowledge God, but dont dare mention him in public or you get trashed by the beast. They have worked it now so that even the word "god" is a religion and must be banned from the publics view. The NCSE can hide all they want in their sheeps clothing but we all know they are just hungry wolves waiting to devour any and all that try to include God in any context dealing with science.Trouble is, Rob, that this is just the sort of prejudicial and apriori nonsense we get from anti-Mormons -- who do not feel that they really need to discuss facts, but only rant and rave about the horrible Mormons. That is not an atmosphere in which any sort of rational discussion can take place. In their and your warped understanding, the "other" is always evil and deceptive, their effort always to obfuscate and lie. No mutual respect need be applied to those beastly "others," as your words so graphically illustrate. That is not the way in which the Brethren address "others," and it should not be our way either. If you cannot apply fairness and even-handed judgment here, don't expect it for yourself hereafter.
bdouglas Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 (edited) I learned long ago with dealing with this subject that you call it straight truthfully or nobody takes you seriously. Some subjects you just have to firmly address head on. Makes me think of Don Quixote tilting at windmills. Nobody took him seriously either, but he was (and is) loved. (Of course he was also crazy —— that must be remembered.) Edited March 12, 2015 by bdouglas
Rob Osborn Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 Trouble is, Rob, that this is just the sort of prejudicial and apriori nonsense we get from anti-Mormons -- who do not feel that they really need to discuss facts, but only rant and rave about the horrible Mormons. That is not an atmosphere in which any sort of rational discussion can take place. In their and your warped understanding, the "other" is always evil and deceptive, their effort always to obfuscate and lie. No mutual respect need be applied to those beastly "others," as your words so graphically illustrate. That is not the way in which the Brethren address "others," and it should not be our way either. If you cannot apply fairness and even-handed judgment here, don't expect it for yourself hereafter.I treat them with the same level of respect as they treat me. I dont know, you know, it bothers me rather greatly that the forces that drive evolution in our public schools very much do have an agenda to do away with God. That really bothers me. And then for them to lie so bad about it claiming they represent religions, blah blah blah, its all BS! That part really bother me. I dont have a warped understanding on the issue. I do not need to warp any facts, I just call them exactly as they are. Evolutionists and those Such as the NCSE, NAS, NSTA, ACLU, AU, all promote evolution and the separation of church and state. They are politically motivated and support each others agendas. They are a pack of wolves- its the truth.
fox_goku Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 OK, maybe I can be accused of compartmentalizing. I don't know. But, I teach a human evolution course at a midwest university, and I teach Ezra Taft Benson in my High Priest group. To me, evolution is fact like gravity is fact, but neither is particularly relevant to the gospel. I assure you that I don't go to Church to learn science, and I don't study science to learn the gospel. So, maybe that is compartmentalization. Even so, I think Genesis 1 is very compatible with evolutionary history, if taken figuratively. I know many LDS evolutionary scientists. I don't always know how they juxtapose the two (science & religion), but they are active (in both domains) and seem to have no problems. To me it is better to reject evolution and accept the gospel, but the ideal is to accept both. Neither the gospel OR evolution is going away. They are here to stay. Discoveries in science CANNOT subvert the purposes of God, and God is NOT threatened by science. However, I will admit there are a few scientists who make poor anti-theologians, who suggest evolution implies NO God. Such individuals have gone FAR beyond the data in order to attack religion. Without evolution, our understanding of genetics, medicine, phylogeny, paleontology, etc. is greatly diminished. I would rather be on the side of advancing knowledge -- both in science & religion. Darwin was the "restoration" in life science, just as Jos. Smith was the "restoration" in Christianity. Isn't it interesting that they both arose about the same time? Sorry, just calling it as I see it. 1
Nofear Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 I treat them with the same level of respect as they treat me. I dont know, you know, it bothers me rather greatly that the forces that drive evolution in our public schools very much do have an agenda to do away with God. That really bothers me. And then for them to lie so bad about it claiming they represent religions, blah blah blah, its all BS! That part really bother me. I dont have a warped understanding on the issue. I do not need to warp any facts, I just call them exactly as they are. Evolutionists and those Such as the NCSE, NAS, NSTA, ACLU, AU, all promote evolution and the separation of church and state. They are politically motivated and support each others agendas. They are a pack of wolves- its the truth. Somebody has an infection.
Nofear Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 I generally don't see people leaving the Church over evolution. But when it does happen, it is probably because they are disgusted by the anti-evolutionary arguments presented by otherwise faithful members. 1
Rob Osborn Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 (edited) OK, maybe I can be accused of compartmentalizing. I don't know. But, I teach a human evolution course at a midwest university, and I teach Ezra Taft Benson in my High Priest group. To me, evolution is fact like gravity is fact, but neither is particularly relevant to the gospel.I assure you that I don't go to Church to learn science, and I don't study science to learn the gospel. So, maybe that is compartmentalization.Even so, I think Genesis 1 is very compatible with evolutionary history, if taken figuratively. I know many LDS evolutionary scientists. I don't always know how they juxtapose the two (science & religion), but they are active (in both domains) and seem to have no problems.To me it is better to reject evolution and accept the gospel, but the ideal is to accept both. Neither the gospel OR evolution is going away. They are here to stay.Discoveries in science CANNOT subvert the purposes of God, and God is NOT threatened by science. However, I will admit there are a few scientists who make poor anti-theologians, who suggest evolution implies NO God. Such individuals have gone FAR beyond the data in order to attack religion.Without evolution, our understanding of genetics, medicine, phylogeny, paleontology, etc. is greatly diminished. I would rather be on the side of advancing knowledge -- both in science & religion. Darwin was the "restoration" in life science, just as Jos. Smith was the "restoration" in Christianity. Isn't it interesting that they both arose about the same time? Sorry, just calling it as I see it.Its even more interesting that The origin of man, published in 1909 by the first presidency was done so on Dawins centenial birthday and 50 th anniversery of his famous book. That 1909 statement is still the official position of the church and is a classic rebuttal to Darwins On origin of species. Just calling it how it really is. Edited March 12, 2015 by Rob Osborn
thesometimesaint Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 Oh, let me guess- how about when was the last time that science has acknowledged God in the creation? I am not talking about scientists personal beliefs, I am talking about the faceless beast we call "science" that evolutionists worship. Because this beast truly exists nad has its own set of rules to worship, one can quietly worship and acknowledge God, but dont dare mention him in public or you get trashed by the beast. They have worked it now so that even the word "god" is a religion and must be banned from the publics view. The NCSE can hide all they want in their sheeps clothing but we all know they are just hungry wolves waiting to devour any and all that try to include God in any context dealing with science. Science can not posit any God or Godlike force. I don't know how many times you have to be told this before it sinks in. "God please don't put oil in my car engine because I want to know when to change the oil". That's makes about as much sense as saying your television worships cars because there car ads on it. Science doesn't worship evolution. It can't worship anything. It is simply a tool to be used just like your television. If you want to play a game of baseball you have to follow the rules of baseball. Does you playing a good game of baseball mean you worship the ball? No one is banning God from the public square, at least not in this country. We have one of the highest rates of religious observance of any country on earth. Yet we are a secular nation. What we can't do is have our government taking sides in sectarian issues. It is the same with science. Believe anything you want, but use agnostic means to demonstrate science. That is nothing more than Ad Hominem invective.
Rob Osborn Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 Science can not posit any God or Godlike force. I don't know how many times you have to be told this before it sinks in. "God please don't put oil in my car engine because I want to know when to change the oil". That's makes about as much sense as saying your television worships cars because there car ads on it. Science doesn't worship evolution. It can't worship anything. It is simply a tool to be used just like your television. If you want to play a game of baseball you have to follow the rules of baseball. Does you playing a good game of baseball mean you worship the ball? No one is banning God from the public square, at least not in this country. We have one of the highest rates of religious observance of any country on earth. Yet we are a secular nation. What we can't do is have our government taking sides in sectarian issues. It is the same with science. Believe anything you want, but use agnostic means to demonstrate science. That is nothing more than Ad Hominem invective.Its only your brand of science that doesnt include a godlike force. My brandof science includes natural forces such as the many things God does. It even includes things we call "miracles". God doesnt use some magic unknowable force like you think he does.Your analogies are way off too. Its more like- "Father, when we go to the lab today please bless the dirt we watch so that "poof" life can magically start and we can show that life doesnt require you".
thesometimesaint Posted March 12, 2015 Posted March 12, 2015 (edited) The Supernatural "Pertaining to God" is not the Natural.Any appeal to any God or Godlike force is not allowed by the rules of science.SEE Edited March 12, 2015 by thesometimesaint
Recommended Posts