thesometimesaint Posted August 16, 2016 Posted August 16, 2016 45 minutes ago, Teancum said: Correct. The Church just tosses up its hands re science that conflicts with religion and gives a no opinion on the critical issue of evolution and humans being on he earth a lot longer than 6000 to 11,000 years. Those are not critical questions. The critical questions are, is Christ the person we claim he is, is this his Church, and should I be a member of it? I'm perfectly fine with mankind, as God defines him, being some 6000 years old.
Johnnie Cake Posted August 16, 2016 Posted August 16, 2016 thesometimesaint: The age of the earth, how it was formed, and the extent of The Flood are not part of LDS doctrine. Individual members are free to believe anything they want on these subject and still be considered good members of the Church if they agree that God did it. I disagree, Section 77 makes it doctrine, claims in the Book of Mormon make them doctrine, claims in the Bible make it doctrine and prophetic pronouncements make it doctrine...even though many in the church wish to walk away from or ignore those doctrine today...they are built into the very fabric of Mormonism
waveslider Posted August 16, 2016 Posted August 16, 2016 4 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said: Actually science has proven/ developed theories on how the earth was formed Theories aren't 100 percent proof of anything. Otherwise there wouldn't be any failed scientific theories like for instance these 10 out of the plethora of failed theories: http://www.famousscientists.org/10-most-famous-scientific-theories-that-were-later-debunked/
cinepro Posted August 16, 2016 Author Posted August 16, 2016 56 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said: Those are not critical questions. The critical questions are, is Christ the person we claim he is, is this his Church, and should I be a member of it? I'm perfectly fine with mankind, as God defines him, being some 6000 years old. So wouldn't the critical question be "If the scriptures and church leaders are massively wrong about the stuff we can investigate, to what degree should we be skeptical about the stuff we can't investigate?" 1
Johnnie Cake Posted August 16, 2016 Posted August 16, 2016 thesometimesaint: Those are not critical questions. The critical questions are, is Christ the person we claim he is, is this his Church, and should I be a member of it? I'm perfectly fine with mankind, as God defines him, being some 6000 years old. The critical question of Christ being the person he claims to be is at the top of a pyramid whose base is built on the sands of a 6,000 year old earth a global flood and the other silly myths religion is built upon. If all of those false claims are just myths then why should I believe anything else claimed by religion as true is true?
Teancum Posted August 17, 2016 Posted August 17, 2016 7 hours ago, stemelbow said: Members who reject the 6,000 year old earth and global flood. So how do you get around the LDS doctrine that there was a global flood.
Teancum Posted August 17, 2016 Posted August 17, 2016 (edited) 6 hours ago, thesometimesaint said: Those are not critical questions. The critical questions are, is Christ the person we claim he is, is this his Church, and should I be a member of it? I'm perfectly fine with mankind, as God defines him, being some 6000 years old. Great if that works for you. But that does not mean they are not critical questions for others. Edited August 17, 2016 by Teancum
stemelbow Posted August 17, 2016 Posted August 17, 2016 12 hours ago, Teancum said: So how do you get around the LDS doctrine that there was a global flood. I reject it.
thesometimesaint Posted August 17, 2016 Posted August 17, 2016 15 hours ago, Teancum said: Great if that works for you. But that does not mean they are not critical questions for others. Everyone gets to decide for themselves. But what I posted is what the Church claims. Even those of other faiths recognize those critical questions. SEE http://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2011/12/why-belief-in-the-deity-of-jesus-christ-is-crucial-for-christian-identity/
bcuzbcuz Posted August 17, 2016 Posted August 17, 2016 On 16 August 2016 at 9:53 PM, waveslider said: Theories aren't 100 percent proof of anything. Otherwise there wouldn't be any failed scientific theories like for instance these 10 out of the plethora of failed theories: http://www.famousscientists.org/10-most-famous-scientific-theories-that-were-later-debunked/ Did you read the list? Whoever composed the list has a very poor understanding of what constitutes "science". Phrenology? Really? People can buy into ideas with absolutely zero evidence that the idea actually works. Phrenology was disproven by Science, but never was a science. Then your list includes Luminiferous aether, Phlogistan theory, spontaneous generation, not to mention Martian canals, the planet Vulcan and the idea that humans started life as a Blank slate. What utter nonsense. People believed many of these ideas for centuries but that doesn't make them science. There are, however, actual scientific theories that have been proven false. And that's great. Religion hates to be proven wrong. Science rejoices when a theory proves wrong. It creates a flury of activity to try to explain factors in a comprehensible way. (The individual scientist will probably not take too kindly to hs ideas being proven wrong, but he/she will get over it....when they die)
Teancum Posted August 18, 2016 Posted August 18, 2016 10 hours ago, stemelbow said: I reject it. Good for you. Me too.
Teancum Posted August 18, 2016 Posted August 18, 2016 (edited) 8 hours ago, thesometimesaint said: Everyone gets to decide for themselves. But what I posted is what the Church claims. Even those of other faiths recognize those critical questions. SEE http://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2011/12/why-belief-in-the-deity-of-jesus-christ-is-crucial-for-christian-identity/ Yet we have an apostle and a prophet of the LDS church who taught that if the Genesis account of the creation and fall are not literally true then there is not need for a Christ and a Savior. Yet I see you and others now saying these are not critical issues. Well they were to Elder McConkie and his father in law President Smith. Given their positions in the LDS Church as prophets, seers and revelators why should I trust you more than them? also based on what I read in your link i recommend the book by Bart Ehrman called How Jesus Became God. It is not as simple as your blogger might lead his readers to think. Edited August 18, 2016 by Teancum
waveslider Posted August 18, 2016 Posted August 18, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, bcuzbcuz said: Religion hates to be proven wrong. Science rejoices when a theory proves wrong ....Unless they are talking about the myth of global warming as being science. Has anyone seen the global temperatures as of late? The way the temperature is going it will in no way shape or form be the warmest year ever like they are saying it is going to be. Good science rejoices when they are wrong, but with bad science where they try to bend the data to fit a false theory, it sure doesn't rejoice. Edited August 18, 2016 by waveslider bad sentence structure
thesometimesaint Posted August 18, 2016 Posted August 18, 2016 On 8/16/2016 at 0:41 PM, Johnnie Cake said: thesometimesaint: The age of the earth, how it was formed, and the extent of The Flood are not part of LDS doctrine. Individual members are free to believe anything they want on these subject and still be considered good members of the Church if they agree that God did it. I disagree, Section 77 makes it doctrine, claims in the Book of Mormon make them doctrine, claims in the Bible make it doctrine and prophetic pronouncements make it doctrine...even though many in the church wish to walk away from or ignore those doctrine today...they are built into the very fabric of Mormonism Bring on the Cockatrice.
thesometimesaint Posted August 18, 2016 Posted August 18, 2016 2 hours ago, waveslider said: ....Unless they are talking about the myth of global warming as being science. Has anyone seen the global temperatures as of late? The way the temperature is going it will in no way shape or form be the warmest year ever like they are saying it is going to be. Good science rejoices when they are wrong, but with bad science where they try to bend the data to fit a false theory, it sure doesn't rejoice. Please learn some basic science before spouting off nonsense. 1
waveslider Posted August 18, 2016 Posted August 18, 2016 1 hour ago, thesometimesaint said: Please learn some basic science before spouting off nonsense. Go ahead a laugh it off as nonsense, but don't complain to me when your food prices soar because of all the frost bitten and flooded out crops this year, all over the world. Besides isn't the arctic ice supposed to be melting? It sure does seem like it is riding around the mid range of record high levels of ice and the record low levels. Not to mention all the great skiing in the Alps this summer, as well as in New Zealand right now. Check it out, instead of just listening to all the sold out media sources. The only nonsense is global warming itself.
2 Zelph 3:16 Posted August 18, 2016 Posted August 18, 2016 On 8/7/2016 at 9:53 PM, cinepro said: I can't speak for Elder Holland, but it's possible that his beliefs about a post-flood breakup of Pangaea would lead him to argue that there was no Mount Everest before the flood... That appears to be a common belief among people who believe in a world-wide flood: http://www.icr.org/article/did-noahs-flood-cover-himalayan-mountains/ Does nobody else sense the madness of all of this? "Well, yes, Bob said such and such but that was before Bill taught this other thing and then yoi have to remember that whenever something taught by a church leader is proven false it simply becomes a 'statement of personal opinion' see?.. yakety blah blah blippity yak yak, etc. and Ah-man!"
bcuzbcuz Posted August 18, 2016 Posted August 18, 2016 9 hours ago, waveslider said: ....Unless they are talking about the myth of global warming as being science. Has anyone seen the global temperatures as of late? The way the temperature is going it will in no way shape or form be the warmest year ever like they are saying it is going to be. Good science rejoices when they are wrong, but with bad science where they try to bend the data to fit a false theory, it sure doesn't rejoice. Please. Not global warming again. You confuse temperature with climate. They are NOT the same thing. Good science will win in the end. (I have pictures of glaciers that have disappeared (or more correctly, the dry areas where glaciers used to be ) over the last 50 years if you're interested.
Johnnie Cake Posted August 18, 2016 Posted August 18, 2016 Yes even the Cockatrice is doctrine ...false doctrine but still doctrine
bcuzbcuz Posted August 18, 2016 Posted August 18, 2016 7 hours ago, waveslider said: Go ahead a laugh it off as nonsense, but don't complain to me when your food prices soar because of all the frost bitten and flooded out crops this year, all over the world. Besides isn't the arctic ice supposed to be melting? It sure does seem like it is riding around the mid range of record high levels of ice and the record low levels. Not to mention all the great skiing in the Alps this summer, as well as in New Zealand right now. Check it out, instead of just listening to all the sold out media sources. The only nonsense is global warming itself. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. (You are aware, are you not, that this article, from June 30th this year is in the winter for the southern hemisphere) http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11666212 "Snow shortage delays Mt Ruapehu season opening The warmest year on record has put New Zealand's snow season off to a sluggish start - and today forced operators on Mt Ruapehu to push back ski area openings that were scheduled this weekend. The delay at Whakapapa and Turoa was the latest of several postponements at skifields around the country following an unusually balmy season lead-up. But a climate scientist says one big event was all that was needed to kick the slopes into action. Weather-permitting, the beginner trails on both Ruapehu ski areas would be open in time for the school holidays. When the Herald visited Whakapapa today, there was a conspicuous absence of snow around the lower mountain as staff were busy making final preparations for the annual visitor influx." http://phys.org/news/2015-12-slalom-areas-future.html "Slalom course for ski areas facing future without snow December 12, 2015 by Benoit Pavan As temperatures rise there is less of it or sometimes even none at all—global warming is forcing ski areas to think about the once unthinkable, a future without snow. Some in the French Alps have gone beyond thinking and begun diversifying the activities they offer visitors, particularly those at around 1,300 metres (4,300 feet) altitude. It's this level—where ski lifts sprouted like mushrooms in the 1960s and 1970s in what "democratised" winter sports in France—that scientists say will face "highly variable annual " fluctuations in snowfall. According to the regional authority measuring the impact of climate change, the Alps have seen a 30 percent drop in the amount of snowfall in the past 30 years and the average temperature has climbed 1.6 degrees Celsius (nearly 3 degrees Fahrenheit) since 1960." I live and ski in Europe. Book a vacation to the Austrian Alps and see for yourself. Some ski slopes are lining their hills with artificial turf. If there is snow, it works as a good base. But when the snows don't come (as happens much more commonly), tourists (especially those with small children, who don't want to tackle the tough upper levels pists) can still ski. Ski hill managers would not spend money on artificial turf if they didn't have to!
thesometimesaint Posted August 18, 2016 Posted August 18, 2016 On 8/16/2016 at 1:09 PM, cinepro said: So wouldn't the critical question be "If the scriptures and church leaders are massively wrong about the stuff we can investigate, to what degree should we be skeptical about the stuff we can't investigate?" No. Scriptures are the work of mortal men. We must by definition trust God, and not rely on the arm of flesh.
thesometimesaint Posted August 18, 2016 Posted August 18, 2016 8 hours ago, waveslider said: Go ahead a laugh it off as nonsense, but don't complain to me when your food prices soar because of all the frost bitten and flooded out crops this year, all over the world. Besides isn't the arctic ice supposed to be melting? It sure does seem like it is riding around the mid range of record high levels of ice and the record low levels. Not to mention all the great skiing in the Alps this summer, as well as in New Zealand right now. Check it out, instead of just listening to all the sold out media sources. The only nonsense is global warming itself. I live in California where a lot of food is grown. We're in our 5th year of drought and extreme heat. Arctic ice comes in two forms Sea Ice and Land Ice. Sea Ice is like ice in a glass it has little effect on the level of the water in the glass because of displacement. The limited effect the melt water has is in thermal expansion. Land ice is different( IE; Greenland), it is like adding more water to the glass. Greenland melt SEE http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/06/ice-melting-greenland-jet-stream-weather-climate-change/ Make sure you acclimate to very high altitudes before you put on those skies. SEE http://www.snowplaza.co.uk/blog/4888-summer-skiing-holidays-in-the-alps/ Cold in winter. What is this world coming to. Average temperature in New Zealand is rising. SEE https://www.nzclimatechangecentre.org/sites/nzclimatechangecentre.org/files/images/research/NZCCC Summary_IPCC AR5 NZ Findings_April 2014 WEB.pdf
Jeanne Posted August 18, 2016 Posted August 18, 2016 On 8/16/2016 at 2:09 PM, cinepro said: So wouldn't the critical question be "If the scriptures and church leaders are massively wrong about the stuff we can investigate, to what degree should we be skeptical about the stuff we can't investigate?" The thing is, for those children who are baptized and LDS now, they will already have the premise that the Book of Mormon is true. There is no questioning or anything to be skeptical about until they are older...and maybe not even then. We have been told to study it out in our minds and yet the thinking has already been done. It just doesn't work for those who have decided the church is true. Sometimes investigating brings all those circular thoughts around and around and then it HAS to be true.
thesometimesaint Posted August 18, 2016 Posted August 18, 2016 11 minutes ago, Jeanne said: The thing is, for those children who are baptized and LDS now, they will already have the premise that the Book of Mormon is true. There is no questioning or anything to be skeptical about until they are older...and maybe not even then. We have been told to study it out in our minds and yet the thinking has already been done. It just doesn't work for those who have decided the church is true. Sometimes investigating brings all those circular thoughts around and around and then it HAS to be true. Why? I'm a long time convert from 20 years old. I had to find out for myself if it was true. Which is what the Church is constantly telling us to do. "Man can not endure on Borrowed light". SEE https://www.lds.org/ensign/1971/06/man-cannot-endure-on-borrowed-light?lang=eng
waveslider Posted August 18, 2016 Posted August 18, 2016 4 hours ago, bcuzbcuz said: Please. Not global warming again. You confuse temperature with climate. They are NOT the same thing. Good science will win in the end. (I have pictures of glaciers that have disappeared (or more correctly, the dry areas where glaciers used to be ) over the last 50 years if you're interested. I too have pictures of glaciers that have forests of trees underneath them as they retreat, in an obvious pattern of normal advancing and retreating glaciers. I don't deny climate change, it is very real. What I deny is Global warming. It is simply a straight up lie.
Recommended Posts