Time in the garden of Eden

[mfbukowski]

16 hours ago, Five Solas said:

mfbukowski has posted about time "before time."  It serves to confound critics & earn him rep points, but I'm told you have to be a committed post-modernist to really understand this kind of thing. 

Do let us know when they start making the Elders Quorum & High Priests sit through Richard Rorty videos.  I'm guessing there will be no middle ground, they'll achieve enlightenment or reenact Luke 8:33...

;0)

--Erik

Thanks for the plug   So glad you are thinking of me,  

Yeah, our minds cannot get around the idea of no time and we definitely cannot think about it in words.  Notice that right now while reading, this sentence itself is sequential and now you are already at the end.  It took time to even express the idea of time.

God could not have "created" time because that very idea implies a before and after which means God must have created time IN time to have a time he created it!

So yah, I'll go with the good old LDS logic of eternal matter being organized at different "times" into different planetary systems etc- but the idea that there was actually a "time before time" just doesn't make sense

On the other hand the IDEA of time could be another matter- before humans there were no ideas so the idea of time could not have existed.

So was that postmodern enough for you?

[ALarson]

1 hour ago, JLHPROF said:

No, God's marriage design is perfect.
He provided the perfect blueprint.

Is polygamy involved perhaps?

[JLHPROF]

7 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Is polygamy involved perhaps?

The evidence would seem to indicate such.  Assuming you believe in eternal marriage at all.

[ALarson]

Just now, JLHPROF said:

The evidence would seem to indicate such.  Assuming you believe in eternal marriage at all.

I thought you'd say that!  

Of course I disagree, but I'm sure you knew that.  I believe that God's perfect marriage plan involves 2 people who are committed only to each other for eternity.  

[Atheist Mormon]

50 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

I guess the alternative is staying on the ground all your life.  Or in other words, since all the birds in the forest do not sing perfectly, none should sing.

I'd be gladly staying grounded when one out of three planes crash. 

[ksfisher]

4 minutes ago, Atheist Mormon said:

I'd be gladly staying grounded when one out of three planes crash. 

And I guess that that's part of what life is all about.  Choosing whether you want to stay on the ground or fly as you say.

[JLHPROF]

11 minutes ago, Atheist Mormon said:

I'd be gladly staying grounded when one out of three planes crash.

What a sad way to live.
Not that I'm all that adventurous.

But life's too short to worry about prolonging it by eating nothing but wheatgrass and tofu.

[Gray]

20 minutes ago, Atheist Mormon said:

I'd be gladly staying grounded when one out of three planes crash. 

Marriage is a successful Darwinian social adaptation. Get with the program. 

[Atheist Mormon]

24 minutes ago, Gray said:

Marriage is a successful Darwinian social adaptation. Get with the program. 

you are very mistaken according to social anthropologists. Marriage/nuclear family was rather a very latecomer in human culture. The culprit was the farming. In our hunter & gatherer period which is 90% of our Homo Sapient episode women/man had sex with multiple partners, children were raised by the village....Then we invented farming & learned to breed like rabbits.

[rodheadlee]

2 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Suppose you'r right, it is 30% failure rate...Would you like to fly under those circumstances?

It's a personal thing my failure rate at marriage is 0%. Do you want to let me be your pilot?

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Suppose you'r right, it is 30% failure rate...Would you like to fly under those circumstances?

Comparing the success of the lifelong commitment of marriage with all its emotional, social, and financial implications to a single airplane flight is asinine. Most friendships also end or are put on hold at some point in life due to distance, changes in interest, or whatever. Would you also compare getting a new friend in elementary school to risking a 90% chance of death on a plane from LA to New York?

[cinepro]

4 hours ago, snowflake said:

How does evolution get around the law of biogenesis?

The law of biogenesis, attributed to Louis Pasteur, is the conclusion that complex living things come only from other living things, by reproduction (e.g. a spider lays eggs, which develop into spiders). That is, modern life does not arise from non-living material, which was the position held by spontaneous generation.

"The spontaneous generation that Pasteur and others disproved was the idea that life forms such as mice, maggots, and bacteria can appear fully formed. They disproved a form of creationism. There is no law of biogenesis saying that very primitive life cannot form from increasingly complex molecules."

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB000.html

[waveslider]

5 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

Yeah? When was the last time you went a university did not teach Evolution? Even BYU has to teach evolution. 

As for for not being able to explain how life started; You are greatly mistaken....We have more evidence than world museums can display.

Just because Evolution is taught everywhere doesn't mean it can trump God.

Please fill me in on how life started? Show me where it was replicated in a scientific method? I'm quite interested in this if indeed there is knowledge of how life originated in the first place!

 

[waveslider]

25 minutes ago, cinepro said:

There is no law of biogenesis saying that very primitive life cannot form from increasingly complex molecules."

I suggest you watch these two documentaries, if you think that there is any real chance that life could spontaneously form from increasingly complex molecules: https://youtu.be/00vBqYDBW5s https://youtu.be/WPkBEYsG6EQ

 

[cinepro]

9 minutes ago, waveslider said:

I suggest you watch these two documentaries, if you think that there is any real chance that life could spontaneously form from increasingly complex molecules: https://youtu.be/00vBqYDBW5s https://youtu.be/WPkBEYsG6EQ

 

I didn't say that.  I was only pointing out that the "Law of Biogenesis" is usually more specifically applied to the theories about flies and rats spontaneously generating from inanimate matter and so on.  It wasn't meant to be applied to theories of abiogenesis.

[cinepro]

32 minutes ago, waveslider said:

Just because Evolution is taught everywhere doesn't mean it can trump God.

Please fill me in on how life started? Show me where it was replicated in a scientific method? I'm quite interested in this if indeed there is knowledge of how life originated in the first place!

 

The reason "evolution is taught everywhere" is because it is a useful theory.  Once you involve supernatural factors in a theory, it becomes much more comforting to people who don't like "unknowns" in their theories (and who strongly want to believe in whichever supernatural force is being invoked), but it doesn't make the theory any more useful.

[Gray]

1 hour ago, Atheist Mormon said:

you are very mistaken according to social anthropologists. Marriage/nuclear family was rather a very latecomer in human culture. The culprit was the farming. In our hunter & gatherer period which is 90% of our Homo Sapient episode women/man had sex with multiple partners, children were raised by the village....Then we invented farming & learned to breed like rabbits.

What does its lateness have to do with its utility? 

[danielwoods]

48 minutes ago, cinepro said:

I didn't say that.  I was only pointing out that the "Law of Biogenesis" is usually more specifically applied to the theories about flies and rats spontaneously generating from inanimate matter and so on.  It wasn't meant to be applied to theories of abiogenesis.

And yet it applies just as well to those theories until demonstrated otherwise. 

[Atheist Mormon]

2 hours ago, rodheadlee said:

It's a personal thing my failure rate at marriage is 0%. Do you want to let me be your pilot?

So, God hit 100% with you and 0% with me...Good for you.

[Atheist Mormon]

59 minutes ago, Gray said:

What does its lateness have to do with its utility? 

It's called Evolving Humans....

[Gray]

21 minutes ago, Atheist Mormon said:

It's called Evolving Humans....

This is not responsive

[Teancum]

4 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

The evidence would seem to indicate such.  Assuming you believe in eternal marriage at all.

Pure and utter horse manure and only defended so one can be committed to the LDS Dogma and JS being a prophet.

[Teancum]

3 hours ago, Atheist Mormon said:

you are very mistaken according to social anthropologists. Marriage/nuclear family was rather a very latecomer in human culture. The culprit was the farming. In our hunter & gatherer period which is 90% of our Homo Sapient episode women/man had sex with multiple partners, children were raised by the village....Then we invented farming & learned to breed like rabbits.

Yes just like other beasts.  Which it seem is really what we are.

[JLHPROF]

1 minute ago, Teancum said:

Pure and utter horse manure and only defended so one can be committed to the LDS Dogma and JS being a prophet.

Yeah - what a crazy thing to have on a Mormon doctrine discussion board.  A belief in LDS doctrine and foundational leaders.
What's next, a Buddhist discussion board with people that believe in Buddhism, or a Muslim discussion board where people call Mohammed a prophet?

Crazy

[Atheist Mormon]

51 minutes ago, Gray said:

This is not responsive

Where did "utility" come into conversation in the first place?