The New Era: "The Church Has No Official Position on The Theory Of Evolution"

[Johnnie Cake]

6 minutes ago, Calm said:

Only if one accepts your premise that it means there were no spirits...which seems unlikely given that the scriptures themselves that you quoted stated all things are created spiritually before they are created temporally.

Not the same spirits as the spirit of the children of Gpd, but there are a lot of spirits out there roaming around on the earth that are not that so I don't see that big of a deal adding a few more variations if one choses to interpret it that way.

Exalted bodies of God's children are said not to have blood.  If we remove the mechanism of blood in the bodies we have now, there will need to be some major evolution of them.  I don't believe we need to assume the bodies we currently have are the bodies we will eventually be having and they may be just be temporary vehicles more suited to a different type of spirit or a vehicle that is able to be adapted to a variety of spirits that have a certain level of intelligence, etc. but only some are God's spirit children.

I'm accepting the premise put out by your church, Calm, that there were no spirits prior to Adam...so are you suggesting that the church is in conflict with its Scriptures?

[Calm]

No, I am suggesting my church in no way put out that premise and instead it is your own fundamentalist, black and white, rigid method of approaching LDS scripture that goes there, nothing actually LDS doctrine or interpretation about that.

edited to more accurate portray what I meant

Edited September 30, 2016 by Calm

[Johnnie Cake]

19 minutes ago, Calm said:

No, I am suggesting my church in no way put out that premise and instead it is your own fundamentalist, black and white, rigid view of scripture that goes there, nothing LDS doctrine or interpretation about that.

Fair enough...I've taken my sab at trying to sync the ensign article with LDS scripture...why don't you take a turn and reconcile them...

Oh and please don't pigeonhole me as a black and white fundamentalist...that's just your attempt to marginalize me

 

PS: Calm...please do your part to have me reinstated and a full member of this board...I know you have some influence with the powers that be

Edited September 30, 2016 by Johnnie Cake

[Calm]

Quote

PS: Calm...please do your part to have me reinstated and a full member of this board...I know you have some influence with the powers that be

You should read the announcement.  It is standard operating procedure:

Quote

If you are ignored there then assume your request was denied.

I don't bug mods about their decisions.  Having been a former mod on another board, it is something I would never do no matter how wrong I thought they were.  I would leave the board first, it being their board and me being a guest.

Edited September 30, 2016 by Calm

[Calm]

23 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

 

Oh and please don't pigeonhole me as a black and white fundamentalist...that's just your attempt to marginalize me

I don't think you are a fundamentalist in your own beliefs.  I don't know them well enough to judge.  But I have seen you approach LDS scripture in what I see as relatively fundamentalist methodology, especially here in this threadso I will alter my above post to reflect that I am talking about that and not your personal beliefs.

Edited September 30, 2016 by Calm

[Johnnie Cake]

5 minutes ago, Calm said:

You should read the announcement.  It is standard operating procedure:

I don't bug mods about their decisions.  Having been a former mod on another board, it is something I would never do no matter how wrong I thought they were.  I would leave the board first, it being their board and me being a guest.

Some say that you and Nemesis are one and the same

(using one of my valuable 12 daily posts to make this post...probably a stupid move on my part... oh well its the end of the day)

Edited September 30, 2016 by Johnnie Cake

[Calm]

1 minute ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Some say that you and Nemesis are one and the same

Some say the Earth is flat.  Doesn't make it so.  Anyone who claims they know this is lying.  I am not Nemesis, I have never been a mod for this board in any of its incarnations.  I have been a mod for three boards:  ZLMB, MormonWomenConnect, and the FairMormon Support Board, may they all rest in peace so I can have my peace as well.

Edited September 30, 2016 by Calm

[Johnnie Cake]

Just now, Calm said:

Some say the Earth is flat.  Doesn't make it so.  Anyone who claims they know this is lying.

I'll take you at your word

 

(Throwing away another post, maybe my last of the day)

[Calm]

Thank you.  It got old five, ten? years ago being asked this.  I would appreciate it if you challenged it when you see it.  I would never be such an idiot as to be a mod for this board, even if I got suckered into trying to help two boards that were meant to be support boards be successful (it didn't work, not sure anything but discussion with a ton of debate can exist on a message board, I don't do debate moderation any more, I hated it while I did it, why would I volunteer or accept being drafted into doing what I hated again?)

I point out moderation procedures because I feel sorry for the mods here and try to lighten the load by removing confusion about procedures that new posters have or help smooth things out so not so many reports have to be looked at, but there is no way in heaven, earth, or hell I would take on the responsibility of deciding who gets dinged for what, etc.

No need to answer, I know it can be frustrating to be limited to so many posts when you want to have a conversation.

Edited September 30, 2016 by Calm

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

Very simple organic compounds have been found on meteorites, but that is a VERY BIG jump to have having A&E transported to this planet.

SEE https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2829962/

Yet it is precisely transmission theory (as I have mentioned to you before) which is favored by scientists like Neil deGrasse Tyson.  Naturally, the scientists are not claiming that Adam & Eve were transported to Earth in person or as embryos, and any good ANE scholar will calmly explain that the words Adam & Eve are archetypal, generic terms which do not apply to specific persons -- but are part of a ritual taking place in a garden-temple, which is just the sort of rite of passage which any Mormon regularly undergoes in an LDS temple (where he or she is specifically considered an Adam or Eve).  Liturgy is not to be confused with a science text.  That would be a category mistake.

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

For the sake of our discussion...we are then in agreement

This earth according to LDS Doctrine (which I understand is squishy) was created by the Mormon God for His Children.  Can you give me any authoritative scripture or prophetic pronouncement where its taught otherwise? 24 And there stood one among them that was like unto God, and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell; Note the reference to the Mormon god saying that He would make an earth for "These" to dwell referring to his own spirit children...not any other God's spirit children

Maybe they share. Sharing is a heavenly virtue.

2 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Its the most logical explanation given that there were no spirit children prior to Adam...and yet there were humans...ergo these humans must not have had spirts per LDS doctrine

Per LDS doctrine nothing that lives is spiritless therefore any other explanation, no matter how outlandish, makes more sense within LDS doctrine.You won't get far with religious theories that rely on discounting major doctrinal points with extaneous theories that "must be true" that contradict them.

2 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Then you give me an explanation that both support "all" LDS doctrine and yet accounts for pre-adamite humans roaming the earth

I did. They were sentient beings that have a spirit different then that of ours even though they may be genetic ancestors. Their nature is currently unknown and has not been revealed. More consistent with LDS doctrine then your theory. Not necessarily true though, there are lots of other possibilities.

2 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Again my explanation is the logical explanation given LDS doctrine of no pre adamic spirits...it then logically must be concluded that these humans had no spirit... (but that opens up its own can of worms doesn't it)

So the logical theological explanation is the one that violates the theology in question?

I am not sure you know what the word 'logical' means........

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Might I also suggest a few changes to LDS Scriptures...just so everything sync's better with this new clarification of doctrine:  Instead of Moses reading thus: 5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew. For I, the Lord God, created all things, of which I have spoken, spiritually, before they were naturally upon the face of the earth. For I, the Lord God, had not caused it to rain upon the face of the earth. And I, the Lord God, had created all the children of men; and not yet a man to till the ground; for in heaven created I them; and there was not yet flesh upon the earth, neither in the water, neither in the air;

In light of the new doctrine on Evolution it should now read thus: 5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew. For I, the Lord God, created all things, of which I have spoken, spiritually, before they were naturally upon the face of the earth, Except those damned Pre-Adamites. For I, the Lord God, had not caused it to rain upon the face of the earth. And I, the Lord God, had created all the children of men, except the Pre-adamites; and not yet a man to till the ground, except those pre-adamite which tilled the ground without any authority to do so; for in heaven created I them, except the pre-adamites; and there was not yet flesh upon the earth, except the Pre-adamites, neither in the water, neither in the air;

We could use another break off sect and you seem like a good leader for one. Good luck!

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, bcuzbcuz said:

I recently watched a program from BBC about visiting Mecca during Hajj. All the grave sites around Mecca were destroyed during the reign of an early Saudi rule. In other words, the possibility of doing temple work for any of the people buried there is ZERO.

It is equally possible that early populations, not recorded in the biblical chronology, and without any physical evidence, are left without any possible signs of any genealogy. 

That means that millions of peoples in China, Mongolia, Peru, Mexico, northern Canada, etc., etc., are left without any possibility of family lines being established. In other words, no graves, no genealogy. It is as though they never existed............

The only people who get temple work, are those that belong to the modern concept of family lines, are those having graves marked with name and dates.  

That also means that any "people" who lived before Adam and Eve, are off the record.

Since your premises are false, naturally your conclusions are as well.  The LDS faith posits that all those humans which ever lived are still alive on the other side of the veil, and that their ordinances will all be performed by proper authority within the coming Millennium.  All of them will have the opportunity to accept or reject those vicarious ordinances.  The destruction of graves, while sad, is irrelevant.

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Jeanne said:

Wow Nehor..you are so above this. 

No, I am really not.  

I don't do this with many people but Johnnie Cake is a special case.

[Jeanne]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

No, I am really not.  

I don't do this with many people but Johnnie Cake is a special case.

Yes..he is a special case...he only gets a few posts a day to explain his case.

[mfbukowski]

4 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Since your premises are false, naturally your conclusions are as well.  The LDS faith posits that all those humans which ever lived are still alive on the other side of the veil, and that their ordinances will all be performed by proper authority within the coming Millennium.  All of them will have the opportunity to accept or reject those vicarious ordinances.  The destruction of graves, while sad, is irrelevant.

Yet another critic who has no clue about what we actually believe.

[thesometimesaint]

7 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yet it is precisely transmission theory (as I have mentioned to you before) which is favored by scientists like Neil deGrasse Tyson.  Naturally, the scientists are not claiming that Adam & Eve were transported to Earth in person or as embryos, and any good ANE scholar will calmly explain that the words Adam & Eve are archetypal, generic terms which do not apply to specific persons -- but are part of a ritual taking place in a garden-temple, which is just the sort of rite of passage which any Mormon regularly undergoes in an LDS temple (where he or she is specifically considered an Adam or Eve).  Liturgy is not to be confused with a science text.  That would be a category mistake.

I'm not convinced that Dr. Tyson is in favor of  the Panspermia Hypothesis. He does recognize it  is possible though.  There is a lot of if's in the hypothesis.

Adam mean's man and Eve means mother of all living. So it is problematic to suggest that simple carbon molecules are man

Anytime you must posit any God or Godlike force onto science to make it work it is no longer science, but it is religion.

Face it BY was simply wrong on this subject. I don't hold it against him. He was a great man who held the Church together when it was falling apart.

[Cold Steel]

Science says there's solid evidence to support the existence of humans twenty thousand years ago, yet there's no evidence that I know of of any written language existing more than five or six thousand years ago. If we could find ancient text with either dates or references to celestial events that we know existed ten-to-fifteen thousand years ago or older, it would be an additional burden on us. In fact, I believe it was Hugh Nibley who talked about how strange it is that we don't see the evolution of written language that we should if it had just started from scratch.

We know Adam was identified in the geneaologies as the "son of God" and that Brigham Young taught that Adam and Eve were brought to this earth from another world and that they were fully developed. Also, that they apparently had a developed written language by which they kept records. Whether they came here with that knowledge or had to develop it themselves, we don't know. They came here as adults with a spoken language which surpasses our own. When and where did they learn it and where did they learn their written language?

Quote

“Yea, verily I say unto you, in that day when the Lord shall come, he shall reveal all things—things which have passed, and hidden things which no man knew, things of the earth, by which it was made, and the purpose and the end thereof—things most precious, things that are above, and things that are beneath, things that are in the earth, and upon the earth, and in heaven.” (D&C 101:32-34)

I suppose we'll have to wait for more information from the vaulted heavens. In the meantime, my position must be the same as that of the church. I take no position on the question of organic evolution. Or UFOs. Or Bigfoot. 

 

[Scott Lloyd]

On 9/29/2016 at 4:32 PM, cinepro said:

Obviously the statement can (and will) be parsed to death; there is a lot that it doesn't say.  But compared to what the New Era was publishing just a few years ago on the subject, it's a big step forward to tell teenagers that...maybe evolution.

 

Now, that student could just say "The details of what happened on earth before Adam and Eve, including how their bodies were created, have not been revealed.  Maybe it was evolution?"

I don't see all that much difference.

In the earlier New Era piece, the question was not whether or not evolution is valid. The question was whether or not God exists. There has been no capitulation on that point.

[Scott Lloyd]

On 9/29/2016 at 4:32 PM, cinepro said:

Obviously the statement can (and will) be parsed to death; there is a lot that it doesn't say.  But compared to what the New Era was publishing just a few years ago on the subject, it's a big step forward to tell teenagers that...maybe evolution.

 

Now, that student could just say "The details of what happened on earth before Adam and Eve, including how their bodies were created, have not been revealed.  Maybe it was evolution?"

I don't see all that much difference.

In the earlier New Era piece, the question was not whether or not evolution is valid. The question was whether or not God exists. There has been no capitulation on that point.

[thesometimesaint]

I don't have a problem with God using the science of Evolution in the Creation of us and our universe.

[Johnnie Cake]

21 hours ago, The Nehor said:

We could use another break off sect and you seem like a good leader for one. Good luck!

Religion is in my rear view mirror

[bcuzbcuz]

22 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Since your premises are false, naturally your conclusions are as well.  The LDS faith posits that all those humans which ever lived are still alive on the other side of the veil, and that their ordinances will all be performed by proper authority within the coming Millennium.  All of them will have the opportunity to accept or reject those vicarious ordinances.  The destruction of graves, while sad, is irrelevant.

-A nice thought but completely devoid of material confiirmation. It doesn´t matter if  those  who once lived, are still alive on the other side...waiting. Just how are their names communicated to us without any written records. The church would need contact through the veil, big time.

So far, I have never heard of any detailed description of how stats from lost generations are conveyed across the live-death barrier.

Edited October 1, 2016 by bcuzbcuz

[Robert F. Smith]

15 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

I'm not convinced that Dr. Tyson is in favor of  the Panspermia Hypothesis. He does recognize it  is possible though.  There is a lot of if's in the hypothesis.

You speak without knowledge, sometimes.  On his views on humans, panspermia, and intelligent alien life in universe, see http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x2a6cnm_cosmos-a-space-time-odyssey-season-01-episode-11_school   (segment of Cosmic Quandaries at St Petersburg College), and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAD25s53wmE

 (March 26, 2009, Cosmic Quandaries).

Tyson also spoke specifically of porous rock with microbes embedded (panspermia) as means of life moving from planet to planet, as well as star system to star system in Tyson’s “The Immortals” episode 11 of Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey (2014), online at http://www.hulu.com/watch/636513 .  See at 8:14.
–he provides the striking example of the Martian rock which hit the Egyptian village of Nakhla about a century ago.

In 2013, [Steven] Benner said during a talk at the Goldschmidt conference for geochemists that Mars might have been a better place for life to begin than Earth.  That’s because ancient Martian meteorites contain more boron and molybdenum — important precursors to the formation of RNA — than early Earth.  Moreover, Christopher Adcock and Elizabeth Hausrath, both researchers at the University of Nevada in 2013, discovered that phosphates — another important chemical in the formation of RNA, DNA, and essential proteins — in Martian meteorites are more water-soluble than those on early Earth.  And since life is suspected to have begun in the presence of water, their research suggests that Mars could have formed life more readily than Earth.  http://finance.yahoo.com/news/sending-humans-mars-could-uncover-221602109.html .
 

15 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

Adam mean's man and Eve means mother of all living. So it is problematic to suggest that simple carbon molecules are man

Yes, as I said to you, they are generic, archetypal Hebrew terms, but you speak nonsense when you say they are not carbon-based lifeforms.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon-based_life .

15 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

Anytime you must posit any God or Godlike force onto science to make it work it is no longer science, but it is religion.

Again, you speak without knowledge:  Carl Sagan, Richard Dawkins, and other scientists have had no problem with "godlike" beings as simply advanced aliens.  You need to spend more time reading science.  http://spectator.org/archives/2011/11/08/extraterrestrial-intelligence .

15 hours ago, thesometimesaint said:

Face it BY was simply wrong on this subject. I don't hold it against him. He was a great man who held the Church together when it was falling apart.

Again, you are wrong, and you need to read what Young and his successors had to say.

[Robert F. Smith]

3 minutes ago, bcuzbcuz said:

-A nice thought but completely devoid of material confiirmation. It doesn´t matter if the those  who once lived, ares till alive on the other side...waiting. Just how are their names communicated to us without and written records. The church would need contact through the veil, big time.

So far I have never heard of any detailed description of how stats from lost generations are conveyed across the live-death barrier.

"O ye of little faith," is what the Savior would say to you.  You are being disingenuous.  For those who posit prophecy and the power of the Holy Spirit, there is naturally no impermeable barrier.