I don't believe in Evolution because No Death before the Fall is in the scriptures

[SamuelTheLamanite]

2 hours ago, Freedom said:

Are you of the opinion that everything said at general conference is doctrine or do you only accept those opinions that align with your own dogma?

Everything taught repeatedly in Conference is doctrine. Imagine your job, if you make the same mistake many times you could get fired. Do you think God allows the same false teaching to be repeated many times in conference? Do you believe our prophets can tell the difference between their own ideas and revelation?

Edited September 3, 2017 by SamuelTheLamanite

[SamuelTheLamanite]

2 hours ago, Freedom said:

So you believe in a god that would trick us into believing falsehoods.

Abraham believed he was going to kill his son. Zion camp believed they were going to go to battle, some got very upset when they learned there was not going to be a battle.  God is simply testing us.

Edited September 3, 2017 by SamuelTheLamanite

[SamuelTheLamanite]

2 hours ago, Freedom said:

The bible may have been written for us but not to us. The creation stories made perfect sense to the original audience, and they make perfect sense to those who read it in the cultural context of the original audience. If I were to say "I am so hungry I could eat a horse" I am expressing a literal hunger using figurative language. Someone 3000 years from how reading this may think that I was claiming I could actually eat a horse, not being familiar with the figure of speech. 

Okay, bu t our church is still teaching the same thing "the Fall of Adam brought physical death into the world (see Moses 6:48). " I doubt the Gospel Topics was not to us. Did ancient Jews didn't take Genesis literally?

[SamuelTheLamanite]

19 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Satan tempted Jesus during his 40-day fast in the wilderness.  That's what he does as the Father of All Lies, and you merely further this program by suggesting that the Times & Seasons, Journal of Discourses, Improvement Era, Ensign, and lds.org are controlled by him.  That is certainly what the anti-Mormon evangelicals believe.  The question is why do you believe that?  Why don't you accept Moroni 7:11-14?

I said lds.org?  I do accept Moroni 7:11. The church doesn't accept some teachings in the Journal of Discourses, such as Adam God. The church is skeptical of Journal of Discourses

"Questions have been raised about the accuracy of some transcriptions. Modern technology and processes were not available for verifying the accuracy of transcriptions, and some significant mistakes have been documented. The Journal of Discourses includes interesting and insightful teachings by early Church leaders; however, by itself it is not an authoritative source of Church doctrine"

Please tell me why it is not possible that Satan made some changes? Do you believe he made changes to the 116 pages?

19 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

You are confused because you slept through high school English -- where you should have learned how to read carefully, and not to personify an organization.  A church does not explain, people explain.

The church is the kingdom of God on earth

Edited September 3, 2017 by SamuelTheLamanite

[Robert F. Smith]

19 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

I said lds.org?  I do accept Moroni 7:11. The church doesn't accept some teachings in the Journal of Discourses, such as Adam God. The church is skeptical of Journal of Discourses

"Questions have been raised about the accuracy of some transcriptions. Modern technology and processes were not available for verifying the accuracy of transcriptions, and some significant mistakes have been documented. The Journal of Discourses includes interesting and insightful teachings by early Church leaders; however, by itself it is not an authoritative source of Church doctrine"

Once again, an elementary English lesson, Sam:  No church or other organization is "skeptical" about anything.  Only people can be skeptical, and people are certainly entitled to their opinions.   The Journal of Discourse was compiled from verbatim transcripts of professional short-hand secretaries.  You are probably too young to recall that at one time shorthand was coin of the realm in all areas of American life, including courts of law.  Official transcripts were not subject to question.  Teachings carried in any magazine or journal from any era are subject to review and question, and lds.org and the rest are as subject to review as any source.  You didn't need to say "lds.org," but you might as well have since your absurd claims include that by implication.  You need to think carefully about your reckless speculations, and about what they imply

19 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Please tell me why it is not possible that Satan made some changes? Do you believe he made changes to the 116 pages?

.............................................................

Satan does not have carte blanche.  Satan can only do what he is permitted to do by God.  See my “Śaṭan: Notes on the Gods,” 2012 (version 2), online at https://www.scribd.com/doc/58985133/Satan-Notes-on-the-Gods .  Humans can of course do all kinds of nefarious things of their own free will and choice.

[Freedom]

1 hour ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Abraham believed he was going to kill his son. Zion camp believed they were going to go to battle, some got very upset when they learned there was not going to be a battle.  God is simply testing us.

These examples are not related. These are  command to accomplish something that God revoked. It was not a trick. 

[Freedom]

1 hour ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Okay, bu t our church is still teaching the same thing "the Fall of Adam brought physical death into the world (see Moses 6:48). " I doubt the Gospel Topics was not to us. Did ancient Jews didn't take Genesis literally?

The ancient jews did take Genesis literally. You are confusing literal with concrete. In my example, the horse is a figurative representation of my literal hunger. Genesis is literal, but you are missing the meaning of the abstraction. You need to study ancient hebrew to understand what the images represent. Yes, the fall brought death, but the atonement brought life. If there was no death before the fall, there should be no death after the atonement in order to consider your argument. 

Here are some of my thoughts on the matter:

http://grantsrants.ca/what-is-genesis-1-talking-about/

 

[SamuelTheLamanite]

23 minutes ago, Freedom said:

These examples are not related. These are  command to accomplish something that God revoked. It was not a trick. 

It is not a trick, but God made them believe

19 minutes ago, Freedom said:

The ancient jews did take Genesis literally. You are confusing literal with concrete. In my example, the horse is a figurative representation of my literal hunger.

So Jews took the teachings in Genesis as a figurative representation?

20 minutes ago, Freedom said:

Yes, the fall brought death, but the atonement brought life. If there was no death before the fall, there should be no death after the atonement in order to consider your argument.

Yes, and the church today talks about no death in the world. Gospel Topics are not ancient writings

[SamuelTheLamanite]

54 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Once again, an elementary English lesson, Sam:  No church or other organization is "skeptical" about anything.  Only people can be skeptical, and people are certainly entitled to their opinions.  

Is Mormon Newsroom making the same mistake "The Church teaches its members"

58 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

  The Journal of Discourse was compiled from verbatim transcripts of professional short-hand secretaries.  You are probably too young to recall that at one time shorthand was coin of the realm in all areas of American life, including courts of law.  Official transcripts were not subject to question.  Teachings carried in any magazine or journal from any era are subject to review and question, and lds.org and the rest are as subject to review as any source.  You didn't need to say "lds.org," but you might as well have since your absurd claims include that by implication.  You need to think carefully about your reckless speculations, and about what they imply

Do the brethren question the Book of Mormon? or the D&C?

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Satan does not have carte blanche.  Satan can only do what he is permitted to do by God.

Didn't God allow Satan to make changes to the 116 pages?

[SamuelTheLamanite]

29 minutes ago, Freedom said:

The ancient jews did take Genesis literally.

One question. If both God and Satan made serpents in Exodus 7, it probably means God didn't need evolution for creation. Why would God need Evolution?

Edited September 3, 2017 by SamuelTheLamanite

[Bobbieaware]

50 minutes ago, Freedom said:

The ancient jews did take Genesis literally. You are confusing literal with concrete. In my example, the horse is a figurative representation of my literal hunger. Genesis is literal, but you are missing the meaning of the abstraction. You need to study ancient hebrew to understand what the images represent. Yes, the fall brought death, but the atonement brought life. If there was no death before the fall, there should be no death after the atonement in order to consider your argument. 

Here are some of my thoughts on the matter:

http://grantsrants.ca/what-is-genesis-1-talking-about/

 

The Book of Mormon prophet Alma makes it clear the reason why the entire human race didn't become immortal immediately after the atoning sacrifice is because if that had occurred the purposes of God in bringing about the salvation of man would have been completely frustrated. The blessing of gaining an immortal body without first being given sufficient opportunity to live the gospel of repentance so as to learn how to become like God would be no blessing at all. So if according to your understanding there was death prior to  the fall, what purposes did that pre-fall phase of mortality serve? Was the pre-fall state of mortality also a probationary period of repentance? If so, what, if anything, was different about the pre-fall phase of mortality from the current post-fall period of mortality?

Edited September 3, 2017 by Bobbieaware

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Is Mormon Newsroom making the same mistake "The Church teaches its members"

A church does not teach anyone anything.  People teach people.  Start using names of people and quoting the claims they make.  That's what responsible people do.

1 hour ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Do the brethren question the Book of Mormon? or the D&C?

You tell me.  Give me a quotation.

1 hour ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Didn't God allow Satan to make changes to the 116 pages?

You tell me.  Give me a quotation.  God allowed Satan to put Job through the ringer as a test of  his faith.

[Freedom]

1 hour ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

One question. If both God and Satan made serpents in Exodus 7, it probably means God didn't need evolution for creation. Why would God need Evolution?

non sequitur. I don't need my children to clean their room but I have them do it anyway. God does not need evolution, but the evidence clearly shows it is the method he choose to use, and the fact that evolution is a fact has no bearing on our eternal salvation. 

[Freedom]

1 hour ago, Bobbieaware said:

The Book of Mormon prophet Alma makes it clear the reason why the entire human race didn't become immortal immediately after the atoning sacrifice is because if that had occurred the purposes of God in bringing about the salvation of man would have been completely frustrated. The blessing of gaining an immortal body without first being given sufficient opportunity to live the gospel of repentance so as to learn how to become like God would be no blessing at all. So if according to your understanding there was death prior to  the fall, what purposes did that pre-fall phase of mortality serve? Was the pre-fall state of mortality also a probationary period of repentance? If so, what, if anything, was different about the pre-fall phase of mortality from the current post-fall period of mortality?

The scriptures begin with Adam.  Prior to adam there is no written record so all we can is speculate but the scientific data would suggest that the prefall state lead up to Adam the man who was capable of making a covenant with God. He was then placed into the garden and this is where the story as far as we are concerned begins. The event before adam hold no bearing on our salvation. The point of the creation story is to teach us that god makes covenants. It is the temple ceremony plain and simple. 

[Bobbieaware]

6 hours ago, Freedom said:

The scriptures begin with Adam.  Prior to adam there is no written record so all we can is speculate but the scientific data would suggest that the prefall state lead up to Adam the man who was capable of making a covenant with God. He was then placed into the garden and this is where the story as far as we are concerned begins. The event before adam hold no bearing on our salvation. The point of the creation story is to teach us that god makes covenants. It is the temple ceremony plain and simple. 

Two questions:

1) Do you believe that if Adam and Eve had not transgressed God's commandment they would have never suffered physical death but would have remained without death in the garden to this day? 

2) Do you believe all living things in the garden of Eden were immortal?

[Bobbieaware]

7 hours ago, Freedom said:

non sequitur. I don't need my children to clean their room but I have them do it anyway. God does not need evolution, but the evidence clearly shows it is the method he choose to use, and the fact that evolution is a fact has no bearing on our eternal salvation. 

I've watched real-life murder mysteries on TV and there have been episodes where a veritable mountain of compelling physical and circumstantial evidence, including a very believable video recording of a confession of guilt by the individual charged with murder, so powerfully damns a man that the jury comes down with a guilty verdict after only a few minutes of proforma deliberation. Everybody including the police investigators, the prosecutors, the judge, the jury, the public and even the family members and friends of the convicted were supremely convinced of the man's guilt. And then years later DNA evidence clears the convicted individual, resulting in his exoneration and release, followed by the long-delayed conviction of the actual perpetrator of the crime who admits to the whole thing. There are even cases where the original mountain of "evidence" is so great that the law enforcement officials and prosecutors stubbornly continue to believe the exonerated man is guilty as sin even though the new exculpatory evidence clearly refutes that belief.

There is no human being alive today who can travel back into the distant past to actually see with their own eyes how the human race came to be, but an alleged mountain of irrefutable evidence convinces many that the human race is the end-product of billions of years of organic evolution. 

Did you ever stop to think that fossil record, however compelling it might now seem, might actually be pointing to something that has not yeti even entered into the minds of those who are convinced that Darwin was correct? Even though the evidence might seem to compellingly point to one scenario, what if those who believe in organic evolution are one day flabbergasted and horrified to learn that something they were so very sure of turns out not to be true?  What if the evidence that so convinced them points to some other creative phenomenon in the mysterious economy of God?

Personally, I am keeping an open mind on the subject because the Lord promises us the day will come when he reveals exactly how he created all things. And among those things he will reveal will be many "HIDDEN THINGS WHICH NO MAN KNEW." Until that blessed millennial day of the heavenly revelation of all things arrives , I will reserve judgement. You seem to be comfortable jumping to conclusions based on the doctrines of modern science, butI am not. The instantaneous resurrection into glorious immortality of billions upon billions of human beings, whose bodies are now nothing but scattered dust, clearly reveals that God is able to do a great deal of his wondrous creative work in a very brief period of time, in the exact manner the proponents of organic evolution say can't happen. The miraculous resurrection alone puts our present understanding of natural law at defiance with the revelations of God. I am at peace waiting on the Lord...

32  Yea, verily I say unto you, in that day when the Lord shall come, he shall reveal all things--

33 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- 

34 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)

"We have the fulness of the everlasting gospel, meaning that we have all that is needed to gain the fulness of salvation. We have every truth, doctrine, and principle, every rite, power, and ordinance--all that is needed--to gain exaltation in the highest heaven of the celestial world. But we do not know all things; there are doctrines in endless array of which we know next to nothing; indeed, there are more things in the darkness of the unknown than there are in the light of the known. We do not even know what the faithful knew in Enoch's Zion, nor among the Nephites when they dwelt in righteousness for generations. We do not know what is on the sealed portion of the plates from which the Book of Mormon came. Ours is a day for drinking milk; the day when we, as a people at least, can partake of the meat of the word is in the future.

That future is millennial. In that day, "all things shall become new," saith the Lord, "that my knowledge and glory may dwell upon all the earth. . . . 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 101:25, 32-34.) As we ponder these heaven-sent words, we are led to exclaim: Thanks be to him who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, who knows all things and who seeks to pour out his revelations, and all the knowledge of eternity, upon all who will receive them. Ere long the dark veil of ignorance and unbelief that covers the earth and blinds the minds of men shall be pierced. Light and truth will fall from heaven as does rain from the clouds above. (Bruce R McConkie)

 

Edited September 3, 2017 by Bobbieaware

[thesometimesaint]

The trouble with that argument is that  you weren't there either so we must look at the evidence available. The evidence for a very old earth is overwhelming even after 200 years of being tried to disproved.

SEE

Don't be so open minded your brain falls out.

Edited September 3, 2017 by thesometimesaint

[Bobbieaware]

32 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

The trouble with that argument is that  you weren't there either so we must look at the evidence available. The evidence for a very old earth is overwhelming even after 200 years of being tried to disproved.

SEE

Don't be so open minded your brain falls out.

When a great many  verses of scripture dispersed all throughout the standard works testify there was no deaths prior to the fall and that Adam and Eve would have remained immortal as long as they obeyed God's law, I hope you will forgive me if as a faithful Latter-Day Saint I choose to ere on the side of the word of God and not on the side of the tentative findings of a school of thought mostly dominated by hardcore atheists. When, as promised in D&C 101, the Lord reveals all those things pertaining to the creation that no man now knows, I will come down off the fence. 

Edited September 3, 2017 by Bobbieaware

[thesometimesaint]

You are entitled to believe anything you want. I'm just as faithful of LDS as you are, and maybe more so. So God can't revel things to scientists? Strange world you live in using the worlds most advanced scientific device ever made, and claiming that God can't inspire us to make it.

Is Pi the whole numeral 3?

 

[Bobbieaware]

1 hour ago, thesometimesaint said:

You are entitled to believe anything you want. I'm just as faithful of LDS as you are, and maybe more so. So God can't revel things to scientists? Strange world you live in using the worlds most advanced scientific device ever made, and claiming that God can't inspire us to make it.

Is Pi the whole numeral 3?

 

You seem to be finding it difficult to understand why a member of the Church would trust the words of the prophets of God more than the every shifting views of non-member scientists, most of whom don't even believe in God. I'm confident that somehow and someway the words of the prophets with regard to the creation and fall will be vindicated and proven fully true. However the apparent discrepancies between the scriptures and the theories of present-day science are going to be resolved I do not know, but what I do know is that the Lord has declared there are now many things pertaining to the creation that are not yet known by mankind because in his infinite wisdom they are deliberately being withheld from our view. When the millennium arrives and the Lord finally reveals these now hidden mysteries pertaining to the creation, I will finally come down off the fence . Sorrry.

Edited September 3, 2017 by Bobbieaware

[thesometimesaint]

I don't have any trouble understanding it. I just find it nonsense to posit any God or Godlike force onto science. God is a non falsifiable proposition in science. That doesn't mean God doesn't exist just that science doesn't have the tools to prove it one way or the other. That is an argument from ignorance. Sure there is plenty we don't know. Our knowledge is but the tiniest of thimbles in the vast oceans of our ignorance. That being said what we do know we do know. It doesn't matter if an Atheist or Theists states a fact, it is still a fact.

SEE

 

[SamuelTheLamanite]

13 hours ago, Freedom said:

non sequitur. I don't need my children to clean their room but I have them do it anyway. God does not need evolution, but the evidence clearly shows it is the method he choose to use, and the fact that evolution is a fact has no bearing on our eternal salvation. 

Yes the evidence clearly shows, I believe God made it look that way.  It God didn't have to use Evolution it means he probably didn't, and was simpler for him not to use it. 

Let me ask you something else. If God used 3 billion years of death and evolution to create humans, does that mean the Resurrection is going to take another 3 billion years to happen? Why doesn't God need millions of years for the Resurrection?  

20 hours ago, Freedom said:

So you believe in a god that would trick us into believing falsehoods. He would intentionally confuse us. To what end may I ask? Are you of the opinion that everything said at general conference is doctrine or do you only accept those opinions that align with your own dogma?

And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie - Thessalonians 2:11

Even Mormon intellectuals believe in "divinely approved deception" 

https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Question:_Why_would_God_tell_Abraham_to_lie_about_his_wife_Sarah%3F

13 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

You tell me.  Give me a quotation.  God allowed Satan to put Job through the ringer as a test of  his faith.

How do you explain Jeremiah 4:10, Jeremiah 20:7, Ezekiel 14:9, 2 Thessalonians 2:11? Abraham 2:24? 

[SamuelTheLamanite]

33 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

I don't have any trouble understanding it. I just find it nonsense to posit any God or Godlike force onto science. God is a non falsifiable proposition in science.

Evolution as universities teach it is a blind watchmaker, please tell us how God used it. How do you explain Jeremiah 4:10, Jeremiah 20:7, Ezekiel 14:9, 2 Thessalonians 2:11, Abraham 2:24?

[thesometimesaint]

A God of deceptions is no different than the Devils. In fact that makes God worse, he should know better.

[thesometimesaint]

2 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Evolution as universities teach it is a blind watchmaker, please tell us how God used it. How do you explain Jeremiah 4:10, Jeremiah 20:7, Ezekiel 14:9, 2 Thessalonians 2:11, Abraham 2:24?

Either blind or sighted Evolution works.