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

[SamuelTheLamanite]

4 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

 What happens at Conference time is that various speakers provide us with food for thought.  Their remarks may be inspired or not, and we can only tell that via the testimony to us of the Holy Spirit.  

Our leaders teach that sometimes a testimony can take time, even years. If you don't have a testimony of No Death yet it doesn't mean you will never have it. 

47 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I imagine that this has been the general conclusion at every conference since the first  one in 1830.  That is not the same as saying that your separate conclusions about evolution are supported in any way, or that everything said by the Brethren is inspired.

So when is a teaching inspired? I quoted three conferences for No Death. If No Death isn't inspired how can we know the Flood, the tower of Babylon, Jonah and the Fish, historical book of Mormon,  Adam the first human,  and many others teachings are inspired?  If No Death isn't inspired then our general conferences may be full of mistakes.  I understand mistakes can and do happen, but the same mistake three or more times?  

Please tell me your method of knowing truth 

Edited August 28, 2017 by SamuelTheLamanite

[Robert F. Smith]

9 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

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

Wait for revelation. Nothing in General Conference, scriptures, and church manuals points to an old earth with millions of years of evolution. 

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

Manuals do point to a very different scenario than the one you are purveying:

http://institute.lds.org/manuals/doctrine-and-covenants-institute-student-manual/dc-in-071-77.asp ,

Quote

D&C 77:6–7 . Why Was the Book Sealed That John Saw?

 “‘The book which John saw’ represented the real history of the world—what the eye of God has seen, what the recording angel has written; and the seven thousand years, corresponding to the seven seals of the Apocalyptic volume, are as seven great days during which Mother Earth will fulfill her mortal mission, laboring six days and resting upon the seventh, her period of sanctification. These seven days do not include the period of our planet’s creation and preparation as a dwelling place for man. They are limited to Earth’s ‘temporal existence,’ that is, to Time, considered as distinct from Eternity.” (Orson F. Whitney, Saturday Night Thoughts, 11)

http://institute.lds.org/manuals/old-testament-institute-student-manual-1/ot-in1-02-gen-a-2.asp ,

Quote

How Old Is the Earth?

 While it is interesting to note these various theories, officially the Church has not taken a stand on the age of the earth. For reasons best known to Himself, the Lord has not yet seen fit to formally reveal the details of the Creation. Therefore, while Latter-day Saints are commanded to learn truth from many different fields of study (see D&C 88:77–79 ), an attempt to establish any theory as the official position of the Church is not justifiable.

Indeed, in the official LDS Church magazine, Joseph Smith Jr (as quoted by William W. Phelps) said:

Quote

"Well, now, Brother William, when the house of Israel begin to come into the glorious mysteries of the kingdom, and find... that eternity, agreeably to the records found in the catacombs of Egypt, has been going on in this system, almost two thousand five hundred and fifty five millions of years [2.55 BILLION YEARS]: and to know at the same time, that... geologists and others are trying to prove that matter must have existed hundreds of thousands of years;.. see and know as we are seen and known!" Times and Seasons, 5:758 (Dec 25, 1844)

 

Edited August 28, 2017 by Robert F. Smith

[Robert F. Smith]

29 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

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

So when is a teaching inspired? I quoted three conferences for No Death. If No Death isn't inspired how can we know the Flood, the tower of Babylon, Jonah and the Fish, historical book of Mormon,  Adam the first human,  and many others teachings are inspired?  If No Death isn't inspired then our general conferences may be full of mistakes.  I understand mistakes can and do happen, but the same mistake three or more times?  

Please tell me your method of knowing truth 

It isn't my method.  It is the only foolproof method recommended by the Lord (Matt 16:17):  The personal witness of the Holy Spirit.  Moroni recommends that method as well (Moroni 10:5).  So did Brother Brigham:

Quote

I am more afraid that this people have so much confidence in their leaders that they will not inquire for themselves of God whether they are led by Him. I am fearful they settle down in a state of blind self-security, trusting their eternal destiny in the hands of their leaders with a reckless confidence that in itself would thwart the purposes of God in their salvation, and weaken that influence they could give to their leaders, did they know for themselves, by the revelations of Jesus, that they are led in the right way. Let every man and woman know, by the whispering of the Spirit of God to themselves, whether their leaders are walking in the path the Lord dictates, or not. This has been my exhortation continually.  B. Young, JD 9:150  (Jan 12, 1862)

 

[Robert F. Smith]

3 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Here is another General Conference "I understand from a statement in the book of Moses, which was made by Enoch, that there was no death in the world before Adam (Moses 6:48; see also 2 Ne. 2:22)." Marion G. Romney, Conference Report, April 1953, pp. 122-126 

In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established, I find it hard to believe No Death wasn't inspired by God. 

I thought that you were talking evolution . . .

[katherine the great]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Sounds logical and convincing on the face of it, which is why all the museums have an illustration of the simian to man sequence -- first one I saw was at Griffith Park Observatory when I was a kid back in the 50s.  Later, during paleontology class, the books by Louis Leakey and Desmond Morris were quite convincing and reinforced my acceptance of that sequence.  The sequence and terminology have gotten more complicated since my teacher, Ofer Bar-Yosef, taught that class and led us in a major paleolithic excavation in the Great Rift Valley.

We can infer a great deal from DNA and skeletal remains, as you suggest, but I have yet to see the pierce de resistance.

I'm not sure there is a single smoking gun--I think its more a huge body of evidence. Although for me, human chromosome 2 left no doubt in my mind that we share ancestry with chimpanzees.

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

Would you provide the title to the book you reference here?

Thanks,

-Smac

I think that Bob is referring to B. H. Roberts, The Way, The Truth, and the Life, edited by John W. Welch (Provo: BYU Studies, 1994).

[katherine the great]

1 hour ago, RevTestament said:

Who knows how many planets He has in the cooker at one time...as new ones are needed they are just taken off the assembly line so to speak...Yeah, that's it.  God is the Henry Ford of the universe....

Except Henry Ford was a jerk.

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, carbon dioxide said:

I really don't know what to think about evolution other than to say is if it takes God a billion years to put a human being on the earth, that seems to be a very slow and not an efficient process of creation.  If I become a God, I am going to seek faster ways to do this.  I am not going to wait millions of years for some biological process to get its act together and do what I want it to do.

You may not have much choice when it comes to natural law.  God doesn't necessarily just say "poof" or "shazam."  He and his concourses of assistants may work with matter and energy for eons before their work is complete.  When you have eternity, there is no need to hurry.

Edited August 28, 2017 by Robert F. Smith

[RevTestament]

12 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

Except Henry Ford was a jerk.

Well, I didn't know Henry Ford personally - I imagine God is nicer.

[Robert F. Smith]

7 hours ago, CV75 said:

Of course there was no death before the Fall.

But let's say with the Fall (the abandonment of a terrestrial law), Adam’s dominion had to be transitioned into, or re-created, according to a telestial law. Just as the pre-mortal spirit realm served as a template for Eden, Eden served as a template for the rest to come, including Earth which is a template for things to come.

Let’s say the transition wasn’t accomplished by evolution as we understand it scientifically. But once things were ready after some 14 billion years (or 4.5 billion years, however you want to look at it) Adam was given his reckoning according to his now-telesial dominion, in other words the 7,000 years of this telestial world’s continuance or temporal existence. The Lord gave him this in the first dispensation some 6,000 years ago, as the scriptures attest. Nature took her time up to that point, as the cosmic and geological records attest.

Yes, that reminds me of Rivers approach on this board about six years ago: 

Quote

On 12/30/2011 at 11:22 AM, Rivers said:

I have a theory about this. If it is true that the entire world was in a edenic state (no death) before the fall, I think there must have been death during the creative period before the earth was placed in a edenic state. This theory came to me while i was going through a session at the Salt Lake temple where it is more plainly conveyed that the world goes through different phases of existence.

The phases of the earth are creation, eden, telestial. terrestrial, and celestial. I think that dinosaurs must have existed during the creation phase in which the earth was being prepared.

D&C 77 seems to be saying that the age of the earth is seven thousand years since the Fall, I am uncomfortable with this idea because this leads to us having a ballpark guess of when the second coming will take place. I'm partial to the idea that the seven thousand years mentioned in D&C 77 are more symbolic than literal.  http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/56586-is-the-earth-only-7000-years-old/  .

 

Edited August 28, 2017 by Robert F. Smith

[ttribe]

1 hour ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Our leaders teach that sometimes a testimony can take time, even years. If you don't have a testimony of No Death yet it doesn't mean you will never have it. 

So when is a teaching inspired? I quoted three conferences for No Death. If No Death isn't inspired how can we know the Flood, the tower of Babylon, Jonah and the Fish, historical book of Mormon,  Adam the first human,  and many others teachings are inspired?  If No Death isn't inspired then our general conferences may be full of mistakes.  I understand mistakes can and do happen, but the same mistake three or more times?  

Please tell me your method of knowing truth 

So, do you go with an all-or-nothing approach?

[Robert F. Smith]

37 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

I'm not sure there is a single smoking gun--I think its more a huge body of evidence. Although for me, human chromosome 2 left no doubt in my mind that we share ancestry with chimpanzees.

Yeh, we share a lot with chimps, as I point out in my “A Comparison of Human & Chimpanzee Behavior,” 2013, online at http://www.scribd.com/doc/154253285/Chimpanzee-Human-Behavior .  The chimps are a case of arrested development.

[katherine the great]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yeh, we share a lot with chimps, as I point out in my “A Comparison of Human & Chimpanzee Behavior,” 2013, online at http://www.scribd.com/doc/154253285/Chimpanzee-Human-Behavior .  The chimps are a case of arrested development.

Nice lit review! Was that written for a class? I was a bit confused though about the claim of concealed estrus in bonobos. Bonobo estrus is as pink and puffy as chimpanzee estrus (although they are receptive to contact pretty much always). I  had an opportunity to observe them a couple years back and was quite, ahem, fascinated by their behavior. 

[SamuelTheLamanite]

4 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Manuals do point to a very different scenario than the one you are purveying:

Doesn't say anything about an Old Earth with millions of years of death and evolution. 

4 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

I thought that you were talking evolution . . .

The theory of evolution requires death for millions of years. 

[SamuelTheLamanite]

4 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

It isn't my method.  It is the only foolproof method recommended by the Lord (Matt 16:17):  The personal witness of the Holy Spirit.  Moroni recommends that method as well (Moroni 10:5).  So did Brother Brigham:

Yes, I like that. I invite you to pray about it. You may not get the answer quickly because revelation sometimes takes time.  

2 Corinthians 13:1 

Edited August 28, 2017 by SamuelTheLamanite

[Robert F. Smith]

35 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Yes, I like that. I invite you to pray about it. You may not get the answer quickly because revelation sometimes takes time.  

2 Corinthians 13:1 

Sola Scriptura?  How very evangelical fundamentalist.

[Robert F. Smith]

41 minutes ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

Doesn't say anything about an Old Earth with millions of years of death and evolution. 

The theory of evolution requires death for millions of years. 

You need to read more carefully.  You completely misunderstood those manuals and LDS theology.

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, katherine the great said:

Nice lit review! Was that written for a class? I was a bit confused though about the claim of concealed estrus in bonobos. Bonobo estrus is as pink and puffy as chimpanzee estrus (although they are receptive to contact pretty much always). I  had an opportunity to observe them a couple years back and was quite, ahem, fascinated by their behavior. 

Yes, for a UCLA anthropology class.  Got an A.   I updated the paper in 2013.  Have never had a chance to observe Bonobos  Guess I was misinformed on estrus.

[CV75]

10 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Yes, that reminds me of Rivers approach on this board about six years ago:

I think what I’m saying is different in that I’m describing an alternative order as follows: the terrestrial Creation (no death, entailing a terrestrial transmission such as you described), the paradisaical Eden assembled using transmitted terrestrial planetary components and inhabited by transmitted life forms (no death), and the Fall (introducing death along with the other natural, telestial laws), which entailed the subsequent transition into a telestial Cosmos and/or Earth through a lengthy telestial creation process such as interpreted from the cosmological and geological evidence.

In other words, the transition into the Fall required the destruction of the terrestrial Creation  and its reformation following lesser laws. Eden was suficiently preserved as Adam's home base -- wherever that was -- until things were ready for him and Eve to exit and pick up leadership for mortal humanity. They've been stewarding this dominion for billions of years, 930 of them as a telestial man.

[CV75]

13 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

My point is that God made it appear that he wanted Abraham to kill his son. That was the Abraham's first impression. 

But that is not relevant. A more accurate comparison would be that the Egyptian priests believed in human sacrifice, and so Abraham went along with it when God commanded it. But his religion and his spiritual experience was not so structured, and false belief was not the reason Abraham obeyed.

We have no corresponding appearance that God wants us to believe in evolution, and there are no revelations to do so. We have scientists who believe in it and for this reason so many saints do, and God hasn't commanded one way or another. He has inspired His servants to teach that it can certainly be a dangerous doctrine in the wrong hands and when wicked assumptions and beliefs are attached to it, but that goes for the Atonement of Christ as well (note the Egyptian priests). We are counseled not to obey or follow false beliefs, or blindly obey and follow any belief.

[Bob Crockett]

14 hours ago, smac97 said:

Would you provide the title to the book you reference here?

Thanks,

-Smac

I wish I could.  When I turned 60 I boxed up all my church books, deciding I needed to focus on something else.  Maybe I'll find it in the next few days.

[Bob Crockett]

13 hours ago, katherine the great said:

Fruit flies have a very short life cycle so we can observe many generations of the full life cycle in a very short amount of time. Evolution happens within populations, not individuals. So we start with a parent population and analyze their DNA (or, in the old days, looked at their physical traits). The population is separated into different groups and put into different environments and observed and tested generation after generation. One environmental change has to do with diet and these experiments have resulted in reproductive isolates and breeding incompatibility. These have been show to occur on the genetic level and the behavioral level (they no longer find each other attractive enough to mate).

Again, I don't have a clue, but it seems to me that one good argument against evolution is that breeding "lockout" has never been observed.  I suppose that what you are saying is that from one generation to the next, there may be interbreeding but the selection process is still underway and at some point, a 367th cousin cannot mate with another.

[snowflake]

14 hours ago, katherine the great said:

Fruit flies have a very short life cycle so we can observe many generations of the full life cycle in a very short amount of time. Evolution happens within populations, not individuals. So we start with a parent population and analyze their DNA (or, in the old days, looked at their physical traits). The population is separated into different groups and put into different environments and observed and tested generation after generation. One environmental change has to do with diet and these experiments have resulted in reproductive isolates and breeding incompatibility. These have been show to occur on the genetic level and the behavioral level (they no longer find each other attractive enough to mate).

What's your take on the "Cambrian Explosion", where all of the major structural and differing species seem to appear out of nothing very rapidly without a common ancestor. The mechanisms (natural selection and genetic mutation) seem woefully inadequate to explain this specific event.  

[clarkgoble]

2 hours ago, Bob Crockett said:

Again, I don't have a clue, but it seems to me that one good argument against evolution is that breeding "lockout" has never been observed.  I suppose that what you are saying is that from one generation to the next, there may be interbreeding but the selection process is still underway and at some point, a 367th cousin cannot mate with another.

This is not true. There are numerous examples of true speciation where members of the new species can't interbreed with others. That includes fruit flies where the actual gene for the speciation has now been identified. 

[clarkgoble]

3 hours ago, CV75 said:

In other words, the transition into the Fall required the destruction of the terrestrial Creation  and its reformation following lesser laws. Eden was suficiently preserved as Adam's home base -- wherever that was -- until things were ready for him and Eve to exit and pick up leadership for mortal humanity. They've been stewarding this dominion for billions of years, 930 of them as a telestial man.

The alternative interpretation is that the terrestrial world Adam and Eve were in simply was a different world that they were cast out of. Thus instead of Eden falling it was just Adam and Eve falling. There are compelling reasons to believe that I should add. The Moses version of the fall seems to suggest Eden was still there and still paradisiacal. The main reason no death before the fall people give for their belief tends to be 2 Nephi 2:22. However even that verse depends upon "all things which were created must have remained in the same state." But it's explicitly talking about Adam and Eve and there's nothing explicit about birds only experiencing death because of the fall. Indeed that makes little sense if Eden still exists. Further again it's Adam and Eve who sin and are cast out. Why punish the birds in Eden for Adam's sin?

Now I recognize those defending NDBF tend to do so because of what 20th century GAs said. However none of those GAs claimed a revelation to the Church on the subject but were giving their interpretation (largely based upon that verse). It's quite a theology to build based upon one at best ambiguous verse. Especially when there aren't other scriptures to point to.