Science sometimes contradicts the Gospel

[rodheadlee]

22 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Are you talking Mars, or far more distant place?a

Sorry I nipped my post somehow. I'm talking about the whole Sol Solar System. We could probably build a generation ship that could take generations to reach a new earth. We have nuclear submarines, we could have a nuclear powered starship by now.

[Robert F. Smith]

1 hour ago, rodheadlee said:

Sorry I nipped my post somehow. I'm talking about the whole Sol Solar System. We could probably build a generation ship that could take generations to reach a new earth. We have nuclear submarines, we could have a nuclear powered starship by now.

As long as it is nuclear fusion, because fission power is becoming passe.  On the other hand, the nearest habitable planets may be so far distant that it will take many generations to get there.  Is conventional travel by spaceship really practical?  Might there be better methods?

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, rodheadlee said:

Sorry I nipped my post somehow. 

Ouch!   That can really hurt!

[Freedom]

On 2/9/2018 at 12:56 PM, SamuelTheLamanite said:

I believe Evolution, overpopulation, and other scientific theories do contradict the gospel of Jesus Christ. I agree with my friend JLHPROF when he said, "But I consider the term overpopulation, as in too many people on earth, to be contrary to gospel doctrine"

Scientists believe the world is dangerously overpopulated. "There's a strong correlation between the risk of pandemic and human population density. We've done the math and we've proved it," said Peter Daszak, a disease ecologist.  Scientists think they proved overpopulation can be very dangerous,, but our inspired leaders teach the planet is not dangerously overpopulated. 

As an apostle our prophet Elder Nelson taught, "Arguments swirl around that the earth is dangerously overpopulated and that couples should restrict the number of their children. … I adjure you to believe the Lord, who said that ‘the earth is full, and there is enough and to spare’ [D&C 104:17].”"   

In General Conference president Nelson (apostle then) taught "Many in developing nations unknowingly ascribe their lack of prosperity to overpopulation. While they grovel in ignorance of God and his commandments, they may worship objects of their own creation (or nothing at all), while unsuccessfully attempting to limit their population by the rampant practice of abortion. They live in squalor, oblivious to the divine teaching—stated in the scriptures not once, but thirty-four times—that people will prosper in the land only if they obey the commandments of God"   

Church manuals teach "The commandment to multiply and replenish the earth is a vital part of Heavenly Father's eternal plan and remains in force today"

So yes, it is clear science can contradict religion. God wouldn't tell us to "multiply and replenish" the Earth had it been dangerous. There can't be direct consequences for obeying the commandments of God. I  believe the larger the population gets the more blessed we will be.

Here is the Deseret News editorial debunking overpopulation alarmism.   "Overpopulation isn't the world's concern — the problem is too few births" https://www.deseretnews.com/article/865604167/Overpopulation-isnt-the-worlds-concern-2-the-problem-is-too-few-births.html

and church article proves "the problems of overpopulation may be exaggerated"  https://www.lds.org/ensign/1971/05/realities-of-the-population-explosion?lang=eng

 

 

 

 

You say that science contradicts the gospel but you did not provide any doctrinal sources. Can you provide any doctrine found in official sources? There are numerous historical examples of over population leading to serious problems so if it happened in the past it can happen in the future. 

[snowflake]

On 2/9/2018 at 11:09 PM, Telescope said:

Neither the Big Bang nor evolution contradict Genesis. 

Really? Genesis says there was not death before the fall of man. In evolution, according to the "science" teacher,  death creates man. 

 

On 2/9/2018 at 11:09 PM, Telescope said:

 

On 2/9/2018 at 11:09 PM, Telescope said:

 

On 2/9/2018 at 11:09 PM, Telescope said:

It boils down to God created the Earth, he organized it in a particular order (an order which doesn't substantially contradict the scientific record),

Plants day 3, Sun, moon and stars day 4. Absolutely disagrees with the "scientific" record.

 

On 2/9/2018 at 11:09 PM, Telescope said:

Although science can disprove that the Earth was created in 6 24-hour periods, or 6,000 years.

Ok, please show me how you can "scientifically" prove this. 

On 2/9/2018 at 11:09 PM, Telescope said:

As to literally how God created the human race, Genesis doesn't say this either.  God created our mortal bodies, and that's all you need to know.  And you don't need to believe that God created us by hand-waving magical incantations.  Which Genesis doesn't attest to, anyway.  I don't care if I descended from a ape (or if the ape and I descended from a common ancestor).  However it happened, God was behind it.

If you read Genesis and what it actually says, you would realize you are depositing much faith in your own assumptions (and what you have been told since kindergarten), and not in God's word. 

[Benjamin McGuire]

Snowflake writes:

Quote

Really? Genesis says there was not death before the fall of man. In evolution, according to the "science" teacher,  death creates man. 

 

Ummmm. Where does it say this in Genesis?

Ben McGuire

[SamuelTheLamanite]

On 2/12/2018 at 6:30 AM, Freedom said:

You say that science contradicts the gospel but you did not provide any doctrinal sources. Can you provide any doctrine found in official sources? There are numerous historical examples of over population leading to serious problems so if it happened in the past it can happen in the future. 

The Family's proclamation "God’s commandment for His children to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force"

[Alaris]

Anyone who thinks overpopulation is a real threat needs to go on a road trip.

[Freedom]

2 hours ago, SamuelTheLamanite said:

The Family's proclamation "God’s commandment for His children to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force"

You are conflating two concepts. We are also commanded to do all things in moderation. You are also forgetting that the promises are conditional upon repentance. But again I would ask for a scripture that teaches any doctrine that contradicts science.  History tells us that as a region becomes to heavily populated to the point that the resources cannot support the population, people starve, die from pandemics, or die in war. 

[Alaris]

30 minutes ago, Freedom said:

You are conflating two concepts. We are also commanded to do all things in moderation. You are also forgetting that the promises are conditional upon repentance. But again I would ask for a scripture that teaches any doctrine that contradicts science.  History tells us that as a region becomes to heavily populated to the point that the resources cannot support the population, people starve, die from pandemics, or die in war. 

All of those problems are a result of wickedness not overpopulation. 

[Freedom]

58 minutes ago, Alaris said:

All of those problems are a result of wickedness not overpopulation. 

Over population leads to these problems and there is no doctrine that disputes this. Is there any scripture that says economic pressures from too high a population and too limited resources will never happen? There is no doctrine that contradicts the science of scarce resources.  

[Marginal Gains]

Should the members in Cape Town keep increasing the population?

On 10/02/2018 at 4:20 PM, rpn said:

Samuel, you have it backwards.   The Gospel of Jesus Christ incorporates all truth: science and secular, and religious.    The challenge of today is that we don't actually know what science is full truth  (in my lifetime, many once "scientifically proven" ideas have changed, sometimes even 180 degrees), and we don't even know all things about faith.    Ultimately, though we know that the Gospel of Jesus Christ does fully incorporate all truth in all realms.

Science suggests that there wasn’t a literal global flood around circa 2,300 BCE. Does the Gospel Of Jesus Christ incorporate that? Or does science have that wrong and there actually was a literal global flood around circa 2,300 BCE?

[JLHPROF]

1 hour ago, Marginal Gains said:

Science suggests that there wasn’t a literal global flood around circa 2,300 BCE. Does the Gospel Of Jesus Christ incorporate that? Or does science have that wrong and there actually was a literal global flood around circa 2,300 BCE?

You assume that when truth is revealed that both biblical account and scientific fact will not mesh.

Both are based on partial understanding.

[carbon dioxide]

On 2/9/2018 at 7:11 PM, sunstoned said:

Agreed.  There are about a thousand things better to spend money on than weapons of war.  

Not in this world.  If one does not spend money on defense, they can be certain that eventually they will be taken over by an outside group.

[carbon dioxide]

There is no overpopulation issue.  There is not sign placed on this earth with an occupancy limit.   There might be a population distribution problem but one can find many places on this planet where one can go and not see another human for 20 miles around them.

[clarkgoble]

3 hours ago, Marginal Gains said:

Should the members in Cape Town keep increasing the population?

Science suggests that there wasn’t a literal global flood around circa 2,300 BCE. Does the Gospel Of Jesus Christ incorporate that? Or does science have that wrong and there actually was a literal global flood around circa 2,300 BCE?

The Gospel != every theological interpretation of scripture. It's pretty clear what the good news is and its about redemption not historical claims outside of one about Christ being born and resurrected. We may in addition have theological views. But I think we should be careful to separate the Gospel from such beliefs and claims.

[Alaris]

12 hours ago, Freedom said:

Over population leads to these problems and there is no doctrine that disputes this. Is there any scripture that says economic pressures from too high a population and too limited resources will never happen? There is no doctrine that contradicts the science of scarce resources.  

Which resources are scarce? 

[Freedom]

On 2/14/2018 at 10:51 AM, Alaris said:

Which resources are scarce? 

This is like saying which day is dangerous. Water is scarce in California, transportation is scarce in the Congo, energy is scarce in South Africa, food is scarce in Kazakhstan. I would suggest you read world history to learn about the effects of scarcity on regional populations .Again, show me a verse in the scriptures, any doctrine, that contradicts science. 

[Calm]

7 hours ago, Freedom said:

This is like saying which day is dangerous. Water is scarce in California, transportation is scarce in the Congo, energy is scarce in South Africa, food is scarce in Kazakhstan. I would suggest you read world history to learn about the effects of scarcity on regional populations .Again, show me a verse in the scriptures, any doctrine, that contradicts science. 

There are certainly plenty of famines in the Bible...

[Anijen]

On 2/12/2018 at 4:01 PM, snowflake said:

Plants day 3, Sun, moon and stars day 4. Absolutely disagrees with the "scientific" record.

Any chance the Hebrew words period of time could have been substitututed to the word day? Boy that could make a weekend even longer and connect science and religion too.

 

Call me crazy, but when I read in the Bible how the sun stopped rotating around the earth or when a donkey talked or when the earth stood still for three days, it made me go hmmm perhaps there is a translation problem (or some type of goof here).  Science and religion has its nexus we just haven't discovered it yet.

 

Besides the earth has been having plagues well before overpopulation of cities etc.  I have lived in a very populated city and a very small town if I compare the two; the small town still gets hit with the flu just as bad (percentage wise) as the bigger cities, but the righteousness (translated from google as crime rate) in a small town is much better. Heck I don't even remove my keys from my car or lock my doors. Love, love, love living in a small town (we don't even have a Wallmart, yep that small)

Edited February 17, 2018 by Anijen

[theplains]

On 09/02/2018 at 3:56 PM, SamuelTheLamanite said:

I believe Evolution, overpopulation, and other scientific theories do contradict the gospel of Jesus Christ. I agree with my friend JLHPROF when he said, "But I consider the term overpopulation, as in too many people on earth, to be contrary to gospel doctrine"

Church manuals teach "The commandment to multiply and replenish the earth is a vital part of Heavenly Father's eternal plan and remains in force today"

So yes, it is clear science can contradict religion. God wouldn't tell us to "multiply and replenish" the Earth had it been dangerous. There can't be direct consequences for obeying the commandments of God. I  believe the larger the population gets the more blessed we will be.

If I were to believe in evolution, I could also believe that a tornado blowing through a junk yard could produce a 747
airplane if the parts were all there and the wind blew long enough in the right conditions.

I heard once that all the world's population could fit in the state of Texas if they were to stand side by side.
The world produces enough food to feed the current population. It is only greed and war that is preventing
these supplies from reaching the needy.

Some places in the world are densely overpopulated (per square km), while others are very underpopulated.

The commandment to "multiply and replenish the earth" is not telling a man and wife to have as many children
even if you cannot afford it.

Some ethnic groups have higher birth rates than North American equivalents. For example, Muslims in Europe
I hear are growing faster in population due to higher birth rates than the native Europeans.  

Jim

[mfbukowski]

48 minutes ago, theplains said:

If I were to believe in evolution, I could also believe that a tornado blowing through a junk yard could produce a 747
airplane if the parts were all there and the wind blew long enough in the right conditions.

The very premise of this whole thread is off in my opinion but I have pretty much stayed out of it because in this group, "resistance is futile"  Nobody is going to convert anybody.

But I just want to point out why this particular argument is just logically wrong.  Nothing to do with religion OR science- just logic.

You are starting out with humans and looking BACKWARD through a supposedly random process (I myself believe in a kind of "directed" evolution in which God allows it to continue as long as it is "good"- and lets the earth and seas "bring forth" creatures going in the right direction- Gen 1:24 Gen 1:20) BUT that is not the premise of evolution!!

Your argument is circular- you start out with humanity and then try to figure out how people could have "evolved" randomly into a PARTICULAR FORM

Same with the "watchmaker" analogy or the billions of monkeys with typewriters writing Shakespeare

But that is not what evolutionists are saying.  They are saying OUR FORM evolved randomly- it could have been ANY form- intelligent creatures might have been worms or reptiles or things we have not even imagined.  There was a Star Trek which proposed intelligent rocks that evolved from a silicon based chemistry rather than carbon, as our life forms have.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Devil_in_the_Dark

Your 747 parts, to use the same analogy, might have evolved into a time machine or a transporter or nothing at all but a pile of parts.  Of course it is absurd to start with the finished product and look back and wonder how that all came together randomly because what you are looking at did NOT come together randomly.

So intelligent design always starts with something intelligently designed to prove itself.   It does not ask how a tree could evolve by chance, it asks how a watch could evolve by chance or a 747 or the works of Shakespeare.  This kind of circular argument is called "begging the question"

So as one who himself believes in the possibility of intelligent design (I really don't care if that is true or false but it could be true) just a word about the logic of your argument here- it really does not work.

 

Edited February 17, 2018 by mfbukowski

[SamuelTheLamanite]

On 2/14/2018 at 12:30 PM, Marginal Gains said:

Science suggests that there wasn’t a literal global flood around circa 2,300 BCE. Does the Gospel Of Jesus Christ incorporate that? Or does science have that wrong and there actually was a literal global flood around circa 2,300 BCE?

True. God told us to multiply because there is no overpopulation problem. If God can fit thousands of animals in the ark, he can also fit billions and billions of people on the Earth.  But false doctrines are now trending on Youtube. For Gates the middle class needs to have less children.

 

 

Edited February 23, 2018 by SamuelTheLamanite

[SamuelTheLamanite]

On 2/17/2018 at 2:09 PM, Anijen said:

Besides the earth has been having plagues well before overpopulation of cities etc.  I have lived in a very populated city and a very small town if I compare the two; the small town still gets hit with the flu just as bad (percentage wise) as the bigger cities, but the righteousness (translated from google as crime rate) in a small town is much better. Heck I don't even remove my keys from my car or lock my doors. Love, love, love living in a small town (we don't even have a Wallmart, yep that small)

The flu has always existed on Earth since the Fall, you make a very good point. With or without a large population the flu is still there. No need to worry about overpopulation.

[mfbukowski]

On 2/9/2018 at 12:56 PM, SamuelTheLamanite said:

I believe Evolution, overpopulation, and other scientific theories do contradict the gospel of Jesus Christ. I agree with my friend JLHPROF when he said, "But I consider the term overpopulation, as in too many people on earth, to be contrary to gospel doctrine"

Scientists believe the world is dangerously overpopulated. "There's a strong correlation between the risk of pandemic and human population density. We've done the math and we've proved it," said Peter Daszak, a disease ecologist.  Scientists think they proved overpopulation can be very dangerous,, but our inspired leaders teach the planet is not dangerously overpopulated. 

As an apostle our prophet Elder Nelson taught, "Arguments swirl around that the earth is dangerously overpopulated and that couples should restrict the number of their children. … I adjure you to believe the Lord, who said that ‘the earth is full, and there is enough and to spare’ [D&C 104:17].”"   

In General Conference president Nelson (apostle then) taught "Many in developing nations unknowingly ascribe their lack of prosperity to overpopulation. While they grovel in ignorance of God and his commandments, they may worship objects of their own creation (or nothing at all), while unsuccessfully attempting to limit their population by the rampant practice of abortion. They live in squalor, oblivious to the divine teaching—stated in the scriptures not once, but thirty-four times—that people will prosper in the land only if they obey the commandments of God"   

Church manuals teach "The commandment to multiply and replenish the earth is a vital part of Heavenly Father's eternal plan and remains in force today"

So yes, it is clear science can contradict religion. God wouldn't tell us to "multiply and replenish" the Earth had it been dangerous. There can't be direct consequences for obeying the commandments of God. I  believe the larger the population gets the more blessed we will be.

Here is the Deseret News editorial debunking overpopulation alarmism.   "Overpopulation isn't the world's concern — the problem is too few births" https://www.deseretnews.com/article/865604167/Overpopulation-isnt-the-worlds-concern-2-the-problem-is-too-few-births.html

and church article proves "the problems of overpopulation may be exaggerated"  https://www.lds.org/ensign/1971/05/realities-of-the-population-explosion?lang=eng

 

 

 

 

Hopefully with your new insights from Lanza you Now understand that there is no conflict between science and religion because each one of them is talking about something different, from different perspectives.

Edited February 23, 2018 by mfbukowski