Article re lack of consensus in evolutionary theory

[Fair Dinkum]

6 hours ago, Jamie said:

I was once like you in some ways too, thinking all I needed to know could be learned from some book.  I have no doubt that what God has taught me is true and what he'll tell me when I see him again.

Faith or belief can’t dismiss this evidence. I challenge you to watch this.  The evidence is beyond dispute. Humans and chimpanzees evolved from a common ancestor  that’s just the truth  

faith as well intentioned as it might be must be built on facts not fiction. Faith in fiction is a damnable false hope. - Thomas Edison

Edited May 14, 2021 by Fair Dinkum

[Jamie]

3 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

Not necessarily...one of those is a metaphor and the other is a fact.  Can I ask you a sincere question?  Do you also believe the earth is 6,000 years old as claimed in scripture and that an actual Adam and Eve left a garden in Missouri 6,000 years ago and that there was no death before the fall?

There are no scriptures that state this planet is only 6000 years old. There are scriptures that indicate this planet was created about 6000 years ago but it has since been made clear that when it was created it was made from matter that already existed. Which means this planet or what it is made of is older than the number of years since when it was created.  Your question is strange and in summary my answer is no.

[Stargazer]

14 hours ago, MrShorty said:

If nothing else, you're in good company. Joseph Fielding Smith and Bruce R. McConkie and others believed this. Enough of curriculum writers believed it strongly enough to include these kinds of teachings in our manuals for several decades in the late 20th century. I'm not certain if this belief was something they independently came up with or if it was imported (so to speak) from broader Christian Creationist teachings.

The problem I see is that not everyone in the Church believes this, and I'm not convinced that "The Church" (whatever that really means) officially believes that the fall and evolution are incompatible. I know that I reject the idea that the fall and evolution are incompatible (or a gulf separating them is too wide to be bridged as JFS put it in his Doctrines of Salvation), but I'm not sure what to do with that disagreement. It was probably one of the first steps I took towards becoming a cafeteria Mormon.

I don't see the Fall and evolution being incompatible, either. As @Fair Dinkum has said, there is sufficient evidence in the scientific record to be sure that evolution is real. I suppose this leads some people to conclude that God doesn't exist, since the Genesis account doesn't seem to follow the model, as it were. However, I have sufficient confirmatory evidence that God is real, and He is our Creator, so I have long since concluded that any apparent contradiction between what science has discovered and what revealed religion has asserted is a result of our ignorance. Eventually, these supposed contradictions will be cleared up, as knowledge increases or is further revealed. I don't expect this to occur in my lifetime, necessarily. Unless I am still alive at the beginning of the Millenium. 

Interestingly, there is evidence that, as Genesis 1:9 says, the earth was a one point a "water world".

And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so.

See a recent paper which appeared in Nature: Limited Archaean continental emergence reflected in an early Archaean Oxygen-18-enriched ocean. The paper is behind a bit of a paywall, but the first page (including the abstract) is freely visible. The time-frame in this is about 3.2 billion years ago. I won't copy/paste the full abstract here because it is very densely written. It concludes with this sentence: "We conclude that Earth’s water cycle may have gone through two separate phases of steady-state behaviour, before and after the emergence of the continents."

An interesting video talking about this (using the paper above as a reference) can be found on Anton Petrov's YouTube channel: Turns Out, Earth Was a Water World With No Continents or Land!

The rest of Genesis seems to correspond quite well to what is known about the evolution of life on earth, with plants preceding animal life, aquatic animals preceding terrestrial, and with man being the ultimate (i.e. last of all). It gets the sequence right, at least. It doesn't prove evolution, but neither does evolution disprove God.

As far as this business about someone being a cafeteria Mormon, I don't see that disagreeing with McConkie or JFS about evolution is tantamount to picking and choosing about the Gospel. I disagree with McConkie about a few things, and am somewhat sure that not all that JFS taught was correct, but I wouldn't describe myself as being in any sort of cafeteria. 

 

Edited May 14, 2021 by Stargazer

[mfbukowski]

14 hours ago, Jamie said:

When I said the fall and evolution are incompatible as far as I know, what I had in mind is how the fall is thought of as a regression and evolution is believed to be a progressive advancement of species.  They are opposites, rather than processes that work together. And before the fall we are told things would have stayed the way they were forever if there had been no fall.  And the state of no change isn't compatible with evolution either.  Without death evolution is not possible, as evolution is understood.

Actually we LDS believe that the "Fall" was part of God's plan, to teach us that we have the freedom and power to choose between good and evil.

It was a progression that gave us choice, over Satan's plan of no choice, not a regression.

God's plan is that we change and progress from the "natural man " to becoming Christlike, and that cannot happen without overcoming our sins with repentance, all of which cannot happen without knowing good AND evil 

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Stargazer said:

The rest of Genesis seems to correspond quite well to what is known about the evolution of life on earth, with plants preceding animal life, aquatic animals preceding terrestrial, and with man being the ultimate (i.e. last of all). It gets the sequence right, at least. It doesn't prove evolution, but neither does evolution disprove God.

👍

[Jamie]

13 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Actually we LDS believe that the "Fall" was part of God's plan, to teach us that we have the freedom and power to choose between good and evil.

It was a progression that gave us choice, over Satan's plan of no choice, not a regression.

God's plan is that we change and progress from the "natural man " to becoming Christlike, and that cannot happen without overcoming our sins with repentance, all of which cannot happen without knowing good AND evil 

I believe God our Father knew Adam and Eve would fall, and that he had a plan already in place for when they would, but I take note of the fact that we refer to their fall as a fall rather than saying they advanced or progressed at that point.

What reason do you give for the fall of Adam and Eve being referred to as the Fall rather than the Advancement of Adam and Eve?  See here: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/fall-of-adam-and-eve?lang=eng

I also notice how we are not becoming a higher or more advanced kind of being than we are.  Those who believe in evolution believe beings advance to become a more advanced kind of being, and that isn't happening to us.  Or I will say I don't believe it is.  Even when we are resurrected we do not become a more advanced kind of being, different from the kind of being we already are.  We will be judged by our works and whether or not we accept the atonement of Jesus Christ and then we will receive privileges  and rewards based on how well we applied and are applying the gospel in our lives.  Becoming like our Father and Jesus Christ means to behave and act and think as they do, believing what they tell us and applying their counsel in our lives.  We are already the same kind of being they are, and it didn't happen by advancing from a lower kind of being than we are to the kind of being we are now.  

God has told us that we lived with him in heaven as his sons and daughters before we came here, and that Adam and Eve were the first of us to live here.  I think of how we must have learned a lot about him while we lived with him, although some of us must not have learned as much as some others of us did.  I don't know how much Adam and Eve learned before they came here, and God has told us they could not remember how much they knew either, but even with that veil of forgotten memories I'm sure they were still the same kind of being they were in heaven, still sons and daughters of our Father.  And even when they became mortal, like us, they were still the same kind of being they were, and the same kind of being I believe they always will be.  Probably with those forgotten memories restored now that they have been resurrected and restored to the same state they were in while living in the garden of Eden.

[katherine the great]

38 minutes ago, Jamie said:

Those who believe in evolution believe beings advance to become a more advanced kind of being, and that isn't happening to us

I’m not sure why, but this is a common misconception about evolution. Evolution isn’t a “progression”. If it were, there would be no single cell organisms left. It is not about becoming more advanced-it’s about populations adapting to changing environments. We are not more “advanced” than chimpanzees. They adapted to their environment we adapted to ours. While we share most traits, our brains grew much larger through our adaptive patterns than theirs did. 

[katherine the great]

48 minutes ago, Jamie said:

What reason do you give for the fall of Adam and Eve being referred to as the Fall rather than the Advancement of Adam and Eve? 

Because they were kicked out of God‘s presence. Much like we are kicked out of His presence when we come to earth and leave our heavenly home to take on mortality.

[Jamie]

2 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

I’m not sure why, but this is a common misconception about evolution. Evolution isn’t a “progression”. If it were, there would be no single cell organisms left. It is not about becoming more advanced-it’s about populations adapting to changing environments. We are not more “advanced” than chimpanzees. They adapted to their environment we adapted to ours. While we share most traits, our brains grew much larger through our adaptive patterns than theirs did. 

The reason there are still some single cell organisms is because some have not "advanced" as some others have.  Which is the same reason given for why there are still a myriad of other "lower" life forms.  Some of any kind of being advance and others of that same kind do not.  And those that advance sometimes advance in ways that are different than how others of the same kind advance.

Anyway, this is my understanding of what evolution is all about, by those who believe beings and different kinds of beings evolve.  And it is apparently okay in the scientific community to have various and multiple understandings of evolution.

 

[Jamie]

6 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

Because they were kicked out of God‘s presence. Much like we are kicked out of His presence when we come to earth and leave our heavenly home to take on mortality.

I suppose if someone thinks of heaven as 'up above' and this planet as 'down here' from there, that would work as an explanation, but in reality heaven is anywhere 'out there' from where someone is if they are not already in heaven.

[ksfisher]

58 minutes ago, Jamie said:

I believe God our Father knew Adam and Eve would fall, and that he had a plan already in place for when they would

The plan was them to fall.  If they had remained in the garden they could not have obeyed the commandment to "Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth" (Gen 1:28).

[Calm]

3 minutes ago, Jamie said:

I suppose if someone thinks of heaven as 'up above' and this planet as 'down here' from there, that would work as an explanation, but in reality heaven is anywhere 'out there' from where someone is if they are not already in heaven.

Why does location matter when being out of God’s presence is a downgrade in most people’s eyes?  Fall from grace, for example. 

Edited May 14, 2021 by Calm

[ksfisher]

14 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

Because they were kicked out of God‘s presence. Much like we are kicked out of His presence when we come to earth and leave our heavenly home to take on mortality.

I knew this is the more traditional interpretation, but I'm not so sure that it was God doing the separating.  Genesis 3:8 reads:

"And they heard the voice of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day: and Adam and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God amongst the trees of the garden."

Leaving the garden, in my mind, seems to be just a symbolic consequence of Adam and Eve choosing to cut themselves off from the Lord.

[mfbukowski]

59 minutes ago, Jamie said:

I believe God our Father knew Adam and Eve would fall, and that he had a plan already in place for when they would, but I take note of the fact that we refer to their fall as a fall rather than saying they advanced or progressed at that point.

What reason do you give for the fall of Adam and Eve being referred to as the Fall rather than the Advancement of Adam and Eve?  See here: https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/gospel-topics/fall-of-adam-and-eve?lang=eng

I also notice how we are not becoming a higher or more advanced kind of being than we are.  Those who believe in evolution believe beings advance to become a more advanced kind of being, and that isn't happening to us.  Or I will say I don't believe it is.  Even when we are resurrected we do not become a more advanced kind of being, different from the kind of being we already are.  We will be judged by our works and whether or not we accept the atonement of Jesus Christ and then we will receive privileges  and rewards based on how well we applied and are applying the gospel in our lives.  Becoming like our Father and Jesus Christ means to behave and act and think as they do, believing what they tell us and applying their counsel in our lives.  We are already the same kind of being they are, and it didn't happen by advancing from a lower kind of being than we are to the kind of being we are now.  

God has told us that we lived with him in heaven as his sons and daughters before we came here, and that Adam and Eve were the first of us to live here.  I think of how we must have learned a lot about him while we lived with him, although some of us must not have learned as much as some others of us did.  I don't know how much Adam and Eve learned before they came here, and God has told us they could not remember how much they knew either, but even with that veil of forgotten memories I'm sure they were still the same kind of being they were in heaven, still sons and daughters of our Father.  And even when they became mortal, like us, they were still the same kind of being they were, and the same kind of being I believe they always will be.  Probably with those forgotten memories restored now that they have been resurrected and restored to the same state they were in while living in the garden of Eden.

Thanks for your reply.

I do not debate speculative metaphysics that depend on one person's definition of a single word, in this case, "progression".

 Define it as you will, I see it as progression and you do not. It's a waste of time to debate who is "right" in cases like this one, when it is merely a choice of nuances of meaning of a single word.

I believe it was a progression and you do not.

Such is life.

[mfbukowski]

23 minutes ago, Jamie said:

The reason there are still some single cell organisms is because some have not "advanced" as some others have.  Which is the same reason given for why there are still a myriad of other "lower" life forms.  Some of any kind of being advance and others of that same kind do not.  And those that advance sometimes advance in ways that are different than how others of the same kind advance.

Anyway, this is my understanding of what evolution is all about, by those who believe beings and different kinds of beings evolve.  And it is apparently okay in the scientific community to have various and multiple understandings of evolution.

 

And here, by your use of quotes, show that debating word definitions is futile

And yet you do so.

Sounds contradictory to me

 

Edited May 14, 2021 by mfbukowski

[katherine the great]

18 minutes ago, Jamie said:

Anyway, this is my understanding of what evolution is all about, by those who believe beings and different kinds of beings evolve.  And it is apparently okay in the scientific community to have various and multiple understandings of evolution.

I recommend you study the issue a little more. That viewpoint shows a lack of understanding of biology.

[Jamie]

3 minutes ago, Calm said:

Why does location matter when being out of God’s presence is a downgrade in most people’s eyes?  Fall from grace, for example. 

Okay.  That helps.  Some people think of a fall as a downgrade, or a demotion  I usually think of falling in terms of a spatial construct, something above falling down or to a lower level.

When I think of being out of God's presence what I think of is being somewhere other than where he is, and I wouldn't necessarily consider that to be a downgrade or a demotion, otherwise people who have the same glory he has would be downgraded somehow if they ever left the presence of our Father in heaven.

[Jamie]

3 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

I recommend you study the issue a little more. That viewpoint shows a lack of understanding of biology.

Apparently we both have the same regard for each other's viewpoint and I will now say the same to you.

[ksfisher]

1 hour ago, Jamie said:

I also notice how we are not becoming a higher or more advanced kind of being than we are.  Those who believe in evolution believe beings advance to become a more advanced kind of being, and that isn't happening to us. 

How long do you think it would take to notice this?  

 

 

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Jamie said:

Those who believe in evolution believe beings advance to become a more advanced kind of being, and that isn't happening to us. 

Uh, no, we don't believe that.

Science takes no stand in value judgments, in fact many think that mankind is a parasite destroying the planet 

 

[Jamie]

10 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Thanks for your reply.

I do not debate speculative metaphysics that depend on one person's definition of a single word, in this case, "progression".

 Define it as you will, I see it as progression and you do not. It's a waste of time to debate who is "right" in cases like this one, when it is merely a choice of nuances of meaning of a single word.

I believe it was a progression and you do not.

Such is life.

I asked why you think the fall of Adam and Eve is referred to as the Fall of Adam and Eve rather than the Advancement, and I will now add Progression, of Adam and Eve.  

[Jamie]

4 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

How long do you think it would take to notice this?  

 

 

I would say it depends on who is watching and how observant he or she is.  Now would you please explain what you think happens in what is here referred to as Speciation.  A short and simple summary would be very nice.

[ksfisher]

2 minutes ago, Jamie said:

I would say it depends on who is watching and how observant he or she is.  Now would you please explain what you think happens in what is here referred to as Speciation.  A short and simple summary would be very nice.

Speciation is the evolutionary process by which populations evolve to become distinct species.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciation

[Calm]

16 minutes ago, Jamie said:

otherwise people who have the same glory he has would be downgraded somehow if they ever left the presence of our Father in heaven.

This assumes that those of the same glory leave his presence. If we become one with God, then perhaps at that time we are always with him in some fashion. 

[Calm]

14 minutes ago, Jamie said:

Apparently we both have the same regard for each other's viewpoint and I will now say the same to you.

Do you have a degree that uses biology?  Just curious.