New Video on Evolution and Latter-day Saints

[Rivers]

 

[Fether]

I guess this is a touchy subject for some?

I grew up in the heart of UT in a middle class Latter-day Saint community. I never once was taught by anyone at church about evolution and what I should believe about it. In fact, I didn’t even know it was a concern for Christians before I heard my Baptist cousin make a fuss about it when I was 15 years old.

Since then, I have occasionally heard people speak as if it is an assumed truth that evolution is blasphemous.

[mrmarklin]

26 minutes ago, Fether said:

I guess this is a touchy subject for some?

I grew up in the heart of UT in a middle class Latter-day Saint community. I never once was taught by anyone at church about evolution and what I should believe about it. In fact, I didn’t even know it was a concern for Christians before I heard my Baptist cousin make a fuss about it when I was 15 years old.

Since then, I have occasionally heard people speak as if it is an assumed truth that evolution is blasphemous.

Many LDS believe in evolution as "God's Way" of creating Adam.  I personally think most of it is nonsense.  The Church has taken no position, but some of the Apostles have written extensively on the subject, rejecting Evolution. 

That doesn't mean they accept young earth theories either.

[mfbukowski]

51 minutes ago, Rivers said:

 

Great video, exactly what I say on this board daily

But he did not take it far enough.

Objective evidence itself has nothing to do with religion AND THAT INCLUDES HISTORY and things like a historical Book of Mormon. Both science and history require objective observations, from humans, but do not tackle WHY the earth and humans even exist at all, and deliberately avoid even that way of thinking!

How questions have nothing to do with why questions.

HOW we got the BOM and its alleged history has nothing to do with WHY God gave it to us and how it teaches WHY we are here.

Obviously the BOM has a history, and origins, but how we got it is irrelevant to WHY we have it.

I believe it shows us WHY mankind exists at all.

 

[mfbukowski]

1 minute ago, mrmarklin said:

Many LDS believe in evolution as "God's Way" of creating Adam.

Again how Adam was created is not why he was created, or if he is even a symbol for humanity in general.

Any "how" does not answer "why".

[Rivers]

9 minutes ago, mrmarklin said:

Many LDS believe in evolution as "God's Way" of creating Adam.  I personally think most of it is nonsense.  The Church has taken no position, but some of the Apostles have written extensively on the subject, rejecting Evolution. 

That doesn't mean they accept young earth theories either.

I used to have a big issue with evolution.  But I evolved.  Pun intended.

[MrShorty]

I loved the face palms for the current (soon to be retired??) Old Testament Institute manual.

I liked that he mentioned the long debate that has featured such notable names as B. H. Roberts and Joseph Fielding Smith and James E. Talmage and Bruce R. McConkie. I think a big problem with this debate in the Church is that, as a top down, authority driven church, the debate is mostly about who decides what the Church believes. Part of the problem I see is that the anti-evolution side has tended to draw the brightest lines around the issue (Elder McConkie -- Evolution is a deadly heresy, J. F. Smith --the gap between evolution and the gospel cannot be bridged), and those voices seem to have carried the day in the mid to late 20th century.

Overall, it was a good video. I doubt it has the authority to improve the discussion around evolution, but it was good.

[Rivers]

20 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

 Part of the problem I see is that the anti-evolution side has tended to draw the brightest lines around the issue (Elder McConkie -- Evolution is a deadly heresy, J. F. Smith --the gap between evolution and the gospel cannot be bridged), and those voices seem to have carried the day in the mid to late 20th century.

 

We’re in a new century now.  The Restoration is ongoing.

[CV75]

48 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Great video, exactly what I say on this board daily

But he did not take it far enough.

Objective evidence itself has nothing to do with religion AND THAT INCLUDES HISTORY and things like a historical Book of Mormon. Both science and history require objective observations, from humans, but do not tackle WHY the earth and humans even exist at all, and deliberately avoid even that way of thinking!

How questions have nothing to do with why questions.

HOW we got the BOM and its alleged history has nothing to do with WHY God gave it to us and how it teaches WHY we are here.

Obviously the BOM has a history, and origins, but how we got it is irrelevant to WHY we have it.

I believe it shows us WHY mankind exists at all.

 

Maybe it's just me, but given current evens at any level, more and more people seem to be asking "why?" questions.

[MrShorty]

@Rivers I would agree, but I don't think it's that easy. Our beliefs and theology are full of things from the 20th and 19th centuries, the middle ages, the time of Jesus, and going all the way back into the Old Testament. I don't think we can just say, "anything said before (insert date here) has expired." I think the real hard work is deciding which ideas from the past are worth keeping (or True(TM), if you prefer) and which ideas should be discarded (or Not True(TM)).

[mfbukowski]

33 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Maybe it's just me, but given current evens at any level, more and more people seem to be asking "why?" questions.

I hope so. Maybe they will soon understand the difference between why and how.

[Rivers]

People in

14 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

@Rivers I would agree, but I don't think it's that easy. Our beliefs and theology are full of things from the 20th and 19th centuries, the middle ages, the time of Jesus, and going all the way back into the Old Testament. I don't think we can just say, "anything said before (insert date here) has expired." I think the real hard work is deciding which ideas from the past are worth keeping (or True(TM), if you prefer) and which ideas should be discarded (or Not True(TM)).

People in different time periods all understood things from their own world view.   The real trick is to extract universal truths from from the past and separate those truths from primitive scientific understandings.  
 

This is where Jungian archetypes come in handy.

 

Edited November 5, 2021 by Rivers

[mfbukowski]

49 minutes ago, Rivers said:

We’re in a new century now.  The Restoration is ongoing.

And if we don't understand the difference between why and how, the Restoration may have to be restored.

There is no God? No, there is no empirical evidence, period, end of story.

But that is irrelevant to questions like WHY is there anything at all?

What is MY purpose in life?

How do I know my purpose? How do I find purpose/ meaning in MY life?

Why do I feel compelled to become a fulfilled human and reach my highest purpose if I don't have one?

Why be the best I can be?

These are the nagging questions that point the mind toward ideas that cannot be answered by empirical data 

 

[Teancum]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

Again how Adam was created is not why he was created, or if he is even a symbol for humanity in general.

Any "how" does not answer "why".

Sure. Nothing really matters, nothing really matters at all......

[Rivers]

16 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Sure. Nothing really matters, nothing really matters at all......

Yep. Nothing matters.  Eat, drink, and be merry.  We’re all just floating around on a rock around a star that will eventually burn out.  

[smac97]

4 hours ago, Fether said:

I guess this is a touchy subject for some?

I think it can be, depending on the background of the individual.

Can evolution be reconciled with the religious doctrines and claims of the Church?  In the long run, yes.  As Elder McConkie said: "Truth is every in harmoney with itself."  Ironically, he said this in the context of categorically stating that "[t]here is no harmony between the truths of revealed religion and the theories of organic evolution."  Of course, he was a Seventy when he said both of these things, and he was speaking in his personal capacity (though the lines were a bit fuzzy back then).  And to his credit, he later said (in the context of the Priesthood Ban) : 

Quote

Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young or President George Q. Cannon or whomsoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world. We get our truth and our light line upon line and precept upon precept. We have now had added a new flood of intelligence and light on this particular subject, and it erases all the darkness, and all the views and all the thoughts of the past. They don't matter any more. It doesn't make a particle of difference what anybody ever said about the Negro matter before the first day of June of this year [1978]. It is a new day and a new arrangement, and the Lord has now given the revelation that sheds light out into the world on this subject. As to any slivers of light or any particles of darkness of the past, we forget about them. 

I think the Brethren have become quite a bit better at differentiating between personal opinion and doctrine.  More than a few people probably got whiplash from Elder McConkie, and I suspect he came to regret his authoritarian/doctrinaire pronouncements on topics about which we have limited light and knowledge.

4 hours ago, Fether said:

I grew up in the heart of UT in a middle class Latter-day Saint community. I never once was taught by anyone at church about evolution and what I should believe about it.  In fact, I didn’t even know it was a concern for Christians before I heard my Baptist cousin make a fuss about it when I was 15 years old.

Same here.  My first recollection about being taught evolution was in high school and later in college (at BYU).  I had questions about how to reconcile evolution with Adam & Eve and such.

On this board we've seen posters declare that "science" has definitively disproven the doctrines of the Church.  I don't think that has happened.  What has happened is that, as pertaining to the doctrines of the Church, quite a few folk doctrines, speculations, opinions-presented-as-doctrine, surmises, guesses, assumptions, and so on have been been demonstrated as such.  I am, candidly, grateful for that.  

4 hours ago, Fether said:

Since then, I have occasionally heard people speak as if it is an assumed truth that evolution is blasphemous.

I think the general concepts pertaining to evolution are taking hold in the Church.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited November 5, 2021 by smac97

[smac97]

22 minutes ago, Teancum said:

Quote

Again how Adam was created is not why he was created, or if he is even a symbol for humanity in general.

Any "how" does not answer "why".

Sure. Nothing really matters, nothing really matters at all......

I am typing these words on an Asus VivoBook.  It is connected to my home's WiFi internet connection, which is provided by Google Fiber.

I have only the most rudimentary understanding of how the hardware and software of my laptop works.  I also have very little understanding of how WiFi works, the complexities of the Internet, the software and code used to create this message board, and so on.  I also have only a rudimentary understanding of how my body and mind works, such that I can cogitate and type out these words to express my thoughts.

That I don't have a perfect understanding of the "how" of these things does not preclude me from doing these things and using these resources to my advantage.

So it is, I think, with the Restored Gospel of Jesus Christ.  I don't have all the answers as to evolution.  Or the Hill Cumorah.  Or the Great Flood.  Or the Priesthood Ban.  Or gender-based restrictions on priesthood ordination.  Or same-sex attraction.  Or the particular geography/anthropology of the Book of Mormon events.  Or the translation process for the Book of Mormon.  Or the translation process for the Book of Abraham.  

The Church has long sought to emphasize the "doctrine, or gospel truths that are essential for our salvation."  Faith, repentance, baptism (and other saving ordinances).  As Joseph Smith put it: 

Quote

“The fundamental principles of our religion are the testimony of the Apostles and Prophets, concerning Jesus Christ, that He died, was buried, and rose again the third day, and ascended into heaven; and all other things which pertain to our religion are only appendages to it” (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, 121).

So whether or not the drumlin in New York State is the "Hill Cumorah" described in the text of the Book of Mormon is not, in my view, an issue that is "essential for our salvation."  Whether or not the Great Flood was global or local is not essential.  A perfect and complete understanding of the origins of the Book of Mormon is not essential.

That doesn't mean we cannot or ought not discuss these things and work to expand our understanding of them.  We should certainly do that.  But these are, IMO, decidedly lower-tier considerations as compared to many, many more important things.

Thanks,

-Smac

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Teancum said:

Sure. Nothing really matters, nothing really matters at all......

YES, that is your position, but the question is WHY you think so?

What empirical evidence do you have for WHY you get out of bed in the morning? 

What do you get by not just staying in bed?

Edited November 5, 2021 by mfbukowski

[Teancum]

44 minutes ago, Rivers said:

Yep. Nothing matters.  Eat, drink, and be merry.  We’re all just floating around on a rock around a star that will eventually burn out.  

My comment was more along the lines of the position of the poster who I commented to. It was not about what you responded to.

[Teancum]

2 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

YES, that is your position, but the question is WHY you think so?

No. That is your position.  Not mine.  See I think this stuff matters. And I think it is problematic for the LDS position/ But you don't.  Nothing is real. It is all about feelings or some metaphysical experience. Your truth may be different from someone else's truth.  But so what? Nothing of substance matters. Words don't mean anything.  What is truth?  What does that word even mean?

Edited November 5, 2021 by Teancum

[rpn]

The Gospel of Jesus Christ incorporates all absolute truth.     We do not know how God created our earth.   Prophets have said that Adam and Eve are the two first mortals, IOW the first whose bodies were alive via spirit child of God being inside it.   I've been alive long enough to have seen multiple times when science changed its mind on "facts"  and history being redefined after new facts.   I don't think we know everything out this world yet, and I won't be surprised if the process included trial and error before it was declared "created".

[mfbukowski]

48 minutes ago, Rivers said:

Yep. Nothing matters.  Eat, drink, and be merry.  We’re all just floating around on a rock around a star that will eventually burn out.  

So WHY eat drink and be merry?

Where is your empirical evidence for that value?

Are there any higher pleasures?

This is the question that Epicurians face.

 

[CV75]

1 hour ago, MrShorty said:

@Rivers I would agree, but I don't think it's that easy. Our beliefs and theology are full of things from the 20th and 19th centuries, the middle ages, the time of Jesus, and going all the way back into the Old Testament. I don't think we can just say, "anything said before (insert date here) has expired." I think the real hard work is deciding which ideas from the past are worth keeping (or True(TM), if you prefer) and which ideas should be discarded (or Not True(TM)).

I think the way people behave (barring things they cannot control) is the net distillation of their ideas, so they decide which behaviors are worth keeping, and why. This is hard work, indeed!

[mfbukowski]

11 minutes ago, Teancum said:

No. That is your position.  Not mine.  See I think this stuff matters. And I think it is problematic for the LDS position/ But you don't.  Nothing is real. It is all about feelings or some metaphysical experience. Your truth may be different from someone else's truth.  But so what? Nothing of substance matters. Words don't mean anything.  What is truth?  What does that word even mean?

None of this reflects my position on anything.  I have tried a hundred times to get you to understand me, while others do understand.  We just can't communicate.

Goodbye

 

Edited November 5, 2021 by mfbukowski

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Rivers said:

This is where Jungian archetypes come in handy.

You are a fan?  Sweet.

I spent many an afternoon laying on my mom’s bed reading her Man and His Symbols as a preteen (I admit I mostly looked at the pictures back then).

Edited November 5, 2021 by Calm