bmy-

I've always found it interesting that it is common for highly educated engineers to still be religious.. it's backwards in regards to most advanced degrees. I think it has more to do with the highly educated people recognizing the potential for life in just our solar system.. and forming an opinion about our galaxy based on a much-to-small sample. The difference (I suspect) between the people is this -- the higher educated non-religious people would drop their idea of UFOs if evidence to the contrary was presented. The lower educated religious people would fight tooth and nail because theirs is an emotional attachment.. not an intellectual one. No.. he was previously exalted. His 'creation' was nothing out of the ordinary.

I stand corrected. Appreciate it Vort.. perhaps that's why God hasn't let me in on any juicy secrets yet, EDIT: I deleted the original post to fix the mistake.

Outside of the 'sensitive' topics -- yes. I see no harm in telling them what each ceremony consists of, etc. Those are to be considered 'sacred' but not secret. Even most of the information in there.. is just that.. information. A good example I think would be how the temple creation story differs from the story in our physical scriptures.

That's on a need to know basis.. nah.. seriously? For certain items.. only in the temples (or at the very least in the presence of a priesthood holder). For the vast majority of the information most places would be acceptable as long as it is presented in the correct way.

Cognitive dissonance. The only medicine.. is well.. more evidence.

What about the starving children mentioned earlier? Did they just "not listen" or what? Given your two choices.. I would say that God warned nobody -- and your friend got lucky.

The allegorical interpretation is the only one that has merit IMO. It's plain as day that the order of events in the scriptures are wrong when we look at the fossil records, etc. To me.. it's obviously allegorical. The creation story in the Bible/BoM would not differ form the temple version if it was not.

No one here is trying to tear down your faith. We're trying to get you to use your brain. You can use both -- it's possible. Snow said it best.. "scary"

The Wheel of Time and the wheel of a man's life turn alike without pity or mercy.

Where in the video was that? I skimmed through it but didn't catch a name. Doesn't exactly look credible which is why i'm asking.

The first line.. "I believe in One God".

I thought so too. Maybe one day..

Don't waste your time Snow. Believer will counter logic with illogic and think the argument has been won.

You realize that rainbows have always 'existed' right? It's just the refraction and reflections of light off water droplets in the air.

I can't help but look at certain children who never had a chance and feel pity. They're happy -- and that's very important to me -- but is that really everything? Take those FLDS kids for example.. do you not feel sorry for them? I sure as heck do. As to how it's important.. doctrinally speaking -- what we learn here we will take with us into the celestial kingdom and further. The more you learn now the less you will have to learn later. TalkOrigins Archive: Exploring the Creation/Evolution Controversy is a good place to start if you ever want to learn a little bit.

This is a great link for you to read. It's really interesting stuff What Causes DNA Mutations?

This video makes me laugh every time :lol: YouTube - Colbert on Glenn Beck

Dude is crazy. He's not one I'm fond of at all.. we can find a better poster child for sure

Frankly.. it's moreso ignorance in regard to evolutionary biology. If you understood it.. it's pretty much impossible to deny. It was not that <you> were spouting faulty information as fact.. it is that creationists do (and more specifically galations220). You seemed to be in support of galations220 when you said.. (and by supporting his post you support his arguments, so in a way.. you were defending his faulty information) My mistake if you were not Now on to the rest.. 1) What you believe.. odds are.. your (possible) children will believe. You're free to ignore facts and data all you would like.. but give those potential or real children a chance to love science, etc. 2) Promoting critical thinking and teaching people that specific arguments are full of holes. You can also learn a few things and make a few great friends while you're at it. 3) It's a very important topic, IMO. It's really the scientific reasoning vs blind faith debate.

Insane? Nah. Uneducated (in this subject)? Yes. It's not that I care if you believe in evolution or not.. it's that you clearly have no understanding of evolutionary mechanisms and you misrepresent your faulty knowledge on internet forums. All i'm asking is that you educate yourself and then make a decision.

We (as a species, this includes God) evolved from something. What that something was.. or when that something was makes no real difference. It could have been 8 billion years ago and 100 million light years away.. or on the exact timeline of this planet. I'm blown away that people do not believe in evolution.

You should brush up your evolutionary biology.. man did not evolve from monkeys. Man and monkeys share a common ancestor -- that's it. Look around you -- things change. Bacteria becomes resistant to antibiotics through natural selection.. and this is happening rapidly. 'Young earth creationism' is a joke and it's no coincidence that those who believe it misrepresent scientific theories and the like. Challenge evolution all you would like -- that's science -- but challenge it with something worth while (not creationism). 1. I don't see your point.. if there is one. 2. Common ancestor. 3. Again.. another blatant misrepresentation. Your "soon" took place over billions of years. That's not to mention that bacteria did NOT evolve directly into fish. Please take a few college level (heck, even highschool level would work) biology courses and quit frequenting Kent Hovinds YEC websites.

History has never been very reliable.. it still is not today. 'The victor writes history'. Compare our history books to the ones in Russia (just an example).. you'll see quite a few discrepancies. Never heard of the Loch Ness monster? That's recent.. and there's quite a few people who have reported seeing it.. they're not all crazies, either. It really comes down to picking and choosing whose testimony is worth much and whose is worth little.. right? Or rather, the fact that when one persons testimony agrees with ones own.. and the other persons does not -- people choose the one that best suits them.

That's good. Prove to me that there isn't a dragon in my garage. Do you see why this exercise can get ridiculous? Once you realize that there is no evidence to support the claim there is no God.. you rely on faith (used as: sure knowledge of something unseen). This is not always a bad thing in my opinion. I was simply correcting a poor argument. The witnesses are (or should be) considered the LDSs best weapons. Unfortunately.. they've all passed on.. and if one can consider old writings true -- why not writings about dragons, mermaids, or Atlantis? I'm simply playing devils advocate here..

What you missed is that.. the burden of proof is on the one who makes the positive claim. Proving a negative (while in some cases possible) is simply not worth the extraordinary amount of time and effort it would take. So in a structured debate you would be the one who needs to 'prove' that God exists. As such.. you shifting the 'burden of proof' to those who do not share your view is a fallacy.