Bluejay

Hi, Changed. I like HGT too. But, can you give me any reason why "new genetic programs" cannot emerge through other means? For example, why can't they occur by the normal processes of chemistry? ----- This is very misleading. "Traditional" evolution uses the phrase "random mutations" to describe the sources/causes of changes to the genome. They are called "random" because we don't know how to predict their incidence. Note that the term "spontaneous," which means "without a cause," is not used. Invariably, as scientists study mutations more, they will learn more about what actually causes them. HGT is just one of many causes of mutations. Others are radiation, imperfections in the DNA replication mechanism in the cell, recombination and crossing over during meiosis, pH imbalances, dehydration, etc.

Hi, Changed. I think that takes away from the fall. I agree with you: it certainly changed how I view the Fall. ----- Much more solid than what? Than the Theory of Evolution? In terms of the Theory of Evolution, horizontal gene transfer is simply one of many mechanisms that are grouped under the catch-all phrase, "random mutations." It presents no contradiction to the Theory of Evolution. ----- Well, sure it could: but the proper way to approach a problem isn't to find out which interpretation could result in the answer you want, but to find out which interpretation is more in harmony with the evidence. That there are hundreds of fossil specimens whose skeletal appearance fits between humans and apes, and that these fossils can be dated radiometrically to match a logical progression from the more ape-like to the more human-like forms, combined with similar suites of evidence for dozens, even hundreds of other organisms on our planet... suggests that the evolutionary explanation is more likely to be accurate. ----- I think this refers to spiritual death.

Hi, Justice. No, it doesn't. ??

Hi, Threepercent. I'm pretty sure the key to understanding the creation is to learn about creation.

Hi, Changed. No one has said otherwise. ----- In 2 Nephi 2:23, it is stated that Adam would have had no children. It does not leave wiggle-room for immortal children. So, your entire argument topples here: Adam would not have had any children at all: not mortal, not immortal. ----- Okay. But, evolving from apes is also coming to Earth as a mortal...

Hi, Changed. What does this have to do with Adam's infertility?

Hi, Believer. I actually addressed this same question on the other recent evolution thread. Here was my proposal: Don't ask me what other evolutionists think, though.

Hi, Threepercent. I was afraid that this was what you were getting at. Ironically, you're suffering from a misunderstanding of the scriptures, not a misunderstanding of evolution. Remember when Jesus was resurrected, and Mary was horrified to learn that Jesus's body was not there? Why was His body not there? Because Jesus was alive again in that same body. God doesn't make you a new body when you're resurrected: rather, He changes the one you already have into a celestial state. And, since that body has already been created, there is no need to create it again.

Hi, threepercent. What? I just explained in my first post why this is an invalid question: what do you hope to accomplish by simply repeating an invalid question? Please try to engage in the discussion. ----- Individuals do not evolve. Any change that happens to an individual during that individual's lifetime is not evolution, because it cannot be passed on to the individual's offspring. So, any change that happens to your body between now and your celestialization is also not evolution. Evolution has nothing to do with changes taking place within individuals: its only jurisdiction is the changes taking place within populations. If multiple generations are not involved, evolution is not involved. So, your question is invalid: do not ask it again.

Evolution created his body? Huh.......and I thought Heavenly Father should get credit for that.:huh: "By" in that sentence is used in an operative sense, not an anthropomorphic sense: as in, "God created your body by evolution."

This scripture contains two clues: (1) fever, and (2) seasonal. How can you conclude "tropical diseases" from this?

Hi, Threepercent. Since you are typing on a computer, I assume you have fingers? If so, I think it is safe to conclude that you already have a body. So, your body has already been created by evolution. There is no need to create it again. ----- Individual bodies cannot evolve in the manner described by the Theory of Evolution: ToE only deals with the changes that occur between generations (i.e. it deals with the differences between you and your parents; not between 5-year-old you and 25-year-old you).

The Mormon katydid?

Hi, Changed. Please make your points to the proper person: I'm not the one arguing that it is about making humans less special. That was Ray Hale. ----- Spiritual death. ----- What do you mean by "perfect"? I consider infertility to be a disorder. If, as the story goes, Adam was infertile, how can he also be considered perfect? ----- Yes. ----- Why? Because apes are perfect? Does primate ancestry mean a man can't sin? Sin comes as a function of awareness about right and wrong. Let's suppose Adam was the first human in a line of apes. If so, becoming aware of right and wrong made it possible for Adam to sin; and, Adam was the first with this awareness. Then, Adam sinned. He was the first being on earth to sin, and thus, he brought spiritual death into the world. Animals, who are not aware of right and wrong, cannot sin, and thus, cannot experience spiritual death. Thus, the whole world remained in the same state of unawareness, until Adam Fell. ----- Then so be it. Or, alternately, it destroys what you think the Fall and the Plan of Salvation is.

Hi, Gatorman. What difference does that make? Moses was able to be in God's presence at the top of Mount Sinai for 40 days and 40 nights (Exodus 24:18), so I think you're wrong about this.

Hi, Rayhale. In what way would evolution make humans less special?

Hi, Tubaloth. Why would you assume that creating a spirit and creating a body are equivalent processes? Perhaps spirits are created one way, and bodies, in another way. ----- It's not about what God need: it's about what He does. Just because He did it one way doesn't mean He couldn't have done it differently. ----- You can't help your children evolve, because individuals do not evolve: populations evolve. Evolution happens between generations, because that is the point where genomes are mixed and changed. ----- Yes. It happens everytime the distribution of genetic traits in the new generation is different from the distribution of those same traits in the preceding generation.

My advice to you: don't ask people for advice. I have 2 reasons: 1. Fortune-cookie language is impossible to actually apply to your life. 2. Every bit of advice you hear will invariably be contradicted by advice from somebody else.

Hi, Hemidakota and John Doe. "Natural" does not mean "acceptable" or "good": it only means that it happens in nature (notice the etymological similarities between "nature" and "natural"). If anything, Mormons should believe that "natural" means the opposite of "good" or "acceptable": Remember Mosiah 3:19 (cited earlier in this thread): "For the natural man is an enemy to God... unless he... putteth off the natural man and becometh a saint..." Reverence for nature is currently in vogue in our societies, so we tend to assign positive value to things that are natural. But, the term "natural," itself, is not a value judgment, but a simple description of origin. Do not conflate the concept with the value it is assigned by society.

Hi, John Doe. Why is being an animal such an offensive idea? As far as biology is concerned, you have a limited number of options: AnimalPlantFungusSlime MoldAlgaAmoebaBacteriumetc... I kind of figured the "animal" one was the least offensive and the most appropriate. ----- It isn't really about what's natural for you, though. Nobody is trying to convince you that you should be homosexual. The only thing that is being said is that homosexuality happens, just like blue eyes, bee stings and weeds in the garden happen. And, they're certainly right: it does happen.

Hi, Tubaloth. But, the second estate is a reward for keeping the first estate, and we still have to undergo a test here. So, rewards and tests are clearly not mutually exclusive. ----- By the same logic, if we are able to progress in the second estate, then there is no point in the first estate. But, we did have a first estate, and there was a point to the first estate, and we can progress in the second estate, so I don't think your logic holds up.

Hi, Tom. I have never liked Joseph Smith's conclusion in the King Follet discourse. It seems like an unfounded extrapolation to me. The very scripture that Joseph quotes seems to contradict the conclusion: Right after saying, "I do nothing that my Father doesn't do," Jesus lists something that He does that the Father doesn't do. Given this, I'm not sure what significance is appropriate to attribute to this scripture at all.

Hi, Tubaloth. Or, in the case of those people who lived during the Apostasy, two more millennia...? {Added by Edit: I don't agree with you on this one. We know that there is a contingency plan in place for those who don't have the opportunity in this life. How does not having an opportunity in this life fit in with your notion that God has tailored His plan to accomodate the needs of individuals entirely during this life?}

Hi, Churchmouse. I suppose you would prefer them to tell you the month before it happens? ----- In many ways, you have no idea how true this is. Still, not all research has to be about immediate, pressing concerns of people: stuff like this is just what nerds do when they're bored and need to practice their math skills ("use it or lose it," they always say). A lot of background research---which laypersons will usually see as frivolous, unimportant and wasteful of resources---has to go into a field of study before we can start gleaning practical benefits from it. If something major were to happen that might effect your life, I'm sure you'd be glad that these guys know their calculus.

Hi, Traveler. How about the things that people don't worry about? What percentage of those never happens?