volgadon

My experience was the same. Even emanate took me perhaps 3 seconds.

Do you perhaps mean the Mount of Beatitudes?

Metaphor? Not quite. A symbol, yes, but symbols can be an actual, physical occurence. Turning to a non-LDS source, the late Martin Buber (On the Bible, p. 53), there is the following observation on the meaning of signs in the Bible. "It is a symbolization, a sensory presentation of a manifested truth, a perceptible reality which, no matter whether it is more or less "wondrous," always reminds people once again of that truth." Same goes for baptism, and, indeed, the cleansing power of the atonement. As Buber goes on to say, "What is now only existent in words will then take on real existence."

Very weak argument.

You are welcome to do so. If I object I'll state it.

That is exactly how I understood it.

And what does accepting Christ have to do with anything? Oh, right, the atonement, where he took our sins upon himself. Are you still saying that the ability to do this comes as part of the evolutionary and technological process? No, forgiveness of sins is not something we can grant anyone. We can forgive someone for what they've done to us, but only God can forgive them of their sins. So, in other words, even if I forgive the whole day long, the sin doesn't go away unless God forgives it.

So, are you saying that the ability to cleanse from sin comes as part of the evolutionary and technological process?

Christyba, the other thread was closed before you had a chance to respond to my question. What I don't see in your hyper-evolved alien theory is how sin and atonement fit into it all. Would you mind expanding on that in relation to your theory?

What I don't see in you hyper-evolved alien theory how sin and atonement fit into it all.

Seems perfectly fine.

If they were even brothers in the usual English sense of the word, and not half-brothers, or cousins.

If it is God the Father speaking, though, one needn't speculate further. That is my point.

Love the book, can't stand the songs in the musical.

I don't find divine investiture a convincing explanation here.

Not the most fortunate of emoticon choices.

I don't think we'd ever even approximate God through technological advancement. Does technology make one more moral? Here are some thoughts from Woland in Bulgakov's Master and Margarita.

The way it is framed, her faith made her part of the covenant.

I'm sure he is, with the right set of knowledge. Something we do not fully possess.

I think that severing critical thinking from an history class is disastrous. I don't mind separate critical thinking classes, but it has to be a component of history as well.

I paid over 80 bucks for a college textbook in Western history that contained several sizeable bloopers, illogical staments, muddled thinking, and other fun items. Amen. Watching a movie and discussing it also allows one to come to grips critically with a very prevalent source of information about the world for many people. Aye.

Critical thinking is perhaps THE most important skill for any historian, yet all too often is taught so poorly.

Actually, that is an important skill to have as those are some of the commoner embellishments and distortions in primary (and even secondary) sources.

I dunno, movies can be an effective teaching tool as long as there is a good discussion afterwards. I'm speaking as a bookworm, BTW. It has to do with how effective the teacher is, as a good teacher will employ various kinds of media. A movie also helps spark interest in a topic, encouraging people to read books they might not have tried otherwise.

Sounds about right for a higher-calibre historical film. Why shouldn't this be used in a classroom? Seems like one could convey the gist, then open the door to discuss the differences.