Third Hour Forum Rules - Please be familiar with these rules before posting

Rob Osborn

Banned
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3852

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Rob Osborn

  1. Why Creationism or Intelligent Design is Important

    in LDS Gospel Discussion

    Posted

    8 minutes ago, Vort said:

    Honestly, folks, Rob Osborn's mind is not merely shut. It's hermetically sealed. None of your arguments will change his mind, because he already knows The Truth®. Let him believe what he wants. No skin off anyone else's nose. Who knows? He might yet have something of value to offer on other topics. In the meantime, let him be content in his sure knowledge that he knows Science. Whatever.

    Please read the link I posted above. Thanks.

  3. Why Creationism or Intelligent Design is Important

    in LDS Gospel Discussion

    Posted

    9 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

    So you confess you can not counter the First Presidency Memo I posted...  The best you got is you don't like the people who made it available

    Please read the 2002 Feb. First presidency message. It states that the 1909 statement represents the current official teachings of the church in regards to evolution. I not only countered, I did it with the First Presidency.

  9. Why Creationism or Intelligent Design is Important

    in LDS Gospel Discussion

    Posted

    11 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

    That is from 1909 I quoted the most recent from 1931...  Unless you only believe in modern revelation when it is suits you

    Did you read it- ""In the early 1900s, questions concerning the Creation of the earth and the theories of evolution became the subject of much public discussion. In the midst of these controversies, the First Presidency issued the following in 1909, which expresses the Church’s doctrinal position on these matters."

  10. Why Creationism or Intelligent Design is Important

    in LDS Gospel Discussion

    Posted

    52 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

    Sad..

    Found here http://en.fairmormon.org/Mormonism_and_science/Pre-Adamites#cite_ref-1

    After listening to argument from both sides this is what the First Presidency of the Church declared of the matter.

    If we consider our selves faithful saints we should follow and emulate the wisdom of the First Presidency and not claim that we know better then them what is true about the subject

     

    "In the early 1900s, questions concerning the Creation of the earth and the theories of evolution became the subject of much public discussion. In the midst of these controversies, the First Presidency issued the following in 1909, which expresses the Church’s doctrinal position on these matters. A reprinting of this important First Presidency statement will be helpful as members of the Church study the Old Testament this year.

    Inquiries arise from time to time respecting the attitude of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints upon questions which, though not vital from a doctrinal standpoint, are closely connected with the fundamental principles of salvation. The latest inquiry of this kind that has reached us is in relation to the origin of man. It is believed that a statement of the position held by the Church upon this subject will be timely and productive of good.

    In presenting the statement that follows we are not conscious of putting forth anything essentially new; neither is it our desire so to do. Truth is what we wish to present, and truth—eternal truth—is fundamentally old. A restatement of the original attitude of the Church relative to this matter is all that will be attempted here. To tell the truth as God has revealed it, and commend it to the acceptance of those who need to conform their opinions thereto, is the sole purpose of this presentation....

     

    "It is held by some that Adam was not the first man upon this earth and that the original human being was a development from lower orders of the animal creation. These, however, are the theories of men. The word of the Lord declared that Adam was “the first man of all men” (Moses 1:34), and we are therefore in duty bound to regard him as the primal parent of our race."

    https://www.lds.org/ensign/2002/02/the-origin-of-man?lang=eng

  11. Why Creationism or Intelligent Design is Important

    in LDS Gospel Discussion

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Jane_Doe said:

    You do realize that I teach college science?  And yes, "what is science" is literally covered the first week of class.  And yes, I routinely fail people who refuse to learn.

    I dont care if you were the head chief of NASA, you cant run around saying someone elses beliefs arent science when you dont really know. ID theory is science. You can personally say it isnt, thats fine, but it is science.

  16. Why Creationism or Intelligent Design is Important

    in LDS Gospel Discussion

    Posted

    11 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

     

    Science is a branch of investigation which uses the scientific method to gain knowledge.  The scientific method tests hypothesis that can be proven or disproven  in an observable quantifiable and repeatable fashion.  Hypothesis which cannot be proven cannot be addressed by the scientific method and hence are not science.  Likewise hypothesis which cannot be disproven cannot be addressed by the scientific method and hence are not science.  

    The idea that there is a deity (let alone ID) cannot be proven or disproven in an observable quantifiable and repeatable fashion, and hence are not scientific questions.  That doesn't mean that they aren't valid or important questions, just that they don't fit within the domain of science.  

    ID is only trying to show there is a design element in nature and is best explained by showing that intelligent input is required to produce something intelligent itself.

  17. Why Creationism or Intelligent Design is Important

    in LDS Gospel Discussion

    Posted

    10 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

    I can understand this.  But it's just weird because of the Articles of Faith.  God doesn't have to reveal to us the truth of some things for us to determine it virtuous and of good report, or at least, not against virtue.  May it be that it's like the kid thinking there's a monster in the closet so he won't open it to find out if it's really there?

    I don't know, it kinda makes it difficult to approach the rest of modern scientific discovery, especially the advances in bioengineering without it, yes?

    Bioenginerring= Intelligent designers in a lab. Truly ironic.

  18. Why Creationism or Intelligent Design is Important

    in LDS Gospel Discussion

    Posted

    9 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

    That's fair.  As long as people reject it with good reason.  "Evolution doesn't coincide with my religious beliefs" is a good reason.  "Scientific evidence of ID debunks the scientific evidence of evolution" is a bad reason.

    Well, for you, in your mind, that works. For the rest of us it doesnt. But its okay, we can disagree on the science. Im just glad I have taught my children the right logic. Thats all that matters really for me.

  20. Why Creationism or Intelligent Design is Important

    in LDS Gospel Discussion

    Posted

    10 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

    Of course you don't have to believe me.  But at least understand what I'm saying.  I've never argued that Behe is not a scientist nor that he didn't use the scientific method in ID.  But, just because you ran a scientific experiment doesn't make it science.  My son can submit science projects every year for the science fair.  Doesn't necessarily mean that the science fair accepts it as sound science.  And like I said - this requires us to have the same understanding of the standards of acceptable scientific method.

    Its okay, we dont have to agree. You say its not science, I say it is. 

  21. Why Creationism or Intelligent Design is Important

    in LDS Gospel Discussion

    Posted

    17 minutes ago, Vort said:

    I suspect you are. Most Latter-day Saints, like most people in general, don't have a very good understanding of evolution. There is a longstanding bias in the Church against evolution, and many Saints are under the impression that the theory of evolution is some Satanic conspiracy to separate us from God. As someone with interest in these areas, I find that such an attitude sort of rankles.

    But I generally keep my mouth shut about it, and usually only say something when someone starts pontificating in Church about the evils of evolutionary theory or some such. I'm happy to let people believe what they will without insisting that they share my viewpoint in every detail. When Christ healed the crippled man at the pool of Bethesda, he didn't first lecture the man about the foolishness of believing such clearly non-doctrinal superstition about angels troubling the waters and the first one in gets a free healing. He just healed the guy. To me, that's a lesson that we don't need to be correct in all our beliefs to come unto God, and that in fact God may not even particularly care if we hold to certain false beliefs or superstitions.

    I think most people do have a pretty good view of evolution and are pretty smart with rejecting it. 

  23. Why Creationism or Intelligent Design is Important

    in LDS Gospel Discussion

    Posted

    58 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

    The Galileo experience pretty much opened and shut this case, didn't it?  Okay, so yes, there are still people who believe the earth is flat but they are on the fringes of Christianity.  I would think that the Galileo experience taught the Church that it need not be afraid of scientific discovery.  The truth of the scripture remains true regardless of what comes out of science.  Science merely gives us a better understanding of what scriptural verses actually imply.  So, instead of fighting science, the Church can use science.  Old-earth versus young-earth are both theories.  But old-earth has gone through scientific rigor and mountains of scientific evidence.  There's no need to resist the scientific evidence to cling to something without much evidence just because it is easier to reconcile with a few verses in scripture.  Rather, one can accept the evidence for either theory without it affecting in any way our belief in the truth of the gospel.  Why does it have to be a fight between religion and science?  They should work hand in hand to bring us closer to our understanding of God.

    There really isnt mountains of evidence as you claim. Both sides have evidence and each side is on opposite ends of the spectrum.

  24. Why Creationism or Intelligent Design is Important

    in LDS Gospel Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Rob Osborn

    2 hours ago, anatess2 said:

    Rob, this is the issue.  To a scientist, these are not the same things.  That's why it becomes a big argument.  If we're going to talk science at least acknowledge the presence/absence of science.  If we can't see the difference, then we can't understand why ID does not pass scientific muster.

    As long as you say ID isnt science, then we will always disagree. Im surprised that scientists in generall  cant see ID as science. It truly boggles my brain. Folks like Behe and Dembski must be idiots eh?

  25. Why Creationism or Intelligent Design is Important

    in LDS Gospel Discussion

    Posted

    15 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

    An ID site is not a scientific site.  Scientific definitions below--

    1.  Intelligent design is a theory that suggests that that the results of the evolutionary process are not random, but follow an intelligent design determined beforehand by some source.  An example source would be a a creator God.

    Difference: no reference to the origin of this life and uses evolution as a process within it.

    2. Evolution: the process by which different kinds of living organisms are thought to have developed and diversified from earlier forms during the history of the earth.

    Difference: no reference to the origin of life, only the diversification of species.  A more detailed explanation would specify that this is through the transmission of genetic inheritable traits through successive generations.  

    3. Peer review: the process in which pending publications are reviewed by peers in the field for scientific rigor and accuracy.  

    Difference: this is a process, not specific to ID. 

    Whatever makes you happy. Pretty much said the same thing...