• Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Thanks
    DennisTate reacted to NeuroTypical in Plandemic and 5G conspiracies and...   
    Both the existence and details of this virus, and the all the different national/federal/state/local government's various reactions to it, have all made perfect sense to me...
    Since we got a new virus with a high R0 value, where people can be carriers for days and not have any symptoms.
    Since we got a new virus with a high R0 value, where people can be carriers for days and not have any symptoms, and the thing has a higher fatality rate than the usual flu.
    No really, high R0 value, asymptomatic carriers, and higher death rate.  Those are three things.  They're the things that make everything make perfect sense.  If you don't understand or believe one or more of them, I suppose you could have your beliefs about it.  But I both understand and believe all 3, and it all makes sense to me.
    Governors shutting things down, doesn't have a single thing to do with the federal constitution.  It has to do with the individual states' constitutions.  I wish more people would understand this important point.  State governments don't get their rights from the constitution, they get them from the people.  
    Best dang thing I've seen during this whole thing: A reporter asked Trump something like "You just said that you wish more states would X, and yet there are reports that some states are not X-ing.  Why doesn't your administration do more to make these governors X?"   Trump replied "Well, there's this thing called the constitution..."
  2. Thanks
    DennisTate reacted to JohnsonJones in Are LDS open to Theistic Evolutionary Theory?   
    Something VERY controversial that I've thought upon but do not know what to think on it (no real opinion formed yet).  It's born of some Christians trying to equate creationism with that of our theories of evolution, the universe, and scientific ideas of how the universe, this earth, and life on it occurred.
    There is an idea (and there is a similar one for the Book of Mormon as well) of WHY the Children of Israel were the chosen people of the Lord.  They were his literal offspring (or, in otherwords, the real children of Adam).
    In this idea, there were MEN and then there were the Children of Heaven.  I gather this is ALL from one verse found in Genesis 6, verse 2.  It says that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them of wives all which they chose.  The idea is that there were men on the earth already, but they were NOT the actual children of Adam.  Thus, what happened was intermingling.
    This allows for evolution to have occurred, but also the creation and fall of Adam.  Thus, those that are the actual children of Adam are the ones that are gathered and saved under the umbrella of the Lord's atonement.  With the spread of the seed of Abraham throughout the world, it would encompass MANY in this world, but only those that are true children heed the call of Christianity and the Lord and follow him, while those that are not do not necessarily follow this call.
    This means that evolution occurred, and when Adam fell, he came into the mortal world among these mortal beings that had evolved from Apes...but Adam himself...did NOT evolve from Apes but was of a Father in Heaven.
    Now, I am under the impression this is NOT that much of an accepted idea in the Church or my faith.  I'm not sure where I stand on it.  It COULD explain a good many things (why there were a special and select group of Children and People of the Lord rather than ALL people being his children...though there are also other explanations to it, as well as how genetically we were diverse enough to continue as a species...scientifically speaking...two individuals do not have enough genetic variability to really keep a species going without a GREAT DEAL of interaction with scientific items that were probably not around in the primitive societies prior to 100 years ago...etc...etc...etc).  However, I think that it is not something that would be really accepted in our faith by most.
    However, I think it is an example of people of faith trying to figure out how science and religion may both be accurate and true, without the one contradicting the other.
    (PS: And for those wondering, though I think it's come up on these forums before, is the idea that Lehi's family had a similar experience.  There were other inhabitants on the American continent, and that the families of Laman and Lemuel and possibly some of the sons of Ishamael intermingled with them, and possibly the Nephites, though it sounds more like they could have been more pure in that they did not intermingle their bloodlines, and thus created the genetic variability as well as the numbers to have wars and other items in the short span that they apparently did.  Very similar to the Adam and Eve with evolutionary theory ideas I've heard, but obviously slightly different as well).
  3. Thanks
    DennisTate reacted to MrShorty in Are LDS open to Theistic Evolutionary Theory?   
    So, it isn't so much that evolutionists fail to present evidence for their theory, it's that creationists reject the evidence that has been presented. I suppose the thing that we disagree on is why fossil evidence can or cannot be used as evidence for macroevolution.
    Wikipedia has a fairly extensive summary article on the evidences for evolution. It includes evidence from the fossil record.
    I would like to note that I have mostly enjoyed this discussion, as it has mostly avoided the worst of the contentions that often bring more heat than light to this debate. I don't expect either side to convince the other in a lowly forum like this, but it is nice for once to have the debate go on without accusations of apostasy or similar.
  4. Thanks
    DennisTate reacted to Traveler in Are LDS open to Theistic Evolutionary Theory?   
    Interesting thoughts - but do you realize that G-d created the shark before he created the dinosaurs and has not improved on its basic design since then.  Also that many consider mankind to be his greatest creative achievement - but he used himself for that design - which is a design what existed long before even the shark?  Why did he wait so long to create man - when he already a working prototype?
    The Traveler 
  5. Thanks
    DennisTate reacted to ldsguy422 in Are LDS open to Theistic Evolutionary Theory?   
    Macroevolution, the idea that essentially one animal can change into another kind. That's much, much different than microevolution, which is something like horses, and donkeys, and zebras all deriving from the same common ancestor. But, that's where the evolution stops. You don't cross over into other kinds. At least we don't have any evidence for this. Some like to argue that it takes millions and millions of years to see the results of macroevolution; they'll say it's basically microevolution + microevolution + microevolution... a thousand times over. Okay, I get that. But, there's still no evidence for it. It's hard for me to wrap my head around the idea that the offspring of a parent will produce something other than its own kid.
  6. Thanks
    DennisTate reacted to ldsguy422 in Are LDS open to Theistic Evolutionary Theory?   
    Yup. The Hebrew word for create, bara, doesn't mean to create something out of nothing. It more appropriately means to organize, the same way a man might assemble raw material to "create" a vehicle. This seems to be in alignment with the law of conservation of mass, which states that energy cannot be created or destroyed. God was not creating ex nihilo as  you say, he was simply organizing matter that already existed. 
    Microevolution is a scientific fact. There's no denying that. It's observable, it's repeatable, it's testable. We can see this within the canine and feline families. The macro side of evolution is the one where people have trouble wrapping their heads around. Believing that the offspring of one taxonomic group can change to another group is very difficult to reconcile. I believe in evolution in the sense that things change over time. But, I believe there are limits within each species. 
  7. Thanks
    DennisTate got a reaction from Anddenex in Are LDS open to Theistic Evolutionary Theory?   
    Thank you immensely for this.......
    Here is a statement from a near death experiencer that I think Latter day Saints will tend to take more seriously and understand better than most Evangelical Christians will tend to do.

    Dr. Richard Eby:
  8. Thanks
    DennisTate reacted to Dismatt in Are LDS open to Theistic Evolutionary Theory?   
    Well, compare this to what's said in Abraham (4:20-21):
    20 And the Gods said: Let us prepare the waters to bring forth abundantly the moving creatures that have life; and the fowl, that they may fly above the earth in the open expanse of heaven.
    21 And the Gods prepared the waters that they might bring forth great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters were to bring forth abundantly after their kind; and every winged fowl after their kind. And the Gods saw that they would be obeyed, and that their plan was good.
    24 And the Gods prepared the earth to bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle and creeping things, and beasts of the earth after their kind; and it was so, as they had said.
    A few things I find interesting here: the waters/earth are described as being "prepared" to bring forth "after their/his kind". Based on this description it doesn't appear to me that whales or the living creatures were created on the spot but that the environment was prepared to to be brought forth and the Gods watch and see that they were obeyed. Also in v2 it states "and the Spirit of the Gods was brooding upon the face of the waters." An 1828 dictionary of "Brood" gives: "To sit on and cover, as a fowl on her eggs for the purpose of warming them and hatching chickens, or as a hen over her chickens, to warm and protect them."
    Notice also the creation of man is described separately.
    I only find this interesting, I don't expect to understand the creation process and I know evolution has been denied by Church leaders but currently takes no stance. I just find it interesting that this sounds very similar to the general consensus among scientists.
  9. Thanks
    DennisTate reacted to Anddenex in Are LDS open to Theistic Evolutionary Theory?   
    Here is a good article to read from a First Presidency of the Church given in 1909, "Origin of Man."
  10. Thanks
    DennisTate reacted to Br-Ahman in Does Multiverse Theory fit with Ezekiel 37 and the White Throne Judgment?   
    It seems obvious to me, from these NDEs and from many scriptures, that God can SEE all possible futures (and can show glimpses of them to some of us, when it serves His purposes), but believing that all of these possible futures are actually playing out at the same time in alternate universes is an INIFINITELY DIFFERENT thing. I would have to agree with Vort (the user) and call that "silly" and "nonsensical".
  11. Okay
    DennisTate reacted to Carborendum in Could the HOLY SPIRIT be YHWH the Mother?   
    You had once stated that you were interested in being baptized as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  We do NOT hold NDEs to be scripture.  So, if you're not willing to plow your field and re-sow, you're not ready for the waters of baptism.
    The Church is enlightened by more people who carry with them the Spirit of God into the Church.  Your intent from the beginning has been to bring with you all manner of false doctrine so that you may be driven with the wind and tossed.
    STOP IT!
    Humble yourself and learn from the Oracles of God.  Learn from actual scriptures rather than the privately interpreted house-of-cards that you've formed for yourself.  Those who have claimed NDEs are NOT PROPHETS!!! just because they claim an NDE. Stop treating them as such.
  12. Thanks
    DennisTate reacted to Br-Ahman in Does Multiverse Theory fit with Ezekiel 37 and the White Throne Judgment?   
    I've often wondered whether the multiverse theory wasn't concocted by atheists to explain away how the laws of physics, the universe, the solar system, and the earth have turned out to be so perfectly fine-tuned for the support of life.
  13. Thanks
    DennisTate reacted to Vort in Does Multiverse Theory fit with Ezekiel 37 and the White Throne Judgment?   
    As far as I can tell, the multiverse idea was concocted by comic book writers who wanted to be able to explore the same comic book character (like Spiderman or Wonder Woman) taking mutually exclusive paths of action. The so-called Many Worlds interpretation* of quantum mechanics seemed to them to give a great excuse to do this, and voilá! A silly idea is born.
    *To be fair, Schrödinger himself appeared to entertain this idea of each quantum event creating or existing in a separate universe. So there may be as much "mad scientist" as "bored artist" in the idea's genesis. At this point it appears to be accepted as one mainstream interpretation, I suspect due to pulp fiction like Star Trek using nonsensical "multiverse" ideas as storyline plots.
  14. Haha
    DennisTate reacted to NeuroTypical in Does Multiverse Theory fit with Ezekiel 37 and the White Throne Judgment?   
    I wonder what the universe with the Good Vort is like?
  15. Haha
  16. Thanks
    DennisTate reacted to Carborendum in Could the HOLY SPIRIT be YHWH the Mother?   
    I have to wonder, are NDEs your "scriptural canon" upon which you base your faith?  If not, why do you lean so heavily upon these words of men, rather than the word of the Lord? Why do you quote them so much?
    If you do use them as part of your scriptural canon, then why do you lean so heavily upon these words of men, rather than the word of the Lord?
  17. Thanks
    DennisTate reacted to Moonbeast32 in Are LDS open to Theistic Evolutionary Theory?   
    @DennisTate I've been reading a few of your posts lately, and you seem to fixate on near death experiences a lot. You often talk about theories, or teachings by mystics in and out of the church of Christ.
    I think you're missing the point.
    What makes the Church of Jesus Christ strong, is its doctrines. These doctrines are simple and easy. Look through the scriptures, and you'll find there's nothing mentioned about string theory, or multiverse theory, or "grand unified theory." 
    We as a church are not in a position to disprove anything, especially not while using near death experiences as our evidence. What we are in a position to do, is prove that God lives, and loves his children, that he actively ministers among Man through the organization and execution of the priesthood offices. This is our stance: the pure and simple doctrines of the plan of salvation, the restoration, and the teachings of Jesus Christ. Anything more than this cometh of evil.
    @DennisTate, have you read the Book of Mormon? If so, when was the last time you read it all the way through? I promise you, you have so much more to learn about the nature of creation from that book than you have to learn from unaffiliated, non-endorsed visions and revelations.such as you've referenced.
  18. Okay
  19. Okay
    DennisTate reacted to anatess2 in Could the HOLY SPIRIT be YHWH the Mother?   
    Well, if he would take some time to talk to the missionaries and consult with the Holy Spirit about it, he just might get an inkling of how limited his understanding of God is when stabbing in the dark.
  20. Thanks
    DennisTate reacted to anatess2 in Could the HOLY SPIRIT be YHWH the Mother?   
    Not in LDS teaching.
    Gender is an eternal characteristic of the God and the Godhead is Male - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all male.  Heavenly Mother who is The Father's eternal companion is female.
    In any case, this topic is addressed here:  
  21. Thanks
    DennisTate reacted to Traveler in Are LDS open to Theistic Evolutionary Theory?   
    It is my understanding that the concept of "creation" in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is not ex nihilo or out of "nothing" but more of a concept of intelligent engineering of change or to organize.    To be honest, I cannot think of a better definition or statement of evolution than that idea of constant vigil of intelligent oversight in maintaining order in a universe capable of change - especially change defined by the second law of thermal dynamics. 
    I have argued with many fellow scientists - that believing life can evolve by chance from singularity is infinitely more far fetched and improbable than the probability of a G-d.  But then my atheists friends say - that such does not answer where G-d came from - to which I say they missed the whole point that intelligence evolves.  Since we know intelligence exist because we are intelligent - that evolution defines at its foundation that G-d is a possibility that cannot be discounted without explicit proof.
    The Traveler
  22. Thanks
    DennisTate reacted to lonetree in Are LDS open to Theistic Evolutionary Theory?   
    As an outsider, I remember reading Sterling McMurrin's stuff on evolution and theology in the 1990s and found it sensible. Nowadays I'm not so sure & tend to doubt whether theism and evolution can be reconciled. Even if evolution does not necessarily need to be 'godless' there are still the factors of the immense stretches of time, and (pointless?)animal cruelty to consider-at least for me. Of course, God could guide or use evolution to bring about a wonderful creation. But why would he-unless his options were pretty limited.  The Samuel Johnson observation on women preachers comes to mind.
  23. Thanks
  24. Thanks
    DennisTate reacted to Vort in Can a Christian who takes the idea of reincarnation seriously...   
    Fwiw, I would strongly urge you to avoid such fringe doctrine. The prophets have never taught any such thing. Even if we were to suppose there was some truth to the idea, I see no possible good coming from such teachings. It is a false doctrine that nurtures a false hope, appealing to the natural man who wants to eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die. No need to fret about repentance. Just go your way and do whatever you want. There's always mañana. I realize that it's a fun intellectual exercise to play with such ideas, but in doing so you run the very real risk of accepting them into your heart, where they will do untold damage.
  25. Thanks
    DennisTate reacted to Moonbeast32 in Can a Christian who takes the idea of reincarnation seriously...   
    Not really. Before you can be baptized, you must be taught and accept the revealed doctrines of the plan of salvation. This doctrine teaches that there is only 1 shot at mortality. Once your first incarnation ends, you never get another. However, we are taught that our first incarnation resumes and is perfected in the process called the ressurection.
    These doctrines must be accepted in order to be baptized. They are fundamentally at odds with the doctrine of reincarnation.
    There are however similarities. The plan of salvation teaches that all individuals had a life and personality before incarnation. I believe that a few are even able to recall bits and pieces of that life. Though I know of no doctrine supporting this, I believe that the unique personalities, passions, fears, and skills developed before incarnation carry over into this life. Likewise, we will be the same people after we die, and yet again when resurrected.
    But despite parallels to reincarnation, there is no flexibility; no room for speculation in this regard. New converts must know and understand these things before baptism.