prisonchaplain Posted January 16, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 16, 2017 40 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said: It is central to LDS beliefs that God is the creator. Evolution is a theory on how the various species came to be through time. It does not address the why nor can it. For those answers, we can turn to religion, but not science. Hence the idea of evolution (the how) and creationism (the why) actually compliment each other. In the 1970s-80s too many Christians delved into scientific questions, insisting that the Bible had definitive answers. In the 2000s and 20-teens too many naturalistic scientists seem to be insisting that their experiments and analyses offer definitive answers to theological questions about the origins of life and matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane_Doe Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 8 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said: In the 1970s-80s too many Christians delved into scientific questions, insisting that the Bible had definitive answers. In the 2000s and 20-teens too many naturalistic scientists seem to be insisting that their experiments and analyses offer definitive answers to theological questions about the origins of life and matter. Color me skeptical. I would like to see some of these papers. Even if someone could *prove* (not merely theorize) on how life came to be, it does not address the why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prisonchaplain Posted January 17, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 Here's an example of a claim to having discovered the "missing like" that may indicate the chemistry needed for life to begin (sans intelligent design, of course): http://www.dailygalaxy.com/my_weblog/2010/05/scientists-discover-missing-link-between-organic-and-inorganic-life.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MormonGator Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 (edited) 5 hours ago, zil said: Like this one, that looks shockingly like @MormonGator wandering the compound... What's heartbreaking @zil? The park is now a tourist trap because of this pic going viral. Another pic was taken of him, and people are getting much too close to a 13 foot wild alligator. Tragically, some idiot is going to try taking a selfie with the gator and will get mauled. An alligator that big is usually afraid of humans (that's how they got that big. Avoiding people) but it'll defend itself, kill someone, than have to be put down. So tragic. Edited January 17, 2017 by MormonGator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Osborn Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 4 hours ago, Jane_Doe said: Speaking as a profession peer-reviewed scientist, such mockery would be EXTREMELY inappropriate. A scientist may have whatever religious views they want. However, for peer-reeved scientific research, we need to address scientific questions and "whether or not there is a God/designer" is not a question that fits into the scientific method. The limitations of the scientific method are very well known. Its not the question of whether there is a God/designer. Your bias towards secularism is showing through. Intelligent design theory is about refuting random evolutionary processes from chance alone. ID theory doesnt say evolution isnt possible, its saying the mechanism fir evolution is flawed. ID seeks to show that intelligent designs in nature only come about by intelligent designs preceding it. Now, who or what drives that process of design in nature is not important to ID theory. Science is the drive to provide answers to what we observe. If what we observe as intelligence shows an intelligent process precedibg it then we shoukd acknowledge it. Thats science isnt it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MormonGator Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 (edited) 17 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said: Your bias towards secularism is showing through. With all due respect, the fact that you think anyone who disagrees with you is "biased towards secularism or liberalism" or whatever ideology you personally don't agree with is more than a bit troubling. @Jane_Doe is hardly part of the vast humanist secular conspiracy. Edited January 17, 2017 by MormonGator Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Osborn Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 1 minute ago, MormonGator said: With all due respect, the fact that you think anyone who disagrees with you is "biased towards secularism or liberalism" or whatever ideology you personally don't agree with is more than a bit troubling. @Jane_Doe is hardly part of the vast humanist secular conspiracy. Im just replying to a very typical secular evolutionist type of reply. Whether she is really like that or not doesnt matter, its the fact that the arguments used by secularism are biased against anything that may denote deity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a mustard seed Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 I don't know...evolution kind of seems to me that it's saying God's design of us was imperfect. That He needed to tweak it and progress us from fish to ape to man or whatever. Why? When we look like Him already why would he go through all that as if searching for what to finish us as? Adaptation makes sense because we've seen it happen but missing link does not jibe with what we know about the nature of God. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Osborn Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 (edited) 54 minutes ago, a mustard seed said: I don't know...evolution kind of seems to me that it's saying God's design of us was imperfect. That He needed to tweak it and progress us from fish to ape to man or whatever. Why? When we look like Him already why would he go through all that as if searching for what to finish us as? Adaptation makes sense because we've seen it happen but missing link does not jibe with what we know about the nature of God. I find it strange that with all the advanced knowledge that LDS have that some members would still believe man evolved from a lower species. If we are the seed of God, doesnt that mean we are his literal offspring? The geneology of man according to scripture places us back to Noah, then from Noah back to Adam and Adam as being the son of God. Why would God, who according to our doctrine has a physical body with sex organs just like ours use millions of years of chance to get a son who looks just like him when God already has the seed within to create a son the first time through a known process? Thus why it truly boggles my mind. Edited January 17, 2017 by Rob Osborn a mustard seed 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane_Doe Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said: Its not the question of whether there is a God/designer. Your bias towards secularism is showing through. Intelligent design theory is about refuting random evolutionary processes from chance alone. ID theory doesnt say evolution isnt possible, its saying the mechanism fir evolution is flawed. ID seeks to show that intelligent designs in nature only come about by intelligent designs preceding it. Now, who or what drives that process of design in nature is not important to ID theory. Can God not control what we call chance? He sure can. 1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said: Science is the drive to provide answers to what we observe. If what we observe as intelligence shows an intelligent process precedibg it then we shoukd acknowledge it. Thats science isnt it? If such an intelligent designer was testable with repeated observation. As it is not, it is not a question science can answer. Yes, yes, there are indeed questions science can't answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane_Doe Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 1 hour ago, Rob Osborn said: Im just replying to a very typical secular evolutionist type of reply. Whether she is really like that or not doesnt matter, its the fact that the arguments used by secularism are biased against anything that may denote deity. With all due respect, if you're going to call someone something, you should first get your facts straight. For example, I am anything but a secular humanist or biased against deity. Your comments here were off based and hurtful. The truth is I am an extremely devoted LDS woman who's active in her ward, joyful TR holder, and yes I study evolution professionally and that ENHANCES my faith in the almighty creator. Yep- I get to be paid to study God's handiwork, it's awesome a mustard seed 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane_Doe Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 1 hour ago, a mustard seed said: I don't know...evolution kind of seems to me that it's saying God's design of us was imperfect. That He needed to tweak it and progress us from fish to ape to man or whatever. Why? When we look like Him already why would he go through all that as if searching for what to finish us as? Adaptation makes sense because we've seen it happen but missing link does not jibe with what we know about the nature of God. Christ is a carpenter, not a magician. The fact that He carves our physical bodies out stroke by stroke, using natural law as His tools in no way dismisses His marvelous work. Vort 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Osborn Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 3 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said: Can God not control what we call chance? He sure can. If such an intelligent designer was testable with repeated observation. As it is not, it is not a question science can answer. Yes, yes, there are indeed questions science can't answer. Again, we are not asking if science can find the intelligent designer, thats not ID theory. If science can show evidence that life can only arise from life precedeing it, shouldnt we embrace it as part of science? Thats what ID theory is seeking to establish. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Osborn Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 2 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said: With all due respect, if you're going to call someone something, you should first get your facts straight. For example, I am anything but a secular humanist or biased against deity. Your comments here were off based and hurtful. The truth is I am an extremely devoted LDS woman who's active in her ward, joyful TR holder, and yes I study evolution professionally and that ENHANCES my faith in the almighty creator. Yep- I get to be paid to study God's handiwork, it's awesome Im sorry if I offended you, that wasnt my point. Your answer typically shows a bias towards secularism. Thats all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane_Doe Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 2 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said: Again, we are not asking if science can find the intelligent designer, thats not ID theory. If science can show evidence that life can only arise from life precedeing it, shouldnt we embrace it as part of science? Thats what ID theory is seeking to establish. I am not sure what you are asking. You seem to have a non-traditional view of ID and mixing evolution with origin-ofo-lie theories (those are two different things). mordorbund 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane_Doe Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 1 minute ago, Rob Osborn said: Im sorry if I offended you, that wasnt my point. Your answer typically shows a bias towards secularism. Thats all. Except there was not bias towards secularism... It seems like you are pointing at nothing. I don't know if that the case, or if I'm just not seeing what you're pointing at. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 5 hours ago, prisonchaplain said: I offer the following link, not to advocate the site or perspective, but so that any who wish may read the basic beliefs of "biblical creationism" from a primary source (sort of like trying to learn about LDS beliefs by going to lds.org). http://www.icr.org/tenets Ok. I know you weren't advocating their position. But I read it. It doesn't really say anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a mustard seed Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 1 minute ago, Jane_Doe said: Christ is a carpenter, not a magician. The fact that He carves our physical bodies out stroke by stroke, using natural law as His tools in no way dismisses His marvelous work. That's not what evolution says, though. It says that we came from monkey-like creatures, that their bones left behind are evidence of this. This isn't a poetic interpretation of Adam being formed in the Garden of Eden, God's hands over him, manipulating the flesh, the long hair of homo erectus(Idk) falling off and his overgrown jaw and protruding brow easing into a man's forehead. This is, "here are the bones of what we were before." Why? And how? Was Adam a monkey or monkey-like creature? Why would Heavenly Father do that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a mustard seed Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 19 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said: I find it strange that with all the advanced knowledge that LDS have that some members would still believe man evolved from a lower species. If we are the seed of God, doesnt that mean we are his literal offspring? The geneology of man according to scripture places us back to Noah, then from Noah back to Adam and Adam as being the son of God. Why would God, who according to our doctrine has a physical body with sex organs just like ours use millions of years of chance to get a son who looks just like him when God already has the seed within to create a son the first time through a known process? Thus why it truly boggles my mind. And if we accept that man does not evolve from anything and was put here just as he was made, then why would all of the other creatures need to be massaged and developed into being their rightful creatures? And when is all of this happening? I thought there was no death or procreating in the Garden of Eden, that everything existed in a spirit state there. And as soon as he left, Adam was instructed to perform blood sacrifices with his flocks of sheep. When was all this evolving happening? When were the bones being left there from the previous creatures as they died and their progeny carried on these matured characteristics? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane_Doe Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 2 minutes ago, a mustard seed said: That's not what evolution says, though. It says that we came from monkey-like creatures, that their bones left behind are evidence of this. Christ did not pull our physical bodies out of a hat- again He's not a magician. Rather, He carved them gradually from preexisting physical lifeforms He had created, moving as a carpenter- stroke by stroke, change by change - until our physical bodies were what He had designed beforehand. At which points, they were willing to host the spirits of God's children. 2 minutes ago, a mustard seed said: Why would Heavenly Father do that? Because God works line upon line in ALL things. He works with natural law as it's Master. Vort 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a mustard seed Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 (edited) 9 hours ago, Jane_Doe said: Christ did not pull our physical bodies out of a hat- again He's not a magician. Rather, He carved them gradually from preexisting physical lifeforms He had created, moving as a carpenter- stroke by stroke, change by change - until our physical bodies were what He had designed beforehand. At which points, they were willing to host the spirits of God's children. Because God works line upon line in ALL things. He works with natural law as it's Master. When? In the Garden? Even though there was no blood in any of the bodies there and no death until the Fall? Why did these physical preforms leave bones behind? Was Adam a human being or a monkey-like creature? MY point, in case it was missed, was that the discussion is irrelevant until you take into account what the scriptures say. If you're mormon and have a testimony of the scriptures then I'd really like a belief in evolution also to be explained because no, they are not compatible. Edited January 17, 2017 by a mustard seed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Osborn Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 23 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said: I am not sure what you are asking. You seem to have a non-traditional view of ID and mixing evolution with origin-ofo-lie theories (those are two different things). My view of ID theory is mainstream ID theory. ID theory is misunderstood by most because of all the Darwinian evoloutionists propaganda against ID proponents. Mainstream Evolutionary biology must deal with origins of life as it is a part of its own theory. Every biology class I ever took dealt with the origin of life. Every biology book I have owned has at least one or more chapters dealing with answering the origins of life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prisonchaplain Posted January 17, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 1 hour ago, Carborendum said: Ok. I know you weren't advocating their position. But I read it. It doesn't really say anything. My take-away is that they promote those scientific theories and findings that comport with a very literal interpretation of the Bible's creation accounts, and especially of a younger earth. This contrasts greatly with Intelligent Design and groups like the Discovery Institute, which keep their arguments mostly academic and scientific. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
askandanswer Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 On 1/16/2017 at 3:48 AM, prisonchaplain said: How dare I approach God? How dare I ask for help, for mercy, for forgiveness? What makes me think the God of the universe would condescend to care about me? The Psalmist David answers: DON'T ABANDON ME FOR YOU MADE ME. This is why God-as-creator is so important, and why skeptics are so opposed to the discussion. I know this is not the point you are making but this is my initial response to this post: How rude and proud and pointless it is not to approach God. God has nothing better to do, and nothing He wants to do more, than help His children. A god that is more concerned about the stage - the universe - than the actors on the stage - us - seems like a very odd kind of god and one not worthy of my worship. Jane_Doe 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
askandanswer Posted January 17, 2017 Report Share Posted January 17, 2017 13 hours ago, zil said: Like this one, that looks shockingly like @MormonGator wandering the compound... You're exaggerating again Zil. Much as you like to think of the man of your compound as being big and bold I think this is a more accurate picture Larry Cotrell, Anddenex, Jane_Doe and 1 other 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.