Adam and Eve and Evolution

[zlllch]

8 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

This isn't necessarily true, that "anything outside the realm of official church doctrine is speculation." Otherwise we would have to accept that "all" witness from the Holy Ghost is speculation. When a person learns truth, even not yet revealed doctrine, it isn't speculation; however, in saying this, if a person has received truth that has not yet been revealed by the Holy Ghost it is wise to keep it to him/herself until a prophet reveals it. As it isn't our place to reveal new truth, and we technically step the bounds of our stewardship when we reveal truth not yet revealed (except in matters of prophecy which the Spirit may direct the heart and mind to bear witness of).

Here is a perfect example from the life of Lorenzo Snow, "

Lorenzo Snow was not speculating. He knew exactly what the Spirit taught him, and he guarded it reverently and with respect. Should we teach anything outside of revealed doctrine, we must remember that people can say that we are speculating as that is their right (and is often wise), as they have not yet received witness and it is not coming from the keys of those who are able to reveal knew doctrine to the Church as a whole.

Good point. I think this example is extraordinary and unusual though, one because the truth was revealed to a prophet, and two because he "saw as clear as the sun at noonday." Personally, I have never had anything revealed to me in such an undeniable way, and because I haven't, I am careful not to be too dogmatic about what I believe has been revealed to me through the Spirit that is outside the realm of official church doctrine. 

[Rob Osborn]

8 hours ago, wenglund said:

Yes, including Lehi's dream, alhough what was depicted in the dream was not historical but symbolic. The scriptures are full of symbolism, conveyed not just through dreams, but also by way of allegories and parables. Even many of the real life historical events had symbolic overtones, and were types and shadows of things to come.

The point being that what I described earlier is deeply religious and anything but secular. The ancient prophets  were dreamers of the first order. So, you managed to get it exactly backwards.

That is okay. Symbolic thinking isn't for everyone, though I can't imagine how the temple experience could be in depth without it. 

To each their own.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

I have dreams and visions also. But my existance isnt any different than ancient people. Things like the creation, the fall, the global flood, etc, all have symbolisms but the reality is they are also historical events.

[Anddenex]

18 minutes ago, zlllch said:

Good point. I think this example is extraordinary and unusual though, one because the truth was revealed to a prophet, and two because he "saw as clear as the sun at noonday." Personally, I have never had anything revealed to me in such an undeniable way, and because I haven't, I am careful not to be too dogmatic about what I believe has been revealed to me through the Spirit that is outside the realm of official church doctrine. 

This is the year this was revealed to Lorenzo Snow, "In the spring of 1840, Lorenzo Snow was in Nauvoo, Illinois, preparing to leave for a mission in England." (emphasis added)

He wasn't the prophet in 1840, and there were three others that proceeded him.

We don't have to be a prophet, apostle, nor a general authority to have the spirit reveal principles and truth of the eternities. I already know I have had such things revealed; however, as previously stated, I have never shared them as it is not my place to reveal any new doctrine, and we are wise to be careful.

[Traveler]

16 hours ago, CV75 said:

Sorry, I don't think that is a scientific concept either... if so, that would be verrry interesting indeed! I believe in God and eternal progression, and my appreciation for science does not get in the way of that, but I don't see it being appreciated as a scientific principle.

 

Here are a few considerations to think about – strictly from a scientific point of view.

. Evolution is not all “random chance”.  Man has formed symbiotic relationships with many life forms from protozoa to highly evolved complex plants and animals that changes the natural or wild course of evolution – in the past we have called some of these relationships “domestications”.   Humans are not the only organisms to follow such evolutionary modification paths but humans are the most complex intelligent life form so involved.

. We are about to enter a new phase of evolution where human intelligence plays a direct role in staging fast and significant evolution with cloning, genetic engineering and intelligently introducing new species or reintroducing same or modified extinct species and also the introduction of artificial intelligence.  

. Besides bio evolution; since the domestication of fire man has been involved directly in the evolution of matter.  Already there are claims that man is changing climate and with the introduction of nuclear fusion and fission man is dependently altering evolution.

. Already there are advances in “artificial intelligence” that will change the evolution of intelligence and what can be manipulated through intelligence.  This feedback evolutionary track is already being considered and worried about – you can Google artificial intelligent singularity.

. It has long been believed that anything that “CAN” happen can be made to happen or rehappen through intelligent engineering and design.   

All this is basically what I have been implying and is in essence what most think G-d is and is capable of doing anyway.  Religious theologians have long argued that such “thinking” negates the need for G-d and have fought such notions from their inceptions – but science keeps taking steps that are getting us closer to realizing our actual potential.  But for me – especially from a scientific point of view – if we are to survive as a species not only must we evolve in what we all identify as scientifically – but we must also evolve religiously.  

I believe the Gospel of Jesus targeted intelligent religious evolution in projecting that we become “Born Again” and “New Creatures”.  The definition of evolution is “Change”.  I believe that such evolution is targeted to even change our thinking or “Thoughts”.  “For my thoughts are not your thought neither are my ways your ways”.  But there is a great deal of “religious” resistance (opposition) to evolution – especially evolution of what we call religion.  I believe such resistance began as a war in the pre-existence.  For me I find the LDS thinking the most advanced and capable of moving mankind forward in all aspects of understanding.  The only means to bring the truths science and religion together intelligently in the full light of truth.  But change is not without resistance and has never been possible without opposition as an existing possibility – even from the best and brightest among us.

 

The Traveler

[brlenox]

17 hours ago, zlllch said:

Just to clarify, are you saying that every word spoken by a prophet is and has been correct?

If, in the off chance I ever determined something that a prophet might have mischaracterized, for all intents and purposes he would still be right as far as anyone around me was concerned as I would never vocalize my observations. Only once has it occurred that I thought something said was incorrect through years of intense study of the gospel. They are right pretty much most of the time.

Edited December 21, 2017 by brlenox

[Rob Osborn]

17 minutes ago, Traveler said:

 

Here are a few considerations to think about – strictly from a scientific point of view.

. Evolution is not all “random chance”.  Man has formed symbiotic relationships with many life forms from protozoa to highly evolved complex plants and animals that changes the natural or wild course of evolution – in the past we have called some of these relationships “domestications”.   Humans are not the only organisms to follow such evolutionary modification paths but humans are the most complex intelligent life form so involved.

. We are about to enter a new phase of evolution where human intelligence plays a direct role in staging fast and significant evolution with cloning, genetic engineering and intelligently introducing new species or reintroducing same or modified extinct species and also the introduction of artificial intelligence.  

. Besides bio evolution; since the domestication of fire man has been involved directly in the evolution of matter.  Already there are claims that man is changing climate and with the introduction of nuclear fusion and fission man is dependently altering evolution.

. Already there are advances in “artificial intelligence” that will change the evolution of intelligence and what can be manipulated through intelligence.  This feedback evolutionary track is already being considered and worried about – you can Google artificial intelligent singularity.

. It has long been believed that anything that “CAN” happen can be made to happen or rehappen through intelligent engineering and design.   

All this is basically what I have been implying and is in essence what most think G-d is and is capable of doing anyway.  Religious theologians have long argued that such “thinking” negates the need for G-d and have fought such notions from their inceptions – but science keeps taking steps that are getting us closer to realizing our actual potential.  But for me – especially from a scientific point of view – if we are to survive as a species not only must we evolve in what we all identify as scientifically – but we must also evolve religiously.  

I believe the Gospel of Jesus targeted intelligent religious evolution in projecting that we become “Born Again” and “New Creatures”.  The definition of evolution is “Change”.  I believe that such evolution is targeted to even change our thinking or “Thoughts”.  “For my thoughts are not your thought neither are my ways your ways”.  But there is a great deal of “religious” resistance (opposition) to evolution – especially evolution of what we call religion.  I believe such resistance began as a war in the pre-existence.  For me I find the LDS thinking the most advanced and capable of moving mankind forward in all aspects of understanding.  The only means to bring the truths science and religion together intelligently in the full light of truth.  But change is not without resistance and has never been possible without opposition as an existing possibility – even from the best and brightest among us.

 

The Traveler

Im not so sure our intelligence helps our supposed evolution. Sure, we are making great progresd in technology and medicine but in truth we may just find that our ancient ancestors knew more about natural medicines and were smarter in many other areas. I personally think the human race has gotten dumber and more broken biologically from copy errors in the genome. How does that comply?

[Rob Osborn]

5 minutes ago, brlenox said:

If, in the off chance I ever determined something that a prophet might have mischaracterized, for all intents and purposes he would still be right as far as anyone around me was concerned as I would never vocalize my observations. Only once has it occurred that I thought something said was incorrect through years of intense study of the gospel. They are right pretty much most of the time.

I have learned the hard way that you just keep the things you know more private. I have had many choice experiences that have completely changed my view of Christ and his gospel. Its best to keep quite mostly otherwise everyone thinks you are an apostate for suggesting we may not have correct knowledge on a certain issue.

[Traveler]

15 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

Im not so sure our intelligence helps our supposed evolution. Sure, we are making great progresd in technology and medicine but in truth we may just find that our ancient ancestors knew more about natural medicines and were smarter in many other areas. I personally think the human race has gotten dumber and more broken biologically from copy errors in the genome. How does that comply?

 

You have my attention – I am interested in any empirical evidence you may offer.

 

The Traveler

[Rob Osborn]

19 minutes ago, Traveler said:

 

You have my attention – I am interested in any empirical evidence you may offer.

 

The Traveler

Empirical evidence eh? Really dislike that phrase, its so biased. Anyway...

Man used to have long lifespans. The great patriarchs lived hundreds and hundreds of years before dying. In the Book of Mormon it tells the tale of a civilization that started out fair and delightsome and became dark and loathsome. Thats kind of the nature of history. It always starts out good and then deteriates before God takes a few out and destroys the wicked. We are in the midst of that right now. We get lazier everyday, we are becoming like the Lamanites- a dark and loathsome people. 

Intelligence itself is not measured by what technology one has so much as ones ability to solve their relevant problems. For instance, the ancients in Peru were master masons. Not only that but they figured out how to build earthquake resistant walls and structures that in a lot of ways surpasses our intellect today. Then, like all great civilizations they deteriated and later cultures were more lazy, built more shoddy, etc. until they were finally conqured by the Spanish explorers and their armies.

Its the same tale everytime. We do live in a day when a lot of revelation is on the earth leading to great technologies but we are in kind of a losing battle as the dark and loathsome amongst us are gaining in numbers. Terrorists for example arent smarter today, they are dumber. We may have the addition of 6,000 years of accumilated lessons and resources of technology but as a whole were getting dumber and our bodies are weaker.

[brlenox]

53 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

I have learned the hard way that you just keep the things you know more private. I have had many choice experiences that have completely changed my view of Christ and his gospel. Its best to keep quite mostly otherwise everyone thinks you are an apostate for suggesting we may not have correct knowledge on a certain issue.

Certainly true of sharing too much on public forums.  Frequently though as I learn new things, I realize knowing correctly is not always the pinnacle of judgement but instead the Lord is more pleased when we maintain our loyalties to him and his servants throughout the process.  

[zlllch]

1 hour ago, brlenox said:

If, in the off chance I ever determined something that a prophet might have mischaracterized, for all intents and purposes he would still be right as far as anyone around me was concerned as I would never vocalize my observations. Only once has it occurred that I thought something said was incorrect through years of intense study of the gospel. They are right pretty much most of the time.

"And, to be perfectly frank, there have been times when members or leaders in the Church have simply made mistakes. There may have been things said or done that were not in harmony with our values, principles, or doctrine. I suppose the Church would be perfect only if it were run by perfect beings. God is perfect, and His doctrine is pure. But He works through us—His imperfect children—and imperfect people make mistakes." -- Dieter F. Uchtdorf 

Here's an interesting read about the fallibility of prophets: https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Mormonism_and_doctrine/Prophets_are_not_infallible#cite_note-3

It's important to remember that no mortal is perfect or infallible, and sometimes we tend to ask too much of the prophets when we expect them to be even nearly perfect. We have to remember that they are men "of like passions with their fellow men." The only perfect person ever to walk this earth was Jesus Christ himself.

"The position is not assumed that the men of the New Dispensation —its prophets, apostles, presidencies, and other leaders—are without faults or infallible, rather they are treated as men of like passions with their fellow men." -- Statement from the First Presidency 

[brlenox]

1 hour ago, zlllch said:

"And, to be perfectly frank, there have been times when members or leaders in the Church have simply made mistakes. There may have been things said or done that were not in harmony with our values, principles, or doctrine. I suppose the Church would be perfect only if it were run by perfect beings. God is perfect, and His doctrine is pure. But He works through us—His imperfect children—and imperfect people make mistakes." -- Dieter F. Uchtdorf 

Here's an interesting read about the fallibility of prophets: https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Mormonism_and_doctrine/Prophets_are_not_infallible#cite_note-3

It's important to remember that no mortal is perfect or infallible, and sometimes we tend to ask too much of the prophets when we expect them to be even nearly perfect. We have to remember that they are men "of like passions with their fellow men." The only perfect person ever to walk this earth was Jesus Christ himself.

"The position is not assumed that the men of the New Dispensation —its prophets, apostles, presidencies, and other leaders—are without faults or infallible, rather they are treated as men of like passions with their fellow men." -- Statement from the First Presidency 

President Uchtdorf speaks from a need to try to stem a swelling tide of arm chair critiques who have sidestepped proper behavior towards the Lords anointed. In other words, the topic is only being addressed because of the near constant banter of a generation that takes a bit too much upon themselves when it comes to evaluating the Lords servants. He is trying to mitigate their bad behavior by tossing them a bone and hoping they will step off and move on to less risky behavior - he is trying to save their eternal lives.

You feel it is very important to remember the infallibility of man. That is true but, and I am not stating that you are like what I am about to describe but those like this do appear to be everywhere these days...  

Is it equally important to remind at every juncture that prophets and apostles make mistakes, to repeat ad nauseam pithy little phrases like a prophet is only a prophet? ... generally misquoted and improperly referenced for the sake of vaunting personal wisdom ahead of those that are much wiser and far surpass the spiritual capacity of those who feel the need to cast doubts upon those called of God.  Are not the extreme of these the ones who under the banner of the faithful Mormon find themselves in the rafters at conference sounding their dissention in their votes of non-sustainment of the prophets and apostles.  

How often was it that President Uchtdorf stood at the podium seeking the voice of common consent when he was treated instead to the echoes of "NO!!" "No!!" "he's not my prophet".  I think you misread President Uchtdorf entirely. He has suffered greatly for these acts of defiance which he has encountered. While not chronologically associated, his comments are correct, they are comments that he delivers for a reason. Do you ever wonder why a subject is treated in conference? In this case, as always there is a need for the saints to understand something - perhaps not what they think though.   These are not instructions for you and I as to the weaknesses of men which should be self-evident. Instead couched in the cautious voice of a man who will not violate his position or your agency, full of love he is issuing a caution. In speaking to the obvious he is hoping to placate the spirit of dissention which is expanding amongst the saints for those few wise enough to listen.  Do we really need a general authority to stand before us and remind us of the imperfections of fallen man or is he saying something far more significant? Is he talking about them? Or is he talking about us?

After this post I will add to this message one of profound wisdom in the form of a story that Brigham Young tells.  If you are good at extrapolating it will explain in it's entirely why I made the statement I made in my post where I described methods I use to try to prevent Satan from claiming my soul. It is the most significant thing you will read this day.        

Edited December 21, 2017 by brlenox

[brlenox]

1 hour ago, zlllch said:

"And, to be perfectly frank, there have been times when members or leaders in the Church have simply made mistakes. There may have been things said or done that were not in harmony with our values, principles, or doctrine. I suppose the Church would be perfect only if it were run by perfect beings. God is perfect, and His doctrine is pure. But He works through us—His imperfect children—and imperfect people make mistakes." -- Dieter F. Uchtdorf 

Here's an interesting read about the fallibility of prophets: https://www.fairmormon.org/answers/Mormonism_and_doctrine/Prophets_are_not_infallible#cite_note-3

It's important to remember that no mortal is perfect or infallible, and sometimes we tend to ask too much of the prophets when we expect them to be even nearly perfect. We have to remember that they are men "of like passions with their fellow men." The only perfect person ever to walk this earth was Jesus Christ himself.

"The position is not assumed that the men of the New Dispensation —its prophets, apostles, presidencies, and other leaders—are without faults or infallible, rather they are treated as men of like passions with their fellow men." -- Statement from the First Presidency 

From Brigham Young:

It is folly in the extreme for persons to say that they love God, when they do not love their brethren; and it is of no use for them to say that they have confidence in God, when they have none in righteous men, for they do not know anything about God. It is reasonable for the Elders of Israel to be very sanguine and strenuous on this point. And were I to be asked whether I have any experience in this matter, I can tell the people that once in my life I felt a want of confidence in brother Joseph Smith, soon after I became acquainted with him. It was not concerning religious matters—it was not about his revelations—but it was in relation to his financiering—to his managing the temporal affairs which he undertook. A feeling came ever me that Joseph was not right in his financial management, though I presume the feeling did not last sixty seconds, and perhaps not thirty. But that feeling came on me once and once only, from the time I first knew him to the day of his death. It gave me sorrow of heart, and I clearly saw and understood, by the spirit of revelation manifested to me, that if I was to harbor a thought in my heart that Joseph could be wrong in anything, I would begin to lose confidence in him, and that feeling would grow from step to step, and from one degree to another, until at last I would have the same lack of confidence in his being the mouthpiece for the Almighty, and I would be left, as brother Hooper observed,upon the brink of the precipice, ready to plunge into what we may call the gulf of infidelity, ready to believe neither in God nor His servants, and to say that there is no God, or, if there is, we do not know anything about Him; that we are here, and by and by shall go from here, and that is all we shall know. Such persons are like those whom the Apostle calls “As natural brute beasts, made to be taken and destroyed.” Though I admitted in my feelings and knew all the time that Joseph was a human being and subject to err, still it was none of my business to look after his faults.

I repented of my unbelief, and that too, very suddenly; I repented about as quickly as I committed the error. It was not for me to question whether Joseph was dictated by the Lord at all times and under all circumstances or not. I never had the feeling for one moment, to believe that any man or set of men or beings upon the face of the whole earth had anything to do with him, for he was superior to them all, and held the keys of salvation over them. Had I not thoroughly understood this and believed it, I much doubt whether I should ever have embraced what is called “Mormonism.” He was called of God; God dictated him, and if He had a mind to leave him to himself and let him commit an error, that was no business of mine. And it was not for me to question it, if the Lord was disposed to let Joseph lead the people astray, for He had called him and instructed him to gather Israel and restore the Priesthood and kingdom to them.

It was not my prerogative to call him in question with regard to any act of his life. He was God's servant, and not mine. He did not belong to the people but to the Lord, and was doing the work of the Lord, and if He should suffer him to lead the people astray, it would be because they ought to be led astray. If He should suffer them to be chastised, and some of them destroyed, it would be because they deserved it, or to accomplish some righteous purpose. That was my faith, and it is my faith still.

If we have any lack of confidence in those whom the Lord has appointed to lead the people, how can we have confidence in a being whom we know nothing about? (John 4:20)It is nonsense to talk about it. It will weaken a person quicker to lose confidence in those who dictate the affairs of God's kingdom on the earth, than to say “I do not know whether there is a God or not, and I care nothing about Him.” A man or woman will not be prepared to be taken by the enemy, and led captive by the devil so quickly for disbelieving in a being they do not know about, as for disbelieving in those whom they do know. (Young, Brigham - He that Loveth Not His Brother Loveth Not God—If We Have Not Confidence in Our Leaders We Shall Not Have It in a Higher Power—The Church Holds the Keys of Salvation—The Providences of God to the Saints. JOD vol. 4, pp. 295-302)

Edited December 21, 2017 by brlenox

[Anddenex]

2 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

I have learned the hard way that you just keep the things you know more private. I have had many choice experiences that have completely changed my view of Christ and his gospel. Its best to keep quite mostly otherwise everyone thinks you are an apostate for suggesting we may not have correct knowledge on a certain issue.

Might I add something Rob. What we currently have as "revealed" doctrine to the Church (collectively) is exactly what God is willing to give to the Church collectively. It isn't that we do not have correct knowledge.

We are able to receive further knowledge that has not yet been revealed. Allow the Lord to deliver, reveal, truth through its proper channel. People do not think we are apostate if we share out thoughts, but people do have every right to think we are apostate if we are telling the world, and members, that the prophets have it wrong or incorrect.

What you (generally speaking) don't know is exactly what a prophet has seen, and has been commanded by God not to reveal. Think about Nephi and what he was about to write and was thus constrained by the Spirit to do so. It would be similar to someone saying, in relation to what Nephi has revealed, that he had it incorrect, when Nephi is thinking, "No, I had it correct. I revealed exactly what the Lord wanted me to reveal. I know there is more."

We need, as a people, to stop thinking the prophets and apostles only know what has been revealed. If scriptures teach us anything, they teach us that the Lord has revealed a lot more to prophets than most others, and the prophets are often commanded to not reveal what they have been shared. This doesn't make them incorrect, it actually increases their wisdom, because they know when to reveal and when not to, often because they have been commanded not to.

We only have ourselves to blame as a Church (collectively) when more truth is not revealed. Think upon all the people who can not handle the minute knowledge we have of the eternities, and basic practices, and it is no wonder why we haven't received more.

Edited December 21, 2017 by Anddenex

[zlllch]

22 minutes ago, brlenox said:

President Uchtdorf speaks from a need to try to stem a swelling tide of arm chair critiques who have sidestepped proper behavior towards the Lords anointed. In other words, the topic is only being addressed because of the near constant banter of a generation that takes a bit too much upon themselves when it comes to evaluating the Lords servants. He is trying to mitigate their bad behavior by tossing them a bone and hoping they will step off and move on to less risky behavior - he is trying to save their eternal lives.

You feel it is very important to remember the infallibility of man. That is true but, and I am not stating that you are like what I am about to describe but those like this do appear to be everywhere these days...  

Is it equally important to remind at every juncture, to repeat ad nauseam pithy little phrases like a prophet is only a prophet? ... generally misquoted and improperly referenced for the sake of vaunting personal wisdom ahead of those that are much wiser and far surpass the spiritual capacity of those who feel the need to cast doubts upon those called of God.  Are not the extreme of these the ones who under the banner of the faithful Mormon find themselves in the rafters at conference sounding their dissention in their votes of non-sustainment of the prophets and apostles.  

How often was it that President Uchtdorf stood at the podium seeking the voice of common consent when he was treated instead to the echoes of "NO!!" "No!!" "he's not my prophet".  I think you misread President Uchtdorf entirely. He has suffered greatly for these acts of defiance which he has encountered.  And that while his comments are correct, they are comments that he delivers for a reason. Do you ever wonder why a subject is treated in conference? In this case, as always there is a need for the saints to understand something - perhaps not what they think though.   These are not instructions for you and I as to the weaknesses of men which should be self-evident. Instead couched in the cautious voice of a man who will not violate his position or your agency, full of love he is issuing a caution. In speaking to the obvious he is hoping to placate the spirit of dissention which is expanding amongst the saints for those few wise enough to listen.  Do we really need a general authority to stand before us and remind us of the imperfections of fallen man or is he saying something far more significant? Is he talking about them? Or is he talking about us?

After this post I will add to this message one of profound wisdom in the form of a story that Brigham Young tells.  If you are good at extrapolating it will explain in it's entirely why I made the statement I made in my post where I described methods I use to try to prevent Satan from claiming my soul. It is the most significant thing you will read this day.        

I include these quotations not to discount or lessen the divine callings of the prophets, but to put them in their proper place, the place of simple men doing the best they can to follow God, just like you and me. I fear we sometimes place prophets almost on the same level as God himself. We just need to sort out our priorities. I trust in God above all else. After that, I trust in the imperfect prophets he has called. 

Mosiah 2

25 And now I ask, can ye say aught of yourselves? I answer you, Nay. Ye cannot say that ye are even as much as the dust of the earth; yet ye were created of the dust of the earth; but behold, it belongeth to him who created you.
26 And I, even I, whom ye call your king, am no better than ye yourselves are; for I am also of the dust.

[Rob Osborn]

24 minutes ago, Anddenex said:

Might I add something Rob. What we currently have as "revealed" doctrine to the Church (collectively) is exactly what God is willing to give to the Church collectively. It isn't that we do not have correct knowledge.

We are able to receive further knowledge that has not yet been revealed. Allow the Lord to deliver, reveal, truth through its proper channel. People do not think we are apostate if we share out thoughts, but people do have every right to think we are apostate if we are telling the world, and members, that the prophets have it wrong or incorrect.

What you (generally speaking) don't know is exactly what a prophet has seen, and has been commanded by God not to reveal. Think about Nephi and what he was about to write and was thus constrained by the Spirit to do so. It would be similar to someone saying, in relation to what Nephi has revealed, that he had it incorrect, when Nephi is thinking, "No, I had it correct. I revealed exactly what the Lord wanted me to reveal. I know there is more."

We need, as a people, to stop thinking the prophets and apostles only know what has been revealed. If scriptures teach us anything, they teach us that the Lord has revealed a lot more to prophets than most others, and the prophets are often commanded to not reveal what they have been shared. This doesn't make them incorrect, it actually increases their wisdom, because they know when to reveal and when not to, often because they have been commanded not to.

We only have ourselves to blame as a Church (collectively) when more truth is not revealed. Think upon all the people who can not handle the minute knowledge we have of the eternities, and basic practices, and it is no wonder why we haven't received more.

I find it interesting that I can say its my opinion that our view of the plan of salvation has flaws and people call me on the road to apostacy and yet others say that the 1909 statement is wrong and everyones fine with mocking God by not attributing our race as His offspring. I find it rather disturbing that people call me apostate for saying baptism is required in order to be saved from the eternal hell and yet they are fine saying past prophets were wrong in stating our physical bodies are the literal offspring of God.

[Rob Osborn]

1 hour ago, brlenox said:

Certainly true of sharing too much on public forums.  Frequently though as I learn new things, I realize knowing correctly is not always the pinnacle of judgement but instead the Lord is more pleased when we maintain our loyalties to him and his servants throughout the process.  

I believe we can be loyal to the prophets even though we may disagree with areas of the gospel we feel are needing attention to fix errors. In fact, my own testimony has actually increased knowing that our understanding of the doctrine of Jesus Christ is becoming more perfect. I am also pleased to see the general attitude of the church leadership continue to change and respect other religions as partners in the cause of Christ. In the early church it was almost seen that other Christian religions were from the devil. That has greatly changed. We now respect and partner with other churches to bring about Christs gospel.

[MrShorty]

17 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

I find it interesting that I can say its my opinion that our view of the plan of salvation has flaws and people call me on the road to apostacy and yet others say that the 1909 statement is wrong and everyones fine with mocking God by not attributing our race as His offspring. I find it rather disturbing that people call me apostate for saying baptism is required in order to be saved from the eternal hell and yet they are fine saying past prophets were wrong in stating our physical bodies are the literal offspring of God.

Speaking from the opposite side of the specific issue being debated here, I agree with this observation. It is really interesting how this debate highlights thoughts, ideas, and philosophies around how we read, interpret, and understand scripture and other statements from prophets and apostles. I don't claim any particular insights into The Right Way (TM) to read and understand the revelations, but it is interesting how differently different people read and understand them.

4 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

I believe we can be loyal to the prophets even though we may disagree with areas of the gospel we feel are needing attention to fix errors.

Another interesting statement. I tend to want to agree with you, but I have found it interesting how often any kind of disagreement with prophets and apostles gets treated by other members as some kind of disloyalty or "road to apostasy."

Probably a topic for its own thread, but I do find these asides very interesting.

[brlenox]

13 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

I believe we can be loyal to the prophets even though we may disagree with areas of the gospel we feel are needing attention to fix errors. In fact, my own testimony has actually increased knowing that our understanding of the doctrine of Jesus Christ is becoming more perfect. I am also pleased to see the general attitude of the church leadership continue to change and respect other religions as partners in the cause of Christ. In the early church it was almost seen that other Christian religions were from the devil. That has greatly changed. We now respect and partner with other churches to bring about Christs gospel.

The religions are of the devil - most of the people are not. Although this is a different arena than I perceived this discussion moving, I find far too many nuances that define the changes we see to take the time to discuss them. Sufficeth to say, that in the least as we move towards a day when we anticipate the reestablishment of Zion that we should see behaviors which lend themselves to understanding how Zion can be reestablished.

[Rob Osborn]

16 minutes ago, brlenox said:

The religions are of the devil - most of the people are not. Although this is a different arena than I perceived this discussion moving, I find far too many nuances that define the changes we see to take the time to discuss them. Sufficeth to say, that in the least as we move towards a day when we anticipate the reestablishment of Zion that we should see behaviors which lend themselves to understanding how Zion can be reestablished.

In my own small town of 11,000 there is a small methodist church that does a lot in the community. One of them is the community dinner table that offers free meals one day a week. They also give away coats and boots. They work directly with our church and others to provide this service. In fact, most of the donated food and time are from LDS members. When I go in that church I feel the spirit of the Lord very strongly and know that the clergy of that church are men of God and are guided by the spirit in all things. It proves to me that God uses other religions and prepares souls to administer in them to fulfill his work. We dont have the monopoly for carrying out Gods works and plans. If this is true, and I believe it is, there are prophets in all walks and religions in the world and as such we can find revealed truth in all peoples regardless of religion. Our distinction is that we have proper authority to carry out salvanic ordinances, but thats it.

Edited December 21, 2017 by Rob Osborn

[Rob Osborn]

20 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

Speaking from the opposite side of the specific issue being debated here, I agree with this observation. It is really interesting how this debate highlights thoughts, ideas, and philosophies around how we read, interpret, and understand scripture and other statements from prophets and apostles. I don't claim any particular insights into The Right Way (TM) to read and understand the revelations, but it is interesting how differently different people read and understand them.

Another interesting statement. I tend to want to agree with you, but I have found it interesting how often any kind of disagreement with prophets and apostles gets treated by other members as some kind of disloyalty or "road to apostasy."

Probably a topic for its own thread, but I do find these asides very interesting.

Oft times I feel the forums and blogs cant replace the actual physical communications of face to face. Pretty much, I cant really convince anyone of my own beliefs online. But, in person, especially in my own immediate family and extended family I have all convinced them of my beliefs and they share a lot of those beliefs with me. Typing vs. voice has a big impact on how people perceive and listen and communicate in accepting truth.

[brlenox]

2 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

In my own small town of 11,000 there is a small methodist church that does a lot in the community. One of them is the community dinner table that offers free meals one day a week. They also give away coats and boots. They work directly with our church and others to provide this service. In fact, most of the donated food and time are from LDS members. When I go in that church I feel the spirit of the Lord very strongly and know that the clergy of that church are men of God and are guided by the spirit in all things. It proves to me that God uses other religions and prepares souls to administer in them to fulfill his work. We dont have the monopoly for carrying out Gods works and plans. If this is true, and I believe it is, there are prophets in all walks and religions in the world and as such we can find revealed truth in all peoples regardless of religion. Our distinction is that we have proper authority to carry out salvanic ordinances, but thats it.

I don't really think there is much need for discussion on these points.  I understand completely with what you are saying, but I also think you understand the scriptural references that define my position of emphasis as it relates to your position of emphasis.  One could argue that if God's plan embraces a central perspective of bringing to pass the immortality and eternal life of man that it matters very little how close a religious body comes to any manifest charitable behaviors as part of their existence.  If salvific ordinances is the only distinction of significance and "that's it" but it is after all referred to as a plan of salvation then it might bear greater recognition that salvific ordinances are the required means by which the Lord achieves the ultimate desires he has for his children of salvation in eternal life. That those who partake of the ordinances of salvation are required to be charitable is not the same as saying that those who become charitable achieve the benefits of the ordinances of salvation.  This is my work and my glory defined as "to bring about the charitable natures of godliness in the children of God" might sound a bit lofty but it leaves us all short of his glory.

If you are a purest, and I believe you to be so, it surprises me to see you slide a little to the left to what I would believe to be a personal interpretation or expectation of the gospel which is perhaps excessively influenced by a socially informed graciousness, while stepping over 1 Nephi 14:10:

Quote

10 And he said unto me: Behold there are save two churches only; the one is the church of the Lamb of God, and the other is the church of the devil; wherefore, whoso belongeth not to the church of the Lamb of God belongeth to that great church, which is the mother of abominations; and she is the whore of all the earth. 

If in the process of association with your small Methodist church any one of them benefits from the association in your charitable efforts and sees the rest of the light that hopefully shines from your efforts then, then there is joy to be had in your efforts if they find their way to those salvific ordinances. 

[zlllch]

24 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

In my own small town of 11,000 there is a small methodist church that does a lot in the community. One of them is the community dinner table that offers free meals one day a week. They also give away coats and boots. They work directly with our church and others to provide this service. In fact, most of the donated food and time are from LDS members. When I go in that church I feel the spirit of the Lord very strongly and know that the clergy of that church are men of God and are guided by the spirit in all things. It proves to me that God uses other religions and prepares souls to administer in them to fulfill his work. We dont have the monopoly for carrying out Gods works and plans. If this is true, and I believe it is, there are prophets in all walks and religions in the world and as such we can find revealed truth in all peoples regardless of religion. Our distinction is that we have proper authority to carry out salvanic ordinances, but thats it.

Well said Rob! I understand it in the sense that other churches have fragments of the truth, but we have the whole truth at least as far as the basic principles of the Gospel are concerned, and most importantly we have the authority to administer saving ordinances. I love seeing the work of the Lord manifest itself in the hands of those whose beliefs differ from our own.

[Vort]

25 minutes ago, Rob Osborn said:

But, in person, especially in my own immediate family and extended family I have all convinced them of my beliefs and they share a lot of those beliefs with me.

I am very sorry to hear this. I had hoped that you would be more responsible with your private beliefs than to convince those you love most of them. That will lead to no good end.

Edited December 21, 2017 by Vort

[Traveler]

3 hours ago, Rob Osborn said:

Empirical evidence eh? Really dislike that phrase, its so biased. Anyway...

Man used to have long lifespans. The great patriarchs lived hundreds and hundreds of years before dying. In the Book of Mormon it tells the tale of a civilization that started out fair and delightsome and became dark and loathsome. Thats kind of the nature of history. It always starts out good and then deteriates before God takes a few out and destroys the wicked. We are in the midst of that right now. We get lazier everyday, we are becoming like the Lamanites- a dark and loathsome people. 

Intelligence itself is not measured by what technology one has so much as ones ability to solve their relevant problems. For instance, the ancients in Peru were master masons. Not only that but they figured out how to build earthquake resistant walls and structures that in a lot of ways surpasses our intellect today. Then, like all great civilizations they deteriated and later cultures were more lazy, built more shoddy, etc. until they were finally conqured by the Spanish explorers and their armies.

Its the same tale everytime. We do live in a day when a lot of revelation is on the earth leading to great technologies but we are in kind of a losing battle as the dark and loathsome amongst us are gaining in numbers. Terrorists for example arent smarter today, they are dumber. We may have the addition of 6,000 years of accumilated lessons and resources of technology but as a whole were getting dumber and our bodies are weaker.

I think I understand why you dislike the phrase "empirical evidence".  There is interesting empirical evidence of ancient achievements - but it does not appear to be feasible to include such things in our discussion.  BTW - by definition, empirical evidence is not and cannot be biased.  And yet there are some that will stand in the bright sun of noon day – and declare it night.

 

The Traveler