Russel M. Nelson comments on big bang theory and evolution

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Buffalo
_Emeritus
Posts: 12064
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:33 pm

Re: Russel M. Nelson comments on big bang theory and evoluti

Post by _Buffalo »

bcspace wrote:
Thankfully, my hypothesis does neither of those things; natural selection is part of special creation. As I have demonstrated on multiple occasions, there does exist a model(s) that does not contradict either the LDS doctrine of the Creation or the scientific theory of Evolution.

I would agree that Nelson probably strongly desires to oppose evolution, but notice that he can't, being restricted by the doctrine. Instead, he can only (and correctly so) speak out against the conclusion some draw about evolution; that God is not responsible for the Creation. Evolution itself neither precludes the existence of God or His hand in evolution.


Natural selection is incompatible with divine intervention. Otherwise it would be supernatural selection. But LDS theology precludes anything but constant divine intervention. You cannot serve Dawkins and Mormon.

You don't have a model that can withstand scrutiny from either side of the disparate worlds you're trying to bring together.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.

B.R. McConkie, © Intellectual Reserve wrote:There are those who say that revealed religion and organic evolution can be harmonized. This is both false and devilish.
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Re: Russel M. Nelson comments on big bang theory and evoluti

Post by _bcspace »

Natural selection is incompatible with divine intervention.


Not at all. You've yet to address environmental factors in natural selection not to mention the motions of cells and atoms. Let me know when science can track all subatomic particles 24/7.

Otherwise it would be supernatural selection


Semantics.

But LDS theology precludes anything but constant divine intervention. You cannot serve Dawkins and Mormon.


LDS doctrine being supportive of all truth, you can.

You don't have a model that can withstand scrutiny from either side of the disparate worlds you're trying to bring together.


You've yet to get past my model. Let me know when you come up with something.
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
_Buffalo
_Emeritus
Posts: 12064
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:33 pm

Re: Russel M. Nelson comments on big bang theory and evoluti

Post by _Buffalo »

bcspace wrote:
Natural selection is incompatible with divine intervention.


Not at all. You've yet to address environmental factors in natural selection not to mention the motions of cells and atoms. Let me know when science can track all subatomic particles 24/7.


Divine meddling with the behavior of subatomic particles would render particle physics moot. It's you vs science. Sorry.


bcspace wrote:
LDS doctrine being supportive of all truth, you can.

You've yet to get past my model. Let me know when you come up with something.


This is the doctrine on evolution and the gospel:

"There are those who say that revealed religion and organic evolution can be harmonized. This is both false and devilish." - Bruce R. McConkie, Copyright Intellectual Reserve
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.

B.R. McConkie, © Intellectual Reserve wrote:There are those who say that revealed religion and organic evolution can be harmonized. This is both false and devilish.
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Re: Russel M. Nelson comments on big bang theory and evoluti

Post by _bcspace »

Divine meddling with the behavior of subatomic particles would render particle physics moot.


If God understands how such particles behave and how to manipulate them, how so? Our own scientists do the same at particle accelerators and nuclear facilities around the world and it's still called Science.

This is the doctrine on evolution and the gospel:

"There are those who say that revealed religion and organic evolution can be harmonized. This is both false and devilish." - Bruce R. McConkie, Copyright Intellectual Reserve


Are you sure you're quoting that correctly or is that the doctored mrm version?

From the original source (by the way, the IRI stamp has been shown to not be doctrinal as the Church has only identified publication, not intellectual property, as the source of doctrine):

Heresy two concerns itself with the relationship between organic evolution and revealed religion and asks the question whether they can be harmonized.

There are those who believe that the theory of organic evolution runs counter to the plain and explicit principles set forth in the holy scriptures as these have been interpreted and taught by Joseph Smith and his associates. There are others who think that evolution is the system used by the Lord to form plant and animal life and to place man on earth.

May I say that all truth is in agreement, that true religion and true science bear the same witness, and that in the true and full sense, true science is part of true religion. But may I also raise some questions of a serious nature. Is there any way to harmonize the false religions of the Dark Ages with the truths of science as they have now been discovered? Is there any way to harmonize the revealed religion that has come to us with the theoretical postulates of Darwinism and the diverse speculations descending therefrom?

Should we accept the famous document of the First Presidency issued in the days of President Joseph F. Smith and entitled "The Origin of Man" as meaning exactly what it says? Is it the doctrine of the gospel that Adam stood next to Christ in power and might and intelligence before the foundations of the world were laid; that Adam was placed on this earth as an immortal being; that there was no death in the world for him or for any form of life until after the Fall; that the fall of Adam brought temporal and spiritual death into the world; that this temporal death passed upon all forms of life, upon man and animal and fish and fowl and plant life; that Christ came to ransom man and all forms of life from the effects of the temporal death brought into the world through the Fall, and in the case of man from a spiritual death also; and that this ransom includes a resurrection for man and for all forms of life? Can you harmonize these things with the evolutionary postulate that death has always existed and that the various forms of life have evolved from preceding forms over astronomically long periods of time?

Can you harmonize the theories of men with the inspired words that say:

And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the Garden of Eden. And all things which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end.

And they [meaning Adam and Eve] would have had no children; wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence, having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin.

But behold, all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things.

Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy.

And the Messiah cometh in the fulness of time, that he may redeem the children of men from the fall. [2 Nephi 2:22­26]

These are questions to which all of us should find answers. Every person must choose for himself what he will believe. I recommend that all of you study and ponder and pray and seek light and knowledge in these and in all fields.

I believe that the atonement of Christ is the great and eternal foundation upon which revealed religion rests. I believe that no man can be saved unless he believes that our Lord's atoning sacrifice brings immortality to all and eternal life to those who believe and obey, and no man can believe in the atonement unless he accepts both the divine sonship of Christ and the fall of Adam.

My reasoning causes me to conclude that if death has always prevailed in the world, then there was no fall of Adam that brought death to all forms of life; that if Adam did not fall, there is no need for an atonement; that if there was no atonement, there is no salvation, no resurrection, and no eternal life; and that if there was no atonement, there is nothing in all of the glorious promises that the Lord has given us. I believe that the Fall affects man, all forms of life, and the earth itself, and that the Atonement affects man, all forms of life, and the earth itself.

http://speeches.BYU.edu/reader/reader.php?id=6770


Notice that even here in this non doctrinal venue, BRM, can't quite bring himself to condemn Evolution but rather asks whether or not one can so harmonize. He states why he can't, but my answer to the question is yes, I can and that jives with his statement and injunction that all of us should find answers and choose what we will believe. I choose to believe both because I can harmonize. I agree that all truth is in agreement and true religion and true science bear the same witness.

By your inability to show how my hypothesis is in conflict and your use of doctored quotes, I'd say you also agree that such can be harmonized but just don't want anyone to know or figure that out because it creates yet another avenue of belief in the LDS Church.
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
_Buffalo
_Emeritus
Posts: 12064
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:33 pm

Re: Russel M. Nelson comments on big bang theory and evoluti

Post by _Buffalo »

bcspace wrote:
Divine meddling with the behavior of subatomic particles would render particle physics moot.


If God understands how such particles behave and how to manipulate them, how so? Our own scientists do the same at particle accelerators and nuclear facilities around the world and it's still called Science.


There would be no way to predict behavior of particles if that were the case. All of physics would be moot.

bcspace wrote:
This is the doctrine on evolution and the gospel:

"There are those who say that revealed religion and organic evolution can be harmonized. This is both false and devilish." - Bruce R. McConkie, Copyright Intellectual Reserve


Are you sure you're quoting that correctly or is that the doctored mrm version?


Those are his exact words, as published by the church.

bcspace wrote:Notice that even here in this non doctrinal venue, BRM, can't quite bring himself to condemn Evolution


"There are those who say that revealed religion and organic evolution can be harmonized. This is both false and devilish." - Bruce R. McConkie, Copyright Intellectual Reserve
bcspace wrote:
By your inability to show how my hypothesis is in conflict and your use of doctored quotes, I'd say you also agree that such can be harmonized but just don't want anyone to know or figure that out because it creates yet another avenue of belief in the LDS Church.


Your quotation is the one that was doctored. But both are published by the church, and thus consistent with doctrine.

You lose.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.

B.R. McConkie, © Intellectual Reserve wrote:There are those who say that revealed religion and organic evolution can be harmonized. This is both false and devilish.
_Quasimodo
_Emeritus
Posts: 11784
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2010 1:11 am

Re: Russel M. Nelson comments on big bang theory and evoluti

Post by _Quasimodo »

DrW wrote:
liz3564 wrote:Did you guys really expect anything but Creationism to be taught in a religious forum? I don't care if you were listening to a Catholic, Protestant, or Mormon sermon, the Creation would be taught as truth.

Ah - creationists- ya just gotta love 'em. Came across some examples of a creationist's worst nightmare a few days ago. This fossil of a fish in limestone (bottom image) is in a bed that is rich with sea life including thousands of shells, fish and small invertebrates (a large shell fossil can be seen lower left on the rock face in the main photo).

This bed is located about 50 miles from the coast at around 6000 feet in elevation and is pretty hard for a creationist to explain, since the village shown in the top image (which is there because of a mountain spring) has been in existence in some form for a couple of thousand years.

Image




Image


Sorry, I'm coming to this thread late (doing a lot of that, lately). Great shots DrW! You must have been sorely tempted to chisel that fantastic fish fossil out and put it in your pocket. I haven't seen one like that. Any idea what it is?

Of course, it must have been deposited there as the flood waters receded (just kidding).
This, or any other post that I have made or will make in the future, is strictly my own opinion and consequently of little or no value.

"Faith is believing something you know ain't true" Twain.
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Re: Russel M. Nelson comments on big bang theory and evoluti

Post by _bcspace »

Are you sure you're quoting that correctly or is that the doctored mrm version?

Those are his exact words, as published by the church.


You've given no reference. But I have.
Try again.
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
_Buffalo
_Emeritus
Posts: 12064
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:33 pm

Re: Russel M. Nelson comments on big bang theory and evoluti

Post by _Buffalo »

bcspace wrote:You've given no reference. But I have.
Try again.


http://speeches.BYU.edu/?act=viewitem&id=658&tid=2

Enjoy.

Your spiral toward complete irrelevance is complete. :cool:
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.

B.R. McConkie, © Intellectual Reserve wrote:There are those who say that revealed religion and organic evolution can be harmonized. This is both false and devilish.
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Re: Russel M. Nelson comments on big bang theory and evoluti

Post by _bcspace »

You've given no reference. But I have.
Try again.


http://josephsmithacademy.org/audio/ind ... y_Heresies

Enjoy.

Your spiral toward complete irrelevance is complete.


Nope. You just hoisted yourself by your own petard. Your quote is not found there either.

Edit: Your edited link doesn't have it either.
Machina Sublime
Satan's Plan Deconstructed.
Your Best Resource On Joseph Smith's Polygamy.
Conservatism is the Gospel of Christ and the Plan of Salvation in Action.
The Degeneracy Of Progressivism.
_Buffalo
_Emeritus
Posts: 12064
Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 10:33 pm

Re: Russel M. Nelson comments on big bang theory and evoluti

Post by _Buffalo »

bcspace wrote:
You've given no reference. But I have.
Try again.


http://josephsmithacademy.org/audio/ind ... y_Heresies

Enjoy.

Your spiral toward complete irrelevance is complete.


Nope. You just hoisted yourself by your own petard. Your quote is not found there either.

Edit: Your edited link doesn't have it either.


It's in the unedited audio version. Somehow I doubt you listened to the entire speech in two minutes.
Parley P. Pratt wrote:We must lie to support brother Joseph, it is our duty to do so.

B.R. McConkie, © Intellectual Reserve wrote:There are those who say that revealed religion and organic evolution can be harmonized. This is both false and devilish.
Post Reply