DiscussMormonism.com

Its not often that I laugh out loud in front of the computer. One of the networks should snatch Cinepro up as a writer. :)



QUOTE(Adamson2 @ Jul 27 2008, 08:51 AM)
I am not sure I know what you mean by "Adam was the frist human" being part of that group of thoughts falling by the wayside. I took up the board name Adamson as a response to a talk by an Apostle in a regional conference when he said in effect...don't worry about the dinosaurs and all those things. They existed. Remember, however that we are all sons and daughters of Adam and he was an actual historic person.

I don't have a clue as to what transpired before Adam, but I am content to belive that Adam was the first man on this earth as we know men.




Cinepro responds:

*** You must not be familiar with the Limited Garden Theory. Turns out, Adam and Eve probably lived in the isolated Garden of Eden while whole communities and cultures of human-like creatures were pro-creating, farming, warring, writing, living, dying, and just getting along in the outside world. You might wonder why the Bible doesn't mention all these other people when Adam and Eve leave the Garden, but it's just like how the Lehites don't mention all the people they run into upon landing in the New World. Apparently, God has a "don't mention all the other people" policy for his scriptures.

And genetically speaking, there could have been 100,000 other men living when Adam around, and we would all still be descendants of Adam. It's not just the scriptures or apostles that can tell you that; Wired magazine would agree: ***




QUOTE Adamson2 (I think)
Whoever it was probably lived a few thousand years ago, somewhere in East Asia -- Taiwan, Malaysia and Siberia all are likely locations. He or she did nothing more remarkable than be born, live, have children and die.

Yet this was the ancestor of every person now living on Earth -- the last person in history whose family tree branches out to touch all 6.5 billion people on the planet today.

That means everybody on Earth descends from somebody who was around as recently as the reign of Tutankhamen, maybe even during the Golden Age of ancient Greece. There's even a chance that our last shared ancestor lived at the time of Christ.



Cinepro:

*** But the idea that Adam and Eve were the first "humans" (by any definition), and that they first started having kids around 4,000 BC, is definitely the first thing to go when science comes on the scene. ***

This kind of thing, Adam and Eve, the Flood of Noah, are absolutely damning of the LDS worldview. They demonstrate clearly and unequivocally that the "Prophets" LDS look up to as having known "the Truth" from God through revelation, were really just passing on their culture's inherited mythology, which is precisely congruent with what we would expect if they weren't really true Prophets of a God who actually existed.

This is a very large piece in the puzzle whose picture, if put together enough by a questioning member, can show, at last, just how manmade this church is, contrary to how they grew up believing, or convinced themselves of as adults.

Members of all sorts of churches, not just ours, become very adept at papering over problems with their theories and beliefs, but underneath all the obfuscation, excuses, rationalizations, etc. the picture is pretty clear, and obvious. These were just men, and these men knew nothing more than anyone else in their time and place, and certainly weren't getting their "truth" from an omnipotent being who existed anywhere outside of their imaginations.

Here's the part where I come clean and admit that until a few years ago, I totally believed Adam and Eve were the first humans (or human-like creatures), and that there was no physical death in the world until Adam fell.

I also totally believed Noah's flood covered the whole world.

And I believed these things because that was what I had always been taught at Church.

That now seems like so long ago, and I understand that the many different wards I lived in were all teaching a particular strain of fundamentalism, and were misinterpreting the scriptures and lesson manuals provided by the Church.

Somebody needs to drop the bad news to "Adamson" that he married his cousin. :)

Incest was started by Adam and Eve's family.

This kind of thing, Adam and Eve, the Flood of Noah, are absolutely damning of the LDS worldview. They demonstrate clearly and unequivocally that the "Prophets" LDS look up to as having known "the Truth" from God through revelation, were really just passing on their culture's inherited mythology, which is precisely congruent with what we would expect if they weren't really true Prophets of a God who actually existed.

No, what it demonstrates is that without more detailed revelation, they take the traditional pov. Also, still waiting for evidence against evolution not conflicting with LDS doctrine......

Maxrep: Thanks for sharing the laughs. Cinepro's pearls of satire are best appreciated when cast before the MADB swine.

One of the networks should snatch Cinepro up as a writer. :)

Oh, I suspect he's deeply involved in Disney's anti-family machinations and the corruption of Hannah Montana.

bcspace wrote:

This kind of thing, Adam and Eve, the Flood of Noah, are absolutely damning of the LDS worldview. They demonstrate clearly and unequivocally that the "Prophets" LDS look up to as having known "the Truth" from God through revelation, were really just passing on their culture's inherited mythology, which is precisely congruent with what we would expect if they weren't really true Prophets of a God who actually existed.

No, what it demonstrates is that without more detailed revelation, they take the traditional pov. Also, still waiting for evidence against evolution not conflicting with LDS doctrine......

You got it dozen of times from every angle. We can't help that you are the master of stubborn denial and failure to realize when the jig is up.
Your apologetic didn't make any sense and everyone could see it but you.

Oh, and I am right about the horses and paleontologists I asked about it despite your pretending.

Your apologetic didn't make any sense and everyone could see it but you.

Only those with an antiMormon agenda claimed it didn't make sense.

Oh, and I am right about the horses and paleontologists I asked about it despite your pretending.

What are you talking about?

bcspace wrote: Also, still waiting for evidence against evolution not conflicting with LDS doctrine......

The problem, BC, isn't the evidence. It's what lies between your ears. :)