Ultimate prejudice?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Post by _bcspace »

Since you are not able to point out how I am in violation of LDS doctrine, perhaps you should take my word.

Go back and read the thread man. Don;t play coy. Their words are right there.


I've addressed those words on several threads. Never at anytime has anyone successfully pointed out where I might be in conflict.

the fact that you have to construct such a strange and complicated theory, that even you can't explain, is what people like to call "a little clue".


Created state vs. Creative state.

How is that complicated and what's to explain?
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.
_solomarineris
_Emeritus
Posts: 1207
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2007 1:51 am

Post by _solomarineris »

Brackite wrote:
bcspace wrote:
These spirits would come from the same source as the spirit of any other animal. Methinks Tarski forgot to take into account LDS doctrine.

Is the theory of organic evolution compatible with LDS Doctrine? The Following is Part of the article Titled, 'IS EVOLUTION COMPATIBLE WITH Mormon DOCTRINE?,' Written By LDS Apologist, Michael T. Griffith:
Conclusion: The theory of organic evolution is clearly Not compatible with LDS Doctrine.


That might be your conclusion. Most Mormons do not give rats ass what Michael T. Griffith's opinion is.
They are far more enlightened than their Born again fundie cousins.
I'd say majority of Mormons do believe in evolution.
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Post by _bcspace »

That might be your conclusion. Most Mormons do not give rats ass what Michael T. Griffith's opinion is.
They are far more enlightened than their Born again fundie cousins.
I'd say majority of Mormons do believe in evolution.


Indeed. There are both creationists and evolutionists within the Church which has taken no official stand on the matter except to reiterate LDS doctrine. I am certainly not the first LDS person to accept evolution as compatible though as far as I can tell my explaination using 2 Nephi 2:22 to distinguish between the created and creative states is unique.
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.
_Tarski
_Emeritus
Posts: 3059
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:57 pm

Post by _Tarski »

bcspace wrote:
Since you are not able to point out how I am in violation of LDS doctrine, perhaps you should take my word.

Go back and read the thread man. Don;t play coy. Their words are right there.


I've addressed those words on several threads. Never at anytime has anyone successfully pointed out where I might be in conflict.

the fact that you have to construct such a strange and complicated theory, that even you can't explain, is what people like to call "a little clue".


Created state vs. Creative state.

How is that complicated and what's to explain?


What extra value does being a spirit procreated (wink wink) of God give as opposed to merely having a spirit?

Also, all that evolution for what? Just to end up with what could never be the end product of evolution; a deathless Adamic body? To produce a biological form that already exists in previous worlds and is Gods very own form (quite absurd that)? Why?
What was all that? (the millions of years of monkeys and apes swinging through the trees--for what?)

You believe in evolution but deprive it of its explanitory power. For example, for you, the human form is what it is because that's the form of the God that procreated the similarly shaped spirit body. Procreated means what? Wink wink woo hoo!
But evolution explains the human form in much more reasonable terms: gradual adaptation based on numerous biohistorical contigencies. (Rerun evolution and one does not end up with humans--it is emergence from complexity and chaos in the mathematical sense of sensitive dependence on initial conditions)
The human form is not a necessary end product of evolution.

And then to top it all off, being a spirit child of God give you no extra features. Turns out that in your senario, mere animals can speak language, love, create poems and music, dream and aspire.

Does the owrd incongruous mean anything to you?
when believers want to give their claims more weight, they dress these claims up in scientific terms. When believers want to belittle atheism or secular humanism, they call it a "religion". -Beastie

yesterday's Mormon doctrine is today's Mormon folklore.-Buffalo
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Post by _bcspace »

What extra value does being a spirit procreated (wink wink) of God give as opposed to merely having a spirit?


The value is in the definition of 'first man'.

Also, all that evolution for what? Just to end up with what could never be the end product of evolution; a deathless Adamic body?


How is evolution forced to produce something deathless here? It is God who places Adam into that state.

To produce a biological form that already exists in previous worlds and is Gods very own form (quite absurd that)? Why?
What was all that? (the millions of years of monkeys and apes swinging through the trees--for what?)


To produce the required physical body according to the laws of the universe.

You believe in evolution but deprive it of its explanitory power. For example, for you, the human form is what it is because that's the form of the God that procreated the similarly shaped spirit body. Procreated means what? Wink wink woo hoo!


Evolution in and of itself does nothing to prove or disprove the existence of God. You are depriving evolution of something it never had in the first place.

But evolution explains the human form in much more reasonable terms: gradual adaptation based on numerous biohistorical contigencies. (Rerun evolution and one does not end up with humans--it is emergence from complexity and chaos in the mathematical sense of sensitive dependence on initial conditions)


We know how God created the physical body. So?

The human form is not a necessary end product of evolution.


Seems to me that there are many end products. Nothing precludes God from simply setting the initial conditions and taking from the process what is needed for His higher purposes.

And then to top it all off, being a spirit child of God give you no extra features. Turns out that in your senario, mere animals can speak language, love, create poems and music, dream and aspire.


Seems like many animals can do most of that today anyway.

Does the word incongruous mean anything to you?


It's meaning does not seem to apply to anything I have said.
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.
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

Created state vs. Creative state.

How is that complicated and what's to explain?



What's to explain is what you refused to explain, because you can't.

How is Adam's mother fundamentally different than Adam? In other words, what difference does it make to the state of being human whether or not one is the "spirit offspring of HF"?
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Post by _bcspace »

What's to explain is what you refused to explain, because you can't.

How is Adam's mother fundamentally different than Adam? In other words, what difference does it make to the state of being human whether or not one is the "spirit offspring of HF"?


Didn't you see my dolphin comment? Perhaps you should try to find in LDS theology where a man is still a man if his spirit is not that begotten by HF.
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.
_beastie
_Emeritus
Posts: 14216
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2006 2:26 am

Post by _beastie »

Didn't you see my dolphin comment? Perhaps you should try to find in LDS theology where a man is still a man if his spirit is not that begotten by HF.


(this is beginning to feel a little insane)

In terms of genetics, Adam's mother had to look like a human being. I'm trying to get you to explain how the fact that Adam's mother was not begotten by HF manifested itself. Let's review:

1. looks like human being - check
2. loves offspring - check
3. can formulate thoughts and communicate - check
4. can feel feelings - check

So help me out here with this simple concept. How is Adam's mother different from Adam?
We hate to seem like we don’t trust every nut with a story, but there’s evidence we can point to, and dance while shouting taunting phrases.

Penn & Teller

http://www.mormonmesoamerica.com
_bcspace
_Emeritus
Posts: 18534
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 6:48 pm

Post by _bcspace »

In terms of genetics, Adam's mother had to look like a human being. I'm trying to get you to explain how the fact that Adam's mother was not begotten by HF manifested itself. Let's review:

1. looks like human being - check
2. loves offspring - check
3. can formulate thoughts and communicate - check
4. can feel feelings - check

So help me out here with this simple concept. How is Adam's mother different from Adam?


Does this look like a human being?

Image
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.
_Tarski
_Emeritus
Posts: 3059
Joined: Thu Oct 26, 2006 7:57 pm

Post by _Tarski »

bcspace wrote:
What extra value does being a spirit procreated (wink wink) of God give as opposed to merely having a spirit?


The value is in the definition of 'first man'.



Also, all that evolution for what? Just to end up with what could never be the end product of evolution; a deathless Adamic body?


How is evolution forced to produce something deathless here? It is God who places Adam into that state.

Then what was all that evolution for? He already possessed the genetic code of a perfect human. Right?

To produce a biological form that already exists in previous worlds and is Gods very own form (quite absurd that)? Why?
What was all that? (the millions of years of monkeys and apes swinging through the trees--for what?)

To produce the required physical body according to the laws of the universe.

No need, that already happened. The genetic code already existed! he even had cells right?
when believers want to give their claims more weight, they dress these claims up in scientific terms. When believers want to belittle atheism or secular humanism, they call it a "religion". -Beastie

yesterday's Mormon doctrine is today's Mormon folklore.-Buffalo
Post Reply