I think you were sowing the seeds of doubt. It's just science. But that's the problem here - the scientific view of this continent's peopling is a different story than that told in the Book of Mormon.
How so? If LDS doctrine is that the Garden of Eden was here, then there were people here before the Jaredites.
On top of that, there being no conflict between LDS doctrine and evolution theory, there were homo sapiens here thousands of years before the Fall. Where does the Book of Mormon conflict with that?
We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light. - Plato
Ray, you need to know something about the modus operandi of BCSpace.
Since Mormon theology is nothing more than a figment of man's imagination, there are really no rules regarding elements that absolutely must be there. Words are up for grabs, and can be redefined at will if necessary. He has already been refuted and debunked many times, but he always replies with some variant of "no I haven't, you're wrong, and now you're just fuming because you can't find any way that my theory conflicts with either science or LDS scripture".
Stating that something is "crap" hardly qualifies as a debunking or a refutation.
I wonder if bcspace is a sock puppet of Paul Osbourne?
Him and bc have very similarly whacked views on Mormonism.
... our church isn't true, but we have to keep up appearances so we don't get shunned by our friends and family, fired from our jobs, kicked out of our homes, ... Please don't tell on me. ~maklelan
If there were millions of Homo Sapiens around when God chose one male body in which to instill his God procreated spirit child, and placed this male in the Missouri Garden of Eden are there billions of humans that are not actual descendants of Adam?
The various theories posited for the fate of the neanderthals could work here.
I don't think there is a man or woman who would find BC's "theory" to make any sort of sense at all. I think he is the sole believer in his philosophy.
I've never claimed any followers. But I do know that there are many LDS who accept evolution theory.
So, maybe it is more, "the philosophies of BC mingled with a speck of scripture?"
Indeed it is. I have never claimed my theory to be doctrine. I simply claim that LDS doctrine does not conflict with evolution and have simply provied an example.
I asked BCSpace about this identical point some months ago, having supplied him with data on the accepted dates at which modern human beings populated the different parts of the earth's surface, and after having got him to give a range of dates during which his version of the Fall could have taken place. The impossibility of us all being in any sense descendants of Adam was then very evident. I asked him to confront this huge objection to his theory.
Answer came there none. Pending further clarification, I can only conclude provisionally that he is not discussing this and similar points in good faith, but is simply playing little games. Thus I suggest it may be better not to bother arguing with him.
I did give you (or someone else asking the same question) an answer. You (or that someone else) simply failed to address it.
I wonder if bcspace is a sock puppet of Paul Osbourne?
Nope.
Him and bc have very similarly whacked views on Mormonism.
Does that qualify as a debunking? lol
Good hell bc, you might as well be asking me to debunk your theories on the whereabouts of Bilbo Baggins.
... our church isn't true, but we have to keep up appearances so we don't get shunned by our friends and family, fired from our jobs, kicked out of our homes, ... Please don't tell on me. ~maklelan
Good hell bc, you might as well be asking me to debunk your theories on the whereabouts of Bilbo Baggins.
Likely because you don't know what LDS doctrine is even though how to identify it is plainly and clearly stated.
You don't have to believe what LDS do. All you have to do is examine my claim and compare with LDS doctrine. That is, if you really are trying to debunk my theory. However, I've successfully defended this theory for over 20 years. It's unlikely that you'll be able to present anything I haven't seen before and dealt with.
