Creation/Evolution

[Thinker]

Lots of supporting evidence that Adam lived that long, and that years were not measured in lunar months. Look at the genealogies and ages. Look at Adam-ondi-Ahman. Look at the astronomy.

How is a genealogy list or astronomy, supporting evidence? Seems you're engaging in circular reasoning which is not evidence.

What do you make of all of the bones anthropologists have found that have shown gradual changes in human development over many years?

Personally, I don't really concern myself too much with the past - that's his-story - this is now. Still, I won't deny logic just because people want to insist on Catholic canonized symbolic writings being taken scientifically & historically literally.

[BeNotDeceived]

Yom & The Age of the Earth . . . .

This is an excellent article. Thanks for posting. But too many times on this forum, people post articles without the link to the source up front. I don't know how many times, I have delved into a given post, not knowing for sure where it came from or whether the poster was trying to take credit for someone else's work.

You do have some links, but could you identify where you got this article in a way that doesn't force people to click on your links? I also believe that quoted articles should be put in the quotes Brian provides for them.

Thanks

Every word was from the cited articles.

Copyright laws must be followed, ...

The trick is to place the quote and url portion, all on the same line.

I think you're complicating the issue, but just my opinion. I just look for clarity indicating who is responsible for what I'm reading. Even something like: the following is from XXXXX, making sure you differentiate where the XXXX stops and starts . . . at least some way. And I thought the 'fair use' rule on this forum was set much higher than a mere 50%. But again, notice: the article was excellent. Good post.

Thank you for your kind words, and your many salient points.

... “Heavenly Father is aware of our limitations and knows the factors that contribute to our limitations,” he said. “Despite our deficiencies, however, He also knows how to communicate important directives as we are able to receive them.”

He cited the passage in Doctrine and Covenants 1:24, “Behold, I am God and have spoken it; these commandments are of me, and were given unto my servants in their weakness, after the manner of their language, that they might come to understanding.”

I just saved my text as God Speaks to Us in Ways We Can Understand, ... edit1 ldsff after saving it with "stub" in place of "edit1". Next I will also save it as a draft, again. Saving it repeatedly requires more gyrations, besides complexity, but adds safety. To said words from lds.org, also consider President JFK's admonishment that "we don't do things because they are easy, but because they are hard". And Also, Stephen King said "Easy reading is the product of hard writing"

Placing things between quotation marks is another way to credit the author. The Yom Article followed the conventions of day, when it was posted, as so indicated. Titles of written works are underlined, is another convention of the English Language. Beginning sentences with "and" or "but" was once forbidden, but now is an accepted good practice, if not over done.

HTML or BBCode is now our written language, aptly demonstrated on lds.org, etc. Notice the url between quote blocks is truncated; noticing little things like this, are works that accompany the seed of faith, spoken of in Alma 32:27.

Today I'm composing my reply on my macbook with dual monitors; on other days this would be to-much complexity, to attempt on a mobile device. "Practice Makes Perfect" is a well know axiom, so in those cases, I'll just place stuff like that in quote marks to simply say, these are not my words. If your curious, google away.

Spelling words minus the vowels, or appending ii, in some cases are some other tricks to help find stuff. Search ldsff for iiii for more info.

Saving now, replacing "stub" with "fnl" after one last preview. Happy posting everyone, have an awesome day.

[JohnnyL]

False the scriptures teach the first 6 creative periods were spiritual creation.

Interesting point - spiritual creation precedes material/physical creation. Makes sense.

That Adam the first flesh on the earth his physical body was created in the 7th period then the garden of Eden created where Adam and Eve were placed. The animals only came after and the earth was in a terrestrial state of no death. Only since Adam was thrown out of the earth changed to a telestrial state. Animal life and man has only been in our current state for less than 6,000y, I see nothing in geology or any other science that contradicts this - note the discussion on soft tissue found on dinosaurs that are supposedly 130million years old..

Years ago, even when I took things literally in symbolic scripture stories, I questioned the math.
How could Adam and Eve have lived about 6,000 years ago, and we are supposed to be in the "last days" and yet Jesus came in the "meridian of time"?
That would mean that Jesus would have had to come much earlier than he did.

I think it would be helpful to look up "meridian of time" on lds.org.

Lots of supporting evidence that Adam lived that long, and that years were not measured in lunar months. Look at the genealogies and ages. Look at Adam-ondi-Ahman. Look at the astronomy.

How is a genealogy list or astronomy, supporting evidence? Seems you're engaging in circular reasoning which is not evidence.

How is it circular reasoning?

[Thinker]

Jonny, Thanks. I'll respond later to you.

This can't wait.

EVOLUTION

[Spaced_Out]

False the scriptures teach the first 6 creative periods were spiritual creation.

Interesting point - spiritual creation precedes material/physical creation. Makes sense.

That Adam the first flesh on the earth his physical body was created in the 7th period then the garden of Eden created where Adam and Eve were placed. The animals only came after and the earth was in a terrestrial state of no death. Only since Adam was thrown out of the earth changed to a telestrial state. Animal life and man has only been in our current state for less than 6,000y, I see nothing in geology or any other science that contradicts this - note the discussion on soft tissue found on dinosaurs that are supposedly 130million years old..

Years ago, even when I took things literally in symbolic scripture stories, I questioned the math.
How could Adam and Eve have lived about 6,000 years ago, and we are supposed to be in the "last days" and yet Jesus came in the "meridian of time"?
That would mean that Jesus would have had to come much earlier than he did.
Anyway - that and other problems - reminded me that the scriptures are not intended for science or history class - but for spiritual learning - to be likened to us symbolically. When we get caught up in taking things literally, we miss the mark - the whole point of the intended teaching.

God also commanded all animal life to only multiply in their respective orders. To claim evolution is to make a mockery of the entire plan of salvation, and deny the Scriptures and teachings of the prophets.

God (actually imperfect writers of canonized, cherry picked work) - also suggested that skin color was comparable to worthiness - and other racial prejudice like people should not marry other races. But do you know what happens when people don't mix genetically? Genetic flaws are more likely. That's why in our country it's illegal to marry your sibling or even cousin. So on one hand, you have writing encouraging prejudice and in-bread sickness. On the other hand you have scriptures like, "God is no respector of persons" and "love one another as I have loved you" - even if they're a hated Samaritan or other race. The more genetically diverse we are - the better chance of healthier genes.

Moral: Nobody (not even scripture writers) is perfect. Study, ponder & pray - to discern truth and goodness - & take the best, leave the rest.

All life is intelligence that has been given a spiritual body and on earth a physical body. Evolution is simply not possible or any part of the plan of salvation. Nothing to pray or think about just very basic understanding of the plan of salvation.
To say the scriptures are wrong or incorrectly interpreted just to fit your very limited understanding of science hold no water.

[Spaced_Out]

False the scriptures teach the first 6 creative periods were spiritual creation.

Interesting point - spiritual creation precedes material/physical creation. Makes sense.

That Adam the first flesh on the earth his physical body was created in the 7th period then the garden of Eden created where Adam and Eve were placed. The animals only came after and the earth was in a terrestrial state of no death. Only since Adam was thrown out of the earth changed to a telestrial state. Animal life and man has only been in our current state for less than 6,000y, I see nothing in geology or any other science that contradicts this - note the discussion on soft tissue found on dinosaurs that are supposedly 130million years old..

Years ago, even when I took things literally in symbolic scripture stories, I questioned the math.
How could Adam and Eve have lived about 6,000 years ago, and we are supposed to be in the "last days" and yet Jesus came in the "meridian of time"?
That would mean that Jesus would have had to come much earlier than he did.
Anyway - that and other problems - reminded me that the scriptures are not intended for science or history class - but for spiritual learning - to be likened to us symbolically. When we get caught up in taking things literally, we miss the mark - the whole point of the intended teaching.

The scriptures are accurate both to physical/science and spiritual things as all things to God are spiritual. I find nothing in that are not scientifically accurate.

http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Meridian_of_Time
Author: Burton, Marshall T.
The meridian of time has been defined by one LDS apostle as "the middle or high point of that portion of eternity which is considered to be mortal time" (MD, 1966, p. 486). It is the dispensation in which Jesus Christ lived in mortality. The term does not occur in the Bible, but is found in the Doctrine and Covenants (20:26;39:3) and in the Book of Moses (5:57;6:57, 62;7:46).
The word "meridian" suggests the middle. According to Old Testament genealogies, from the Fall of Adam to the time of Jesus Christ was approximately 4,000 years. It has been nearly 2,000 years since Jesus' birth. The millennial reign will commence "in the beginning of the seventh thousand years" (D&C 77:12). After the Millennium there will be a "little season," the exact length of which is not revealed, but it could be several hundred years. In the context of these events, the Lord's mortal ministry took place near the meridian, or middle, of mortal time (DS 1:81).
The meridian of time may also be seen as the high point of mortal time. Latter-day revelation shows that all of the ancient prophets looked forward to the Messiah's coming (Jacob 4:4; Mosiah 13:33-35;15:11). His coming fulfilled their prophecies, and he was prefigured in the Law of Moses (Mosiah 13:29-32) and in ancient ceremonial ordinances (Moses 5:5-8). The meridian of time is the apex of all dispensations because of the birth, ministry, and Atonement of Christ. Without him all prophetic writings and utterances would have had no efficacy, and the hopes of mankind today and forever would be but futile desires and yearnings without possibility of fulfillment. MARSHALL T. BURTON

[Seek the Truth]

Evolution is defined as "the process by which different kinds of living organisms are thought to have developed and diversified from earlier forms during the history of the earth; the gradual development of something, especially from a simple to a more complex form."

Evolution is NOT "our bodies changing into another species every 7 years" as you mistakenly wrote.

You said that cellular replacement was evolution. It is not evolution, at all, in any way. I gave an example of what evolution would be in your example.

Evolution is not about such drastic rapid change - but gradual - with the patience of God - we're talking millions of years sometimes - for changes.

You have no idea what you are talking about.

Evolution is proof of intelligent design!

No it isn't. Evolution doesn't happen therefore it isn't proof of anything.

Intelligence has been defined as "the ability to adapt to change." Evolution is adaptation.

Adaptation is adaptation. Evolution is when a turtle turns into a cow. They are two different words.

Science looks for and tests habits - consistencies. Evolution is breaking out of those habits to try something new - something better!

You are reciting a fairy tale. Science is what can be replicated in a lab. Even evolutionists view evolution as neutral. No such thing as something better.

Some obvious evidences that we have evolved is our resilience to disease compared to years ago... and we live longer lives than we used to. We're evolving to adapt in better ways. Another proof of diversification & increasingly adaptability is how bi-racial offspring are genetically better off than those who are "in-breeds."

Mostly imaginary, but not evidence of evolution. Evidence would be if we found some humans evolving into something other than human. Which we never find anywhere ever ever ever ever ever.

Spirituality is all about evolution - eternal progress!

Lol progression is progression. Evolution is a frog turning into a goat. For example, how many species has God been? Please provide citations.

Damnation is as a damn - holds us back from progressing. Everything was created spiritually before materialized, so again, a type of evolution is universal truth. That doesn't mean to imply that we were monkeys or that we'll evolve into some weird creature - but that we are spiritually & physically programmed by God (intelligent design) to become the best we can become - eternal progress!

If you want to explore this further... Consider who/what God is. If God is truly infinite, omnipotent, omnipresent etc... how could God be limited to a human body? I believe, though I don't understand the details, that God is much more than my finite mind can comprehend.

God by definition is limited to an exalted body. God will never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever turn into a goat.

I don't think you know what evolution is.

[Seek the Truth]

God (actually imperfect writers of canonized, cherry picked work) - also suggested that skin color was comparable to worthiness - and other racial prejudice like people should not marry other races. But do you know what happens when people don't mix genetically? Genetic flaws are more likely. That's why in our country it's illegal to marry your sibling or even cousin. So on one hand, you have writing encouraging prejudice and in-bread sickness. On the other hand you have scriptures like, "God is no respector of persons" and "love one another as I have loved you" - even if they're a hated Samaritan or other race. The more genetically diverse we are - the better chance of healthier genes.

Moral: Nobody (not even scripture writers) is perfect. Study, ponder & pray - to discern truth and goodness - & take the best, leave the rest.

I'm going to straight up ask you, have you ever taken a biology class.

[JohnnyL]

If it took Jesus 4 billion years to create this world, and he has made numberless creations, would that put him as a spirit for trillions and trillions of years? And someone was watching for over 4 billion years, to make sure everything obeyed?

[JohnnyL]

How would the world being created in a different sphere, and being of a higher glory, then falling and coming to this solar system, and having a different atmosphere before the Flood, affect its creation and "existence data" we have now?

[Thinker]

God (actually imperfect writers of canonized, cherry picked work) - also suggested that skin color was comparable to worthiness - and other racial prejudice like people should not marry other races. But do you know what happens when people don't mix genetically? Genetic flaws are more likely. That's why in our country it's illegal to marry your sibling or even cousin. So on one hand, you have writing encouraging prejudice and in-bread sickness. On the other hand you have scriptures like, "God is no respector of persons" and "love one another as I have loved you" - even if they're a hated Samaritan or other race. The more genetically diverse we are - the better chance of healthier genes.

Moral: Nobody (not even scripture writers) is perfect. Study, ponder & pray - to discern truth and goodness - & take the best, leave the rest.

All life is intelligence that has been given a spiritual body and on earth a physical body. Evolution is simply not possible or any part of the plan of salvation. Nothing to pray or think about just very basic understanding of the plan of salvation.
To say the scriptures are wrong or incorrectly interpreted just to fit your very limited understanding of science hold no water.

I agree that all life is intelligence - and again one way of defining intelligence is "ability to adapt to change."
We adapt. I often argue against the myth that people are "born" with homosexual preferences by explaining that upon birth, our brains are only 25% developed - in large part, so that we can best adapt to our environments.

The plan of salvation is eternal progress - spiritual evolution. Damnation is being held back and not adapting or learning.

To say the scripture writers are infallible is having false gods before God.

[Thinker]

False the scriptures teach the first 6 creative periods were spiritual creation.

Interesting point - spiritual creation precedes material/physical creation. Makes sense.

That Adam the first flesh on the earth his physical body was created in the 7th period then the garden of Eden created where Adam and Eve were placed. The animals only came after and the earth was in a terrestrial state of no death. Only since Adam was thrown out of the earth changed to a telestrial state. Animal life and man has only been in our current state for less than 6,000y, I see nothing in geology or any other science that contradicts this - note the discussion on soft tissue found on dinosaurs that are supposedly 130million years old..

Years ago, even when I took things literally in symbolic scripture stories, I questioned the math.
How could Adam and Eve have lived about 6,000 years ago, and we are supposed to be in the "last days" and yet Jesus came in the "meridian of time"?
That would mean that Jesus would have had to come much earlier than he did.

I think it would be helpful to look up "meridian of time" on lds.org.

Lots of supporting evidence that Adam lived that long, and that years were not measured in lunar months. Look at the genealogies and ages. Look at Adam-ondi-Ahman. Look at the astronomy.

How is a genealogy list or astronomy, supporting evidence? Seems you're engaging in circular reasoning which is not evidence.

How is it circular reasoning?

I looked it up years ago. I know symbolically - meridian represents the climax of a story.
But if you were to take it literally as many are mistakenly doing with scriptures - it doesn't make sense mathematically.
It's a reminder that scriptures are NOT math, science or history books - but spiritual parables to be likened to us.
Anything more than that is missing the mark.

Circular reasoning is when you begin with what you're trying to conclude with.
So ie: You want to prove scriptures are true by use of scriptures.


The 2 points to the theory of evolution are:
1. All life on earth is connected & related to each other
2. This diversity of life is a product of modifications of populations by natural selection, where some traits were favored in an environment over others.

To me, this explains spiritual evolution - eternal progress. And as above, so below.

[Thinker]

No it isn't. Evolution doesn't happen therefore it isn't proof of anything.

Evolution by natural selection is one of the best substantiated theories in the history of science, supported by evidence from a wide variety of scientific disciplines, including paleontology, geology, genetics and developmental biology. livescience.com

Adaptation is adaptation. Evolution is when a turtle turns into a cow. They are two different words.

Natural selection implies adaptability.
And evolution is not about a turtle turning into a cow - if you think otherwise, I don't know if I can help you.

Science looks for and tests habits - consistencies. Evolution is breaking out of those habits to try something new - something better!

You are reciting a fairy tale. Science is what can be replicated in a lab. Even evolutionists view evolution as neutral. No such thing as something better.

The bible could be considered fairy tale - ie another creation story exists in which God overcomes a sea-monster in Revelations.
Spiritual and physical evolution is what God has created and designed for us - it is God's intelligent design - giving us intelligence to progress eternally.

Some obvious evidences that we have evolved is our resilience to disease compared to years ago... and we live longer lives than we used to. We're evolving to adapt in better ways. Another proof of diversification & increasingly adaptability is how bi-racial offspring are genetically better off than those who are "in-breeds."

Mostly imaginary, but not evidence of evolution. Evidence would be if we found some humans evolving into something other than human. Which we never find anywhere ever ever ever ever ever.

Experiement with E.Coli has been going on since 1988 - wherein there have been over 44,000 generations of bacteria. Evidence suggests they have evolved because bacteria in the experiment today breed 75% faster than their original ancestor.

I don't claim to be an expert on evolution, but you seem to have a very narrow understanding of what it is - repeating the same thing which lacks substantial aspects of the theory. If you were really interested in truth, you would eagerly seek it and embrace it wherever it's found. If you truly worshiped God (who is a God of Truth) - you would prioritize truth more.

"There is no true religion without true science, and consequently there is no true science without true religion." -BY
"Any open-minded search for truth requires courage, constancy, and humility." -HB Brown
"If we value house, if we value lands, if we value good name, if we value even life itself more than we do the truth we are unworthy of the truth." -GQ Cannon

Spirituality is all about evolution - eternal progress!

Lol progression is progression. Evolution is a frog turning into a goat. For example, how many species has God been? Please provide citations.

I don't appreciate you mocking my spiritual beliefs. I haven't mocked yours. I hope in the future you will be more respectful.
You're asking me something that is subjectively believed.
I believe God is omnipresent - in and through everything and everyone.

“‘Am I only a God nearby,’ declares the Lord, ‘and not a God far away? Can anyone hide in secret places so that I cannot see him’ declares the Lord. ‘Do not I fill heaven and earth?’ declares the Lord” (Jeremiah 23:23–24).

"Split wood, I am there. Lift up a rock, you will find me there. ... Split a wooden stick and I am there and lift a stone and you shall find me."

Damnation is as a damn - holds us back from progressing. Everything was created spiritually before materialized, so again, a type of evolution is universal truth. That doesn't mean to imply that we were monkeys or that we'll evolve into some weird creature - but that we are spiritually & physically programmed by God (intelligent design) to become the best we can become - eternal progress!

If you want to explore this further... Consider who/what God is. If God is truly infinite, omnipotent, omnipresent etc... how could God be limited to a human body? I believe, though I don't understand the details, that God is much more than my finite mind can comprehend.

God by definition is limited to an exalted body. God will never ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever ever turn into a goat.

I don't think you know what evolution is.

It seems that you and I are defining evolution differently. That's more respectful than you telling me I don't know what I'm talking about as you have several times in your post.

I believe in both intelligent design AND evolution.
Suggesting you must choose one or the other is a false dilemma.
Evolution cannot disprove creationism.
Creationism cannot disprove evolution.
The problem is when you take an idea you gathered and distort it - and then assume the whole thing is stupid - like when you claim "Evolution is a frog turning into a goat." You repeated similar phrases with little more about evolution so I can't help but wonder if you were projecting your own lack of research of this topic.

[skmo]

I can draw a similarity between this discussion and the Polygamy one:

Both are generally exercises in futility.

Many times discussions reconciling Creationism and Evolution are aimed at justifying the validity of the holder's point of view, whether that's proving one right and one wrong, although on rare occasions there are people genuinely interested in learning how the two are intertwined without knowing it. Many times discussions of polygamy are aimed at justifying the selfish desires of individuals, whether those desires are to have multiple partners or to sow discord in the church, although on rare occasions a person is trying to learn how to follow past and present laws which differ.

The one thing which they have in common is that both can have significance in the eternities which are not relevant to us today, and if that changes the loving God which sent us to earth to test us will reveal what we need to know through His living prophets.

I will say that there certainly is an element of scientific learning in Creationism/Evolution which can contribute in an exceedingly small way to life, but I regard it the same as I do some of the numbered items in Facsimile 2 in the Book of Abraham:

If the world can find these out, so let it be.

I deem it a waste of time given the many needs our world currently has which require our efforts.

[Seek the Truth]

Evolution by natural selection is one of the best substantiated theories in the history of science, supported by evidence from a wide variety of scientific disciplines, including paleontology, geology, genetics and developmental biology. livescience.com

No it isn't.

Natural selection implies adaptability.
And evolution is not about a turtle turning into a cow - if you think otherwise, I don't know if I can help you.

Turtles turning into cows is exactly what evolution is. You cannot help me because you have no earthly idea what you are talking about.

The bible could be considered fairy tale - ie another creation story exists in which God overcomes a sea-monster in Revelations.
Spiritual and physical evolution is what God has created and designed for us - it is God's intelligent design - giving us intelligence to progress eternally.

Again, please cite the number of different species God has been as he evolved. Was he once a tuna?

Experiement with E.Coli has been going on since 1988 - wherein there have been over 44,000 generations of bacteria. Evidence suggests they have evolved because bacteria in the experiment today breed 75% faster than their original ancestor.

They are still bacteria, which means they didn't evolve.

I don't claim to be an expert on evolution,

This much is true.

but you seem to have a very narrow understanding of what it is - repeating the same thing which lacks substantial aspects of the theory.

The theory is one species turns into another species. Cows turn into whales, dinosaurs turn into chickens. That is what the theory is. It is a false theory.

If you were really interested in truth, you would eagerly seek it and embrace it wherever it's found. If you truly worshiped God (who is a God of Truth) - you would prioritize truth more.

I have studied evolution extensively and found no truth in it at all. Goats do not turn into spiders.

"There is no true religion without true science, and consequently there is no true science without true religion." -BY
"Any open-minded search for truth requires courage, constancy, and humility." -HB Brown
"If we value house, if we value lands, if we value good name, if we value even life itself more than we do the truth we are unworthy of the truth." -GQ Cannon

None of this supports evolution. At all.

I don't appreciate you mocking my spiritual beliefs. I haven't mocked yours. I hope in the future you will be more respectful.
You're asking me something that is subjectively believed.
I believe God is omnipresent - in and through everything and everyone.

We aren't talking about spiritual beliefs. We are talking about science. Evolution fails when run through the scientific process.

“‘Am I only a God nearby,’ declares the Lord, ‘and not a God far away? Can anyone hide in secret places so that I cannot see him’ declares the Lord. ‘Do not I fill heaven and earth?’ declares the Lord” (Jeremiah 23:23–24).

"Split wood, I am there. Lift up a rock, you will find me there. ... Split a wooden stick and I am there and lift a stone and you shall find me."

Great phrases, but they don't show how a minnow becomes a frog.

[quote="Thinker"
It seems that you and I are defining evolution differently. That's more respectful than you telling me I don't know what I'm talking about as you have several times in your post.[/quote]
I'm using the scientific definition. One species turning into another species. Open and shut. Evolution is not real by this definition.

I believe in both intelligent design AND evolution.
Suggesting you must choose one or the other is a false dilemma.
Evolution cannot disprove creationism.
Creationism cannot disprove evolution.
The problem is when you take an idea you gathered and distort it - and then assume the whole thing is stupid - like when you claim "Evolution is a frog turning into a goat." You repeated similar phrases with little more about evolution so I can't help but wonder if you were projecting your own lack of research of this topic.

I've researched evolution my whole life. The theory of evolution as taught in schools is that frogs turn into goats over millions of years. It is laughable. They invented the word and the concept. You apparently use the word differently and have a different concept. I suppose it is a free country and you can do what you want but my concern are the people who believe frogs turn into goats, because they are legion, teaching a false principle and using my tax money to do it with.

[skmo]

No it isn't.

Yes, it is, but like all theories there is disagreement on degree and application.

Turtles turning into cows is exactly what evolution is. You cannot help me because you have no earthly idea what you are talking about.

No. Don't drink the "Evolution Theory" that closed-minded, hootenanny Pentecostals proclaim. Learning about evolution from Born Again religionists is like learning about U.S. Constitutional Law from Karl Marx or Bernie Sanders.

And I DO know what I'm talking about. It was my job to know these things, I taught them as part of my job. I never taught, as a fact, anything that could not theoretically be reconciled with our understanding of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Again, please cite the number of different species God has been as he evolved. Was he once a tuna?

God has always been God, but at some time lost in Eternities so long ago we can't understand it, He learned how to make a tuna, most likely just as some of His children will one day. As we are, He once was. As He is, we may become. He did not make us God. Like Him, we may one day learn how, is a similar manner than He did.

They are still bacteria, which means they didn't evolve.

Does your car use a steam engine? No? I guess it evolved. That doesn't mean you drive your Apple MacBook Pro to the store, you drove your car. It's a different car than the Motorwagen which Karl Benz invented in 1885. It's a different car than Henry Ford turned out from his moving assembly plant. That doesn't mean it isn't a car, it just evolved.

Staphylococcus aureus is a bacteria that can cause infections in humans. If a person gets a staph infection, their doctor will usually give them a prescription for amoxicillin. Generally, 5-10 days later they're fine. However, Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, better known by the acronym MRSA is an evolved form of that bacteria which laughs at most kinds of penicillin. Very complex anti-bacterials are needed to combat this, often something like Clindamycin or Vancomycin. This is because of the evolution, the change, of even a simple life form like the staph bacteria took place.

The theory is one species turns into another species. Cows turn into whales, dinosaurs turn into chickens. That is what the theory is. It is a false theory.

No. The theory is that species adapt to changing conditions. Those who can change do so to meet their needs. Those who do not go extinct. You're accepting only one small, narrow example of the many different parts of evolutionary theory.

If you won't change your mind based on an accurate description from someone who is a moderately-well-trained individual simply because you want to accept the ignorant diatribes of people are NOT schooled in a proper way, that is your choice. However, do not deceive yourself that you're accepting Truth and Light from an ignorant source.

The idea that evolution can be simply boiled down to "Cows turn into whales and goats turn into spiders" is completely false. It is a statement of false hyperbole from dogmatic religionists who are unwilling to think for themselves. Please understand, the kind of Pentecostal thinkers who insist that evolution means men were once monkeys would just as absolutely tell LDS people we're UNCONDITIONALLY going to burn forever in a lake of brimstone and fire for believing the Book of Mormon is the Word of God. Again - let me be clear -

These are ignorant beliefs.

Certainly there are a lot of scientific theories that are as screwy as anything Baptists and Pentecostals and politicians and late night infomercial salesmen and others of their ilk can come up with. However, just as you would not accept their beliefs about the Book of Mormon, you should not accept their INCORRECT teachings about what evolution is.

I have studied evolution extensively and found no truth in it at all. Goats do not turn into spiders.

May I ask where this study came from? If it's Oral Roberts University teachings about evolution, or the Jim Bakker Institute of Monkeys and female assistants, I'd recommend a little more diversified approach. My basic Science came from Ricks College and BYU. Maybe try there.

We aren't talking about spiritual beliefs. We are talking about science. Evolution fails when run through the scientific process.

No. Simplistic, dogmatic misbeliefs about evolution fail the scientific process.

Great phrases, but they don't show how a minnow becomes a frog.

Nor do you explain how patently incorrect claims of evolution can be claimed to represent evolution. You are arguing a point that is indefensible. You are claiming evolution is something its detractors claim, not what its proponents claim. This would be like having an Iranian Imam teach people what the Book of Mormon was about.

[Seek the Truth]

Every textbook in America teaches that life began as a single celled type organism that eventually became alligators, elephants, rhinoceros, whale, cows, and giraffes, and along the way took millions of different forms.

The theory literally claims that fish turned into lizards that eventually turned into birds, mammals and then apes/humans.

This is literally the theory taught in textbooks. I am not misrepresenting it in any way shape or form. This is what Richard Dawkins, Neil Tyson, Sam Harris, Chris Hitchens etc teach and believe and promulgate as science.

It is not science. It has never been observed, has never been replicated in a lab and never confirmed by genetics. It is impossible.

Now many of you indeed may have views on biology and the origin of species, and you might like to use the word evolution in conjunction with your views but it doesn't change the fact that the scientific community has a very specific definition that they uniformly promote using my tax dollars.

I am rebutting their theory in the textbooks. If you don't like that I use that word evolution, I would recommend going after the scientific community that insists they own the word and that it means what they say it means.

Now, for those of you who think I am misrepresenting the theory or don't understand the theory I challenge you to tell me one single thing about it that I've never heard before. I guarantee you won't be able to do it.

[Spaced_Out]

God (actually imperfect writers of canonized, cherry picked work) - also suggested that skin color was comparable to worthiness - and other racial prejudice like people should not marry other races. But do you know what happens when people don't mix genetically? Genetic flaws are more likely. That's why in our country it's illegal to marry your sibling or even cousin. So on one hand, you have writing encouraging prejudice and in-bread sickness. On the other hand you have scriptures like, "God is no respector of persons" and "love one another as I have loved you" - even if they're a hated Samaritan or other race. The more genetically diverse we are - the better chance of healthier genes.

Moral: Nobody (not even scripture writers) is perfect. Study, ponder & pray - to discern truth and goodness - & take the best, leave the rest.

All life is intelligence that has been given a spiritual body and on earth a physical body. Evolution is simply not possible or any part of the plan of salvation. Nothing to pray or think about just very basic understanding of the plan of salvation.
To say the scriptures are wrong or incorrectly interpreted just to fit your very limited understanding of science hold no water.

I agree that all life is intelligence - and again one way of defining intelligence is "ability to adapt to change."
We adapt. I often argue against the myth that people are "born" with homosexual preferences by explaining that upon birth, our brains are only 25% developed - in large part, so that we can best adapt to our environments.

The plan of salvation is eternal progress - spiritual evolution. Damnation is being held back and not adapting or learning.

To say the scripture writers are infallible is having false gods before God.

No, God takes intelligence and builds a perfect spiritual body for it, it then comes down to earth and gets a physical body that can locally adapt to circumstances but not evolve to anything else. In the resurrection it receives a perfect body for it's spiritual body. It cant move beyond the limits of it's intelligence or spiritual body.

As man is God once was, are we going to evolve to be more perfect than Heavenly father, so after billions of years of father son father son a more perfect God is created or as a son of God I can evolve to be greater than the Father of my spirit. Total nonsense.
The pattern of given intelligence a spiritual body then a physical body in the likeness has been going on for all eternity and the the spiritual body is created in perfection there is no evolution no need for it and the scriptures are clear God commanded it to be so.

[Spaced_Out]

The plan of salvation is eternal progress - spiritual evolution. Damnation is being held back and not adapting or learning.

To say the scripture writers are infallible is having false gods before God.

God does not progress in intelligence as he has reached perfect knowledge of all things but progresses in glory which is his work to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.
The intelligence and spirit of a blade of grass cant progress to be the intelligence of tree and get a spirit and physical body of a tree. You are saying God does not create us in perfection but have to be continually reincarnated into something else. Or the E coli bacteria after a few decades is somehow superior to previous generations and has greater advantage in the world to come.

The scriptures are infallible they are the word as dictated by God and by the mouth of two or three witnesses the truth is established, we have many scriptures on the creation and the teachings in the temple and the teachings of all the general authorities that are in agreement - to claim that it is wrong and you have a better doctrine based on failed sciences of man is the real false god (the worship of the sciences of man above Gods word),

[skmo]

Every textbook in America teaches that life began as a single celled type organism that eventually became alligators, elephants, rhinoceros, whale, cows, and giraffes, and along the way took millions of different forms.

Not the textbooks I actually used myself as a teacher, but your mind is made up. C'est la vie. We can just disagree.

This is what Richard Dawkins, Neil Tyson, Sam Harris, Chris Hitchens etc teach and believe and promulgate as science.

You don't have scientists, you have the most virulent atheistic science activists in the country. That's like saying Malik Zulu Shabazz, Louis Farrakhan, and Al Sharpton claim all white people are racist, therefore blacks believe it must be.

It is not science. It has never been observed, has never been replicated in a lab and never confirmed by genetics. It is impossible.

If one is unwilling to accept the proven example of staph evolving into MRSA, or Mouflon evolving into different varieties of domesticated sheep or any of the many animal husbandry examples of cattle and other animals evolving, then again, C'est la vie. We can just disagree.

Now, for those of you who think I am misrepresenting the theory or don't understand the theory I challenge you to tell me one single thing about it that I've never heard before. I guarantee you won't be able to do it.

One of the things I learned as a teacher is that a closed mind will not be challenged, and I shan't bother to try. As I said, we will just have to disagree about this point.

[passionflower]

You guys have got it all complete wrong and are "barking up the wrong tree". This is actually quiet shocking..... the confusion, where the scriptures are very plain and simple....

The first 6 creative periods were spiritual creations - no physical creation on the earth. Adam was the first flesh on the earth then God planted a garden eastward in Eden and put animals on the earth etc..

Gen 1:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
2 And on the seventh day God ended his work which he had made; and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made.
3 And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it: because that in it he had rested from all his work which God created and made.
4 ¶ These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the earth and the heavens,
5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
6 But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
7 And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
8 ¶ And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.


Moses 3:1 Thus the heaven and the earth were finished, and all the host of them.
2 And on the seventh day I, God, ended my work, and all things which I had made; and I rested on the seventh day from all my work, and all things which I had made were finished, and I, God, saw that they were good;
3 And I, God, blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it; because that in it I had rested from all my work which I, God, had created and made.
4 And now, behold, I say unto you, that these are the generations of the heaven and of the earth, when they were created, in the day that I, the Lord God, made the heaven and the earth,
5 And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew. For I, the Lord God, created all things, of which I have spoken, spiritually, before they were naturally upon the face of the earth. For I, the Lord God, had not caused it to rain upon the face of the earth. And I, the Lord God, had created all the children of men; and not yet a man to till the ground; for in heaven created I them; and there was not yet flesh upon the earth, neither in the water, neither in the air;
6 But I, the Lord God, spake, and there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
7 And I, the Lord God, formed man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul, the first flesh upon the earth, the first man also; nevertheless, all things were before created; but spiritually were they created and made according to my word.

Thank you for going through all this trouble, as it is absolutely true. All three scriptural accounts are consistent with this. The spiritual creation is what is represented in the six creative periods. The physical creation is after this. Adam comes first, then the plants, then the animals. The rest of Christianity has taught that the six days of creation was a physical creation because they have lost the knowledte of the premortal spiritual creation.

When you understand that we had a premortal life, These scriptures make very plain reading and are a no brainer.

And about natural selection, this is hardly some good thing. Many people believe that the term " survival of the fittest" automatically means survival of the best, but it doesn't. This was never its original meaning, and this isn't what it means now. Actually, it is a most uncertain and even frightening concept, meaning only the survival of what can adapt the fastest. Not the survival of the best, not the most worthy, not the most deserving, or even the most intelligent. There is no upward climb associated with the survival of the fittest, it is just fitting the fastest into the surrounding environment, whatever that may be. In germ warfare, good people can be killed by bad people because their bugs are better adapted to human beings than human beings are to them, and they can't catch up before becoming dead. This would be a true example of "survival of the fittest".

[Thinker]

I thought of this thread as I was listening to this video, “Religion vs Science.”
He explained that trying to wave away evolution theory facts is dispensing with most of biology. And yet, religion serves an important purpose too.

Is God a God of truth or lies? Truth. And when you have truth, you’re strong.
“If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed.” – Pres. J. Reuben Clark
“There is no true religion without true science, & consequently there is no true science without true religion.” - B Young

It doesn’t have to be one or the other, and actually ideally, we embrace “truth wherever its found” because truth is of God our Creator. We need both science and religion - but they serve different purposes in helping us discover truth. We wouldn’t use a screw driver to hammer a nail. Science helps us learn observable truths. Religion helps us learn moral and value truths. The bible was not written by scientific method or purpose and science cannot give us an ethical sense of what’s spiritually important.
Here’s that video: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nvFd4obpP6Y

[Spaced_Out]

We adapt. I often argue against the myth that people are "born" with homosexual preferences by explaining that upon birth, our brains are only 25% developed - in large part, so that we can best adapt to our environments.

The plan of salvation is eternal progress - spiritual evolution. Damnation is being held back and not adapting or learning.

To say the scripture writers are infallible is having false gods before God.

Yes, People are born with weaknesses and give into them that is not evolution it is failure. Like the paedophile has the same unnatural urges can only be sexually attracted children - no matter how much counselling they get few are able to overcome it. but because it is such an abomination it is not accepted as a born with natural urge whereas homosexuality is. same side of the coin sexual sin that is unnatural and a mental disorder.

[Spaced_Out]

I thought of this thread as I was listening to this video, “Religion vs Science.”
He explained that trying to wave away evolution theory facts is dispensing with most of biology. And yet, religion serves an important purpose too.

Is God a God of truth or lies? Truth. And when you have truth, you’re strong.
“If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed.” – Pres. J. Reuben Clark
“There is no true religion without true science, & consequently there is no true science without true religion.” - B Young

It doesn’t have to be one or the other, and actually ideally, we embrace “truth wherever its found” because truth is of God our Creator. We need both science and religion - but they serve different purposes in helping us discover truth. We wouldn’t use a screw driver to hammer a nail. Science helps us learn observable truths. Religion helps us learn moral and value truths. The bible was not written by scientific method or purpose and science cannot give us an ethical sense of what’s spiritually important.
Here’s that video: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nvFd4obpP6Y

I have three natural science degrees all in different fields I see no evidence of evolution anywhere it is a total corruption to fit a man made theories.
God is truth and he commanded there to be no evolution it is impossible it would frustrate the entire plan of salvation. That intelligence is given a prefect spiritual body and the physical is in the likeness of the spiritual so it is also in the Resurrection. All intelligence is placed in sphere with bounds that cant be broken.

D$C 93:29 Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be.
30 All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence.
31 Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light.
32 And every man whose spirit receiveth not the light is under condemnation.
33 For man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy;

[sandman45]

My thoughts:

I am more in line with Creationism than other.

Dinosaurs? Sure--as long as you accept the same evidence that exists for human giants (see Steve Quayle).

People living 900+ years? It's what JS and other prophets said, too. Pre-Flood, with different atmospheric conditions?

Dinosaurs (and anything else) before humans? Could be, just not death. Would a Fall wipe out dinosaurs?

Dating assumes everything remains the same, and all changes are small. Pretty big assumptions. Post-Flood times are likely to be much, much more accurate than pre-Flood times.

AMEN about the GIANTS!!! If you look into the Giants more you find that the Smithsonian has done some shady things to hide or cover up their existence... there was more evidence they existed than the dinosaurs..