NOM

This thread has "Epic" written all over it for its ability to split the true believers along interesting lines relative to doctrine:

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/694 ... criptures/

Good thread. My favorite story about this topic is when Talmage was at adam-ondi-ahman and examining a pile of stones that Smith said was Adam's altar. Talmage dug up fossils in the pile and said it proved death existed before the fall.

http://signaturebookslibrary.org/the-b- ... ge-affair/

Moreover, he “was bold enough to point out that according to a tradition in the Church based on good authority as having risen from a declaration made by the Prophet Joseph Smith, a certain pile of stones at Adam-ondi-Ahman, Spring Hill, Mo., is really part of the altar on which Adam offered sacrifices, and that I had personally examined those stones and found them to be fossiliferous, so that if those stones be part of the first altar, Adam built it of stones containing corpses, and therefore death must have prevailed in the earth before Adam’s times.”23

This has a thematic feel to it that reminds me about the time FairMormon critiqued the Heartland model of Book of Mormon Geography. I read through it and am amused seeing both sides take their best quote-mined data from their favorite prophets without trying to disturb the divine role of some prophet, seer, or revelator who has evidence for the other side of the argument.

What a hilarious conversation between equally opinionated people. Talk about missing the mark.

The OP is really putting a whole lot of weight on general conference. it seems that checking common sense at the door is a requirement here.

Wow, reading that thread makes me soooo glad I'm not emprisoned in that looney bin anymore.

I always get car sick reading that board.

...and I never read it in the car!

It's nice to read Happy Jack Wagon's posts. He was fun during his time here at NOM.

Thanks for posting. You probably won't hear this discussed in Gospel doctrine class, but it's there lurking in the shadows of people's minds. Once in a while our Stake Patriarch, and very nice guy, will talk about how creationism should be taught in school.

Corsair wrote: ↑Sun Aug 27, 2017 8:22 pm This has a thematic feel to it that reminds me about the time FairMormon critiqued the Heartland model of Book of Mormon Geography. I read through it and am amused seeing both sides take their best quote-mined data from their favorite prophets without trying to disturb the divine role of some prophet, seer, or revelator who has evidence for the other side of the argument.

Reading the various geography model people tear each other to pieces made it really hard to believe any geography model would be real. The testimonials on Rod Meldrum's site were also a real blow.

For Evolution- my wife is a very true believer, but she's also a biologist, and accepts human evolution. We have other true believers in our extended family who think she's a heretic. She won't discuss it with them because of how terrible it gets!

I think the teachings about "no contention" are important to Mormonism's survival. If liberal and conservative believers get into too many serious arguments, they have enough ammo to tear everything apart. An observer can easily lose all faith.

BriansThoughtMirror wrote: ↑Mon Aug 28, 2017 9:04 am I think the teachings about "no contention" are important to Mormonism's survival. If liberal and conservative believers get into too many serious arguments, they have enough ammo to tear everything apart. An observer can easily lose all faith.

Great observation.

Hey, I just realized I've been reading your name wrong. I thought it was BrainsThroughMirror, and I thought it was pretty clever, in an Alice in Wonderland sort of way.

Mormons need to think of science as something that expands their understanding of God's methods, rather than clinging to past religious speculations. There is no need for members to be antiquated in their understanding nor to pit those past speculations against science.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Mon Aug 28, 2017 6:20 pm I thought it was BrainsThroughMirror...

Haha, too bad I wasn't that clever...

moksha wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2017 10:31 am Mormons need to think of science as something that expands their understanding of God's methods, rather than clinging to past religious speculations. There is no need for members to be antiquated in their understanding nor to pit those past speculations against science.

Organized Christianity in general does not seem to be willing to do that. I cant understand why such a view is so threatening, but then again I am a scientist.

Oh, Bobbieaware, how I love your rabid commitment to orthodoxy:

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/694 ... 1209751946

Stig wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 10:25 am Oh, Bobbieaware, how I love your rabid commitment to orthodoxy:

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/694 ... 1209751946

Bobbieaware's contribution to this thread is equal parts fascinating and tedious. It's amazing to see such devotion in a forum where testimony is exposed to critical questions. It's the kind of exposure that I see so rarely in real world conversations because the believers around me rarely want to engage like this.

Corsair wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 11:46 am

Stig wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2017 10:25 am Oh, Bobbieaware, how I love your rabid commitment to orthodoxy:

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/694 ... 1209751946

Bobbieaware's contribution to this thread is equal parts fascinating and tedious. It's amazing to see such devotion in a forum where testimony is exposed to critical questions. It's the kind of exposure that I see so rarely in real world conversations because the believers around me rarely want to engage like this.

Yep. There are a couple of posters over there who you can count on to simultaneously talk down to you and adhere to orthodoxy in the same sentence - Bobbieaware and Scott Lloyd come to mind. Bro. Lloyd has been notably absent from that thread. Makes me wonder...

I used to enjoy this kind of debate but now I find it burdensome. We could argue endlessly about the color of the invisible aardvark in the room but I doubt it would yield any Illumination on the subject.