Do you believe in organic evolution?

[Rob Osborn]

3 hours ago, anatess2 said:

You should study Darwin as a person.  The Christian leadership treated him as a leper even as his observations hung on a universal creator because his scientific observations diverged from the Church’s Creationist teachings which is the same reason those same Christian leadership to this day reject Mormons as Christians.  Darwin’s observations is compatible with Joseph Smith’s restored gospel as well as the Catholic Church’s adjusted stance on science after they realized their error in excommunicating Galileo.

For me, personally, watching apostate churches reject scientific discovery as “secularly godless” is funny.

The reality is that as he grew older his faith in a Creator diminished until it was gone completely. He felt that natural selection void of a Creator was the best possible answer to his observation of nature. Even though he considered himself more agnostic than atheist the facts remain that his conclusions in regard to our origins were and must be based on completely secularist beliefs. He stopped believing in miracles and religion on that entire premise.

To compare him to Joseph Smith is absurd. They are at polar ends in their personal beliefs in regards of faith, design, Christianity, salvation and hope.

Edited November 17, 2018 by Rob Osborn

[dogwater]

The phrasing of the question is odd to me. I don't believe in organic evolution. I accept organic evolution as the best explanation of the AVAILABLE EVIDENCE.

Beleive is a faith verb. Evidence is not faith and faith is not evidence, Paul's statements not withstanding. Faith extends where evidence lacks.

Paul's statement that faith is evidence of things unseen is more about the understanding of his day in my interpretation of the statement. 

My understanding of the creation is that there was no death before the fall so evolution is not how God did it. But I'm still interested in human understanding. In the empirical human view, evolution is a very good explanation.

 

 

[Traveler]

On 11/16/2018 at 11:05 PM, Rob Osborn said:

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. (Moses 3:5-6)

According to scripture, there was no growth because there was no rain until the seventh day. No birds, no creatures, no man, no plant life until the seventh day.

I think you are adding concepts that are specifically not there - What is to say that the spiritual creation did not take place before the "day" by "day" accounts?  The scriptures are animate that G-d used the 7th period as a day of "rest" - The particular Hebrew would indicate - resting from physical labors.  Also there is not a lot of "doctrine" to indicate what constitutes spiritual creation.  

The whole point of spiritual creation is an interesting subject unto it's self.  Are you interested and open to exchanges of ideas on the matter or is your mind made up and your ideas currently cast in stone with no intent for possible updates?

 

The Traveler 

[Rob Osborn]

4 hours ago, Traveler said:

I think you are adding concepts that are specifically not there - What is to say that the spiritual creation did not take place before the "day" by "day" accounts?  The scriptures are animate that G-d used the 7th period as a day of "rest" - The particular Hebrew would indicate - resting from physical labors.  Also there is not a lot of "doctrine" to indicate what constitutes spiritual creation.  

The whole point of spiritual creation is an interesting subject unto it's self.  Are you interested and open to exchanges of ideas on the matter or is your mind made up and your ideas currently cast in stone with no intent for possible updates?

 

The Traveler 

My own testimony on the matter is that during the first six days the physical earth was created and prepared for life. On the seventh day God sanctified the earth. This means he blessed it and set it apart for holy purpose. And what was the purpose? To bring forth life. Thus, on the seventh day God brought to pass the actual physical formation of life onto the earth. Resting on the seventh day means something we aren't accustomed to. For instance- on our Sabbath day there is a lot of work that goes on. So, when the scriptures say "rest" it doesn't mean a stoppage of all labors, only a shift in labors. We know that the millennium is lijened to the Sabbath. Will we be "resting" from all our labors during the 1000 year period? No, but the labor is shifted and pertains to labors for sanctifying and perfecting life.