Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Well... no! Surprisingly enough! This startling essay shows it to actually be BILLIONS of years old!!!
There are two purposes for life in mortality. The first is that we might gain experiences that we could not obtain in any other way. The second is to obtain tabernacles of flesh and bones. Both of these purposes are vital to the existence of man.
We are now being tried and tested to see if we will do all the things the Lord has commanded us to do. These commandments are the principles and ordinances of the gospel, and they constitute the gospel of Jesus Christ. Every principle and ordinance has a bearing upon the whole purpose of our testing, which is to prepare us to return to our Heavenly Father and become more like Him. Elder Bruce R. McConkie has said this about following the straight and narrow path:
"What I think all of us need to do is to determine where we stand in every field of mortal endeavor. Then, based on the general overall concepts that are clear and plain, we make a determination on how we will live in this field or in that field in order to pass the probationary estate in order to succeed in the test of mortality. If we make the right choices, we'll go on to eternal reward, and if we do not, then we'll get some lower and lesser place in the kingdoms that are prepared.
"God is the Father of our spirits. We are literally His children, and He loves us. We lived as spirit children of our Father in Heaven before we were born on this earth. We were not, however, like our Heavenly Father, nor could we ever become like Him and enjoy all the blessings that He enjoys without the experience of living in mortality with a physical body.
"God's whole purpose-His work and His glory-is to enable each of us to enjoy all His blessings. He has provided a perfect plan to accomplish His purpose. We understood and accepted this plan before we came to the earth" ([2004], 48).
We first heard about the plan of salvation before we were born, in what the scriptures call our first estate (see Abraham 3:26). What occurred in this first estate is dimly understood, but we do know that we lived there as spirits, children of our Heavenly Father, and we made certain steps of advancement to prepare for the opportunity of housing our eternal spirits in earthly bodies. We also know that our Father held a great council to explain the purpose of earth life.
We had the opportunity of accepting or rejecting the plan of salvation. It was not forced upon us. The essence of the plan was that man would have an opportunity of working out his own salvation on earth, with God's help. A leader was selected to teach us how to follow the plan and to redeem us from sin and death. As the Lord explained to Moses, "Behold, my Beloved Son, which was my Beloved and Chosen from the beginning, said unto me-Father, thy will be done, and the glory be thine forever" (Moses 4:2).
Jesus Christ, our Elder Brother
became the leader in advocating the plan designed by the Father, and we accepted the plan and its conditions. With that choice we earned the right to come to earth and enter our second estate.
God created Adam and Eve in His own image, with bodies of flesh and bones, and placed them in the Garden of Eden. They were given the choice either to remain in the garden or to partake of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil and have the opportunity of experiencing mortality. They accepted the challenge, partook of the fruit, and thus became mortal and subject to physical death. Because of their choice, they would experience all of the trials and difficulties of mortality.
Free will doesn't exist. The end.
Or maybe God didn't write the bible.
Circular logic defined.
When the LORD God made the earth and the heavens- 5 and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth and no plant of the field had yet sprung up, for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth and there was no man to work the ground, 6 but streams came up from the earth and watered the whole surface of the ground- 7 the LORD God formed the man from the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being.
8 Now the LORD God HAD planted a garden in the east, in Eden;
...and there he put the man he HAD formed. This part must take place some time after the last part because it's referring to both in the past tense.
If that's not the explanation then it's really just another contradiction.
No, it specifically states that there was no plant life on the earth before God created man (look at the passage I quoted).
A little further...
Here's a hint: the conflict comes from the fact that Genesis 1:1-2:3 tells a different story from Genesis 2:4-2:25.
Genesis 2:4-2:25 isn't an account of creation of the earth. It's the account of God's creation of man and his reckoning of his previous creation. The phrase: These are the generations, means a history or a previous record. The six days of creation from Genesis 1 end with the creation of land animals. Gen. 2 is a review of what had already been done.
So why does it say God created plant life before He created man in the first part, and after he created man in the second part?
It's cool. I generally just argue for whichever side seems to have the facts correct. Also i do believe in god, but i do not believe that the bible is 100% correct.So the Bible says; "Thou shall not kill" but in reality the 10 commandments only apply in some circumstances; there are times when it's not a sin to break them? Where does it say this in the bible?
No, the real translation is closer to thou shalt not murder.
There are circumstances where killing is fine. Unjustified killing though is not.
I presumed the comment at the bottom was in regards to what the Bible says, not a general statement about killing people. If that assumption is wrong then I apologise. The point is that if you take the Old Testament literally in regards to what it says about homosexuality, you have to take it literally when it says you should stone your children to death if they disobey your word.
Dedicated Theist; If you had children and they disobeyed your word, would you stone them to death?
A little further...
Here's a hint: the conflict comes from the fact that Genesis 1:1-2:3 tells a different story from Genesis 2:4-2:25.
free will
divine plan
if God is perfect then he must be evil as well as good as perfection would mean nothing must be lacking, including evil
there's loads more counter arguments but this is boring so I won't bother
Free will is partially covered in my babysitter example one way, and was also discussed to be a limit to God's creative ability another way. Surely God, could create a world with free will but no evil. This still ends with one of the definitions of God removed. On the side from the debate, may I ask why free will is even necessary? Do we even have free will?
The divine "Grand Plan" is actually not so much of an answer as a method of avoiding the question.
When one asks "why", the response "it is God's will" isn't truly an answer. If anything, it is an appeal to force (God is all powerful and what he says goes)
God is 'perfect' is a much broader category of definitions and therefore is harder to both prove and disprove. This seems to be a new definition of God in a way, as I only applied the argument to an omni-4 God.
In any case, I will still play with this notion: How does perfect mean nothing is lacking? Is this even a logical possibility considering God cannot contain universal absence along with universal existence?
If you find philosophy so boring, you have no duty to read or post. That was your decision.
Let's start at the beginning with the two conflicting accounts of Creation...
There is no conflict in the account of Creationism. "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth" from nothing. He spoke and it existed.
Read past line 1, Sherlock.
Premise1: If there is a God, God is defined as omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent.
Premise2: If God exists, there would be no evil in the world.
Premise3: There is evil in the world.
Conclusion: There is no God.
Here's an example:
Consider a babysitter taking care of your three year old. You come home to find out your kid drank a bottle of drain cleaner (the evil). The babysitter cannot have all four qualities of being there - able to prevent/stop it - knowing better - and being a 'good' babysitter, and still have the kid drinking drain cleaner. All four 'omni' qualities and evil are inherently mutually exclusive. Since evil exists, no such being exists.
Any thoughts on the evidential argument from evil?
Let's start at the beginning with the two conflicting accounts of Creation...
I do not know how to simplify it further for you. But come to think of it, the concept of Satan goes to show God is not everywhere/everything and perfectly good.
And if God does not have control of Satan, he is not all powerful.
He goes on and on about what the Bible says, not grasping that everything he says his moot because the vast majority of the Old Testament is false.
Premise1: If there is a God, God is defined as omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent.
Premise2: If God exists, there would be no evil in the world.
Premise3: There is evil in the world.
Conclusion: There is no God.
Here's an example:
Consider a babysitter taking care of your three year old. You come home to find out your kid drank a bottle of drain cleaner (the evil). The babysitter cannot have all four qualities of being there - able to prevent/stop it - knowing better - and being a 'good' babysitter, and still have the kid drinking drain cleaner. All four 'omni' qualities and evil are inherently mutually exclusive. Since evil exists, no such being exists.
Any thoughts on the evidential argument from evil?
