The real reason for Mormonism's declining growth rate - Page 2 - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

MikeWaters · 10-21-2005, 05:38 AM

What do Mormons believe about God?

That he is a being with a body that lives on or near the planet of Kolob.

What could be more akin to believing that God is an extra-terrestrial being?

So seattleute, do you think that rational scientific people can believe that intelligent ET beings exist? Or that it is probable they exist?

It is not hard for me to accept the possibility or probability of "God" in this context.

Of course I have many other contexts and ways of getting to what I think God is.

But I accept a rational universe, with laws, and God operating within that universe with laws (again supported by LDS scripture). I personally don't feel a conflict between my religious and scientific beliefs. But my unorthodox viewpoints are likely in the minority to say the least.

SeattleUte · 10-21-2005, 05:09 PM

Mike,

The first rule of science is that any belief or system of beliefs about our world must stricty be based upon systematic observation. Otherwise, there is no restraint on subjective beliefs and there will result a cascade of speculation and fancy that will quickly spell the death of science. It's happened before in vast swaths of our civilization, as you know (even though I tend to believe that popular beliefs about the "dark ages"/great apostacy are grossly oversimplified and overstated). So to answer your question, true scientists would only go so far as to say that because it's happened here there could in theory have occurred intelligent extra-terrestrial life. But they would tell you no conclusion can be drawn about existence of God from the scientific method. That is not to say there aren't scientists who have chosen to believe in God base on their personal faith. But faith gets them there, not science.

Finally, I note that at the heart of Mormon doctrine is obviously the Adam and Even story, and literal belief in the story (as opposed to regarding it as allegory) can't be reconciled with observable fact, including the now immense fossil record (which is quickly filling in many previous "missing links"), reason (such as recognizing that the human appendix obviously evolved form something else that once served a useful purpose), and the age of the earth. The same is true with many statements that were made in the later part of the twentieth century in churhc publications and over the pulpit at Conference about ancestry of American aborigines.

MikeWaters · 10-21-2005, 05:13 PM

In contrast to that I would suggest that sometimes those emersed in science come to view the nature of the universe as evidence of "God" or higher power. I am referring to Albert Einstein.

Part of being Mormon, or of probably any religious faith, is the acceptance of the ability to understand things in irrational ways.

Hunches, gut feelings, spiritual confirmations. I can't scientifically prove them, but I don't think you are irrational if you pay them attention. Or ponder them.

SeattleUte · 10-21-2005, 05:41 PM

I agree with you about the validity of hunches, feelings. This is in fact the primary precept of Romantic movement. See, e.g., Tolstoy, Dostoyevski, Wagner, Dickens, Shelley (both of them), Keates, etc. I venture that is what Einstein was talking about, not any conclusion drawn about God from the scientific method.

SeattleUte · 10-21-2005, 06:15 PM

Elder McConkie's letter confirms that blood atonement is a core doctrine, not just as "Christ's atonement," as I've always understood the doctrine:

http://www.shields-research.org/Gene..._atonement.htm

creekster · 10-21-2005, 06:45 PM

I think Einstein's views of God are frequently taken out of context. His most frequently referenced statemnt is something along the lines that "God doesn't play dice with teh Universe" or some such. This was not so much an affirmative statement in his belief in some sort of corporeal being as it was an attempt to refute the uncertainty principle, of which he was not a fan in some physics context that I probably don't really understand. Einstein was not a traditionally religious man. From what I understand, he had more of an Aristotelian sense of a prime mover behind it all, but not an essentially Christian or Jewish view of a supreme being. IN fact, and a little ironically, it was Einstein's rejection of an uncertainty (e.g. a hunch about where that electron might be) that casued him to make some of his staements that others rely on to show his belief in God.

From my point of view, however, what Einstein did or did not believe doesn't affect my faith too much. In fact, not at all.

tooblue · 10-21-2005, 07:00 PM

Uhmm ... that letter isn't even on official letterhead of the church.

:roll:

Blood atonement is not extreme, subtle and not so subtle examples of the very same priciples permiate and form the backbone or our justice system.

You are a lawyer right?

SeattleUte · 10-21-2005, 07:53 PM

Amen brother Creekster.

10-21-2005, 05:09 PM	#12
SeattleUte fairlds.org Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 10,665	Reply to Mike Mike, The first rule of science is that any belief or system of beliefs about our world must stricty be based upon systematic observation. Otherwise, there is no restraint on subjective beliefs and there will result a cascade of speculation and fancy that will quickly spell the death of science. It's happened before in vast swaths of our civilization, as you know (even though I tend to believe that popular beliefs about the "dark ages"/great apostacy are grossly oversimplified and overstated). So to answer your question, true scientists would only go so far as to say that because it's happened here there could in theory have occurred intelligent extra-terrestrial life. But they would tell you no conclusion can be drawn about existence of God from the scientific method. That is not to say there aren't scientists who have chosen to believe in God base on their personal faith. But faith gets them there, not science. Finally, I note that at the heart of Mormon doctrine is obviously the Adam and Even story, and literal belief in the story (as opposed to regarding it as allegory) can't be reconciled with observable fact, including the now immense fossil record (which is quickly filling in many previous "missing links"), reason (such as recognizing that the human appendix obviously evolved form something else that once served a useful purpose), and the age of the earth. The same is true with many statements that were made in the later part of the twentieth century in churhc publications and over the pulpit at Conference about ancestry of American aborigines. __________________ Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster

10-21-2005, 05:41 PM	#14
SeattleUte fairlds.org Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 10,665	I agree with you about the validity of hunches, feelings. This is in fact the primary precept of Romantic movement. See, e.g., Tolstoy, Dostoyevski, Wagner, Dickens, Shelley (both of them), Keates, etc. I venture that is what Einstein was talking about, not any conclusion drawn about God from the scientific method. __________________ Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster

10-21-2005, 06:15 PM	#15
SeattleUte fairlds.org Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 10,665	Reply to Archea re blood atonement Elder McConkie's letter confirms that blood atonement is a core doctrine, not just as "Christ's atonement," as I've always understood the doctrine: http://www.shields-research.org/Gene..._atonement.htm __________________ Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster

10-21-2005, 07:53 PM	#18
SeattleUte fairlds.org Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 10,665	Amen brother Creekster. __________________ Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster

10-21-2005, 05:38 AM	#11
MikeWaters Demiurge Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 36,365	What do Mormons believe about God? That he is a being with a body that lives on or near the planet of Kolob. What could be more akin to believing that God is an extra-terrestrial being? So seattleute, do you think that rational scientific people can believe that intelligent ET beings exist? Or that it is probable they exist? It is not hard for me to accept the possibility or probability of "God" in this context. Of course I have many other contexts and ways of getting to what I think God is. But I accept a rational universe, with laws, and God operating within that universe with laws (again supported by LDS scripture). I personally don't feel a conflict between my religious and scientific beliefs. But my unorthodox viewpoints are likely in the minority to say the least.

10-21-2005, 05:13 PM	#13
MikeWaters Demiurge Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 36,365	In contrast to that I would suggest that sometimes those emersed in science come to view the nature of the universe as evidence of "God" or higher power. I am referring to Albert Einstein. Part of being Mormon, or of probably any religious faith, is the acceptance of the ability to understand things in irrational ways. Hunches, gut feelings, spiritual confirmations. I can't scientifically prove them, but I don't think you are irrational if you pay them attention. Or ponder them.

10-21-2005, 06:45 PM	#16
creekster Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: the far corner of my mind Posts: 8,711	I think Einstein's views of God are frequently taken out of context. His most frequently referenced statemnt is something along the lines that "God doesn't play dice with teh Universe" or some such. This was not so much an affirmative statement in his belief in some sort of corporeal being as it was an attempt to refute the uncertainty principle, of which he was not a fan in some physics context that I probably don't really understand. Einstein was not a traditionally religious man. From what I understand, he had more of an Aristotelian sense of a prime mover behind it all, but not an essentially Christian or Jewish view of a supreme being. IN fact, and a little ironically, it was Einstein's rejection of an uncertainty (e.g. a hunch about where that electron might be) that casued him to make some of his staements that others rely on to show his belief in God. From my point of view, however, what Einstein did or did not believe doesn't affect my faith too much. In fact, not at all.

10-21-2005, 07:00 PM	#17
tooblue Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 4,016	Uhmm ... that letter isn't even on official letterhead of the church. :roll: Blood atonement is not extreme, subtle and not so subtle examples of the very same priciples permiate and form the backbone or our justice system. You are a lawyer right?