When I was a freshman in college, I took my first anthropology class where I was taught human evolution. The professor laid out replicas skulls of our hominid ancestors from australopithecus afarensis to homo sapiens in front of us. At the same time I was studying the old testament at the LDS institute about a block away.

I remember thinking that what I was learning about human evolution and history in my anthropology class was completely at odds with what I was learning about the Bible (Adam and Eve, the fall, the flood, the tower of Babel, etc.) in my religious studies. As I was preparing for a Mormon mission at the time, I ignored those thoughts and stuck with Mormon Doctrine.

Now that I am older, and hopefully a little wiser, I find that it is more important to me to allow evidence and reason to shape my beliefs than only paying attention to the evidence that matches my beliefs.

In this video, I explore the contrast between what Mormon doctrine and science say about the origin of mankind. Where does the evidence lie and are they compatible. I thought some of you might find this interesting.

https://youtu.be/yOoSCWuK1Ok

Nice job.

I don't know how the youtube ads work. Too bad your video is preceded by a pastor Bible Study BS blurb.

Is this ad something that youtube selects based on my viewing history or did everyone have that ad (that thankfully you can skip)?

IMO, criticism of Mormonism's views of the Bible is not helped when someone else assumes their cherry picked views are any better. After all, there are various Christian groups who take Bible literalism to more extremes than Mormons.


That said, very nicely done. Thanks for sharing it.

That is kind of an ironic youtube ad. I don't get any say as to what kind of ad they decide to play, and I have had church ads play before my videos before. It's kind of funny.

Thanks for the kind words, I appreciate it

You can stop these ads by adding an Ad Blocker to your browser. You can usually get one free. YouTube ads were driving me crazy before I did this.

When I was studing my way out of the church I read alot about biblical history and archaeology. I realized that the Bible and the BOM are both works of fiction, the only difference is that the bible had better writers.

Nice video.
I have to admit, though, that when Mark E. Petersen started talking, I got that sinking, oh-so-mormony, "general conference" feeling. It amazes me how the indoctrination still can kick my emotions in the behind even after more than 35 years out.

It is interesting how the familiar setting, the way that they talk, has such an effect on those of us who where raised LDS. The indoctrination goes deep.

I, too, had an anthropology course where we looked at actual human skull remains. One point, among many, that the professor pointed out was the changes in the shape of the skull over time enabling the human brain to become larger. It was truly amazing to see these skulls, even touch them, and I feel fortunate to have been part of this experience. Seeing this evidence with my own eyes certainly helped me realize and appreciate how incredible and amazing facts are in opening up the pages of discovery.

Your well done video is in this same league. Thanks for sharing.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/12/2016 05:15PM by presleynfactsrock.

Thanks, I appreciate that

May I remind you that the reason why D&C is "Doctrine & Covenants" rather than something like "Deluded & Clueless" or "Dumb & Creepy" is because what is in that sacred book are the absolutely true and sacred doctrines. If those doctrines were remotely fallacious then the covenants would be meaningless and no more important to mankind than the covenants that kids make in their secret Kindergarden clubs.

So what do the sacred true doctrines tell us about the history of this earth? Well I take you to D&C 77:6 to clarify things.

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/77.6?lang=eng

6 Q. What are we to understand by the book which John saw, which was sealed on the back with seven seals?
A. We are to understand that it contains the revealed will, mysteries, and the works of God; the hidden things of his economy concerning this earth during the seven thousand years of its continuance, or its temporal existence.


That's it. Only an unbeliever or apostate could possibly believe that the entire temporal existence of the earth could possibly be some heretical number like 8000 years. About the only thing conceivably more heretical would be to suggest 9000 years; and 10K+ is absolutely out of the question.

If I were to google it then if Google is true it would agree with the earth only having a temporal existence of 7000 years.

https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=age%20of%20the%20earth

I really don't need to click on this link because I just need to follow the Brethren. They say they have the truth so obedience it is :) And besides anyone who is being totally obedient to them doesn't have time for that. We've got more important things to do like cleaning the Lord's toilets at the chapel.

True, don't ask questions or think about things that are not "pertinent to your salvation". Instead just turn if off, like a lightswitch, and serve the church like a cog in a machine.

Maybe there is some hope for you as you are possibly seeing the light.

We can ask questions or think about things, just as long as they are on topics that the Brethren approve as being "pertinent to our salvation". Instead we just turn if off, like a lightswitch :) And rather than say we serve the church like a cog in a machine you should say it nicely.

"We are as the armies of Helaman. We have been called in your youth."

That's why when we are 8 years old & very mature/ready to make lifelong commitments with our super mature brains then we make the most important commitment of our lives :) Maybe that's when Heavenly Father has decided that the Mormon brain reaches its highest level of maturity? That's just simply marvelous :)


Sometimes these exmos think that the TBM's are delusional dimwits. But in reality the TBM's feel that they are feeling the Spirit :)

Interesting post, it could be true? but here is another perspective to consider that's probably more accurate... For me I have a hard time believing that credentialed acadamians who have spent their lives regurgitating memorised philosophies to younger pupils have somehow stumbled upon all the secrets of the universe and of millions of years ago.

Now don't get me wrong Universities educators do some excellent work for the communities and are great assets in defending the peace, quieting the masses, and playing with tax dollars.

The present philosophy on Neanderthals is that supposedly a team of researchers in August 2014, got together and decided that Neanderthals died out about 40,000 years ago. All based on Carbon dating. But the problem is that carbon dating is only accurate to a couple hundred years, after that it's anyones guess (but they conveniently forgot that part). But the philosophers need their sallaries so they have to spout the party line, etc. It's like the councill of Nicea where truth is decided upon all over again, and we are suppose to swallow it, lol!

As for skulls with shrunken heads. If these old bones are really 40000 years old, they probably got stuck in ice, during the ice age and got warped by the glaciers. A much simpler explanation, right?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal_extinction



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/12/2016 09:14PM by poopstone.

I took that stance for a while too. Doesn't work. There are too many different disciplines finding the same thing. Also, although it's possible to doubt C14 dating, it's unreasonable to do so because various other isotopes are available for older age spans and the equipment is very good. All of the error sources are well understood. Linguistics and DNA research confirm a human race much older than 10000 years.

That's not to say they're wrong on the fringes. Like the bones of giants and other weird finds. But the Garden of Eden story and the fall are impossible based on mainstream science. Of course, myths often contain a grain of truth. There was a metaphorical fall into language, for example. But to make a temple ceremony out of the myth would be pure heresy to the originator of the story. Even if today's literalists could be factually correct, which they can't, they would still be wrong.

Your understanding of the subject is not good.

If you care to learn about it, please follow this link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating

lurking in Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Your understanding of the subject is not good.
>
> If you care to learn about it, please follow this
> link:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiocarbon_dating

From the Wikipedia article:

"Radiocarbon dating is generally limited to dating samples no
more than 50,000 years old, as samples older than that have
insufficient 14C to be measurable. Older dates have been
obtained by using special sample preparation techniques, large
samples, and very long measurement times. These techniques can
allow measurement of dates up to 60,000 and in some cases up to
75,000 years before the present."

When my brother first converted, he was all over the "C14 is inaccurate" thing because he bought the LDS timeline they sold him.

poopstone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Interesting post, it could be true? but here is
> another perspective to consider that's probably
> more accurate... For me I have a hard time
> believing that credentialed acadamians who have
> spent their lives regurgitating memorised
> philosophies to younger pupils have somehow
> stumbled upon all the secrets of the universe and
> of millions of years ago.

This picture of ivory-tower-dwelling "regurgitators" is
definitely at odds with researchers who publish in
peer-reviewed journals. Having spent some time in grad school
I can definitely vouch for the fact that my professors did not
"spend their lives regurgitating memorised philosophies." Each
week was a colloquium where a researcher would present the
state of his research. It was almost a feeding frenzy when
other professors would challenge the points being made. The
first time I saw it I thought the professor, who interrupted
and challenged the speaker, was just being rude. I finally
realized that this was normal. This is how science is done--an
active endeavor with rigor forced upon the researcher by the
community of scholars he has to deal with.

And these secrets of the universe are not "stumbled upon."
They are painstakingly distilled from the data by a world-wide
team of active researchers who are kept scrupulously honest by
the fact that shooting down a colleague's work is a popular
blood sport in academia.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/13/2016 04:07PM by baura.

And still Poopstone refuses to learn about actual science. Some have tried to educate him, but it's just too hard for ol' Poop. Give him the simple stuff.

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1472943,1472968#msg-1472968
http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1846234,1846290#msg-1846290

http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1756825,1757333#msg-1757333

flackerman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When I was a freshman in college, I took my first
> anthropology class where I was taught human
> evolution. The professor laid out replicas skulls
> of our hominid ancestors from australopithecus
> afarensis to homo sapiens in front of us.

I recall seeing this done (with replica skulls) by a professor
for a group of creationist-leaning lay-people. He put the
skulls out and asked, IF, hypothetically, evolution were true
could they put the skulls in chronological order?

The evolution-doubting lay-people put them in an order that
they could all comfortably agree upon "if evolution were
true." The professor congratulated them, and informed them
that the chronology they had just created matched exactly the
chronology based upon the strata in which the skulls had been
found.

So easy, even a... believer... can do it?

Since childhood I had a tough time with the literal nature prescribed to scripture. Made it hard to be a tbm and a realist.

At this point I view the Bible as a work encoding some history, lore, and social lessons of people who lived thousands of years ago. Literal history NO. Its on par with mythologies of other cultures in my opinion. Could some of the people been historical and made bigger than life overtime? Probably. Humans tend to memorialize big players in history. To say literal is absolutely insane, meaning of words change a great deal looking at the bible in ancient Greek to how its read in English.

I see example after example of archetypal story. We love these type of stories they normally teach some sort of moral value, good conquering evil. LITERALISTS normally using the Bible as a lever to manipulate people to shut down dissenting thought. I would looking at the Bible for what it is, a ancient time capsule of ancient wisdom. Some good some bad.

When you find out that even the most bible-literal scholars agree that the evidence clearly shows the first five books of the bible were written during or after the Babylonian captivity (around 500 BCE and later), the stories being either fully concocted or grand exaggerations of existing mythology becomes much plainer. :)

Its hard to take anything literal in the world when you see current events not being reported literally. What chance does an ancient record have of literal interpretation? Like it or hate it, the Bible along with other classical thinkers created the Bedrock of Western Civilization. The morals built what we have today while most of the dogmas is what created the suffering.

Dogma is what is killing the Mormon church today.