Reader comments
Joseph A. Cannon: God watches over the universe; he 'is not dead nor doth he sleep'
99 comments | Read story
@Duff | 7:29 a.m. June 28, 2009
.... and no one can explain who created the first protozoan who
'fathered' all the rest. It is one of the mysteries of life, for
believers in God or Darwin.
Who said, let alone proved, that all planets except our own in our galaxy are uninhabited? Who claimed that all planets are exclusively for habitation, or that they are all to be inhabited at once?
I do not think that it would take more than a million years ( no time at all in eternity) to inhabit a billion or trillion planets.
Just double our present, admittedly relatively small, population a billion times and tell me what number you get.
Who said, let alone proved, that all planets except our own in our galaxy are uninhabited? Who claimed that all planets are exclusively for habitation, or that they are all to be inhabited at once?
I do not think that it would take more than a million years ( no time at all in eternity) to inhabit a billion or trillion planets.
Just double our present, admittedly relatively small, population a billion times and tell me what number you get.
Duff | 10:20 a.m. June 28, 2009
But when science does explain how the first crystal replicated, and that is
happening as we speak, then, where are you going to retreat? Since before
Galileo, religionists have nowhere to go but backward into the realm of the
unfalsifiable.
Those who believe those trillions of planets were made for man by a god are like the crazy ruler in ancient Greece who thought all the ships which came into the harbor, came just for his gratification.
Those who believe those trillions of planets were made for man by a god are like the crazy ruler in ancient Greece who thought all the ships which came into the harbor, came just for his gratification.
Comments continue below
Chuck | 10:21 a.m. June 28, 2009
Excellent series. It does not discount science, but shows the emptiness of only
science as a person's explanation for life. God is very much in control,
and just because some mere mortal with a few decades of limited experience
doesn't understand it all, doesn't lessen that fact.
Thanks Joe for bringing this discussion forward. It has been off limits in the public for too long.
Thanks Joe for bringing this discussion forward. It has been off limits in the public for too long.
Anonymous | 10:57 a.m. June 28, 2009
Religion does a poor job of explaining things that Science can, and things can
easily be altered like the bible to fit whatever view you are trying to get
people to accept. An example is "In the beginning the Gods created the
heavens and the earths." With a little bit of translation and editing what
most Bibles now read "In teh beginning God created the heaven and the
earth." That isn't much of a change but it is highly significant.
At one point there was a greater belief in a plurality of Gods. Today, at least in the US, it seems a belief that there is one God prevails.
Chuck, from someone else's perspective there is no emptiness in believing only in Science. Your statement shows you lack the cognitive ability to see from someone else's point of view. The purpose of life is still to be happy, whether you believe in a God or not. Please expand your horizons instead of being so gloomy.
At one point there was a greater belief in a plurality of Gods. Today, at least in the US, it seems a belief that there is one God prevails.
Chuck, from someone else's perspective there is no emptiness in believing only in Science. Your statement shows you lack the cognitive ability to see from someone else's point of view. The purpose of life is still to be happy, whether you believe in a God or not. Please expand your horizons instead of being so gloomy.
Anonymous | 11:11 a.m. June 28, 2009
"It does not discount science, but shows the emptiness of only science as a
person's explanation for life."
As an Atheist I love it when people tell me how my beliefs make me feel... I'll go crawl into a corner now and cry, because I'm so miserable. *rolls eyes*
As an Atheist I love it when people tell me how my beliefs make me feel... I'll go crawl into a corner now and cry, because I'm so miserable. *rolls eyes*
Perspective | 11:15 a.m. June 28, 2009
I received this joke via EMail years ago and believe it might have a place in
this discussion:
A group of self-congratulatory scientists were talking among themselves and boasting about how their scientific methods were so advanced they could now create human beings, just like God, even better than God. They were very anxious to prove to the world that science was greater than God and that God was totally irrelevant. After talking about the best way to prove that God was unnecessary to mankind, they decided to challenge God to a contest in front of the peoples of the world to prove who could create the best human. God calmly accepted the challenge.
The day of the contest came and the scientists eagerly went first, sure of their ultimate triumph. One knelt to gather up a fistful of dust with which to create a human.
God said, Oh no, no, noget your own dirt.
A group of self-congratulatory scientists were talking among themselves and boasting about how their scientific methods were so advanced they could now create human beings, just like God, even better than God. They were very anxious to prove to the world that science was greater than God and that God was totally irrelevant. After talking about the best way to prove that God was unnecessary to mankind, they decided to challenge God to a contest in front of the peoples of the world to prove who could create the best human. God calmly accepted the challenge.
The day of the contest came and the scientists eagerly went first, sure of their ultimate triumph. One knelt to gather up a fistful of dust with which to create a human.
God said, Oh no, no, noget your own dirt.
Lew Jeppson | 11:24 a.m. June 28, 2009
Mr Cannon, I think you see only part of the picture. The most significant
development of the 19th century was the rise of the self-regulating market,
which created unprecedented technological development and accumulation of
wealth, but which also made labor (e.g. people) into a commodity. This is the
riddle with which we deal today. How will the Gospel make people less of a
commodity?
@Joe | 11:33 a.m. June 28, 2009
I enjoyed this article and your series immensely. They were well reasoned and
written.
Those who cling to science and the physical exclusively do not understand that the spirit precedes the physical. Because they have the cart before the horse, they will always come up short in their analysis and understanding.
Ironically, now that science has discovered the invisible world from the sub atomic level to the outer galaxies, many still refuse to consider the unseen but very real world of the Spirit and dismiss the testimony of millions who have felt its powerful influence.
Those who cling to science and the physical exclusively do not understand that the spirit precedes the physical. Because they have the cart before the horse, they will always come up short in their analysis and understanding.
Ironically, now that science has discovered the invisible world from the sub atomic level to the outer galaxies, many still refuse to consider the unseen but very real world of the Spirit and dismiss the testimony of millions who have felt its powerful influence.
Mike Richards | 11:38 a.m. June 28, 2009
This series has been of great worth. Mr. Cannon has provided all of us with
enough material to keep us busy for a long time to come - unless we already know
it all and are beyond being teachable.
There are two classes of individuals who are not popular with God, the proud and "they that do wickedly". Who is a proud person? Could it be someone who thinks he knows it all, when he knows almost nothing? Who is a wicked person? Is it someone who is in open rebellion against greater knowledge, someone who knows better, but chooses to live counter to that knowledge?
Knowing the science of HOW God does something would be interesting, but of little real value because His abilities, His "tools", and His methods would be beyond our ability to replicate.
Knowing the religion of WHY God does something has value. If we begin to understand why He gave us life, why He gave us a place to live and why He gives us rules that we may govern ourselves using His methods and His pattern, we may just find a way to improve ouselves while helping others carry their own burdens.
There are two classes of individuals who are not popular with God, the proud and "they that do wickedly". Who is a proud person? Could it be someone who thinks he knows it all, when he knows almost nothing? Who is a wicked person? Is it someone who is in open rebellion against greater knowledge, someone who knows better, but chooses to live counter to that knowledge?
Knowing the science of HOW God does something would be interesting, but of little real value because His abilities, His "tools", and His methods would be beyond our ability to replicate.
Knowing the religion of WHY God does something has value. If we begin to understand why He gave us life, why He gave us a place to live and why He gives us rules that we may govern ourselves using His methods and His pattern, we may just find a way to improve ouselves while helping others carry their own burdens.
SS | 11:53 a.m. June 28, 2009
Lew, I'm with you on this one. In the company I work for, which is owned
by Episcopalians, there is a blessing on the wall from the day the company was
opened. One passage says something to the effect that may the employer and the
employees work together for their mutual benefit.
Our company pays a little more than the competition and expects a little more in return. We promote almost exclusively from within and turnover is low.
I think they ARE following gospel teachings and I don't feel like a commodity - I feel valued. Now not everyone can make six figures in the company, but they are receiving the experience and training to make a good living - either by advancement with us or going somewhere else if the opportunity presents itself.
I believe this is how it's supposed to work. If only more employers treated their workers as valuable assets and if only more employees gave their employers 100% rather than expect payment for every tiny act and a blind eye to their endless personal calls and surfing the internet on company time.
Our company pays a little more than the competition and expects a little more in return. We promote almost exclusively from within and turnover is low.
I think they ARE following gospel teachings and I don't feel like a commodity - I feel valued. Now not everyone can make six figures in the company, but they are receiving the experience and training to make a good living - either by advancement with us or going somewhere else if the opportunity presents itself.
I believe this is how it's supposed to work. If only more employers treated their workers as valuable assets and if only more employees gave their employers 100% rather than expect payment for every tiny act and a blind eye to their endless personal calls and surfing the internet on company time.
C almond | 12:25 p.m. June 28, 2009
I find it ironic the conflicting views religious people take towards scientists.
On one hand I have many times heard it mentioned by Lds people and others, that
the true insights of Scientists are from God, 'revealed' through that
particular person. Yet scientists are also criticized for their abandonment of
god and increasingly materialistic perspective. The most successful and
accomplished of all scientists are generally those who are the most atheist in
their thinking. Why then would God be continually 'blessing them with
insight' into the functioning of the Universe while withholding it from the
more religiously minded? It seems ironic indeed that god would choose to
'reveal' so much of his truth to those who most dispute his existence.
Anonymous | 12:41 p.m. June 28, 2009
SS | 11:53 a.m. We secularist say:"When you pay minimum wage, you get
minimum wage workers."
"If donkeys had gods, their god's would have long ears."
We have the endemic person. This is who we are. When my family picked the prophet du jour it was the idea that earth was ending soon and by following they could be god's special people.
What king of mind set feels unity with imminent endings, damnation and harsh judgments? These are ideas people with depression find magnetic.
My family overlooked a strange story because they already believed. They were seeking affirmation. They created a god in their image.
"If donkeys had gods, their god's would have long ears."
We have the endemic person. This is who we are. When my family picked the prophet du jour it was the idea that earth was ending soon and by following they could be god's special people.
What king of mind set feels unity with imminent endings, damnation and harsh judgments? These are ideas people with depression find magnetic.
My family overlooked a strange story because they already believed. They were seeking affirmation. They created a god in their image.
Duff | 12:48 p.m. June 28, 2009
I challenge any of you religious people to name even one piece of knowledge that
god has given to mankind that wasn't already available in human society.
On the other hand there is not enough space to list the millions of bits of
"knowing" made available from science. And I predict with perfect
confidence that in the future, all our knowing is going to come from science
and none of it from god.
If there is an omnipotent god directing the affairs of man, he is very stingy with his knowledge.
Science simply means knowledge. Knowing is what science produces. How can that be wrong or bad in any way?
If there is an omnipotent god directing the affairs of man, he is very stingy with his knowledge.
Science simply means knowledge. Knowing is what science produces. How can that be wrong or bad in any way?
Thanks | 12:57 p.m. June 28, 2009
Thank you for your perspective on religious and scientific history and thought
through the ages. I plan on referencing your thoughts later on when my history
career kicks off.
I am very glad the Deseret News was willing to publish these great writings summarizing the historical shifts in thought and belief through the ages to explain society as it stands today - an undersanding that seems to have been lost in this modern age of tv and computers and digital music - something that not many people have even thought about - something mostly ignored by the decision-makers in media/academia/politics, who seem to have completely distanced themselves from anything deemed "non-secular (an oxymoron)."
Having been raised Mormon with the all-encompassing maxim that "the Glory of God is Intelligence, or, in other words, Light and Truth," I believe time will both vindicate the words of the prophets and scientists enlightened from above, and meld both scientific and religious truth into one happy, perfectly-balanced, well-understood at-one-ment, where all truth has its chance to shine brightly, irrespective of the opinions of mankind, who, if we are honest, realize there are many things we do not yet know.
I am very glad the Deseret News was willing to publish these great writings summarizing the historical shifts in thought and belief through the ages to explain society as it stands today - an undersanding that seems to have been lost in this modern age of tv and computers and digital music - something that not many people have even thought about - something mostly ignored by the decision-makers in media/academia/politics, who seem to have completely distanced themselves from anything deemed "non-secular (an oxymoron)."
Having been raised Mormon with the all-encompassing maxim that "the Glory of God is Intelligence, or, in other words, Light and Truth," I believe time will both vindicate the words of the prophets and scientists enlightened from above, and meld both scientific and religious truth into one happy, perfectly-balanced, well-understood at-one-ment, where all truth has its chance to shine brightly, irrespective of the opinions of mankind, who, if we are honest, realize there are many things we do not yet know.
Bill S. | 2:12 p.m. June 28, 2009
My University degrees provided me with a lot of knowledge of things, but failed
to provide me with the meaning and purpose for my life and the life of others.
My faith in God provides me with that essential and vital part of life.
@Duff | 2:21 p.m. June 28, 2009
You issued a challenge. Here is my response for all who are interested.:
1. The "Word of Wisdom", revealed by God through Joseph Smith, was not had by the world. It came in 1833 and is recorded in Section 89 of the Doctrine and Covenants. Pick up a copy at a thrift store for about a dollar or so.
2. The macro-organisation of the planetary systems as recorded in the Pearl of Great Price, relating to Fascimilie Number 2 and its Explanation in the Book of Abraham. Yuo'll find it after the Doctrine and Covenants.
3. The Book of Mormon explains the origin of the former inhabitants of the Americas.
1. The "Word of Wisdom", revealed by God through Joseph Smith, was not had by the world. It came in 1833 and is recorded in Section 89 of the Doctrine and Covenants. Pick up a copy at a thrift store for about a dollar or so.
2. The macro-organisation of the planetary systems as recorded in the Pearl of Great Price, relating to Fascimilie Number 2 and its Explanation in the Book of Abraham. Yuo'll find it after the Doctrine and Covenants.
3. The Book of Mormon explains the origin of the former inhabitants of the Americas.
Word of Wisdom | 2:49 p.m. June 28, 2009
This pronouncement by Joseph Smith was nothing new. People already knew the ill
effects of liquor and tobacco.
As for the origin of ancient Americans, Mormon scientists and geneticists proved they were not from a lost tribe of Israel. Not to mention the archaeologists who have never found evidence for ancient Israelis.
Egyptologists and linguists easily proved that The Book of Abraham is fiction.
Blind faith will deceive you.
As for the origin of ancient Americans, Mormon scientists and geneticists proved they were not from a lost tribe of Israel. Not to mention the archaeologists who have never found evidence for ancient Israelis.
Egyptologists and linguists easily proved that The Book of Abraham is fiction.
Blind faith will deceive you.
John Gilmore | 2:51 p.m. June 28, 2009
Is @duff 2:21 serious?
I could have made the same three points as an atheist joke.
Yeah, the word of wisdom came out of thin air.
Yeah, the pearl of great price and the fascimilies are not complete and proven fabrications.
Yeah, the native americans came from Jerusalem.
hehehe.
I could have made the same three points as an atheist joke.
Yeah, the word of wisdom came out of thin air.
Yeah, the pearl of great price and the fascimilies are not complete and proven fabrications.
Yeah, the native americans came from Jerusalem.
hehehe.
John Gilmore | 2:56 p.m. June 28, 2009
I posted a nice comment on this at about 1 in the morning, which the monitors
chose not to publish for whatever reason.
It seems the monitors are perfectly willing to publish my rabid liberal opinions, and yet, they reject my atheistic ones. I honestly don't get it.
I think this article is timely in that it explains why so many religious people feel we don't have a responsibility as a so-called civilized country to guarantee health care for our citizens. the 22,000 who die yearly in this country because of lack of insurance "are in a better place." And god is in control. He helped in the 1820's and 1830's, and he's still running the show now, so why raise our taxes when all suffering is dictated by him for our benefit?
Also, global warming, global shwarming. Somebody got a patriarchal blessing recently that promised the second coming before his death...
Please publish, monitors. Anonymous people come ranting and you publish. I'm not anonymous, I take responsibility for my opinions.
It seems the monitors are perfectly willing to publish my rabid liberal opinions, and yet, they reject my atheistic ones. I honestly don't get it.
I think this article is timely in that it explains why so many religious people feel we don't have a responsibility as a so-called civilized country to guarantee health care for our citizens. the 22,000 who die yearly in this country because of lack of insurance "are in a better place." And god is in control. He helped in the 1820's and 1830's, and he's still running the show now, so why raise our taxes when all suffering is dictated by him for our benefit?
Also, global warming, global shwarming. Somebody got a patriarchal blessing recently that promised the second coming before his death...
Please publish, monitors. Anonymous people come ranting and you publish. I'm not anonymous, I take responsibility for my opinions.
THEeyepatch | 3:13 p.m. June 28, 2009
I never try to explain the what, who, when, where, about GOD. Unless your a GOD,
neither should you. Just enjoy what is offered and live your life in the light,
for one day you will meet your maker and hopefully at that moment everything
will make sense. Time, Space, Life, Death, who shot JR, just kidding. Go to GOD
as a empty glass ready to be filled. People seem to make the uncomplicated
complicated and then are disapointed when the truth is revealed. Don't set
yourself up for failure.
Re: Duff | 3:17 p.m. June 28, 2009
Hey Duff,
Your challenge is one that no one can win, so I'll ignore it. Your closing comment on science and kwowledge is poor logic. Science isn't knowing, but it is asking questions about what you observe. Newton was a great scientist, but Einstein proved some of his stuff wrong. If we assumed scientific explanations couldn't be wrong or at least partially wrong, we would be stuck back with Aristotle. Let's all assume that we can learn more and keep an open mind.
Your challenge is one that no one can win, so I'll ignore it. Your closing comment on science and kwowledge is poor logic. Science isn't knowing, but it is asking questions about what you observe. Newton was a great scientist, but Einstein proved some of his stuff wrong. If we assumed scientific explanations couldn't be wrong or at least partially wrong, we would be stuck back with Aristotle. Let's all assume that we can learn more and keep an open mind.
Anonymous | 3:19 p.m. June 28, 2009
I've read about the "Book of Abraham." :-) He didn't use a
magic rock and a black hat.
Why would you translate a book in to a King Jame's favored English and not you contemporary dialect? Why hide plates no one can read? Why hid something with your goal of translating it is to make it public?
Don't ask questions, I know.
Why would you translate a book in to a King Jame's favored English and not you contemporary dialect? Why hide plates no one can read? Why hid something with your goal of translating it is to make it public?
Don't ask questions, I know.
Bill | 3:28 p.m. June 28, 2009
Would you skeptics explain to me why there is "something" instead of
"nothing." Being instead of non-being.
RE: Anonymous | 3:19 p.m. | 4:03 p.m. June 28, 2009
So you already know about FAITH and testing of your FAITH?
You already know what a urim and thummim is and how they work?
Then you should know the answer to one of the important questions:
WHY ARE WE HERE?
and you should have heads start on other two:
WHERE DID WE COME FROM?
WHERE ARE WE GOING?
Scinece isn't the beginning and end of truth.
but only a window to some of the physical aspects of truth,
science completely ignores and rejects anything, with prejudice, that can NOT be touch by the physical senses and measured.
AND WORSE, makes up stories, and forces and twists the interpretation of evidence to make it fit a theory,
not only is that bad science, but closed minded science,
TO rely on it wholly is to rely on the infallibility of man.
You already know what a urim and thummim is and how they work?
Then you should know the answer to one of the important questions:
WHY ARE WE HERE?
and you should have heads start on other two:
WHERE DID WE COME FROM?
WHERE ARE WE GOING?
Scinece isn't the beginning and end of truth.
but only a window to some of the physical aspects of truth,
science completely ignores and rejects anything, with prejudice, that can NOT be touch by the physical senses and measured.
AND WORSE, makes up stories, and forces and twists the interpretation of evidence to make it fit a theory,
not only is that bad science, but closed minded science,
TO rely on it wholly is to rely on the infallibility of man.
@Bill 3:28 pm. | 4:03 p.m. June 28, 2009
Good question. This is the only thing religion has going for it in my mind. I
was born and raised LDS, graduated seminary, served a mission and married in the
temple. After 30 years, I realized I had been lied to and all religion was a
sham. Though I am not certain there is no God...your question is the same as
mine. Why is there 'anything'?
ww | 4:14 p.m. June 28, 2009
What about " believing is seeing "? How do scientists and atheists
explain human consciousness? Evolution is still theory.
@ 4:03 | 4:26 p.m. June 28, 2009
Had you been listening in Gospel Doctrine, the question "why is there
anything" is answered every week in church.
"...men are that they might have joy". That's one reason why we are here. We don't know the ' whys' of everything, but God's purposes will be revealed to us some day. In the mean time maybe if people prayed about it, they would receive some of the answers they're looking for.
"...men are that they might have joy". That's one reason why we are here. We don't know the ' whys' of everything, but God's purposes will be revealed to us some day. In the mean time maybe if people prayed about it, they would receive some of the answers they're looking for.
CB | 4:36 p.m. June 28, 2009
Thank you Joe, for the thoughtful, insightful articles. Mocking one's
belief in God is an easy cop-out for those who do not like to think that they
will have to account to anyone, let alone someone who is far superior to them,
for the life they've lived. John A. Widtsoe was a great scientist who
recognized that which he accomplished was a gift from God, and received one of
his greatest insights on a project he had worked on for many month while
attending the temple in Salt Lake City. Scientist or Religionist, they both have
their sceptics and critics.
Michael Elliott | 4:43 p.m. June 28, 2009
The idea of an beneficent interventionist god is incompatible with observed
reality. Where was this god as millions of Jews where gunned down, gassed, or
vivisected? What is this god doing for the 1 in 5 African children who die
before reaching puberty? The list of past and current atrocities which have
occurred and continue to occur without divine intervention is endless. Yet
we're expected to believe that there is a god who disrupts natural laws and
directs human affairs?
The notion that such a god exists should offend anyone with even a modicum of moral instinct. Only a capricious monster would intervene in such trivial matters as are often cited as evidence for divine intervention, yet stand by idly as millions are slaughtered.
You can imagine a kind, just god, or you can imagine an intervening god. You cannot have both.
The notion that such a god exists should offend anyone with even a modicum of moral instinct. Only a capricious monster would intervene in such trivial matters as are often cited as evidence for divine intervention, yet stand by idly as millions are slaughtered.
You can imagine a kind, just god, or you can imagine an intervening god. You cannot have both.
Anonymous | 4:58 p.m. June 28, 2009
To Word of Wisdom: There is nothing, absolutely nothing, new in the LDS version
of the word of wisdom. Much of what Joseph Smith echoed in Section 89 was
already swirling around the United States in the 1820s and '30s. The
literature about the ill effects of coffee, tea, alcohol and tobacco are well
documented by historians, as is the need to eat fruits and grains. You can
start with Robert Abzug's fine book, COSMOS CRUMBLING and work from there.
You will see that there is nothing new in Smith's revelation; in fact, you
can make a strong argument that he siphoned it from others and then spit it out
as his own. Without proper attribution, we call that plagiarism.
POL | 5:00 p.m. June 28, 2009
God is dead. Humans have developed to the point where science can guide our
decisions. Religion is for the weak who cannot stand up on there own and make
there own way; this is paricularly true with cults such as the mormon church.
RE: Michael Elliot | 5:10 p.m. June 28, 2009
The answer is easy and obvious,
He gave man their agency,
and must allow them to act, for good or evil, so he can judge on their works,'
so can see if they will do whatsoever he commandth them,
to test our faith,
so we can recieve blessings.
while God may allow suffering and terrible things, it is man that is doing them.
He gave man their agency,
and must allow them to act, for good or evil, so he can judge on their works,'
so can see if they will do whatsoever he commandth them,
to test our faith,
so we can recieve blessings.
while God may allow suffering and terrible things, it is man that is doing them.
@@Bill | 5:12 p.m. June 28, 2009
I've been in the Church 30 years and I can't number the blessings in
my life and the lives of my family members because we have trusted in God and
strived to do what he has asked of us. We are by far not perfect, but as I
count our blessings, it emphasizes his great mercy for us. How sad it would be
if you didn't KNOW where we came from, why we are here, where we are going.
The key is enduring in faith by pleasing God in every choice youo make; He then
reveals Himself slowly, but surely to you.
@ POL | 5:27 p.m. June 28, 2009
How would you know God is dead if you don't believe in His existence in the
first place?
@ Michael Elliott | 5:38 p.m. June 28, 2009
A kind and just God has given us free agency and promised not to intervene
unless we ask. It's always HIS will, not ours. There is a reason for
everything, including when bad things happen we just don't have the
comprehension to understand such things, our minds are limited. Even that is for
a reason.
mark | 5:39 p.m. June 28, 2009
I gotta tell ya Richards, I, of course, disagree with you. I found the column
very banal, Cannon is definately not a deep thinker nor, for that matter, much
of a thinker at all. His arguments are trite, his reasoning lazy. His reliance
on strawmen is laughable, his logic juveniel, his writing trite. And what is
with that bibliography? Is he really trying to tell us he used the five pages of
writtiings as reference to this reletivity small series? I don't believe
that he has even read those books, let alone made use of them for this series.
Other then that it was okay.
Other then that it was okay.
Scientist | 5:44 p.m. June 28, 2009
The whole notion that native americans came from Jerusalem isn't supported
beyond the book of Mormon and popular theory. Science has disproven it.
Each cell in our body is a perfect record that can tell a persons genealogy. There has been no proof that the natives came from Israel. Most of the proof indicates a correlation to Asia. That makes sense because of the theoretical land bridge, however I had always thought some genes would still connect to the Jews.
Also the Earth isn't tens of thousands of years old. It is approximately 4.5 billion years old, along with the rest of the Solar System. If it truly was ejected from Kolob, the dating of the Earth should be different from the other matter we have collected from Mars and Asteroids. THe age of rocks can't be fooled with.
I happen to like Mormonism. It teaches people some good values, and IF they actually lived them, they would do well. However the proof doesn't exist beyond the scriptures and personal testimony that God exists.
Each cell in our body is a perfect record that can tell a persons genealogy. There has been no proof that the natives came from Israel. Most of the proof indicates a correlation to Asia. That makes sense because of the theoretical land bridge, however I had always thought some genes would still connect to the Jews.
Also the Earth isn't tens of thousands of years old. It is approximately 4.5 billion years old, along with the rest of the Solar System. If it truly was ejected from Kolob, the dating of the Earth should be different from the other matter we have collected from Mars and Asteroids. THe age of rocks can't be fooled with.
I happen to like Mormonism. It teaches people some good values, and IF they actually lived them, they would do well. However the proof doesn't exist beyond the scriptures and personal testimony that God exists.
Your three answers using Science | 6:11 p.m. June 28, 2009
Your answers
Why are we here?
Obviously because we are bored and like to argue. The real answer should be right in front of your nose. We are here to be happy. Some have a different view on how that happiness is obtained.
Where did we come from?
They REALLY need to teach Sex Education in the schools since so many still can't answer this simple question. We came from a great and wonderful thing called Sex. You get some genes from a dad and some from a mom, and together with time and nutrients you became you.
Where are we going?
Eventually I am going to Walmart because I need groceries. If the question relates to death, the answer will astonish you. After you die your body and spirit separate. That body rots. Your spirit is pure energy or light, and has very little weight according to Science. Like all forms of energy it fades as it transfers heat or light into its environment. At some point the spirit dissipates completely. This explains WHY no one sees ghosts that dies hundreds of years before. THe ones I have seen were all people who lived recently.
Why are we here?
Obviously because we are bored and like to argue. The real answer should be right in front of your nose. We are here to be happy. Some have a different view on how that happiness is obtained.
Where did we come from?
They REALLY need to teach Sex Education in the schools since so many still can't answer this simple question. We came from a great and wonderful thing called Sex. You get some genes from a dad and some from a mom, and together with time and nutrients you became you.
Where are we going?
Eventually I am going to Walmart because I need groceries. If the question relates to death, the answer will astonish you. After you die your body and spirit separate. That body rots. Your spirit is pure energy or light, and has very little weight according to Science. Like all forms of energy it fades as it transfers heat or light into its environment. At some point the spirit dissipates completely. This explains WHY no one sees ghosts that dies hundreds of years before. THe ones I have seen were all people who lived recently.
@POL | 6:27 p.m. June 28, 2009
laugh, laugh, laugh.
Anonymous | 6:58 p.m. June 28, 2009
A very odd thread.... Cannon's column is based on his faith and beliefs,
to which he is entitled. The reaction, pro and con, misses the point.
@yr 3 anws. using sc. 6:11 | 7:41 p.m. June 28, 2009
maybe you don't see ghosts that died hundreds of years before, is because
they reincarnated.
the blind faith of atheists | 7:47 p.m. June 28, 2009
...is proven every day on these boards.
They're nasty too.
They're nasty too.
John Gilmore | 8:13 p.m. June 28, 2009
I'm an atheist, I don't have blind faith. Maybe some do - I don't
know any though.
I don't understand what about rejecting any of the millions, billions, truly infinite completely undisprovable and untestable "non-physical and untouchable" theories has to do with having blind faith.
To call atheism blind faith is the equivalent of me telling you that Invisible pink unicorns exist, and that if you don't believe so, you have blind faith that they don't exist.
That's not blind faith.
Blind faith would be believing in something despite lack of evidence, or, as is common, in spite of a preponderance of completely contrary evidence.
Mark hit it right on, the column is quite dull. It sounds like a seminary teacher on "we love science" day.
I don't understand what about rejecting any of the millions, billions, truly infinite completely undisprovable and untestable "non-physical and untouchable" theories has to do with having blind faith.
To call atheism blind faith is the equivalent of me telling you that Invisible pink unicorns exist, and that if you don't believe so, you have blind faith that they don't exist.
That's not blind faith.
Blind faith would be believing in something despite lack of evidence, or, as is common, in spite of a preponderance of completely contrary evidence.
Mark hit it right on, the column is quite dull. It sounds like a seminary teacher on "we love science" day.
Anonymous | 8:43 p.m. June 28, 2009
I believe that all truth is science, but that not all science is truth. All we
know, all we believe, is filtered through our imperfect selves. Reason tells me
that I am not capable of understanding how everything works, and that the
possibility of the existence of God is no more irrational than many other
explanations for why things are the way they are. To discount either science or
the possibility of divine influence limits our ability to discover truth.
There are also many ways to learn truth. Not all of them are quantifiable. In fact, most of what I know about life comes through nonscientific means. Emotion, intuition, inspiration, all have taught me much. To limit your acceptance of knowledge to that which is scientifically provable limits your ability to learn.
So I will continue to believe in the possibility of God until I know all, and can see that there is no God. At that point, though, knowing all, I will be God. :-)
There are also many ways to learn truth. Not all of them are quantifiable. In fact, most of what I know about life comes through nonscientific means. Emotion, intuition, inspiration, all have taught me much. To limit your acceptance of knowledge to that which is scientifically provable limits your ability to learn.
So I will continue to believe in the possibility of God until I know all, and can see that there is no God. At that point, though, knowing all, I will be God. :-)
john gilmore | 9:00 p.m. June 28, 2009
@ 8:43
I like your points. Most atheists I know agree:
"the possibility of the existence of God is no more irrational than many other explanations for why things are the way they are"
The possible existence of a god is not that irrational. It's orders of magnitude less irrational than, say, the possible existence of a god who is actively aware of/involved in human existence, or the possible existence of any of humans' favorite gods, like Yahweh or Zeus.
As an atheist, I lack a belief in God. I'm agnostic, which is to say, I understand that no one can know either way.
I like your points. Most atheists I know agree:
"the possibility of the existence of God is no more irrational than many other explanations for why things are the way they are"
The possible existence of a god is not that irrational. It's orders of magnitude less irrational than, say, the possible existence of a god who is actively aware of/involved in human existence, or the possible existence of any of humans' favorite gods, like Yahweh or Zeus.
As an atheist, I lack a belief in God. I'm agnostic, which is to say, I understand that no one can know either way.
@Bill | 9:29 p.m. June 28, 2009
Re: Why something rather than nothing.
All the question does is replace one unknown (the universe) with another (god), which makes it kind of pointless. I could ask you the same type of questions about god: Why one god and not multiple ones? Why god and not no god?
In fact, any question you can ask about the origin of the universe, I can ask about the origin of god. Any answer you supply as to the origin of god can be applied to the origin of the universe. God is an unnecessary step.
Does a god or gods exist? I don't know. If so, he/she/it/they is doing a fantastic job of staying hidden and doesn't seem to mind seeing many of his/her/its/their creations suffer.
Science doesn't deal with god, one way or another; it can't prove his existence or non-existence. God, by definition, is beyond science. What it does do is explain the things we observe - and does a very fine job. One day, if we don't destroy ourselves, science may be able to answer why there is something instead of nothing.
All the question does is replace one unknown (the universe) with another (god), which makes it kind of pointless. I could ask you the same type of questions about god: Why one god and not multiple ones? Why god and not no god?
In fact, any question you can ask about the origin of the universe, I can ask about the origin of god. Any answer you supply as to the origin of god can be applied to the origin of the universe. God is an unnecessary step.
Does a god or gods exist? I don't know. If so, he/she/it/they is doing a fantastic job of staying hidden and doesn't seem to mind seeing many of his/her/its/their creations suffer.
Science doesn't deal with god, one way or another; it can't prove his existence or non-existence. God, by definition, is beyond science. What it does do is explain the things we observe - and does a very fine job. One day, if we don't destroy ourselves, science may be able to answer why there is something instead of nothing.
Anonymous | 11:21 a.m. June 29, 2009
To Bill,
"Would you skeptics explain to me why there is "something" instead of "nothing." Being instead of non-being."
Please explain to us "skeptics" who or what created your god.
If you say another god did so, then explain who or what created THAT god... all the way back to the beginning.
If your answer is "gods have been creating gods through all eternity and there never was a first god", then you have your answer to the previous question: "why is there something instead of nothing?" Because that is the way it has always been, for eternity.
Your answer as to the origins of gods is no better than our answer. The fact that there is something rather than nothing cannot possibly prove or even support the existence of a god.
"Would you skeptics explain to me why there is "something" instead of "nothing." Being instead of non-being."
Please explain to us "skeptics" who or what created your god.
If you say another god did so, then explain who or what created THAT god... all the way back to the beginning.
If your answer is "gods have been creating gods through all eternity and there never was a first god", then you have your answer to the previous question: "why is there something instead of nothing?" Because that is the way it has always been, for eternity.
Your answer as to the origins of gods is no better than our answer. The fact that there is something rather than nothing cannot possibly prove or even support the existence of a god.
Ifandbut | 3:02 p.m. June 29, 2009
@4:26 PM
""...men are that they might have joy". That's one reason why we are here. "
Then why is it that every religion I have looked at says to stay away from the things that give Humans joy. I'm talking about Sex, Drugs, and Rock and Roll.
Smoking pot and drinking gives people joy then why are there countless sermons at church trying to teach the evils of the drugs?
Some consistency would be nice.
Also, if God gave us all free will then how is everything part of God's plan? By giving us free will God can not influence our decisions. The best he could do is predict broad things like a weatherman saying a hurricane will hit shore somewhere within this 100 mile area and that hardly counts as a plan.
""...men are that they might have joy". That's one reason why we are here. "
Then why is it that every religion I have looked at says to stay away from the things that give Humans joy. I'm talking about Sex, Drugs, and Rock and Roll.
Smoking pot and drinking gives people joy then why are there countless sermons at church trying to teach the evils of the drugs?
Some consistency would be nice.
Also, if God gave us all free will then how is everything part of God's plan? By giving us free will God can not influence our decisions. The best he could do is predict broad things like a weatherman saying a hurricane will hit shore somewhere within this 100 mile area and that hardly counts as a plan.
Turk | 3:48 p.m. June 29, 2009
Who knows, nobody knows: so why don't we deal with the things we do know;
like care for our planet and each other.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
- Funds help Utah science education 4:46 p.m.
- Growing pot earns man 5 years 4:42 p.m.
- Boyle hopes debut album 'delivers' 4:17 p.m.
- Fans greet returning Real Salt Lake 4:16 p.m.
- RSL protects 11 players from draft 4:00 p.m.
- Man allegedly fired at motorist 4:00 p.m.
- Doctor faces voyeurism charges 3:57 p.m.
- Payson, chamber seek medical firm 2:49 p.m.
- Protests against Phoenix LDS temple 2:47 p.m.
- Palin's book tour hits Fort Bragg 2:42 p.m.
- Buttars wants to limit gay rights laws
214 - Glenn Beck to enter politics?212
- RSL wins MLS Cup on penalty kicks189
- Palin plans tour stop in Utah178
- BYU records with win132
- Palin's book shows she's unqualified131
- Bronco, Kyle rubber match110
- Officer cleared in Cardall Taser case103
- BYU cuts Women's Research Inst.103
- Jazz finally win in San Antonio99
Latest comments
in the late '60s and early '70s in Southern California they were worried...
Tailhook was NAVY stupid!
To "Stalwart Sentinel | 3:59 p.m." if you want some really big understanding...
To Moses: To actually be honest I would welcome it just like most LDS would....
I have to wonder, when the debate came around about the guy who ripped down a...
Usually the penalty of extreme stupidity is, fortunately for us on the good...
You treat others how you wish to be treated and the same should apply to...
Are you a BYU scout? If Johnson is so overrated then I guess BYUs game plan...
What's the book called? Dumb & Dumbest?
Sung to the tune of The Flintstones I see another sing along here...
Advertisements
But then again, you can't explain who created god, so you're back to square one. So much for your logic.