Discussão:Primary sources/Evolution/EoM Evolution - Histórico de revisões

RogerNicholson: Talk:Evolution:Primary sources:EoM Evolution moved to Talk:Primary sources/Evolution/EoM Evolution: subpage

2008-06-13T14:08:42Z

Talk:Evolution:Primary sources:EoM Evolution moved to Talk:Primary sources/Evolution/EoM Evolution: subpage

← Revisão anterior	Revisão das 14h08min de 13 de junho de 2008
(Sem diferenças)

MikeParker: Links

2006-04-26T16:00:50Z

Links

← Revisão anterior		Revisão das 16h00min de 26 de abril de 2006
Linha 1:		Linha 1:
	There is an interesting article on [http://ndbf.net/ No Death before the Fall] that shows fairly convincingly that this Encyclopedia of Mormonism article has a significant error. The second quote was not about organic evolution. It was regarding B. H. Roberts's theory about the origin of man, which still did not allow for organic evolution, so it doesn't really have any bearing on evolution. Do we want to perpetuate that mistake by having it on here?		There is an interesting article on [http://ndbf.net/ No Death before the Fall] that shows fairly convincingly that this Encyclopedia of Mormonism article has a significant error. The second quote was not about organic evolution. It was regarding B. H. Roberts's theory about the origin of man, which still did not allow for organic evolution, so it doesn't really have any bearing on evolution. Do we want to perpetuate that mistake by having it on here?

	:Nathan: Gary "NDBF" Shapiro overstates his case. Technically, the only error in the EoM article is its claim that "In 1931...there was intense discussion on the issue of organic evolution...." Gary is right that the discussion was not about evolution, but about pre-Adamites; however, the 1931 First Presidency statement still applies very well to the debate over evolution. Where Gary is wrong is that he goes on to quote the [[General authorities' statements as scripture\|noncanonical statements and writings of various general authorities]], and then calls them "settled doctrine." --[[User:MikeParker\|MikeParker]] 17:06, 24 Apr 2006 (EDT)		:Nathan: Gary "NDBF" Shapiro overstates his case. Technically, the only error in the EoM article is its claim that "In 1931...there was intense discussion on the issue of organic evolution...." Gary is right that the discussion was not about [[evolution]], but about [[pre-Adamites]]; however, the 1931 First Presidency statement still applies very well to the debate over evolution. Where Gary is wrong is that he goes on to quote the [[General authorities' statements as scripture\|noncanonical statements and writings of various general authorities]], and then calls them "settled doctrine." --[[User:MikeParker\|MikeParker]] 17:06, 24 Apr 2006 (EDT)

MikeParker: Yes and no

2006-04-24T21:06:17Z

Yes and no

← Revisão anterior		Revisão das 21h06min de 24 de abril de 2006
Linha 1:		Linha 1:
	There is an interesting article on [http://ndbf.net/ No Death before the Fall] that shows fairly convincingly that this Encyclopedia of Mormonism article has a significant error. The second quote was not about organic evolution. It was regarding B. H. Roberts's theory about the origin of man, which still did not allow for organic evolution, so it doesn't really have any bearing on evolution. Do we want to perpetuate that mistake by having it on here?		There is an interesting article on [http://ndbf.net/ No Death before the Fall] that shows fairly convincingly that this Encyclopedia of Mormonism article has a significant error. The second quote was not about organic evolution. It was regarding B. H. Roberts's theory about the origin of man, which still did not allow for organic evolution, so it doesn't really have any bearing on evolution. Do we want to perpetuate that mistake by having it on here?

			:Nathan: Gary "NDBF" Shapiro overstates his case. Technically, the only error in the EoM article is its claim that "In 1931...there was intense discussion on the issue of organic evolution...." Gary is right that the discussion was not about evolution, but about pre-Adamites; however, the 1931 First Presidency statement still applies very well to the debate over evolution. Where Gary is wrong is that he goes on to quote the [[General authorities' statements as scripture\|noncanonical statements and writings of various general authorities]], and then calls them "settled doctrine." --[[User:MikeParker\|MikeParker]] 17:06, 24 Apr 2006 (EDT)

Nathan000000: Error in this EoM article

2006-04-21T03:27:44Z

Error in this EoM article

Página nova

There is an interesting article on [http://ndbf.net/ No Death before the Fall] that shows fairly convincingly that this Encyclopedia of Mormonism article has a significant error. The second quote was not about organic evolution. It was regarding B. H. Roberts's theory about the origin of man, which still did not allow for organic evolution, so it doesn't really have any bearing on evolution. Do we want to perpetuate that mistake by having it on here?