Why is empirical evidence so wonderful when it confirms our - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

rebelx · 08-17-2005, 01:32 AM

Why is empirical evidence so wonderful when it confirms our beliefs, but contradictory empirical evidence is shrugged off as being used by the "unfaithful".....i.e., you should have more faith.

The whole idea of believing without knowing to me is okay, but why is it that the members of the church champion evidential matter that may lead outsiders to believe that the church is true, but then disregard other evidence that contradicts things.

In Guatemala, we'd constantly have church groups come down and visit the B of M sites.....well, thats what they thought they were visiting. However, from what I noticed while serving in the mountainous regions of Guatemala is that these people HAVE to be Asian.....they just have so much similarity with the Asian cultures from their ancient languages (that have an Asian sound to them), to their writings, architecture, and the people themselves look Asian...

I guess my point is, that I dont' doubt the B of M, I just don't need to try and fit a square peg in a round hole so that there's enough empirical evidence to prove the book is true. I personally think its a disservice to lead those people to believe that they are descendents of Lehi, when we can't be sure that all of them truly are his descendents. I mean, the B of M wasn't 100% clear that there didn't exist other throughout mesoamerican, south or north america, etc..... The area of land that Lehi and his family lived in could've been a few hundred square miles and thats what they new to be the "promised land".

I just hate interpretation being taught as fact......I mean, the DNA of a certain tribe in South America appeared to be unique worldwide until they compared it to the indigenous people of Australia....and now scientists believe that this one tribe of people that appears to have been here in the Americas for 1,000s of years, are the ancient ancestors of the Aboriginees of Australia. Its obvious that there were others here, science isn't anti-God, in fact its God's creation.....why dismiss it so much?

Oh btw, thanks for the invite to this site Archaea.

08-17-2005, 01:32 AM	#1
rebelx Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 2	Why is empirical evidence so wonderful when it confirms our Why is empirical evidence so wonderful when it confirms our beliefs, but contradictory empirical evidence is shrugged off as being used by the "unfaithful".....i.e., you should have more faith. The whole idea of believing without knowing to me is okay, but why is it that the members of the church champion evidential matter that may lead outsiders to believe that the church is true, but then disregard other evidence that contradicts things. In Guatemala, we'd constantly have church groups come down and visit the B of M sites.....well, thats what they thought they were visiting. However, from what I noticed while serving in the mountainous regions of Guatemala is that these people HAVE to be Asian.....they just have so much similarity with the Asian cultures from their ancient languages (that have an Asian sound to them), to their writings, architecture, and the people themselves look Asian... I guess my point is, that I dont' doubt the B of M, I just don't need to try and fit a square peg in a round hole so that there's enough empirical evidence to prove the book is true. I personally think its a disservice to lead those people to believe that they are descendents of Lehi, when we can't be sure that all of them truly are his descendents. I mean, the B of M wasn't 100% clear that there didn't exist other throughout mesoamerican, south or north america, etc..... The area of land that Lehi and his family lived in could've been a few hundred square miles and thats what they new to be the "promised land". I just hate interpretation being taught as fact......I mean, the DNA of a certain tribe in South America appeared to be unique worldwide until they compared it to the indigenous people of Australia....and now scientists believe that this one tribe of people that appears to have been here in the Americas for 1,000s of years, are the ancient ancestors of the Aboriginees of Australia. Its obvious that there were others here, science isn't anti-God, in fact its God's creation.....why dismiss it so much? Oh btw, thanks for the invite to this site Archaea.