Ensign advises members to"Look for documented scientific research to support claims."

[helemon]

But only with respect to diet and nutrition, not with respect to doctrine. So does this mean that if science contradicts the WoW then it can be disregarded!

[Born Free]

But only with respect to diet and nutrition, not with respect to doctrine. So does this mean that if science contradicts the WoW then it can be disregarded!

Now there is documentary evidence of how religion works: you look for evidence supporting your stance, whilst ignoring anything contrary.

Ah, don't you just love faith-based living?

Daryl

PS: Check out previous discussion on the inspired nature of the WoW. JS and MoInc looks more like sheep than prophets and leaders.

http://www.postmormon.org/forum_vb/showthread.php?t=96

[nate]

But only with respect to diet and nutrition, not with respect to doctrine. So does this mean that if science contradicts the WoW then it can be disregarded!

NO way! Science already supports half of what the WoWs says (meat in moderation) and the church doesn't enforce it, so why would they STOP enforcing the other half that science contradicts?

Whoa. Now I'm confused.

[Born Free]

NO way! Science already supports half of what the WoWs says (meat in moderation) and the church doesn't enforce it, so why would they STOP enforcing the other half that science contradicts?

Whoa. Now I'm confused.
The avoidance of the meat issue is a good example of how the fundy mind works.

There is more on very moderate consumption of meat in the WoW than there is in all the issues that the Church has mandated.

By what curious logic can someone, claiming they are a devout literal follower of God (and his prophet), slavishly follow parts of God's advice (even though history makes abundently clear JS did not), but then ignore completely other parts (re meat), inspite that God rated more verbage?

I was reminded a friend heard an interview recently (with Dawkins as I recall) in which he pointed out that Leviticus mentions of seafood are multiple, whilst the ones on homosexuality are few. How do fundy homophobic Christians justify getting all excited at the minor part?

The answer is simple: they rarely read their scriptures in their entirety, and think about ALL the parts as a whole even less.

[elder_nomo]

I was reminded a friend heard an interview recently (with Dawkins as I recall) in which he pointed out that Leviticus mentions of seafood are multiple, whilst the ones on homosexuality are few. How do fundy homophobic Christians justify getting all excited at the minor part?

The answer is simple: they rarely read their scriptures in their entirety, and think about ALL the parts as a whole even less.
That, and the fact that they are fixated on their "parts"... ;)
Are there any people more sex-obsessed?