Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Newly found species fills evolutionary gap between fish and land animals
EurekAlert (AAAS) ^ | 05 April 2006 | Staff

Posted on 04/05/2006 10:32:31 AM PDT by PatrickHenry

Paleontologists have discovered fossils of a species that provides the missing evolutionary link between fish and the first animals that walked out of water onto land about 375 million years ago. The newly found species, Tiktaalik roseae, has a skull, a neck, ribs and parts of the limbs that are similar to four-legged animals known as tetrapods, as well as fish-like features such as a primitive jaw, fins and scales.

These fossils, found on Ellesmere Island in Arctic Canada, are the most compelling examples yet of an animal that was at the cusp of the fish-tetrapod transition. The new find is described in two related research articles highlighted on the cover of the April 6, 2006, issue of Nature.

"Tiktaalik blurs the boundary between fish and land-living animal both in terms of its anatomy and its way of life," said Neil Shubin, professor and chairman of organismal biology at the University of Chicago and co-leader of the project.

Tiktaalik was a predator with sharp teeth, a crocodile-like head and a flattened body. The well-preserved skeletal material from several specimens, ranging from 4 to 9 feet long, enabled the researchers to study the mosaic pattern of evolutionary change in different parts of the skeleton as fish evolved into land animals.

The high quality of the fossils also allowed the team to examine the joint surfaces on many of the fin bones, concluding that the shoulder, elbow and wrist joints were capable of supporting the body-like limbed animals.

"Human comprehension of the history of life on Earth is taking a major leap forward," said H. Richard Lane, director of sedimentary geology and paleobiology at the National Science Foundation. "These exciting discoveries are providing fossil 'Rosetta Stones' for a deeper understanding of this evolutionary milestone--fish to land-roaming tetrapods."

One of the most important aspects of this discovery is the illumination of the fin-to-limb transition. In a second paper in the journal, the scientists describe in depth how the pectoral fin of the fish serves as the origin of the tetrapod limb.

Embedded in the fin of Tiktaalik are bones that compare to the upper arm, forearm and primitive parts of the hand of land-living animals.

"Most of the major joints of the fin are functional in this fish," Shubin said. "The shoulder, elbow and even parts of the wrist are already there and working in ways similar to the earliest land-living animals."

At the time that Tiktaalik lived, what is now the Canadian Arctic region was part of a landmass that straddled the equator. It had a subtropical climate, much like the Amazon basin today. The species lived in the small streams of this delta system. According to Shubin, the ecological setting in which these animals evolved provided an environment conducive to the transition to life on land.

"We knew that the rocks on Ellesmere Island offered a glimpse into the right time period and the right ancient environments to provide the potential for finding fossils documenting this important evolutionary transition," said Ted Daeschler of the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia, a co-leader of the project. "Finding the fossils within this remote, rugged terrain, however, required a lot of time and effort."

The nature of the deposits where the fossils were found and the skeletal structure of Tiktaalik suggests the animal lived in shallow water and perhaps even out of the water for short periods.

"The skeleton of Tiktaalik indicates that it could support its body under the force of gravity whether in very shallow water or on land," said Farish Jenkins, professor of organismic and evolutionary biology at Harvard University and co-author of the papers. "This represents a critical early phase in the evolution of all limbed animals, including humans--albeit a very ancient step."

The new fossils were collected during four summers of exploration in Canada's Nunavut Territory, 600 miles from the North Pole, by paleontologists from the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia, the University of Chicago and Harvard University. Although the team has amassed a diverse assemblage of fossil fish, Shubin said, the discovery of these transitional fossils in 2004 was a vindication of their persistence.

The scientists asked the Nunavut people to propose a formal scientific name for the new species. The Elders Council of Nunavut, the Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit, suggested "Tiktaalik" (tic-TAH-lick)--the word in the Inuktikuk language for "a large, shallow water fish."

The scientists worked through the Department of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth in Nunavut to collaborate with the local Inuit communities. All fossils are the property of the people of Nunavut and will be returned to Canada after they are studied.

###

The team depended on the maps of the Geological Survey of Canada. The researchers received permits from the Department of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth of the Government of Nunavut, and logistical support in the form of helicopters and bush planes from Polar Continental Shelf Project of Natural Resources Canada. The National Science Foundation and the National Geographic Society, along with an anonymous donor, also helped fund the project.


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: 375millionyears; coelacanth; crevolist; lungfish; tiktaalik; transitional
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 861-880881-900901-920 ... 1,501-1,512 next last
To: PatrickHenry

Proves nothing. It is an animal that existed and went extinct. There is no proof of that it's or any of it's decendents were different from their parents.


881 posted on 04/06/2006 12:01:46 PM PDT by Creationist (If the earth is old show me your proof. Salvation from the judgment of your sins is free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Texan Mom
Most of knowledge and observed events are in the subconsciousness. Sometimes that knowledge nudges you even if one does not know why.
882 posted on 04/06/2006 12:03:21 PM PDT by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 781 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Dan Tucker
The nature of the deposits where the fossils were found and the skeletal structure of Tiktaalik suggests the animal lived in shallow water and perhaps even out of the water for short periods.


Now, whales on the other hand, did adapt from living on land to living in the sea. (See: Living whales found with hindlimbs)


It's too bad that the Tic-Tac finders are not as SURE of their data interpretation as others seem to be.

883 posted on 04/06/2006 12:08:27 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 792 | View Replies]

To: WildHorseCrash
There is no "truth" in any scripture, but simply the subjective emotions of its adherents.

(Ya left off...

"And that's the absolute truth!"

884 posted on 04/06/2006 12:12:14 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 818 | View Replies]

To: WildHorseCrash
I've decided that the evidence is such that there is no way to make any informed, objective conclusion about the matter absent additional evidence, and that most people who have reached a conclusion have done so out of emotion, not reason.

You've backed off a little in only 7 replies....

885 posted on 04/06/2006 12:15:19 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 825 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Which "church"? After all, some "churches" are founded on the idea that we are, as it were, the imaginings or thoughts of a sleeper who is awakening

René Descartes

1633 was the year that Galileo's Dialogue was condemned by the Catholic Church, and although Descartes book was ready, he put off its publication out of ...

886 posted on 04/06/2006 12:16:53 PM PDT by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 802 | View Replies]

To: js1138
Individuals differ from their parents, but this, by itself, is not evolution.

Then NOTHING; "by itself", is ALSO not evolution. Since there isn't ANYTHING, taken alone, that can be 'evolution', therefore, Evolution must not exist!

887 posted on 04/06/2006 12:17:52 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 827 | View Replies]

To: Elsie
It's too bad that the Tic-Tac finders are not as SURE of their data interpretation as others seem to be.

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

888 posted on 04/06/2006 12:18:21 PM PDT by Ol' Dan Tucker (Karen Ryan reporting...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 883 | View Replies]

To: William Terrell

There are two observations I am wondering about.
Law, implies order, or predictability.
Here are the most relevant definitions.

Law: a generalization that describes recurring facts or events in nature; "the laws of thermodynamics" [syn: law of nature].A formulation describing a relationship observed to be invariable between or among phenomena for all cases in which the specified conditions are met.
A generalization based on consistent experience or results.

They all indicate a form of order. Now I have also observed laws of nature being referred to as forces of nature. Here are relevant definitions of force

1 : a cause of motion, activity, or change. : (physics) the influence that produces a change in a physical quantity; "force equals mass times acceleration". physical energy or intensity. a powerful effect or influence.

Now, the word force, as it applies to nature is generally a noun. I think that it would not be out of line to say that nature follows natural law in creating these forces. So, when the statement is made that evolution is a process of unguided forces, we can surmise that evolution is a process of unguided forces, which are the result of natural law.

Here are the relevant definitions for guide.

Something that serves to direct or indicate. To direct the course of; steer. To exert control or influence over.

Hence, unguided means the opposite.

Is the term unguided forces a contradiction?




889 posted on 04/06/2006 12:19:24 PM PDT by Conservative Texan Mom (Some people say I'm stubborn, when it's usually just that I'm right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 770 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
Creation is all around us - how can you say it isn't observed?

I see nothing popping into existence. You might say the results of Creation are all around us, but that is pure conjecture with no scientific foundation.

The Bible Creation Myth is no more valid than the flying Spaghetti Monster -- it merely has more adherents.

890 posted on 04/06/2006 12:20:24 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Don't call them "Illegal Aliens." Call them what they are: CRIMINAL INVADERS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 864 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Remember, in geology, gradualism as the primary factor in surface change has been defunct for 46 years.

What happened 46 years ago?

As far as evolution goes, it does seem to be "gradual" if you look over the continuum from 4 billion years ago to the present time. However, for the first 3.6+/- billion years NOTHING HAPPENED.

NOTHING HAPPENED is a bit of an embellishment, I think. The Precambrian (particularly the Ediacaran era) is a time of immense biological change - though a lot of it was happening on a molecular level. The first eukaryotic organisms appeared then, and the first macroscopic plants and animals - not a small change at all in the existing biospshere, all prior to the Cambrian explosion. Lateral gene transfer no doubt played a much larger role in that era of evolutionary history. Many of the tools in the genetic toolkit that allow macroscopic change hadn't appeared yet, but to put it in the words of Carl Zimmer, "evolution is and always has been primarily a story about bacteria", if you really want to trace where most of the genetic change in life has taken place. The whole Cambrian explosion is really little more than a 'macro-centric phenomenon', from what I can understand - robust change in living organisms had already been occurring for a long time, only on a cellular level.

What exactly spawned the sudden change is indeed a mystery, but I think it's pretty clear that the reason it didn't occur earlier is because the genetic toolkit of triploblastic organisms wasn't all in place yet (e.g. the HOX genes you referred to earlier).

891 posted on 04/06/2006 12:20:36 PM PDT by Quark2005 (Confidence follows from consilience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 868 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Dan Tucker; Elsie

So, does it taste more like chicken, or fish?


892 posted on 04/06/2006 12:21:46 PM PDT by muawiyah (-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 888 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

FSM - yeah, whatever.

Thanks for the intelligent discussion. Have a nice afternoon.


893 posted on 04/06/2006 12:21:53 PM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 890 | View Replies]

To: js1138; WildHorseCrash; metmom; AndrewC; narby; RunningWolf
You don't appear to take ID seriously, and I didn't address the question to you.

I don't take much of EITHER side 'seriously' (So WHY do I waste so much TIME on these threads???)

I however DO get to post Scripture from time to time.

It irritates the hell out of WHC, glazes the eyes of others, makes folks like Narby lose their faith, and encourages dudes like Runningwolf and Metmom and Andrewc.


Go figger....

894 posted on 04/06/2006 12:24:48 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 845 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

The question is why someone calling himself a conservative would waste the time of people who don't enjoy his company, and why he would invite himself to a party having nothing to contribute.


895 posted on 04/06/2006 12:31:02 PM PDT by js1138 (~()):~)>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 894 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
 
BTW, the Mormons are almost unique in holding to the idea that the age of prophecy is still upon us. That's why their top guy is the prophet.
 
 
There are PROPHETS and then there are prophets.....

 

THE DOCTRINE AND COVENANTS

SECTION 132

Revelation given through Joseph Smith the Prophet, at Nauvoo, Illinois, recorded July 12, 1843, relating to the new and everlasting covenant, including the eternity of the marriage covenant, as also plurality of wives. HC 5: 501—507. Although the revelation was recorded in 1843, it is evident from the historical records that the doctrines and principles involved in this revelation had been known by the Prophet since 1831.

1—6, Exaltation is gained through the new and everlasting covenant; 7—14, The terms and conditions of that covenant are set forth; 15—20, Celestial marriage and a continuation of the family unit enable men to become gods; 21—25, The strait and narrow way that leads to eternal lives; 26—27, Law given relative to blasphemy against the Holy Ghost; 28—39, Promises of eternal increase and exaltation made to prophets and saints in all ages; 40—47, Joseph Smith is given the power to bind and seal on earth and in heaven; 48—50, The Lord seals upon him his exaltation; 51—57, Emma Smith is counseled to be faithful and true; 58—66, Laws governing the plurality of wives are set forth.

  1 VERILY, thus saith the Lord unto you my servant Joseph, that inasmuch as you have inquired of my hand to know and understand wherein I, the Lord, justified my servants Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as also Moses, David and Solomon, my servants, as touching the principle and doctrine of their having many awives and bconcubines

  2 Behold, and lo, I am the Lord thy God, and will answer thee as touching this matter.

  3 Therefore, aprepare thy heart to receive and bobey the instructions which I am about to give unto you; for all those who have this law revealed unto them must obey the same.

  4 For behold, I reveal unto you a new and an everlasting acovenant; and if ye abide not that covenant, then are ye bdamned; for no one can creject this covenant and be permitted to enter into my glory.

  5 For all who will have a ablessing at my hands shall abide the blaw which was appointed for that blessing, and the conditions thereof, as were instituted from before the foundation of the world.

  6 And as pertaining to the new and aeverlasting covenant, it was instituted for the fulness of my bglory; and he that receiveth a fulness thereof must and shall abide the law, or he shall be damned, saith the Lord God.

 7 And verily I say unto you, that the aconditions of this law are these: All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, boaths, cvows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations, that are not made and entered into and dsealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, of him who is eanointed, both as well for time and for all eternity, and that too most holy, by frevelation and commandment through the medium of mine anointed, whom I have appointed on the earth to hold this gpower (and I have appointed unto my servant Joseph to hold this hpower in the last days, and there is never but one on the earth at a time on whom this power and the ikeys of this priesthood are conferred), are of no efficacy, virtue, or force in and after the resurrection from the dead; for all contracts that are not made unto this end have an end when men are dead.

 8 Behold, mine house is a house of aorder, saith the Lord God, and not a house of confusion.

  9 Will I aaccept of an offering, saith the Lord, that is not made in my name?

  10 Or will I receive at your hands that which I have not aappointed?

  11 And will I appoint unto you, saith the Lord, except it be by law, even as I and my Father aordained unto you, before the world was?

  12 I am the Lord thy God; and I give unto you this commandment—that no man shall acome unto the Father but by me or by my word, which is my law, saith the Lord.

  13 And everything that is in the world, whether it be ordained of men, by athrones, or principalities, or powers, or things of name, whatsoever they may be, that are not by me or by my word, saith the Lord, shall be thrown down, and shall bnot remain after men are dead, neither in nor after the resurrection, saith the Lord your God.

  14 For whatsoever things remain are by me; and whatsoever things are not by me shall be shaken and destroyed.

 15 Therefore, if a aman marry him a wife in the world, and he marry her not by me nor by my word, and he covenant with her so long as he is in the world and she with him, their covenant and marriage are not of force when they are dead, and when they are out of the world; therefore, they are not bound by any law when they are out of the world.

  16 Therefore, when they are out of the world they neither marry nor are given in amarriage; but are appointed angels in bheaven, which angels are ministering cservants, to minister for those who are worthy of a far more, and an exceeding, and an eternal weight of glory.

  17 For these angels did not abide my law; therefore, they cannot be enlarged, but remain separately and singly, without exaltation, in their saved condition, to all eternity; and from henceforth are not gods, but are aangels of God forever and ever.

  18 And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife, and make a covenant with her for time and for all eternity, if that acovenant is not by me or by my word, which is my law, and is not sealed by the Holy Spirit of promise, through him whom I have anointed and appointed unto this power, then it is not valid neither of force when they are out of the world, because they are not joined by me, saith the Lord, neither by my word; when they are out of the world it cannot be received there, because the angels and the gods are appointed there, by whom they cannot pass; they cannot, therefore, inherit my glory; for my house is a house of order, saith the Lord God.

  19 And again, verily I say unto you, if a man amarry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and beverlasting covenant, and it is csealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of dpromise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the ekeys of this priesthood; and it shall be said unto them—Ye shall come forth in the first resurrection; and if it be after the first resurrection, in the next resurrection; and shall inherit fthrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths—then shall it be written in the Lamb’s gBook of Life, that he shall commit no hmurder whereby to shed innocent iblood, and if ye abide in my covenant, and commit no murder whereby to shed innocent blood, it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their jexaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the kseeds forever and ever.

  20 Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from aeverlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be bgods, because they have call power, and the angels are subject unto them.

 21 Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye abide my alaw ye cannot attain to this glory.

  22 For astrait is the gate, and narrow the bway that leadeth unto the exaltation and continuation of the clives, and few there be that find it, because ye receive me not in the world neither do ye know me.

  23 But if ye receive me in the world, then shall ye know me, and shall receive your exaltation; that awhere I am ye shall be also.

  24 This is aeternal lives—to bknow the only wise and true God, and Jesus Christ, whom he hath csent. I am he. Receive ye, therefore, my law.

  25 aBroad is the gate, and wide the way that leadeth to the bdeaths; and many there are that go in thereat, because they creceive me not, neither do they abide in my law.

  26 Verily, verily, I say unto you, if a man marry a wife according to my word, and they are sealed by the aHoly Spirit of promise, according to mine appointment, and he or she shall commit any sin or transgression of the new and everlasting covenant whatever, and all manner of blasphemies, and if they bcommit no murder wherein they shed innocent blood, yet they shall come forth in the first resurrection, and enter into their exaltation; but they shall be destroyed in the flesh, and shall be cdelivered unto the buffetings of dSatan unto the day of eredemption, saith the Lord God.

  27 The ablasphemy against the Holy Ghost, which shall bnot be cforgiven in the world nor out of the world, is in that ye commit dmurder wherein ye shed innocent blood, and assent unto my death, after ye have received my new and everlasting covenant, saith the Lord God; and he that abideth not this law can in nowise enter into my glory, but shall be edamned, saith the Lord.

  28 I am the Lord thy God, and will give unto thee the alaw of my Holy Priesthood, as was ordained by me and my Father before the world was.

  29 aAbraham received all things, whatsoever he received, by revelation and commandment, by my word, saith the Lord, and hath entered into his exaltation and sitteth upon his throne.

  30 aAbraham received promises concerning his seed, and of the fruit of his loins—from whose bloins ye are, namely, my servant Joseph—which were to continue so long as they were in the world; and as touching Abraham and his seed, out of the world they should continue; both in the world and out of the world should they continue as innumerable as the cstars; or, if ye were to count the sand upon the seashore ye could not number them.

  31 This promise is yours also, because ye are of aAbraham, and the promise was made unto Abraham; and by this law is the continuation of the works of my Father, wherein he glorifieth himself.

  32 Go ye, therefore, and do the aworks of Abraham; enter ye into my law and ye shall be saved.

  33 But if ye enter not into my law ye cannot receive the promise of my Father, which he made unto Abraham.

  34 God acommanded Abraham, and Sarah gave bHagar to Abraham to wife. And why did she do it? Because this was the law; and from Hagar sprang many people. This, therefore, was fulfilling, among other things, the promises.

  35 Was Abraham, therefore, under condemnation? Verily I say unto you, Nay; for I, the Lord, acommanded it.

  36 Abraham was acommanded to offer his son Isaac; nevertheless, it was written: Thou shalt not bkill. Abraham, however, did not refuse, and it was accounted unto him for crighteousness.

  37 Abraham received aconcubines, and they bore him children; and it was accounted unto him for righteousness, because they were given unto him, and he abode in my law; as Isaac also and bJacob did none other things than that which they were commanded; and because they did none other things than that which they were commanded, they have entered into their cexaltation, according to the promises, and sit upon thrones, and are not angels but are gods.

  38 David also received amany wives and concubines, and also Solomon and Moses my servants, as also many others of my servants, from the beginning of creation until this time; and in nothing did they sin save in those things which they received not of me.

  39 aDavid’s wives and concubines were bgiven unto him of me, by the hand of Nathan, my servant, and others of the prophets who had the ckeys of this power; and in none of these things did he dsin against me save in the case of eUriah and his wife; and, therefore he hath ffallen from his exaltation, and received his portion; and he shall not inherit them out of the world, for I ggave them unto another, saith the Lord.

  40 I am the Lord thy God, and I gave unto thee, my servant Joseph, an aappointment, and restore all things. Ask what ye will, and it shall be given unto you according to my word.

  41 And as ye have asked concerning adultery, verily, verily, I say unto you, if a man areceiveth a wife in the new and everlasting covenant, and if she be with another man, and I have not appointed unto her by the holy banointing, she hath committed cadultery and shall be destroyed.

    

(Oops!  backpedal time....)

 
 
OFFICIAL DECLARATION—1

To Whom It May Concern:

Press dispatches having been sent for political purposes, from Salt Lake City, which have been widely published, to the effect that the Utah Commission, in their recent report to the Secretary of the Interior, allege that plural marriages are still being solemnized and that forty or more such marriages have been contracted in Utah since last June or during the past year, also that in public discourses the leaders of the Church have taught, encouraged and urged the continuance of the practice of polygamy

I, therefore, as President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, do hereby, in the most solemn manner, declare that these charges are false. We are not teaching polygamy or plural marriage, nor permitting any person to enter into its practice, and I deny that either forty or any other number of plural marriages have during that period been solemnized in our Temples or in any other place in the Territory.

One case has been reported, in which the parties allege that the marriage was performed in the Endowment House, in Salt Lake City, in the Spring of 1889, but I have not been able to learn who performed the ceremony; whatever was done in this matter was without my knowledge. In consequence of this alleged occurrence the Endowment House was, by my instructions, taken down without delay.

Inasmuch as laws have been enacted by Congress forbidding plural marriages, which laws have been pronounced constitutional by the court of last resort, I hereby declare my intention to submit to those laws, and to use my influence with the members of the Church over which I preside to have them do likewise.

There is nothing in my teachings to the Church or in those of my associates, during the time specified, which can be reasonably construed to inculcate or encourage polygamy; and when any Elder of the Church has used language which appeared to convey any such teaching, he has been promptly reproved. And I now publicly declare that my advice to the Latter-day Saints is to refrain from contracting any marriage forbidden by the law of the land.

WILFORD WOODRUFF
President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

President Lorenzo Snow offered the following:

“I move that, recognizing Wilford Woodruff as the President of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and the only man on the earth at the present time who holds the keys of the sealing ordinances, we consider him fully authorized by virtue of his position to issue the Manifesto which has been read in our hearing, and which is dated September 24th, 1890, and that as a Church in General Conference assembled, we accept his declaration concerning plural marriages as authoritative and binding.”

The vote to sustain the foregoing motion was unanimous.

Salt Lake City, Utah, October 6, 1890.


EXCERPTS FROM THREE ADDRESSES BY
PRESIDENT WILFORD WOODRUFF
REGARDING THE MANIFESTO

The Lord will never permit me or any other man who stands as President of this Church to lead you astray. It is not in the programme. It is not in the mind of God. If I were to attempt that, the Lord would remove me out of my place, and so He will any other man who attempts to lead the children of men astray from the oracles of God and from their duty. (Sixty-first Semiannual General Conference of the Church, Monday, October 6, 1890, Salt Lake City, Utah. Reported in Deseret Evening News, October 11, 1890, p. 2.)

It matters not who lives or who dies, or who is called to lead this Church, they have got to lead it by the inspiration of Almighty God. If they do not do it that way, they cannot do it at all. . . .

I have had some revelations of late, and very important ones to me, and I will tell you what the Lord has said to me. Let me bring your minds to what is termed the manifesto. . . .

The Lord has told me to ask the Latter-day Saints a question, and He also told me that if they would listen to what I said to them and answer the question put to them, by the Spirit and power of God, they would all answer alike, and they would all believe alike with regard to this matter.

The question is this: Which is the wisest course for the Latter-day Saints to pursue—to continue to attempt to practice plural marriage, with the laws of the nation against it and the opposition of sixty millions of people, and at the cost of the confiscation and loss of all the Temples, and the stopping of all the ordinances therein, both for the living and the dead, and the imprisonment of the First Presidency and Twelve and the heads of families in the Church, and the confiscation of personal property of the people (all of which of themselves would stop the practice); or, after doing and suffering what we have through our adherence to this principle to cease the practice and submit to the law, and through doing so leave the Prophets, Apostles and fathers at home, so that they can instruct the people and attend to the duties of the Church, and also leave the Temples in the hands of the Saints, so that they can attend to the ordinances of the Gospel, both for the living and the dead?

The Lord showed me by vision and revelation exactly what would take place if we did not stop this practice. If we had not stopped it, you would have had no use for . . . any of the men in this temple at Logan; for all ordinances would be stopped throughout the land of Zion. Confusion would reign throughout Israel, and many men would be made prisoners. This trouble would have come upon the whole Church, and we should have been compelled to stop the practice. Now, the question is, whether it should be stopped in this manner, or in the way the Lord has manifested to us, and leave our Prophets and Apostles and fathers free men, and the temples in the hands of the people, so that the dead may be redeemed. A large number has already been delivered from the prison house in the spirit world by this people, and shall the work go on or stop? This is the question I lay before the Latter-day Saints. You have to judge for yourselves. I want you to answer it for yourselves. I shall not answer it; but I say to you that that is exactly the condition we as a people would have been in had we not taken the course we have.

. . . I saw exactly what would come to pass if there was not something done. I have had this spirit upon me for a long time. But I want to say this: I should have let all the temples go out of our hands; I should have gone to prison myself, and let every other man go there, had not the God of heaven commanded me to do what I did do; and when the hour came that I was commanded to do that, it was all clear to me. I went before the Lord, and I wrote what the Lord told me to write. . . .

I leave this with you, for you to contemplate and consider. The Lord is at work with us. (Cache Stake Conference, Logan, Utah, Sunday, November 1, 1891. Reported in Deseret Weekly, November 14, 1891.)

Now I will tell you what was manifested to me and what the Son of God performed in this thing. . . . All these things would have come to pass, as God Almighty lives, had not that Manifesto been given. Therefore, the Son of God felt disposed to have that thing presented to the Church and to the world for purposes in his own mind. The Lord had decreed the establishment of Zion. He had decreed the finishing of this temple. He had decreed that the salvation of the living and the dead should be given in these valleys of the mountains. And Almighty God decreed that the Devil should not thwart it. If you can understand that, that is a key to it. (From a discourse at the sixth session of the dedication of the Salt Lake Temple, April 1893. Typescript of Dedicatory Services, Archives, Church Historical Department, Salt Lake City, Utah.)
 


So much for an 'Everlasting Covenant' that thundered out of Heaven!!!

896 posted on 04/06/2006 12:32:02 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 847 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
Wikipedia is not a reliable, trustworthy source. That's because anybody can go in there and write anything they want. I've done it myself.

Well you could look it up yourself or read a science book but anything other than your opinion would be discounted. The definition of evolution was stated many years before Wikipedia and in fact I probably studied it before you were born. It has not changed even though you would change Wikipedia as a agenda to support your opinion.

897 posted on 04/06/2006 12:32:05 PM PDT by jec41 (Screaming Eagle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 822 | View Replies]

To: William Terrell

I have noticed something else. It seems certain posters are quite happy to speculate about how nature could lead to many things without a designer, yet when asked if these things could be following the design of a designer, they repond with, "evolution doesn't address this."


898 posted on 04/06/2006 12:34:09 PM PDT by Conservative Texan Mom (Some people say I'm stubborn, when it's usually just that I'm right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 765 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
Thanks for the intelligent discussion. Have a nice afternoon.

IOW, you can't really defend your thinking since I have you dead to rights. Will it make the boo-boo go away if I substitute the American Indian Creation Myth in place of FSM?

You can't win the argument anyway.

899 posted on 04/06/2006 12:36:19 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Don't call them "Illegal Aliens." Call them what they are: CRIMINAL INVADERS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 893 | View Replies]

To: Elsie

1:42:59 PM CDT

1:52:16 PM CDT

How do I get a double post THIS far apart in time???


900 posted on 04/06/2006 12:36:50 PM PDT by Elsie (Heck is where people, who don't believe in Gosh, think they are not going....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 872 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 861-880881-900901-920 ... 1,501-1,512 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson