Jump to content

Mormon views on evolution

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk | contribs) at 20:59, 2 March 2016 (→Further reading: corrected a broken link to a BYU thesis). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The largest church within Mormonism, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church), takes no official position on whether or not biological evolution has occurred, or on the validity of the modern evolutionary synthesis as a scientific theory. In the 20th century, the LDS Church published doctrinal statements on the origin of man and creation. In addition, individual leaders of the LDS Church have expressed a variety of opinions on evolution, many of which have affected the beliefs and perceptions of Latter-day Saints.

Official church doctrine

The LDS Church has stated that it "has no official position on evolution, and each member is entitled to his or her own personal views on the subject".[1]

Some general authorities and lay members of the LDS Church have considered evolution to be at variance with scriptural teaching. Apostles Joseph Fielding Smith and Bruce R. McConkie were among the most well known advocates of this position. Other church authorities and members have seen much of value in evolutionary theory, even if they have not endorsed every aspect of it. Examples of this approach include B. H. Roberts, James E. Talmage, John A. Widtsoe, Henry B. Eyring, and Gordon B. Hinckley.[1]

While maintaining its "no position" stance, the LDS Church has produced a number of official publications that have included discussion and unofficial statements from these various church leaders on evolution and the "origin of man." These statements generally adopt the position, as a church-approved encyclopedia entry[a] states, "[t]he scriptures tell why man was created, but they do not tell how, though the Lord has promised that he will tell that when he comes again."[3]

The first official statement on the issue of evolution was in 1909, which marked the centennial of Charles Darwin's birth and the 50th anniversary of his On the Origin of Species. In that year, the First Presidency, led by Joseph F. Smith as church president, issued a statement declaring that the church, "basing its belief on divine revelation, ancient and modern, proclaims man to be the direct and lineal offspring of Deity."[4] This teaching regarding the origin of man differs from traditional Christianity's doctrine of creation, referred to by some as "creationism", which comprises belief in a fiat creation. In addition, the statement declares human evolution as one of the "theories of men," but falls short of explicitly declaring it untrue or evil. It states:[4]

All [men] who have inhabited the earth since Adam have taken bodies and become souls in like manner. It is held by some that Adam was not the first man upon this earth, and that the original human being was a development from lower orders of the animal creation. These, however, are the theories of men. The word of the Lord declares that Adam was "the first man of all men" (Moses 1:34), and we are therefore in duty bound to regard him as the primal parent of the race ... all men were created in the beginning after the image of God; and whether we take this to mean the spirit or the body, or both, it commits us to the same conclusion: Man began life as a human being, in the likeness of our heavenly Father.

True it is that the body of man enters upon its career as a tiny germ or embryo, which becomes an infant, quickened at a certain stage by the spirit whose tabernacle it is, and the child, after being born, develops into a man. There is nothing in this, however, to indicate that the original man the first of our race, began life as anything less than a man, or less than the human germ or embryo that becomes a man.

The statement did not define the origins of animals other than humans, nor did it venture into any more specifics regarding the origin of man.

In its 1910 Christmas message, the First Presidency made reference to the church's position on science:[5]

Diversity of opinion does not necessitate intolerance of spirit, nor should it embitter or set rational beings against each other. ... Our religion is not hostile to real science. That which is demonstrated, we accept with joy; but vain philosophy, human theory and mere speculations of men, we do not accept nor do we adopt anything contrary to divine revelation or to good common sense.

In 1925, in the midst of the Scopes Trial in Tennessee, a new First Presidency issued an official statement which reaffirmed the doctrine that Adam was the first man upon the earth and that he was created in the image of God.[6] There is a short article in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism which is largely composed of quotes from the 1909 and 1925 statements,[3] and the First Presidency has not issued an official statement on evolution since 1925.[7]

Later endorsement of First Presidency statements

The 1909 and 1925 statements of the First Presidency have been subsequently endorsed by church leaders. In 1988, apostle Boyd K. Packer stated:[8]

Twice the First Presidency has declared the position of the Church on organic evolution. The first, a statement published in 1909 entitled The Origin of Man was signed by Presidents Joseph F. Smith, John R. Winder, and Anthon H. Lund. The other, entitled Mormon View of Evolution, signed by Presidents Heber J. Grant, Anthony W. Ivins, and Charles W. Nibley, was published in 1925. It follows very closely the first statement, indeed quotes directly from it. The doctrines in both of them are consistent and have not changed. ... Statements have been made by other presidents of the Church and members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles which corroborate these official declarations by the First Presidency.

In the February 2002 edition of the LDS Church's official magazine Ensign, the 1909 First Presidency message "The Origin of Man" was reproduced in its entirety with the following heading:[9]

In the early 1900s, questions concerning the Creation of the earth and the theories of evolution became the subject of much public discussion. In the midst of these controversies, the First Presidency issued the following in 1909, which expresses the Church's doctrinal position on these matters. A reprinting of this important First Presidency statement will be helpful as members of the Church study the Old Testament this year.

Official church publications

The subject of evolution has been addressed in several official publications of the LDS Church. While these resources are authorized by the LDS Church for use by its members, the highest form of church doctrine is established by a vote of the church members, a process to which only the standard works have been subjected.[10]

Old Testament Student Manual

The Old Testament Student Manual, published by the Church Educational System, contains several quotes by general authorities as well as academics from a variety of backgrounds (both members of the church and non-members).[11] Several theories are put forth including the following:[12]

The first theory says that the word day is understood as it is used currently and therefore means a period of 24 hours. According to this theory, the earth was created in one week, or 168 hours. Thus, the earth would be approximately six thousand years old .... Very few people, either members of the Church or members of other religions, hold to this theory, since the evidence for longer processes involved in the Creation is substantial.

In the world another theory of how things began is popularly held and widely taught. This theory, that of organic evolution, was generally developed from the writings of Charles Darwin. It puts forth different ideas concerning how life began and where man came from. In relation to this theory, the following statements should help you understand what the Church teaches about the Creation and the origin of man. ... [quoting Joseph Fielding Smith:] "Of course, I think those people who hold to the view that man has come up through all these ages from the scum of the sea through billions of years do not believe in Adam. Honestly I do not know how they can, and I am going to show you that they do not. There are some who attempt to do it but they are inconsistent—absolutely inconsistent, because that doctrine is so incompatible, so utterly out of harmony, with the revelations of the Lord that a man just cannot believe in both.

"... I say most emphatically, you cannot believe in this theory of the origin of man, and at the same time accept the plan of salvation as set forth by the Lord our God. You must choose the one and reject the other, for they are in direct conflict and there is a gulf separating them which is so great that it cannot be bridged, no matter how much one may try to do so."

While it is interesting to note these various theories, officially the Church has not taken a stand on the age of the earth. For reasons best known to Himself, the Lord has not yet seen fit to formally reveal the details of the Creation. Therefore, while Latter-day Saints are commanded to learn truth from many different fields of study (see D&C 88:77–79), an attempt to establish any theory as the official position of the Church is not justifiable.

Doctrine and Covenants and Church History Seminary Teacher Manual

Doctrine and Covenants 77:6 mentions "the seven thousand years of [the earth's] continuance, or its temporal existence", which has been interpreted by Joseph Fielding Smith, Bruce R. McConkie, and other Mormon leaders as a convincing statement that the earth is no more than about six thousand years old (the seventh thousand-year period being the future millennium).[b]

However, in relation to this verse, the manual for seminary teachers explains: "It may be helpful to explain that the 7,000 years refers to the time since the Fall of Adam and Eve. It is not referring to the actual age of the earth including the periods of creation."[14]

Bible Dictionary

In the Bible Dictionary of the LDS Church, the entry for "Fall of Adam" includes the following statement: "Before the fall, Adam and Eve had physical bodies but no blood. There was no sin, no death, and no children among any of the earthly creations."[15] Under the entry "Flesh", it is written: "Since flesh often means mortality, Adam is spoken of as the 'first flesh' upon the earth, meaning he was the first mortal on the earth, all things being created in a nonmortal condition, and becoming mortal through the fall of Adam.[16]

As noted above, the Bible Dictionary is published by the LDS Church, and its preface states: "It [the Bible Dictionary] is not intended as an official or revealed endorsement by the Church of the doctrinal, historical, cultural, and other matters set forth."[17]

Ensign

In 1982, the Ensign, an official periodical of the LDS Church, published an article entitled "Christ and the Creation" by Bruce R. McConkie, which stated that "[m]ortality and procreation and death all had their beginnings with the Fall."[18]

In an earlier edition of the Ensign published in 1980, McConkie stated that "the greatest heresy in the sectarian world ... is that God is a spirit nothingness which fills the immensity of space, and that creation came through evolutionary processes."[19]

Improvement Era

The Improvement Era was an official periodical of the LDS Church between 1897 and 1970. The following entry appeared in the April 1910 edition in the "Priesthood Quorum's Table" section of that periodical, and the answer is attributed to the church's First Presidency.[7][20]

Origin of Man. — "In just what manner did the mortal bodies of Adam and Eve come into existence on this earth?" This question comes from several High Priests' quorums.

Of course, all are familiar with the statements in Genesis 1:26, 27; 2:7; also in the Book of Moses, Pearl of Great Price, 2:27; and in the Book of Abraham 5:7. The latter statement reads: "And the Gods formed man from the dust of the ground, and took his spirit (that is, the man's spirit) and put it into him; and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul."

These are the authentic statements of the scriptures, ancient and modern, and it is best to rest with these, until the Lord shall see fit to give more light on the subject. Whether the mortal bodies of man evolved in natural processes to present perfection, through the direction and power of God; whether the first parents of our generations, Adam and Eve, were transplanted from another sphere, with immortal tabernacles, which became corrupted through sin and the partaking of natural foods, in the process of time; whether they were born here in mortality, as other mortals have been, are questions not fully answered in the revealed word of God.

Unofficial teachings of leaders

Individual leaders of the LDS Church have expressed a variety of opinions on biological evolution.

Roberts–Smith–Talmage dispute

In 1930, B. H. Roberts, the presiding member of the First Council of the Seventy, was assigned by the First Presidency to create a study manual for the Melchizedek priesthood holders of the church.[21] Entitled The Truth, The Way, The Life, the draft of the manual that was submitted to the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles for approval stated that death had been occurring on earth for millions of years prior to the fall of Adam and that human-like pre-Adamites had lived on the earth.[7][22]

On 5 April 1930, Joseph Fielding Smith, a junior member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and the son of a late church president, "vigorously promulgated [the] opposite point of view" in a speech that was published in a church magazine.[21][23] In his widely read speech, Smith taught as doctrine that there had been no death on earth until after the fall of Adam and that there were no "pre-Adamites".[7][21]

In 1931, both Roberts and Smith were permitted to present their views to the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve.[21] After hearing both sides, the First Presidency issued a memo to the general authorities of the church which stated:[24]

Upon the fundamental doctrines of the Church we are all agreed. Our mission is to bear the message of the restored gospel to the people of the world. Leave Geology, Biology, Archaeology, and Anthropology, no one of which has to do with the salvation of the souls of mankind, to scientific research .... We can see no advantage to be gained by a continuation of the discussion ... but on the contrary are certain it would lead to confusion, division and misunderstanding if carried further. Upon one thing we should all be able to agree, namely, that Presidents Joseph F. Smith, John R. Winder and Anthon H. Lund were right when they said: "Adam is the primal parent of our race."

Another of the apostles, geologist James E. Talmage, pointed out that Smith's views could be misinterpreted as the church's official position, since Smith's views were widely circulated in a church magazine but Roberts's views were limited to an internal church document.[7][21] As a result, the First Presidency gave permission to Talmage to give a speech promoting views that were contrary to Smith's.[7] In his speech on August 9, 1931, in the Salt Lake Tabernacle, Talmage taught the same principles that Roberts had originally outlined in his draft manual.[25] Over Smith's objections, the First Presidency authorized a church publication of Talmage's speech in pamphlet form.[7] In 1965, Talmage's speech was reprinted again by the LDS Church in an official church magazine.[26] As Talmage points out in the article, "The outstanding point of difference ... is the point of time which man in some state has lived on this planet." With regards to evolution in general, Talmage challenged many of its aspects in the same speech. He said:

I do not regard Adam as related to—certainly not as descended from—the Neanderthal, the Cro-Magnon, the Peking or the Piltdown man. Adam came as divinely created, created and empowered, and stands as the patriarchal head of his posterity .... Were it true that man is a product of evolution from lower forms, it is but reasonable to believe that he will yet develop into something higher. While it is a fact that eternal progression is a characteristic of man's Divine birthright, as yet we have learned nothing to indicate that man shall develop physically into any other form than that in which he now appears...Believe not those who would make man but little above the brutes, when in truth he is but little below the angels, and if faithful shall pass by the angels and take his place among the exalted sons of God. ...

Evolution is true so far as it means development, and progress, and advancement in all the works of God .... At best the conception of the development of man's body from the lower forms through evolutionary processes has been but a theory, an unproved hypothesis. Theories may be regarded as the scaffolding upon which the builder stands while placing the blocks of truth in position. It is a grave error to mistake the scaffolding for the wall, the flimsy and temporary structure for the stable and permanent. The scaffolding serves but a passing purpose, important though it be, and is removed as soon as the walls of that part of the edifice of knowledge have been constructed. Theories have their purpose, and are indispensable, but they must never be mistaken for demonstrated facts. The Holy Scriptures should not be discredited by theories of men; they cannot be discredited by fact and truth.

Roberts died in 1933 and The Truth, The Way, The Life remained unpublished until 1994, when it was published by an independent publisher.[11]

Although it is apparent that Roberts and Smith may have had differing views on whether there was death before the fall of Adam, it is evident that they may have had similar views against organic evolution as the explanation for the origin of man. For example, Roberts wrote that "the theory of evolution as advocated by many modern scientists lies stranded upon the shore of idle speculation. There is one other objection to be urged against the theory of evolution before leaving it; it is contrary to the revelations of God."[27] Roberts further criticized the theories of evolution as follows:[28]

As before stated, the claims of evolution, as explained by philosophers of the Darwin school, are contrary to all experience so far as man's knowledge extends. The great law of nature is that every plant, herb, fish, beast and man produces its kind; and though there may be slight variation from that law, those variations soon run out either by reverting to the original stock, or else by becoming incapable of producing offspring, and thus become extinct.

Man, His Origin and Destiny

In 1954, when he was President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, Smith wrote at length about his views on evolution in his book Man, His Origin and Destiny.[29] In response to an inquiry about the book from the head of the Geology Department at the University of Utah, church president David O. McKay affirmed that "the Church has officially taken no position" on evolution, that Smith's book "is not approved by the Church", and that the book is composed entirely of Smith's "views for which he alone is responsible".[30]

Bruce R. McConkie

In his popular and controversial reference book Mormon Doctrine, general authority Bruce R. McConkie devoted ten pages to his entry on "Evolution".[31] After canvassing statements of past church leaders, the standard works, and the 1909 First Presidency statement, McConkie concluded that "[t]here is no harmony between the truths of revealed religion and the theories of organic evolution."[32] The evolution entry in Mormon Doctrine quotes extensively from Smith's Man, His Origin and Destiny.[c] McConkie characterized the intellect of those Latter-day Saints who believe in evolution while simultaneously having knowledge of LDS Church doctrines on life and creation as "weak and puerile".[32]

McConkie included a disclaimer in Mormon Doctrine stating that he alone was responsible for the doctrinal and scriptural interpretations.[33]

Statements of Presidents of the Church

Every statement by a President of the LDS Church does not necessarily constitute church doctrine, but a statement by a church president is generally regarded by church membership to be the most authoritative declaration of doctrine that can be made by a person acting alone.

Brigham Young

Brigham Young, the second president of the LDS Church, stated:[34]

In these respects we differ from the Christian world, for our religion will not clash with or contradict the facts of science in any particular ... whether the Lord found the earth empty and void, whether he made it out of nothing or out of the rude elements; or whether he made it in six days or in as many millions of years, is and will remain a matter of speculation in the minds of men unless he give revelation on the subject. If we understood the process of creation there would be no mystery about it, it would be all reasonable and plain, for there is no mystery except to the ignorant.

Young made the following statement two years later: [35][36][37]

We have enough and to spare, at present in these mountains, of schools where young infidels are made because the teachers are so tender-footed that they dare not mention the principles of the gospel to their pupils, but have no hesitancy in introducing into the classroom the theories of Huxley, of Darwin, or of Mill and the false political economy which contends against co-operation and the United Order. This course I am resolutely and uncompromisingly opposed to, and I hope to see the day when the doctrines of the gospel will be taught in all our schools, when the revelations of the Lord will be our texts, and our books will be written and manufactured by ourselves and in our own midst. As a beginning in this direction I have endowed the Brigham Young Academy at Provo.

John Taylor

John Taylor was the first president of the LDS Church to comment directly on Darwinian theory. In his 1882 book Mediation and Atonement, Taylor stated:[38]

The animal and vegetable creations are governed by certain laws, and are composed of certain elements peculiar to themselves. This applies to man, to the beasts, fowls, fish and creeping things, to the insects and to all animated nature .... These principles do not change, as represented by evolutionists of the Darwinian school, but the primitive organisms of all living beings exist in the same form as when they first received their impress from the Maker. ... [Man] did not originate from a chaotic mass of matter, moving or inert, but came forth possessing, in an embryonic state, all the faculties and powers of a God.

Joseph F. Smith

Soon after the First Presidency's 1909 statement, Joseph F. Smith professed in an editorial that "the church itself has no philosophy about the modus operandi employed by the Lord in His creation of the world."[39]

However, in the very same month (and in the wake of the evolution controversy that had recently ensued at Brigham Young University), Smith published and signed a statement wherein he explained some of the conflicts between revealed religion and the theories of evolution. He wrote:[40]

Recently there was some trouble ... in one of the leading Church schools—the training college of the Brigham Young University—where three of the professors advanced certain theories on evolution as applied to the origin of man, and certain opinions on "higher criticism," as conclusive and demonstrated truths. This was done although it is well known that evolution and the "higher criticism" ... are in conflict on some matters with the scriptures, including some modern revelation. ... The Church, on the contrary, holds to the definite authority of divine revelation which must be the standard; and that, as so-called "science" has changed from age to age in its deductions, and as divine revelation is truth, and must abide forever, views as to the lesser should conform to the positive statements of the greater. ... Philosophic theories of life have their place and use, but it is not in the classes of the Church schools, and particularly are they out of place here or anywhere else when they seek to supplant the revelations of God.

A 1910 editorial in an LDS Church magazine that enumerates various possibilities for creation is usually attributed to Smith or to the First Presidency.[7] Included in the listed possibilities were the ideas that Adam and Eve: (1) "evolved in natural processes to present perfection"; (2) were "transplanted [to earth] from another sphere"; or (3) were "born here ... as other mortals have been."[41]

David O. McKay

In a 1952 speech to students at Brigham Young University, McKay used the theory of evolution as an example while suggesting that science can "leave [a student] with his soul unanchored". He stated:[42]

There is a perpetual design permeating all purposes of creation. On this thought, science again leads a student up to a certain point and sometimes leaves him with his soul unanchored. ... For example, evolution's beautiful theory of the creation of the world offers many perplexing problems to the inquiring mind. Inevitably, a teacher who denies divine agency in creation, who insists there is no intelligent purpose in it, will impress the student with the thought that all may be chance. I say, that no youth should be so led without a counterbalancing thought. ... God is at the helm. God is the Creator of the earth. He is the Father of our souls and spirits. No question about it. You have your testimony—if you haven't you shouldn't be on the faculty—that God lives and Jesus is the Christ, and the purpose of creation is theirs."

In the April 1968 church general conference, McKay's son David Lawrence McKay read a message on his father's behalf that was an edited version of the 1952 speech, including the omission of the word "beautiful" when describing the theory of evolution.[43]

In 1954, McKay quoted the Old Testament while affirming to members of the BYU faculty that living things only reproduce "after their kind". He said:[44]

The stern fact of life is that animals, as other living things, can grow and produce their kind only in accordance with fixed laws of nature and the divine command, "Let the earth bring forth the living creatures after his kind, cattle and creeping things, and the beast of the earth after his kind." (Genesis 1:24)

Spencer W. Kimball

At a 1975 church women's conference, church president Spencer W. Kimball stated, "we don't know exactly how [Adam and Eve's] coming into this world happened, and when we're able to understand it the Lord will tell us."[45]

Ezra Taft Benson

As president of the church, Ezra Taft Benson, published teachings about the theories of evolution. In 1988, he counseled members of the church to use the Book of Mormon to counter the theories of evolution. He wrote that "we have not been using the Book of Mormon as we should. Our homes are not as strong unless we are using it to bring our children to Christ. Our families may be corrupted by worldly trends and teachings unless we know how to use the book to expose and combat the falsehoods in ... organic evolution.[46]

Also in 1988, Benson published another book that included his earlier warnings[47] about the "deceptions" of Charles Darwin. He wrote:[48]

As a watchman on the tower, I feel to warn you that one of the chief means of misleading our youth and destroying the family unit is our educational institutions. There is more than one reason why the Church is advising our youth to attend colleges close to their homes where institutes of religion are available. It gives the parents the opportunity to stay close to their children, and if they become alerted and informed, these parents can help expose some of the deceptions of men like ... Charles Darwin.

Gordon B. Hinckley

In a 1997 speech at an Institute of Religion in Ogden, Utah, church president Gordon B. Hinckley said:[49]

People ask me every now and again if I believe in evolution. I tell them I am not concerned with organic evolution. I do not worry about it. I passed through that argument long ago.

Also in 1997, Hinckley published his earlier teachings[50][51] wherein he contrasts "organic evolution" with the evolution and improvement of individuals:[52]

None of us ... knows enough. The learning process is an endless process. We must read, we must observe, we must assimilate, and we must ponder that to which we expose our minds. I believe in evolution, not organic evolution, as it is called, but in the evolution of the mind, the heart, and the soul of man. I believe in improvement. I believe in growth.

In the late 1990s, Hinckley recalled his university studies of evolution to reporter Larry A. Witham: "'Studied all about it. Didn't worry me then. Doesn't worry me now.'"[53] In 2004, an official church magazine printed a quote from Hinckley from a 1983 speech where he expressed a similar sentiment.[54]

See also

Notes

Footnotes
  1. ^ The entry on evolution in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism was approved by apostles Neal A. Maxwell and Dallin H. Oaks.[2]
  2. ^ Joseph Fielding Smith: "We have evidence beyond dispute that Adam was driven out of the Garden of Eden about 6,000 years ago, or perhaps a short time less. ... In [Doctrine and Covenants] section 77:6–15, we have more information in relation to the opening of these seals [i.e., the seven seals mentioned in the Book of Revelation], with the following significant detail: 'Q. What are we to understand by the book which John saw, which was sealed on the back with seven seals? A. We are to understand that it contains the revealed will, mysteries, and works of God; the hidden things of his economy concerning this earth during the seven thousand years of its continuance, or its temporal existence.'"[13]
  3. ^ McConkie was Smith's son-in-law and the two had largely compatible doctrinal views.
Works cited
  1. ^ a b "Mormonism and science/Evolution/Official stance".
  2. ^ Evenson, William E.; Jeffrey, Duane E. (2005), Mormonism and Evolution: The Authoritative LDS Statements, Salt Lake City, Utah: Greg Kofford Books, p. 35, ISBN 1589580931, OCLC 62090739
  3. ^ a b Evenson, William E. (1992). "Evolution". In Ludlow, Daniel H (ed.). Encyclopedia of Mormonism. New York: Macmillan Publishing. p. 478. ISBN 0-02-879602-0. OCLC 24502140.
  4. ^ a b Smith, Joseph F.; Winder, John R.; Lund, Anthon H. (November 1909), "The Origin of Man", Improvement Era, 13 (1): 75–81. Online reprint by the Biology Department of the College of Life Sciences, Brigham Young University
  5. ^ Smith, Joseph F.; Winder, John R.; Lund, Anthon H. (17 December 1910), "Words in Season from the First Presidency", Deseret Evening News, sec. 1, p. 3. Online reprint by the Biology Department of the College of Life Sciences, Brigham Young University
  6. ^ First Presidency (Heber J. Grant, Anthony W. Ivins, Charles W. Nibley), "'Mormon' View of Evolution", Deseret News, 1925-07-18, reprinted in Improvement Era 28:1090–91 (September 1925).
  7. ^ a b c d e f g h William E. Evenson and Duane E. Jeffrey (2005). Mormonism and Evolution: The Authoritative LDS Statements (Salt Lake City, Utah: Greg Kofford Books) ISBN 1-58958-093-1.
  8. ^ Boyd K. Packer (1988), "The Law and the Light", Book of Mormon Symposium, BYU, (30 October 1988).
  9. ^ Smith, Joseph F.; Winder, John R.; Lund, Anthon H. (February 2002), "The Origin of Man", Ensign: 26–30.
  10. ^ B. H. Roberts, "Official Doctrine", sermon of 10 July 1921, Deseret News (23 July 1921) section 4:7.
  11. ^ a b Tim S. Reid (1997). "Mormons and evolution: A history of B. H. Roberts and his attempt to reconcile science and religion," Ph.D. dissertation, Oregon State University.
  12. ^ Church Educational System (2003, 3d ed.). "Genesis 1–2: The Creation", Old Testament Student Manual Genesis – 2 Samuel (Salt Lake City, Utah: LDS Church) ISBN 1-81301-212-1.
  13. ^ Smith, Joseph Fielding (1954–56), "The Earth, Its Creation and Destiny", in McConkie, Bruce R. (ed.), Doctrines of Salvation: Sermons and Writings of Joseph Fielding Smith, vol. 1, Bookcraft, p. 19
  14. ^ Church Educational System (2013). Doctrine and Covenants and Church History Seminary Teacher Manual. Salt Lake City, Utah: LDS Church. p. 280.
  15. ^ "Fall of Adam", Bible Dictionary (Salt Lake City, Utah: LDS Church).
  16. ^ "Flesh", Bible Dictionary (Salt Lake City, Utah: LDS Church). pp. 670, 675.
  17. ^ Bible Dictionary (Salt Lake City, Utah: LDS Church). p. 599.
  18. ^ Bruce R. McConkie, "Christ and the Creation," Ensign, June 1982, p. 9.
  19. ^ Bruce R. McConkie, "This Generation Shall Have My Word through You," Ensign, June 1980, p. 54.
  20. ^ Improvement Era, April 10, 1910, vol. 13, p. 570
  21. ^ a b c d e Richard Sherlock, "'We Can See No Advantage to a Continuation of the Discussion': The Roberts/Smith/Talmage Affair," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 13(3):63–78 (Fall 1980).
  22. ^ B. H. Roberts (John W. Welch ed.) (1996, 2d ed.) The Way, The Truth, The Life: An Elementary Treatise on Theology (Provo Utah: BYU Studies).
  23. ^ Joseph Fielding Smith, "Faith Leads to a Fulness of Truth and Righteousness", Utah Genealogical and Historical Magazine 21:145–158 (October 1930).
  24. ^ First Presidency (Heber J. Grant, Anthony W. Ivins, Charles W. Nibley), "Memo from the First Presidency to the Council of the Twelve, the First Council of Seventy, and the Presiding Bishopric", 1931-04-05; reprinted in William E. Evenson and Duane E. Jeffrey (2005). Mormonism and Evolution: The Authoritative LDS Statements (Salt Lake City, Utah: Greg Kofford Books) pp. 54–67.
  25. ^ James E. Talmage, "The Earth and Man", Deseret News, 1931-11-21; reprinted in pamphlet form by the LDS Church in 1931.
  26. ^ James E. Talmage, "The Earth and Man", Instructor 100:474–77 (December 1965).
  27. ^ B. H. Roberts, The Gospel and Man's Relationship to Deity, pp. 265–67.
  28. ^ B. H. Roberts, The Gospel and Man's Relationship to Deity, pp. 279–82.
  29. ^ Joseph Fielding Smith (1954). Man, His Origin and Destiny (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book).
  30. ^ Letter from David O. McKay to William Lee Stokes, 1957-02-15, reprinted in William Lee Stokes, "An Official Position", Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 12(4):90–92 at p. 91.
  31. ^ Bruce R. McConkie (1966, 2d ed.). Mormon Doctrine (Salt Lake City, Utah: Bookcraft) pp. 247–56.
  32. ^ a b Bruce R. McConkie (1966, 2d ed.). Mormon Doctrine (Salt Lake City, Utah: Bookcraft) p. 256 [emphasis in original].
  33. ^ Horne, Dennis B. (2000). Bruce R. McConkie: Highlights From His Life & Teachings. Eborn Books. ISBN 1-890718-01-7.
  34. ^ Brigham Young, (May 14, 1871) Journal of Discourses 14:116: http://en.fairmormon.org/Journal_of_Discourses/14/16#116
  35. ^ Brigham Young, "Letter to his son Mr. Willard Young", [Salt Lake City, Utah, 14 April 1873].
  36. ^ Dean C. Jessee, Letters of Brigham Young to His Sons, [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 1974], p. 200.
  37. ^ Brigham Young Academy (2009). Brigham Young's Vision For Education. Retrieved October 18, 2009 from Brigham Young Academy website: http://www.brighamyoungacademy.org.
  38. ^ John Taylor (1882). An Examination Into and an Elucidation of the Great Principle of the Mediation and Atonement of Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret News) p. 160.
  39. ^ Juvenile Instructor, 46 (4), 208-209 (April 1911).
  40. ^ Improvement Era vol. 14, p. 548 (April 1911).
  41. ^ Improvement Era vol. 13, p. 570 (April 1910).
  42. ^ David O. McKay, "A Message for L.D.S. College Youth", 1952-10-08, printed in 1952 BYU Speeches of the Year (Provo, Utah: Brigham Young University) pp. 5–6.
  43. ^ David O. McKay, Conference Report, Apr. 1968, p. 92.
  44. ^ David O. McKay, "Some Fundamental Objectives of a Church University", BYU Faculty Workshop, September 17, 1954. Published in Deseret News, 25 September 1954.
  45. ^ Spencer W. Kimball, "The Blessings and Responsibilities of Womanhood," Ensign, March 1976, pp. 70–72.
  46. ^ Ezra Taft Benson, A Witness and a Warning: A Modern-Day Prophet Testifies of the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book, 1988) p. 6.
  47. ^ Ezra Taft Benson, God, Family, Country: Our Three Great Loyalties (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book, 1974] p. 225.
  48. ^ Ezra Taft Benson, Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson (Salt Lake City, Utah: Bookcraft, 1988] p. 307.
  49. ^ Gordon B. Hinckley, 1997-04-15, reprinted in Gordon B. Hinckley (1999). Discourses of President Gordon B. Hinckley, Volume 1: 1995-1999 (Salt Lake City, Utah: Deseret Book) p. 379.
  50. ^ Gordon B. Hinckley, "Four Imperatives for Religious Educators" (address to religious educators, 15 September 1978).
  51. ^ Gordon B. Hinckley, “Four Imperatives for Religious Educators,” Religious Educator 5, no. 2 (2004): 1–7.
  52. ^ Gordon B. Hinckley, Teachings of Gordon B. Hinckley, p. 298.
  53. ^ Quoted in Larry A. Witham (2002). Where Darwin Meets the Bible: Creationists and Evolutionists in America (New York: Oxford University Press) p. 177.
  54. ^ Gordon B. Hinckley, Salt Lake Institute of Religion speech, 1983-11-05, first printed as Gordon B. Hinckley, "'God Hath Not Given Us the Spirit of Fear'," Ensign, October 1984, pp. 2–6, quoted in "My Answer to Evolution," New Era, May 2004, pp. 36–37.

References

Further reading

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mormon_views_on_evolution&oldid=707965558"