HOW AN LDS BIOLOGIST RESOLVES THE EVOLUTION "CONFLICT"

A. LESTER ALLEN

DEAN, COLLEGE OF BIOLOGY & AGRICULTUREBRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY

The title of this article assumes that there is an evolution "conflict".

For most members of the LDS Church and for most LDS biologists there is no

problem. Occasionally, however, we find statements made by members of the

Church which seem to generate conflict when compared with the propositions of

scientists concerning the theory of evolution. The purpose of this article

is to present a series of related ideas that may suggest one possibility for

harmonizing the doctrinal interpretations of inspired Church leaders and

the factual perceptions of learned scientists.Another word in the title needs to be clarified; this is the article

"an". I do not presume to be "the" LDS biologist. The views expressed are minefor which I, alone, am responsible; although I trust that they are compatible

with Church doctrine.

I will not discuss evolution in detail. Readers who are not informed in thissubject are urged to read other. articles in this text. I wi11 assume that the

theory of evolution includes the formation of the earth, biogenesis (the

creation of life), and the increasing diversity and complexity of life forms to

include all of its representatives, living and fossil, including man. The

theory proposes that the process of natural selection and genetic engineering,

operating through the laws of nature, has brought about the evolution of the

entire world of life.

Evolutionists may be divided into two categories; mechanists and

vitalists. Mechanists assume that the laws of nature are inherent in matter;

that the nature of matter without divine intervention brings about so-called:

natural law. A logical sequel to this reasoning leads to the assumption that-

not only

has man evolved, but also has his concept of God; that God exists only in

the mind of man, created by Him to satisfy His "evolved yearnings".

The vitalists assume that living things are endowed with a special life

principle or spirit; the deistic vitalists believe that God controls the

physical manifestations of the bodies through their spirits, and further

assume that God uses natural law to bring about His purposes. This type of

vitalist-evolutionist assumes that God used evolutionary processes to

prepare the earth for the habitation of man (Talmage, 1931x). In preparing

this article, I have assumed this possibility, recognizing, however, thatthe

Lord will give us the complete picture at the time of His second coming

(Doc: & Cov. 101:33).

DOCTRINAL LANDMARKS

There are certain characteristic basic concepts of our religion that are

incontrovertible or essential to the gospel and which I, an LDS biologist,

must accept. Here, are seven of these doctrinal landmarks which must always

be kept in view:

1. God is the creator. He created the earth, all of its inhabitants,

and all that pertains to the earth. Joseph Smith said that the

scriptural word "create" means organize. We understand that God

did not create matter or its natural laws but employs them to

organize and govern his creations.

2. All creatures, including man, have spirit counterparts. Theanalytical mind of the scientist may tend to reject that whichcannot be measured, but the existence of spirit bodies must beaccepted though we cannot perceive them

3. Man is distinct from the animals in that the spirit in his body is the direct, literal offspring of God. Man is more intelligent thanany of the animals and is capable of abstract reasoning well beyond

that of any animal, but the essential difference is much more distinct

than just the degree of intelligence. Our spirits are God's children,

whereas the spirit bodies of animals are not his literal progeny. The

man-like beings that are said to have existed upon the earth prior to

the mortal advent of Adam may have looked like human beings, and perhaps

they drew pictures on cave walls and performed a number of other intelli

gent acts, but they were animals to us, not human beings of Adam's

lineage. What is the difference? The human spirit confers free

agency; the animal spirit does not. Animals have instincts that may

be marvelously refined, as displayed in bird migration or care of the

young, but these instincts do not involve the moral decision-making

of good versus evil.

4. Adam was the first human being upon this earth--the first of our

race, whose spirit body was the literal offspring of God. The other

prehistoric creatures on the temporal earth that biologists have

classified as Homo sapiens did not possess that combination of Adam's

physical lineage and God's-spiritual lineage that are requisite for

their classification as human beings of our race. There appears to be

ample evidence of the existence of other prehistoric races of

Homo sapiens, but we know nothing of the precise relationship between

them and the Creator, or the lineage of their spirit bodies. Many

Church. spokesmen have said that Adam was the first human being on'

the earth (.4ee, 1972) and we LDS biologists agree with that.

5. Adam and Eve and all of God's creations in the Garden were in an

immortal state (2 Nephi 2:22).

6. Adam and Eve fell from the immortal conditions of Eden to the

temporal or telestial state in which we now live. This fall was a

miraculous event--a change which we could not monitor or understand

because it involved a change from an immortal state to a mortal

existence.

7. Christ provided for the resurrection from death and the atonement for

sin. This must be explicitly declared by the LDS evolutionist who would

avoid an impasse with those who claim that if one believes in evolution

he denies Christ and the saving atonement. There are numerous devout

LDS scientists who believe that Christ's mission and the

general theories of evolution are compatible.

If one has sincere faith in these doctrinal landmarks he can study

evolution without fear of having his LDS religion weakened or destroyed by

any theories or facts.

LIMITATIONS OF OUR PERCEPTION OF REALITY

Our mortal minds are limited to the extent that we can comprehend only

certain aspects of reality. We speak of space, time, matter and energy as

if we know quite a lot about them; but how little we really "know". The

following examples will clarify this:

Let us first consider space. We certainly do not share much of what God

knows about space. Is it infinite in boundary; does it curve back upon

itself? Mathematicians can approach these questions in terms that almost elude

our temporal senses and which cannot easily be perceived as reality.

It is easier to quote the Lord's statement in Doc. & Cov. 88:37, than it is to

understand what He meant: "And there are many kingdoms; for there is no space in

which there is no kingdom; and there is no kingdom in which there is nospace....."

Another limitation that we have is in our concept of time. The lord

has told us that our time is measured only to man in mortality. After the

creation of Adam and Eve our earthly system of time began to be measured to

man, (Abraham 5:13) and that measurement will cease as we approach the

millennium (Doc. & Cov. 84:100). It is a parameter of our mortality.

Pauli (1949) gives an example that will demonstrate our limitations. Suppose,

for instance, that we imagine a "being" moving onto our earth whose entire

lifespan is only 1/100 of second. Ten thousand "years" for him, generation after

generation, would be only one second of our time. Suppose this imaginary being

comes up to a quiet pond in the forest where you are seated. You have just

tossed in a rock and are watching the ripples. A leaf is fluttering from the

sky and a bird is swooping over the water. He would find everything absolutely

motionless. Looking at you, he would say: "In all recorded history nothing

has changed. My father and his father before him have seen that everything is

absolutely still. This creature called -man has never had a heartbeat and has

never breathed. The water is standing in stationary waves as if someone

had thrown a rock into it; it seems frozen. A leaf is suspended in air, and

a bird has stopped right over the meddle of the pond. There is no movement.

Gravity is suspended." The concept of time of this imaginary being, so differ-

ent from ours, would give him an entirely different perspective of what we call

reality. On the other hand, picture another imaginary creature for

whom one "second" of his time is 10,000 years of our time. What would the pond be

like to him? By the time he sat down beside it, taking 15,000 of our years to do

so, the pond would have vanished. Individual human beings would be invisible,

since our entire life-span would be only 1/100 of one of his "seconds." The

surface of the earth would be undulating as mountains are built up and worn down.

The forest would persist but a few minutes and then disappear. His concept of

"reality" would be much different than our own.

Realizing that our concept of time is very limited, let us look at the

doctrine of uniformitarianism as opposed to catastrophism. The former proposes

that processes on the earth have proceeded uniformly through millions or

billions of years without any great, sudden catastrophes. The latter proposes

that there have been sudden and major changes in the earth. These

catastrophes may have included rapid continental shifts with

consequential flooding, or interaction of the earth with other planets,

or other events of similar cataclysmic proportion. As we consider the possible limitation of our concepts of time, we should

not immediately reject either of these doctrines. Perhaps the geologic history

of the earth includes elements of both concepts. I suggest that we adopt a

uniformitarian philosophy unless we find a valid reason for not doing so.

However, let us not limit the miracle-performing ability of the Lord and say

that there could have been no such event as the Noachian flood, or the

tremendous earth-remodeling events that occurred in Central America at the time

of the

crucifixion of the Savior as recorded in the Book of Mormon (3 Nephi 8).

Let us not limit God in his ability to-perform miracles by our unqualified

acceptance of the concept of uniformitarianism.

Another conceptual problem that we have is with the nature of matter. What

1s this solid desk? Are my flesh and bone solid? Physicists tell us that all

matter is composed of tiny building blocks called atoms, each about a trillionth

of an inch in size. When we examine the substructure of an atom we find that it

is composed of still tinier particles--electrons and a nucleus. The electrons

exist in energy levels or "'orbits" around the nucleus and, by holding out

neighboring atoms, give a sense of solidity. Yet, between the .. electrons

and the nucleus there is as much "empty" space relative to their

size, as there is "empty" space in the solar system between the sun and the

earth. Putting it another way, if the nucleus of an atom were the size of

a beebee on the fifty yard line of the Los Angeles Coliseum, the electrons

would be other beebees located out in the topmost rows of bleachers. Therefore,

"solid" matter is mostly empty space. The astrophysicists have a theory that.

when some old stars collapse they form neutron stars. This matter has condensed,

eliminating most of the intra-atomic space. A teaspoonful of such a star

would weigh trillions of tons on our earth.

We see, therefore, that what we perceive as the "reality" of solid

matter cannot really be comprehended with our mortal senses. If we cannot

fully comprehend temporal matter, how can we understand spiritual matter,

which Joseph Smith said exists in a "more fine or pure" state (Doc. & Cov.

131:7)_? And if we can't understand either of these, how can we understand

what matter was like in the Garden of Eden? We are told that Adam and Eve and

all creatures in the Garden existed in an immortal state. Somehow the immortal

matter must have been different from our temporal matter, at least to our

perception. All of the creatures in the Garden, including man, were not subject

to death ands would have remained in that state forever had there been

no fall C2 Nephi 2:22). Could we perceive matter in this immortal state if it

were to be placed before us today? Could we feel it or touch it? Very

possibly we could not.

Consider the possibility that the Garden and all of its inhabitants in a

specialized, immortal state could have co-existed with the temporal earth. Recall

that, after the fall, Adam and Eve were cast out of the Garden into this temporal

world, they then could hear the voice of God but could no longer-see him (,Moses

5:41. The fall of Adam and Eve consisted of a change from an

immortal to a mortal state (Smith, Joseph Fielding, 1954, p. 543). Perhaps

the earth had been existing in its temporal condition, being prepared for the

habitation of man, and Adam and Eve were created Wan immortal state and

placed in the co-existent Garden. Why, therefore, look for fossil ancestors

of those immortal beings on our temporal earth? Why consider whether Cro

Magnon Man was the father of the body of Adam? These two classes of beings

(Cro-Magnon and Adam) might well have been in different states of matter.

We should assume some divine intervention as Adam and Eve were transformed

from the immortal form of matter into this mortal sphere, the same as that

inhabited by the telestial creatures that have been identified by their

fossil remains and cultural artifacts. If we cannot comprehend even what

temporal matter is, how can we justify ourselves in making any statements

about the physical origins of Adam and Eve and the animals in the Garden, and

whether, for instance, the lion could have eaten straw as the ox does? Let us

leave much latitude for the Lord to have done things that would be miraculous

to our senses, and, at the same time, not attempt to define the prehistoric

events of our mortal earth with scriptural accounts of an immortal sphere. In

addition to space, time and matter, a fourth "knowable" to be added to the list

is energy. We can use it, talk about it and measure some of its aspects, but we

don't fully understand it. A form of energy which completely eludes our

comprehension is that which we use when doing God's work--priesthood. We have

seen manifestations of priesthood power in our own lives which are miraculous

events that cannot be comprehended. We do not demand a complete understanding

of these manifestations, and we should not fully understand all of the actions

of the Lord as he prepared the earth for the habitation of man.

Let us not limit God in His workings to our perceptions of space, time,

matter or energy.

Another limitation placed upon our mental understanding is how spirit and matter

interact with each other. We know that there is a spirit associated

with each body (Moses 3:5)., that the two are related in their activities

and that one influences the other. How does your spirit control your body?

Is it at the atomic, the molecular or cellular level, or in some manner indefin-

able to our mortal senses? You are a human because you have the spirit of a

human within your body and because you have inherited genetic instructions from

human parents, but what is the interrelationship between the two in the control

of the growth and activities of the body?

Perhaps it would be helpful to LDS scholars as we study the vast assemblage of

all the organisms that have ever lived upon the earth. and study the intricate

interrelationships between them to keep in mind that the Lord created them all

spiritually before they were on the earth. The myriad changes in form and

functions may all have been manifestations of the patterns of the pre-created

spirits. No evolutionary changes need to be considered as random or accidental

developments.

ROLE OF SCIENCE

When a scientist examines the fundamental laws of nature to answer a

question, instead of gaining a complete answer he opens the door to other vistas

with more unanswered questions. Each discovery opens the door to vast realms

where new research can be carried out and where man can further see the handiwork

of God.

I think that the Lord is not displeased with science or with scientists. It

appears that the Lord is using man to help prepare the earth for the millennium.

Since the advent of Joseph Smith,, knowledge has been poured out on the earth

-10

and has been increasing exponentially. Prior to the time of Joseph Smith,

travel, communication and medicine were much as they had been for hundreds or

thousands of years, but since that time great changes have occurred. The Lord

is the source of all truth known to man, whether secular or revealed. We under

stand that the Lord helps enlighten the minds of intelligent scientists who seek

after answers, and any sincere, well-trained seeker after truth may discover

truth in his own field of endeavor.

The Lord permits man to use the discoveries of science for righteous

purposes. Satellites beam television broadcasts of our Church conference over the

hairplanes take our prophets rapidly to various locations, and computers are used

to keep records of the millions of Church members. The Lord is apparently not

displeased with what man has been able to accomplish in the realms of science, but

is displeased with men who use those accomplishments for unrighteous purposes.

EVOLUTION

Next, let us examine some of the conflicts that may arise from a study of

evolution. One of the most devastating, anti-Christ conclusions of some who

believe in evolutionary theory is the proposal that not only has man evolved but

that he, in turn, has created and evolved. the concept of God. The following

example is extracted from an article by Strickberger (1973) and illustrates how

challenging some evolutionary ideas can be when misused by theologically

unenlightened men to support atheistic concepts. It demonstrates the conflicts

that seem inevitably to arise between the concepts of apostate religion and

atheistic science, and may lead the rational student (who is not well-grounded in

LOS doctrine} to conclude that atheistic interpretations of evolution provides

better answers than religion.

"In general, religion develops in a culture as an expression of attempts to deal with those aspects of experience which cannot be controlled or understood ... In the earliest stages of religion, the forces of nature are directly endowed with the spirits of animals and humans ... From individual gods for each element of nature it is only one-further step to have gods which can be ranked in respect to their power, and then only a further step to have a God of gods, such as Jove, Jehovah,, Brahma, Krishna, and others ... Evolution is a part of the world view that every thinking human needs in order to help his species survive in a human way. Man must learn*to set his own directions and goals."

The author then moves to a general denunciation of religion, including

a list of some of the problems with which, in his understanding, religion

cannot cope:

"Abortion, population control, the transplantation of organs between humans, euthanasia, the transplantation of fertilized eggs between mothers, artificial insemination, the cloning of human fetuses,, the control of aging, genetic control of the human gene pool, etc."

The author continues his denunciation of religion:

"...from their past history, it is doubtful that religious institutions, as we now see them can lead us...Religion, in fact, developed considerable immoralities of its own-The immorality of arrogance, that there is a revealed truth which each religion usually claims as its unique possession ... the religious immorality of conceiving man as a goal of creation ... there is often, too, the immorality... of religion attempting to rigidly restrict human feelings, and of helping to instill the idea that human sexual behavior is shameful."

The above quotations from an irreligious evolutionist clearly exemplifythe patterns of faulty reasoning that are capable of leading the uninspired

student to abandon religion in favor of evolution as a basis for moral judgment.

Another problem that may arise from the uninspired study of evolution

is the attempt to limit God's power by-demanding that he use only mechanisms of

which man can conceive. Henry Eyring has quipped (Paraphrasing a scientist): "I

don't see how God could have done it. It's so complicated I can hardly figure it

out myself."

-12

SCRIPTURAL STANDARDS

I shall now present some scriptures and doctrinal statements of

Church leaders which relate to evolution:

I call the reader's attention to the very interesting paper in this

volume by Dr. Duane Jeffery entitled "Seers, Savants and Evolution--The

Uncomfortable Interface." It is a history of the views of evolution by the

Church leaders. Some of the following material has been extracted from his

paper.In 1909, there was published the first formal statement on evolution

from the First Presidency entitled "The Origin of Man" (Smith, Winder & Lund,

1909). Following is a short extract:

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

This is a very clear statement and has often been quoted as an official

pronouncement against evolution. The following year, President Smith and

Edward H. Anderson, as editors of the Improvement Era published a second

statement which adds an amplified new view of the official Church viewpoint

Smith & Anderson, 1910)

"Whether the-mortal bodies of man evolved in natural processes topresent perfection, through the direction and power of God; whetherthe first parents of our generation, Adam and Eve, were transplantedfrom another sphere, with. immortal tabernacles, which becamecorrupted through sin and the partaking of natural foods, fn theprocess of time, whether they were born here in mortality, as othermortals have been, are questions not fully answered In the revealedword of God."

These were landmark declarations by the First Presidency. The above

statements, particularly the first, have often been quoted, but the official

position of the LDS Church has never been re-defined.

-13

Two decades later there developed two opposing points of view. One was

championed by Joseph Fielding Smith, an Apostle, and the other by

Brigham H. Roberts, senior member of the First Council of Seventy. They

opposed each other on the question of whether there was death on the earth,i.e.,

living and dying of mortal creatures, before the fall of Adam. Brother Roberts

assumed that there were pre-Adamic beings whereas Elder Smith, basing his

argument on 2 Nephi 2:22, said there was no death before the fall and,therefore,

there could have been no evolution; the fossils have to be interpreted inanother

way. Each prepared his position paper and presented it to the Quorum of the

Twelve and First Presidency. Primary research documents from that period

Jeffery, op.cit.) show that several meetings were spent on the subject.

Finally, the First Presidency indicated that the argument should not becontinued

further. They then made the following statement of significant neutrality:

"The statement made by Elder Smith that the existence of pre-Adamitesis not a doctrine of the Church is true. It is just as true thatthe statement: 'there were no pre-Adamites upon the earth', is not adoctrine of the Church. Neither side of the controversy has beenaccepted as a doctrine at all."

Elder James E. Talmage of the Quorum of the Twelve had assisted President

Joseph F. Smith in the formulation of the 1909 statement, and took an active

interest in the Smith-Roberts controversy. His Journal (Talmage, 1931b)

records:

"The conception embodied fn the belief of many to the effect thatthere were no such pre-Adamite races, and that there was no deathupon the earth prior to Adam's fall is likewise declared to be nodoctrine of the Church.” April 7, 1931).

Elder Talmage further recorded in his journal (Nov. 21, 1931) that

",...the First presidency had commented somewhat favorably upon thesuggestion that sometime, somewhere, something should be said byone or more of us to-make plain that the Church does not refuseto recognize the discoveries and demonstrations of science, especiallyin relation to the subject at issue.'

-14

He, therefore, prepared and delivered an address in the Tabernacle

entitled "The Earth and Man" (Talmage, 1931a). He was intrigued, as we all

are, by the obvious biological heritage of man's body and its many similarities

to both living animals and the fossil remains of ancient creatures. His talk

was obviously intended to provide a compromise between Elders Smith and Roberts.

According to his journal, he was directed by the First Presidency to have the

talk published in the Church News and further to have it printed in pamphlet

form. It was published by the Church of Jesus Christ of-Latter-day Saints

and constitutes a fundamental source document for considering the position of

the Church. Dr. Talmage indicated that:

'° ... organisms ... lived and died, age after age, while the earth was yetunfit for human habitation. Adam was a real personage, who stands atthe head of this race chronologically... I do not regard Adam asrelated to--certainly not as descended from--the Neanderthal, the Cro-Magnon, the Peking or the Piltdown man. Adam came as divinely directed,created and empowered, and stands as the patriarchal head of hisposterity... '+ .I

In'1954 Elder Joseph Fielding Smith, senior member of the Quorum of the

Twelve, published his views in a book entitled: "Man, His Origin and Destiny."

This book contains some very important statements and I suggest that everyone

read it carefully and prayerfully. It contains a great deal of well-defined

doctrine, and also some very provocative, negative statements on the subject

of evolution and pre-Adamic life. The following statement is extracted

from the book:

"It has been truthfully said that organic evolution is Satan'schief weapon in this dispensation in his attempt to destroy thedivine mission of Jesus Christ...There is not and cannot be, anycompromise between the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the theories ofevolution (,Smith, Joseph Fielding, 1954, pgs. 184 & 276).

It is important that we understand why it was that Elder Smith and other--

Church-leaders have been so concerned. Frequently members of the Church have

encountered ideas such as those cited above from Strickberger's paper and have

evidence of evolution, such as fossils, and believing that religion and

-15

evolution are mutually exclusive, have abandoned religion. They have assumed

that "since my seminary teacher was wrong, my bishop was wrong and the Church

was also wrong."

It is my belief that this mutually exclusive position need not be taken,

and that it, in fact, sets the stage for apostasy. The reader may think that

he is bound to accept the anti-evolutionary ideas of Joseph Fielding Smith, who

later became President of the Church. However, it was David 0. McKay who was

the President at the time Elder Smith's book was published. Responding to numerous

questions that came to the First Presidency regarding the controversy raised

by that book, letters were written by President McKay stating the position of-the

Church:

"On the subject of organic evolution, the Church has officiallytaken no position. The book 'Man, His Origin and Destiny' was notpublished by the Church, and is not approved by the Church. Thisbook contains expressions of the author's views for which he aloneis-responsible." (,McKay, 1957)

This raises the question of whether one is entitled to disagree with

any of the prominent leaders of the Church on a subject as critical as that

under discussion. President J. Reuben Clark of the First Presidency

broached that question in 1954. In a summer institute at B.Y.U. the Seminary

and Institute teachers were addressed by Elder Smith on the subject of his

newly-published book. As the institute drew to a close, President Clark was

asked by Harold B. Lee to speak on the subject: "When are Church Leader's

Words Entitled to the Claim of Scripture?" (Clark, 1954). He referred specific

ally to that statement in the Doctrine and Covenants (68:4)."...when moved upon

by the Holy Ghost, their- words shall be scripture." He said:

"...only the Presidency of the Church...has the right-to giveauthoritative interpretations of scripture that shall be bindingon the Church...,when any other person, irrespective of who heis, undertakes to do any of these things, you may know that he isnot moved upon by the Holy Ghost, in so speaking, unless_ he has thespecial authorization from the President of the Church."

-16

It seems, therefore, that one need not be bound in his review of

evolution by statements made on the subject by any members of the Church

other than those speaking for the First Presidency.

There are several scriptures which ought to help shape our posture towardevolution. We should study them thoughtfully and prayerfully, and be aware

of their various interpretations. The ancient Mormon Prophet Lehi explained

to one of his sons the conditions in the Garden of Eden (Nephi 2:22):

"And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not havefallen, but he would have remained in the Garden of Eden. And allthings which were created must have remained in the same state inwhich they were after they were created; and they must haveremained forever, and had no end."

Some have interpreted this literally to mean that there would have been

no death, anywhere on the temporal earth, prior to the fail. This would

imply, further that there could have been no evolution. This was the position

taken by Joseph Fielding Smith, refuted by B.H. Roberts and James E. Talmage

and neutralized by President McKay. If we assume that Adam and the rest of the

Garden inhabitants were in an immortal state and that a temporal world was

co-existent with them, then we might also assume that Lehi's -declaration of no

death prior to the fail could have pertained only to those immortal inhabitants

of Eden, and not to the temporal world.

In the Lord's description to Moses C3:7) of the creation there is a state-

ment of the primacy of Adam which has been variously interpreted:

"And I, the Lord God, formed man from the dust of the ground,and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man

became a living soul, the first flesh upon the earth, the first man,also; nevertheless, all things were created before; but spirituallywere they created and made according to my word."

If the word "flesh" is interpreted to mean any kind of life, then we

would have to understand that Adam was the first living creature. This

interpretation was not acceptable to either Elder Talmage or Smith, and the

latter (Smith, 1954, p. 329) said:

-17

"So Adam became the 'first flesh upon the earth', through the fall,, not that he was placed here before any other creatures."

The Lord's description of the creation to Abraham contains a statement

which has been interpreted by some to mean that the body of Adam was created

by a process of sculpturing from mud or "dust" (Abraham 5:6-7). "But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground. 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."

Biochemists tell us that our bodies are literally formed from the "dust

of the earth", or more precisely, from the chemicals of the soil, water and

air. The molecules of our bodies are being continuously replaced by metabolic

exchange from the food we eat. It could be said that the chemicals of which

our bodies are composed were, for the most part, in the farmer's field or on

the grocer's shelf a few weeks or months ago. Our bodies are being continuously

formed from the dust of the earth, in a sense.

Scriptures which seem to describe the immutability of species, and which

are often cited as evidence against the possibility of evolution, come princi

pally from statements that each animal or plant is to reproduce after its own

“kind."

"And I, God, said: Let the earth bring forth the living creatures after his kind, cattle, and creeping things, and beasts of the earth after their kind, and it was so.'* Uses 2:24).

The same spokesmen have also drawn further support for the questionable

concept of species immutability from the following modern revelation:

"They are figurative expressions used by the Revelator, John, in describing heaven, the paradise of God, the happiness of man, and of beasts, and of creeping things, and of the fowls of the air; that which is spiritual being in the likeness of that which is temporal; and that which is temporal in the likeness of that which is spiritual..." (Doc. & Cov. 77:2).

-18

An anti-evolutionary interpretation of the above scriptures is that

since the spirits were created before the earth was, and since the bodies

were to be in the likeness of the spirits, there could be no mutations

on the earth, for the body had to follow the form of the spirit.

It may be instructive for us to realize that, although "like produces

like", no two creatures are ever exactly alike. Even identical twins, or

highly inbred, isogenic strains of mice whose genetic instructions are

supposed to be identical, begin to diverge from each other even before

birth. Through the process of somatic mutation the cells and organs of growing

creatures are altered so that they do not follow, completely, the genetic

instructions given them by the egg and sperm. Evolutionary theory proposes

that slight changes from one generation to the next accumulate to bring about,

after many generations, discernible differences, These slight changes

are no greater than those we see between parents and children in our own

families. We can heartily agree that like produces like, but would it

not be possible for the Lord to have foreseen changes in his living creations

and programmed for them as he created the spirit bodies of all creatures that

were later to inhabit the earth? President Harold B. Lee informally addressed the Deans and Administrators at

Brigham Young University on September 11, 1972, following his address

to the student body. Citing the example of Dr. Henry Eyring, of the University

of Utah, he indicated that science teachers could expect their students to learn

all there is to know about the theories of evolution, but not require belief in

them. He then wisely counseled a temperate path of interpretation when he said:

"Do not expound that which the Lord has not seen fit to reveal:"

-19

RECOMMENDED POSTURE

All members of the LOS Church who wish to examine the concepts and

theories of evolution are encouraged to assume the mental posture outlined

below. Doing so may help avert the danger of testimony destruction foreseen-

by Joseph Fielding Smith (.Smith, 1954).

First of all keep an open mind, without compromise with the doctrinal

landmarks cited previously. Secondly, don't expect public revelation on the

subject beyond that which has been announced by the First Presidency. You

are entitled to ask for the Lord's help in the form of personal revelation

to bring you to understanding and faith. He is the author of all truth, so

both secular and revealed knowledge must blend harmoniously together.

However, you should earnestly look for continuing enlightenment, principally

through a study of science. Pay particular attention to those scholars who

speak in the field of expertise in which they have been well-trained.

Sometimes scientists who may have achieved a degree- of eminence in their own

specialty feel entitled to expound in some other fields, thereby becoming

pseudoscientists. Their ideas should be entertained with interest, but

skepticism. You should also earnestly seek continuing enlightenment through

prayerful study-of the scriptures. Also, thoughtfully study the statements

of the leaders of the Church, particularly those that come from the

presidency of the Church. Do not expect answers from divine sources to come

easily, for "you must study it out in your mind" before you ask the Lord

for a witness (Doc, & Coy. Sec, 4), Remember that the Lord will reveal the

complete explanation at His coming.(Doc. & Coy. 101:33). ..

Finally, don't judge people on the basis of their opinion of evolution

unless their opinions conflict with the doctrinal landmarks.

-20

The purpose of this paper has been to harmonize the positions of inspired

Church leaders and learned scientists on the subject of evolution. To this end,

the following proposition is given:

PROPOSITION: This earth is in a telestial state. The immortal Garden of

Eden of Adam and Eve could have been a special "creation", co.-existent with the temporal (telestial) world. If it were of a different kind of matter, it

may not have been perceived by temporal (fallen) creatures.

"All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes. We cannot see it..." (Doc. & Cov. 131:7-8).

The immortal creatures would have left no telestial fossils and would

likely not have interrupted the continuing history of the temporal earth.

As Adam and Eve were cast out of their paradise into this telestial world, their

bodies were changed from an immortal to a mortal state (Smith, op. cit.)

Thus, they were truly the first of our race, but this does not negate the concept

that life, death and evolution occurred in the temporal world prior and after their

fall.

Finally, this paper supports the thesis:

(a) All LDS scientists who teach evolution or peripheral subjects should

affirm that Adam and Eve were "divinely" created, as indic4ted in the

scriptures, as were all components and conditions of the immortal Garden

from the creation to the fall. These people, conditions and times Are

known only through the scriptures and revelations, but are not known at

this time through the mortal senses.

(b) After specifically and intentionally excluding the above, all facts,

theories and speculations concerning the history of the temporal earth.,

its geology, biology and anthropology, shall be “fair game", for

investigation by the responsible scientist,

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Clark, J.R. (1954). When Are Church Leader's Words Entitled To Claim of Scripture? Church News section of Deseret News, July 31, 1954.

Lee, H. B. (1972). Find The Answers In The Scriptures. Ensign, December, 1972, pp. 2-3.

McKay, D. 0. (1957). Personal letter to Professor William Lee Stokes, February 15, 1957. Copy in author's possession.

Pauli, W. F. (1949). The World of Life, pp. 11-12. Cambridge, Mass., Houghton Mi f in Co.

Smith, Joseph F., Winder, J. R. & Lund A. H., (1909). The Origin of Man, Improvement Era 13, 75-81.

Smith, Joseph F. & Anderson, E. H. (editors), (1910). Editorial, Improvement Era 13, 570.

Smith, Joseph Fielding, C1954). Man, His Origin and Destiny, 541 pp., Salt Lake City, Deseret Book Co.

Strickberger, M. W. C1973). Evolution and Religion. BioScience 23, 417-421.

Talmage, J. E. (1931a). The Earth and Man, Salt Lake City, 16 pp. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Also appeared in Church News section of Deseret News, Nov. 21, 1931, pp. 7-8.

Talmage, J. E. (1931b) Personal Journal of James Edward Talmage unpublished.