First Presidency

Doctrinal Expositions of

the First Presidency

The Origin of Man

By The First Presidency of the Church

"God created man in his own image."

Inquiries arise from time to time respecting the attitude of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints upon questions which, though not vital from a doctrinal standpoint, are closely connected with the fundamental principles of salvation. The latest inquiry of this kind that has reached us is in relation to the origin of man. It is believed that a statement of the position held by the Church upon this important subject will be timely and productive of good.

In presenting the statement that follows we are not conscious of putting forth anything essentially new; neither is it our desire so to do. Truth is what we wish to present, and truth-eternal truth-is fundamentally old. A restatement of the original attitude of the Church relative to this matter is all that will be attempted here. To tell the truth as God has revealed it, and commend it to the acceptance of those who need to conform their opinions thereto, is the sole purpose of this presentation.

"God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." In these plain and pointed words the inspired author of the book of Genesis made known to the world the truth concerning the origin of the human family. Moses, the prophet-historian, "learned," as we are told, "in all the wisdom of the Egyptians," when making this important announcement, was not voicing a mere opinion, a theory derived from his researches into the occult lore of that ancient people. He was speaking as the mouthpiece of God, and his solemn declaration was for all time and for all people. No subsequent revelator of the truth has contradicted the great leader and lawgiver of Israel. All who have since spoken by divine authority upon this theme have confirmed his simple and sublime proclamation. Nor could it be otherwise. Truth has but one source, and all revelations from heaven are harmonious with each other. The omnipotent Creator, the maker of heaven and earth-had shown unto Moses everything pertaining to this planet, including the facts relating to man's origin, and the authoritative pronouncement of that mighty prophet and seer to the house of Israel, and through Israel to the whole world, is couched in the simple clause: "God created man in his own image" (Genesis 1:27; Pearl of Great Price-Book of Moses, 1:27-41).

The creation was two-fold-firstly spiritual, secondly temporal. This truth, also, Moses plainly taught-much more plainly than it has come down to us in the imperfect translations of the Bible that are now in use. Therein the fact of a spiritual creation, antedating the temporal creation, is strongly implied, but the proof of it is not so clear and conclusive as in other records held by the Latter-day Saints to be of equal authority with the Jewish scriptures. The partial obscurity of the latter upon the point in question is owing, no doubt, to the loss of those "plain and precious" parts of sacred writ, which, as the Book of Mormon informs us, have been taken away from the Bible during its passage down the centuries (1 Nephi 13:24-29). Some of these missing parts the Prophet Joseph Smith undertook to restore when he revised those scriptures by the spirit of revelation, the result being that more complete account of the creation which is found in the Book of Moses, previously cited. Note the following passages:

And now, behold, I say unto you, that these are the generations of the heaven and of the earth, when they were created, in the day that I, the Lord God, made the heaven and the earth;

And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew.

For I, the Lord God, created all things of which I have spoken, spiritually, before they were naturally upon the face of the earth. For I, the Lord God, had not caused it to rain upon the face of the earth.

And I, the Lord God, had created all the children of men, and not yet a man to till the ground; for in heaven created I them, and there was not yet flesh upon the earth, neither in the water, neither in the air.

But, I, the Lord God, spake, and there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.

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 before created, but spiritually were they created and made, according to my word (Pearl of Great Price-Book of Moses, 3:4-7. See also chapters 1 and 2, and compare with Genesis 1 and 2).

These two points being established, namely, the creation of man in the image of God, and the two-fold character of the creation, let us now inquire: What was the form of man, in the spirit and in the body, as originally created? In a general way the answer is given in the words chosen as the text of this treatise. "God created man in his own image." It is more explicitly rendered in the Book of Mormon thus: "All men were created in the beginning after mine own image" (Ether 3:15). It is the Father who is speaking. If, therefore, we can ascertain the form of the "Father of spirits," "The God of the spirits of all flesh," we shall be able to discover the form of the original man.

Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is "the express image" of His Father's person (Hebrews 1:3). He walked the earth as a human being, as a perfect man, and said, in answer to a question put to Him: "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father" (John 14:9). This alone ought to solve the problem to the satisfaction of every thoughtful, reverent mind. The conclusion is irresistible, that if the Son of God be the express image (that is, likeness) of His Father's person, then His Father is in the form of a man; for that was the form of the Son of God, not only during His mortal life, but before His mortal birth, and after His resurrection. It was in this form that the Father and the Son, as two personages, appeared to Joseph Smith, when, as a boy of fourteen years, he received his first vision. Then if God made man-the first man-in His own image and likeness, he must have made him like unto Christ, and consequently like unto men of Christ's time and of the present day. That man was made in the image of Christ is positively stated in the Book of Moses: "And I, God, said unto mine Only Begotten, which was with me from the beginning, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and it was so…. And I, God, created man in mine own image, in the image of mine Only Begotten created I him, male and female created I them" (2:26, 27).

The Father of Jesus is our Father also. Jesus Himself taught this truth, when He instructed His disciples how to pray: "Our Father which art in heaven," etc. Jesus, however, is the firstborn among all the sons of God-the first begotten in the spirit, and the only begotten in the flesh. He is our elder brother, and we, like Him, are in the image of God. All men and women are in the similitude of the universal Father and Mother, and are literally the sons and daughters of Deity.

"God created man in His own image." This is just as true of the spirit as it is of the body, which is only the clothing of the spirit, its complement; the two together constituting the soul. The spirit of man is in the form of man, and the spirits of all creatures are in the likeness of their bodies. This was plainly taught by the Prophet Joseph Smith (Doctrine and Covenants 77:2).

Here is further evidence of the fact. More than seven hundred years before Moses was shown the things pertaining to this earth, another great prophet, known to us as the brother of Jared, was similarly favored by the Lord. He was even permitted to behold the spirit-body of the foreordained Savior, prior to His incarnation; and so like the body of a man was gazing upon a being of flesh and blood. He first saw the finger and then the entire body of the Lord-all in the spirit. The Book of Mormon says of this wonderful manifestation:

And it came to pass that when the brother of Jared had said these words, behold the Lord stretched forth His hand and touched the stones one by one with His finger; and the veil was taken from off the eyes of the brother of Jared, and he saw the finger of the Lord; and it was as the finger of a man, like unto flesh and blood; and the brother of Jared fell down before the Lord, for he was struck with fear.

And the Lord saw that the brother of Jared had fallen to the earth; and the Lord said unto him, Arise, why hast thou fallen?

And he saith unto the Lord, I saw the finger of the Lord, and I feared lest he should smite me; for I knew not that the Lord had flesh and blood.

And the Lord said unto him, Because of thy faith thou hast seen that I shall take upon me flesh and blood; and never has man come before me with such exceeding faith as thou hast; for were it not so, ye could not have seen my finger. Sawest thou more than this?

And he answered, Nay, Lord, show thyself unto me.

And the Lord said unto him, Believest thou the words which I shall speak?

And he answered, Yea, Lord, I know that thou speakest the truth, for thou art a God of truth and canst not lie.

And when he had said these words, behold, the Lord showed himself unto him, and said, Because thou knowest these things ye are redeemed from the fall; therefore ye are brought back into my presence; therefore I show myself unto you.

Behold, I am He who was prepared from the foundation of the world to redeem my people. Behold, I am Jesus Christ, I am the Father and the Son. In me shall all mankind have light, and that eternally, even they who shall believe on my name; and they shall become my sons and my daughters.

And never have I shewed myself unto man whom I have created, for never hath man believed in me as thou hast. Seest thou that ye are created after mine own image? Yea, even all men were created in the beginning after mine own image.

Behold, this body, which ye now behold, is the body of my spirit, and man have I created after the body of my spirit; and even as I appear unto thee to be in the spirit, will I appear unto my people in the flesh. (Ether 3:6-16.)

What more is needed to convince us that man, both in spirit and in body, is the image and likeness of God, and that God Himself is in the form of man?

When the divine Being whose spirit-body the brother of Jared beheld, took upon Him flesh and blood, He appeared as a man, having "body, parts and passions," like other men, though vastly superior to all others, because He was God, even the Son of God, the Word made flesh: in Him "dwelt the fulness of the Godhead bodily." And why should He not appear as a man? That was the form of His spirit, and it must needs have an appropriate covering, a suitable tabernacle. He came unto the world as He had promised to come (III Nephi 1:13), taking an infant tabernacle, and developing it gradually to the fulness of His spirit stature. He came as man had been coming for ages, and as man has continued to come ever since. Jesus, however, as shown, was the only begotten of God in the flesh.

Adam, our progenitor, "the first man," was, like Christ, a pre-existent spirit, and like Christ he took upon him an appropriate body, the body of a man, and so became a "living soul." The doctrine of the pre-existence, -revealed so plainly, particularly in latter days, pours a wonderful flood of light upon the otherwise mysterious problem of man's origin. It shows that man, as a spirit, was begotten and born of heavenly parents, and reared to maturity in the eternal mansions of the Father, prior to coming upon the earth in a temporal body to undergo an experience in mortality. It teaches that all men existed in the spirit before any man existed in the flesh, and that all 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 our race. It was shown to the brother of Jared that 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 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.

Man, by searching, cannot find out God. Never, unaided, will he discover the truth about the beginning of human life. The Lord must reveal Himself, or remain unrevealed; and the same is true of the facts relating to the origin of Adam's race-God alone can reveal them. Some of these facts, however, are already known, and what has been made known it is our duty to receive and retain.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, basing its belief on divine revelation, ancient and modern, proclaims man to be the direct and lineal offspring of Deity. God Himself is an exalted man, perfected, enthroned, and supreme. By His almighty power He organized the earth, and all that it contains, from spirit and element, which exist co-eternally with Himself. He formed every plant that grows, and every animal that breathes, each after its own kind, spiritually and temporally-"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." He made the tadpole and the ape, the lion and the elephant but He did not make them in His own image, nor endow them with Godlike reason and intelligence. Nevertheless, the whole animal creation will be perfected and perpetuated in the Hereafter, each class in its "distinct order or sphere," and will enjoy "eternal felicity." That fact has been made plain in this dispensation (Doctrine and Covenants 77:3).

Man is the child of God, formed in the divine image and endowed with divine attributes, and even as the infant son of an earthly father and mother is capable in due time of becoming a man, so the undeveloped offspring of celestial parentage is capable, by experience through ages and aeons, of evolving into a God.

Joseph F. Smith,

John R. Winder,

Anthon H. Lund,

First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ

of Latter-day Saints

(Encyclopedia of Mormonism, 1-4 vols., edited by Daniel H. Ludlow (New York: Macmillan, 1992), 1669.)

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. For helpful discussion of the subject, see IMPROVEMENT ERA, Vol. XI, August 1908, No. 10, page 778, article, "Creation and Growth of Adam;" also article by the First Presidency, "Origin of Man," Vol. XIII, No. 1, page 75, 1909.

(Priesthood Quorums' Table., Improvement Era, 1910, Vol. Xiii. April, 1910. No 6. .)

"Mormon" View of Evolution

A Statement by the First Presidency of

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

"God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

In these plain and pointed words the inspired author of the book of Genesis made known to the world the truth concerning the origin of the human family. Moses, the prophet-historian, who was "learned" we are told, "in all the wisdom of the Egyptians," when making this important announcement, was not voicing a mere opinion. He was speaking as the mouthpiece of God, and his solemn declaration was for all time and for all people. No subsequent revelator of the truth has contradicted the great leader and law-giver of Israel. All who have since spoken by divine authority upon this theme have confirmed his simple and sublime proclamation. Nor could it be otherwise. Truth has but one source, and all revelations from heaven are harmonious one with the other.

Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is "the express image" of his Father's person (Hebrews 1:3). He walked the earth as a human being, as a perfect man, and said, in answer to a question put to him: "He that hath seen me hath seen the Father" (John 14:9). This alone ought to solve the problem to the satisfaction of every thoughtful, reverent mind. It was in this form that the Father and the Son, as two distinct personages, appeared to Joseph Smith, when, as a boy of fourteen years, he received his first vision.

The Father of Jesus Christ is our Father also. Jesus himself taught this truth, when he instructed his disciples how to pray: "Our Father which art in heaven," etc. Jesus, however, is the first born among all the sons of God-the first begotten in the spirit, and the only begotten in the flesh. He is our elder brother, and we, like him, are in the image of God. All men and women are in the similitude of the universal Father and Mother, and are literally sons and daughters of Deity.

Adam, our great progenitor, "the first man," was, like Christ, a pre-existent spirit, and, like Christ, he took upon him an appropriate body, the body of a man, and so became a "living soul." The doctrine of pre-existence pours wonderful flood of light upon the otherwise mysterious problem of man's origin. It shows that man, as a spirit, was begotten and born of heavenly parents, and reared to maturity in the eternal mansions of the Father, prior to coming upon the earth in a temporal body to undergo an experience in mortality.

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, basing its belief on divine revelation, ancient and modern, proclaims man to be the direct and lineal offspring of Deity. By his Almighty power God organized the earth, and all that it contains, from spirit and element, which exist co-eternally with himself.

Man is the child of God, formed in the divine image and endowed with divine attributes, and even as the infant son of an earthly father and mother is capable in due time of becoming a man, so that undeveloped offspring of celestial parentage is capable, by experience through ages and aeons, of evolving into a God.

Heber J. Grant

Anthony W. Ivins

Charles W. Nibley

First Presidency

(Encyclopedia of Mormonism, 1-4 vols., edited by Daniel H. Ludlow (New York: Macmillan, 1992), 1670.)

TO THE COUNCIL OF THE TWELVE,
THE FIRST COUNCIL OF SEVENTY,
AND THE PRESIDING BISHOPRIC.

Dear Brethren:

On the 5th of April, 1930, at a conference of the Genealogical Society of Utah, Elder Joseph Fielding Smith delivered a sermon under the title "Faith Leads to a Fullness of Truth and Righteousness."

This sermon was published in the Utah Genealogical and Historical Magazine, and copies of it in pamphlet form were distributed, which gave it wide circulation.

In the sermon referred to, Elder Smith devotes the greater portion of his remarks to the subject of the creation of the earth and the relationship of our Father Adam to it and its inhabitants. He refers to the conflict which exists between geologists and the scripture dates which are given, in regard to the period of time that has elapsed since the creation to the present, and definitely states that there was no death upon the earth, either vegetable, insect or animal, prior to the fall of man, and that human life did not exist upon the earth prior to Adam.

On the 15th of December, 1930, Elder B. H. Roberts submitted the following letter to the First Presidency:

            “President Heber J. Grant, and Counselors; Building.

            Dear Brethren:

I am writing you to ask if the article published in the Utah Genealogical and Historical Magazine of October, 1930, under the title “Faith Leads to a Fulness of Truth and Righteousness,” dealing mainly with the antiquity of life and death upon the earth and treated as a discourse by Elder Joseph Fielding Smith on the 5^th of April, 1930, is a treatise on the that subject that was submitted to and approved by the Council of the First Presidency and perhaps the Quorum of the Twelve? And is it put forth as the official declaration of the Church on the subject treated? Or is it the unofficial and personal declaration of the opinion only of Elder Smith?

In the latter event then I feel that the fact should have been expressed in the discourse; or if it is an official pronouncement of the Church then that fact should have been avowed; for the strictly dogmatical and the pronounced finality of the discourse demand the suggested explanation in either case.

If the discourse of Elder Smith is merely his personal opinion, while not questioning his right to such opinions, and also the right to express them, when avowed as his personal opinions, yet I object to the dogmatic and finality spirit of the pronouncement and the apparent official announcement of them, as if speaking with final authority.

If Elder Smith is merely putting forth his own opinions I call in question his competency to utter such dogmatism either as a scholar or as an Apostle. I am sure he is not competent to speak in such a manner from general learning or special research work on the subject; nor as an Apostle, as in that case he would be in conflict with the plain implication at least of the scriptures, both ancient and modern, and with the teaching of a more experienced and learned and earlier Apostle than himself, and a contemporary of the Prophet Joseph Smith—whose public discourse on the subject appears in the Journal of Discourses and was publicly endorsed by President Brigham Young, all which would have more weight in setting forth doctrine than this last dictum of Elder Smith.

My question is important as affecting, finally, the faith and status of a very large portion of the Priesthood and educated membership of the Church, I am sure; and I trust the matter will receive early consideration. All which is respectfully submitted.

Very truly your brother,

(signed) B. H. Roberts”

The sermon referred to, with this letter, was handed by the Presidency to the Council of Twelve with the request that the matter be taken up, and the difference of opinion which existed between the two brethren be composed.

At a meeting of the Council of Twelve, Elder Roberts was invited to be present and submit his findings upon the question at issue, the principal point involved being: Is the age of the earth greater than that set forth in the scripture, as it is given in the Bible, and was Adam the first human life upon it, or does he represent the first of the human race that now occupy it, and may human life have existed prior to his advent.

Elder Roberts appeared before the Council of Twelve and submitted a paper of fifty pages, in which he quotes copiously from the sermon of Elder Smith, and then proceeds to discuss the following statements made in the sermon:

"All life in the sea, on the earth, in the air, was without death. Things were not changing, as we find them changing in this mortal existence, for mortality had not come. I denounce as absolutely false the opinion of some that this earth was peopled by a race before Adam. I do not care what scientists say in regard to dinosaurs and other creatures upon the earth millions of years ago, that lived and died, and fought and struggled for existence."

Elder Roberts quotes from the scripture and extensively from the conclusions reached by the leading scientists of the world, to show that the earth is older than the time given to its creation in Genesis indicates. He places much stress upon the command of the Lord to Adam in which he says: "Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth." The word replenish he defines to mean to do a thing which has been done before, or refill that which has been made empty.

 

He quotes a statement made by Apostle Orson Hyde who, at a general conference of the Church, held October, 1854, declared that there were people upon the earth prior to the advent of Adam. Brigham Young and other of the presiding officers were present, and after the remarks made by Elder Hyde, President Young arose and said:

"I do not wish to eradicate any items from the lecture Elder Hyde has given us this evening, but simply to give you my views in a few words on the portion touching Bishops and Deacons. We have had a splendid address from Brother Hyde, for which I am grateful. I say to the congregation treasure up in your hearts what you have heard tonight, and at all other times."

Two weeks after Elder Roberts had submitted his paper Elder Smith appeared before the Council of Twelve and submitted a paper consisting of fifty-eight pages, in which he answers the arguments advanced by Elder Roberts, his contention being that Adam was the first man to come to this earth, and that consequently it could not have been previously inhabited by man; that there was no death upon the earth prior to the fall, neither vegetable, insect, or animal, which of course includes man.

In support of his argument he quotes extensively from the scripture, and from sermons of presiding men of the Church, particularly from the sermons of Orson Pratt, who refers to Adam as the first man, the first of all men, the Ancient of Days, etc. To meet the argument of Elder Roberts in the application of the word replenish he shows that the word may be used, and signifies, to fill as well as to fill again.

To meet the statement of Orson Hyde, Elder Smith says that Orson Hyde was not discussing the subject of Pre-Adamites, but was preaching upon marriage, and referred to Pre-Adamites incidentally. He admits that President Young was present, and that he endorsed the remarks made.

While there are many quotations cited by Elder Smith which refer to Adam as the first man, the following is the only one in which a pre-Adamic race is referred to. It is quoted under the heading: "Testimony of Charles W. Penrose":

"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 of all men, (Moses 1:34) and we are therefore in duty bound to regard him as the primal parent of our race.

(signed) Joseph F. Smith

John R. Winder

Anthon H. Lund."

While this quotation is signed by the Presidency of the Church, it is given under the heading of "Testimony of President Charles W. Penrose."

After hearing granted to Elder Smith the following communication was received by the Presidency:

            “January 21, 1931

            President Heber J. Grant & Counselors,

            Dear Brethren:

           

We, the Council of the Twelve, to whom was referred the letter of Elder B. H. Roberts addressed to the First Presidency, a criticism of a certain discourse delivered by Elder Joseph Fielding Smith and published in the Genealogical Magazine, October, 1930, beg leave to report that we have given the time of three rather lengthy meetings to this matter.

At the first meeting Elder Roberts read and submitted a paper embodying his views at some length on the theory of pre-Adamic races, based on scientific investigation—a theory, we understand, which Elder Roberts has promulgated in some of his public utterances among the Later-day Saints.

At the third meeting Elder Joseph Fielding Smith read and submitted a paper in which he defended the claim he made in the sermon published in the Genealogical Magazine above referred to, viz.; that pre-Adamic races on the earth is simply a theory and not a Church doctrine, and is not true. This he sought to prove by quoting Joseph Smith, the Prophet, Brigham Young, Parley P. Pratt Orson Pratt, John Taylor and other high Church Authorities, particularly the late First Presidency, Joseph F. Smith, John R. Winder and Anthon H. Lund.

He also quoted a number of passages from the Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine & Covenants and Pearl of Great Price, pointing to the facts as he constructed them, that there were no pre-Adamic races of man on the earth, neither was there death upon the earth prior to the time of Adam.

We quote a sentence from Elder Roberts’ letter: “If Elder Smith is merely putting forth his own opinions I call in question his competency to utter such dogmatism either as a scholar or as an Apostle. I am sure hi is not competent to speak in such manner from general learning or special research work on the plain implication at least of the scriptures, both ancient and modern, and with the teaching of a more experienced and learned and earlier Apostle then himself, and a contemporary of the Prophet Joseph Smith.”

This reference and language we regard as very offensive on the part of Elder Roberts, who fails to show the deference due from one brother to another brother of higher rank in the Priesthood. However, it may be said that these brethren affirmed at the close of the meeting that they entertained no ill feeling, one toward the other.

Elder Roberts’ letter is herewith returned, and the two papers alluded to are now submitted to the Presidency. The Twelve await your further instructions relative to this matter, if you have any to give.

Sincerely your brethren,

The Council of the Twelve

By (signed) Rudger Clawson, Pres.”

It will be observed that no suggestion is made in this communication regarding the attitude of the Council of Twelve in respect to the question involved in the controversy under consideration.

On February 9th the following communication was received from Elder Roberts:

“President Heber J. Grant and Counselors, Building

Dear Brethren:

I feel almost as if I ought to apologize in addressing this letter to you lest you think that I am over-persistent in the representation of things referred to herein.

You will recall that the letter I wrote to you asking the questions in relation to the status of Elder Joseph Fielding Smith’s discourse published in the Genealogical Magazine for October last, was referred to the Twelve for consideration. Agreeably to a request of theirs I submitted a paper (fifty typewritten pages) setting forth precisely some of the objections I had to the discourse. Two weeks later, bringing us to January 21, Elder Smith submitted a paper of about the same length to the Apostles, myself being present. Since which time I have understood that a report was made to the First Presidency of which I have no copy. That is now three weeks ago and just what the status of the discussion or action upon it is I have not, up to the present, learned.

The questions involved are of very great importance from my standpoint. As for instance, I would no like the matter to go to judgment as matters now stand until I have an opportunity to point out what to me are the weaknesses and inconsistency of Elder Smith’s paper. There was really no discussion on the subject before the Twelve, except the presentation of these two papers, and they represent solely the basis of discussion, no the discussion itself. And I have much more to present after hearing Elder Smith’s reply to my paper, which should be said before any decision is rendered.

To me both the discourse on the points questioned and the paper in defense of them is slighter than a house of cards. Yet it was on such pabulum as this that suspended the publication of my book—now in manuscript—“The Truth, The Way, The Life!” This book from my judgment of it is the most important work that I have yet contributed to the Church, the six-volumed Comprehensive History of the Church not omitted.

Life at my years and with an incurable ailment is very precarious, and I should dislike very much to pass on without completing and publishing this work. I therefore ask that in any arrangement that that may be made for a further hearing, I may be permitted to present my views on Elder Smith’s paper in reply to mine, and if the position he has taken can be met successfully, then I think the principal cause of suspending the publication of my work, “The Truth, The Way, The Life” will be removed.

All which is respectfully submitted,

Very truly your brother

(signed) B. H. Roberts”

After receipt of this latter communication the Presidency carefully reviewed the papers which had been submitted to the Council of the Twelve, and after prayerful consideration decided that nothing would be gained by a continuation of the discussion of the subject under consideration.

The statement made by Elder Smith that the existence of pre-Adamites is not a doctrine of the Church is true. It is just as true that the statement: "There were not pre-Adamites upon the earth", is not a doctrine of the Church. Neither side of the controversy has been accepted as a doctrine at all.

Both parties make the scripture and the statements of men who have been prominent in the affairs of the Church the basis of their contention; neither has produced definite proof in support of his views.

We quote the following from the Millennial Star, February 19, 1931:

"The sun is giving out energy daily. In a few million (or billion) years its energy will be gone. The other heavenly bodies are radiating and losing their heat; and in time they will be no better off than the age-bitten sun. The universe will run down. Then, on earth, there will be no summer and winter, perhaps no light and day, but just eternal twilight of middle African temperature, in the monotony of which all life will perish. So warns Sir James Jeans, famous British scientist, and brilliant writer and lecturer. Well for us that day is distant—a billion years or so—but, think of the grandchildren.

There is a ray of hope.

 

Dr. Robert A. Millikan, famous American scientist, and brilliant writer and lecturer, has discovered cosmic rays, sources of energy, that come from the uttermost confines of the universe to replenish the energy we lose by radiation. Out in the depths of space, by means unknown to us, the lost energy is assembled, converted, concentrated and sent back to delay the evil day. In short, Dr. Millikan says that this is a self-winding, self-repairing deathless universe. Day and night, summer and winter, may follow one another endlessly. That is more cheerful.

Whom are we to believe? These men are both world famous; both experimenters of the first rank, both honest men. Perhaps Dr. Millikan gives us a clue in his address as retiring president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, delivered last Christmas week. He says:

'If Sir James Jeans prefers to hold one view and I another on this question, no one can say us nay. The one thing of which you may all be quite sure is that neither of us knows anything about it.'"

This is the frank and truthful admission of one of the foremost scientists of the world, an honest man, earnestly searching after truth, which he admits has not been definitely discovered.

The Prophet Joseph Smith said: "Oh, ye elders of Israel, hearken to my voice; and when you are sent into the world to preach, tell those things you are sent to tell; preach, and cry aloud, "Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand; repent and believe the Gospel." Declare the first principles, and let mysteries alone, lest ye be overthrown… Elder Brown, when you go to Palmyra say nothing about the four beasts, but preach those things the Lord has told you to preach about—repentance and baptism for the remission of sins."

We call attention to the fact that when one of the general authorities of the Church makes a definite statement in regard to any doctrine, particularly when the statement is made in a dogmatic declaration of finality, whether he express it as his opinion or not, he is regarded as voicing the Church, and his statements are accepted as the approved doctrines of the Church, which they should be.

 

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, while we magnify our calling in the realm of the Church.

We can see no advantage to be gained by a continuation of the discussion to which reference is here made, but on the contrary are certain that 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."

(Memo From the First Presidency April 5, 1931 To the Council of the Twelve, the First Council of the Seventy, and the Presiding Bishopric as quoted in Mormonism and Evolution: The Authoritative LDS Statements 54-67).

---

Brigham Young

I have lately deeded to a board of trustees, for the purpose of erecting an academy thereon, the block (20x20 rods) immediately north of the Naisbitt place where Thomas Jennings now resides, and shall probably yet further endow the academy which will be known as the "Young Academy of Salt Lake." It will be open to the children of the Latter-day Saints only. In it the Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants, and other works of the Church will be the standard textbooks, and the preceptors will be especially enjoined to instill into the minds of our youth a faith in the religion of their fathers. 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 Miall 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 revelation 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 and [am] now seeking to do the same thing in this city. Believing that my own boys will best accomplish and have regard to my wishes, I have appointed a board of seven trustees, of whom five are my sons, viz., Brigham Jun., John W., Ernest I., Hyrum S., and yourself. The other two members of the board are brothers D[avid] O. Calder and Geo. Reynolds. The deed will require your signature as one of the trustees which I think can be deferred until your return. If this pleases you, and you are willing to act as one of the trustees, so inform us in your next letters so that we can place your name in the deed and have it duly recorded.

(Brigham Young, Letters of Brigham Young to His Sons, edited and introduced by Dean C. Jessee [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1974], 200.)

---

Joseph F. Smith

Some questions have arisen about the attitude of the Church on certain discussions of philosophy in the Church schools. Philosophical discussions as we understand them, are open questions about which men of science are very greatly at variance. As a rule we do not think it advisable to dwell on questions that are in controversy, and especially questions of a certain character, in the courses of instruction given by our institutions. In the first place it is the mission of our institutions of learning to qualify our young people for the practical duties of life. It is much to be preferred that they emphasize the industrial and practical side of education. Students are very apt to draw the conclusion that whichever side of a controversial question they adopt is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth; and it is very doubtful therefore, whether the great mass of our students have sufficient discriminating judgment to understand very much about some of the advanced theories of philosophy or science.

Some subjects are in themselves, perhaps, perfectly harmless, and any amount of discussion over them would not be injurious to the faith of out young people. We are told, for example, that the theory of gravitation is at best a hypothesis and that such is the atomic theory. These theories help to explain certain things about nature. Whether they are ultimately true can not make much difference to the religious convictions of our young people. On the other hand there are speculations which touch the origin of life and the relationship of God to his children. In a very limited degree that relationship has been defined by revelation, and until we receive more light upon the subject we deem it best to refrain from the discussion of certain philosophical theories which rather destroy than build up the faith of our young people. One thing about this so-called philosophy of religion that is very undesirable, lies in the fact that as soon as we convert our religion into a system of philosophy none but philosophers can understand, appreciate, or enjoy it. God, in his revelation to man has made His word so simple that the humblest of men without especial training, may enjoy great faith, comprehend the teachings of the Gospel, and enjoy undisturbed their religious convictions. For that reason we are averse to the discussion of certain philosophical theories in our religious instructions. If our Church schools would confine their so-called course of study in biology to that knowledge of the insect world which would help us to eradicate the pests that threaten the destruction of our crops and our fruit, such instruction would answer much better the aims of the Church school, than theories which deal with the origin of life.

These theories may have a fascination for our teachers and they may find interest in the study of them, but they are not properly within the scope of the purpose for which these schools were organized.

Some of our teachers are anxious to explain how much of the theory of evolution, in their judgment, is true, and what is false, but that only leaves their students in an unsettled frame of mind. They are not old enough and learned enough to discriminate, or put proper limitations upon a theory which we believe is more or less a fallacy. In reaching the conclusion that evolution would be best left out of discussions in our Church schools we are deciding a question of propriety and are not undertaking to say how much of evolution is true, or how much is false. We think that while it is a hypothesis, on both sides of which the most eminent scientific men of the world are arrayed, that it is folly to take up its discussion in our institutions of learning; and we can not see wherein such discussions are likely to promote the faith of our young people. On the other hand we have abundant evidence that many of those who have adopted in its fullness the theory of evolution have discarded the Bible, or at least refused to accept it as the inspired word of God. It is not, then, the question of the liberty of any teacher to entertain whatever views he may have upon this hypothesis of evolution, but rather the right of the Church to say that it does not think it profitable or wise to introduce controversies relative to evolution in its schools. Even if it were harmless from the standpoint of our faith, we think there are things more important to the daily affairs of life and the practical welfare of our young people. The Church itself has no philosophy about the modus operandi employed by the Lord in His creation of the world, and much of the talk therefore, about the philosophy of Mormonism is altogether misleading. God has revealed to us a simple and effectual way of serving Him, and we should regret very much to see the simplicity of those revelations involved in all sorts of philosophical speculations. If we encouraged them it would not be long before we should have a theological scholastic aristocracy in the Church, and we should therefore not enjoy the brotherhood that now is, or should be common to rich and poor, learned and unlearned among the Saints.

Joseph F. Smith

(The Juvenile Instructor 46(4):208-209 (April 1911))

---

George Q. Cannon

President Young, in the foregoing passages, while substantiating the fact of the union of man’s pre-existing spirit with a bodily product of the “dust of the ground,” enters more particularly into the modus operandi of that union. He unmistakably declares man’s origin to be altogether of a celestial character—that not only is his spirit of heavenly descent, but his bodily organization too,—that the latter is not taken form the lower animals, but from the originally celestial body of the greatest Father of humanity.

Taking the doctrine of ma’s origin as seen from this higher point of view, and comparing it with the low assumptive theories of uninspired men, such as those we have alluded to, how great the contrast appears! “Look on this picture”—Man, the offspring of an ape! “And on this”— Man, the image of God, his Father! How wide the contrast! and how different the feelings produced in the breast! In the one case, we instinctively shrink with dread at the bare insinuation; while in the other, the heart beats with higher and warmer and stronger emotions of love, of adoration, and praise; the soul is cheered and invigorated in its daily struggles to emancipate itself from the thralldom of surrounding evils and darkness pertaining to this lower sphere of existence, and is animated with a purer and nobler zeal in its onward and upward journey to that Divine Presence whence it originally came.

(George Q. Cannon in The Latter-day Saints' Millennial Star Vol. 23, [Oct. 1861], 654)

We are told in the Bible that "God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he Him." (Genesis 1:27.) Adam was no gorilla, no squalid savage of doubtful humanity, but a perfect man in the image of God. When placed on the earth he was immortal. Eve was no degraded, loathsome creature, but a lovely, admirable being, a suitable partner for an immortal man.

The loveliest pair

That ever yet in love's embraces met:

Adam, the goodliest man of men since born

His sons; the fairest of her daughters, Eve.

Man when placed on the earth was not far from God. But through the practice of sin he has fallen. The most perfect men and women on earth today are physically far beneath their great progenitors, Adam and Eve. We are not the offspring of monkeys but are the children of God, and Jesus is our brother.

The Book of Mormon shows us how the Lamanites became the degraded beings they are. Revelation informs us also concerning the negroes [sic]. They are not more perfect than their ancestors; they have not been progressing towards a better type but have fallen, by the transgression of some of their parents, far below what they were originally.

(George Q. Cannon, Gospel Truth: Discourses and Writings of President George Q. Cannon, selected, arranged, and edited by Jerreld L. Newquist [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1987], 9.)

The Latter-day Saints are in a position to progress and to become informed in every direction without having to stop to investigate the theories and views of men. The Lord has revealed with plainness and simplicity, accompanied by the testimony of the Holy Ghost, many things about which the world is in doubt. Books have been written and years of time spent by learned men to establish what is called the Darwinian theory, while others have endeavored to combat that theory. It has disturbed the whole religious world. Many preachers of the Gospel have adopted this theory. The result is, infidelity has spread. Doubt has been thrown upon the Mosaic account of creation, the whole religious world has been agitated, and in many instances faith in the scriptures has been destroyed by this theory of the eminent philosopher, Charles Darwin. I suppose the majority of the theologians who have been trained in the universities during the last quarter of a century, are inclined to look upon the Mosaic account of the creation as mythical in character. Men will try to show you—and apparently succeed—that this earth and its inhabitants have existed for a far longer period than the Bible warrants us in believing. Only a week or two ago it was published that some scientific man, in digging in the ruins of one of the ancient cities, found, as he claims, evidences that that city was in existence thousands of years before the biblical time of the creation of man. According to the chronology in the Bible, the Savior came about four thousand years after the placing of Adam on the earth; but this man of science says this city must have been in existence seven or eight thousand years before the birth of the Savior. He produces evidence of this in the form of pottery upon which the records of those days were kept, and which he has succeeded in deciphering. Other scientific men attempt to prove in different ways that the earth has been in existence long periods anterior to the time that those who believe in the Bible accept. They talk of the flint age, of the bronze age, of the iron age, etc., and try to prove from these things that the antiquity of man is far greater than the Bible chronology gives evidence of.

(George Q. Cannon in Brian H. Stuy, ed., Collected Discourses, 5 vols. [Burbank, Calif., and Woodland Hills, Ut.: B.H.S. Publishing, 1987-1992], Vol. 5 .)

Men of understanding have left on record, as the fruit of their experience and their observation of mankind, that "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom." (Psalm 111:10.) It is the sure foundation upon which all true knowledge is based. Men may acquire extensive information and learning; but unless accompanied by faith in and fear of God such acquirements are not so profitable unto them as they might be. A knowledge of the truth as revealed by the Lord furnishes men who obtain it a sure foundation on which to stand; it is also a standard by which all man-made systems, theories and opinions can be measured.

A most excellent illustration of its value for this purpose can be found in judging what is known as the Darwinian theory. According to this theory, man has gradually ascended, through a process of evolution covering ages of time, from some low form of animal life; he stands today as the product of a long period of development. . . .

But to the Latter-day Saints who understand the principles of truth, it is the greatest absurdity and folly to state that man has been evolved from an inferior form of animal life, and has progressed step by step through the ages until he has reached his present stage of development. They do not need to spend any time to examine such a proposition for they know better.

God has revealed in these last days, as well as in former times, that He is the Father of mankind, that we are descended from Him, that he "created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them." (Genesis 1:27.) The theories of all the philosophers in the world, however cunningly framed or speciously argued, cannot shake the faith of a man or woman of God in this immutable truth.

Here, then, is seen the value of the fear of God. It "is the beginning of knowledge." (Proverbs 1:7.) He who fears God and receives the truths He reveals can safety trust them; he can test men's opinions and systems by them without a doubt as to the result. Building upon these truths, he can go on from knowledge to knowledge until he enters into possession of a fullness.

But "the fool has said in his heart, there is no God." (Psalms 14:1; 53:1.) He seeks no light from heaven. He gropes in search of it by his own wisdom. He builds theories and systems of philosophy which only exhibit his own folly. Calling himself wise, and proud of his acquirements, he fails to recognize the truths of heaven and measures Divinity by his miserable little yardstick.

Man by his own wisdom cannot know God. To know Him man must go to Him in the way he has appointed, or he cannot find him.

(George Q. Cannon, Gospel Truth: Discourses and Writings of President George Q. Cannon, selected, arranged, and edited by Jerreld L. Newquist [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1987], 281-284.)

We hear considerable about evolution. Who is there that believes more in true evolution than the Latter-day Saints?—the evolution of man until he shall become a god, until he shall sit at the right hand of the Father, until he shall be a joint heir with Jesus! That is the Gospel of Jesus Christ, believed in by the Latter-day Saints. That is the kind of evolution we believe in, but not the evolution of man from some low type of animal life.

There is a tendency today in the scientific world to entertain and advocate such ideas concerning the origin of man. The attempt is made to prove that man has come up from the lowest depths through the stone age, the bronze age, the iron age, until he has reached his present condition. This is incorrect.

Man is the son of God and came here perfect from the eternal worlds. Adam was made in the image of God, and he stood upright before Him. His children, however, fell into darkness and sin, and corrupted themselves; and probably there were times when they used flints, just as geologists now attempt to prove, and afterwards, bronze and iron. But that was not man's original condition. He came from God perfect, and he was so intelligent as to give names to all the animal creation, and he became their lord and master. He knew God and walked with Him.

(George Q. Cannon, Gospel Truth: Discourses and Writings of President George Q. Cannon, selected, arranged, and edited by Jerreld L. Newquist [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1987], 9.)

---

Erastus Snow

There is a theory put forth by Mr. Darwin, and others, that is the school of modern philosophers, which is termed in late years, the theory of Evolution, that man in our present state upon the earth, is but the sequence and outgrowth of steady advancement from the lowest order of creation, till the present type of man, and that we have advanced step by step from the lowest order of creation till at last man has been formed upon the earth in our present sphere of action; in short, that our great-grandfathers were apes and monkeys. And how much satisfaction these philosophers have in the contemplation of their grandfather monkeys, we are left to conjecture; but such are the theories put forth by some of our modern philosophers. But we find nothing on the earth, or in the earth, nor under the earth, that indicates that any of these monkeys or apes, or any other orders of creation below man have ever accomplished any great exploits. So far as the history of this earth is known, whether written or unwritten, or whether written in volumes of books, whether engraven upon metallic plates, or whether found impressed in rocks, neither geologists, nor any other scientists have ever been able to show us any great exploits of any of these inferior grades of being to indicate that there was any such vitality in them, as to develop in their future progress, the present order of beings we call man. But if there is any truth in the history given us by Moses this being we call man, is only God in embryo. And Moses tells us that the Creator conversed with this man whom he called Adam, consisting of male and female. He conversed with them, showed himself to them, spoke with them at different times, gave them instructions, gave them his law, visited them repeatedly in their new home, in the place we call the Garden of Eden, the garden that the Lord planted for man—eastward in Eden. And after he was driven out from the face of his Creator, from the Garden, and the vail [sic] was drawn between him and his Creator, yet from time to time God was wont to draw aside that vail [sic] and show himself, and we not only find that Adam and Eve had frequent intercourse with their Creator and talked with him personally as we talk with our children and they with us; but we find many of Adam's descendants obtained like privileges of seeing their Creator, and speaking with him, receiving instructions from him. Enoch, the seventh from Adam, it was said walked with God, and enjoyed this privilege for three hundred years. From time to time the vail [sic] was drawn aside, and whenever he desired, and it was expedient to receive instructions and counsels from his father and Creator he enjoyed this privilege, and the Father came and showed himself to him and spoke with him. The same may be said of Noah and of Abraham, who conversed with him, and the Scriptures tell us, furthermore, that Abraham killed the fatted calf, and prepared savory meat for a meal, and set before him and he ate with him.

(Erastus Snow in Journal of Discourses, 26 vols. [London: Latter-day Saints' Book Depot, 1854-1886], 19: 271.)

---

John Taylor

All the works of God connected with the world which we inhabit, and with all other worlds, are strictly governed by law. So accurate are the movements of the heavenly bodies that even with our limited knowledge we can compute, after the departure of most of these bodies, the time of their return to a minute. The sun rises and sets with great regularity, and we can tell to a moment, by calculating the revolution of the earth, at what time it will make its appearance in the morning and disappear in the evening; the same rule applies to the moon, the whole of the solar system, and to all bodies that can be reached by our instruments. There is perfect regularity, exactitude and order associated with all worlds; a departure from which would produce incalculable evil and irretrievable destruction and ruin. With regard to the matter of which the earth is composed, it is also governed by strict, unchangeable laws; matter possessing the same properties under the same conditions, in all parts of the world. The various grasses, herbs, plants, shrubs, flowers, minerals, metals, waters, fluids or gases, when under the same conditions, are subject to or governed by unchangeable laws; and by those laws chemists or scientists are enabled to apply tests to demonstrate the properties of the various elements in nature, which they find are always immutable, and the same degree of accuracy applies to the laws and various formations of crystallization, under the same circumstances. 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; each one possessing its own distinctive features, each requiring a specific sustenance, each having an organism and faculties governed by prescribed laws to perpetuate its own kind. So accurate is the formation of the various living creatures that an intelligent student of nature can tell by any particular bone of the skeleton of an animal to what class or order it belongs.

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 their Maker. There are, indeed, some very slight exceptions, as for instance, the ass may mix with the mare and produce the mule; but there it ends, the violation of the laws of procreation receives a check, and its operations can go no further. Similar compounds may possibly be made by experimentalists in the vegetable and mineral kingdoms, but the original elements remain the same. Yet this is not the normal, but an abnormal condition with them, as with animals, birds, etc.; and if we take man, he is said to have been made in the image of God, for the simple reason that he is a son of God; and being His son, he is, of course, His offspring, an emanation from God, in whose likeness, we are told, he is made. He did not originate from a chaotic mass of matter, moving or inert, but came forth possessing, in an embryotic [sic] state, all the faculties and powers of a God. And when he shall be perfected, and have progressed to maturity, he will be like his Father—a God; being indeed His offspring. As the horse, the ox, the sheep, and every living creature, including man, propagates its own species and perpetuates its own kind, so does God perpetuate His.

(John Taylor, Mediation and Atonement [Salt Lake City: Deseret News, 1882], 163 - 164.)

---

James E. Talmage

"The Earth and Man"

By James E. Talmage

"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters." (Gen. 1:1-2).

Any question as to when that beginning was is largely futile because unanswerable [sic]. In the first place we have no time unit by which to measure back through the ages to the time at which, so far as the earth is concerned, time began.

Years are as inadequate in any attempted survey of the stages of earth development as are miles to the astronomer who would span the distances of interstellar space. He speaks in terms of light-years, such unit being the distance traversed by a ray of light speeding on at the rate of approximately 186,000 miles per second throughout a year.

Secondly, we are without information as to what stage of earth development is indicated by "the beginning." And what is a beginning in nature? At best it is but a new start in advance of what had passed up to that point of time; and every beginning is an ending of what went immediately before, even as every consummation is a commencement of something greater, higher, and therefore superior to the past.

The Earth Older Than Man

To the thoughtful mind there can be no confusion of the beginning spoken of in the opening verse of Genesis with the advent of man upon the changing earth; for by the scriptural record itself we learn of stage after stage, age after age of earth processes by which eventually this planet became capable of supporting life—vegetable, animal and human in due course.

Whether or not scientists have been able to see, however dimly, the way by which the earth as an orb in space was formed, matters little except as a subject of academic interest. For many years it was very generally believed that the earth, once formless and void, passed through stages of cooling of superheated gas to liquid, thence to the solid state, as the Nebular Theory assumed; but this conception has given way to the later thought that the earth as a solid spheroid has resulted from the bringing together of particles once diffused in space—this being the basis of the Planetesimal Hypothesis.

But this we know, for both revealed and discovered truth, that is to say both scripture and science, so affirm—that plant life antedated animal existence and that animals preceded man as tenants of earth.

Life and Death Before Man's Advent

According to the conception of geologists the earth passed through ages of preparation, to us unmeasured and immeasurable, during which countless generations of plants and animals existed in great variety and profusion and gave in part the very substance of their bodies to help form certain strata which are still existent as such.

 

The oldest, that is to say the earliest, rocks thus far identified in land masses reveal the fossilized remains of once living organisms, plant and animal. The coal strata, upon which the world of industry so largely depends, are essentially but highly compressed and chemically changed vegetable substance. The whole series of chalk deposits and many of our deep-sea limestones contain the skeletal remains of animals. These lived and died, age after age, while the earth was yet unfit for human habitation.

From the Simple to the Complex

From the fossil remains of plants and animals found in the rocks the scientist points to a very definite order in the sequence of life embodiment, for the older rocks, the earlier formations, reveal to us organisms of simplest structure only, whether of plants or animals. These primitive species were aquatic; land forms were of later development. Some of these simpler forms of life have persisted until the present time, though with great variation as the result of changing environment.

Geologists say that these very simple forms of plant and animal bodies were succeeded by others more complicated; and in the indestructible record of the rocks they read the story of advancing life from the simple to the more complex, from the single-celled protozoan to the highest animals, from the marine algae to the advanced types of flowering plant—to the apple-tree, the rose, and the oak.

What a fascinating story is inscribed upon the stony pages of the earth's crust! The geologists, who through long and patient effort has learned at least a little of the language in which these truths are written, finds the pages illustrated with pictures, which for fidelity of detail excel the best efforts of our modern engravers, lithographers and half-tone artists. The pictures in the rocks are the originals, the rest at best but copies.

In due course came the crowning work of this creative sequence, the advent of man! Concerning this all-important event we are told that scientists and theologians are at hopeless and irreconcilable variance. I regard the assumption or claim, whichever it be, as an exaggeration. Discrepancies that trouble us now will diminish as our knowledge of pertinent facts is extended. The creator has made record in the rocks for man to decipher; but He has also spoken directly regarding the main stages of progress by which the earth has been brought to be what it is. The accounts can not be fundamentally opposed; one can not contradict the other; though man's interpretation of either may be seriously at fault.

Adam a Historic Personage

So far as the history of man on the earth is concerned the scriptures begin with the account of Adam. True, the geologist does not know Adam by name; but he knows and speaks of man as an early, continuing and present form of earth-life, above and beyond all other living things past or present.

We believe that Adam was a real personage, who stands at the head of his race chronologically. To my mind Adam is a historic personage, not a prehistoric being, unidentified and uncertain.

If the Usher chronology be correct, or even approximately so, then the beginning of Adamic history as recorded in scripture dates back about 4000 years before the birth of Christ. We as a Church believe that the current reckoning of time from the birth of Christ to the present is correct, namely 1931 years -- not from last New Year's day, January 1, but from the month that came to be known among the Hebrews as Nisan or Ahib, corresponding with our late March and early April. So we believe that we are now living in the 1931st year since the birth of Christ, and therefore 5931 years since the beginning of the Adamic record.

This record of Adam and his posterity is the only scriptural account we have of the appearance of man upon the earth. But we have also a vast and ever-increasing volume of knowledge concerning man, his early habits and customs, his industries and works of art, his tools and implements, about which such scriptures as we have thus far received are entirely silent. Let us not try to wrest the scriptures in an attempt to explain away what we can not explain. The opening chapters of Genesis, and scriptures related thereto, were never intended as a text-book of geology, archaeology, earth-science or man-science. Holy Scripture will endure, while the conceptions of men change with new discoveries. We do not show reverence for the scriptures when we misapply them through faulty interpretation.

Primary and Secondary Causes

There has been much discussion over the alleged conflict between the teachings of science and the doctrines of the revealed word concerning the origin of man. Let it be remembered that the term origin is almost invariably used in a relative sense. The mind of man is unable to grasp the fundamental thought of an absolute or primary origin. Every occurrence man has witnessed is the result of some previously acting cause or purpose; and that cause in turn was the effect or result of causes yet more remote. Perhaps we have never been able to trace an effect to its primary or original cause. Man may say that he understands the origin of an oak in the acorn form from which it sprang; but is not the acorn the fruit of a yet earlier oak, and so in reality rather a continuation than a beginning? Yet there is something fascinating in the thought of a beginning; the persistence of a process once started is far less mysterious than its inception.

It is not enough to refer effects to the First Great Cause; it is unsatisfying and not always reverent to answer questions as to how things came to be what they are by the easy statement that God made them so. With such an answer the scientific man has little patience. The fact that all created things are the works of God and that all processes of nature are due to Him as the administrator of law and order is to the scientific mind an axiom requiring neither argument nor demonstration. The botanist knows that God makes the plant grow; but he, weak mortal, is devoting time and energy of body, mind and spirit, to a study of the way in which God works such a marvelous miracle. The geologist knows that God created the earth; but the best effort of his life is put forth in the hope of finding out in some degree, however small, the method by which the Creator wrought this wondrous world. The astronomer gazing into the starry depths sees in their orderly procession the Lord Eternal walking in His majesty and might; and in humility the student of the heavenly bodies spends days and nights striving to learn a little of the way in which God worked out the marvel of the universe.

In proportion as any one of these may learn of the ways of God he becomes wise. To be able to think as God thinks, to comprehend in any degree His purposes and methods, is to become in that measure like unto Him, and to that extent to be prepared for eventual companionship in His presence. The scientist is busily engaged in the study of secondary causes—the ways and means by which God works and through which He accomplishes His miracle, ever beginning, never ending—and in his search for the truth the student of science scarcely dares lift his eyes to look toward the First Great Cause, the Eternal Power that stands and operates behind and above all the secondary causes, or what we call the processes of Nature.

The Origin of Man

The question involved in the origin of man, therefore, is not raised as a challenge to the belief and declaration that he came to earth through Divine direction, but it is in the nature of an inquiry as to the conditions under which he came. There are many who claim that man's advent upon the earth was effected through processes of evolution from lower forms, processes that had been operative for ages, processes by which man is made kin to the brute and a development from the lowest type of organism. Others affirm that he differs from all mortal creatures of lower rank, not only in degree but in kind; in short, that he is not one with the animal creation and that therefore his coming was in no sense a natural and necessary result of earlier animal life. Discussion on this question has developed intense animus, and too often the quest for truth has been lost sight of in the strife for triumph.

In speaking of the origin of man we generally have reference to the creation of man's body; and, of all the mistakes that man has made concerning himself, one of the greatest and the gravest is that of mistaking the body for the man. The body is no more truly the whole man than is the coat the body. The man, as an individual intelligence, existed before his earthly body was framed and shall exist after that body has suffered dissolution. Let it not be assumed that belief in the existence of man's spirit is a conception founded upon scriptural authority only; on the contrary, let it be known that it is in accordance with the best and most advanced scientific thought and philosophic belief of the day to hold that man consists of spirit and body; and Divine revelation makes plain that these together constitute the soul.

We have difficulty in comprehending processes for which we find no analogy in things familiar. Even were it possible for us to know in detail the way in which the body of man was formed and then endowed with the power of procreation, insuring the perpetuity of the race, it would throw but little light upon the subject of the ultimate origin of man. We know but little of things beyond the sphere upon which we live except as information has been revealed by a power superior to that of earth, and by an intelligence above that of man. Notwithstanding the assumption that man is the culmination of an evolutionary development from a lower order of beings, we know that the body of man today is in the very form and fashion of his spirit, except indeed for disfigurements and deformities. The perfect body is the counterpart of the perfect spirit and the two are the constituent entities of the soul.

By What Standard?

Much depends upon the standard by which we judge as to whether any particular organism shall be pronounced of high or lower rank. By the standard of powers of flight, in which the bird excels, man is a very inferior being; if judged by fleetness of foot he is far below the deer; by gage of strength he is inferior to the horse and the elephant; and yet man holds dominion over these and all other living things of earth. In certain important points of body-structure man stands low in the scale if he be graded strictly in accordance with the accepted standard of mammalian anatomy.

In the course of creative events the earth came to a condition fitted for the abiding place of the sons and daughters of God; and then Adam came forth upon the earth. But the beginning of man's mortal existence upon the earth was not the beginning of man; he had lived before, even as he shall life after the earth has passed away and its place taken by a new earth and a new heaven.

Man and the Ape

It has been stated by certain extremists that evolution affirms that man is in the line of posterity from the ape. But scientists today discredit this view. The most that even radical evolutionists assert is that the similarity of structure between man and certain apes indicates the possibility of a common ancestor of the two but between man and the ape there are more essential differences than resemblances.

True, man does not excel in strength of limb, agility, or speed, but in the God-given powers of mind and in the possession of superior ambition and effort. Hear the words of one who until his death was regarded as among the foremost of American geologists, James D. Dana:

"Man's origin has thus far no sufficient explanation from science. His close relations in structure to the man-apes are unquestionable. They have the same number of bones with two exceptions, and the bones are the same in kind and structure. The muscles are mostly the same. Both carry their young in their arms. The affiliations strongly suggest community of descent. But the divergencies ... especially the cases of degeneracy in man's structure, exhibited in his palmigrade feet and the primitive character of his teeth, allying him in these respects to the Lower Eocene forms, are admitted proof that he has not descended from any type of ape. In addition, man's erect posture makes the gap a very broad one. The brute, the ape included, has powerful muscles in the back of the neck to carry the head in its horizontal position, while man has no such muscles, as anyone of the species can prove by crawling for a while on 'all fours.' Beyond this, the great size of the brain, his eminent intellectual and moral qualities, his voice and speech, give him sole title to the position at the head of the kingdoms of life. In this high position, he is able to use Nature as his work-mate, his companion, and his educator, and to find perpetual delight in her harmonies and her revelations.

...

"Whatever the results of further search, we may feel assured, in accord with Wallace, who shares with Darwin in the authorship of the theory of Natural Selection, that the intervention of a Power above nature as at the basis of man's development. Believing that Nature exists through the will and ever-acting power of the Divine Being, and that all its great truths, its beauties, its harmonies, are manifestations of His wisdom and power, or, in the words nearly of Wallace, that the whole universe is not merely dependent on, but actually is, the will of one Supreme Intelligence. Nature, with man as its culminant species, is no longer a mystery."

James D. Dana, Manual of Geology, 4th edition, page 1036.

These lines were written before the death of the writer—and constitute his last testament and testimony as to the origin of the species to which he himself belonged.

Man's Place in Nature

In the work already cited, the same author wrote:

"Man stands in the successional line of the quadrumana, at the head of the animal kingdom. But he is not a primate among primates. The quadrumana are, as Cuvier called them, quadrumana from the first to the last. They are brute mammals, as is manifested in their carnivore-like canines and their powerful jaws; in their powerful muscular development; in their walking on all fours, and the adaption thereto exhibited in the vertebrae, producing the convexity of the back; and also in other parts of the skeleton. Man, on the contrary, is not quadrumanous. ...

"Man was the first being, in the geological succession, capable of an intelligent survey of Nature and a comprehension of her laws; the first capable of augmenting his strength by bending nature to his service, rendering thereby a weak body stronger than all possible animal force; the first capable of deriving happiness from truth and goodness; of apprehending eternal right; of reaching toward a knowledge of self and God; the first, therefore, capable of conscious obedience or disobedience of a moral law, and the first subject to debasement of his moral nature through his appetites.

"There is in man, therefore, a spiritual element in which the brute has no share. His power of indefinite progress, his thoughts and desires that look onward even beyond time, his recognition of spiritual existence and of a Divinity above, all evince a nature that partakes of the infinite and divine. Man is linked to the past through the system of life, of which he is the last, the completing, creation. But, unlike other species of that closing system of the past, he, through his spiritual nature, is more intimately connected with the opening future." —

Dana, pages 1017-18.

A Later Authority

Let me cite a later authority than Dana. Among the living no anthropologist has been more pronounced in upholding the theories of Darwin and Lamarck than Dr. Henry Fairfield Osborn.

By the theories mentioned man was said to have risen from tree-climbing ape-like ancestors. In his address as retiring president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, December, 1929, Dr. Osborn affirms the untenability of the views he had so long and aggressively advocated. He regards the human bones unearthed at Piltdown, Sussex, England, as typical of the "Dawn Man," who was in every distinguishing characteristic, a man, not part man and part ape, but as to brain capacity and other evidences of mentality equal to some races now living. Yet Osborn holds to a communal origin of man and anthropoids related in structure, away back in the late Tertiary age of geologic history.

Thus theories come, endure for a season and go, like the fungi of the night; nevertheless they serve their purpose as temporary aids in human thought and endeavor.

The Time Element

The outstanding point of difference between those who take the opening chapters of Genesis and cognate scriptures as a the whole and only reliable record of the creation of earth and man, and the students of earth-science who fail to find an adequate record in scripture, is the point of time during which man in some state has lived on the planet.

Geologists and anthropologists say that if the beginning of Adamic history dates back but 6000 years or less, there must have been races of human sort upon earth long before that time—without denying, however, that Adamic history may be correct, if it be solely regarded solely as the history of the Adamic race.

This view postulates, by application of Dana's affirmation already quoted: "that the intervention of a power above Nature" brought about the placing of, let me say, Adam upon earth.

It is but fair to say that no reconciliation of these opposing conceptions has been effected to the satisfaction of both parties. We have not yet learned how to correlate geologic time-periods with terms of years, except as estimates, for which no absolutely dependable foundation may be found.

Nobility of Adam's Race

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 directed, created and empowered, and stands as the patriarchal head of his posterity—a posterity, who, if true to the laws of God, are heirs to the Priesthood and to the glories of eternal lives.

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.

Many attempts have been made by those who regard man as an animal to frame some definition by which he may be distinctively described among his fellow animals; but of such attempts none have been satisfactorily successful. The difficulty lies in the fact already stated, that man differs from the animal creation not only in degree but in kind; he is the only being who has any conception of a preexistent state or an existence beyond the grave; the only being whose thoughts turn toward God and who feels in his soul the inspiring impulses of kinship to Deity. 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. The spirit of man is the offspring of the Eternal Father, and his body, if unmarred, is in the very form and fashion of that spirit.

The Ante-Mortal State

We have been told that Jesus Christ is in very truth our Elder Brother, and as to His preexistence in the spirit state there is little room for question. That His spirit was in the form of the earthly body which He afterward took, and which body was slain, buried, and resurrected, and with which body He ascended into heaven, is attested by scripture. Going back to the time immediately following the dispersion from Babel, we read of a prophet to whom the unembodied Lord revealed Himself, saying: "Behold, this body, which ye now behold, is the body of my spirit; and man have I created after the body of my spirit; and even as I appear unto thee to be in the spirit will I appear unto my people in the flesh." (Book of Mormon, Ether, 3:16).

It is evident from this scripture that in His preexistent state, that is to say in the state in which He existed prior to His earthly birth, Jesus Christ had the same form and stature that He afterward presented in the flesh. By natural processes His spirit shaped for itself a body from the material of earth, which body underwent a course of graded development until it reached maturity, in which state that body was the counterpart tot he spirit whose material tabernacle it was. As with Jesus, so with all the sons and daughters of God; each had a spiritual existence before he entered upon this stage of mortal existence, and in each case the body is formed and fashioned by the power of the immortal spirit. In this process of body-shaping, the spirit may be hindered, hampered, and interfered with, through influences of heredity, through prenatal defects, or through accident and disease.

As to how were formed the bodies of the first human beings to take tabernacles, the revealed word gives no details while science has practically nothing to offer by way of explanation. As Dana so positively declares in the work already cited "Man's origin has thus far no sufficient explanation from science."

Man's mortal existence is but temporary to this earth; he came hither from another realm, in which he lived in an unembodied state and to which, in the natural order, he shall return in a disembodied state, following the change known as death. After the Body of the first man had been made ready through the direct operation of the creative power, the spirit of man entered that body. Note the sublimity of the scriptural declaration: "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." (Gen 2:7).

A Power Above Nature

In the study of all the created things over which he has dominion, man has found it possible to investigate with some degree of success the secondary causes, or natural processes through which the creative power has operated to bring about the system that we designate as nature; but in the study of his own eternal self he is brought at once to the contemplation of the First Great Cause as to his origin. The power that lies at the basis of man's development is "a Power above Nature." That is to say, man, as a mortal being, exists as the result of a special and particular creation. Through graded stages the earth was brought into a state suited to the support of life. In orderly sequence plants and animals appeared; and when at last the world was prepared for its royal ruler, he came, even as had been declared:

"And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

"And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." (Gen. 1:26-28).

Such is the declaration of scripture regarding Adam's advent upon earth; and such is a fair summary of our knowledge upon the subject.

Evolution, True and False

Evolution is true so far as it means development, and progress, and advancement in all the works of God; but many of the vagaries that have been made to do duty under that name are so vague as to be unacceptable to the scientific mind. 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 can not be discredited by fact and truth. Within the Gospel of Jesus Christ there is room and place for every truth thus far learned by man or yet to be made known. The Gospel is not behind the times, on the contrary it is up-to-date and ever shall be.

It is natural for the young and immature mind to think that what to it is new must of necessity be new to the world. Comparatively inexperienced students are discovering from time to time apparent discrepancies between the faith of their fathers and the development of modern thought; and these they are apt to magnify and exaggerate, when as a matter of fact, their great-grandfathers met the same seeming difficulties and yet survived. Believe not those who assert that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is in any way opposed to progress or inconsistent with advancement.

In the Lineage of Deity

Man is the child of God, he is born heir to boundless possibilities, the inheritor of the eternities to come. Among mortal beings, the law holds true that the posterity of each shall be after his kind. The child therefore may become like unto the parent; and man may yet attain the rank of godship. He is born in the lineage of Deity, not in the posterity of the brute creation.

I cite my words of an earlier day, with a quotation.

 

Man's Relative Littleness

The insignificance of man in comparison with the earth on which he dwells, and even with the limited topographical features of his world, has oft times been dwelt upon. Draw to scale a towering mountain and a man standing at its base or on its summit—what does the man amount to? But then the earth as a planet is small compared with some others of its own system, to say nothing of the relative sizes of earth and sun. In turn, our entire solar system, in the measurement of which miles cease to have meaning—so vast it is—ranks low in dimensions as we gage it with other families of worlds in the great galaxy of stars to which it belongs, and that immeasurable galaxy is but one among many, and not the greatest of them all.

Dream Vision of the Infinite

This hour is not well suited to the presentation of mathematical data relating to the extent of the universe; though it may permit us to indulge the contemplation of thought-pictures, bewildering though that indulgence may be. John Paul Richter's Dream Vision of the Infinite has been brought to English readers through several renditions; and I ask you to follow or accompany me through one of these, generally worded along the lines of the version given us by Thomas DeQuincey:

"God called up from dreams a man into the vestibule of heaven, saying 'Come thou hither and I will show thee the glories of my house.' And to the servants that stood around the throne he said 'Take the man and strip from him his robes of flesh; cleanse his vision and put a new breath into his nostrils; only touch not with any change his human heart—the heart that fears and trembles.'

"It was done; and, with a mighty angel for his guide, the man stood ready for his infinite voyage. Then, from the terraces of heaven, without sound or farewell, they wheeled away into endless space. Sometimes, with solemn flight of angel wing, they fled through Zaarrahs of darkness, through widernesses [sic] of death that divided the worlds of life. Sometimes they swept over frontiers that were quickening under prophetic motions from God.

"Then, from a distance that is counted only in heaven, light dawned for a time through a sleepy film. By unutterable pace the light swept to them, they by unutterable pace to the light. In a moment the rushing of planets was upon them; in a moment the blazing of suns was around them.

"Then came eternities of twilight, that revealed, but were not revealed. To the right hand and the left towered mighty constellations, that by self-repetitions and answers from afar, that by counterpositions, built up triumphal gates, whose architraves, whose archways—horizontal, upright—rested, rose—at altitudes, by spans—that seemed ghostly from infinitude. Without measure were the architraves, past number were the archways, beyond memory the gates!

"Within were stairs that scaled the eternities above, that descended to the eternities below; above was below, below was above to the man stripped of gravitating body. Depth was swallowed up in height insurmountable; height was swallowed up in depth unfathomable. Suddenly, as thus they rode from infinite to infinite, suddenly as thus they tilted over abysmal worlds, a mighty cry arose—that systems more mysterious, that worlds more billowy, other heights and other depths were coming, were nearing, were at hand!

"Then the man sighed and stopped, shuddered and wept. His overladen heart uttered itself in tears; and he said 'Angel, I will go no father; for the spirit of man aches with this infinity. Insufferable is the glory of God. Let me lie down in the grave and hide myself from the persecutions of the infinite; for end, I see, there is none!'

"And from all the listening stars that shone around issued a choral chant, 'The man speaks truly; end is there none that ever yet we heard of.' 'End is there none?' the angel solemnly demanded. 'Is there, indeed, no end? And is this the sorrow that kills you?' Then the angel threw up his glorious hands to the heaven of heavens, saying 'End is there none to the universe of God! Lo, also, there is no beginning!'"

The Spiritual Grandeur of Man

What is man in this boundless setting of sublime splendor? I answer you: Potentially now, actually to be, he is greater and grander, more precious according to the arithmetic of God, than all the planets and suns of space. For him were they created; they are the handiwork of God; man is His son! In this world man is given dominion over a few things; it is his privilege to achieve supremacy over many things.

"The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament showeth His handiwork." (Psa. 19:1). Incomprehensibly grand as are the physical creations of the earth and space, they have been brought into existence as means to an end, necessary to the realization of the supreme purpose, which in the words of the Creator is thus declared:

"For behold, this is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man." (Pearl of Great Price, page 4).

It is decreed that this earth shall become a celestialized, glorified sphere; such is the revealed world. Science has nothing to say on the matter; it can neither refute nor prove. But the Lord, even God, hath spoken—and so shall it be! Amen.

(Address Delivered in the Tabernacle, Salt Lake City, Utah Sunday, August 9, 1931. Originally published in the Deseret News, Nov. 21, 1931; subsequently published as a pamphlet by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, 1931; later published in The Instructor, vol. 100, no. 12 (Dec. 1965), pg. 474-477; continued in vol. 101, no. 1 (Jan. 1966), pg. 9-15.)

---

John A. Widtsoe

To What Extent Should the Doctrine of Evolution Be Accepted?

The answer to the above question depends on the meaning assigned to the word evolution. Among people generally, as well as lay a group of scientists who should know better, the word is used with unpardonable looseness. Especially should the difference between the law of evolution and the theory or theories of evolution be stressed whenever the word is used.

In its widest meaning evolution refers to the unceasing changes within our universe. Nothing is static; all things change. Stars explode in space; mountains rise and are worn down; men are not the same today as yesterday. Even the regularities of nature, such as the succession of the seasons or of night and day, cause continuous changes upon earth. Everywhere, a process of upbuilding or degradation is in evidence. The face of nature has been achieved by continuous small and slow degrees. This has been observed by man from the beginning, and must be accepted by all thinking people. Darwin knew it no better than the peoples of antiquity. The law of change, an undeniable fact of human experience, is the essence of the law of evolution (H. F. Osborn, From the Greeks to Darwin).

The great champion and amplifier of the doctrine of evolution, the philosopher Herbert Spencer, defined the law of evolution by saying, in substance, that whatever moves from the indefinite to the definite, is evolving; while that which moves from the definite to the indefinite, is dissolution or the opposite of evolution. Nebulae passing into stars are evolving; stars broken into cosmic dust are dissolving (Herbert Spencer, First Principles). When simple units are used to build up more complex structures we have evolution. When any structure is broken down into constituent elements, we have its opposite, dissolution. Evolution in this sense is the same as progression or growth.

From this point of view the law of evolution, representing eternal change upward, becomes a basic, universal law, by which nature in her many moods may in part be explained.

Indeed, it has been one of the most useful means of interpreting the phenomena of the universe. The first and most notable deduction from the law of evolution is that, in the words of Spencer, "We can no longer contemplate the visible creation as having a definite beginning or end, or as being isolated" (Herbert Spencer, First Principles). That is, existence is eternal.

The noisy babble about evolution, often disgraceful to both sides since Darwin wrote Origin of Species, has been confined almost wholly to speculations or guesses concerning the cause, methods and consequences of the law of evolution. The law itself has not been challenged. It is so with every well-established, natural phenomenon. Inferences are set up to explain observed facts. Such hypotheses or theories, which are often helpful, become dangerous when confused with the facts themselves. There are now many theories of evolution, all subject to the normal scrutiny to which all theories should be subjected; and until their probability is demonstrated, it is well to remain wary of them.

The foremost and best-known theory of evolution is that all living things on earth, whether fish, insect, bird, beast, or man, are of the same pedigree. All creation, it declares, has come from a common stock, from a cell formed in the distant past. Man and beast have the same ancestry. In support of this theory numerous well-established observations are presented. These may be grouped into five classes:

First, the fossil remains of prehistoric life on earth show that in the oldest rocks are remains of the simplest forms of life; and as the rocks become younger, more complex or more advanced life forms seem to appear. The scale of life appears to ascend from amoeba to man, as the age of the particular part of the earth's crust diminishes.

Second, each group of living things has much the same bodily organization. In the case of mammals, all, including man, have similar skeletons, muscular arrangements, nervous systems, sense organizations, etc. In some species the organs are merely rudimentary -- but they are there.

Third, the embryos of man and higher animals, in the earlier stages, are identical, as far as the microscope can reveal. This is held to mean that embryonic development summarizes or recapitulates the stages of man's development through the ages of the past.

Fourth, all organic creatures may be so grouped, according to structure and chemical nature, as to show gradually increasing relationships from the lowest to the highest forms of life. Similarities in blood composition are held to indicate nearness of kinship. The blood of the great apes is very similar to the blood of man.

Fifth, it has been possible, within historic times, to domesticate many animals, often with real changes in bodily form, as the various breeds of cattle, sheep, or dogs. Besides, isolated animals, as on the islands of the sea, have become unique forms differing from those on connected continents.

These facts, so claim the proponents of the theory of evolution, all point to the common origin, and an advancing existence, of all animal forms on earth. To many minds these observations, upon which in the main the theory of evolution rests, are sufficient proof of the correctness of the theory of evolution. It is indeed an easy way of explaining the endless variety of life. All life has grown out of a common root. The ease of explaining the origins and differences among life forms has won much support for the theory of evolution (Sir Arthur Keith, Concerning Man's Origin, and Darwinism and What It Implies; H. H. Newman, Evolution Yesterday and Today).

Yet, at the best the doctrine of the common origin of all life is only an inference of science. After these many years of searching, its truth has not been demonstrated. To many competent minds it is but a working hypothesis of temporary value.

Many weaknesses in the theory of evolution are recognized by its adherents. Two are especially notable.

First, many reported similarities are far-fetched and not well enough established to be acceptable as the foundation of a world-sweeping theory. It is surprising how many such cases have been found. (Douglas Dewar, Man a Special Creation; Sir Ambrose Fleming, Evolution or Creation; E. C. Wren, Evolution, Fact or Fiction) Moreover, many actual similarities may be interpreted in more than one way. The theory of a common origin is only one of several possible explanations of the mass of biological facts.

Second the theory fails utterly to explain the emotional, reasoning, and religious nature of man which distinguishes him so completely from the lower animals. One defender of the theory declares that the brains of man and monkey are identical anatomically, but that the larger size of the human brain accounts for the higher intelligence of man. This suggestion falls to the ground in face of well-known facts such as that the ant shows greater intelligence than the cow. Many notable advocates of the theory, such as Darwin and Huxley, have stood helpless before the mental emotional, and moral supremacy of man over the ape, the animal most like man in body. Conscience is peculiar to man. Evil, sin, goodness, truth, love, sacrifice, hope, and religion separate man from the highest animal by a gulf not yet bridged by any scientific theory.

The doctrine of the common origin of life on earth is but a scientific theory, and should be viewed as such. Clear thinkers will distinguish between the general law of change or evolution accepted by all, and the special theories of evolution which, like all scientific theories, are subject to variation with the increase of knowledge. Honest thinkers will not attempt to confuse law and theory in the minds of laymen. The man, learned or unlearned, who declares the doctrine of the common origin of life on earth to be demonstrated beyond doubt, has yet to master the philosophy of science. The failure to differentiate between facts and inferences is the most grievous and the most common sin of scientists.

This is the trend of thought in the best scientific circles. In the words of Professor Punnett of Cambridge University, scientists "still hold by the theory of evolution, regarding the world of living things as dynamic, and not a static concern." But the interpretation of Darwinism has changed greatly. The theory of evolution "is released today from the necessity of finding a use for everything merely because it exists." More interesting, the glib talk about changing species is subdued. "Species are once more sharply marked off things with hard outlines, and we are faced once more with the problem of their origin as such. The idea of yesterday has become the illusion of today; today's idea may become the illusion of tomorrow" (Punnett, "Forty Years of Evolution Theory," in Background to Modern Science). That is the spirit of science. By slow degrees, among many changes, accepting, rejecting, striving, it may in the distant future reach the correct understanding of final causes.

The majority of the advocates of the theory that all life came from one stock believe that the primeval cell originated by the chance assembling under favorable conditions of the constituent elements of cellular substance. That means that life is only an accidental intruder into the universe. The immediate logical weakness of this view is that if life on earth began by the fortuitous assembling of inorganic materials in a slimy, primitive pool, other equally favorable pools for the generation of life may have existed, thus providing more than one origin of life.

Those who insist that all life on earth has come from one source are almost obliged to rule God out of the picture; for, if a Supreme Being is allowed to create a living cell in the beginning, He may at will create other life at different periods of time. Even believers in God who accept the theory of evolution as a final explanation of the origin of life forms, are inclined to insist that the theory represents Gods only method of creation. Nearly always, those who so believe refuse to admit that any other process may also be in operation. They would limit God to one method of operation. Fettering God, or unbelief in Him, or making Him merely a universal super-force, have been usual companions of the theory of evolution (W. W. Keen, I Believe in God and Evolution).

Latter-day Saints accept every scientific fact, but rate theories based upon the facts as human explanations of the facts, likely to change as new facts appear. They do not deny that an evolutionary process, a reflection of the gospel law of progression, may be one of the methods of the Lord's labor in the universe. That does not mean, however, that the Almighty cannot perform other acts of will for the promotion of His plan, as, for example, the special creation of man. God is a purposeful Being; whatever is on earth or in heaven has been designed for the accomplishment of the divine purpose -- the welfare of man. The spirit of man, itself intelligent, purposeful, is an eternal pre-existent being. He reaches beyond the confines of earth. He was with God before the earth was made. The theory of evolution does not explain the external man.

Any theory that leaves out God as a personal, purposeful Being, and accepts chance as a first cause cannot be accepted by Latter-day Saints. The evidence for God is yet greater than for the chance creation of the earth and its inhabitants. Mind and thought shape a work of art from the marble block. More marvelous than any human work of art is man. However he may have risen to his present high estate, it has been by the operation of mind and thought. That man and the whole of creation came by chance is unthinkable. It is equally unthinkable that if man came into being by the will and power of God, the divine creative power is limited to one process dimly sensed by mortal man. The great law of evolution may have many forms of expression, far beyond man's present comprehension.

In fact, the whole squabble about evolution centers upon two questions. Did life on earth come by chance or by divine will? If by divine will, is God limited to one process? These questions are as old as history. The ancients asked them; and those who come after us will ask them.

Here, then, is the answer to the question at the head of this chapter: The law of evolution or change may be accepted fully. It is an established fact so far as human power can determine. It is nothing more or less than the gospel law of progression or its opposite. Joseph Smith taught that men could rise towards Godhood only "by going from one small degree to another, and from a small capacity to a great one; from grace to grace; from exaltation to exaltation." Modern revelation also says, "For I, the Lord God, created all things of which I have spoken, spiritually, before they were naturally upon the face of the earth" (Pearl of Great Price, Moses 3:5), and further that each creation "remaineth in the sphere in which I, God created it" (Pearl of Great Price, Moses 3:9) This last statement suggests limitations placed upon development under the general law of progressive change. The theory of evolution which may contain partial truth, should be looked upon as one of the changing hypotheses of science, man's explanation of a multitude of observed facts. It would be folly to make it the foundation of a life's philosophy. Latter-day Saints build upon something more secure -- the operation of God's will, free and untrammelled [sic], among the realities of the Universe.

(John A. Widtsoe, Evidences and Reconciliations [Salt Lake City: Improvement Era], 163.)

---

Joseph Fielding Smith

Joseph Fielding Smith was by far the most adamantly opposed to evolution of all the Apostles. He wrote an entire book attacking evolution (Man, His Origin and Destiny) and also gave many public discourses on the matter (see Doctrines of Salvation Vol. 1, Chapter 9 for a partial quotation list). Because of the enormous amount of quotes available, we have only included the forward to his work: Man, His Origin and Destiny, which provides a brief overview of the book as well as acknowledgments of others that provided assistance in his work.

The following pages are the result of many months of reflection and conviction that something should be written to strengthen the faith of some weak members of the Church, and our students in the public schools and colleges, who are constantly exposed to the theories of organic evolution and the higher criticism, so-called.

These hypotheses are not confined to the schools, for they find their way into the press and current magazines expressed with a finality as though they had been definitely proved. They are but guesses. They can never be more than guesses, for they lie beyond the possibility of proof. Moreover, being in conflict with the revelations of the Lord to his servants the prophets, and the teachings of our Redeemer, they are ever destructive of faith.

It has been my wish for several years that something might be done to counteract these false teachings, so destructive of faith in God. I have mentioned this many times to my associates and it is with their constant urging that I have undertaken this work.

To Elders Mark E. Petersen, Marion G. Romney of the Council of the Twelve; Elders Milton R. Hunter and Bruce R. McConkie of the First Council of Seventy, I am deeply indebted for the encouragement and help which they have given. Equally am I indebted to Dr. Melvin A. Cook and Elder A. Wm. Lund, assistant Church Historian, for their assistance and their valuable suggestions. Nor must I forget the aid of my secretary, Mrs. Rubie McKinlay Egbert, and my wife, Jessie Evans Smith, for the typing and reading of the proof, and my son, Joseph Fielding Smith Jr., who set the type and offered many helpful suggestions.

—JOSEPH FIELDING SMITH

(Joseph Fielding Smith, Man, His Origin and Destiny [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1954], vi.)

---

George Albert Smith

I am grateful that in the midst of the confusion of our Father's children there has been given to the members of this great organization a sure knowledge of the origin of man, that we came from the spirit world where our spirits were begotten by our Father in heaven, that he formed our first parents from the dust of the earth, and that their spirits were placed in their bodies, and that man came, not as some have believed, not as some have preferred to believe, from some of the lower walks of life, but our ancestors were those beings who lived in the courts of heaven. We came not from some menial order of life, but our ancestor is God our heavenly Father. I am grateful that we are not laboring under a handicap such as I feel that some men are who feel that they have grown up and evolved from some unknown condition; but, on the contrary, standing as we do, facing the problems of life, believing as we do that we were first created in the image of God, that he is the Father of our spirits, and that he created this earth for us that we might dwell hereon, under his wise counsel and direction, we may be happy, to rejoice in life and to prepare ourselves to go back into his presence, to live forever, when our life here upon this earth has been terminated.

(George Albert Smith, Conference Report, October 1925, Afternoon Session 33.)

---

David O. McKay

Your letter of February 11, 1957, has been received.

On the subject of organic evolution the Church has officially taken no position. The book "Man, His Origin and Destiny" was not published by the Church, and is not approved by the Church.

The book contains expressions of the author's views for which he alone is responsible.

Sincerely your brother,

[signed] David O. McKay

(President)

[On 18 October 1968, President McKay gave permission for the publication of this letter. It was published by Stokes in Dialogue 12:90-92 (Winter 1979), along with background and commentary.]

Youth need religion to comply properly with the purposes of creation. There is a purposeful design permeating all nature, the crowning event of which is man. Here, on this thought, science again leads the student up to a certain point, and sometimes leaves him with his soul unanchored. For example, evolution's 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 that there is no intelligent purpose in it, undoubtedly impresses the student with the thought that all may be chance.

I say that no youth should be left without a counterbalancing thought. Even the skeptical teacher should be fair enough to say that Charles Darwin himself, when he faced the great questions of eventual annihilation, if creation is dominated only by chance, wrote: "It is an intolerable thought that man and all other sentient things are doomed to complete annihilation, after such long-continued, slow progress.

And another good authority, Raymond F. West, lecturing on immortality, said: "Why this vast expenditure of time and pain and blood? Why should man come so far if he is destined to go no farther? A creature which has traveled such distances and fought such battles and won such victories deserves, one is compelled to say, to conquer death and rob the grave of its victory."

(David O. McKay, [read by his son David Lawrence McKay] Conference Report, April 1968, General Priesthood Meeting 92.)

There is a perpetual design permeating all purposes of creation. On these thoughts, science again leads the student up to a certain point and sometimes leads him with his soul unanchored. Milikan is right when he say, “Science without religion obviously my become a curse rather than a blessing to mankind.” But, science dominated by the spirit religion is the key to progress and the hope of the future. 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 infest the student with the thought that all may be chance. I say, that no youth should be so led without a counter-balancing thought. Even the skeptic teacher should be fair enough to see that even Charles Darwin, when he faced this great question of annihilation, that the creation is dominated only by chance wrote: “It is an intolerable thought that man and all other sentient beings are doomed to complete annihilation after such long, continued slow progress.” And another good authority, Raymond West, said, “Why this spiniture of time and pain and blood?” Why should man come so far if he’s destined to go no father? A creature that travels such distances and fought such battles and won such victories deserves what we are compelled to say, “To conquer death and rob the gave of its victory.” The public school teacher will probably, even if he says that much, will go no father. In the Church school the teacher is unhampered. In the Brigham Young University and every other church school the teacher can say God is at the helm.”

(David O. McKay, Oct. 8, 1952 BYU Speeches of the Year, 5-6)

---

Harold B. Lee

How many races are there? Most scientists have divided humanity into five groups: The white, the black, the brown, the yellow and the red races. Others have grouped the brown, yellow and red races as "subgroups" of a single race. The scriptures have taught us that God, our Heavenly Father, is the "Father of the spirits of all men" and that when we pass from this life our spirits "whether they be good or evil, are taken home to God who gave (us) life." (Ecclesiastes 12:7; Alma 40:11.) Thus, by the teachings of the scriptures, all mankind are made one great family. Furthermore, we are given to understand that all who live in mortality, if they would perfect their genealogical research, could trace their ancestry back to Adam and Eve, our first earthly parents in the Garden of Eden, through Noah and his family, who were the only living persons on the earth after the flood. Very few researchers in the genealogical field go far in their work until they find widely separated persons of varying nationalities with the same ancestors on the genealogical chart. All of this points unmistakably to the correctness of the scriptural teachings.

(Harold B. Lee, Decisions for Successful Living [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1973], 161 - 162.)

Today, as it was then, it might well be said that the greatest miracles we see are not the healings of sick bodies but the miraculous changes that come into the lives of those who become members of the Church, as all missionaries will testify. The greatest strength of the Church is not the number of units we have, not the amount of tithing that is paid, nor the congregations, but the greatest strength is the united and fervent testimonies that are in the hearts of church members. And by that same token, we might say that the greatest weapon against all untruth, whether it be in science, so-called, or in the philosophies of the world, or in communism, or what not, the greatest weapon is the truth of the gospel of Jesus Christ, which preached in power will be a bulwark against these false ideas in the world today.

(Harold B. Lee, Conference Report, April 1964, Afternoon Meeting 22-23.)

---

Alvin R. Dyer

The hypothesis of evolution is, therefore, a viewpoint of man, which endeavors to show how man has been brought from one state of growth to another; from the ape to the savage and thence to a creature of a higher human order resulting, thus far, in the human specie which we view today. But when we listen to the voice of God's prophet with regard to the spirit and intelligence that have been placed in the physical body of man, which has been created for that purpose, then we realize how weak and shallow and vain are the imaginations of man as he attempts to explain the wonders of God's plan in the procreation of man.

(Alvin R. Dyer, The Meaning of Truth, rev. ed. [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1973], 99.)

The doctrine of evolution is true to the extent that it is confined to improvement within the same species. The eternal law that governs the reproduction of all things within its separate kingdom or after its own kind was revealed to the Prophet Joseph Smith. Reference is made again to this important announcement of truth concerning the "law of the species:"

And the Gods organized the earth to bring forth the beasts after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after its kind; and the Gods saw they would obey.

And the Gods took counsel among themselves and said: Let us go down and form man in our image, after our likeness; and we will give them dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So the Gods went down to organize man in their own image, in the image of the Gods to form they him, male and female to form they them. (Abraham 4:25-27, See Meaning of Truth, Dyer, pp. 17-23.)

It is therefore an eternal principle that every seed produces its own kind. And as we are the children of God, we can follow out the idea and perceive what God, our Eternal Father, is. He is the Being from whom we sprung in our pre-mortal spiritual existence. He is an individual personality and we are his seed formed in his likeness and image. We can be improved and exalted within the realms of this specie.

(Alvin R. Dyer, Who Am I? [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1966], 92.)

The law of variation, as expressed by Darwin, is true with certain limitations. For example, every person must admit a vast change in the condition of the best breeds of our domestic swine, from their ancestors, the wild boars of medieval Europe. Yet nowhere can be found a single trace of transmutation of species. For example, if we should trace the pedigree of the horse backwards through a thousand generations we should find that the original animal was also a horse, though probably a very inferior animal.

(Alvin R. Dyer, The Meaning of Truth, rev. ed. [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1973], 98.)

There were no savages in the Garden of Eden. The high state of intelligence of our first parents enabled them to learn quickly how to prepare themselves clothing, and to learn and practice early the two modes of life, namely, pastoral and agricultural. The slow and laborious steps in the development of man, as contended by others, are not in evidence here. They were in likeness, in their earth-life body to that of their Creator, and were blessed with great perception: cities were built and the riches and blessings of earth life soon came under their domination. The earliest-known civilizations all seemed to follow this pattern.

(Alvin R. Dyer, The Meaning of Truth, rev. ed. [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1973], 102.)

---

Hugh B. Brown

The Latter-day Saint view of man's potential is in the vanguard of religious or scientific thought. Before the gospel was restored, no one was heard to say, "As God is, man may become," and yet Jesus said, "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect." (Matt. 5:48.) Does not that injunction imply limitless possibilities? And the Apostle John said, "Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it does not yet appear what we shall be: but this we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is." (John 2:2.)

Now if any of you have been bothered about the subject of evolution, I submit that here is an inspired concept of evolution which exalts rather than debases man. It relates him to a divine Creator both as to origin and to destiny. Here is true evolution, to which you can subscribe with absolute safety. But when we speak of man's potential Godlike status, let us not forget that the difference between us and our Heavenly Father now is incomprehensively great. And that concept can only be made tenable in the light of the eternities that lie ahead and in the understanding and application of the principle of eternal progression.

(Hugh B. Brown, Continuing the Quest [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1961], 202 - 203.)

There are those who disclaim any need for this proffered "saving." If they are in need of help, they seemingly are not aware of it. If one speaks of rescue or redemption, they ask, "saved from what?" According to some present-day philosophy, man is doing a fair job of saving himself by the gradual process of evolution, and the hope is expressed that this process will continue. The idea of divine intervention on behalf of man is often scoffed at by the skeptic.

The theory of evolution in the sense that man evolves from one stage of being to another is not inconsistent with the science of theology. That we lived as spirit children of our Father before our earth life, that earth life is preparatory to an existence after death, and that throughout eternity we may continue to progress and become more Godlike is the faith of Latter-day Saints. But we believe that man is a child of God and not an offshoot from some other species.

(Hugh B. Brown, The Eternal Quest [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1956], 82 - 83.)

---

Marion G. Romney

Three of the major devices that have led men to reject the truth concerning God have been and still are (1) apostate Christianity, (2) the theory of biological evolution, and (3) communism.

Apostate Christianity, the Lord said, has "strayed from mine ordinances, and . . . broken mine everlasting covenant." (D&C 1:15.) It teaches "for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but . . . [denies] the power thereof." (Joseph Smith 2:19.) For this reason, the Lord instructed Joseph Smith not to join any of its churches, "for they were all wrong."

The theory of biological evolution has, by denying the fall of Adam, made a mockery of the atonement of Christ. Acceptance of this theory has led countless people to deny God.

(Marion G. Romney, Learning for the Eternities [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1977], 3.)

I have an assignment from the First Presidency to serve on the Church Publications Committee. This committee is expected to read and pass upon the literature proposed for use in the study courses of our auxiliary organizations. It would please me immensely if, in the preparation of this literature, we could get away from using the language of those who do not believe in the mission of Adam. I have reference to words and phrases such as "primitive man," "prehistoric man," "before men learned to write," and the like. We sometimes use these terms in a way that offends my feelings; in a way which indicates to me that we get mixed up in our understanding of the mission of Adam. The connotation of these terms, as used by unbelievers, is out of harmony with our understanding of the mission of Adam.

"Adam fell that men might be" (2 Ne. 2:25). There were no pre-Adamic men in the line of Adam. The Lord said that Adam was the first man (Moses 1:34,  3:7; D&C 84:16). It is hard for men to get the idea of a man ahead of Adam, before the first man. The Lord also said that Adam was the first flesh (Moses 3:7), which, as I understand it, means the first mortal on the earth. I understand from a statement in the book of Moses, which was made by Enoch, that there was no death in the world before Adam (Moses 6:48; see also 2 Ne. 2:22). Enoch said:

Death hath come upon our fathers; nevertheless we know them, and cannot deny, and even the first of all we know, even Adam.

For a book of remembrance we have written among us, according to the pattern given by the finger of God; and it is given in our own language (Moses 5:45,  46).

I understand from this that Enoch could read about Adam in a book which had been written under the tutelage of Almighty God. Thus there were no prehistoric men who could not write, because men living in the days of Adam, who was the first man, wrote.

I am not a scientist. I do not profess to know anything but Jesus Christ and him crucified and the principles of his gospel. If, however, there are some things in the strata of the earth indicating that there were men before Adam, they were not the ancestors of Adam.

Adam was the son of God. He was our elder brother, not older than Jesus, but he was our brother in the same sense that Jesus was our brother, and he "fell" to earth life. He did not come up through an unbroken line of organic evolution. There had to be a fall. "Adam fell that men might be" (2 Ne. 2:25).

(Marion G. Romney, Look to God and Live [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1971], 250 - 251.)

---

Bruce R. McConkie

Peter had the Lord's time in mind when he wrote that "there shall come in the last days scoffers," mockers who do not believe the scriptural accounts stating that God created the earth in six days and rested on the seventh. They will say: "Where is the promise of his coming?" They will reject the Second Coming with its millennial era of peace, with its new heaven and new earth wherein death and sorrow cease, because, as they falsely reason: "Since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation." They will say such things as: 'How can there be a millennial era during which men will live to the age of a tree, when everyone knows we are the end product of evolution and that death has always existed on earth?' But Peter says that they "willingly are ignorant" of God's true dealings with reference to the creation, with reference to the flood of Noah, and with reference to the coming day of judgment, a day when "the elements shall melt with fervent heat" and all things shall become new.

To the saints, among whom are we, he says: "But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. The Lord is not slack concerning his promise. . . . But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise." (2 Pet. 3:3-13.)

(Bruce R. McConkie, The Millennial Messiah: The Second Coming of the Son of Man [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1982], 31.)

Heresies among the Saints! Sadly it is so. Are there not those among us who believe the theories of men rather than the revealed word relative to the creation of the earth and organic evolution? Do we not still have teachers who say that God is progressing in knowledge and learning new truths; that there will be a second chance for salvation for those who reject the gospel here but accept it in the spirit world; that there will be progression from one kingdom of glory to another in the world to come? And are there not those among us who refuse to follow the Brethren on moral issues, lest their agency and political rights be infringed, as they suppose? Truly, there are heresies among us.

(Bruce R. McConkie, The Millennial Messiah: The Second Coming of the Son of Man [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1982], 60.)

In prophetic imagery, Babylon is the world with all its carnality and wickedness. Babylon is the degenerate social order created by lustful men who love darkness rather than light because their deeds are evil. Babylon is the almighty governmental power that takes the saints of God into captivity; it is the false churches that build false temples and worship false gods; it is every false philosophy (as, for instance, organic evolution) that leads men away from God and salvation. Babylon is false and degenerate religion in all its forms and branches. Babylon is the communistic system that seeks to destroy the freedom of people in all nations and kingdoms; it is the Mafia and crime syndicates that murder and rob and steal; it is the secret combinations that seek for power and unrighteous dominion over the souls of men. Babylon is the promoter of pornography; it is organized crime and prostitution; it is every evil and wicked and ungodly thing in our whole social structure.

(Bruce R. McConkie, The Millennial Messiah: The Second Coming of the Son of Man [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1982], 424.)

Heresy 2: There is no such thing as a fall of Adam and an atonement of Christ.

Commentary: This is the view of all pagan and heathen people who have no knowledge of the true God and the plan of salvation he ordained and established. It is, for instance, the false Islamic view. Their Koran teaches that there is no God but Allah and that he had no need for a son. Allah, it says, has but to speak and his will is done. It considers Jesus to be in the same class as Moses or one of the prophets, denies the doctrine of the divine Sonship, and claims to know nothing about the fall of man.

Heresy 3: Organic evolution is the process whereby all life on earth came into being, and man, as now constituted, is the end product of this process.

Commentary: This is the false view of many self-designated scientists. The tendency among them is to present Darwinian theories as established realities. These theories postulate the evolvement of all forms of life from lower orders over astronomically long periods of time. They assume death has always been present and that there never was a fall, and they make no provision for a plan of redemption and a resurrection of all forms of life.

(Bruce R. McConkie, A New Witness for the Articles of Faith [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1985], 99.)

This same or like knowledge is contained in the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon. For aught we know the two sealed books are one and the same. Of this much we are quite certain: When, during the Millennium, the sealed portion of the Book of Mormon is translated, it will give an account of life in preexistence; of the creation of all things; of the Fall and the Atonement and the Second Coming; of temple ordinances in their fulness; of the ministry and mission of translated beings; of life in the spirit world, in both paradise and hell; of the kingdoms of glory to be inhabited by resurrected beings, and many such things (see, e.g., Ether 1:3-5).

As of now, the world is not ready to receive these truths. For one thing these added doctrines will completely destroy the whole theory of organic evolution as it is now almost universally taught in the halls of academia. For another they will set forth an entirely different concept and time frame of the Creation, both of this earth and all forms of life, and of the sidereal heavens themselves, than is postulated in all the theories of men. And, sadly, there are those who, if forced to make a choice at this time, would select Darwin over Deity.

(Bruce R. McConkie, Sermons and Writings of Bruce R. McConkie [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1998], 277.)

I propose some simple tests that all of us may take to determine if we are true to the faith. They consist of a few basic questions, all of which must be answered correctly in order to gain the full blessings of the gospel in this life and inherit eternal life in the realms ahead.

Our well-beloved brother Paul, an Apostle of old, counsels us in these words: “Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves.” (2 Cor. 13:5.)

And we may well ask ourselves: Do we believe all of the doctrines of salvation? Are we keeping the commandments? Are we valiant in the cause of truth and righteousness? Will we be saved in the kingdom of God?

From among many questions that all of us must one day answer, let me test you on these:

Test one: Do I worship the only true and living God?

There is no salvation in worshiping a false god—neither a cow; nor a crocodile; nor a cedar post; nor even a spirit essence, without body, parts, or passions, that fills the immensity of space.

True believers worship that Holy Being who “made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters.” (Rev. 14:7.)

He is the Father of spirits with whom we dwelt before the foundations of the earth were laid. He is our Father in Heaven, who ordained and established a plan of salvation by which his spirit children might advance and progress and become like him.

He is a Holy Man, a personage of tabernacle, having a body of flesh and bones; and he created mortal man in his own image, “male and female created he them.” (Gen. 1:27.)

He is a glorified and exalted being in whom all fulness and perfection dwell, who knows all things and has all power, all might, and all dominion.

Test two: Do I believe in the fall of Adam?

There is no salvation in a system of religion that rejects the doctrine of the Fall or that assumes man is the end product of evolution and so was not subject to a fall.

True believers know that this earth and man and all forms of life were created in an Edenic, or paradisiacal, state in which there was no mortality, no procreation, no death.

In that primeval day Adam and Eve were “in a state of innocence, having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin.” (2 Ne. 2:23.)

But in the providences of the Lord, “Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy.” (2 Ne. 2:25.)

By his fall, Adam introduced temporal and spiritual death into the world and caused this earth life to become a probationary estate.

(Bruce R. McConkie, “The Caravan Moves On,” Ensign, Nov. 1984, 82)

---

Spencer W. Kimball

Man became a living soul—mankind, male and female. The Creators breathed into their nostrils the breath of life and man and woman became living souls. We don’t know exactly how their coming into this world happened, and when we’re able to understand it the Lord will tell us.

(Spencer W. Kimball, “The Blessings and Responsibilities of Womanhood,” Ensign, Mar. 1976, 76)

---

Ezra Taft Benson

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 socialism, organic evolution, rationalism, humanism, and so forth. Our missionaries are not as effective unless they are "hissing forth" with it. Social, ethical, cultural, or educational converts will not survive under the heat of the day unless their taproots go down to the fulness of the gospel which the Book of Mormon contains. Our Church classes are not as spirit-filled unless we hold it up as a standard. And our nation will continue to degenerate unless we read and heed the words of the God of this land, Jesus Christ, and quit building up and upholding the secret combinations which the Book of Mormon tells us proved the downfall of both previous American civilizations.

(Ezra Taft Benson, The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1988], 60 - 61.)

In his dedicatory prayer for the Washington Temple, President Kimball referred to the Book of Mormon, as did the Prophet Joseph, as the most correct book. The Prophet Joseph Smith also called it the keystone of our religion. He said that “a man would get nearer to God by abiding by its precepts, than by any other book.” (History of the Church, 4:461.) That book was written for our day. Mormon, who compiled it, saw us in vision and was directed to put into the book those things God felt we would especially need in our time. There was inspiration in making the Book of Mormon a required religion class at Brigham Young University. The faculty and student body there and members of the Church everywhere should know the Book of Mormon better than any other book. Not only should we know what history and faith-promoting stories it contains, but we should understand its teachings. If we really did our homework and approached the Book of Mormon doctrinally, we could expose the errors and find the truths to combat many of the current false theories and philosophies of men, including socialism, humanism, organic evolution, and others.

(Ezra Taft Benson, “Jesus Christ—Gifts and Expectations,” New Era, May 1975, 16)

But it is the living prophet who really upsets the world. "Even in the Church," said President Spencer W. Kimball, "many are prone to garnish the sepulchres [sic] of yesterday's prophets and mentally stone the living ones" (Instructor, 95:257).

Why? Because the living prophet gets at what we need to know now, and the world prefers that prophets either be dead or mind their own business. Some so-called experts of political science want the prophet to keep still on politics. Some would-be authorities on evolution want the prophet to keep still on evolution. And so the list goes on and on.

How we respond to the words of a living prophet when he tells us what we need to know, but would rather not hear, is a test of our faithfulness.

(Ezra Taft Benson, The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1988], 139.)

I know one noble father who reviews with his children regularly what they have been taught, and if they have been taught any falsehoods; then the children and the father together research out the truth. If your children are required to put down on exams the falsehoods that have been taught, then perhaps they can follow President Joseph Fielding Smith's counsel of prefacing their answer with the words "teacher says," or they might say "you taught" or "the textbook states."

If your children are taught untruths on evolution in the public schools or even in our Church schools, provide them with a copy of President Joseph Fielding Smith's excellent rebuttal in his book Man, His Origin and Destiny.

(Ezra Taft Benson, God, Family, Country: Our Three Great Loyalties [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1974], 227.)

More recently one of our Church educators published what he purports to be a history of the Church's stand on the question of organic evolution. His thesis challenges the integrity of a prophet of God. He suggests that Joseph Fielding Smith published his work Man: His Origin and Destiny against the counsel of the First Presidency and his own brethren. This writer's interpretation is not only inaccurate, but it runs counter to the testimony of Elder Mark E. Petersen, who wrote this foreword to President Smith's book, a book I would encourage all of you to read:

"Some of us [members of the Council of the Twelve] urged [Elder Joseph Fielding Smith] to write a book on the creation of the world and the origin of man. . . . The present volume is the result. It is a most remarkable presentation of material from both sources [science and religion] under discussion. It will fill a great need in the Church, and will be particularly invaluable to students who have become confused by the misapplication of information derived from scientific experimentation." (Foreword, Man: His Origin and Destiny, Deseret Book Co., 1954.)

When one understands that the author to whom I allude is an exponent for the theory of organic evolution, his motive in disparaging President Joseph Fielding Smith becomes apparent. To hold to a private opinion on such matters is one thing, but when one undertakes to publish his views to discredit the work of a prophet, it is a very serious matter. It is also apparent to all who have the Spirit of God in them that Joseph Fielding Smith's writings will stand the test of time.

(Ezra Taft Benson, This Nation Shall Endure [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1977], 26.)

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. President Joseph F. Smith referred to false educational ideas as one of the three threatening dangers among our Church members. 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 Sigmund Freud, Charles Darwin, John Dewey, Karl Marx, John Keynes, and others.

Today there are much worse things that can happen to a child than not getting a full education. In fact, some of the worst things have happened to our children while attending colleges led by administrators who wink at subversion and amorality.

(Ezra Taft Benson, God, Family, Country: Our Three Great Loyalties [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1974], 225.)

---

Stephen L Richards

Address to church teachers

I PROPOSE TO QUOTE copiously from a book. This book has been recently written and was sent to me by my friend and colleague, Dr. Joseph F. Merrill. The title of the book is The Origin of Mankind. That, however, is not the subject of my address. It is too pretentious for me. I use the material I have selected from the book for a purpose other than the development of its thesis.

In order to make the quotations impressive I must tell you something about the author. His name is Sir Ambrose Fleming, Kt., M.A., D. Sc., D. Eng., F.R.S., etc. I take it that all of you understand the meaning of these scholastic designations, I don't. They looked impressive to me and that is why I give them to you. Sir Ambrose is the President of the Victoria Institute and Philosophical Society of Great Britain, the President of the Television Society, Emeritus Professor of Electrical Engineering in the University of London, Honorary Fellow of St. John's College, Cambridge, and Fellow of University College, London. He is the inventor of the thermionic valve and has been closely and practically connected with the beginning in Great Britain of the three great inventions, the telephone, incandescent electric lighting, and wireless telegraphy.

I hope I have sufficiently qualified this expert witness to make you respect his testimony.

Strangely enough this man of science begins his book with a quotation from the scriptures:

"What is man, that thou art mindful of him? and the son of man that thou visitest him?

"For thou hast made him a little lower than the angels, and hast crowned him with glory and honour.

"Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet."

With these lofty concepts of the eighth Psalm as a premise, our author proceeds to a discussion of the evolutionary theory of human origin and sets up what seems to me a strong and convincing argument "to show that the Biblical teaching is not inconsistent with any definitely ascertained facts with regard to early mankind." This man says that he wrote the book because of the erroneous conviction existing in many minds that "the progress of science has destroyed all possibility of belief in miraculous or supernatural events as recorded in the Scriptures." He expresses solicitude for the young particularly when he says, "Whatever may be the effect on the religious opinions of adults or of scientific men of an adherence to this evolutionary theory of human origin, it is unquestionable that it is disastrous to the ethical development or spiritual life of the young or uneducated to lead them to believe that 'men are descended from monkeys,' or that "The chimpanzees or gorillas are men's nearest relatives.'"

This scientific man does not believe that "the human being is nothing but an improved animal." Being scientific he substantiates his belief with reasons.

He first analyzes man and contrasts him with all other animal life. He points out six great distinctions between animal and man which are distinctions of kind and not merely of degree.

First—form—"In man the natural position of the spine locomotion is vertical or pointing upwards, the head is poised on it so that the face looks forward and upward. On the other hand in the vertebrate animal the position of the spine in locomotion is for the most part horizontal or nearly parallel to the earth. The position of the head is forward and downward. The animal, as it were, clings to the earth as its natural habitat with gaze directed downward. The man, on the contrary, has the earth beneath his feet and his face turned towards the heavens as if the earth were only a temporary dwelling place. There is no evidence that in his earliest days man was in any degree greatly different in Form."

Second—constructiveness—the animal has no tools. Nature has provided him with teeth, beak, claws, hoofs and horns—with fur, feathers, scales, or thick hide, but he has only that which nature has given him. Man, however, is completely undefended by natural weapons. He has to make his spear, arrow, or knife; he has to cover his bare and sensitive skin to protect him from cold or heat; he opposes the far greater strength of the beast with his constructiveness.

Third—progressiveness—there is no evidence to show that animals left to themselves ever make any progress. "Even the domesticated animals which have been for thousands of years in the company of man are not now more advanced than they were at the beginning, and, left to themselves, would soon lose any acquired powers. But man is always improving his tools, his weapons, dress, dwelling places and conditions."

Fourth—use of fire—"no animal has ever discovered by itself how to create fire. But by fire man creates artificial warmth, cooks food, melts and prepares metals" and creates many of the facilities of civilization.

Fifth—burial customs—"no animal buries its dead companions or exhibits the very slightest signs that it possesses any sense of a personality capable of surviving death. But from the very earliest ages we have evidence in fossil remains of man that he buried his dead with some ceremonial and perhaps with provision of food in such manner as to show that he regarded revival or resurrection of the body possible."

Sixth—mental and spiritual potentialities—"the human baby and the infant chimpanzees are not so strikingly different at their birth. But wait a few years—the human child can speak. It knows the words for many common things and actions and begins to exhibit its creative powers, artistic, mechanical, or observational. The ape remains what it was. The words 'right' and 'wrong' can be made to have a meaning for the human child. They have none at all for an animal of any kind."

We are next introduced to a consideration of matter—its structure and nature. I am not physicist enough to reproduce for you with any degree of adequacy the argument in this field. It seems that "everything in nature" appears to be of the character of a vibration of some sort and that the "fundamental elements of which the physical universe is composed are three, namely, electrons, positrons, or protons, and neutrons, a trinity of units." These elements always exist, cannot be destroyed and the different kinds of matter, form, shape, and weight are the result of wavelike motion in these elemental properties.

The philosophies and theories of different schools of science are set out in their effort to explain how these particles of matter arrange themselves so as to constitute a clod of earth, an ugly toad, or a beautiful maiden. Our author points out the inability of the materialist to offer satisfactory explanation and that "we are on surer and more solid ground when we take as the final link in our chain of causation the Thought in a Universal Mind. It is the fundamental property of mind to originate. The poet or the orator can originate new phrases or new words; the inventor can originate new machines. These exist as thoughts in his mind at first; but he can give them utterance and make them known to others—he speaks and it is done. In the same manner but on a far vaster scale the material universe must have existed as a thought in the Universal Mind before it came into existence for other finite minds by a process equivalent to speech. 'And God said' is the formula in the Genesis record.

"Centuries ago Greek philosophers came to the conclusion that the relation of mind to body is similar to that between a musician and his instrument. Any injury to the instrument limits the power of the musician to produce music. But the instrument alone can yield no music by itself; whereas the musician can survive the entire destruction of his instrument and may even, when provided with a new one, make better music than before. There must be some part of the human body which corresponds to the musician whilst the material body cells are his instrument. It controls the upbuilding of the body but does not necessarily cease to exist if the body is destroyed."

Evolution is held to be insufficient as a cause. It is pointed out that Charles Darwin who is credited with being the originator of the doctrine of evolution did not himself consider evolution to be sufficient as a first cause or creative factor. He says in the sixth edition of his book, The Origin of Species, in the final paragraph, the following: "There is a grandeur in this view of life with its several powers having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or one; and that whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved."

It would seem therefore that Darwin did not preclude the idea of divine creation. But many of the evolutionists have gone much further than he and have stoutly maintained that this doctrine of accidental natural selection is sufficient to account for everything, even the origin of man. Sir Ambrose, while admitting that we cannot explain the processes of creation, maintains inadequacy of evolution as a creative cause and without denying the influence of environment on animal form says that "it is necessary also to take account of a directive power which may be called 'Divine Selection' to explain the vast and various forms of animal life."

The most interesting parts of the book, however, are those which relate directly to the question of human origin and the evidence for divine creation. The so-called missing links of the evolutionists are discussed in considerable detail. Accounts are reviewed of the discovery in Germany of the skull cap and fragments which were declared sufficient to warrant the assumption of a primitive race of men with low cerebral development and great bodily strength who have been named by the scientists the Neanderthal race. This was in 1863. In 1891 a Dutch army surgeon, excavating in Java, found an upper molar tooth he thought was out of an ape. About a yard away he found the top of a skull and a second tooth and about fifty feet away a left thigh bone which had human characteristics. These few scattered fragments were given the pretentious name of Pithecanthropus erectus or the upright man. Sir Ambrose says with reference to this discovery, "To anyone accustomed to or trained in the exact reasoning and strict definitions required in mathematics or physics, it is a matter for surprise to notice the loose, inconclusive arguments and ill-defined terms employed by some Darwinian anthropologists. For example, there is not a shadow of proof that the four fragments of bone comprising the so-called Pithecanthropus erectus belonged to one individual or were deposited in the ground at the same time. But all difficulties are covered up by the adoption of this grand name, which takes for granted the very thing required to be proved. If any similar shaky argument was put forward in a court of law, say in a criminal trial, it would be dismissed as inadequate without any hesitation by judge or jury. Nevertheless, the anthropologists venture boldly on this thin ice and find no difficulty in making it the basis of an argument for the evolutionary origin of Man."

There is set forth also the discovery of the Heidelberg man in 1907, consisting of a part of a jawbone with teeth in it of human type but with a rounded front or an absence of projecting chinbone. From these fragments the evolutionary imagination proceeded to make drawings of the head of this Heidelberg man, declared to be a stage in advance of the Java man. Then in 1911 the Piltdown man was discovered in England and with its smooth forehead but ape-like jaw, in accordance with evolutionary ideas, was christened the Dawn man and asserted to be a sample of a new stage of modern man in process of making. Drawings and busts were accordingly made. Later scientific opinion has declared that the skull was the skull of a modern man but that the jaw was that of an ape.

Other discoveries are described and our author says, "It is the custom of many evolutionists to make large deductions from single specimens or from very few instances, and also to think that a single specimen of fragmentary remains may always be taken to be quite typical of a large number of such beings living at the same time on earth. There is abundant evidence to show that there have always been great differences in the stages of advancement in the totality of human beings distributed over the earth at the same time, and also abnormal cases of degeneration or degradation occasionally appear. Thus, about a hundred years ago, when there were in Europe the most highly educated and advanced human beings having immense powers over natural energies and a highly complicated social and political life, there were also in out-of-the-way parts of the world human beings in a very rudimentary state of development, using stone tools, living in huts, and hardly more advanced than Neanderthal man. Then, again, there is evidence of cases of atavism or throwbacks in which beings probably quite human in many respects exhibit a curious deterioration in bodily form."

And with respect to the geologic periods which are supposed to represent the time of living of these so-called human ancestors, it is pointed out that there are sources of error. "In the first place, earthquakes, floods, or shift of strata by recent 'faults' may displace human fossils and bury them subsequent to death in much older strata than correspond to the time when they actually lived. Then in the next place some animals became extinct in one district long before they did in others, and if we find human fossils with bones of Mammoth or Dinotherium, or other now extinct mammals, it requires some caution in making deductions as to age. Thus, for instance, in the asphalt beds of California, the skeleton of a woman of modern Indian type was found in close association with the bones of the long extinct sabretoothed [sic]tiger.

"The upshot of it all is that we cannot arrange all the known fossil remains of supposed 'man' in a lineal series gradually advancing in type or form.

"It is entirely misleading and unspeakably pernicious to put forward in popular magazines or other publications read by children pictures of gorillas or chimpanzees labeled 'man's cousin' or 'man's nearest relative,' or to publish perfectly imaginary and grotesque pictures of a supposed 'Java man' with brutish face as an ancestor of modern man, as is occasionally done. Those who do such things are guilty of ignorance or deliberate misrepresentation.

"There is no sufficient evidence to show that human language has been gradually evolved from non-articulate noises as made by true animals, although these may convey some meaning to the animal utterers of them. The characteristic of articulate language is that a precisely modulated sound due to expired breath controlled by the lips, tongue, teeth, and facial muscles, causing a particular vibratory motion of the external air, which, acting on the ears of a human hearer raises in the mind a definite idea similar to that in the mind of the speaker. This faculty is latent in the human child, and is a special quality of the human race.

"Another great and unique quality of the human race of which not the least trace appears in any animal is the religious instinct. Great efforts have been made by the evolutionists to show that this has been gradually evolved from the phenomena of sleep and dreams, from the attribution of life to moving objects; the dual phenomena in Nature, some beneficial, such as sunshine and gentle rain, or disasters such as floods and storms. But now all of this has been shown by the researches to be entirely mistaken. It has been proved by a careful analysis of the religious ideas of a large number of modern and ancient tribes of men, that all of their religious ideas have at their base a fundamental monotheistic faith in one Supreme High God. There are not the very faintest indications or even the beginnings of these feelings in the animal races present or past. There are amongst animals social communities with a highly ordered life, such as ants with workers, soldiers, servants or slaves, yet not the slightest indication of any worship or knowledge of a Creator.

"Then, further," says the author, "we can bring forward an effective argument against human evolution from the rate of growth of human population. The number of human beings on this earth, as far as we know, has always continued to increase in the past. That increase depends on the fact that on an average the total number of births in a given time exceeds the number of deaths. A high death rate, by carrying off individuals of improving or improved bodily or mental powers, such as is necessary in the survival of the fittest must be inimical to the chances of any evolutionary improvement of the race. In other words the evolutionists must pre-suppose great increase and a relatively low death rate."

(Stephen L Richards, Where Is Wisdom? [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1955], 374-383.)

---

Mark E. Petersen

“This body, which ye now behold, is the body of my spirit; and man have I created after the body of my spirit; and even as I appear unto thee to be in the spirit will I appear unto my people in the flesh.” (Ether 3:14–16; italics added.)

There we have it in His own words! The glorious, irrefutable truth! Christ is the Creator! Shall we not accept His word in preference to uninspired theories of men?

Probably the greatest challenge to belief in Christ today is the fast-spreading denial that He is the Creator, coming from men who would supplant the revealed truth with the very tenuous and fragile theory that the universe and all life came about in some mysterious, spontaneous, accidental manner.

To deny that He is the Creator is to deny also that He is the Christ.

To deny that He is the Creator is to deny that He can save us from our sins.

To deny that He is the Creator is to deny that He broke the bands of death. It is to reject the fact of the Resurrection.

To deny that He is the Creator is to deny that He wrought out an atonement on the cross at Calvary.

To deny that He is the Creator is to reject His gospel and the true Christian religion.

But He is the Creator! He is the Redeemer! He is the Savior of the world! He did accomplish His atonement on Calvary, and He did bring about the Resurrection. This we know by the revelation of God! His gospel is true and we love it, and we love Him and deem it a privilege to serve Him!

Can anyone ask for a plainer definition of creation and the purpose of life than is given in our scriptures?

(Mark E. Petersen, “Creator and Savior,” Ensign, May 1983, 63)

---

Gordon B. Hinckley

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.”

(Gordon B. Hinckley Discourses of President Hinckley Vol. 1 [commercial edition], 379)

What the church requires is only belief ‘that Adam was the first man of what we would call the human race,’ says Gordon Hinckley, the church’s living prophet. Scientists can speculate on the rest, he says, recalling his own study of anthropology and geology: ‘Studied all about it. Didn’t worry me then. Doesn’t worry me now.’

(Quoted in Larry A. Witham, Where Darwin Meets the Bible: Creationists and Evolutionists in America, 177)

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. . . .

You cannot afford to stop. You must not rest in your development. . . . There is so much to learn and so little time in which to learn it. I confess I am constantly appalled by the scarcity of my knowledge, and the one resentment I think I carry concerns the many pressing demands which limit the opportunity for reading. As we talk of reading, I should like to add a word concerning that which we absorb not only out of the processes of the mind, but something further which comes by the power of the Spirit. Remember this promise given by revelation: "God shall give unto you knowledge by his Holy Spirit, yea, by the unspeakable gift of the Holy Ghost. . . ." (D&C 121:26.)

(Gordon B. Hinckley, Teachings of Gordon B. Hinckley [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1997], 298. omissions in original)

When I was a college student there were many discussions on the question of organic evolution. I took classes in geology and biology and heard the whole story of Darwinism as it was then taught. I wondered about it. I thought much about it. But I did not let it sway me, for I read what the scriptures said about our origins and our relationship to God. Since then I have become acquainted with what to me is a far more important and wonderful kind of evolution. It is the evolution of men and women as the sons and daughters of God, and of our marvelous potential for growth as children of our Creator. For me, this great principle is set forth in the following verses of revelation: "And that which doth not edify is not of God, and is darkness. That which is of God is light; and he that receiveth light, and continueth in God, receiveth more light; and that light groweth brighter and brighter until the perfect day." (D&C 50:23-24.)

(Gordon B. Hinckley, Faith: The Essence of True Religion [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1989], 18.)

---

Boyd K. Packer

It is my conviction that to the degree the theory of evolution asserts that man is the product of an evolutionary process, the offspring of animals—it is false! What application the evolutionary theory has to animals gives me no concern. That is another question entirely, one to be pursued by science. But remember, the scriptures speak of the spirit in animals and other living things, and of each multiplying after its own kind (D&C 77:2; 2 Nephi 2:22; Moses 3:9; Abr 4:11-12, 24).

And I am sorry to say, the so-called theistic evolution, the theory that God used an evolutionary process to prepare a physical body for the spirit of man, is equally false. I say I am sorry because I know it is a view commonly held by good and thoughtful people who search for an acceptable resolution to an apparent conflict between the theory of evolution and the doctrines of the gospel.

(Boyd K. Packer in Monte S. Nyman and Charles D. Tate, Jr., eds., Jacob through Words of Mormon: To Learn with Joy [Provo: BYU Religious Studies Center, 1990], 21. see entire chapter.)

A little girl taught me a profound lesson on this subject. Surely you are not above learning from little children. Much of what I know that really matters I have learned from being a father.

Some years ago I returned home to find our little children waiting in the driveway. They had discovered some newly hatched chicks under the manger in the barn. When they reached for them, a protective hen rebuffed them. So they came for reinforcements.

I soon gathered a handful of little chicks for them to see and touch.

As our little girl held one of them, I said in a teasing way, "That will make a nice watchdog when it grows up, won't it?" She looked at me quizzically, as if I didn't know much.

So I changed my approach: "It won't be a watchdog, will it?" She shook her head, "No, Daddy." Then I added, "It will be a nice riding horse."

She wrinkled up her nose and gave me that "Oh, Dad!" look. For even a four-year-old knows that a chick will not grow to be a dog, nor a horse, nor even a turkey. It will be a chicken. It will follow the pattern of its parentage. She knew that without having had a course in genetics, without a lesson or a lecture.

No lesson is more manifest in nature than that all living things do as the Lord commanded in the Creation. They reproduce "after their own kind" (see Moses 2:12, 24). They follow the pattern of their parentage. Everyone knows that; every four-year-old knows that! A bird will not become an animal nor a fish; a mammal will not beget reptiles; nor "do men gather... figs of thistles" (Matthew 7:16).

In the countless billions of opportunities in the reproduction of living things, one kind does not beget another. If a species ever does cross, the offspring generally cannot reproduce. The pattern for all life is the pattern of the parentage.

This is demonstrated in so many obvious ways that even an ordinary mind should understand it. Surely no one with reverence for God could believe that His children evolved from slime or from reptiles. (Although one can easily imagine that those who accept the theory of evolution don't show much enthusiasm for genealogical research!) The theory of evolution (and it is a theory) will have an entirely different dimension when the workings of God in creation are fully revealed,

Since every living thing follows the pattern of its parentage, are we to suppose that God had some other strange pattern in mind for His offspring? Surely we, His children, are not, in the language of science, a different species than He is.

(Boyd K. Packer, Let Not Your Heart Be Troubled [Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1991], 290.)

---

Russell M. Nelson

Thoughts of life, death, and resurrection bring us to face crucial questions. How were we made? By whom? And why?

Through the ages, some persons without scriptural understanding have tried to explain our existence by pretentious words such as ex nihilo (out of nothing). Others have deduced that, because of certain similarities between different forms of life, there has been a natural selection of the species, or organic evolution from one form to another. Still others have concluded that man came as a consequence of a "big bang," which resulted in the creation of our planet and life upon it.

To me, such theories are unbelievable. Could an explosion in a printing shop produce a dictionary? It's unthinkable! One might argue that it is within a remote realm of possibility, but even if that could happen, such a dictionary could certainly not heal its own torn pages, renew its own worn corners, or reproduce its own subsequent editions.

We are children of God, created by him and formed in his image.

(Russell M. Nelson, The Power within Us [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1988], 9.)

---