The LDS community has diverse opinions
Preface: In a most wonderful 2008 Conference talk (“Finding Joy in the Journey,” Ensign, Nov 2008, 84–87.) President Monson addressed the topic of the constancy of change. Referring to his long tenure as a General Authority, he stated, "The changes over a period of 45 years that were incremental now seem monumental." President Monson was in no way advocating biological evolution, but his ideas apply. Biological evolution is ALL about small incremental genetic changes (like point mutations) that add up over geological time to become monumental.
My forced association of select concepts from a Conference talk with evolutionary ideas might cause some to be uncomfortable. My bias as a strong advocate of evolution probably colors what I hear in the Church. It is simply an empirical fact that the LDS Church is made up of pro-evolutionists and anti-evolutionists, and BOTH can be in good standing with the Church.
Advocates of both positions probably could be appropriately reminded (including myself) of the great words of Nephi from the Book of Mormon that state, "I do not know the meaning of all things" (1 Nephi 11:17). Yet, we do KNOW some things.
One thing we know is that the Church and its priesthood authority is of secondary importance ONLY to God. In the eternal scheme of things, evolution is but a footnote. Evolution, however, is NOT a footnote to biological science – it is central.
My purpose in this essay is NOT to persuade others to believe in evolution. Rather, my goal is to help anti-evolutionists to understand the level of conviction of LDS evolutionists. Further, it is important to be aware that Latter-day Saints can have diverse views on the topic. The stereotype of the LDS Church as a closed society with narrow minded thinkers is completely wrong.
Just the other day I attended a university workshop on "science & religion" for faculty members. One of the presenters was a very respected (non-LDS) theologian. Her talk was about the various identities we carry and how (sometimes) they can come into conflict. She listed a variety of religions on the right-hand side of the board, one of which was Mormon. She listed a variety of everyday roles on the left-hand side, such as professor, parent, and lesbian. This exercise got me to thinking about the tension of roles in my own life, one of which is being an evolutionist and a Latter-day Saint.
While there may be some tension between evolution and the culture of Mormonism, I don't see any fundamental incompatibility between the two. Of course, there are people in the LDS blog world who would tell me: 1) Darwin was wrong; and 2) Darwinism and Mormonism don't mix. Such I have been told multiple times. Even so, one's position on the topic of evolution is about as relevant to Church standing as being a Democrat or a Republican. Consequently, I am perplexed by the current amount of heat that has been generated by a few over evolution.
One way to explain my level of puzzlement over disbelief is by using the following parable:
Suppose a LDS fireside had just ended at the Faux home, and the house was filled with people. The closing prayer had been given, and punch and cookies were being served. A big family room was filled with chatter and laughter, but then all of a sudden a large vase was tipped over and smashed on the floor, making a loud sound. Shards of the vase scattered across the floor. Imagine how you would feel if you were one of the few in the room that reacted to this incident. Suppose people were questioned about what happened, and most everyone insisted the vase never existed, even though they were stepping on the pieces.
The vast majority of scientists do NOT have a problem with evolution because they cannot ignore the loud shatter of the vase hitting the floor – that is, the systematic layering of fossils in the strata of rock, the effect of the environment on genetic sequencing, and the ancient dates that come from multiple radiographic measures. Those who heard the crashing vase would naturally wonder why people could deny the obvious.
In my house I have large plastic dinosaurs on display in my main family room where we meet with visitors, like Home Teachers. These plastic models have been there for nearly two decades. My plastic dinosaurs have been object lessons. I have taught my children that there was NO PROBLEM in believing in Triceratops (the dinosaur) and in believing Jesus. Why should there be any conflict?
Perhaps I am oversimplifying, but there seem to be two views of creation by members in the Church. The two versions are DIGITAL and ANALOG. The digital view is that God created the universe, world, and life within short discrete periods of time (like 6 days). I strongly prefer the analog perspective. My family has been taught that God's creation occurred over a LONG period of time (millions of years) in CONTINUOUS steps using natural processes.
Again, I would NEVER argue that belief in Darwin and evolution is necessary for spiritual salvation. Such an argument would be ridiculous. In fact, I have NEVER heard a LDS evolutionist make such an argument.
Scientific understanding of evolution (and its related genetic sequences), however, is critical for TEMPORAL salvation. Am I suggesting evolution has important practical value? ABSOLUTELY, YES!!!
**Every physician must understand that antibiotic drugs do NOT kill all bacteria. Those that survive "evolve" to be resistant.
**Evolutionary principles are critical for effective conservation management of our stressed ecological environment.
**Evolutionary and genetic principles are necessary in the use of laboratory rats to cure human cancers.
**Evolutionary and genetic principles are necessary to understand epidemiology, the study of the spread of infectious disease, such as those viral or bacterial. Specifically, evolution helps scientists to understand why some viruses attack only pigs, some only humans, and others BOTH pigs and humans.
My list could be GREATLY extended. Most people are unaware of the importance of "evolution" in modern daily life.
The result is that evolutionary ideas are NOT optional for an accurate life science. Even Church sponsored schools have an obligation to teach it.
In the LDS blogging and internet world there is a diverse array of opinions about evolution. The range of ideas can get quite confusing. I have organized a few LDS blog sites according to their positions on Darwinian evolution.
Pro or Tending Toward Pro
Closest to the orthodox positions of evolution are S.Faux ("Mormon Insights") and SteveP ("Mormon Organon"), who both hail from the academic world in the life sciences. Both are active Latter-day Saints, and neither apologizes for promoting evolution in educational activities.
Jared at "LDS Science Review" is a very informed life scientist, and I would describe his posts as pro-evolution enlightened by a very balanced and strong LDS perspective. I recommend his posts to all.
Dave Banack has recently posted an essay entitled, "Theology in the Wake of Evolution," in which he reviews Haught's God After Darwin. The book argues that religion would receive a new birth of excitement if it would recognize "the natural zest for life that links us biologically to our evolutionary past."
Jeff Lindsay, a noted LDS blogger, has written a very balanced essay ("Do Mormons believe in evolution and the fossil record?") on how a pro-evolution perspective can mix with LDS theology.
The LDS author behind "Mormon Fortress," Michael R. Ash, in a 2002 Dialogue article, "The Mormon myth of evil evolution," argues that "in time we may see the demise of the Mormon myth that teaching or accepting evolution amounts to apostasy." The article further argues that the Church's "official stand on the subject [of evolution] is neutral." This paper is very persuasive.
Anti or Tending Toward Anti
By contrast, Dave C., a LDS scientist and philosopher at "Mormons & Science" describes evolution as a "random" process, and argues that "inconsistent with gospel doctrine" is the view that humans evolved from "lower" forms of life. He is adamant (pun intended) and articulate.
Noted LDS blogger R. Gary Shapiro has been extremely articulate in his anti-evolution positions on his site: "No Death Before the Fall." If I were on a BYU debate club and were asked to take an anti-evolution position, then I would want Shapiro on my team. (By the way, a debate club would be the ONLY place where you would hear me taking an anti-evolution position).
R. Webster Kehr has recently posted a second edition of his anti-evolution electronic book entitled, Prophets or Evolution – An LDS Perspective. The linked page states (emphasis in the original): "The teachings of the anti-Christ Korihor are identical to the teachings of the theory of evolution." Obviously, I hope he is wrong.
To the best of my knowledge the LDS Church does NOT take positions on scientific findings. The Church is normally content with letting the scientists engage in battle. The exception might be evolution, but even that is quite debatable, depending upon the source of information (as reviewed in the above section).
The LDS Church traditionally has had an "anti-creedal" philosophy, believing instead in continuous revelation and knowledge. Take for example, this statement from Joseph Smith, the Mormon founder:
Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p.327
I cannot believe in any of the creeds of the different denominations, because they all have some things in them I cannot subscribe to, though all of them have some truth. I want to come up into the presence of God, and learn all things; but the creeds set up stakes, and say, "Hitherto shalt thou come, and no further"; which I cannot subscribe to.
Any human creed, whether religious or scientific, may have some truth and some falsehood. If one's goal is to learn ALL things, then it is best NOT to lock into a position that implies "Hitherto shalt thou come, and no further." Fortunately, science is a self-correcting process, where the boundaries of knowledge should never come to an end.
Copyright 2009 S.Faux (Email: foxgoku54 [at] gmail [d0t] c0m; URL: http://mormoninsights.blogspot.com). Readers may distribute this post for noncommercial purposes provided such distributing is of the entire post, including author's copyright and contact information. All other rights reserved.
Please feel free to give my blog site a "Blogged.com" rating and review by clicking here.
Support Mormon Insights by making a COMMENT.
