Thursday, January 19, 2006

New Book Released: Mormonism and Evolution

[Update: See below.] The Deseret News reports on a new book published by Greg Kofford Books.

That's the backdrop [ie. Buttar's bill] for a slim little book, hot off the presses, written by Utah Valley State College physics professor William E. Evenson and Brigham Young University biology professor Duane E. Jeffery. Titled "Mormonism and Evolution: the Authoritative LDS Statements," the book is a compilation of statements made by or sanctioned by the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, from 1909 to 2004. "There has been a belief, for years and years and years, that Mormonism and evolution are diametrically opposed," Jeffery said in a recent phone call. He hopes the book will illuminate the grayer areas of the church's position. Jeffery calls himself a "theistic evolutionist."

Included in the book are four official First Presidency statements released in 1992 by Brigham Young University in a special "evolution packet" for students. In 1999 the packet was distributed to all teachers in the Church Education System. According to Evenson, "the LDS Church has really been careful over the years not to get into a box where they are taking a position that later gets undermined by science and other developments of human knowledge. I don't think that's well understood by people who would like to have this be a settled issue."

A reading of the official statements, which also include 12 that are not a part of the "BYU packet," shows a subtle evolution of response. In 1909, Joseph F. Smith, John R. Winder and Anthon H. Lund of the First Presidency wrote that Adam is the "primal parent of our race" and that the church "proclaims man to be the direct and lineal offspring of Deity." In a 1992 section on evolution in the Encyclopedia of Mormonism, the church-sanctioned entry reads that: "The scriptures tell why man was created, but they do not tell how, though the Lord has promised that he will tell that when he comes again." It ended with a reiteration that "Adam is the primal parent of our race." Ten years later, President Gordon B. Hinckley was quoted as saying, "What the church requires is only belief 'that Adam was the first man of what we would call the human race.' Scientists can speculate on the rest."

You can read about the book and purchase it here. Based on the table of contents and the appendix, it doesn't look like there is much new here for those familiar with the history of this issue. Unfortunately I doubt I'll be able to buy it for a while. If anybody out there gets their hands on it I would be interested in a report, especially on the quotes by President Hinckley.

(via Red State Rabble)

Update: From what I can tell, the book contains two quotes from President Hinckely. One of them is apparently quoted in the story above (I've seen that one before). The other comes from an Institute devotional in 1997. Most likely it is the April 15, 1997 devotional published in Discourses of President Gordon B. Hinckley Vol. 1: 1995-1999.
"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."

4 comments:

Jared*,  1/19/2006 02:21:00 PM  

I think you are probably right. They apparently define their selection of material. I would be interested to know what those criteria were, exactly.

Clark Goble,  1/19/2006 03:50:00 PM  

I do think the "selectivity bias" is a legitimate charge. I think they'd have been much better off including some of the alternative quotes and then providing an interpretive analysis.

The way things are its just more "battling quotations." Although to be fair, those on the anti-evolution side also are guilty of selective quotations.

Anonymous,  1/19/2006 09:10:00 PM  

Jared, if you look at the Table of Contents, you'll see immediately that the book Mormonism and Evolution: the Authoritative LDS Statements is just the BYU Evolution Packet, plus a generous amount of Evenson/Jeffery spin. In the process of carefully explaining why the evolution packet is authoritative, they effectively discount the remainder of their own book.

Other than a few glaring omissions, there isn't much that all of us haven't seen already seen.

Anonymous,  1/19/2006 09:14:00 PM  

Ed, someone [cough...Gary] already has put together a list of statements that could also be deemed "authoritative" by any reasonable standard (see ndbf.net and ndbf.blogspot.com).

  © Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP