Belief in Evolution = No Belief in Jesus Christ

President Joseph Fielding Smith has stated that one cannot have true faith in the Gospel ofAdam Eve alter Jesus Christ and at the same time hold to the assumptions of Darwinian evolution.

Organic evolution is destructive of faith in God. It is rebellion against him. Those who accept this pernicious doctrine cannot consistently believe in the fall of Adam. If they do not believe in the fall of Adam they cannot believe in Jesus Christ, for if Adam had not transgressed the law under which he was placed on this earth, there would have been no occasion for a redemption. How could Adam be redeemed from something that never happened.[1]

This is a very clear statement by President Smith which is either true of false.Was he right? Is this issue really that serious?Does it cut at the very foundation of faith in Jesus Christ? As mentioned above, President Ezra Taft Benson testified that these words from Joseph Fielding Smith would stand the test of time.Why would this subject be so critical to faith? The Creation, Fall and Atonement are the three pillars supporting the Plan of Salvation. There are no doctrines which are more important. If we investigate the word of scripture on this subject, we find that in nearly all places where the Atonement is taught, a true account of the Creation and Fall are also taught. The great example of missionary work in the Book of Mormon can be found in the accounts of the work of the sons of Mosiah among the Lamanites. Note that both Ammon when teaching Lamoni and Aaron when teaching Lamoni’s father teach the Creation and Fall when teaching the atonement. The account of Ammon is given in this way:

And then Ammon said: Believest thou that there is a Great Spirit?
And he said, Yea.

And Ammon said: This is God. And Ammon saiduntohim again: Believest thou that this Great Spirit, who is God, created all things which are in heaven and in the earth?

And he said: Yea, I believe that he created all things which are in the earth; but I do not know the heavens.

. . .

Ammon saiduntohim: I am aman; and man in the beginning was created after the image of God, and I am called by his HolySpiritto teach these thingsuntothis people, that they may be brought to a knowledge of that which is just and true;

. . .

Now when Ammon had said these words, he began at the creation of the world, and also the creation of Adam, and told him all the things concerning the fall of man, and rehearsedand laid before him the recordsand the holy scriptures of the people, which had been spoken by the prophets, even down to the time that their father, Lehi, left Jerusalem.

. . .

But this is not all; for he expoundeduntothem the planof redemption, which was prepared from the foundation of the world; and he also made knownuntothem concerning the coming of Christ, and all the works of the Lord did he make knownuntothem.

Note Ammon’s reliance upon the Creation and Fall when teaching the Gospel. This true teaching of the Gospel of Jesus Christ was so powerful that Lamoni was overcome with the Spirit and fell to the ground and had many visions himself. When the Gospel is taught in purity, without watering it down, it is very powerful. Aaron’s example of teaching the Gospel is very similar:

And now when Aaron heard this, his heart began to rejoice, and he said: Behold, assuredly as thou livest, O king, there is a God.
And the king said: Is God that Great Spirit that brought our fathers out of the land of Jerusalem?

And Aaron said unto him: Yea, he is that Great Spirit, and he createdall things both in heaven and in earth. Believest thou this?

And he said: Yea, I believe that the Great Spirit created all things, and I desire that ye should tell me concerning all these things, and I will believe thy words.

And it came to pass that when Aaron saw that the king would believe his words, he began from the creation of Adam, reading the scriptures unto the king—how God created man after his own image, and that God gave him commandments, and that because of transgression, man had fallen.

And Aaron did expound unto him the scriptures from the creation of Adam, laying the fall of man before him, and their carnal state and also theplanof redemption, which was prepared fromthe foundation of the world, through Christ, for all whosoever would believe on his name.

And since man had fallenhe could not meritanything of himself; but the sufferings and deathof Christ atone for their sins, through faith and repentance, and so forth; and that he breaketh the bands of death, that the graveshall have no victory, and that the sting of death should be swallowed up in the hopes of glory; and Aaron did expound all these things unto the king.

And it came to pass that after Aaron had expounded these things unto him, the king said: What shall I do that I may have this eternal life of which thou hast spoken?

Again, this teaching of the word of God was so powerful that Lamoni’s father was overcome with the Spirit and was shown visions of the Lord and His work.These are the two most vivid illustrations of how missionary work is to be performed in the scriptures. Are we justified in moving away from the standard of the Lord in teaching without the Creation and Fall?Is it any wonder that Satan has attempted a direct attack upon the doctrines of the Creation and the Fall? Is this not the very heart of missionary work?

In addition to missionary work, a powerful illustration of teaching the Gospel to members of the Church in the Book of Mormon is that performed by King Benjamin. Benjamin had a tower constructed and taught that words which had been delivered to him by an angel.A major theme of these words is the Creation and Fall.

I say unto you, my brethren, that if you should render all the thanks and praise which your whole soul has power to possess, to that God who has created you, and has kept and preserved you, and has caused that ye should rejoice, and has granted that ye should live in peace one with another—
I sayuntoyouthatifyeshould servehim who has createdyoufrom the beginning, and is preserving you from day to day, by lendingyoubreath, thatyemay live and move and do according to your own will, and even supportingyoufrom one moment to another—I say,ifyeshould serve him with all your wholesouls yetyewould be unprofitableservants.

. . .

And now, in the first place, he hath createdyou, and granteduntoyouyour lives, for whichyeare indebteduntohim.

. . .

And now I ask, canyesay aught of yourselves? I answeryou, Nay.Yecannot say thatyeare evenasmuchasthe dust of the earth; yetyewere createdof the dustof the earth; but behold, itbelongethto him who createdyou.

. . .

And he shall be called Jesus Christ, the Sonof God, the Fatherof heaven and earth, the Creatorof all things from the beginning; and hismothershall be called Mary.

. . .

For behold, and also his blood atonethfor the sins of those who have fallenby the transgression of Adam, who have died not knowing thewillof God concerning them, or who have ignorantlysinned.

. . .

And evenifitwerepossible that little childrencould sin they could not be saved; but I sayuntoyouthey areblessed; for behold,asin Adam, or by nature, they fall, even so the blood of Christatonethfor their sins.

. . .

For the naturalmanis an enemyto God, and has been from the fallof Adam, and will be, forever and ever, unless he yieldsto the enticings of the Holy Spirit, andputtethoff thenaturalman and becometh a saintthrough the atonement of Christ the Lord, and becomethasa child, submissive, meek, humble, patient, full of love, willing to submit to all things which the Lord seeth fit to inflict upon him, evenasa child doth submit to his father.

. . .

Therefore, they have drunk out of the cupof the wrath of God, which justice could no more denyuntothem than it could deny that Adamshould fall because of his partaking of the forbidden fruit; therefore, mercycould have claim on them no more forever.

. . .

And now, it came to pass that when king Benjamin had made an end ofspeakingthe words which had been delivereduntohim by the angel of the Lord, that he cast his eyes round about on the multitude, and behold they had fallento the earth, for thefearof the Lord had come upon them.

And they had viewedthemselves in their own carnalstate, even lessthan the dust of the earth. And they all cried aloud with one voice, saying: O have mercy, and apply the atoningblood of Christ that we may receive forgiveness of our sins, and our hearts may be purified; for we believe in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who createdheaven and earth, and all things; who shall come down among the children of men.

. . .

For behold,ifthe knowledge of the goodness of God at this time has awakenedyouto a sense of your nothingness, and your worthless and fallen state—

. . .

I say, that this is the man who receiveth salvation, through the atonement which was prepared from the foundation of the world for all mankind, which everweresince the fallof Adam, or who are, or who ever shall be, evenuntothe end of the world.

And this is the means whereby salvation cometh. And there is noneother salvation save this which hath been spoken of; neither are there any conditions whereby man can be saved except the conditions which I have toldyou.

Believe inGod; believe that he is, and that he createdall things, both in heaven and in earth; believe that he has all wisdom, and all power, both in heaven and in earth; believe that man doth not comprehendall the things which the Lord can comprehend.

. . .

And behold, I sayuntoyouthatifyedo thisyeshall always rejoice, and be filled with the loveof God, and always retaina remission of your sins; andyeshall grow in the knowledgeof the glory of him that createdyou, or in the knowledge of that which is just and true.

. . .

And now,ifGod, who has createdyou, on whomyouare dependent for your lives and for all thatyehave and are, doth grantuntoyouwhatsoeveryeask that is right, in faith, believing thatyeshall receive, O then, howyeought to impartof the substance thatyehave one to another. [2]

These words from King Benjamin were so powerful that every person in attendance was overcome with the power of God and desired to covenant with the Lord and take upon them a new name.Few if any of us have been in a meeting where the spirit of God was so powerful.Again, the Creation, Fall and Atonement are the foundation of his teaching.If we instructed with the same purity of doctrine, would we see more instances of conversion similar to this account in the Book of Mormon?Search the Book of Mormon and other scriptures.When the Atonement is taught, the doctrines of the Creation and Fall are also included.This is the pattern given by the Lord for instruction in the Church.

But can we teach with such power if we deny the foundation doctrines of the Creation and Fall? President Ezra Taft Benson felt that we should reevaluate our teaching of the Plan of Salvation:

We all need to take a careful inventory of our performance and also the performance of those over whom we preside to be sure that we are teaching the “great plan of the Eternal God” to the Saints.Are we accepting and teaching what the revelations tell us about the Creation, Adam and the fall of man, and redemption from that fall through the atonement of Christ? [3]

In recent years there has been much discussion about retaining new members of the Church. It takes time for members to understand all of the principles which are important in the Gospel plan. Where should we start? President Benson gave the Church a powerful key to retaining converts:

“In the twentieth section of the Doctrine and Covenants, the Lord devotes several verses to summarizing the vital truths which the Book of Mormon teaches. (See verses 17-36.) It speaks of God, the creation of man, the Fall, the Atonement, the ascension of Christ into heaven, prophets, faith, repentance, baptism, the Holy Ghost, endurance, prayer, justification and sanctification through grace, and loving and serving God.

We must know these essential truths. Aaron and Ammon and their brethren in the Book of Mormon taught these same kinds of truths to the Lamanite people[4], who were “in the darkest abyss [5]. After accepting these eternal truths, the Book of Mormon states, those converted Lamanites never did fall away. [6] [7]

Note that the Creation and Fall were among the vital truths that could enable members to never fall away nor be deceived by those seeking to disturb their faith.But note that even among these foundational doctrines of the Gospel the Creation and Fall are preeminent:

“The gospel can be viewed from two perspectives. In the broadest sense, the gospel embraces all truth, all light, all revealed knowledge to mankind. In a more restrictive sense, the gospel means the doctrine of the Fall, the consequences of the fall of man that brought into the world physical and spiritual death, the atonement of Jesus Christ which brings to pass immortality and eternal life, and the ordinances of salvation.[8]

Again we ask the question, was President Joseph Fielding Smith correct in his analysis of the dangers to faith in rejecting the true doctrines of the Creation and Fall?Before answering this question for yourself, please read what the scriptures and words of the prophets of God say on the matter.

Prophetic Statements

John Taylor

We can none of us do anything only as we are assisted, guided and directed by the Lord. No man ever lived that could. Adam could not. Noah could not. Even Jesus could not. Nor could the Apostles. They were all of them dependent upon the God of Israel to sustain them in all of their acts. And in regard to Adam himself, as we are, so was he very ignorant of many principles until they were revealed to him. And if they were revealed to him they did not originate with him; and so it was with others. We find that Adam was directed of the Lord to do a certain thing—that is, to offer up sacrifices—and when the angel of the Lord came to him and said: “Adam why do you offer up sacrifices?” Adam replied, “I do not know; but the Lord commanded me to do it, and therefore I do it.” He did not know what those sacrifices were for until the Lord revealed unto him thedoctrine of the atonement and the necessity of the fall of man, and pointed out to him the way and manner to obtain an exaltation. Then he and Eve his wife rejoiced exceedingly at the mercy and kindness of the Almighty, and realized that even in their fall they were placed in a position to obtain a higher glory, and a greater exaltation than they could have done without it. Now, who revealed this to them? The Lord, through the ministering of an holy angel; and in relation to the dealings of God with all of the human family it has been precisely the same. We are told, for instance, that when Adam had lived to a great age—that three years before his death he called together his family—that is, some of the leading branches thereof who held the Holy Priesthood, mentioning the names of many of the more prominent that had received certain peculiar blessings from the hand of God—and there was manifested to him all things that should transpire to his posterity throughout all the future generations of time, and he prophesied of these things; and also upon those who were with him, rested the spirit of prophecy, and he blessed them, and they turned around and blessed him and called him Michael the Archangel, the Prince of Peace, etc. By what spirit then did Adam prophesy, and under what influence was he operating at that time? We are told in Scripture that the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy, and he in common with his sons who were then associated with him were in possession of that spirit which enlightened their minds, unfolded unto them the principles of truth, and revealed unto them the things that would transpire throughout every subsequent period of time. [9]

Joseph F. Smith

“Recently there was some trouble…in one of the leading Church schools—the training college of theBrighamYoungUniversity—where three of the professors advanced certain theories on evolution as applied to the origin of man, and certain opinions on “higher criticism, as conclusive and demonstrated truths. This was done although it is well known that evolution and the “higher criticism…are in conflict on some matters with the scriptures, including some modern revelation…The Church, on the contrary, holds to the definite authority of divine revelation which must be the standard; and that, as so-called “science has changed from age to age in its deductions, and as divine revelation is truth, and must abide forever, views as to the lesser should conform to the positive statements of the greater; and, further, that in institutions founded by the Church for the teaching of theology, as well as other branches of education, its instructors must be in harmony in their teachings with its principles and doctrines…as teachers in a Church school they could not be given opportunity to inculcate theories that were out of harmony with the recognized doctrines of the Church, and hence [they were] required to refrain from so doing…The trustees of the Brigham Young University…unanimously resolved, “that no doctrine should be taught in the Brigham Young University not in harmony with the revealed word of God as interpreted and construed by the Presidency and Apostles of the Church; and that the power and authority of determining whether any professor or other instructor of the institution is out of harmony with the doctrines and attitude of the Church, be delegated to the presidency of the university…Philosophic theories of life have their place and use, but it is not in the classes of the Church schools, and particularly are they out of place here or anywhere else when they seek to supplant the revelations of God. The ordinary student cannot delve into these subjects deep enough to make them of any practical use to him, and a smattering of knowledge in this line only tends to upset his simple faith in the gospel, which is of more value to him in life than all the learning of the world without it.[10]

George Albert Smith

“The atonement of Jesus Christ removed from us the responsibility of atoning for the sin of father Adam, and he has made it possible for us to live here upon the earth, . . .[11]

“We are informed that we will not be held responsible for the sin of Adam, but that we will be held responsible for our own sins. The atonement of Jesus Christ removed from us the responsibility of atoning for the sin of father Adam, and he has made it possible for us to live here upon the earth, and in due time, if we take advantage of our opportunities, we will be prepared to be resurrected from the dead when that time shall come.[12]

Joseph Fielding Smith

“Organic evolution is Satan’s chief weapon in this dispensation in his attempt to destroy the divine mission of Jesus Christ. It is a contemptible plot against faith in God and to destroy the effective belief in the divine atonement of our Redeemer through which men may be saved from their sins and find place in theKingdomofGod.There is not and cannot be any compromise between the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the theories of evolution.Were evolution true, there could be no remission of sin.[13]

We now come to this vital point. My fellow believers in the mission of Jesus Christ, in Joseph Smith and the restoration of the Gospel, as I have said, you are entitled through faithfully keeping the commandments of the Lord, to individual guidance. It is your right under these conditions to know the truth which makes us free. You cannot be a true member of the Church and reject Jesus Christ. You cannot be a faithful member and reject the scriptures—Bible, Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and Pearl of Great Price—for these are the standards of our faith. If you accept them you cannot accept organic evolution, for they are diametrically opposed.[14]

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.[15]

To a person who has faith in God, and believes in the mission of Jesus Christ, such child’s-play is worthy of ridicule. It is astonishing how men can get so far away from the truth in their stubborn, willful, blindness to believe that these wonderful parts of the skeleton so skillfully and artistically placed in the body, each bone having a definite part to play peculiar to itself to give to the body power and efficient service, came to that place by chance, and by a continuous change from a jelly-like creature millions of years ago.This doctrine of descent from lower forms is a trick of the devil whose self-appointed mission is to destroy the work of God and the divine mission of Jesus Christ. It is unfortunate that the devil finds so many followers. [16]

“IF EVOLUTION IS TRUE, THE CHURCH IS FALSE. If life began on the earth, as advocated by Darwin, Huxley, Haeckel (who has been caught openhanded perpetrating a fraud), and others of this school, whether by chance or by some designing hand, then the doctrines of the Church are false. Then there was no Garden of Eden, no Adam and Eve, and no fall. If there was no fall; if death did not come into the world as the scriptures declared that it did—and to be consistent, if you are an evolutionist, this view you must assume—then there was no need for a redemption, and Jesus Christ is not the Son of God, and he did not die for the transgression of Adam, nor for the sins of the world. Then there has been no resurrection from the dead! Consistently, logically, there is no other view, no alternative that can be taken. Now, my brethren and sisters, are you prepared to take this view? [17]

CANNOT BELIEVE BOTH GOSPEL AND EVOLUTION. I say most emphatically,you cannot believe in this theory of the origin of man, and at the same time accept the plan of salvation as set forth by the Lord our God. Youmust choose the one and reject the other, for they are in direct conflict and there is a gulf separating them which is so great that it cannot be bridged, no matter how much one may try to do so.If you believe in the doctrine of the evolutionist, then you must accept the view that man has evolved through countless ages from the very lowest forms of life up through various stages of animal life, finally into the human form. The first man, according to this hypothesis known as the “cave man,” was a creature absolutely ignorant and devoid of any marked intelligence over the beasts of the field.[18]

If death was always here, then Adam did not bring it, and he could not be punished for it. If Adam did not fall, there was no Christ, because the atonement of Jesus Christ is based on the fall of Adam. And so we face these problems.If there is anybody here that believes that death has always been going on, and that sin was always here, he will have a difficult time to explain Adam and the fall, or the atonement. You see from these writings what a dreadful state these men get in when they do not believe in the fall and the introduction of sin into the world.[19]

Another thing I wish to say. A man cannot serve God and mammon.Organic evolution is destructive of faith in God. It is rebellion against him. Those who accept this pernicious doctrine cannot consistently believe in the fall of Adam. If they do not believe in the fall of Adam they cannot believe in Jesus Christ, for if Adam had not transgressed the law under which he was placed on this earth, there would have been no occasion for a redemption.How could Adam be redeemed from something that never happened.We are taught that had not Adam partaken of the forbidden fruit all things would have remained in the condition in which they were before the fall. Here is the passage:

And now, behold, if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden.And allthings which were created must have remained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained for ever and had no end.[20]

THEORY OF EVOLUTION DENIES CHRIST. Then Adam, and by that I mean the first man, was not capable of sin. He could not transgress, and by doing so bring death into the world; for,according to this theory, death had always been in the world. If, therefore, there was no fall, there was no need of an atonement,hence the coming into the world of the Son of God as the Savior of the world is a contradiction, a thing impossible.Are you prepared to believe such a thing as that?Do you believe that the first man was a savage? That he lacked in the power of intelligence? That he has been on the constant road of progression? These are the teachings of such theorists. [21]

APOSTASY COMES WHEN TRUTH NOT TAUGHT. Modern education declares that there never was such a thing as the fall of man, but thatconditions have always gone on in the same way as now in this mortal world. Here, say they,death and mutation have always held sway as natural conditions on this earth and everywhere throughout the universe the same laws obtain. It is declared that man has made his ascent to the exalted place he now occupies through countless ages of development which has gradually distinguished him from lower forms of life.

Such a doctrine of necessity discards the story of Adam and the Garden of Eden, which it looks upon as a myth coming down to us from an early age of foolish ignorance and superstition. Moreover, it is taught that since death was always here, and a natural condition prevailing throughout all space, there could not possibly come a redemption from Adam’s transgression, hence there was no need for a Savior for a fallen world.

Is it any wonder, under such circumstances, that churches are deserted; that more than half of the population of this country has become indifferent, if not antagonistic, to religion? This, also, is just as true of other lands.[22]

Harold B. Lee

President Harold B. Lee was a strong supporter of Joseph Fielding Smith’s bookMan, His Origin and Destiny. President Lee also taught the following in a First Presidency Message as the President of the Church:

I was somewhat sorrowed recently to hear someone, a sister who comes from a church family, ask, “What about the pre-Adamic people?” Here was someone who I thought was fully grounded in the faith. I asked, “What about the pre-Adamic people?” She replied, “Well, aren’t there evidences that people preceded the Adamic period of the earth?” I said, “Have you forgotten the scripture that says, ‘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….’ ”Moses 3:7 I asked, “Do you believe that?” She wondered about the creation because she had read the theories of the scientists, and the question that she was really asking was: How do you reconcile science with religion? The answer must be, If science is not true, you cannot reconcile truth with error. [23]

Unfortunately, some are among us who claim to be Church members but are somewhat like the scoffers in Lehi’s vision—standing aloof and seemingly inclined to hold in derision the faithful who choose to accept Church authorities as God’s special witnesses of the gospel and his agents in directing the affairs of the Church.

There are those in the Church who speak of themselves as liberals who, as one of our former presidents has said, “read by the lamp of their own conceit.” (Joseph F. Smith, Gospel Doctrine [Deseret Book Co., 1939], p. 373.) One time I asked one of our Church educational leaders how he would define a liberal in the Church. He answered in one sentence: “A liberal in the Church is merely one who does not have a testimony.”

. . .

Here again, to use the figure of speech in Lehi’s vision, they are those who are blinded by the mists of darkness and as yet have not a firm grasp on the “iron rod.”

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if, when there are questions which are unanswered because the Lord hasn’t seen fit to reveal the answers as yet, all such could say, as Abraham Lincoln is alleged to have said, “I accept all I read in the Bible that I can understand, and accept the rest on faith.”

How comforting it would be to those who are the restless in the intellectual world, when such questions arise as to how the earth was formed and how man came to be, if they could answer as did an eminent scientist and devoted Church member. A sister had asked: “Why didn’t the Lord tell us plainly about these things?” The scientist answered: “It is likely we would not understand if he did. It might be like trying to explain the theory of atomic energy to an eight-year-old child.”

Wouldn’t it be a great thing if all who are well schooled in secular learning could hold fast to the “iron rod,” or the word of God, which could lead them, through faith, to an understanding, rather than to have them stray away into strange paths of man-made theories and be plunged into the murky waters of disbelief and apostasy?

I heard one of our own eminent scientists say something to the effect that he believed more professors have taken themselves out of the Church by their trying to philosophize or intellectualize the fall of Adam and the subsequent atonement of the Savior. This was because they would rather accept the philosophies of men than what the Lord has revealed until they, and we, are able to understand the “mysteries of godliness” as explained to the prophets of the Lord and more fully revealed in sacred places. [24]

This statement on the Fall was placed in the Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Harold B. Lee, manual in 2000.

Adam and Eve … exercised their agency and of their own volition had partaken of the fruit, of which they were commanded not to eat; thus they had become subject to the law of Satan. In that disobedience, God was now free to visit upon them a judgment. They were to learn that besides God being a merciful Father, he is also a just Father, and when they broke the law they were subject to the receiving of a penalty and so they were cast out of that beautiful garden. They were visited by all the vicissitudes to which mortals from that time since have been heir. They were to learn that by their disobedience they received the penalty of a just judgment. They were forced to earn their bread by the sweat of their brow, for now they had become mortals…Pain, misery, death, all now came in their wake, but with that pain, quite like our own experiences from that time to this, there came knowledge and understanding that could never have been gained except by pain…Besides the Fall having had to do with Adam and Eve, causing a change to come over them,that change affected all human nature, all of the natural creations, all of the creation of animals, plants—all kinds of life were changed.The earth itself became subject to death. … How it took place no one can explain, and anyone who would attempt to make an explanation would be going far beyond anything the Lord has told us.But a change was wrought over the whole face of the creation, which up to that time had not been subject to death. From that time henceforth all in nature was in a state of gradual dissolution until mortal death was to come, after which there would be required a restoration in a resurrected state.[25]

Spencer W. Kimball

“Our first parents, Adam and Eve, disobeyed God.By eating the forbidden fruit, they became mortal. Consequently,they andall of their descendantsbecame subject to both mortal and spiritual death (mortal death, the separation of body and spirit; and spiritual death the separation of the spirit from the presence of God and death as pertaining to the things of the spirit).In order for Adam to regain his original state (to be in the presence of God), an atonement for this disobedience was necessary. In God’s divine plan, provision was made for a redeemer to break the bonds of death and, through the resurrection, make possible the reunion of the spirits and bodies of all persons who had dwelt on earth… “For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.” [26] [27]

Ezra Taft Benson

But it is the living prophet who really upsets the world. . . . 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.[28]

We all need to take a careful inventory of our performance and also the performance of those over whom we preside to be sure that we are teaching the “great plan of the Eternal God” to the Saints. Are we accepting and teaching what the revelations tell us about the Creation, Adam and the fall of man, and redemption from that fall through the atonement of Christ?[29]

In the twentieth section of the Doctrine and Covenants, the Lord devotes several verses to summarizing the vital truths which the Book of Mormon teaches. (See verses 17-36.) It speaks of God, the creation of man, the Fall, the Atonement, the ascension of Christ into heaven, prophets, faith, repentance, baptism, the Holy Ghost, endurance, prayer, justification and sanctification through grace, and loving and serving God.

We must know these essential truths. Aaron and Ammon and their brethren in the Book of Mormon taught these same kinds of truths to the Lamanite people [30], who were “in the darkest abyss” [31]. After accepting these eternal truths, the Book of Mormon states, those converted Lamanites never did fall away. [32][33]

The gospel can be viewed from two perspectives. In the broadest sense, the gospel embraces all truth, all light, all revealed knowledge to mankind. In a more restrictive sense, the gospel means the doctrine of the Fall, the consequences of the fall of man that brought into the world physical and spiritual death, the atonement of Jesus Christ which brings to pass immortality and eternal life, and the ordinances of salvation. [34]

Howard W. Hunter

What of spiritual values and the religious ideals of past generations, which have been the great stabilizing influence on society?Modern thinkers claim these have been the great deterrents to man in the freedoms he now seeks. There is a great effort on the part of so-called modernists to change religious beliefs and teachings of the past to conform to modern thought and critical research. They de-emphasize the teachings of the Bible by modern critical methods and deny that scripture is inspired.The modernist teaches that Christ is not the Son of God. He denies the doctrine of the atoning sacrifice by which all men may be saved. He denies the fact of the resurrection of the Savior of the world and relegates him to the status of a teacher of ethics. Where, then, is hope? What has become of faith?

The Old Testament unfolds the story of the creation of the earth and man by God. Should we now disregard this account and modernize the creation according to the theories of the modernists? Can we say there was no Garden of Eden or an Adam and Eve? Because modernists now declare the story of the flood is unreasonable and impossible, should we disbelieve the account of Noah and the flood as related in the Old Testament?[35]

Darwinist and Neo-Darwinist

Monroe W. Strickberger

“. . . faith in religious dogma has been eroded by natural explanations of its mysteries. . .[36]

Louis Menand

Darwin didn’t invent evolution. He invented Godless Evolution…On
the Origin of Species was published on November 24, 1859. The word
‘evolution’ barely appears in it. Many scientists by 1859 were
evolutionists-that is, they believed that species had not been created once
and for all, but had changed over time. The purpose of On the Origin of
Species was not to introduce the concept of evolution; it was to debunk the
concept of supernatural intelligence…What was radical about On the Origin
of Species was not its evolutionism, but its materialism. [37]

Charles Darwin

“Man still bears in his bodily frame the indelible stamp of his lowly origin [38]

Darwin’s life is a parallel to what has happened in this modern world.The more he pursued his theories, the weaker his faith became.His is an expert witness to the fruit of his theory:

“The old argument of design in nature . . . which formerly seemed to me so conclusive, fails, now that the law of natural selection has been discovered.[39]

Darwin’s theories also led to a complete rejection of scripture:

“I had gradually come . . . to see that the Old Testament from its manifestly false history of the world, with theTowerofBabel, the rainbow as a sign, etc., etc. . . . was no more to be trusted than the sacred books of the Hindoos, or the beliefs of any barbarian.[40]

“By further reflecting that the clearest evidence would be requisite to make any sane man believe in the miracles by which Christianity is supported,—that the more we know of the fixed laws of nature the more incredible do miracles become,—that the men at that time were ignorant and credulous to a degree almost incomprehensible by us,—that the Gospels cannot be proved to have been written simultaneously with the events,—that they differ in many important details, far too important as it seemed to me to be admitted as the usual inaccuracies of eye-witnesses;—by such reflections as these . . . I gradually came to disbelieve in Christianity as a divine revelation.[41]

Darwinnoted that his loss of faith was not sudden, nor without serious reflection:

“Thus disbelief crept over me at a very slow rate, but was at last complete.The rate was so slow that I felt no distress, and have never since doubted even for a single second that my conclusion was correct.[42]

AsDarwinlost his faith in God and his faith that God had created the universe, he lost his love of nature and its beauty.Darwinexpressed his experience:

“I have said that in one respect my mind has changed during the last twenty or thirty years.Up to the age of thirty, or beyond it, poetry of many kinds . . . gave me great pleasure. . . . I have also said that formerly pictures gave me considerable, and music very great delight.But now for many years I cannot endure to read a line of poetry: I have tried lately to read Shakespeare, and found it so intolerably dull that it nauseated me.I have also almost lost any taste for pictures or music.—Music generally sets me thinking too energetically on what I have been at work on, instead of giving me pleasure.I retain some taste for fine scenery, but it does not cause me the exquisite delight which it formerly did.[43]

As Darwin’s view changed from nature being the work of an Omniscient hand to God having no part in the Creation, he no longer saw the beauty in nature.Darwinexplained that it was not a general loss of his mental functions, but only a loss of sensibility and feeling:

“This curious and lamentable loss of the higher aesthetic tastes is all the odder, as books on history, biographies and travels [44], and essays on all sorts of subjects interest me as much as ever they did.My mind seems to have become a kind of machine for grinding general laws out of large collections of facts, but why this should have caused the atrophy of that part of the brain alone, on which the higher tastes depend, I cannot conceive.[45]

“False Facts are highly injurious to the progress of science for they often endure long.[46]

. . . often a cold shudder has run through me, and I have asked myself whether I may not have devoted my life to a phantasy.[47]

At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.[48]

Many others have lost their faith in a similar way.Note these statements by leading thinkers.

Charles Lyell

Charles Lyell desired to destroy belief in the scriptural record:”If we don’t irritate, which I fear that we may . . . we shall carry all with us. If you don’t triumph over them, but compliment the liberality and candor of the present age, the bishops and enlightened saints will join us in despising both the ancient and modern physico-theologians . . . I conceived the idea five or six years ago, that if ever the Mosaic geology could be set down without giving offence, it would be in an historical sketch . . . Let them feel it, and point the moral.[49]

Friedrich Engels

“In our evolutionary conception of the universe, there is absolutely no room for . . . a Creator. Friedrich Engels, Coauthor of the Communist Manifesto.[50]

Darwin, whom I am now reading, is splendid.[51]

Just as Darwin discovered the law of evolution in organic nature, so Marx discovered the law of evolution in human history.[52]

Sigmund Freud

“Darwin’s doctrine, then in vogue, was a powerful attraction, since it promised to provide an extraordinary thrust to understanding the universe.[53]

“Religion is an illusion . . . “[54]

In his Autobiographical Study, Freud would recall that “Darwin’s doctrine, then in vogue, was a powerful attraction, since it promised to provide an extraordinary thrust to understanding the universe” [55].

From then on Darwin joined Hannibal in Freud’s personal pantheon and he dreamed of becoming his equal. In “A Difficulty in the Path of Psycho-Analysis,” he described the three wounds inflicted on humanity’s pride: when Copernicus established that the earth was not the center of the universe, when Darwin proved that mankind developed in an unbroken line from other animal species, and when he, Freud, showed that man did not have control over the most important aspects of his own mental processes [56].[57]

“the theories ofDarwin, which were then of topical interest, strongly attracted me, for they held out hope of an extraordinary advance in our understanding of the world”[58]

John Dewey

“Faith in the prayer-hearing God is an unproved and outmoded faith.[59]

Pierre P. Grassé

Directed by all-powerful selection, chance becomes a sort of providence, which, under the cover of atheism, is not named but which is secretly worshipped.[60]

W. H. Murphy

Evolution is a hard, inescapable mistress.There is just no room for compassion or good sportsmanship.Too many organisms are born, so, quite simply, a lot of them are going to have to die, because there isn’t enough food and space to go around.[61]

Sir Arthur Keith

. . . as we have seen, the ways of national evolution, both in the past and in the present, are cruel, brutal, ruthless and without mercy. . . .the law of Christ is incompatible with the law of evolution. [62]

Barbara Burke

Among some animal species, then, infant killing appears to be a natural practice.Could it be natural for humans, too, a trait inherited from our primate ancestors. . . .Charles Darwin noted in The Descent of Man that infanticide has been “probably the most important of all checks on population growth throughout most of human history.[63]

Joseph Sobran

They still suppose that the fetus is in early stages of development a “lower form of life, and this is probably what they mean when they say it isn’t “fully human.[64]

Robert Muller

I believe the most fundamental thing we can do today is to believe in evolution.[65]

Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

Is evolution a theory, a system or a hypothesis?It is much more: it is a general condition to which all theories, all systems, all hypotheses must bow . . . .Evolution is a light illuminating all facts, a curve that all lines must follow.[66]

American Atheist 1988

When the theory of evolution was advanced, that was the date that the Judeo-Christian religion began the decline in which it now finds itself in the West.The two theories are point-blank in contradiction one to the other.[67]

American Atheist 1978

Christianity has fought, still fights, and will fight science to the desperate end over evolution, because evolution destroys utterly and finally the very reason Jesus’ earthly life was supposedly made necessary. . . .If Jesus was not the redeemer who died for our sins, and this is what evolution means, then Christianity is nothing![68]

Julian Huxley

Darwinpointed out that no supernatural designer was needed; since natural selection could account for any known form of life, there was no room for a supernatural agency in its evolution. . . .we can dismiss entirely all idea of a supernatural overriding mind being responsible for the evolutionary process.[69]

Stephen Jay Gould

He [Darwin] knew that the primary feature distinguishing his theory from all other evolutionary doctrines was its uncompromising philosophical materialism.Other evolutionists . . . permitted a Christian God to work by evolution instead of creation.Darwinspoke only of random variation and natural selection.[70]

Dr. Edward Simon

. . . I cannot deny that the theory of evolution, and the atheism it engendered, let to the moral climate that made a holocaust possible.[71]

Adolf Hitler

He who would live must fight, he who does not wish to fight in this world where permanent struggle is the law of life, has not the right to exist.[72]

Arthur Keith

The German Fuhrer [Adolf Hitler], as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practices ofGermanyconform to the theory of evolution.[73]

Jacques Monod

[Natural] selection is the blindest, and most cruel way of evolving new species . . . .I am surprised that a Christian would defend the idea that this is the process which God more or less set up in order to have evolution.[74]

John D. Rockefeller

This is not an evil tendency in business.It is merely the working-out of a law of nature and a law of God.[75]

Andrew Carnegie

I remember that light came in as a flood and all was clear.Not only had I got rid of theology and the supernatural but I had found the truth of evolution.[76]

Frank R. Zindler

The religion of the Old Testament is a cultural fossil held over from the Pleistocene Epoch, and it reflects an atmosphere of intense intergroup competition.Petrified like the bones in a paleontologist’s cabinet, the greatest ideas of the Ice Age still can be found on display between Genesis and Malachi.[77]

John M. Allegro

For what religious man came eventually to think of as “conscience is simply the faculty that enabled his hominid ancestors to inhibit their programmed responses to stimuli in the interests of some longer-term advantage.”Guilt is the unease that accompanies and sometimes motivates that control, and “god is the idealist projection of the conscience in moral terms.[78]

Dr. Scott Todd

“Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic.[79]

Dr. Richard Lewontin

We take the side of evolutionary science in spite of the patent obscurity of some of it’s constructs. Moreover that materialism in science is absolute for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.[80]

American Humanist Association

In order to capture this nation one has to totally remove moral and spiritual values and absolutes from the thinking of the child. The Child has to think that there is no standard of right and wrong. Truth is relative and that diversity is the only absolute to be gained.[81]

Peter Singer

Killing an disabled infant is sometimes not wrong. Given that the infant, like any infant, is not a person as such. I think that it’s ethically defensible to say, we do not have to continue it’s life. It doesn’t have a right to live.[82]

Durrant Drake

” And what sort of justice is it that could be satisfied with the punishing of one innocent man and the free pardon of myriads of guilty men The theory seems a remnant of the ancient idea that the gods need to be placated but by the side of the pagan gods who were content with humble offerings of flesh and fruit the Christian God demanding the suffering and death of his own Son appears a monster of cruelty. [83]


Bible Dictionary:Fall of Adam –The process by which mankind became mortal on this earth. The event is recorded in Genesis 2, 3, 4 ; and Moses 3, 4 .The fall of Adam is one of the most important occurrences in the history of man. Before the fall, Adam and Eve had physical bodies butno blood.There was no sin, no death, and no children among any of the earthly creations. With the eating of the “forbidden fruit, Adam and Eve became mortal, sin entered, blood formed in their bodies, and death became a part of life.Adam became the “first flesh upon the earth Moses 3: 7 ), meaning that he and Eve were the first to become mortal. After Adam fell,the whole creation fell and became mortal. Adam’s fall broughtboth physical and spiritual death into the worldupon all mankind (Helaman 14: 16–17 ).

Latter-day revelation supports thebiblical account of the fall, showing thatit was a historical event that literally occurred in the history of man. Many points in latter-day revelation are also clarified that are not discernible from the Bible. Among other things it makes clear that the fall is a blessing, and that Adam and Eve should be honored in their station as the first parents of the earth. Significant references are 2 Nephi 2: 15–16 ; 2 Nephi 9: 6–21 ; Mosiah 3: 11–16 ; Alma 22: 12–14 ; Alma 42: 2–15 ; D&C 29: 34–44 ; Moses 5: 9–13 .

D&C 77:12
“. . . asGod made the world in six days, and on the seventh day he finished his work, and sanctified it, and also formed man out of the dust of the earth,even so, in the beginning of theseventh thousand yearswill the Lord God sanctify the earth, and complete the salvation of man . . .

D&C 77:6
“. . . the revealed will, mysteries, and the works of God; the hidden things of his economy concerning this earthduring the seven thousand years of its continuance, or it temporal existence.

2 Nephi 2:22–24
“. . . if Adam had not transgressed he would not have fallen, but he would have remained in the garden of Eden. And all things which were created must haveremained in the same state in which they were after they were created; and they must have remained forever, and had no end.

And they would have had no children; wherefore they would have remained in a state of innocence, having no joy, for they knew no misery; doing no good, for they knew no sin.

But behold, all things have been done in the wisdom of him who knoweth all things.Adam fell that men might be; and men are, that they might have joy.

Moses 5:11
“Were it not for our transgression wenever should have had seed, andnever should have known good and evil, and the joy of our redemption, and the eternal life which God giveth unto all the obedient.

Moses 3:7
“And I, the Lord God, formed man . . . thefirst flesh upon the earth, the first man also . . .

Mosiah 2:20–4:21

Supporting Statements

Will Durrant

By offering evolution in place of God as a cause of history,Darwin removed the theological basis of the moral code of Christendom. . . .That’s the condition we are in. . . .[84]

Dr. Henry Morris

Once the historicity of Genesis is abandoned in a church or school (and this is what evolution requires), it is inevitable that the whole structure of supernatural Christianity will eventually collapse in the teachings of that institution.[85]

  1. ↑ Joseph Fielding Smith, Man, His Origin and Destiny [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1954], 279 – 280
  2. ↑ Mosiah 2:20–4:21
  3. ↑ Ezra Taft Benson, The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson[Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1988], 28 – 29
  4. ↑ Alma 18:22–39
  5. ↑ Alma 26:3
  6. ↑ Alma 23:6
  7. ↑ Ezra Taft Benson,A Witness and a Warning: A Modern-Day Prophet Testifies of the Book of Mormon[Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1988], 11
  8. ↑ Ezra Taft Benson,The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson[Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1988], 30
  9. ↑ John Taylor,Journal of Discourses, 26 vols. [London: Latter-day Saints’ Book Depot, 1854-1886], 26: 129 – 130
  10. ↑ Joseph F. Smith, “Theory and Divine Revelation, Editor’s Table., Improvement Era, 1911, Vol. Xiv. April, 1911. No. 6
  11. ↑ George Albert Smith, Conference Report, October 1926, Second Day—Morning Session 102
  12. ↑ George Albert Smith, Conference Report, October 1926, Second Day—Morning Session 102
  13. ↑ Joseph Fielding Smith,Man, His Origin and Destiny, 184-185
  14. ↑ Joseph Fielding Smith,Man, His Origin and Destiny[Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1954], 276.
  15. ↑ Smith, Joseph Fielding.Man, His Origin and Destiny.Salt Lake City,Utah: TheDeseretNews Press, 1954. preface
  16. ↑ Joseph Fielding Smith,Man, His Origin and Destiny[Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1954], 247 – 248
  17. ↑ Joseph Fielding Smith,Doctrines of Salvation, 1:143.
  18. ↑ Joseph Fielding Smith,Doctrines of Salvation, 1:141.
  19. ↑ Joseph Fielding Smith,Doctrines of Salvation, 1:119-120.
  20. ↑ Joseph Fielding Smith,Man, His Origin and Destiny[Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1954], 279 – 280
  21. ↑ Joseph Fielding Smith,Doctrines of Salvation, 1:142.
  22. ↑ Joseph Fielding Smith,Doctrines of Salvation, 1:315.
  23. ↑ Harold B. Lee, “First Presidency Message: Find the Answers in the Scriptures,”Ensign, Dec. 1972, 2.
  24. ↑ Harold B. Lee, “The Iron Rod,” Ensign, Jun 1971, 5
  25. ↑ Harold B. Lee,Teachings of Presidents of the Church: Harold B. Lee, 2000, p. 20.
  26. ↑ 1 Corinthians 15:22
  27. ↑ Spencer W. Kimball,The Teachings of Spencer W. Kimball, p. 15
  28. ↑ Ezra Taft Benson,The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson, p. 140
  29. ↑ Ezra Taft Benson,The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson[Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1988], 28 – 29
  30. ↑ Alma 18:22–39
  31. ↑ Alma 26:3
  32. ↑ Alma23:6
  33. ↑ Ezra Taft Benson,A Witness and a Warning: A Modern-Day Prophet Testifies of the Book of Mormon[Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Co., 1988], 11
  34. ↑ Ezra Taft Benson,The Teachings of Ezra Taft Benson[Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1988], 30
  35. ↑ Howard W. Hunter,Conference Report, October 1970, Third Day—Morning Meeting 129 – 130
  36. ↑ Evolution,3rdEdition, College Textbook, Monroe W. Strickberger,University of California, Berkeley
  37. ↑ Louis Menand, The Metaphysical Club, Published in 2001, Professor of English at
    Harvard University
  38. ↑ Charles Darwin,The Descent of Man, p. 405
  39. ↑ Charles Darwin,The Autobiography of Charles Darwin, p. 87
  40. ↑ Charles Darwin,The Autobiography of Charles Darwin, p. 85
  41. ↑ Charles Darwin,The Autobiography of Charles Darwin, p. 86
  42. ↑ Charles Darwin,The Autobiography of Charles Darwin,p.87
  43. ↑ Charles Darwin,The Autobiography of Charles Darwin, p.138
  44. ↑ independently of any scientific facts which they may contain
  45. ↑ Charles Darwin,The Autobiography of Charles Darwin,p. 139
  46. ↑ Charles Darwin,Descendant of Man
  47. ↑ Charles Darwin
  48. ↑ Charles Darwin,The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex,M.A., F.R.S., &c p. 201
  49. ↑ Letter written to George Poulette Scrope in1830, then published inLife, Letters and Journal of Charles Lyell, Mrs. Charles Lyell, ed. London: John Murray, 1881, pp. 270-271.
  50. ↑ Friedrich Engels,Socialism, Utopian and Scientific, Foreign Languages Publishing House, p. 21.
  51. ↑ Engels, as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 83
  52. ↑ Engels, as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 83
  53. ↑ Sigmund Freud, Father of Psychoanalytic Psychology,An Autobiographical Study,1925
  54. ↑ Sigmund Freud, “A Philosophy of Life: Lecture 35,New Introductory Lectures on Psycho-analysis, London: Hogarth Press, 1933
  55. ↑ 1925d
  56. ↑ 1917a
  57. ↑ Freud
  58. ↑ Freud
  59. ↑ John Dewey, Father of Progressive Education, “Soul Searching,Teacher Magazine, September 1933, p.33
  60. ↑ Pierre P. Grassé, Evolution of Living Organisms, as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p.161
  61. ↑ W. H. Murdy, “Anthropocentrism, as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p.146
  62. ↑ Sir Arthur Keith,Evolution and Ethics, p. 15, as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 147
  63. ↑ Barbara Burke, “Infanticide, Science 84 (May 1984): quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 140
  64. ↑ Joseph Sobran, “The Averted Gaze: Liberalism and Fetal Pain, Human Life Review 9 (Spring 1984) quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 138
  65. ↑ Robert Muller, as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 132
  66. ↑ Pierre Teilhard de Chardin
  67. ↑ American Atheist1988, as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 119
  68. ↑ American Atheist, 1978, as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 119
  69. ↑ Julian Huxley, 1959 Darwinian Centennial, as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 110
  70. ↑ Stephan Jay Gould, as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 95
  71. ↑ Dr. Edward Simon, biology professor, Purdue University, as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 78
  72. ↑ Adolf Hitler,Mein Kampf (My Struggle), as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 77
  73.  Arthur Keith, Evolution and Ethics, as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 76
  74.  Jacques Monod, as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 58
  75.  John D. Rockefeller, as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 56
  76.  Andrew Carnegie, as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 56
  77.  Frank R. Zindler, American Atheist, as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 43
  78.  John M. Allegro, American Atheist, September 1986, as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 42
  79.  Dr. Scott Todd,Kansas State University
  80.  Dr, Richard Lewontin,Harvard University
  81.  American Humanist Association
  82.  Professor Peter Singer, Dept . Of Bioethics–PrincetonUniversity
  83.  Durrant Drake,Problems of Religion,p. 176.
  84.  Will Durrant, as quoted in Henry Morris,The Long War Against God,p. 149, “Are We in the Last Stage of a Pagan Period?
  85.  Dr. Henry Morris, as quoted in Henry Morris, The Long War Against God, p. 44

20 thoughts on “Belief in Evolution = No Belief in Jesus Christ”

  1. Well that’s certainly a provocative title. And it’s presented in a manner that’s bound to incite uproar. Unfortunately, as is often the case, what we have here is an argument with a straw man, or at least an ill-defined man.
    It would be interesting for you to define “evolution”.

    Turns out, genetic mutation is a thing. And, as far as anyone can tell, the earth is pretty darn old.

    How did God create the earth? The most sacred sources we have, in the Holy Scriptures and in the Temple, are not terribly explicit on that point. They concern themselves with the much more important matter of *why* he created it, and our purpose here.

    If belief in evolution gets in the way of your faith in God, then drop evolution. But science is useful, and continues to develop.

    1. What “straw man” ? If we evolved from from single cell organisms then Adam was not the first man. Didn’t you read what the prophets said…..

  2. The Author speaks as if he has authority to make official statements about Church Doctrine which he does not. The statement by “Elder” Joseph Fielding Smith was his opinion and not doctrine. Other apostles did not agree with his position. The official Church position on the subject is that God created man and Adam was the first man. How that was done is speculation because we have no revelation that answers the question. Pres Hinckley “What the church requires is only belief ‘that Adam was the first man of what we would call the human race.'” President Hinckley added “Studied all about it. Didn’t worry me then. Doesn’t worry me now.”

    1. Abraham ch. 25 And the Gods organized the earth to bring forth the beasts after their kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after its kind; and the Gods saw they would obey.
      26 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.

      If every creature multiplies after it’s own kind how can you explain gorganic evolution. It’s impossible…

  3. What Kenyon said. Many church leaders have been wrong over the years, and yes, it’s been very difficult for later church leaders to say that those leaders were wrong. There are differences between church culture and tradition and church doctrine. Many of those things came from tradition and not doctrine. One recent example of this is Blacks in the priesthood, take a look at the recent church statement.

    It all but says outright that Brigham Young was completely wrong when it came to the priesthood ban.

    Basicaly, many modern leaders have came out and said that Evolution isn’t against doctrine, and you only have quotes from those who do say it is.

      1. How was he not wrong? Are you going to backup your claim? It wasn’t Brigham Young or Joseph Smith that came up with the theory that blackness of skin was the mark of Cain, the idea pre-dated them and they just followed along. There was no revelation about it.

  4. “It would be interesting for you to define “evolution”.
    Turns out, genetic mutation is a thing. And, as far as anyone can tell, the earth is pretty darn old.”
    It would also be interesting to see how you define evolution. Do you define it as change over time via natural selection and random mutation or do you define it as information increases in the genome via natural selection and random mutation. I do not see how natural selection and random mutation which are both information decreasing processes will result in a new species. When I say new species I don’t mean something which is now different from the parent species but something which had massive information increases to result in it’s current form.

  5. Dear Brother or sister,

    You are creating a false dichotomy with these quotes. Moreover, this false dichotomy drives people out of the church. Science and religion are perfectly compatible! BYU has one the strongest evolutionary programs in the US! BYU has a flippn dinosaur museum! Please read Dave Miller’s testimony on Please also listen to fairmormon’s podcast with Byu professor Steve Peck (on youtube).

    1. So you’re saying that BYU has proved that trillions of random gene mutations invented entirely new concepts like vision, hearing, flight, consciousness and intelligence itself?

      That is intriguing because I’m pretty sure that no one has even come remotely close to proving that that actually happened.

      Where is this “Dave Miller” of whom you speak?


  6. This self-replicating, animated matter we call “life” is overflowing with the hallmarks of design, from the molecular machines that service and support the DNA molecule to the complexity, diversity and interdependence of all lifeforms.
    Therefore it is perfectly reasonable and logical to deduce that it is designed unless proven otherwise. Neo-Darwinists are the ones making the claim that the introduction and advancement of life on this planet is/was the product of an exclusively materialistic process. The onus is on them to prove that that actually happened. Thus far their attempts to do so have been breathtaking failures. I am embarrassed that any member of the church would take the theory seriously.

    1. Amen to that. Any self respecting evolutionist that thinks science is on their side should at least have the intellectual honesty to give the opposing science at least 1/100th of equal time and consider both sides. Science simply does not allow for the fairy tale that is modern organic evolution. It just didn’t happen and still doesn’t happen.
      This vid is a guy presenting an overview of several laws of science that evolution magically breaks in order to provide the modern baal worshippers their version of an idol they can break themselves on.

  7. Occam’s razor: Among competing hypotheses the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected.

    Neo-Darwinian evolution is built upon trillions and trillions of assumptions in the form of random genetic mutations that supposedly occurred, without forethought, in a specific sequence to invent the hardware that would bring to fruition concepts that never used to exist, like vision, flight, consciousness, and intelligence itself. If one wants to “believe” in this astronomically improbable scenario that’s fine, but don’t pass off your evolution creation myth as equally logical and equally probable as the self-evident truth that is staring you in the face day after day — that life was designed by a supreme intelligence.

  8. Overall I think this article is very informative. I definitely don’t believe that Darwin was a pawn used by Satan though. He mentions the word “love” over 90 times in his original essay and the words “competition and natural selection only a few times. I am entirely against any religious movement against science. We only use scientific accounts when they benefit the churches dogma. I.e. Charles Anton. But we completely disregard anything that seems to contradict any interpretation an individual might have on scripture. I see no reason to limit God in his creation methods.

    1. God set his own limit when he said that he created the earth and that before adam there was no death. Evolution depends entirely on millions of cycles of life and death to be true. Did you not read the entire article? The two are entirely antithetical. Darwin was officially stated to be an antichrist in general conference under the presiding first presidency and not retracted at any time. Not every kook or pervert that calls their work science is actually science. Standing for truth is standing for science. We don’t appreciate those that sue the Lords name in vain nor should we science. We should be versed enough in science so that the fake modern day high priests of science cannot tell us night is day and day is night and believe it blindly.

  9. Let me ask the Church members who believe God used evolution to finally come to create Adam’s apparently perfected mortal human body this (and leaving aside that the scriptures make it clear death came into the world from Adam’s fall): If it apparently has taken tens of millions of years to create Adam, then the changes from one generation to the next are imperceptible. Thus, Adam’s father and mother would have been genotypically and phenotypically indistinguishable from Adam. Therefore, was not Adam’s father a man before Adam? Or was Adam’s father somehow denied inclusion as one of God’s children and is consigned to merely be among the beasts of the field, despite the fact that Adam’s father most certainly would have had a brain and body indistinguishable from Adam’s? And how many hundreds and thousands of generations before Adam would we need to go back to before we find Adam’s ancestors who would not be worthy to be called Children of God? And where was the cutoff point, apparently somehow to be declared by God that, here the beast-man generations end and here the divine generations of man begin, apparently with Adam? And would not there have been multitudes of these “beast-men” inhabiting Adam’s world? And were all the descendants of other beast-man, or maybe “humanoid”, lines which were not the immediate ancestors of Adam, made children of God once Adam was born, because certainly there would have been more “humanoids” on Earth at the time Adam was born to his humanoid mother? And then did Adam’s posterity somehow completely avoid inter-marriage with Adam’s not-quite-human relatives, e.g. uncles, cousins, etc., or would the children of a descendant of Adam’s, even of mixed blood, be granted full entrance into the divine family, unlike those humanoids who were Adam’s progenitors and collateral relatives? When the earth receives its paradaisical glory and becomes a great urim and thummin to its inhabitants, those who remained faithful but believed in evolution (meaning certainly one may hold to many false beliefs but still continue faithful, though I believe these false beliefs make continued faithfulness more difficult) will quickly come to realize the silliness of their belief in this devilish falsehood and will wonder why they were so easily duped.

  10. The “natural man” is a product of… nature. Is that so hard to accept? What does it mean? That the “natural man” shares instincts and appetites common to the rest of the animal kingdom. Understanding the “natural man” is key to defeating/governing him.

    But that’s not all that man is, for the family of Adam also possesses intelligence, which is the gift of God. Thus man is a dual being, possessing both the spirit and the flesh, the one inhabiting the other. As the spirit gains mastery over the flesh, the spirit and body (which comprise the soul of man) progress toward the fulness of celestial life. “For man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy; and when separated, man cannot receive a fulness of joy” (D&C 93:33-34).

    Is it possible for the natural man to be a product of nature and for the spirit to be begotten of God? If we don’t understand all the particulars of how the two come together in mortal life, does that make either one irrelevant?

    I believe fully in evolution and I have retained a vibrant faith in the restoration and the divinity of Jesus Christ. Furthermore, evolution tells us there are only two genders and otherwise aligns with Church teaching and doctrine. The Church has thankfully moved on from this debate.

    Full disclosure: I am the grandson of Henry Peterson, who was dismissed from BYU for teaching evolution. He drew his whole posterity away from the Church. I’m the first of his posterity to serve a mission, marry in the temple, etc. Science and religion are both engaged in the pursuit of truth, and the only discrepancy between the two is because truth hasn’t yet been gathered into one great whole.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *