Elder John Widtsoe expressed a very useful axiom about inspired writers.
Category: interpretation
Joseph Fielding Smith, 2 Nephi 2:22, and “Death Before the Fall” in Church History
As many of my readers may know, President Joseph Fielding Smith (1876-1972) considered evolution not just incorrect, but devilish; he believed scripture taught a young earth, with no death of any kind anywhere before the fall of Adam c. 4000 BC. His key scriptural evidence was 2 Nephi 2:22-25, which he cited dozens of times in books, articles, and private letters. I want to explore and document a few related questions here.
- Does Smith’s understanding of this passage represent a clear and historically consistent Church position?
- Does Smith, in essence, overclaim?
The New “Answering Gospel Questions,” Part 2: Historical Background
To understand why some of us see these new guidelines as so significant, we need to cover some intellectual and religious history which will allow you to “read between the lines” more. And please note, I’m under time constraints and very much in stark “historian mode” here; I have not taken the time to render this more devotional; suffice to say, one can— as I do— believe fully in biblical and LDS prophets while rejecting the fundamentalist constructs often attached to them.
Almost from the beginning, Latter-day Saints have operated on two loose competing paradigms of knowledge and “the world.” (I wrote a well-received paper on this for a conference in 2017; see here for more details, including the unrevised draft.)
The Power of Good Historiography: Or, How Joseph Fielding Smith Unwittingly Undermined Joseph Fielding Smith
I’m deep in my third (and final, I hope) dissertation chapter, covering the period 1960-1980. My research has always included archival work, interviews, and just generally pulling on every thread I can until the sweater unravels.
History is not merely what happened, but the stories we tell about what happened and how we tell them. Better understanding of the past can change our perception of the present, change our choices and understandings. Better history seems to have been a factor leading up to the 1978 revelation re: the priesthood/temple ban, for example. (See the long version of the Kimball biography.)
It’s also definitely the case with the Church and biological evolution. Joseph Fielding Smith told the story of evolution in the Church in the first half century in a particular way. And funny enough, it is Joseph Fielding Smith who ultimately undermines the very story he tells, leaving us instead a history that allowing much more theological openness to evolution. Continue reading
Evolution and the Gospel
I was recently asked, is evolution compatible with the Gospel?
So let’s talk about it. But first things first; to be productive, any good conversation needs to start with clear definitions.
President J. Reuben Clark: Some Death before the Fall
On October 3, 1946, President J. Reuben Clark delivered a speech to the general Relief Society session of General Conference. Titled ” Our Wives and Our Mothers in the Eternal Plan” —reproduced here— it generated some internal discussion with Elder Joseph Fielding Smith.
“Are not these conclusions reasonable?”: Premises, Faith, and Argument
We begin interpreting scripture before we even crack open the cover, through the assumptions and premises that we bring to scripture.
Reading and Teaching the Bible as Latter-day Saints- Video
This is video from a Stake class I was teaching… Continue reading
D&C 20:1, Plain Reading, and Literal Reading; or, Chexegesis Before You Wrexegesis
The line “check yourself before you wreck yourself” is from a rap song but also happens to just be good advice. “Chexegesis before you wrexegesis” adapts that wisdom to the realm of scripture, that you shouldn’t make strong declarations about scripture’s meaning without checking up on what it actually says and means. Continue reading
What I’m Doing Here, and What I Hope Others Will Do
I am not an “evolution apologist.” Although I suspect I have more scientific training than your average historian, I’m not a scientist. And more likely than not, neither is my average reader. For that reason, and because I don’t follow the specialized and technical literature, I don’t engage in scientific debate about evolution. Rather, in keeping with my own training and expertise, my approach is historical, scriptural, and theological. And historically, I understand how and why evolution has come to be the dominant way to make sense of mountains of data across multiple fields, and why 98% of scientists accept evolution as the best explanation of all that data. Continue reading
Recent Comments