0 Flares Twitter 0 Facebook 0 Google+ 0 StumbleUpon 0 Email -- 0 Flares ×

It seems common among the Church membership?¢‚Ǩ‚Äùat least based on my limited experience in three Canadian province and three US states?¢‚Ǩ‚Äùto reject evolution in support of creationsim.

I have to wonder how creationists reconcile Abraham 4:21:

And the Gods prepared the waters that they might bring forth great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters were to bring forth abundantly after their kind; and every winged fowl after their kind.

Every living, moving creature (and birds) came from the water?

25 thoughts on “Creation

  1. I remember someone usint the term once “evolutionary creationisim” that god used evolution to create the planet. Intersting theory.

    Quite franky I have no Idea how it all worked and I dont expect to for a very long time. I remember learning about evolution in high school biology and I found it very interresting. Somtimes it seemed to make a lot of sense. Throughout the whole thing I thouth that if this evoultion thing would work it would have to have a Divine hand guiding it.

    If we are suposed to learn line upon line precept upon precept I wonder if that also applied to the Saviour as he created the world. I wonder if there was a learning curve for him as he created this beautiful planet for us and if what we now use as evidence of evoultion is just evidence of him learning how to create life.

    But then again maybe God provided all the blue prints and he just followed directions. In which case why couldnt the plans for mosquitos have gotten lost

  2. This is how I feel, Heather, too. I think the Lord used scientific means and used evolutionary laws to a degree. How? I don’t know. And I sure don’t expect to for a long time. :)

    And I concur about the mosquitoes!!!!

  3. “If we are suposed to learn line upon line precept upon precept I wonder if that also applied to the Saviour as he created the world. I wonder if there was a learning curve for him as he created this beautiful planet for us and if what we now use as evidence of evoultion is just evidence of him learning how to create life.”

    Interesting concept, Heather.

  4. hey Kim do you ever read the scriptures just for the sake of reading them and not to try and find hidden meanings through them hehehehehe

  5. at the rate of me thinking “what does this mean” at every verse I will never get President Hinkley’s challenge done by the end of the year lol

  6. I don’t read the scriptures to just read them. I read them to learn something. I’m not participating in President Hinckley’s challenge.

  7. I think Brigham Young said it best: “Here let me state to all philosophers of every class upon the earth. When you tell me that Father Adam was made as we make adobes from the earth, you tell me what I deem an idle tale. When you tell me that the beasts of the field were produced in that manner, you are speaking idle words devoid of meaning. There is no such thing in all the eternities where the Gods dwell. Mankind are here because they are the offspring of parents who were first brought here from another planet, and power was given them to propagate their species, and they were commanded to multiply and replenish the earth.” 7:285-286.

  8. Kim,

    That’s a fun scripture. I have two thoughts:

    1) There could be a direct correlation to organic evolution.

    2) It could have something to do with water being a representation of unorganized matter (according to the Hebrews)

    Don’t really know which one it is–could be both. Organic evolution could certainly be a fulfillment of the latter.


  9. Evolution is a doctrine of Satan used to bind the Lord’s children and quietly lead them down to hell. God Almighty did not use evolution. It is nothing more than the imaginations of men. You should all be ashamed of yourselves for even entertaining the idea.

  10. prudence mcprude

    those are strong words. I am not being carefully lead down to hell.(Well not on the evouliton thing anyway)

    Here is what I know and believe:

    Jesus Christ is my savior and creator of this world.

    I dont know how it was created, I really dont at all, not one little bit. I was only stating theories I have heard and some Ideas I had for myself.

    Satan uses small amounts of truth mixed with garbage to decieve us. There are people who would love to believe that a series of evoulitonary accidents brought us here. That way there is no God and no accountibility.

    I am sure that when we learn in the etertinities how it all worked we will all be amazed at how it was accomplished.

    And I stick by what I said about mosquitos. (Just kidding I really dont want to get hit by lightening)

  11. What Heather said.

    The thing is, the Lord uses science, not magic, and why wouldn’t He use natural laws to some degree to accomplish His purposes?

    As well, remember Ms. McPrude, that the Church has never taken an official stance on evolution. No one here is saying evolution in the worldly way…but some possibilities of evolution (which we have evidence HAS happened, not necessarily to humans). I don’t pretend to know how it happened either, but I do have faith that our Father in Heaven, who created these natural laws, has used some of them in the process.

    Mosquitoes serve WHAT purpose? I do not know.

  12. My dad used to say. All the other plants were practice until God made the strawberry. Maybe mosquitos were practice for butterflies.

  13. Don’t take Mr. McPrude too seriously. He’s just having a little fun watching the sparks fly as he rubs people the wrong way with his McConkie-like flint.


  14. I’ve been both a Church member and a biologist for most of my life, and I’m quite at peace believing in both creation and evolution – although I must admit that after 50 years of earth-life I’ve accumulated more questions than answers. To my mind, the theory of evolution is certainly the most elegant theory in biology – perhaps all of science. And they still haven’t taken away my temple recommend – Bruce R. notwithstanding.

    Think about it – if old-style creationism is true, then mosquitoes are a divine creation. Do you really believe that?!

  15. I think that a lot of the problem people have with evolution is the timing. They try to place evolution before the creation of Adam and Eve in the Garden, and that doesn’t fit well with LDS doctrine. There is, however, another time where evolution could have occurred that fits well with LDS doctrine.

    According to LDS doctrine, the earth and Adam and Eve were created as immortal objects — there was no death. Evolution couldn’t have occurred at that point. So, when could evolution have been used by God? When the mortal world, not the immortal world, was created. When was that? After Adam and Eve made their choice to become mortal and the earth was “changed” or created with mortal elements.

    I’ve written an essay to discuss this “hypothesis” in more detail. The essay can be downloaded by going to

  16. That’s an interesting point of view Allen. I like it.

    I’ve developed an explanation that seems to work for me that looks at things in a similar light.

    I like to think that the account of the creation happened in a celestial sphere where celestial laws of time and physics were in effect.

    After the fall, the world and natural universe as we experience it moved into a telestial sphere where telestial laws of time and physics are in effect.

    If that’s the case, then we are trying to interpret events (the creation) that happened under a different set of natural laws than what we see now. No wonder we can’t get the two to corrilate to each other.

  17. All interesting ideas, to think about, but let’s not go too far in interpreting each phrase literally. For example, Genesis also describes the heavens as a “firmament” or a vault—as if a great arch were stretched over the surface of the earth. There’s such a mix of literal and figurative in these passages that I have great difficulty telling what is which.

  18. Allen, I understand that you’re using humor in comment 24. But it raises an issue about the words of Lehi that has caught my attention over the past few years. I first thought about it while in Afghanistan. I think Lehi’s comment isn’t “about it being necessary to have opposition in all things.” He never says, “There must needs be opposition in all things.” He says, “…it must needs be that there is an opposition in all things. The best way I can think of to interpret this is as follows:

    It must needs be that = It is the an inescapable conclusion or truth that

    There is an oppostion in all things = There exists a division of the universe into opposing forces or sides.

    In other words, he’s not commenting on the necessity or usefulness of adversity (even though that’s a gospel lesson we should learn). Rather, he’s expressing the truth that the universe isn’t just a moral neutral: There really is good versus evil, light versus darkness. There really is a right and a wrong, not just shades of gray. The universe isn’t just a “compound in one” in which neither righteousness nor wickedness, neither good or bad, really exist.

    My two cents on 2 Nephi 2.

Leave a Reply