Science and Religion
All Truth
"All truth is part of the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Whether truth comes from a scientific laboratory or by revelation from the Lord, it is compatible. All truth is part of the everlasting gospel. There is no conflict between science and religion. Conflict only arises from an incomplete knowledge of either science or religion, or both." - Russell M. Nelson
Miracles
I want to be clear about something before you read this page so you don't misunderstand my posistion. I do believe in miracles. God is a God of miracles. I've seen them in my own life and in the lives of others. I read about them in the scriptures and feel the witness of the Holy Ghost when I do so. I also believe that the events involved in the creation, fall, and flood are miraculous. I just think that we do ourselves (and our missionary efforts) a disservice when we read our traditions and preconceived notions into the scriptures. We as Latter-day Saints should accept all truth.
Also, I want to be clear that I know I may be wrong about my ideas. The following are just some ideas that have helped me to reconcile specific areas of science and religion.
Also, I want to be clear that I know I may be wrong about my ideas. The following are just some ideas that have helped me to reconcile specific areas of science and religion.
The Creation of the Earth and the Fall of Man
For some, the geological record of plants and animals that lived and died millions of years ago is faith shaking. It doesn't have to be this way. It is only faith shaking if one is basing their ideas on false assumptions.
The assumption that there was no physical death before the fall is true... but only in the case of God's covenant children at that time (i.e. Adam and Eve only). The fall is much more about a separation from God, both physical and spiritual than every living thing becoming mortal. In reality, the fall is about God's children falling from His presence for a period of learning, growth and development.
What the fall is not about is the biology of the entire planet being immortal and then suddenly becoming mortal. This is clearly seen not only in the fossil record, but in the scriptures. When Adam and Eve transgress, they are kicked out of the Garden of Eden into "The Lone and Dreary World" - a place which apparently previously existed. After the earth had existed and developed for a long time, God decided it was time to place His covenant children on the earth. Soon after the moment when the Father says to the Son, "Let us make man in our own image," He then says that they will plant Adam and Eve a garden in a land called Eden. The garden had to be planted in a region. The garden did not comprise the entire planet.
The earth had existed for a very long time before that garden was ever planted. Adam and Eve found the earth as it had existed for millions of years once they stepped out of the garden. For us to say in one sentence that God exists from all eternity to all eternity and then in the next sentence say that there is no way God could create the earth more than 6,000 years ago is silly.
What about Genesis saying the earth and life were created in mere "days"? Well, we could look to the ancient Hebrew usage of the word "day" and see that it means "period of time". Likewise we can look to our own English language (and many modern languages), and see that the usage is often similar. For example, "in this day of technological advancement..." refers to an era, not a particular calendar date. It can easily be said that the earth was created in six creative eras.
What about Genesis saying that animals like the cow and lion were among the first to appear? We need to remember the original audience of Genesis. (We should always keep in mind the audience of any scripture.) Genesis is essentially taken (and adapted over centuries) from a large revelation given to Moses for the benefit of the Israelites so that they can have a written heritage, rather than just oral traditions. For one to believe that God should be talking about cells, genetic drift and population dynamics to a group of people just freed from slavery is nonsense. We need to remember that our current scientific knowledge is very new to mankind and would have sounded foolish to people even just a few hundred years ago.
The assumption that there was no physical death before the fall is true... but only in the case of God's covenant children at that time (i.e. Adam and Eve only). The fall is much more about a separation from God, both physical and spiritual than every living thing becoming mortal. In reality, the fall is about God's children falling from His presence for a period of learning, growth and development.
What the fall is not about is the biology of the entire planet being immortal and then suddenly becoming mortal. This is clearly seen not only in the fossil record, but in the scriptures. When Adam and Eve transgress, they are kicked out of the Garden of Eden into "The Lone and Dreary World" - a place which apparently previously existed. After the earth had existed and developed for a long time, God decided it was time to place His covenant children on the earth. Soon after the moment when the Father says to the Son, "Let us make man in our own image," He then says that they will plant Adam and Eve a garden in a land called Eden. The garden had to be planted in a region. The garden did not comprise the entire planet.
The earth had existed for a very long time before that garden was ever planted. Adam and Eve found the earth as it had existed for millions of years once they stepped out of the garden. For us to say in one sentence that God exists from all eternity to all eternity and then in the next sentence say that there is no way God could create the earth more than 6,000 years ago is silly.
What about Genesis saying the earth and life were created in mere "days"? Well, we could look to the ancient Hebrew usage of the word "day" and see that it means "period of time". Likewise we can look to our own English language (and many modern languages), and see that the usage is often similar. For example, "in this day of technological advancement..." refers to an era, not a particular calendar date. It can easily be said that the earth was created in six creative eras.
What about Genesis saying that animals like the cow and lion were among the first to appear? We need to remember the original audience of Genesis. (We should always keep in mind the audience of any scripture.) Genesis is essentially taken (and adapted over centuries) from a large revelation given to Moses for the benefit of the Israelites so that they can have a written heritage, rather than just oral traditions. For one to believe that God should be talking about cells, genetic drift and population dynamics to a group of people just freed from slavery is nonsense. We need to remember that our current scientific knowledge is very new to mankind and would have sounded foolish to people even just a few hundred years ago.
Noah's Flood
It's possible to see big floods and other catastrophes in the geological record. However, we have no such record of a massive earth-wide flood occurring 4000 years ago. It would have left a consistent global mark.
In Genesis, the author says that the whole earth was flooded and that Noah took at least two of every animal with him. A good explanation for this would be a massive (but localized) flood with two of each of the animals that Noah would need once he landed seem to be the most reasonable explanation. Again, we need to look at this from the perspective of Noah and the Israelites.
In the scriptures the terms "the world" and "the entire face of the earth" can be clearly seen as meaning "civilization" or "land mass as far as we know about". (Clearly, the Nephites and Jews didn't know much about Australia or Japan.) Scripturally, "the world" also has reference to sin and forgetting God and His covenants. Also, "earth" and "land" are the exact same word in many languages. So, when Genesis says that the entire earth was covered in water, it could very well mean that the entire land that Noah knew about or could see (with all its sinful inhabitants), was flooded and destroyed.
The idea that Noah took with him two of only the animals that he knew about and would need when he landed can be seen in the scriptures when the author describes how they were divided into the "clean" and "unclean" animals. This is obviously a point that the Israelites would understand well with their Mosaic Law. It isn't likely that the Lord required Noah to take care of millions of species of frogs, snakes and lizards on the boat for so long... not to mention the millions of species of insects. Spider bites would have been a big problem. The rainforest fauna simply can't fit on a boat.
In sum, the scriptures consistently use the terms "earth", "world" and "land" in ways that imply limited geography. To allow this usage nearly everywhere else in scripture except for Noah's flood is to be inconsistent in our interpretations.
In Genesis, the author says that the whole earth was flooded and that Noah took at least two of every animal with him. A good explanation for this would be a massive (but localized) flood with two of each of the animals that Noah would need once he landed seem to be the most reasonable explanation. Again, we need to look at this from the perspective of Noah and the Israelites.
In the scriptures the terms "the world" and "the entire face of the earth" can be clearly seen as meaning "civilization" or "land mass as far as we know about". (Clearly, the Nephites and Jews didn't know much about Australia or Japan.) Scripturally, "the world" also has reference to sin and forgetting God and His covenants. Also, "earth" and "land" are the exact same word in many languages. So, when Genesis says that the entire earth was covered in water, it could very well mean that the entire land that Noah knew about or could see (with all its sinful inhabitants), was flooded and destroyed.
The idea that Noah took with him two of only the animals that he knew about and would need when he landed can be seen in the scriptures when the author describes how they were divided into the "clean" and "unclean" animals. This is obviously a point that the Israelites would understand well with their Mosaic Law. It isn't likely that the Lord required Noah to take care of millions of species of frogs, snakes and lizards on the boat for so long... not to mention the millions of species of insects. Spider bites would have been a big problem. The rainforest fauna simply can't fit on a boat.
In sum, the scriptures consistently use the terms "earth", "world" and "land" in ways that imply limited geography. To allow this usage nearly everywhere else in scripture except for Noah's flood is to be inconsistent in our interpretations.