Periodicals; Mormons; Religious thought; Philosophy and religion
Independent national quarterly established to express Mormon culture and examine the relevance of religion to secular life. It is edited by Mormons who wish to bring their faith into dialogue with human experience as a whole and to foster artistic and scholarly achievement based on their cultural heritage. The journal encourages a variety of viewpoints; although every effort is made to insure accurate scholarship and responsible judgment, the views expressed are those of the individual authors and are not necessarily those of the Mormon Church or of the editors.
Dialogue Foundation, 900 Hilgard Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90024
Backstage Library Works - 1180 S. 800 E. Orem, UT 84097
Rees, Robert A.
Pages scanned at 400ppi on Fujitsu fi-5650C sheetfed scanner as 8-bit grayscale or 24-bit RGB uncompressed TIFF images. Images resized to 950 pixels wide, 150 dpi, and saved as JPEG (level 8) in PhotoShop CS with Unsharp Mask of 100/.3.
Digital image, copyright 2004, Dialogue Foundation. All rights reserved.
•jz I Dialogue 20:97-119, 1969, or any good text in systematics or evolution. Also of interest is C. Zirkle, "Species Before Darwin," Proc. Amer. Philosoph. Soc, 103:636-644,1959. 40Smith, Joseph, as taken from Wilford Woodruff's notes, in B. H. Roberts (compiler), History of the Church, 4:554, from a speech delivered March 20,1842; cf. also Roberts' qualifying comments on the notes, ibid., 556n, which must be kept in mind regarding all such speech texts. We have not been able to locate any earlier published accounts. 41JD, 8:29-30, i860. 427D, 26:20, 1884. 43Simpson, G. G., The Meaning of Evolution (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1949), pp. 124-129, 263-279. Simpson, usually pictured as quite insensitive to religious viewpoints, develops some concepts of the limitations and implications of materialism that have considerable interest to Mormons. 44Schubert-Soldern, R., Mechanism and Vitalism, Philosophical Aspects of Biology, edited by P. G. Fothergill (South Bend, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1962), pp. 10-11. 45Hardin, G., Biology, Its Principles and Implications, 2nd ed. (San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Co., 1966), p. 11. 46Roberts, B. H., A Comprehensive History of the Church, 1930, 2:392. A close friend of Joseph Smith's, Benjamin F. Johnson, makes the "light-life-spirit" equation in his 1903 letter to Elder George F. Gibbs, p. 5, typescript copy; copy available in Brigham Young University library. 47Andrus, H. L., Cod, Man and the Universe (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1968), pp. 144-192. 48Roberts, op. cit., 2:381-412, especially 399-401. 49D&C 131:7-8. 50Deseret News, 10(21) :i62-163, July 25/ i860, and 14(47) :372~373/ August 23, 1865; also in Clark, J. R., Messages of the First Presidency 2:214-223, 229-240,1965. "Compare the first edition, 1855, Key to the Science of Theology, printed by J. Sadler, Liverpool, with later editions. 52JD, 3:276-277, 1856. Benjamin F. Johnson, op. cit., pp. ^-6 indicates that essentially this same doctrine was taught by Joseph Smith. 53eg., JD, 1:349 (1853); 3:354 (I856); 7=2-3/ 285 (1859); 9:242 (1862). 54In Lee, H. B., "Find the Answers in the Scriptures," Ensign, 2(12) :2~3, Dec. 1972, there does appear a passage which seems to imply an authoritative acceptance of the literal interpretation of Moses 3 -.7. Correspondence which we are not at liberty to release, however, indicates that this should not be construed as a pronouncement of any particular interpretation or doctrinal position. 55e.g., from Brigham Young, JD, 3:319 (1856); 4:216-218 (1857); 7:285 (1859); 15:137 (1872). 56Roberts, B. H., History of the Church, 6:476, a speech by Joseph Smith dated June 16,1844, as taken from notes by Thomas Bullock. We have not been able to locate any earlier published sources. Cf. also fn. 40. "We are well aware of the intense arguments and deeply-held opinions revolving around this doctrine, and the current propensity to deny that it was ever taught. There can be no justification for denying its historical reality; it is too well documented, and was taught by Brigham Young from 1852 until his death in 1877. cf. R. Turner, "The Position of Adam in Latter-day Saint Scripture and Theology," MA thesis, Division of Religion, Brigham Young University, 1953. A more recent and thorough account is O. Kraut, Michael/Adam, n.d., n.p., but published in 1972. Both sources discuss reactions of church members to the doctrine, which include problems with scriptural reconciliation. Those who attempt to prove that Brigham Young taught only doctrine that is currently orthodox are driven to an inexcusable exercise of freedom in interpreting, and even a doctoring of, his critical sermons; e.g., Widtsoe, J. A. (comp.); Discourses of Brigham Young, p. 159, 1925 edition. These errors are resolutely compounded and further promulgated by Smith, Joseph Fielding, e.g., Answers to Gospel Questions (1966), 5:121-128, excerpted in the 1972-73 Melchizedek Priesthood manual, pp. 20-22. Compare, for example, the quote from JD, 9:148 in its original form and as printed by Widtsoe, loc. cit.; by Smith, p. 124, and in the priesthood manual, p. 22. We do not contend that President Young's concepts concerning Adam are an accurate representation of the concepts of other LDS presidents, or that they are to be accepted as basic Church doctrine. That to President Young Adam was a resurrected being is clear: The mystery is this, as with miracles, or anything else, is only to those who are ignorant. Father Adam came here, and then they brought his wife. "Well," says one, "Why was Adam