Church History Matters, Episode 190:

Do Church Leaders Support Scripture or Science? | Science & Religion Series
Date: February 3, 2026
Hosts: Scott & Casey

Episode Overview

This episode continues Scott and Casey’s in-depth series on the relationship between science and religion in Latter-day Saint history, focusing specifically on how discussions around evolution and scriptural interpretation have played out among church leaders, educators, and institutions. The conversation explores whether church leadership fundamentally sides with scripture or science, recounts key historical controversies (especially about evolution), and analyzes important documents and debates between prominent leaders. The hosts emphasize the evolving, often complex relationship the Church has developed around these issues, balancing faith, intellectual inquiry, and institutional priorities.

Key Themes & Discussion Points

1. Setting the Stage: LDS Theology & Scientific Inquiry

• Early Latter-day Saint leaders (Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, Wilford Woodruff) broadly encouraged scientific learning and didn’t see inherent conflict between science and religion. ([01:25]–[02:43])
• The famous Doctrine & Covenants verse: “Seek ye out of the best books words of wisdom; seek learning, even by study and by faith” (D&C 88:118) underlies the podcast’s approach. ([02:43])

Scott: “We talked about how scripture and science are both talking about truth—they’re just not talking about the same truth at the same time... Science deals with the what, the when, the how; whereas religion and philosophy are getting at the why, and even maybe behind all of that, the who.” [03:36]

• Epistemologies: Distinguishing ways of knowing (science vs. religion vs. philosophy) is crucial. Problems arise when these are conflated.

2. Scripture’s Purpose and Interpretation

• Scripture, as the hosts repeatedly state, is “the result of a human-divine collaboration…crafted by those authors primarily for the purpose of doing theology, not science.” ([05:21])
• Most scriptural creation accounts focus on the why of creation, not the how, leaving room for interpretation and flexibility among Latter-day Saints.

3. The Evolution Controversy: Doctrinal Clarity and Diversity

• Evolution is the prime flashpoint in LDS science/religion discourse.
• Church leaders and materials have historically reflected a range of views:
  • Some publications (e.g., an Old Testament Institute manual) condemned evolution.
  • Recent official statements (e.g., 2016 New Era, Gospel Topics essay) clarify no official Church stance on evolution. ([12:18])

Official Statement (2016/Gospel Topics Essay):
“The Church has no official position on the theory of evolution. Organic evolution or changes to species’ inherited traits over time is a matter for scientific study. Nothing has been revealed concerning evolution... Our teachings regarding man’s origin are clear and come from revelation... God directed the creation of Adam and Eve and placed their spirits in their bodies.” [12:18]

Casey, summarizing: “The Church seems to have no position on the theory of evolution. So, Scott, that means we can end the podcast and go home, right?” ([14:15])

4. Fundamentalists vs. Modernists: Framing the Debate

• The discussion contrasts fundamentalists (defending literal biblical accounts and opposing evolution/higher criticism) with modernists (favoring adaptation to scientific knowledge).
• The hosts emphasize that Latter-day Saints don’t fit neatly into either camp. ([26:43])

Casey: “We kind of march to the beat of our own drummer... Some of the stuff we do upsets fundamentalists; some of the stuff we do upsets modernists. We don’t fit easily into either camp.” [26:46]

5. The Scopes “Monkey Trial” as American Context

• The 1925 Scopes Trial over teaching evolution symbolized the tension nationwide.
  • It was more about faith vs. modern knowledge than literal evolution.
  • Memorable courtroom exchanges highlighted changing American attitudes toward scripture.
  • Both sides claimed moral/intellectual victory, and Latter-day Saints watched closely. ([16:21]–[20:15])

Casey: “It symbolized the tension between faith and education and scientific authority in a rapidly modernizing society... The real monkey business happens outside the cage.” ([18:22])

6. Key Institutional Moments in LDS History

A) 1909 First Presidency Statement: "The Origin of Man"

• Drafted by Orson F. Whitney (strongly anti-evolution in draft), but final document was revised after input from scientists James E. Talmage and John A. Widtsoe. ([33:56])
• Most explicitly anti-evolution passages were removed, ending up with a position focused on humanity’s divine lineage (“Man is the child of God... capable by experience through ages and eons of evolving into a God”), and leaving the mechanism (e.g., evolution) open.

Scott: “The takeaway from that 1909 statement... is when it comes to the physical origin of the human body, revelation leaves some very big question marks. The Church therefore does not have a final detailed answer on the how.” ([37:55])

B) The 1911 BYU Controversy

• Professors were asked to resign over teaching evolution and higher criticism. ([39:42])
• President Joseph F. Smith’s public position: not doctrinal condemnation, but felt evolution was a “fallacy” inappropriate for Church schools. No official statement on the truth or falsity of evolution—mainly a matter of classroom propriety.

Smith (quoted): “The church itself has no philosophy about the modus operandi employed by the Lord in His creation of the world.” ([42:17])

• Illuminates the tension between academic freedom and doctrinal loyalty.

C) Church Scientists Consulted

• Frederick Pack’s Case: Invited to present old-earth/evolutionary perspectives to Church leaders, showing willingness to engage faithful scientists rather than ban discussion. ([48:50])
  • Pack: “Theology should never pass upon the truth or falsity of scientific doctrines. It does not constitute a jury designed for that purpose...” ([50:53])

7. 1925 First Presidency Statement: "Mormon View of Evolution"

• Issued during the Scopes trial media circus.
• Substantially condensed from 1909 statement—further softened, with any specifically anti-evolution language excised.
• Focused solely on the divine parentage of humanity, leaving mechanism unaddressed.
• Edits made by President Heber J. Grant.

Scott: “The 1925 statement... wanted to make even clearer that our position is man came from God. So wherever you want to go from there in terms of mechanism, great.” ([55:25])

• LDS position doesn't fit easily as fundamentalist or modernist: scriptural literalism on miracles, but open to broader scientific approaches regarding origins.

8. Major Internal Disputes:

The 1930s Roberts–Smith–Talmage Debates

• B.H. Roberts (Presidency of the Seventy): Advocated room for old earth, pre-Adamites, and critical thinking, though skeptical of full human evolution. ([61:36])
• Joseph Fielding Smith (Apostle): Strong scriptural literalist, opposed evolution, rejected pre-Adamites and death before the Fall. ([63:18])
• James E. Talmage (Apostle, geologist): Accepted an old earth, pre-Adamites, and death pre-Fall, but avoided explicit endorsement of evolutionary mechanism.

Key Event:

• First Presidency reviews the debate, chooses not to publish Roberts’s manuscript, but also allows Talmage to publicly counter Smith’s views.
  • Official Instruction: “Leave geology, biology, archaeology and anthropology... to scientific research, while we magnify our calling in the realm of the Church.” ([70:40])

First Presidency Memo (1931): “Upon the fundamental doctrines of the Church, we are all agreed... Leave geology, biology, archaeology and anthropology ... to scientific research while we magnify our calling in the realm of the Church.” ([70:40])

Talmage’s “The Earth and Man” Address (1931):

• Lays out principle of two “books”—scripture and nature—each subject to interpretation.
  • “One of the gravest errors is that of mistaking the body for the man. The body is no more truly the man himself than is the coat the body.” ([75:24])
  • Private journal: “I can see no reason why the evolution of animal bodies cannot be true, as indeed the facts of observation make it difficult to deny. And still the soul of man is of divine origin.” ([76:19])

Diverging Reactions:

• Joseph Fielding Smith (journal): “Dr. JET spoke not edifyingly but questionable.” ([78:36])
• Some apostles supported Smith; others (Smoot, possibly majority) supported Talmage’s approach.

9. Institutional Shifts and Education

• Post-1930, the battle moves to curriculum. As LDS education expands (seminaries, institutes), the tension between fundamentalist and modernist approaches is reflected in which materials are assigned, often leading to further disputes.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• Casey (joking): “That means we can end the podcast and go home, right?” [14:15]
• Scott (on drafts of 1909 statement): “How do you feel about evolution, Orson F. Whitney? You’re kind of pulling your punches a little bit here! … It’s like a blind man hunting through a haystack for a needle that is not there.” [31:56]
• Talmage (journal): “If there be a word of scriptural record ... which we find even a seeming conflict with scientific discoveries ... and that therefore the policy of the church is in effect opposed to scientific research. That concerned Elder Talmage greatly.” [75:24]
• First Presidency (memo, 1931): “Leave geology, biology, archeology and anthropology ... to scientific research while we magnify our calling in the realm of the Church.” [70:40]
• Scott: “The conflicts almost evaporate [between science and religion] when you understand them as two different approaches to truth.” [05:29]

Important Segment Timestamps

• [01:25]–[05:21]: LDS theological attitude toward science, epistemologies
• [06:26]–[12:18]: Evolution in modern Church materials and official statements
• [15:28]–[19:20]: Scopes “Monkey Trial” context and significance
• [29:43]–[37:55]: 1909 First Presidency statement on evolution, editing process
• [39:42]–[44:18]: 1911 BYU evolution controversy
• [47:02]–[50:53]: Frederick Pack and Church-scientist engagement
• [54:49]–[57:30]: 1925 First Presidency "Mormon View of Evolution" and edits
• [61:36]–[77:02]: 1930s debate—Roberts, Smith, and Talmage’s conflicting approaches, First Presidency response
• [81:06]–[82:56]: Shift to seminary/institute and curriculum as battleground

Tone and Style

• Conversational, candid, and occasionally humorous, with both hosts expressing admiration for the intellectual rigor and spiritual devotion of historical Church leaders—even when they disagreed.
• Strong advocacy for intellectual charity and not demonizing any party in the historical debates.
• Encourages listeners to appreciate the complexity and multilayered nature of science/religion interactions in LDS history.

Conclusion

The LDS Church’s official stance on evolution has never been one of outright opposition or endorsement; rather, significant latitude has long been preserved for individual interpretation within the parameters of faith in divine creation and human divine parentage. Institutional statements and leadership interventions have generally sought to avoid dogmatic positions, especially when faithful, learned individuals disagree. The episode sets up further exploration on how these dynamics continued to unfold, especially as the Church’s educational programs grew and the curriculum became a new front in the evolution controversy.

Next Episode Teaser:
The saga continues into the mid-20th century, where the battleground shifts to lesson materials and educator perspectives—setting the stage for more discussions on how faith, science, and doctrine continue to interact in modern Latter-day Saint experience.

Acknowledgment:
Special thanks to Ben Spackman, whose historical research and dissertation greatly informed this discussion.