Roberts vs. Smith: Death Before the Fall (part 1 of 2)
B.H. Roberts considered his manuscript The Truth, The Way, The Life (TWL) to be "the most important work that I have yet contributed to the Church, the six-volumed Comprehensive History of the Church not omitted."1 TWL aimed to be "the most comprehensive treatise of the Gospel that has yet been published," as Elder George Albert Smith described it in 1929.2 A committee of members of the Quorum of the Twelve was assigned to review the lengthy manuscript in order to approve it for use as a church manual. The committee attempted to convince Roberts to change some of his fundamental arguments in order to conform more closely to established church doctrine. "Some learned men don't see some of its chapters so I am letting it ride until I have more time," Roberts wrote to a friend, "Will not change it if it has to sleep."3
It had to sleep.
Until 1994 when it was awakened in two separate publications by Smith Research Associates and BYU Studies, respectively. In the next few posts I want to highlight some passages I found most interesting.
Much has been written regarding the doctrinal/scientific debates between Roberts and Joseph Fielding Smith regarding TWL.4 This post highlights an interesting argument Roberts employed in his scriptural exegesis regarding whether there was death on the earth prior to the fall of Adam in response to Joseph Fielding Smith. In part one I give a little historical background on the exchange between Roberts and Smith. In part two I discuss the exegetical argument Roberts used to diffuse Smith's objections, an argument I haven't seen confronted in any of the subsequent literature.
Historical Background:
Elder Joseph Fielding Smith was a member of the committee of Apostles reviewing Roberts's manuscript, and was its most vocal opponent. On April 5, 1930 Smith delivered an address to Genealogical Society of Utah to "denounce" the ideas that the earth was peopled before Adam or that there was death on the earth prior to the fall—ideas found in the unpublished TWL. Smith didn't refer to TWL directly, but his preemptive strike was published in the October issue of the Utah Genealogical and Historical Magazine.5
Roberts must have been angry to see Smith's views published so easily while his own were undergoing intense scrutiny. On December 15 Roberts wrote to the First Presidency to ask if Smith's address had been approved by the First Presidency and the Twelve. Was it the official position of the Church? If not, why wasn't it labeled as Smith's own opinion? Roberts objected to its "finality" and "dogmatic" style, questioning the "competence" of the author and citing Orson Hyde and Brigham Young as greater authorities than Smith who allowed for similar views to Roberts's.6
On January 7, 1931 Roberts met with the Twelve with a draft of TWL amplified by additional scientific evidence and quotes from Hyde and Young for ecclesiastical leverage. An “Addendum" to chapter 31 directly responded to Smith's main points about death on earth before the fall.7 In the next part I'll highlight an interesting argument Roberts used therein to deflate Smith's assertion that Adam was "immortal" in the Garden of Eden: "There is no such thing as conditional immortality."
FOOTNOTES
[1] B. H. Roberts to Heber J. Grant, 9 February 1931, quoted in James B. Allen, "The Story of The Truth, the Way, the Life," B. H. Roberts, The Truth, the Way, the Life: An Elementary Treatise on Theology, ed. John W. Welch (Provo, Utah: BYU Studies, 1994), clxxxvi.
[2] George Albert Smith to John A. Widtsoe, February 26, 1929, Ibid., clxxv.
[3] B.H. Roberts to Elizabeth Hinckley, May 1929, Ibid., clxxvii.
[4] See, for instance, Truman G. Madsen, Defender of the Faith: The B.H. Roberts Story (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1980); Richard Sherlock, "A Turbulent Spectrum: Mormon Reactions to the Darwinist Legacy," Journal of Mormon History 5 (1978): 33-59; "'We Can See No Advantage To a Continuation of the Discussion': The Roberts/Smith/Talmage Affair," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 13 (Fall 1980): 63-78; Jeffrey R. Keller, "Discussion Continued: The Sequel to the Roberts/Smith/Talmage Affair," Dialogue 15 (Sprint 1982): 79-98. An updated version of these was published in Richard Sherlock and Jeffrey E. Keller, "The B. H. Roberts/Joseph Fielding Smith/James E. Talmage Affair," The Search for Harmony: Essays on Science and Mormonism, eds. Gene A. Sessions and Craig J. Oberg, (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1993), chapter six. B.H. Roberts, The Truth, the Way, the Life: An Elementary Treatise on Theology: The Masterwork of B.H. Roberts, ed. Stan Larsen (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1995), "Editors Introduction."
[5] Allen, Ibid.,, clxxix.
[6] Ibid., clxxxi.
[7] The "Addendum" is awesomely included in the BYU Studies edition of TWL on pages 318-322.
Until 1994 when it was awakened in two separate publications by Smith Research Associates and BYU Studies, respectively. In the next few posts I want to highlight some passages I found most interesting.
Much has been written regarding the doctrinal/scientific debates between Roberts and Joseph Fielding Smith regarding TWL.4 This post highlights an interesting argument Roberts employed in his scriptural exegesis regarding whether there was death on the earth prior to the fall of Adam in response to Joseph Fielding Smith. In part one I give a little historical background on the exchange between Roberts and Smith. In part two I discuss the exegetical argument Roberts used to diffuse Smith's objections, an argument I haven't seen confronted in any of the subsequent literature.
Historical Background:
Elder Joseph Fielding Smith was a member of the committee of Apostles reviewing Roberts's manuscript, and was its most vocal opponent. On April 5, 1930 Smith delivered an address to Genealogical Society of Utah to "denounce" the ideas that the earth was peopled before Adam or that there was death on the earth prior to the fall—ideas found in the unpublished TWL. Smith didn't refer to TWL directly, but his preemptive strike was published in the October issue of the Utah Genealogical and Historical Magazine.5
Roberts must have been angry to see Smith's views published so easily while his own were undergoing intense scrutiny. On December 15 Roberts wrote to the First Presidency to ask if Smith's address had been approved by the First Presidency and the Twelve. Was it the official position of the Church? If not, why wasn't it labeled as Smith's own opinion? Roberts objected to its "finality" and "dogmatic" style, questioning the "competence" of the author and citing Orson Hyde and Brigham Young as greater authorities than Smith who allowed for similar views to Roberts's.6
On January 7, 1931 Roberts met with the Twelve with a draft of TWL amplified by additional scientific evidence and quotes from Hyde and Young for ecclesiastical leverage. An “Addendum" to chapter 31 directly responded to Smith's main points about death on earth before the fall.7 In the next part I'll highlight an interesting argument Roberts used therein to deflate Smith's assertion that Adam was "immortal" in the Garden of Eden: "There is no such thing as conditional immortality."
FOOTNOTES
[1] B. H. Roberts to Heber J. Grant, 9 February 1931, quoted in James B. Allen, "The Story of The Truth, the Way, the Life," B. H. Roberts, The Truth, the Way, the Life: An Elementary Treatise on Theology, ed. John W. Welch (Provo, Utah: BYU Studies, 1994), clxxxvi.
[2] George Albert Smith to John A. Widtsoe, February 26, 1929, Ibid., clxxv.
[3] B.H. Roberts to Elizabeth Hinckley, May 1929, Ibid., clxxvii.
[4] See, for instance, Truman G. Madsen, Defender of the Faith: The B.H. Roberts Story (Salt Lake City: Bookcraft, 1980); Richard Sherlock, "A Turbulent Spectrum: Mormon Reactions to the Darwinist Legacy," Journal of Mormon History 5 (1978): 33-59; "'We Can See No Advantage To a Continuation of the Discussion': The Roberts/Smith/Talmage Affair," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 13 (Fall 1980): 63-78; Jeffrey R. Keller, "Discussion Continued: The Sequel to the Roberts/Smith/Talmage Affair," Dialogue 15 (Sprint 1982): 79-98. An updated version of these was published in Richard Sherlock and Jeffrey E. Keller, "The B. H. Roberts/Joseph Fielding Smith/James E. Talmage Affair," The Search for Harmony: Essays on Science and Mormonism, eds. Gene A. Sessions and Craig J. Oberg, (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1993), chapter six. B.H. Roberts, The Truth, the Way, the Life: An Elementary Treatise on Theology: The Masterwork of B.H. Roberts, ed. Stan Larsen (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1995), "Editors Introduction."
[5] Allen, Ibid.,, clxxix.
[6] Ibid., clxxxi.
[7] The "Addendum" is awesomely included in the BYU Studies edition of TWL on pages 318-322.
6 comments:
Interesting topic. An good follow up discussion would be how the topic has played out in the decades since then. As far as I can tell, the "no death before the fall"/"no Pre-Adamites" factions has been winning by default in the arena of Church published statements.
Thanks cinepro. Hop into the comments over at FPR (linked at the beginning of the post) so I remember.
Didn't Hugh Nibley theorize about pre-Adamites, too? I'm looking forward to hearing more on this topic--it's weighed heavily on my mind recently.
To me this debate comes down to whether we have faith in modern theory science or faith in ancient scripture.
Attemps are made by those who have a love for theory science to fit it in with their belief in God. Yet in spite of all the "evidence" of theory science it constantly is demonstrated to be wrong.
Those involved say that this is expected as they learn new things. That is all very well but why should I believe those opinions almost destined to change, as opposed to Scripture which doesn't?
Can science really prove that fossils take so long to form? Of course they can't. They can only claim they know within the bounds of their non-existent experience (ie. they have never seen them form).
Are dating methods as accurate as they quote? Not from many instances I have watched done by scientists themselves. And how can any sensible person claim they kKNOW that the earth is this age or that age? Are we serious?
If the Pope claimed something and all his cardinals, priests and nuns support it does that make it right? Theory science is a religion with often high paid ministers. Do I believe in it just because they may appear to agree with each other?
In the end we have to go by faith. Is it to be faith in ever changing opinions of theory scientists or faith in the Scriptuers? I choose the latter.
To me this debate comes down to whether we have faith in modern theory science or faith in ancient scripture.
To me that is an inaccurate picture of the situation. I would rephrase it to say something like "whether we have faith in modern theories of particular branches of science or faith in contemporary attempts to make sense of ancient scripture, and in some cases erring through a fundamentalist lens that misunderstands their sources and nature."
Yet in spite of all the "evidence" of theory science it constantly is demonstrated to be wrong.
I'm not sure what you mean. Scientific enterprises are built by design to weed out inaccuracies and find better resolutions to questions or problems. The advancement of technology and scientific endeavors is hardly a gigantic failure. If anything, we fail the possibilities as often as "Science" fails us, if science can even be spoken of so generally.
That is all very well but why should I believe those opinions almost destined to change, as opposed to Scripture which doesn't?
Religion changes as well. That's the LDS concept of continuing revelation and "line upon line." The Law of Moses was preceded by a covenant God made with Abraham and followed by the new testament after Christ's mortal ministry. An apostasy was followed by a new and everlasting covenant, the restoration, which once had a law of plural marriage and now doesn't. There are changes occurring but this doesn't prove falsehood or hopelessness in the endeavor, in my view.
In the end we have to go by faith. Is it to be faith in ever changing opinions of theory scientists or faith in the Scriptuers? I choose the latter.
I think it's a false dichotomy, and I think we've been commanded in scripture to "have dominion" over the earth, to seek knowledge from the "best books," to use our minds. Faith is vital to the enterprise, but faith need not exclude reason (or science, if you'd like to call it that.)
Anyway, thanks for stopping by, Doug. Take care.
change address in hdfc current account
Post a Comment
All views are welcome when shared respectfully. Use a name or consistent pseudonym rather than "anonymous." Deletions of inflammatory posts will be noted. Thanks for joining the conversation.