bluebell Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 Specifically, does BYU have classes that teach that man came from monkeys? I thought that i remembered that they did, but a friend of mine does not believe that a church school would allow such things to be taught so i'm looking for information and some specific class names (because she'll want them). Thanks!
6EQUJ5 Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 (edited) They did when I was there many many years ago. Biology 101 if my memory is right. But the first day of class the professor got up and read "competing" quotes from Church leaders on evolution. His point was that each of us should choose to believe what we felt was right because the Church had no official position. I remember this poor girl behind me saying to her friend: "I am so confused...." ETA: Oh, and FWIW -- evolution does not mean man came from monkeys. It means that at some point in the far distant past we had a common ancestor. Edited October 14, 2016 by 6EQUJ5 2
thesometimesaint Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 17 minutes ago, bluebell said: Specifically, does BYU have classes that teach that man came from monkeys? I thought that i remembered that they did, but a friend of mine does not believe that a church school would allow such things to be taught so i'm looking for information and some specific class names (because she'll want them). Thanks! No. It teaches that apes, and we have a common ancestor. 3
Kenngo1969 Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 I don't have an answer to your question. BYU does teach evolution, but I'm unsure if it teaches it as you have defined it (that men came from monkeys). My personal take on the whole question of evolution (which I know you didn't ask for, but fools rush in .... ) is that we don't know how long Adam and Eve were in the Garden, or what, precisely (from a scriptural standpoint) was happening outside the Garden while they were there. As for the question of (hu)man's ascension from lower life forms, there's still that pesky missing link. 2
maklelan Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 It does teach evolution, in many different classes. It has a weeklong celebration of Darwin's birthday each year, too. Saying "man came from monkeys," though, is a misrepresentation of what the theory of evolution actually is. Here's one class, along with some related classes, from BYU's own website. Your friend has a phenomenally weak grasp of the Church's history with evolution. 3
Tacenda Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 (edited) I agree with the others comments. We have a common ancestor. I found this online, if it helps. A DELICATE BALANCE : TEACHING BIOLOGICAL EVOLUTION AT BYU-IDAHO Lynn Firestone—Department of Biology “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.” file:///home/chronos/u-6670d360874b1eaea21bbdc4270abcd677ccef05/Downloads/v4n2_firestone%20(1).pdf Or this from a BYU professor for 15 years or more. http://kutv.com/news/local/byu-professor-man-evolved-from-apes Edited October 14, 2016 by Tacenda
thesometimesaint Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 5 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said: . As for the question of (hu)man's ascension from lower life forms, there's still that pesky missing link. Not so much. 1
cdowis Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 (edited) Or this from Hugh Nibley, Before Adam http://scottwoodward.org/Talks/html/z-Scholarly Articles/NibleyH_BeforeAdam.html This futile quarrel should be no concern of ours. For one thing, we have a story to tell before Adam. Religion and science have none, absolutely none. ..... And one of our biggest stumbling blocks is not knowing how Adam relates to other beings, earthly and heavenly. That is the root of the Adam-God misunderstanding. (Until we care to look into the matter seriously, I will keep my opinions in a low profile.) Do not begrudge existence to creatures that looked like men long, long ago, nor deny them a place in God's affection or even a right to exaltation—for our scriptures allow them such. Nor am I overly concerned as to just when they might have lived, for their world is not our world. They have all gone away long before our people ever appeared. God assigned them their proper times and functions, as he has given me mine—a full-time job that admonishes me to remember his words to the overly eager Moses: "For mine own purpose have I made these things. Here is wisdom and it remaineth in me." (Moses 1:31.) It is Adam as my own parent who concerns me. When he walks onto the stage, then and only then the play begins. He opens a book and starts calling out names. They are the sons of Adam, who also qualify as sons of God, Adam himself being a son of God. This is the book of remembrance from which many have been blotted out. They have fallen away, refused to choose God as their father, and by so doing were registered in Satan's camp. "Satan shall be their father, and misery shall be their doom." (Moses 7:37.) Can we call them sons of Adam, bene-Adam, human beings proper? The representative Egyptians, Babylonians, Greeks, and Romans, to name only the classic civilizations of old, each fancied themselves to be beings of a higher nature, nearer to gods than others who inhabited the land with them (and before them), or who dwelt in other lands. And yet they did not deny humanity to them. Adam becomes Adam, a hominid becomes a man, when he starts keeping a record. What kind of record? A record of his ancestors—the family line that sets him off from all other creatures. Such records begin very early, to judge by the fabulous genealogic knowledge of the Australian aborigines (A. P. Elkin) or the most "primiitive" Africans (L. Frobenius). Even written records go back to ages lost in the mists of time—the Azilian pebbles, the marking of arrows, and the identity of individuals in their relationships with each other.48 Whether former speculation about life on other worlds is now to be upgraded to life from other worlds remains to be seen, but Adam is wonderful enough without that. That gap between the record keeper and all the other creatures we know anything about is so unimaginably enormous and yet so neat and abrupt that we can only be dealing with another sort of being, a quantum leap from one world to another. Here is something not derivative from anything that has gone before on the local scene, even though they all share the same atoms. Edited October 14, 2016 by cdowis 2
bluebell Posted October 14, 2016 Author Posted October 14, 2016 7 minutes ago, maklelan said: It does teach evolution, in many different classes. It has a weeklong celebration of Darwin's birthday each year, too. Saying "man came from monkeys," though, is a misrepresentation of what the theory of evolution actually is. Here's one class, along with some related classes, from BYU's own website. Your friend has a phenomenally weak grasp of the Church's history with evolution. I probably do as well.
Tacenda Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 28 minutes ago, bluebell said: I probably do as well. I'll never forget a high school teacher that taught evolution and men coming from apes. He actually tried to walk like an ape, I swear, each day. I thought it was all bull, and still have a hard time believing we evolved from apes.
RevTestament Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 50 minutes ago, bluebell said: Specifically, does BYU have classes that teach that man came from monkeys? I thought that i remembered that they did, but a friend of mine does not believe that a church school would allow such things to be taught so i'm looking for information and some specific class names (because she'll want them). Thanks! BYU teaches the theory of evolution in Biology and Anthropology. I believe about the earliest bipedal creature man is linked to is the australophithecines, which were not apes. Modern man does share many ape-like features with apes - fingernails, bipedal capability, usually only two breasts, etc, but diverged millions of years ago according to theory. Chimps do not digest meat well at all. They don't cry. Man shares many features with pigs actually - similar heart, skin, etc. I believe this corresponds to Genesis 1 that God brought forth creatures from the earth to multiply each after their kind by using DNA. The spiritual creation was not until Genesis 2 and began with the word of God, and God breathing his breath into Adam as the first Son of God. In this sense Adam is the first Christ as Paul says, who was the first begotten of God in the flesh, and Eve as the church becomes the mother of all flesh even as the church is our mother in the Word. In other words because the word was introduced the world became temporal, and man become subject to sin and death. Which means creatures prior thereto were not subject to spiritual death.
cdowis Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 (edited) 12 minutes ago, RevTestament said: Man shares many features with pigs actually - similar heart, skin, etc. Yes, I have myself made that observation from time to time. I find it interesting that DNA research shows a relationship between whales and bovines. I'm sure some of the highly imaginative evolutionists have figured out how that worked. Edited October 14, 2016 by cdowis 1
thesometimesaint Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 27 minutes ago, Tacenda said: I'll never forget a high school teacher that taught evolution and men coming from apes. He actually tried to walk like an ape, I swear, each day. I thought it was all bull, and still have a hard time believing we evolved from apes. We are the last remaining of our species of Apes. 1
Tacenda Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 Just now, thesometimesaint said: We are the last remaining of our species of Apes. The question remains, why didn't all the other Apes evolve? 2
thesometimesaint Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 7 minutes ago, cdowis said: Yes, I have myself made that observation from time to time. I find it interesting that DNA research shows a relationship between whales and bovines. I'm sure some of the highly imaginative evolutionists have figured out how that worked. Like whales having hands
maklelan Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 5 minutes ago, cdowis said: Yes, I have myself made that observation from time to time. I find it interesting that DNA research shows a relationship between whales and bovines. I'm sure some of the highly imaginative evolutionists have figured out how that worked. Not a lot of imagination required, actually. It's the fossil record that connects all the dots, and most scientists actually rejected the notion that whales were related to bovines until the discovery of Pakicetus, Ambulocetus, and other fossils that showed the direct link between the two families. You'll find as you learn more about evolution and science in general that the vast majority of the people involved think far more critically and skeptically about these connections than you are aware or even capable. See here, for example. 2
Oliver_Cowdery Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 (edited) 1 hour ago, Tacenda said: The question remains, why didn't all the other Apes evolve? You misunderstand evolution. Humans share a common ancestor with Apes. Humans continued to evolved from that ancestor and apes also likewise continued to evolve. On every branch of the tree of life every species continued to evolve. There is no species of Apes out there that just stopped evolving. See the tree: https://www.evogeneao.com/explore/tree-of-life-explorer#new-world-monkeys Edited October 14, 2016 by Oliver_Cowdery 3
thesometimesaint Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 13 minutes ago, Tacenda said: The question remains, why didn't all the other Apes evolve? Most of Americans have a common ancestor that is English. Why are there still English? 1
maklelan Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 26 minutes ago, Tacenda said: The question remains, why didn't all the other Apes evolve? I sincerely hope you're joking with this question. 1
Tacenda Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 (edited) 6 minutes ago, maklelan said: I sincerely hope you're joking with this question. Nope, did I show my ineptitude? Please tell me where I erred. I'm so far from science learned than I care to admit. ETA: Here's a possible answer. https://www.icr.org/article/3109/ Edited October 14, 2016 by Tacenda
bluebell Posted October 14, 2016 Author Posted October 14, 2016 Just now, maklelan said: I sincerely hope you're joking with this question. I really appreciate that you are willing to share your knowledge on this topic. It is so incredibly interesting. Sometimes your responses come off harsh and condescending though. I'm sure it's not intentional.
Oliver_Cowdery Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 (edited) I took a few BYU biology courses. Despite McConkie's objections one of my professors used the theological justification of "pre-adamites" to justify teaching evolution. It's also interesting to note what the BYU geology department teaches. My BYU Geology teacher was firmly in the camp that there was never a global flood. I didn't take any linguistic classes at BYU, but I am told that professors at BYU who teach linguistic don't believe in the literal tower of babel story either. The literalness of that story is important for establishing a literal Book of Mormon. Edited October 14, 2016 by Oliver_Cowdery 1
maklelan Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 6 minutes ago, Tacenda said: Nope, did I show my ineptitude? Please tell me where I erred. I'm so far from science learned than I care to admit. ETA: Here's a possible answer. https://www.icr.org/article/3109/ Uh, no, that's not a possible answer. That's uniformed ideology and absolutely nothing more. Humans did not evolve from apes. Rather, both humans and apes are different evolutionary branches away from a common ancestor that sits closer to looking like chimps or apes than like us. Papers like this illustrate what kind of evidence and what kind of reasoning are involved in reconstructing the earlier portions of that tree. 2
thesometimesaint Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Tacenda said: Nope, did I show my ineptitude? Please tell me where I erred. I'm so far from science learned than I care to admit. ETA: Here's a possible answer. https://www.icr.org/article/3109/ ICR isn't a trustworthy site. SEE http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Institute_for_Creation_Research They start with a conclusion and work towards a question. Better places to look are like National Academies of Science and American Association for the Advancement of Science. Edited October 14, 2016 by thesometimesaint 2
Daniel2 Posted October 14, 2016 Posted October 14, 2016 During my tenure at BYU from 1991 to 1997, I was taught by several professors that humankind biologically evolved from a more primitive form of life, and that we biologically share a common ancestor with today's monkeys (as we ultimately do, with all other forms of animal life on earth). Biology 100 was one of the classes I recall... 1
Recommended Posts