BYU’s new book on Evolution and the Gospel of Jesus Christ may yet prove to be the most important contribution to literature for Church members out of the new Mormon Studies Books in 2025. If nothing else, the analytical tools and frameworks it introduces to members makes it worth reading. in a recent interview at the Latter-day Saint history blog From the Desk, Ben Spackman shared some of his insights, particularly about First Presidency statements on evolution. What follows here is a copost to the full interview.

What Did the First Presidency Say About Evolution in 1909 and 1925?

To start, Ben Spackman shared the purposes and intents of the book:

We set out with a distinct goal of removing obstacles to faith for Latter-day Saints where evolution was concerned. We wanted to bring the best science to the conversation, of course, but especially historical and scriptural scholarship to Latter-day Saints.

We also wanted to make it as accessible as possible, which meant writing clearly and concisely for non-specialists (it’s very difficult to do both) and making it readily available. We hope many students and Seminary and Institute (S&I) teachers will use it, particularly as we head into the Old Testament again in January 2026.

It’s a topic that is important to address in today’s world, since, as Spackman notes, “Evolution tends to bring many key assumptions and feelings about science, religion, politics, and education to the forefront, and a significant number people have lost faith because of it.”

In the early twentieth century, the First Presidency released two related statements that addressed evolution – one in 1909 and one in 1925. Dr. Spackman shared some information about the 1909 statement:

The 1909 statement arose in response to mounting public interest—both within and outside the Church—about its position on evolution. BYU had recently celebrated Darwin Day, and broader cultural currents were stirring up questions about science, scripture, and authority. In that context, Church leaders felt it would be timely to restate core doctrines about divine creation, without attempting to settle scientific specifics.

It’s extremely important to recognize that Church leaders authored these two statements on evolution not as timeless and abstract thoughts in a vacuum but in the midst of significant intellectual, social, and religious turmoil. …

The 1909 statement concerns the origin of man, whereas evolution is more about the origin of species and the relatedness of living things. The statement echoed scripture as the “old truth” that God created man in His image, both spiritually and physically.

It says nothing about what that might entail, nor how God created (if implied, it is subtle). The closest thing to a direct denunciation is this: “It is held by some that Adam was not the first man upon this earth and that the original human being was a development from lower orders of the animal creation. These, however, are the theories of men.”

The 1925 statement (released 100 years ago!) was an updated and streamlined version of the 1909 statement, issued during the times of the infamous Scopes Trial.

The 1925 statement “‘Mormon’ View of Evolution” is a simple edit of the 1909 statement. The unknown editors (approved by the First Presidency) cut 80% of the word count of the 1909 statement to produce the 1925 statement. …

The 1925 statement helps clarify the original intent of the 1909 version by showing what Church leaders chose to retain, emphasize, and omit. Released in a more public-facing format during a time of national debate, it reinforced the idea that the Church intentionally avoided declaring evolution as incompatible with its doctrine—despite external pressures to do so. … Whereas the 1909 statement appeared once in the Deseret News and was never again referred to, the 1925 statement appeared in “many newspapers throughout the country.” …

It’s clear that Church leaders saw the 1925 statement as replacing or superseding the 1909 statement— completely unknown to the readers of those “many newspapers throughout the country”— and this perspective is what Church leaders wanted the national public to know about the Latter-day Saint position on evolution.

The 1925 version is the more up-to-date version of the statement, which is why when I’ve put together collections of important Latter-day Saint documents, I’ve favored including the 1925 statement rather than the 1909 statement.

What is interesting, however, is that in the Church today, the 1909 statement is better-known than the 1909 statement. Dr. Spackman shared some of why that is the case:

What’s interesting is that the 1909 statement doesn’t appear to be publicly quoted, reprinted, or even referenced—aside from the follow-up question in The Improvement Era—until Joseph Fielding Smith brought it up in 1953. He wasn’t an Apostle during its drafting or involved in the review process, but his words carried weight as Church Historian and President of the Quorum of the Twelve.

Joseph Fielding Smith began portraying the statement as a rejection of evolution—a reading not supported by the original context or language.

In doing so, he effectively misrepresented its intent and retrojected his own doctrinal assumptions onto it. Other General Authorities followed suit, focusing their teachings on Smith’s usage and framing of the statement rather than the First Presidency statement itself. This trickled down to how many Church members understand (or misunderstand) the Church’s position on evolution today. …

Post-1950s understandings of the 1909 and 1925 statements were heavily influenced by the tradition propounded by Joseph Fielding Smith. …

Elder Joseph Fielding Smith saw evolution as an existential threat to everything—Jesus’ divinity, the Atonement, prophets, the Book of Mormon, Joseph Smith, and the temple ordinances—and he spoke about it frequently in a negative way, drawing on Price and other similar writers.

He also popularized the 1909 statement as a bright-line doctrinal declaration against evolution.

It is largely through the influence of Joseph Fielding Smith that the 1909 document gained both its prominence and interpretation in the Church today.

Spackman, however, argues that “Joseph Fielding Smith’s understanding of those early 20th-century events was inaccurate. There had been no official rejection of evolutionary science.” To see the reasons why, head on over to the Latter-day Saint history site From the Desk to read the full interview about “What Did the First Presidency Say About Evolution in 1909 and 1925?“