The Problem with Academics

Part of the problem stems from those involved in the sciences, such as anthropology, archaeology, and geology, where certain dogmas are learned and accepted by many, if not most, students in their growing years in college. Then some become professors and are forced to think along those lines since that is what all their schooling, training, degrees, and income are based upon.

Naturally, when they write books or articles, they do so to those like themselves, that is, people who are also schooled in the academic approach to whatever field they are writing about, such as Anthropologists writing about the study of humans and human behavior and societies in the past and present—filling their articles with anthropological terms, and not common knowledge terms, such as “pre-ceramic period,” “classic period,” “post-classic,” “Mesolithic,” “Neolithic,” “Archaic,” “early intermediate,” “middle horizon,” “late intermediate,” “protohistory,” “postmodern,” and the like.

It seems they have been doing this for so long, that they have lost sight of other, more simple, yet more meaningful parts of the history of whoever they are writing about, whether found in Europe, Asia, Middle East, or the Americas.

Somewhere along the way, they eliminate their reliance upon and their discussion of, those areas of human behavior and history regarding religion, or actual history, such as “evolution” opposed to “creationism,” or “Classical Antiquity,” as opposed to saying “the Greco-Roman world.”

If you read John L. Sorenson’s works, especially his first, it is not difficult to see that his writing was to other anthropologists/archaeologists, and not to the membership of the church, or those inquiring about it or interested in it. It was, as most of these works are, an academic work and not truly an informative one. The scriptural record becomes the “text,” with no mention of scripture involved.

Thus, they use dates, time frames, and historical data, etc., from historical works, rather than those of the scriptural record, either Bible or Book of Mormon—such as the Mayan calendar, and the Popol Vu, a text recounting the mythology and history of the Kʼicheʼ people, one of the Maya peoples, who inhabit the Guatemalan Highlands, Mexican Chiapas, Campeche and Quintana Roo states, and areas of Belize.

It seems that their denial is more to hiding or subordinating personal opinions of religion or religious-directed views to those of their field of science. Thus we have a 4.55 billion-year-old Earth, Carbon-14 dating, and academic terminology for all things that, in the end, almost eliminates all consideration of what the Lord has said, done, and taught on any subject, and what the ancient prophets wrote and available to us today. whatsoever. This, in turn, blends history written by men with history written by prophets on an equal level, if not tilted toward the former.

BYU, of course, teaches these man-made philosophies because it is required in the academic world in order to substantiate their academic accreditation so the degree students receive has meaning. This is achieved for the post-secondary educational institutions or programs that are evaluated by an external body to determine if applicable standards are met, meet the requirements. If standards are met, accredited status is granted by the agency, and the attendee or the graduation of any accredited college course, is standard and one’s degree from BYU is the same on that subject as a degree from any other accredited university.

BYU’s seven-story, 120,000 square feet N. Eldon Tanner Building

 

After all, no single University can either stray from those standards, or can set their own standards, and be accredited. That is why certain degrees from certain schools carry more weight in the market place than from others that, in some cases, are not accredited. BYU is a Church school, but its purpose, like the vast majority of post-secondary education institutions, is to provide acceptable education to a student that would allow the student to compete fairly in the open market for the use of their talents, abilities, skills, and education levels.

In general, specialized accreditation attests to the quality of an educational program that prepares for entry into a recognized profession, and on that basis, the problem lies in the accreditation process and agency, not with the University, or in the case of BYU with the Church. Thus, BYU and the University of Utah are examples of schools that have accreditation by the United States Department of Education, though one is a church and the other is a state school.

At the same time, Accreditation in higher education is a collegial process based on self and peer assessment. Its purpose is the improvement of academic quality and public accountability. This continuing quality control process occurs usually every five to ten years, and is based on independent verification that a program or institution meets established quality standards and is competent to carry out specific conformity assessment tasks. Conformity assessment tasks may include, but are not limited to, testing, inspection, or certification. In the case of archaeology, it includes field work, such as digs and evaluation of artifacts uncovered.

Because of the importance of accreditation, an accredited degree is recognized for meeting specific educational standards, which have been set by an accrediting agency. Choosing an accredited degree ensures its acceptance by other recognized institutions and organizations and potential employers. Thus, for BYU to be accredited, it must provide classes and courses that meet the standard, which includes teaching evolution and other subjects normal for that subject though contrary to the Church teaching.

This includes BYU, like other universities, teaching Ecological Evolution in Geology and understanding that modern Earth is a product of the coevolution of the biosphere, lithosphere, atmosphere, and hydrosphere over 4.6 billion years of earth history. Also, that knowledge of depositional, tectonic, and climatic events in the context of the geological timescale is required.

As one scientist teaching this information has said, “I have specialized in the study of Earth’s architecture (structural geology) and in understanding the ages of rocks and minerals (geochronology). Much of what I have learned from my studies and believe to be true is seemingly incompatible with the scriptures.”

This means that under this teaching the Earth is 4.6 billion years old, and that all geological factors are evaluated within that time frame including earth formations, fossil record, flora, fauna, and man. While this is contrary to biblical and Book of Mormon teaching, it is required for accreditation, which makes a degree from BYU of value.

Academicians are often faced with teaching information that is not compatible with their personal views. In addition, to cloud the issues being taught, a special language has been developed and used by all geologists, archaeologists and anthropologists that is not readily apparent to the reader, and often skipped over, relying on overall meaning rather than specific facts.

On the other side of the coin, in 1954, when Joseph Fielding Smith was President of the Quorum of the Twelve, he wrote at length about his personal views on evolution in his book Man, His Origin and Destiny stating that it was a destructive and contaminating influence and that "If the Bible does not kill Evolution, Evolution will kill the Bible.” He further stated that "There is not and cannot be, any compromise between the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the theories of evolution”and that "It is not possible for a logical mind to hold both Bible teaching and evolutionary teaching at the same time” since "If you accept [the scriptures] you cannot accept organic evolution.” In response to inquiries, President David O. McKay affirmed that "the Church has officially taken no position" on evolution, Smith's book "is not approved by the Church", and that the book is entirely Smith's "views for which he alone is responsible.” Smith also produced personal statements on evolution in his Doctrines of Salvation including that "If evolution is true, the church is false" since "If life began on Earth as advocated by Darwin...then the doctrines of the church are false.” He added on his views of evolution, "No Adam, no fall; no fall, no atonement; no atonement, no savior."