Does that embrace of all truths extend to theories that directly contradict the typical definition of creation? Evolution for an example? What percentage of Mormons in your estimate accepts evolution?
A poll of LDS folks would yield statistically different results from such a poll of most other Christian sects.
Among Mormons there will be some who don't believe in evolution in any sense. None of these would be put on trial for their church standing. There would be maybe about half who incorporate evolutionary time frames and processes into their best guess about how living things were created by God. Again, there is no doctrinal requirement to accept this view. In many more Bible-text oriented "mainstream" Christian Churches people who think like this would be looked at as insecure in their faith in an almighty sovereign God capable of creating everything as it is and as it appears and as it functions. No holds barred. Among Mormons it is often a belief that God uses natural laws and abides by them. . . . . not so much emphasis on the ultimate origin of things, which exposes to Mormons to criticism that they believe in a different sort of God. . .
A large portionof Mormons would simply say it doesn't matter how it happened, they personally and directly belief in God and "know" God loves them quite unconditionally, and they love Him quite unconditionally too.
The "typical idea of creation" went out the Mormon window with Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, who taught that man and life was brought here from other planets some time after this earth was created some 4.5 Billion years ago. Well, in the current age the LDS Church does not stress this view, and tries not to aggravate the perceptions or prejudices of other "Christians", settling more for the idea that what is important is our belief in Jesus and His Gospel. Centering on living lives that reflect personally on the moral teachings if not intellectual views.
Maybe a few less religiously- centered Mormons actually believe in "Evolution". Probably some very inactive or merely socially-oriented Mormons are pretty weak even on believing in God at all. It's pretty much a "Church of the Open Door" where you actually can "come as you are" provided you are not obnoxiously strident in trying to impose your views on others.
Church leaders sometimes hold forth fairly eloquently on their views and may be more scriptural or doctrinal in their pronouncements, but these leaders change in the process of time, and some authorities get well-ignored by most LDS in succeeding generations. Once in a while, even the scriptural texts will be updated when the unanimously perceived need arises. There are members who sometimes speak about in regard to the pros and cons of these changes. . . . There is a claim that if there is any contradiction between authoritative present teachings, and scriptures, the scriptures prevail. . . . while emphasizing the need to support current leaders and emphasis as a practical matter.
I think someone like Henry E. Eyring would have encouraged people to think and ask questions. Well, actually I don't have to say "I think". I know. I worked for him for twelve years. One of his sons, "Ted" was my bishop at the University of Utah, and I don't think I ever had anyone in "authority" who promoted inquiry with the level of acceptance and encouragement he did. Another pretty good scientist, like his father.
