What They Talk About: Historical Skepticism of Mormonism

[Pyreaux]

11 hours ago, Clear said:

Pyreaux said : "I made similar arguments as you about the parallels in the then undiscovered Apocalypse of Abraham, and he replied to me that Joseph had access to those same parallels in other contemporary works. I'm not an expert in Joseph's private book collection to refute him. I thought it was an interesting claim. I wanted your opinion."

This is an interesting claim.  Please give me specific examples from the books you referenced and lets discuss them.

I was hoping to have summoned "CA Steve" so he could take the issue on himself. It seems this is the common position of critical scholars of Mormonism who argue for a naturalistic origin of the Book of Abraham, namely Dan Vogel. I'll try to steelman Vogel.

Vogel's 2020 book, Book of Abraham Apologetics: A Review and Critique, there he claims that the purported "unique" elements found in the Book of Abraham; such as Terah's idolatry, Abraham's attempted sacrifice, and his astronomical knowledge, were known to Joseph Smith's contemporaries and available in popular religious literature of the time. This mirrors "CA Steve's" claim.

He uses of sources like Clarke's Bible Commentary and Brown's Bible Dictionary to show Terah's idolatry was a known theme was a common scholarly tactic in this field, and Vogel cites numerous contemporary sources to establish this cultural and literary context.

The argument that themes like the pre-existence were commonly debated in 19th-century American religious thought by figures like Noah Worcester and Hosea Ballou is also a standard feature of naturalistic explanations for the content of early Mormon scripture.

The ex-Mormon's point rests on the idea that Joseph Smith did not need access to non-canonical texts to produce similar ideas, because those traditions had already filtered into the popular American Protestant culture of the time through works like:

Terah's Idolatry: The Old Testament verse Joshua 24:2 says that Abraham's ancestors "served other gods." This hint was widely elaborated upon in Jewish and later Christian tradition (Midrash), which was then accessible through commentaries and Bible dictionaries (like those mentioned) that Joseph Smith owned or could access. This explains the depiction of Abraham's father, Terah, as an idolater in the Book of Abraham (Abraham 1:5-7).

Pre-existence and Cosmology: Themes like the pre-existence of spirits and a complex, hierarchical cosmology governed by a larger star, Kolob, in the Book of Abraham, were also actively discussed in the 19th-century religious environment, often driven by new scientific discoveries in astronomy.

This argument reframes alleged "unique" parallels as simply evidence of Joseph Smith synthesizing ideas available in his own cultural and religious milieu.

Stephen O. Smoot and other writing in the Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship (a response to Vogel's book), counter the "contemporary parallels" argument by pointing to evidence that suggests Joseph Smith's text better aligns with ancient, extra-biblical traditions that were demonstrably not widely available in 19th-century America, as the cumulative pattern of these unique traditions strongly suggests an ancient origin. They contend that while Terah's idolatry was common, the specific combination of elements, such as a priest of Pharaoh attempting to sacrifice Abraham on an altar near an image of an idol (Abraham 1:7-12) is so complex that its appearance in the Book of Abraham is more likely a restoration of ancient knowledge than a fabrication based on common commentary.

[Clear]

 

Pyreaux said: “Vogel's 2020 book, Book of Abraham Apologetics: A Review and Critique, there he claims that the purported "unique" elements found in the Book of Abraham; such as Terah's idolatry, Abraham's attempted sacrifice, and his astronomical knowledge, were known to Joseph Smith's contemporaries and available in popular religious literature of the time. This mirrors "CA Steve's" claim.”

I very much agree that Terahs idolatry existed in the early literature and this can explain the single phrase in the Book of Abraham that Abrahams “fathers” engaged in idolatry.  All of us have read this in the Old Testament record as well.  How does this single and discrete reference explain the entire book of Abraham?

 

Pyreaux said : “The argument that themes like the pre-existence were commonly debated in 19th-century American religious thought by figures like Noah Worcester and Hosea Ballou is also a standard feature of naturalistic explanations for the content of early Mormon scripture.”

Very good.  Will you give us actual references and quotes from Noah Worchester and Hosea Ballou so we can actually examine their discussions and how they actually relate to this claim?

 

Pyreaux said: “Pre-existence and Cosmology: Themes like the pre-existence of spirits and a complex, hierarchical cosmology governed by a larger star, Kolob, in the Book of Abraham, were also actively discussed in the 19th-century religious environment, often driven by new scientific discoveries in astronomy.”

I VERY MUCH agree that ancient Judeo-Christian literature discusses the pre-existence of spirits (e.g. 1 Enoch, etc) which later rabbinic Judaism prohibited and which Joseph re-adopted in a more mature and detailed form.   Can you give us specific examples from the literature that you are referring to?  (I can give references, I just want to know what, specifically, YOU are referring to).

Can you give us specific references of this discussion of cosmology of being governed by a larger star Kolob (“all father” or “father of all” in Hebrew) so we can examine these discussions?

 

1)  THE AGE OF AND PROCESS OF RESTORATION IS NOT SIMPLY THE PURVUE OF THE LDS.   THERE ARE MANY NON-LDS PROCESSES GOING ON AND THE LDS SHOULD WELCOME CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE RESTORATION OF ANCIENT RELIGION REGARDLESS OF THEIR SOURCE

I would certainly agree with CA Steve if he maintains that not all of Josephs return to authentic ancient Judeo-Christian doctrines were by revelation.  It makes no sense (to me) to require new revelation from heaven when reading early Judeo-Christian literature with simple confirmation of the spirit will provide the same insights.

For example, religious historians are, increasingly, discovering the exact same principles in ancient Judeo-Christian literature that Joseph Smith taught.  It isn’t merely Joseph Smith who restored early Judeo-Christian doctrines, but this process of restoration is on-going and involves many individuals in multiple historical fields of study whether they are LDS or not.  

I have given the example of Michael Heiser, whose PhD was on “The Divine council in Late Canonical and Non-Canonical Second Temple Jewish Literature”.  The non-Mormon, Heiser, simply discovered the same principle Joseph discovered and thus, Heiser, and individuals like him, are also play their role in the process of restoring ancient Judeo-Christianity, and confirming their historicity in their own right.  I think it is a GOOD thing that non-LDS have and continue to discover the same principles Smith discovered and taught.

It's not just a few individuals who are discovering the same principles Smith discovered.  MANY non-LDS individuals and researchers are discovering the same principles discovered by Joseph Smith.   I, for one, feel very comfortable allowing that non-LDS individuals are also able discover true doctrinal principles and Restorational assistance from any source it comes from.  

Thus, the continuing restoration of early Judeo-Christian religion is NOT a process exclusive to the LDS. 

For example, the Messianic Judaism movement that is gathering Israel to Christ is, (in my estimation) playing it’s own role in the Gathering of Israel to Jesus as much as the LDS attempts to do the exact same thing.

 

Anyway, please give me some specific references and quotes from the individuals you referenced so we can examine and discuss their concepts and how they might relate to Joseph Smith and the process of restoration of those principles.

[Pyreaux]

On 9/24/2025 at 1:38 PM, Clear said:

 

Pyreaux said: “Vogel's 2020 book, Book of Abraham Apologetics: A Review and Critique, there he claims that the purported "unique" elements found in the Book of Abraham; such as Terah's idolatry, Abraham's attempted sacrifice, and his astronomical knowledge, were known to Joseph Smith's contemporaries and available in popular religious literature of the time. This mirrors "CA Steve's" claim.”

I very much agree that Terahs idolatry existed in the early literature and this can explain the single phrase in the Book of Abraham that Abrahams “fathers” engaged in idolatry.  All of us have read this in the Old Testament record as well.  How does this single and discrete reference explain the entire book of Abraham?

 

Pyreaux said : “The argument that themes like the pre-existence were commonly debated in 19th-century American religious thought by figures like Noah Worcester and Hosea Ballou is also a standard feature of naturalistic explanations for the content of early Mormon scripture.”

Very good.  Will you give us actual references and quotes from Noah Worchester and Hosea Ballou so we can actually examine their discussions and how they actually relate to this claim?

 

Pyreaux said: “Pre-existence and Cosmology: Themes like the pre-existence of spirits and a complex, hierarchical cosmology governed by a larger star, Kolob, in the Book of Abraham, were also actively discussed in the 19th-century religious environment, often driven by new scientific discoveries in astronomy.”

I VERY MUCH agree that ancient Judeo-Christian literature discusses the pre-existence of spirits (e.g. 1 Enoch, etc) which later rabbinic Judaism prohibited and which Joseph re-adopted in a more mature and detailed form.   Can you give us specific examples from the literature that you are referring to?  (I can give references, I just want to know what, specifically, YOU are referring to).

Can you give us specific references of this discussion of cosmology of being governed by a larger star Kolob (“all father” or “father of all” in Hebrew) so we can examine these discussions?

 

1)  THE AGE OF AND PROCESS OF RESTORATION IS NOT SIMPLY THE PURVUE OF THE LDS.   THERE ARE MANY NON-LDS PROCESSES GOING ON AND THE LDS SHOULD WELCOME CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE RESTORATION OF ANCIENT RELIGION REGARDLESS OF THEIR SOURCE

I would certainly agree with CA Steve if he maintains that not all of Josephs return to authentic ancient Judeo-Christian doctrines were by revelation.  It makes no sense (to me) to require new revelation from heaven when reading early Judeo-Christian literature with simple confirmation of the spirit will provide the same insights.

For example, religious historians are, increasingly, discovering the exact same principles in ancient Judeo-Christian literature that Joseph Smith taught.  It isn’t merely Joseph Smith who restored early Judeo-Christian doctrines, but this process of restoration is on-going and involves many individuals in multiple historical fields of study whether they are LDS or not.  

I have given the example of Michael Heiser, whose PhD was on “The Divine council in Late Canonical and Non-Canonical Second Temple Jewish Literature”.  The non-Mormon, Heiser, simply discovered the same principle Joseph discovered and thus, Heiser, and individuals like him, are also play their role in the process of restoring ancient Judeo-Christianity, and confirming their historicity in their own right.  I think it is a GOOD thing that non-LDS have and continue to discover the same principles Smith discovered and taught.

It's not just a few individuals who are discovering the same principles Smith discovered.  MANY non-LDS individuals and researchers are discovering the same principles discovered by Joseph Smith.   I, for one, feel very comfortable allowing that non-LDS individuals are also able discover true doctrinal principles and Restorational assistance from any source it comes from.  

Thus, the continuing restoration of early Judeo-Christian religion is NOT a process exclusive to the LDS. 

For example, the Messianic Judaism movement that is gathering Israel to Christ is, (in my estimation) playing it’s own role in the Gathering of Israel to Jesus as much as the LDS attempts to do the exact same thing.

 

Anyway, please give me some specific references and quotes from the individuals you referenced so we can examine and discuss their concepts and how they might relate to Joseph Smith and the process of restoration of those principles.

I agree that even contemporary non-LDS discoveries are themselves parallel evidence of restoration rather than a fabrication. Dan Vogel's argument, however, is that Joseph Smith’s specific, unique theological concepts in the Book of Abraham were derived from contemporaneous, published American sources. 

Cosmology: The Plurality of Worlds and Governing Stars

The Book of Abraham's cosmology, particularly the concept of Kolob, is widely believed by critics to have been inspired by the popular astronomical writings of the 19th century, particularly those of the Scottish minister, writer, and astronomer, Thomas D!ck (1774–1857). D!ck's work, which was popular and circulated widely in the US, attempted to reconcile Newtonian astronomy with Christian theology.

Source: Thomas D!ck, The Philosophy of a Future State (1829).

The Plurality of Worlds: D!ck heavily promoted the idea that the universe was filled with innumerable stars and that these stars were likely peopled by various orders of intelligences (similar to Abraham's "intelligences"). He suggested that these intelligences were progressive beings evolving toward perfection.

The Center of the Universe: D!ck speculated that the systems of the universe revolve around a common centre...the throne of God.

The Kolob Parallel: Critics see this as the direct source for the idea of Kolob which is described as the star "nearest unto the throne of God" and the "great governing one" of the celestial bodies. The Book of Abraham then applies a system of decreasing greatness and increasing time measurement as one moves farther from this center, mirroring the hierarchical nature of D!ck’s infinite and orderly universe.

An excerpt from D!ck’s work was published by Oliver Cowdery in the Latter Day Saints' Messenger and Advocate in December 1836, confirming that his associates had access to it during the time of the Book of Abraham translation. Joseph Smith is recorded as donating a copy to the Nauvoo Library and Literary Institute in 1844.

Sources like that forms the core of the naturalistic argument: Joseph Smith's unique doctrinal elements are claimed to be a creative synthesis of known theological and scientific/philosophical ideas popular among American religious seekers in his era. I don't think Vogel shows Joseph took from those sources without presupposing a naturalistic view first to say he must have, but he effectively counters the apologist claims that Joseph must be a prophet, as he could not have had access to these ideas before later discoveries, like the Apocalypse of Abraham, were found.

Edited September 25, 2025 by Pyreaux

[Clear]

Hi Pyreaux

Thank you for at least providing a name (Thomas D!ck) associated with this theory.
Will you provide specific quotes from D!cks text so we can actually SEE what D!ck said that paralleled Josephs narrative?

 

The last theory regarding Terah and idolatry was unimpressive and undeveloped. 

For example, the last example regarding the existence of the tradition that Terah was involved in idolatry does nothing to actually explain the single phrase in the Book of Abraham that simply confirms what was “well known”. If Terahs idolatry was so well known (and I agree it was), why would Joseph even need another book to simply state what was, already, a well known belief?

 

Please, give us the specific narratives D!ck wrote that you are referring to.

 

Thanks

[Pyreaux]

 

15 hours ago, Clear said:

Hi Pyreaux

Thank you for at least providing a name (Thomas D!ck) associated with this theory.
Will you provide specific quotes from D!cks text so we can actually SEE what D!ck said that paralleled Josephs narrative?

The last theory regarding Terah and idolatry was unimpressive and undeveloped. 

For example, the last example regarding the existence of the tradition that Terah was involved in idolatry does nothing to actually explain the single phrase in the Book of Abraham that simply confirms what was “well known”. If Terahs idolatry was so well known (and I agree it was), why would Joseph even need another book to simply state what was, already, a well known belief?

Please, give us the specific narratives D!ck wrote that you are referring to.

Thanks

The "Throne of God"

The most frequently cited parallel relates to the concept of a grand, physical center of the universe.

Thomas D!ck's The Philosophy of a Future State (1829)

"It is now considered by astronomers, as highly probable, if not certain… that all the systems of the universe revolve round one common centre… If this is in reality the case, it may, with the most emphatic propriety, be termed, the throne of God… This grand central body may be considered as the capital of the universe." (pp. 244-246)

"And I saw the stars, that they were very great, and that one of them was nearest unto the throne of God; and there were many great ones which were near unto it; And the name of the great one is Kolob, because it is near unto me, for I, Abraham, saw it; it is the first creation, nearest to the celestial, or the residence of God." (Abraham 3:2-3)

Key Parallels:

The Throne of God: Both D!ck's speculation and Joseph Smith's revelation use the precise phrase "the throne of God" to describe this cosmic central location.

Governing Power: D!ck suggests this center is where "embassies may be occasionally dispatched to all surrounding worlds," aligning with the Book of Abraham's description of Kolob as a great "governing power."

Now ancient Egyptians did have a view of the cosmos that, in some ways, parallels the concepts in the Book of Abraham and Thomas D!ck's writings. It was geocentric, with the celestial North Pole was seen as a pivot or central point of rotation. The stars around the celestial North Pole were considered "imperishable" because they never sank below the horizon. They were a powerful symbol of immortality and were often associated with the afterlife of the pharaoh, who wished to become one of these stars. Visualized as the "mount of heaven," a divine location from which certain stellar races were said to have originated. This concept aligns with a central, revered location in the cosmos.

"Intelligences"

Thomas D!ck's The Philosophy of a Future State (1829)

D!ck speculates that many of these stars are peopled by "various orders of intelligences" and that these intelligences are "progressive beings" in various stages of evolution toward perfection. (p. 230)

"Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones... and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born." (Abraham 3:22-23)

Key Parallels:

Intelligences: Both texts use the specific, non-biblical term "intelligences" to refer to spiritual or uncreated beings who inhabit the cosmos.

Various Orders: Both texts establish a hierarchy, with D!ck mentioning "various orders" and Abraham describing a system where some are "noble and great ones" and others are lesser.

Progression: D!ck's mention of "progressive beings" echoes the LDS concept of eternal progression, though the theological details of perfection differ between the two authors.

Egyptian "Ka" (Life Force), the essence of the "double-form" created at birth, was thought to have "always existed" and was "passed across the successive generations, carrying the spiritual force of the first creation." This mirrors the idea of a primordial, uncreated substance of intelligence.

It is important to note that while the language and concepts are strikingly similar, many Latter-day Saint scholars emphasize the differences in the overall theological framework (e.g., D!ck viewing God as omnipresent and ethereal versus Joseph Smith's corporeal God) to argue against direct plagiarism, suggesting instead that the book may have served as a cultural vocabulary for Smith's gift to work with.

Edited September 26, 2025 by Pyreaux

[Clear]

Hi Pyreaux.  Thank you for the references.

I apologize.  It took me a while to find D!cks actual book (archived) and to find and familiarize myself with the partial quotes you have provided.   D!ck explains that the “future state” **** is theorizing about is “heaven” itself.  

 

1)  THE LDS SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED BY PARALLELS TO THEIR THEOLOGY

I think the LDS should celebrate any and all parallels to their theology (since this represents others are discovering ancient theology as well as them).  However, the parallels they claim to have is parallels to ancient Judeo-Christianity since their claim is they are in the process of restoration of ancient Christian theology.

 

2)  POSSIBLE “MODERN” PARALLELS BY THOMAS ****???

Pyreaux said: The most frequently cited parallel relates to the concept of a grand, physical center of the universe. 

Can you quote where Joseph Smith tells us that the universe has a center so I can see if a parallel actual exists?   I am unaware of such a parallel.

 

Pyreaux quoted D!ck: "It is now considered by astronomers, as highly probable, if not certain… that all the systems of the universe revolve round one common centre… (NOT pp244-246, but on page 249)

Can you quote where Joseph Smith tells us the systems of the universe revolve “round one common centre” since I am unaware of such a parallel.

Also, I don’t see where D!ck says “the Throne of God” is a planet per se, but instead, given D!cks belief that God inhabits the entire universe, D!ck seems to be trying to describe the size of this center of the universe and “throne of God” using “an astronomical idea” (p 249).  Let me know if this is incorrect (I did not read the whole chapter your quote came from)

These are not specific concepts Smith adopted (that I am aware of)

 

Pyreaux quoted D!ck  “If this is in reality the case, it may, with the most emphatic propriety, be termed, the throne of God… This grand central body may be considered as the capital of the universe." (pp. 244-246)

Given D!cks concept of a God that lives in all places in the universe, D!ck describes the SIZE of the throne, saying “such a central body (the throne) would be five hundred times larger than all the systems and worlds in the universe”.  D!ck goes on to say “Here, the, may be a vase universe of itself, an example of material creation, exceeding all the rest in magnitude and splendor, and in which are blended the glories of every other system.  If this is in reality the case, it may, with the most emphatic propriety, be termed, THE THRONE of God.” (p 249-250)

I am unaware of any specific parallel to a teaching of Joseph Smith that speaks to or adopts this model of the actual size of the throne of a God who inhabits the entire universe.  The quote given of Smith is not equating Kolob to the size of the Throne of God, nor is it equated to, the Throne of God in Smiths theology.   Can you find an actual parallel?

 

Key Parallels according to Pyreaux:

Pyreaux said : “The Throne of God: Both D!ck's speculation and Joseph Smith's revelation use the precise phrase "the throne of God" to describe this cosmic central location.

Firstly, I am unaware of Joseph Smith describing the Throne of God "in a cosmic central location". (can you find this?)

Secondly, while it is true that D!ck and Smith both call the Throne of God by the term “Throne of God”, D!ck describes HIS source of this term as the bible (mainly Revelations).  On page 249 D!ck says : “The Scriptures frequently refer to a particular place, circumstance, or manifestation, termed, The throne of God; as in the following passages” He then relates FIVE scriptures that use the term “Throne” of God.

If D!ck gets the Term “Throne of God” from the scriptures.  Why not assume that Joseph Smith (whose family read the same bible D!ck read), also read the term from his own readings of the bible as well?    It makes no sense to say Joseph read the same bible verses, yet claim he must have gotten this biblical term from reading D!ck…    Why assume the least likely  possibility instead of the most likely?

 

Governing Power: D!ck suggests this center is where "embassies may be occasionally dispatched to all surrounding worlds," aligning with the Book of Abraham's description of Kolob as a great "governing power."

D!ck explains his belief that the actual “embassaries” sent out are angels, saying : “In every instance in which angels have been senton embassies to mankind, they have displayed sensible qualities…” and the sentence ends that they are “recognized by the persons to whom they were sent…”

While Josephs theology DOES recognize angels as Embassaries to mankind, and some are sent from the throne of God, most all Judeo-Christian theology does the same.  Thus, a specific Joseph Smith/D!ck parallel is hard to claim. For example, I was taught angels were God’s Embassaries to mankind in my native, protestant church. 

Can you explain how Joseph did not understand this concept until exposed to D!cks writings?   Can you even demonstrate that Joseph Smith ever even read D!cks writings at all?

 

D!ck speculates that many of these stars are peopled by "various orders of intelligences" and that these intelligences are "progressive beings" in various stages of evolution toward perfection. (p. 230)  and “Both texts use the specific, non-biblical term "intelligences" to refer to spiritual or uncreated beings who inhabit the cosmos.”

We need to unpack these claims.  

First, D!ck postulates that planets (he uses the example of Mars) are inhabited.  

I don’t know of any parallel to this specific theory of planets in our solar system being inhabited that Joseph Smith adopted.

Can you give us the quote where D!ck describes “uncreated beings”?

D!ck DOES however, describe that those who inhabit heaven have “the distinguishing characteristic feature of every species of intellectual beings – their modes of existence, of improvement, and of social intercourse – the solemn forms of worship and adoration that prevail among them – the laws of social, and of moral order peculiar to each province of the Divine Empire – the progress they have made in knowledge and the discoveries they have brought to light… p 230”.  These are wonderful and parallel Smiths theology in wonderful ways.   However, they also parallel my theology growing up as a Baptist regarding what heaven would be like.

I LIKE CA Steves notice that D!ck goes into greater detail and surmises that humans, in heaven, will continue learning and reach great heights of knowledge.  This supports and does not subtract from Smiths confirmation of this same principle.   The difficulty will be for CA Steve to show that Joseph got this theology from D!cks book.

 

Intelligences: While both D!ck and Smith use the specific, non-biblical term "intelligences" to refer to spiritual or uncreated beings who inhabit the cosmos.

D!ck explains concerning “The gradations of intellect, or the various orders of intelligences which may people the universal system…”  He says “we find a regular gradation of intellect, from the muscle, through all the orders of the aquatic and insect tribes, till we arrive at the dog, the monkey, the beaver, and the elephant, and last of all, to man, who stands at the top of the intellectual scale…   and D!ck concludes “On the other hand, we have reason to believe that man, with all his noble powers, stands nearly at the bottom of the scale of the intelligent creation. (p 219)

While Smith does agree that there are gradations of intelligence (this is more an empirical and logical conclusion that all of us observe and doesn't represent any great discovery), Smith places man at the pinnacle of creations.  So, there is some parallelism, and some disagreement.

 

Various Orders: Both texts establish a hierarchy, with D!ck mentioning "various orders" and Abraham describing a system where some are "noble and great ones" and others are lesser.

Again, D!ck says that “among these celestial beings, there are gradations of nature and of office: since there are among them, “seraphim and cherubim, archangels, thrones, dominions, principalities and powers,” which designations are evidently expressive of their respective endowments…” and he explains that “we know but little in the mean time of the nature of that diversity of intellect which prevails among the higher orders of created beings…”

I would expect Joseph Smith would agree with these references to beings mentioned in the biblical text as well.  Where is the evidence Smith took his more mature and detailed theology from D!ck?

 

Pyreaux said : “Progression: D!ck's mention of "progressive beings" echoes the LDS concept of eternal progression, though the theological details of perfection differ between the two authors.”

While it is true that it is in the obvious nature of man to “progress” from infant, to childhood and make both physical and mental progress, and more progress (at least intellectual progress) throughout their lives, this is pretty much a given observation we all make during this life.  What IS a parallel, is that both Smith and D!ck agree that this intellectual and moral progress continues beyond this life in heaven.   However, again, this also parallels my Baptist theology as a youth.

 

3)  LDS SHOULD CELEBRATE MODERN PARALLEL THEOLOGIES.  HOWEVER, THE CRUCIAL PARALLELS ARE THOSE OF THE LDS WITH ANCIENT JUDEO-CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY.

 

a) The ancient Judeo-Christianity taught man was intelligent and was a “Progressive being” and there were different levels of characteristics.

While Josephs theology may have a hundred parallels with specific modern theories, the fact that his theology closely parallels ancient Judeo-Christian theology is the actual LDS claim and is the most important set of parallels.

“… (one) person is more worthy than (another) person: one because of much property; another because of superlative wisdom of the heart; and another because of intelligence…  2^nd Enoch mp 43:1-3

 Also, as for the glory of those who proved to be righteous on account of my law, those who possessed intelligence in their life, and those who planted the root of wisdom in their hearts – their splendor will then be glorified by transformations, …and receive the undying world which is promised to them.   Baruch 2 51:2-6;

”… ask the Lord that you may receive the intelligence to understand them.”  Hermas 79:6

“…the nature of men is always changeable.  For as we were once, we are no longer, and as we are now, we shall not remain in the future.  Baruch 2 21:13-18;

 

While D!ck suggests Heaven (i.e. The Throne of God) is the “great Governing Power” and that there were levels of authorities there, Joseph (and most Christianities) agree that God, on his Throne IS the “Great Governing power” and I do not see why Joseph gained this principle from D!ck, rather than from his normal Christian upbringing (the source where the rest of us, typically, gained it)

However, Josephs parallel with Ancient Judeo-Christian doctrine is deeper than that of D!ck.

The ancient Testament of Adam relates: “ The heavenly powers  what they are like and how each of their orders is occupied in the service and the plan of this world.  Listen, my beloved, as they are set in order one after another from the bottom, until we reach those who carry our Lord Jesus the Messiah and bear him up.  The lowest order is the angels.  And the plan has been revealed to it by God concerning every human being whom they watch over…   “The second order is the archangels…This is the service: directing everything in this creation according to the plan of God…The third order, which is the Archons...The fourth order, which is authorities.  The fifth order, which is the powers…The sixth order, which is the dominions.  Testament of Adam  4:1-6

 

b)  Josephs theology parallels the ancient doctrine of pre-existence:

Jewish Enoch (of 300 b.c.) parallels Josephs theology when describing the Christ who was with the Father in the beginning, who were separate beings; who was chosen to be the Christ before the world was created.

The Prophet Enoch describes seeing God and Jesus in his Heavenly vision, saying : “At that place, I saw he who is of primordial days,  And his head was white like wool, and there was with him another individual whose face was like that of a human being.  His countenance was full of grace like that of one among the holy angels.   And I asked the one–from among the angels…“Who is this, and from where could he be, and for what reason does he go with him who precedes time?”  And he answered me and said to me, “This is the Son of Man, to whom belongs righteousness, and with whom righteousness dwells.  And he will open all the hidden storerooms; for the Lord of the Spirits has chosen him, and he is destined to be victorious before the Lord of the Spirits in eternal uprightness.  This Son of Man whom you have seen is the One who would remove the Kings and the mighty ones from their comfortable seats, and the strong ones from their thrones.   1st Enoch 46:1-6;    

 

c)  The ancient theology of pre-existence of individuals parallels Josephs theology:

Jewish Haggadah literature relates : “The spirit and body of man are united in this way: When a woman has conceived...God decrees what manner of human being shall become of it – whether it shall be male or female, strong or weak, rich or poor, beautiful or ugly, long or short, fat or thin, and what all it’s other qualities shall be…  God makes a sign to the angel appointed over the souls, saying, “Bring me the soul so-and-so, which is hidden in Paradise, whose name is so-and-so, and whose form is so-and-so.”  The angel brings the designated soul, and she bows down when she appears in the presence of God, and prostrates herself before him.  At that moment, God issues the command, “Enter this sperm.”  The soul opens her mouth, and pleads: “O Lord of the world!  I am well pleased with the world in which I have been living since the day on which you called me into being.  Why do you now desire to have me enter this impure sperm, I who am holy and pure, and a part of your glory?”  God consoles her: “The world which I shall cause you to enter is better than the world in which you have lived hitherto, and when I created you, it was only for this purpose.” …

Then angel then shows the spirit others (some of whom had been mortal and returned):  

“The Angel then says to the soul, “Do you know who these are?” She replies in the negative, and the angel goes on:  “These whom you behold here were formed, like you, in the womb of their mother.  When they came into the world, they observed God’s Torah and his commandments.  Therefore they became the partakers of this bliss which you see them enjoy.    Know, also, you will one day depart from the world below, and if you will observe God’s Torah, then will you be found worthy of sitting with these pious ones.  But if not, you will be doomed to the other place”  The Haggadah (The Soul of Man);   

 

d)  Smiths theology restores and parallels ancient Jewish theology regarding the tutoring reason for mortality:

The Jewish Zohar narrative relates:    “…the soul of the female and the soul of the male, are hence preeminent above all the heavenly hosts and camps.  It may be wondered, if they are thus preeminent on both sides, why do they descend to this world only to be taken thence at some future time?  “This may be explained by way of a simile: A king has a son whom he sends to a village to be educated until he shall have been initiated into the ways of the palace.  When the king is informed that his son is now come to maturity, the king, out of his love, sends the matron his mother to bring him back into the palace, and there the king rejoices with him every day.   THE ZOHAR - A SEAL UPON YOUR HEART   

Josephs theology regarding Embassaries from Heaven to Mankind:   For example, the early apo Abraham narrative describes three angelic messengers sent to Adam to teach him the gospel (among other things).  The Narrative starts with Adam, teaching his son regarding the visitation of angels to him after being exiled from the Garden of Eden.  Adam taught his son: “Now I was sleeping in the thought of my heart, and I saw before me three men whose appearance I could not recognize…The men [spoke] , saying to me, ‘Rise up, Adam, from the sleep of death, and hear about the aeon and the seed of that man to whom life has come, the one who came forth from you and from Eve your wife.  When I heard these words from those great men who stood before me, we sighted in our hearts, I and Eve.  And the Lord, the God who created us, stood in our presence and said to us, ‘Adam, why were you sighing in your hearts?  Do you not know that I am God who created you, and that I breathed into you a spirit of life for a living soul?’  “Then darkness fell over our eyes.  Then the god who created us created a son from himself [and Eve your mother]...”[then I was defiled] in the thought of my heart.  I recognized a sweet desire for your mother.  Then the vigor of our eternal knowledge perished in us...“Now then, my son Seth, I will reveal to you what was revealed to me by those men whom I once saw before me.   The Apocalypse of Adam  2:1-6-7, ch 3:1;    

Adam describes not only the visitation of angels to him, but also that once fallen, he felt physical desire for his wife and posterity was possible.  As Baruch explained : “For when he transgressed, untimely death came into being, mourning was mentioned, affliction was prepared, illness was created, labor accomplished, … the conception of children came about, the passion of the parents was produced...”  Baruch 2 55:6;    

 

e)  The ancient doctrine that Men are punished for their own sins and not Adams transgression parallels Josephs theology:

Apo Baruch explains : “But now, turn yourselves to destruction, you unrighteous ones who are living now, for you will be visited suddenly, since you have once rejected the understanding of the most High.  For his works have not taught you, nor has the artful work of his creation which has existed always persuaded you.   Adam is, therefore not the cause, except only for himself, but each of us has become our own Adam.”  The apocalypse of Baruch 54:17-19;  

 

f)  The promise of God to Adam that he would provide a savior for him and resurrect him in the last days parallels Joseph Smiths theology:

“…and God called Adam and said, “Adam, Adam.”  And the body answered from the ground and said, “Here I am, Lord.”  2 And the Lord said to him, “I told you that you are dust and to dust you shall return.  3 Now I promise to you the resurrection; I shall raise you on the last day in the resurrection with every man of your seed.” Life of Adam and Eve (apocalypse) 41:1-3; 

In the ancient testament literature, the promise is explicit (Adam is again, teaching Seth):

“Adam said to Seth, his son, “You have heard my son, that God is going to come into the world after a long time, (he will be) conceived of a virgin and put on a body, be born like a human being, and grow up as a child.  He will perform signs and wonders on the earth, will walk on the waves of the sea. ... He spoke to me about this in Paradise after I picked some of the fruit in which death was hiding: ‘Adam, Adam do not fear.  You wanted to be a god; I will make you a god, not right now, but after a space of many years.  I am consigning you to death, and the maggot and the worm will eat your body.’...But after a short time there will be mercy on you because you were created in my image, and I will not leave you to waste away in Sheol.  For your sake I will be born of the Virgin Mary.  For your sake I will taste death and enter the house of the dead....4'And after three days, while I am in the tomb, I will raise up the body I received from you.  And I will set you at the right hand of my divinity, and I will make you a god just like you wanted.  And I will receive favor from God, and I will restore to you and to your posterity that which is the justice of heaven.” ”  Testament of Adam  3:1-4;   

 

g) The ancient Judeo-Christian literature regarding the world of Spirits parallels Josephs theology.  The prophet Enoch describes cognizant, intelligent, and communicative spirits in the world of spirits.  The righteous and unrighteous are separated. Etc.

“At that moment I raised a question regarding him and regarding the judgment of all, For what reason is one separated from the other?  9 And he replied and said unto me, “These three have been made in order that the spirits of the dead might be separated.  And in the manner in which the souls of the righteous are separated  (by) this spring of water with light upon it, 10 in like manner the sinners are set apart when they die and are buried in the earth and judgment has not been executed upon them in their lifetime…  12 And in this manner is a separation made for the souls of those who make the suit…Such has been made for the souls of the people who are not righteous, but sinners and perfect criminals; they shall be together with (other) criminals who are like them…” 1st Enoch 22:9-13;     

 

h)  The ancient descensus literature parallels Josephs Theology:

For example, the bible tells us: “The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live. John 5:25) and the early descensus narratives describe this in terms as clear as Smiths and that parallel Smiths theology.  For example, in the gospel of Nicodemus, as Matt 27:52 tells us, at the time of the resurrection of Christ, the bodies of other saints “who had slept”  arose from the tombs and went into the holy city and appeared to many”.

This ancient decensus narrative describes the two sons of Rabbi symeon who had both died, and had been in the spirit world and had resurrected at the time of Jesus.  These two resurrected sons describe the spirit world and what happened in a narrative that both parallels Joseph Smiths descriptions and witnesses to us this wonderful early Christian doctrine.  The ancient narrative begins with the Christian leaders marveling at the resurrection of Jesus and Joseph of Arimathea relates that the two sons of Symeon were among the resurrected.  The group then goes to find the men who then describe what they witnessed in the spirit world.

 

“Joseph said: “Why then do you marvel at the resurrection of Jesus?  It is not this that is marvelous, but rather that he was not raised alone, but raised up many other dead men who appeared to many in Jerusalem.  And if you do not know the others, yet Symeon, who took Jesus in his arms, and his two sons, whom he raised up, you do know.   For we buried them a little while ago.  And now their sepulchers are to be seen opened and empty, but they themselves are alive and dwelling in Arimathaea.”  They therefore sent men, and they found their tombs opened and empty.  Joseph said: “Let us go to Arimathaea and find them.” 

After finding the young men, the two young men begin to describe what they experienced as spirits in the spirit world:

“We, then were in Hades with all who have died since the beginning of the world.  And at the hour of midnight there rose upon the darkness there something like the light of the sun and shone, and light fell upon us all, and we saw one another.  And immediately our father, Abraham, along with the patriarchs and the prophets, was filled the joy, and they said to one another: “This shining comes from a great light.”   The prophet Isaiah, who was present there, said : “This shining comes from the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.  This I prophesied when I was still living: The land of Zabulon and the land of Nephthalim, the people that sit in darkness saw a great light.”  Then there came into the midst another, an anchorite from the wilderness.  The patriarchs asked him: “Who are you?”

He replied: “I am John, the last of the prophets, who made straight the ways of the Son of God, and preached repentance to the people for the forgiveness of sins.   ....And for this reason he sent me to you, to preach that the only begotten Son of God comes here, in order that whoever believes in him should be saved, and whoever does not believe in him should be condemned.  

Notice the dead are cognizant and communicative and are being preached the gospel.  This parallels Josephs Theology very closely.

“Now when John was thus teaching those who were in Hades, the first-created, the first father Adam heard, and said to his son Seth: My son, I wish you to tell the forefathers of the race of men and the prophets where I sent you when I fell into mortal sickness.”    

Seth then relates the promise of a savior and a resurrection to Adam.  Again, the parallels to Joseph Smiths theology is close and unmistakable.  The narrative continues:

“...the gates of brass were broken in pieces and the bars of iron were crushed and all the dead who were bound were loosed from their chains, and we with them.  And the King of glory entered in like a man, and all the dark places of Hades were illumined.”… Hades at once cried out : “We are defeated,.......”You were nailed to the cross, and laid in the sepulcher, and now you have become free and have destroyed all our power...While Hades was thus speaking with Satan, the King of glory stretched out his right hand, and took hold of our forefather Adam and raised him up.  Then he turned also to the rest and said: “Come with me, all you who have suffered death through the tree which this man touched.  For behold, I raise you all up again through the tree of the cross.  With that he put them all out....“ Thus he went into Paradise holding our forefather Adam by the hand…”

The end of the narrative continues to both parallel and confirm Joseph Smiths theology:

“All this we saw and heard, we two brothers who also were sent by Michael the archangel and were appointed to preach the resurrection of the Lord, but first to go to the Jordan and be baptized.  There also we went and were baptized with other dead who had risen again.  Then we went to Jerusalem also and celebrated the Passover of the resurrection.  But now we depart, since we cannot remain here.  And the love of God the Father and the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.”    The Gospel of Nicodemus-  Christ’s descent into hell  

The LDS will note that many, many parallels exist in ancient Judeo-Christian literature which parallels their own.  Such parallels are literary witnesses that Joseph Smiths theology parallels and mirrors theirs.   This is why the LDS can use such ancient literature without causing doctrinal ripples while other Christian movements are unable to use such ancient literature.   

The LDS claim their theology parallels the ancient Judeo-Christian theology.  It should not bother the LDS in the least if others discover some discrete parallels (the religious historians cannot help but discover and create historical models that parallel the LDS claims – (hence the origin of the Heiser theological funnel”) The fact that Joseph Smiths theology mirrors the ancient Judeo-Christian theology are the parallels of importance.

 

In any case, I have already gone through a few years of trying to reason out how Joseph was able to restore so much from early Judeo-Christian theology and I have not, nor have I found anyone else who has been able to give a historically coherent theory with any confirming data as to how Joseph was able to do this without revelation.

In any case, Pyreaux, I hope your own spiritual journey is good and your heart can be at peace with these issues. 

[Pyreaux]

On 9/28/2025 at 12:26 AM, Clear said:

Hi Pyreaux.  Thank you for the references.

I apologize.  It took me a while to find D!cks actual book (archived) and to find and familiarize myself with the partial quotes you have provided.   D!ck explains that the “future state” **** is theorizing about is “heaven” itself.  

 

1)  THE LDS SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED BY PARALLELS TO THEIR THEOLOGY

 

3)  LDS SHOULD CELEBRATE MODERN PARALLEL THEOLOGIES.  HOWEVER, THE CRUCIAL PARALLELS ARE THOSE OF THE LDS WITH ANCIENT JUDEO-CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY.

 

a) The ancient Judeo-Christianity taught man was intelligent and was a “Progressive being” and there were different levels of characteristics.

While Josephs theology may have a hundred parallels with specific modern theories, the fact that his theology closely parallels ancient Judeo-Christian theology is the actual LDS claim and is the most important set of parallels.

“… (one) person is more worthy than (another) person: one because of much property; another because of superlative wisdom of the heart; and another because of intelligence…  2^nd Enoch mp 43:1-3

 Also, as for the glory of those who proved to be righteous on account of my law, those who possessed intelligence in their life, and those who planted the root of wisdom in their hearts – their splendor will then be glorified by transformations, …and receive the undying world which is promised to them.   Baruch 2 51:2-6;

”… ask the Lord that you may receive the intelligence to understand them.”  Hermas 79:6

“…the nature of men is always changeable.  For as we were once, we are no longer, and as we are now, we shall not remain in the future.  Baruch 2 21:13-18;

 

While D!ck suggests Heaven (i.e. The Throne of God) is the “great Governing Power” and that there were levels of authorities there, Joseph (and most Christianities) agree that God, on his Throne IS the “Great Governing power” and I do not see why Joseph gained this principle from D!ck, rather than from his normal Christian upbringing (the source where the rest of us, typically, gained it)

However, Josephs parallel with Ancient Judeo-Christian doctrine is deeper than that of D!ck.

The ancient Testament of Adam relates: “ The heavenly powers  what they are like and how each of their orders is occupied in the service and the plan of this world.  Listen, my beloved, as they are set in order one after another from the bottom, until we reach those who carry our Lord Jesus the Messiah and bear him up.  The lowest order is the angels.  And the plan has been revealed to it by God concerning every human being whom they watch over…   “The second order is the archangels…This is the service: directing everything in this creation according to the plan of God…The third order, which is the Archons...The fourth order, which is authorities.  The fifth order, which is the powers…The sixth order, which is the dominions.  Testament of Adam  4:1-6

 

b)  Josephs theology parallels the ancient doctrine of pre-existence:

Jewish Enoch (of 300 b.c.) parallels Josephs theology when describing the Christ who was with the Father in the beginning, who were separate beings; who was chosen to be the Christ before the world was created.

The Prophet Enoch describes seeing God and Jesus in his Heavenly vision, saying : “At that place, I saw he who is of primordial days,  And his head was white like wool, and there was with him another individual whose face was like that of a human being.  His countenance was full of grace like that of one among the holy angels.   And I asked the one–from among the angels…“Who is this, and from where could he be, and for what reason does he go with him who precedes time?”  And he answered me and said to me, “This is the Son of Man, to whom belongs righteousness, and with whom righteousness dwells.  And he will open all the hidden storerooms; for the Lord of the Spirits has chosen him, and he is destined to be victorious before the Lord of the Spirits in eternal uprightness.  This Son of Man whom you have seen is the One who would remove the Kings and the mighty ones from their comfortable seats, and the strong ones from their thrones.   1st Enoch 46:1-6;    

 

c)  The ancient theology of pre-existence of individuals parallels Josephs theology:

Jewish Haggadah literature relates : “The spirit and body of man are united in this way: When a woman has conceived...God decrees what manner of human being shall become of it – whether it shall be male or female, strong or weak, rich or poor, beautiful or ugly, long or short, fat or thin, and what all it’s other qualities shall be…  God makes a sign to the angel appointed over the souls, saying, “Bring me the soul so-and-so, which is hidden in Paradise, whose name is so-and-so, and whose form is so-and-so.”  The angel brings the designated soul, and she bows down when she appears in the presence of God, and prostrates herself before him.  At that moment, God issues the command, “Enter this sperm.”  The soul opens her mouth, and pleads: “O Lord of the world!  I am well pleased with the world in which I have been living since the day on which you called me into being.  Why do you now desire to have me enter this impure sperm, I who am holy and pure, and a part of your glory?”  God consoles her: “The world which I shall cause you to enter is better than the world in which you have lived hitherto, and when I created you, it was only for this purpose.” …

Then angel then shows the spirit others (some of whom had been mortal and returned):  

“The Angel then says to the soul, “Do you know who these are?” She replies in the negative, and the angel goes on:  “These whom you behold here were formed, like you, in the womb of their mother.  When they came into the world, they observed God’s Torah and his commandments.  Therefore they became the partakers of this bliss which you see them enjoy.    Know, also, you will one day depart from the world below, and if you will observe God’s Torah, then will you be found worthy of sitting with these pious ones.  But if not, you will be doomed to the other place”  The Haggadah (The Soul of Man);   

 

d)  Smiths theology restores and parallels ancient Jewish theology regarding the tutoring reason for mortality:

The Jewish Zohar narrative relates:    “…the soul of the female and the soul of the male, are hence preeminent above all the heavenly hosts and camps.  It may be wondered, if they are thus preeminent on both sides, why do they descend to this world only to be taken thence at some future time?  “This may be explained by way of a simile: A king has a son whom he sends to a village to be educated until he shall have been initiated into the ways of the palace.  When the king is informed that his son is now come to maturity, the king, out of his love, sends the matron his mother to bring him back into the palace, and there the king rejoices with him every day.   THE ZOHAR - A SEAL UPON YOUR HEART   

Josephs theology regarding Embassaries from Heaven to Mankind:   For example, the early apo Abraham narrative describes three angelic messengers sent to Adam to teach him the gospel (among other things).  The Narrative starts with Adam, teaching his son regarding the visitation of angels to him after being exiled from the Garden of Eden.  Adam taught his son: “Now I was sleeping in the thought of my heart, and I saw before me three men whose appearance I could not recognize…The men [spoke] , saying to me, ‘Rise up, Adam, from the sleep of death, and hear about the aeon and the seed of that man to whom life has come, the one who came forth from you and from Eve your wife.  When I heard these words from those great men who stood before me, we sighted in our hearts, I and Eve.  And the Lord, the God who created us, stood in our presence and said to us, ‘Adam, why were you sighing in your hearts?  Do you not know that I am God who created you, and that I breathed into you a spirit of life for a living soul?’  “Then darkness fell over our eyes.  Then the god who created us created a son from himself [and Eve your mother]...”[then I was defiled] in the thought of my heart.  I recognized a sweet desire for your mother.  Then the vigor of our eternal knowledge perished in us...“Now then, my son Seth, I will reveal to you what was revealed to me by those men whom I once saw before me.   The Apocalypse of Adam  2:1-6-7, ch 3:1;    

Adam describes not only the visitation of angels to him, but also that once fallen, he felt physical desire for his wife and posterity was possible.  As Baruch explained : “For when he transgressed, untimely death came into being, mourning was mentioned, affliction was prepared, illness was created, labor accomplished, … the conception of children came about, the passion of the parents was produced...”  Baruch 2 55:6;    

 

e)  The ancient doctrine that Men are punished for their own sins and not Adams transgression parallels Josephs theology:

Apo Baruch explains : “But now, turn yourselves to destruction, you unrighteous ones who are living now, for you will be visited suddenly, since you have once rejected the understanding of the most High.  For his works have not taught you, nor has the artful work of his creation which has existed always persuaded you.   Adam is, therefore not the cause, except only for himself, but each of us has become our own Adam.”  The apocalypse of Baruch 54:17-19;  

 

f)  The promise of God to Adam that he would provide a savior for him and resurrect him in the last days parallels Joseph Smiths theology:

“…and God called Adam and said, “Adam, Adam.”  And the body answered from the ground and said, “Here I am, Lord.”  2 And the Lord said to him, “I told you that you are dust and to dust you shall return.  3 Now I promise to you the resurrection; I shall raise you on the last day in the resurrection with every man of your seed.” Life of Adam and Eve (apocalypse) 41:1-3; 

In the ancient testament literature, the promise is explicit (Adam is again, teaching Seth):

“Adam said to Seth, his son, “You have heard my son, that God is going to come into the world after a long time, (he will be) conceived of a virgin and put on a body, be born like a human being, and grow up as a child.  He will perform signs and wonders on the earth, will walk on the waves of the sea. ... He spoke to me about this in Paradise after I picked some of the fruit in which death was hiding: ‘Adam, Adam do not fear.  You wanted to be a god; I will make you a god, not right now, but after a space of many years.  I am consigning you to death, and the maggot and the worm will eat your body.’...But after a short time there will be mercy on you because you were created in my image, and I will not leave you to waste away in Sheol.  For your sake I will be born of the Virgin Mary.  For your sake I will taste death and enter the house of the dead....4'And after three days, while I am in the tomb, I will raise up the body I received from you.  And I will set you at the right hand of my divinity, and I will make you a god just like you wanted.  And I will receive favor from God, and I will restore to you and to your posterity that which is the justice of heaven.” ”  Testament of Adam  3:1-4;   

 

g) The ancient Judeo-Christian literature regarding the world of Spirits parallels Josephs theology.  The prophet Enoch describes cognizant, intelligent, and communicative spirits in the world of spirits.  The righteous and unrighteous are separated. Etc.

“At that moment I raised a question regarding him and regarding the judgment of all, For what reason is one separated from the other?  9 And he replied and said unto me, “These three have been made in order that the spirits of the dead might be separated.  And in the manner in which the souls of the righteous are separated  (by) this spring of water with light upon it, 10 in like manner the sinners are set apart when they die and are buried in the earth and judgment has not been executed upon them in their lifetime…  12 And in this manner is a separation made for the souls of those who make the suit…Such has been made for the souls of the people who are not righteous, but sinners and perfect criminals; they shall be together with (other) criminals who are like them…” 1st Enoch 22:9-13;     

 

h)  The ancient descensus literature parallels Josephs Theology:

For example, the bible tells us: “The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live. John 5:25) and the early descensus narratives describe this in terms as clear as Smiths and that parallel Smiths theology.  For example, in the gospel of Nicodemus, as Matt 27:52 tells us, at the time of the resurrection of Christ, the bodies of other saints “who had slept”  arose from the tombs and went into the holy city and appeared to many”.

This ancient decensus narrative describes the two sons of Rabbi symeon who had both died, and had been in the spirit world and had resurrected at the time of Jesus.  These two resurrected sons describe the spirit world and what happened in a narrative that both parallels Joseph Smiths descriptions and witnesses to us this wonderful early Christian doctrine.  The ancient narrative begins with the Christian leaders marveling at the resurrection of Jesus and Joseph of Arimathea relates that the two sons of Symeon were among the resurrected.  The group then goes to find the men who then describe what they witnessed in the spirit world.

 

“Joseph said: “Why then do you marvel at the resurrection of Jesus?  It is not this that is marvelous, but rather that he was not raised alone, but raised up many other dead men who appeared to many in Jerusalem.  And if you do not know the others, yet Symeon, who took Jesus in his arms, and his two sons, whom he raised up, you do know.   For we buried them a little while ago.  And now their sepulchers are to be seen opened and empty, but they themselves are alive and dwelling in Arimathaea.”  They therefore sent men, and they found their tombs opened and empty.  Joseph said: “Let us go to Arimathaea and find them.” 

After finding the young men, the two young men begin to describe what they experienced as spirits in the spirit world:

“We, then were in Hades with all who have died since the beginning of the world.  And at the hour of midnight there rose upon the darkness there something like the light of the sun and shone, and light fell upon us all, and we saw one another.  And immediately our father, Abraham, along with the patriarchs and the prophets, was filled the joy, and they said to one another: “This shining comes from a great light.”   The prophet Isaiah, who was present there, said : “This shining comes from the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.  This I prophesied when I was still living: The land of Zabulon and the land of Nephthalim, the people that sit in darkness saw a great light.”  Then there came into the midst another, an anchorite from the wilderness.  The patriarchs asked him: “Who are you?”

He replied: “I am John, the last of the prophets, who made straight the ways of the Son of God, and preached repentance to the people for the forgiveness of sins.   ....And for this reason he sent me to you, to preach that the only begotten Son of God comes here, in order that whoever believes in him should be saved, and whoever does not believe in him should be condemned.  

Notice the dead are cognizant and communicative and are being preached the gospel.  This parallels Josephs Theology very closely.

“Now when John was thus teaching those who were in Hades, the first-created, the first father Adam heard, and said to his son Seth: My son, I wish you to tell the forefathers of the race of men and the prophets where I sent you when I fell into mortal sickness.”    

Seth then relates the promise of a savior and a resurrection to Adam.  Again, the parallels to Joseph Smiths theology is close and unmistakable.  The narrative continues:

“...the gates of brass were broken in pieces and the bars of iron were crushed and all the dead who were bound were loosed from their chains, and we with them.  And the King of glory entered in like a man, and all the dark places of Hades were illumined.”… Hades at once cried out : “We are defeated,.......”You were nailed to the cross, and laid in the sepulcher, and now you have become free and have destroyed all our power...While Hades was thus speaking with Satan, the King of glory stretched out his right hand, and took hold of our forefather Adam and raised him up.  Then he turned also to the rest and said: “Come with me, all you who have suffered death through the tree which this man touched.  For behold, I raise you all up again through the tree of the cross.  With that he put them all out....“ Thus he went into Paradise holding our forefather Adam by the hand…”

The end of the narrative continues to both parallel and confirm Joseph Smiths theology:

“All this we saw and heard, we two brothers who also were sent by Michael the archangel and were appointed to preach the resurrection of the Lord, but first to go to the Jordan and be baptized.  There also we went and were baptized with other dead who had risen again.  Then we went to Jerusalem also and celebrated the Passover of the resurrection.  But now we depart, since we cannot remain here.  And the love of God the Father and the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.”    The Gospel of Nicodemus-  Christ’s descent into hell  

The LDS will note that many, many parallels exist in ancient Judeo-Christian literature which parallels their own.  Such parallels are literary witnesses that Joseph Smiths theology parallels and mirrors theirs.   This is why the LDS can use such ancient literature without causing doctrinal ripples while other Christian movements are unable to use such ancient literature.   

The LDS claim their theology parallels the ancient Judeo-Christian theology.  It should not bother the LDS in the least if others discover some discrete parallels (the religious historians cannot help but discover and create historical models that parallel the LDS claims – (hence the origin of the Heiser theological funnel”) The fact that Joseph Smiths theology mirrors the ancient Judeo-Christian theology are the parallels of importance.

 

In any case, I have already gone through a few years of trying to reason out how Joseph was able to restore so much from early Judeo-Christian theology and I have not, nor have I found anyone else who has been able to give a historically coherent theory with any confirming data as to how Joseph was able to do this without revelation.

In any case, Pyreaux, I hope your own spiritual journey is good and your heart can be at peace with these issues. 

Cool beans, it may take me a bit to read and put together a full reply to your questions, if I'm able at all, I'm not the best for the task. Awesome poster. I hope you'll stick around for a while.

That's an exceptionally detailed and critical analysis of the alleged parallels between Thomas' The Philosophy of a Future State and Joseph Smith's revelations. You are correct in observing that many of the supposed "parallels" rely on common biblical themes and that the specific theological details often diverge significantly.

Your critique highlights the importance of distinguishing between:

Shared Vocabulary: Terms common to contemporary Christian discourse (e.g., "Throne of God," "angels/embassies").

Shared General Concepts: Broad philosophical ideas (e.g., a multi-part soul, a hierarchy of beings, post-mortal progress) found across various religious and philosophical traditions.

Specific, Unique Parallels: Concrete, detailed concepts or phrases that are the direct signature of an influence.

You are correct that the Book of Abraham does not use the phrase "common centre". Thomas uses it to describe the universe's mechanical rotation. Joseph Smith's scripture focuses the "center" concept on a single, literal star, Kolob, not the entire systems of the universe.

You are correct in your assessment of Thomas' intention and theology. Thomas does not call the "Throne of God" a star or planet. Given his belief in God's universal omnipresence (which you correctly noted), he struggles to reconcile this with the biblical tradition of a specific, localized "throne."

So he is describing a massive, central region or body of creation, a "material creation", that is so grand it could metaphorically represent the omnipresent God's "throne." This is distinct from Joseph Smith’s theology, which posits God as a corporeal being requiring a specific, organized location (a "residence").

Smith did not adopt Thomas' model. To claim Joseph Smith must have gotten the biblical term "Throne of God" from reading Thomas' book (which quotes the Bible) is illogical and assumes the least likely possibility. The term "Throne of God" is ubiquitous in Christian culture. Thomas explicitly sources it from the Bible (e.g., Revelation 4:2, Psalms 11:4).

The specific parallel cited by critics is not the term itself, but the use of the term - in a cosmic hierarchy context:

Thomas is looking for a physical reality that corresponds to the biblical "Throne of God" to serve as a common center for all other systems. 

In both cases, the "Throne of God," exerts cosmic control. This specific combination is the parallel, but the source for the term itself is unquestionably the Bible for both authors.

The most concrete evidence that Joseph Smith or his close associates were aware of and used Thomas' ideas comes from Oliver Cowdery's public writings.

In December 1836, Cowdery's newspaper, the Messenger and Advocate, published lengthy, uncredited excerpts from Thomas' book, including passages about the plurality of worlds. W. W. Phelps wrote a poem in the same year that contains language highly reminiscent of Thomas' writings.

While this doesn't prove Joseph Smith personally read the entire book before receiving the Book of Abraham revelation (circa 1835-1842), it confirms the ideas and specific terminology from Thomas' work were in the immediate intellectual atmosphere of the early Mormon leadership when the Book of Abraham was being produced.

Thomas does not explicitly use the phrase "uncreated beings" to describe the spirits on other worlds. This phrase is a summary used by critics to capture the implication of his argument against creation ex nihilo (creation out of nothing) and his discussion of eternal matter. Like Smith, Thomas supported the idea that matter is eternal and indestructible (they agree on some level). His "intelligences" are the inhabitants of an infinite, eternal creation, often called "progressive beings" advancing toward perfection.

Thomas places man at the bottom of the intellectual scale. Smith's theology places man at the pinnacle of this creation, as the offspring of God.

The parallel relies on two specific pieces of vocabulary:

"Intelligences": Used to describe the spiritual/intellectual inhabitants of the cosmos.

"Progressive Beings": Used to describe the ongoing, eternal nature of these spirits' development.

Edited October 3, 2025 by Pyreaux

[Clear]

Hi Pyreaux

As a convert to Restorational theology and the Restorational movement, I am (probably) less knowledgeable regarding the history of the LDS role in the restoration and more knowledgeable in ancient Judeo-Christian History and it’s literature (which describes their early beliefs and practices.  However, I find the two are equivalents in profoundly important ways. 

For example, while (I personally think) the LDS ought to applaud ANY parallel thinking to their theology, from any source or time period, it is because anyone or any group that has discovered or is discovering true principles are to be congratulated and not dismissed.

The astounding number and type of parallels between Restorational theology and ancient Judeo-Christian theology were, from the moment I discovered them, astounding.

For example, early on in my investigation of Restorational theology, I remember the first time I encountered a quote by Joseph smith where he explained the plan surrounding the atonement in the most simple, yet profound terms saying:
 

"The first principles of man are self-existent with God. God himself, finding he was in the midst of spirits and glory, because he was more intelligent, saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest could have a privilege to advance like himself. The relationship we have with God places us in a situation to advance in knowledge. He has power to institute laws to instruct the weaker intelligences, that they may be exalted with Himself, so that they might have one glory upon another, and all that knowledge, power, glory, and intelligence, which is requisite in order to save them in the world of spirits. - Joseph Smith "

On the surface, the quote is so expansive that it is "too big a concept to handle". However, as I’ve broken it down and looked at it, it is completely consistent with the most ancient literature and teachings regarding God, the Fathers, overall plan for man, (of which the atonement is the central mechanism for making the plan work.) For example :


1) "...God...finding he was in the midst of spirits and glory..." (Joseph Smith)

Joseph Smith’s restoration of this principle harkens back to the earliest testimonies and descriptions of the ancient scriptures and texts that describe the innumerable number of spirits existing in the beginning and what God intended to do with these innumerable spirits. Regarding his vision of pre-creation heaven, Enoch records :

"No one could come near unto him from among those that surrounded the tens of millions (that stood) before him". 1 En 14:23; In other parts of Enochs’ vision he testifies : "I saw a hundred thousand times a hundred thousand, ten million times ten million, an innumerable and uncountable (multitude) who stand before the glory of the Lord of the Spirits. (1 Enoch 40:1-2)" God was in the midst of spirits of all the spirits who ever lived or will live on this earth in the future according to these ancient Old Testament scriptures (Enoch IS in the eastern Old Testament)



2) "...because he was more intelligent, saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest could have a privilege to advance like himself..." (Joseph Smith)

The ancient Jews taught that God had instituted a divine plan. This concept is interwoven into concepts that are stated repeatedly, such as "Before all things came to be, he [God] has ordered all their designs" (4Q255-264)

The Prophet Enoch describes the earliest stages of this plan before it was known among the heavenly host : "for not even to my angels have I explained my secrets, nor related to them their origin, nor my endless and inconceivable creation which I conceived." (2nd Enoch 24:3) In these ancient descriptions of his Plan, God the Father seems to take great care in both the planning of and in ensuring the deep involvement in the Heavenly Hosts (for whose benefit the plan existed).

Quote: ....I (the Father), in the midst of the light (glory), moved around in the invisible things, like one of them, as the sun moves around from east to west and from west to east. But the sun has rest; yet I did not find rest, because everything was not yet created. And I thought up the idea of establishing a foundation, to create a visible creation." (2nd Enoch 24:4)

Though ALL spirits existed in the beginning, they were in no way equals (just as we are not equal now). Among them were the more intelligent and gifted; those who were more full of grace and truth than others. In this context Ignatius explains that among those spirits was "Jesus...who before the ages was with the father.. (Ignatius :6:1).

The ancient records show the Father and Jesus, from early on, possessed a great similarity and unity. Jesus was given greater authority and administrated much of the Father’s plan from early on (God’s "right hand" was one of the Pre-Creation Jesus’ appellations).

Diognetus reaffirms the LDS restoration of this ancient doctrine in Diognetus teachings: "And when he revealed it (his plan) through his beloved Child and made known the things prepared from the beginning, he gave us to share in his benefits and to see and understand things which none of ever would have expected.. So then, having already planned everything in his mind together with his child... (Diog 301:8-11)

Ancient pre-creation council histories demonstrates that most of the spirits were joyous at having this opportunity to progress. For example the question God places to Job was not merely a rhetorical instruction, but a reminder of Jobs personal pre-creation theology. Quote: "Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof; When the morning stars sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy? (Job 38:4-7)

Enoch says that he saw : " the fountain of righteousness,...surrounded completely by numerous fountains of wisdom. All the thirsty ones drink (of the water) and become filled with wisdom. (Then) their dwelling places become with the holy, righteous, and elect ones. ‘

Who among these spirits viewing this spectacle would not have wanted to drink from that same wisdom and take their place with others who were holy, righteous and elect?

It is of such a pre-creation council of spirits that Enoch testifies : Quote: " At that hour, that the Son of Man was given a name, in the presence of the Lord of the spirits, the Before-Time; even before the creation of the sun and moon, before the creation of the stars, he was given a name in the presence of the Lord of the Spirits. He will becomes a staff for the righteous ones in order that they may lean on him and not fall. He is the light of the gentiles...All those who dwell upon the earth shall fall and worship before him; they shall glorify; bless and sing the name of the Lord of the Spirits. For this purpose he became the Chosen One; And he has revealed the wisdom of the Lord of the Spirits to the righteous and the holy ones...in the name of the Lord of the Spirits; and because they will be saved in his name and it is his good pleasure that they may have life." (1 Enoch 48:1-7)

Long before Diognetus bore his New Testament Era testimony, Old Testament Era Enoch had bore the SAME visionary testimony: In Enoch’s vision, he see’s pre-creation Jesus with the Father and asks who this individual (Jesus) is and what role he has in the Father's Plan: Quote: "At that place, I saw the Beginning of days [i.e. the Father] And his head was white like wool, and there was with him another individual, whose face was like that of a human being. His countenance was full of grace like that of one among the holy angels. And I asked the one – from among the angels –who was going with me,..."Who is this and from where could he be, and for what reason does he go with him who precedes time?" And he answered me and said to me, "This is the Son of Man, to whom belongs righteousness, and with whom righteousness dwells...the Lord of the spirits has chosen him, and he is destined to be victorious before the Lord of the spirits in eternal uprightness...." (1 Enoch 46:1-4)

This is the testimony of Old Testament Enoch, it is the testimony of New testament Diognetus. It is the testimony of Joseph Smith (if I am correct in my interpretation). The parallels between the LDS restoration and the ancient teachings regarding the plan of salvation and the atonement continue even in discrete details the ancients taught. For example:

 

3) The relationship we have with God places us in a situation to advance in knowledge (Joseph Smith)

The ancient texts form the foundation for the relationship of these various spirits of men, of angels, and of the Pre-creation Jesus to the “Father of Spirits” (as they called “The Lord God”). For example (though it's simply a gloss over what are deep concepts)


A) : The physical creation was accomplished in order to allow men to advance in knowledge:
Though multiple creation accounts exist, the earlier accounts make it clear both that God created the Planets and Stars (often translated “orbs” or “circles”) out of “lessor”, or more chaotic material, and, importantly, he commissioned the Pre-creation Jesus (Often called “the word” or his “right hand”) to Administrate over this material creation of an earth which he will populate with embodied spirits for their education and testing.

For example : The Jewish Geninza 4Q texts are clear that the plan is the Father’s plan and that he “determined all your works before you created them, together with the host of your spirits and the assembly of your holy ones… - all your designs for the end of time..” He counsels with those whose involvement he wants, but it is his plan : “Moreover the Holy One, blessed be he, does nothing in his world without first taking counsel with them; then he acts, as it is written” (3Enoch :4 283). The Jewish teaching that the physical creation was accomplished for the purpose of advancing mankind is is the same tradition as the early Christians held. New Testament Hermas taught : “...don’t you understand how great and mighty and marvelous God’s glory is, because he created the world for the sake of man, and subjected all his creation to man..” (Her 47:2-4).

The physical creation of ancient accounts was accomplished by taking “lessor” or more chaotic matter, and organizing it into a “higher” or more organized and purposeful form such as the organized earth had. Old Testament Enoch describes this process: “And I called out a second time into the very lowest things, and I said, ‘Let one of the (in)visible things come out visibly, solid.’..” (2nd Enoch 26:1). From chaotic debris, the earth and other planets were formed : Quote: “And thus I made solid the heavenly circles (orbs). ...And from the rocks I assembled the dry land; and I called the dry land Earth. “ (2nd Enoch 28:1-2).

And thus, in company with the Pre-Mortal spirit of Jesus (called "the word” or “the right hand” in some accounts), the Father accomplished creation. Quote: I said, “O Lord, you spoke at the beginning of creation, and said on the first day, ‘Let heaven and earth be made, ‘ and your word accomplished the work...Again, on the second day, you created the spirit of the firmament and commanded him to divide and separate the waters...On the third day you commanded the waters to be gather together...For your word went forth, and at once the work was done. “ (4th Enoch 3:38-42).

I think it is this closely unified and joint administration that contributes to much of the later confusion between Father and Son in later doctrines though the early texts it is taught that they are two individuals that are profoundly unified in PURPOSE.


B) . The Administrative organization was accomplished to allow men to advance in knowledge:

It is Baruch that reminds us of the innate ability of the spirit of men to advance in knowledge. He says Quote:
“For the nature of men is always changeable. For as we were once, we are no longer, and as we are now, we shall not remain in the future. For if an end of all things had not been prepared, their beginning would have been senseless”. 2 Baruch 21:16-17

Changeable willful spirits were given a choice : In the ancient accounts, the spirits of men were allowed to choose to take part in this plan, just as they are allowed to choose what they will do in this life. I’ll skip the “war in heaven” and the controversy with Lucifer that was a central part of it and simply mention that there were recalcitrant spirits of which the Jews said : “God had not chosen them from ancient eternity. Before they were created (in the body), he knew what they would do. “ (Geninza A+B 4Q266) “ still, even of the less valiant spirits they said :“he taught them through those anointed by the Holy Spirit…”.

There were important principles underlying this fairness. For example, though God knows their nature, they needed to discover their own nature. God said : Quote: “And I gave him his free will; and I pointed out to him the two ways –light and darkness. And I said to him, ‘This is good for you, but that is bad’; ...so that it might become plain who among his race loves me. Whereas I have come to know his nature, he does not know his own nature.”... (2 enoch 30:15-16)

Even those who are to remain unrewarded, are to learn why they remained unrewarded. “It is true that man would not have understood my judgment if he had not received the Law and if he were not instructed with understanding. But now, because he trespassed, having understanding, he will be punished because he has understanding." (2 baruch 15:5-6).

This principle the ancient taught that “before he created them He knew their thoughts…” (geninza) is not just true of the wicked spirits, but it was also true of the good and valiant spirits as well. Jeremiah the prophet was told "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations." (Jeremiah 1:5)

Thus, God’s planning extended not merely to such great roles as prophets, but in teaching his son’s the nature of the souls agreement to come to earth, Enoch taught his sons regarding the “covenant of God, while they are even in their mother’s womb....that even before any person was in his mother’s womb, individually a place I prepared for each soul, as well as a set of scales and a measurement......” As if to make sure his sons understand the import of this doctrine, Enoch repeats the same doctrine again in just a few lines: “For I am swearing to you, my children, that before any person existed, a place of judgment was prepared for him and the scale and the weight by means of which a person will be tested were prepared there ahead of time. " (2 enoch 49:1-3)

Thus the Jewish Dead Sea Scroll that speaks of this plan to “refine them” (the spirits of men) was not forced upon anyone, but all who are here, agreed beforehand, to come to this life.

Since studying the LDS restoration of Ancient and precious things and offering my observations and comparisons to the ancient teachings of the Jews and Christians, I feel like we are necessarily skipping over deep and portentous doctrines, like a rock, skipping across the surface of deep doctrinal waters, touching only lightly upon a point here and there.



4) “He has power to institute laws to instruct the weaker intelligences, that they may be exalted with Himself, so that they might have one glory upon another, and all that knowledge, power, glory, and intelligence, which is requisite in order to save them in the world of spirits.“ - Joseph Smith

There are important principles underlying this statement : For example
1) Mortality is a time of INSTRUCTION and LEARNING
2) Specific knowledge is requisite to save us in the world of spirits
3) How is it that God teaches knowledge that will save us
4) What is the end result of Learning to live the principles that save us


1) Mortality is a time of INSTRUCTION and LEARNING

Thus, the ancient doctrine places mankind in the position of Students, who are to learn the principles God is trying to teach them. Thus Clement II teaches that “we are being trained by the present life” (2 clement 20:2) Thus Ignatius is correct to say to the Ephesians, “I speak to you as my fellow students. For I need to be trained by you in faith, instruction, endurance, and patience. (Ig-eph 3:1 The Apostle Peter’s protégé Clement taught that “through him [Christ] the Master [the Father] has willed that we should taste immortal knowledge”.

New Testament Era Diognetus makes clear that without this “immortal knowledge”, there IS no basis for eternal life. He taught : Quote:
“But the tree of knowledge does not kill, on the contrary, disobedience kills. For it is not without significance that the scriptures record that God in the beginning planted a tree of knowledge and a tree of life in the midst of Paradise, thereby revealing that (eternal) life is through knowledge...For there is neither life without knowledge, nor sound knowledge without true life; therefore each tree stands planted near the other. (Diog 12:2-3)

It is significant that early accounts call Eden’s tree of “knowledge”, the tree of “wisdom”. In Enoch’s vision of heaven he says : [quote] “... And the tree of wisdom, of which one eats and knows great wisdom, (was among them)....This very thing is the tree of wisdom from which your old father and aged mother, they who are your precursors, ate and came to know wisdom; and (consequently) their eyes were opened...” (1Enoch 32:6) And, importantly, the type of wisdom that is gained, includes the type of moral knowledge man was sent here to learn (“there is no [eternal] life without knowledge”).

 
2) Specific knowledge is requisite to save us in the world of spirits

Not all TYPES of knowledge have equal value in learning principles that will bring us joy and harmony in the eternities. The ORDER in which we learn principles is important as well. For example, learning moral laws which underlie and support social harmony are more important than knowledge of how to wage successful war against an another. Learning how to hurt another person, before learning patience to control that knowledge will still not result in joy and harmony, but may result in sadness and disharmony.

When Clement taught that “through him the Master has willed that we should taste immortal knowledge”, he was speaking primarily of moral principles that support a more exalted and glorified existence (i.e. moral and social rules of living in joy and harmony in heaven).

For example: They ancient were taught to learn UNITY

“Focus on unity, for there is nothing better” (Polycarp 1:2). “...let there be one prayer, one petition, one mind, one hope, with love and blameless joy...let all of you run together as to one temple of God, as to one altar, to one Jesus Christ...” (Ignatius to the Magnesians 7:2) For example, when congregations achieved unity, Ignatius honors them : Quote: “I congratulate you who are united with him, as the church is with Jesus Christ and as Jesus Christ is with the father, that all things might be harmonious in unity. (Ign to eph 5:1)

This was NOT taught simply to the Christians, but to the Jews as well. For example, in the Dead Sea Scroll “CHARTER OF A JEWISH SECTARIAN ASSOCIATION” (1QS, 4Q, 5Q), the translators decided not to use the word “community” throughout the translation to describe this group, but rather they used one of the society’s most common self-designations: “YAHAD”, which means “unity”. It was after all, the moral ideal they sought to achieve and the word they used to describe themselves and their higher aspirations.

This is no different than the christian teaching “ Let there be nothing among you which is capable of dividing you, but be united ....with those who lead..” (Ign to Mag 6:2). The principle of UNITY and HARMONY were principles that ALL disciples were taught just as “ the archangels who are over the angels...harmonize all existence, heavenly and earthly...” (2nd Enoch 19:3). If spirits could NOT learn to overcome their undisciplined impulses, there could BE no harmony in heaven, or on earth). This was the pattern Jesus and the Apostles set. Just as Jesus was obedient to HIS Father, the church was to be obedient to their authorities. “Be subject to the Bishop and to one another, as Jesus Christ in the flesh was to the Father, and as the apostles were to Christ and to the Father, that there might be unity, both physical and spiritual". (Ign to Mag 13:2).

The concept of obedience, and “unity” and “oneness” is woven throughout all the ancient texts. When a man “leaves his parents” he is to become “one” (unified) with his wife (Gen 2:24) to the point that Jesus says that the “man and his wife are no longer “twain” but are “one” flesh (matt 19:6). Jesus requests of his Father regarding his disciples that he had “given them the glory that you [the Lord God] gave me, that they may be one as we are one “(NIV jn 17:23). The same unity of which Jesus has with his Father, the disciples were also to achieve (and all the rest of us as far as we are able to emulate Jesus and the disciples). For example: Jesus prays in Jn 17:20, “I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you.”,

If you remove the adherence to this principle of unity, the sociality in heaven cannot BE, nor REMAIN “unified” and “harmonious”. And all who live there MUST live this principle that God is attempting to teach man.

If the atonement is to bring men back to the presence of God, in a more exalted condition; able to live in a holy heaven, then the atonement must also have a mechanism to teach men to live the principles of a heavenly existence. The LDS restoration of these ancient teachings makes clear these ancient teachings regarding what God is doing with man and their relationship to the Atonement of our Savior, Jesus Christ.



"He has power to institute laws to instruct the weaker intelligences, that they may be exalted with Himself, so that they might have one glory upon another, and all that knowledge, power, glory, and intelligence, which is requisite in order to save them in the world of spirits."- Joseph Smith

I believe that the LDS return to ancient principles of learning religious principles is important in understanding what God is doing with man, and man’s role and responsibility to the atonement.

Parallels to LDS theology are not bad, but instead I think the LDS should encourage and celebrate any and all parallels that mirror ancient theology since, (I think) the earliest forms of Judeo-Christianity are most likely the most authentic and correct version of Christianity.

At any rate, the principles of parallels between the LDS and ancient Judeo-Christian movement and its beliefs and its literature are the most important parallels since they demonstrate the very parallel theology the LDS claim to have restored.   Parallels with modern thinkers who are discovering similar principles are, I think, to be lauded and not worried about in the least.

Good luck coming to your own conclusions about parallels and how they should be viewed.

[Kevin Christensen]

Besides Steve Smoot, Jeff Lindsay also provided an important response to Vogel's take on Book of Abraham apologetics.

https://journal.interpreterfoundation.org/book-of-abraham-polemics-dan-vogels-broad-critique-of-the-defense-of-the-book-of-abraham/

The abstract has this:

Quote

 Dan Vogel’s latest book claims to offer clear-cut evidence showing what, when, and how Joseph Smith fraudulently translated the Book of Abraham. While he claims to use an objective approach, he instead weaves a polemical agenda that ignores some of the most important scholarship in favor of the Book of Abraham. He ignores crucial evidence and relies on assumptions and hypotheses as if they were established facts. The arguments of apologists, which he claims to be reviewing and critiquing, are often overlooked or, when treated, attacked without letting readers know the substance of the apologetic argument. He neglects key arguments, and important documents that don’t fit his theory. The work is a valuable tool to explore Book of Abraham polemics, but it is not even-handed scholarship by any means. Vogel’s latest contribution does not overturn the evidence against his paradigm nor overthrow the growing body of insights into the antiquity of the Book of Abraham.

For a specific example of neglect:

Quote

But through all this talk of Shinehah and where it first occurred and when, it was only in preparing this review, prompted by seeing Nibley’s discussion of this issue as one of numerous equally fascinating issues in his tome, that I noticed something astonishing: there is no discussion by Vogel of why Abraham 3’s use of Shinehah is considered evidence for the Book of Abraham or why it matters to Latter-day Saint defenders. It’s as if Vogel is just inoculating readers against a commonly cited evidence without creating any awareness of what the evidence is. One could explain that without giving very much ground by proposing that Shinehah in Abraham 3:13 is just one lucky guess. But Vogel, clearly aware of the argument, doesn’t reveal why some see it as relevant evidence. This is not the dispassionate scholarship promised at the beginning of the book.

There are many other similar nuggets in Nibley’s One Eternal Round, along with fascinating vistas about ancient Egyptian perspectives that help us see the ancient setting of the broad themes of the Book of Abraham. Unfortunately, readers of Book of Abraham Apologetics will not even learn of the existence of Nibley’s magnum opus, for it is never discussed or cited.

Besides ignoring One Eternal Round, Vogel also does not mention Tim Barker's revolutionary FAIR Presentation “Translating the Book of Abraham: The Answer Under Our Heads.” Barker shows that Joseph Smith directed Reuben Hedlock to fill in gaps in Facsimile 2 with characters from the Hor Book of Breathings and in the published facsimiles declares that he has not translated those characters, a significant obstacle for the long standing claim that Joseph Smith mistakenly thought or fraudulently claimed that he had translated the Book of Abraham from the Hor Book of Breathings.  Vogel also fails to mention or engage Will Schryver's FAIR Presentation on the Kirtland Egyptian papers  as an attempt to create a cypher, rather than a dubious approach to translation.

At the end of his long response, Lindsay reports that:

Quote

Overall, Book of Abraham Apologetics: A Review and Critique is an intriguing book, but it doesn’t live up to its claims or even its title. There is plenty of critique, but a severe shortage of review.

FWIW,

Kevin Christensen

Tooele, UT

[Clear]

Hi Kevin Christensen

On 10/6/2025 at 11:03 AM, Kevin Christensen said:

Besides Steve Smoot, Jeff Lindsay also provided an important response to Vogel's take on Book of Abraham apologetics.

 

One problem with a specific critique of the Book of Abraham is that it is a tip of the iceberg in terms of ancient Judeo-Christian literature.   For example, if one is going to criticize a single and specific ancient text that parallels an LDS doctrine such as the Pre-existence and conditions before creation. It isn’t enough to simply criticize the existence of this doctrine in a single text such as the Apocalypse of Abraham that parallels LDS theology.   The context is that there are MANY ancient texts containing the same doctrine.

For examples: 

What does one make of the apostolic Fathers (e.g. Ignatius), Diognetus, 2^nd Clement, or Hermas and their descriptions of pre-creation heaven?    

What about the 300 b.c. Enochian literature that describes innumerable spirits before the throne of God?  The choosing of the Messiah? 

What about Abaton and it’s discussion of Jesus’ volunteering to be the advocate for mankind?    

Even if one dismisses them, what does one do with The Apocalypse of Sedrach and the Greek Apocalypse of Ezra since ALL of these ancient sacred documents tell the same stories? 

What about Jubilees (which remains IN the 2025 Ethiopian biblical canon)?  What about the Jewish Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs which tell the same story (e.g. Napthali 2:2-5).   If one dismisses this specific description of pre-existence, then the Dead Sea Scroll literature then steps in to take its place such as the 4Q damascus Documents, the Thanksgiving Psalms (1QH), or Charter (1QS or 4Q or 5Q).  Does one dismiss ALL of these witnesses. 

What does one do then with the Cave of Treasures texts since they, with all others mentioned, tell the same witness as LDS theology does?

Suppose one dismisses ALL of these ancient witnesses that parallel LDS theology on this point.  Other literature simply steps in with the same set of witnesses of the restoration.

The second treatise of the Great Seth then steps up as a witness, or the Gospel of Thomas (v 49), or the Gospel of Phillip?

 If you dismiss ALL early Christian literature, written by the early Christians themselves where they describe their beliefs that parallel Restorational theology, then still more ancient literature steps in, such as The Apocryphon of James, or Jewish Haggadah (e.g. “the soul of Man”), or Jewish Zohars textual witnesses that parallel LDS theology.

 Does one then have to find a way to dismiss the many other witnesses such as The Gospel of Bartholomew and the Psalms in the Coptic psalm book (e.g. psalm 223) and the Hellenistic Synagogal prayers?

 The point is that while a critic may criticize a specific and single reference to LDS Restorational theology in a single text, there are many, many, many other textual witnesses that must be, somehow, dismissed, in order to secure legitimate dismissal of the restoration of certain specific principles.

 

Even if one simply says “All such literature was written by heretics”, the immediate question then becomes, “why didn’t any orthodox Judeo-Christians leave their written testimonies?  Why ONLY heretics?

 I think that the vast ancient and sacred Judeo-Christian literature in all of it’s various genres is a wonderful and objective evidence for Restorational theology and swatting at a single gnat, will not prove anything.   One must find a way to dismiss a great deal of ancient literary witnesses if one is to honestly dismiss the parallels to LDS Restorational theology.