Joseph Smith, Plato, and the Apostasy

At a conference and later book that Jonathan and I both contributed to, Terryl Givens noted the Mormon notion of restoration was quite different than Protestants. Givens quoted Parley Pratt, “We can never understand precisely what is meant by restoration, unless we understand what is lost or taken away.”

“The problems seen by other restorationists,” noted Givens, “from Calvin and Severtus to the Campbellites was unwarranted accrual, not missing elements.” Givens noted Mormon revelations that speak of “no paring away, no stripping back to essentials, but rather, the hint of a vast expansion…. The Bible … was neither complete nor accurate. Neither was it sufficient.”[1]

Protestants wanted to restore primitive Christianity by removing what they saw as non-biblical elements accrued over the millennia, while Joseph Smith wanted to restore elements that had been removed. 1 Nephi 13:26 “thou seest the formation of that great and abominable church, which is most abominable above all other churches; for behold, they have taken away from the gospel of the Lamb many parts which are plain and most precious; and also many covenants of the Lord have they taken away.”

As I note in the video (minute 23-24), the claim that Christianity was corrupted by Greek philosophy was quite common in available Protestant books in Joseph Smith’s day. Smith owned one of the most popular of such books: Johann Lorentz von Mosheim’s Institutes of Ecclesiastical History.[2] But as Givens and 1 Nephi 13 note, Smith taught the opposite: it wasn’t the addition of false ideas after Jesus that was the problem, the problem was the REMOVAL of true principles.

I argue in my dissertation’s introduction that Mosheim attributed a notion of such removal of truth to the early Christian Platonist Ammonius Saccas. Mosheim spends considerable time attacking early Christian Platonists and describes them as having many Mormon ideas—like truth scattered everywhere, there being secret initiation rites, and links to other Mormon ideas elsewhere—ideas Mosheim hated and claimed corrupted Christianity.[3]

Mosheim thus wanted to explain Ammonius’s thought even though we have almost no writings from Ammonius. Mosheim therefore found the similarities in those whom Ammonius taught and attributed those ideas to Ammonius.

Mosheim said that Ammonius Saccas taught that Jesus’s “sole view, in descending upon earth, was … to remove the errors that had crept into the religions of all nations but not to abolish the ancient theology from whence they were derived.” Mosheim went on to say that Jesus’s “only intention was to purify the ancient religion, and that his followers had manifestly corrupted the doctrine of their divine master.”[4]

To “abolish” would be a suppressing or taking away, thus the later followers’ “corruption” that Mosheim claimed Ammonius claimed, would seem to be a taking away. The abundant Mormon ideas in the “ancient religion” and among the Christian Platonists that Mosheim denounced suggests that the removal of those ideas would be a loss of Mormon ideas that Smith restored.

I’ve stated many times that Smith’s later Nauvoo theology was full of Platonic ideas especially the plan of salvation (see Chapter Six of my dissertation as an example). The “vast expansion” that Smith restored had much in common with the ancient theology/religion that Mosheim noted and denounced.

Later Mormon thinkers adopted the Protestant view that Greek philosophy corrupted Christianity. But Joseph Smith specifically rejected such claims, and declared the opposite: truth was missing.

I’ll give more examples in upcoming posts.

[1] Terryl Givens, “’We Have Only the Old Thing’: Rethinking Mormon Restoration,” in Miranda Wilcox and John D. Young eds. Standing Apart: Mormon Historical Consciousness and the Concept of Apostasy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 339-40.

[2] Christopher C. Jones, “The Complete Record of the Nauvoo Library and Literary Institute,” Mormon Historical Studies 10, no. 1 (2009): 192.

[3] Stephen J. Fleming, “’The Fulness of the Gospel’: Christian Platonism and the Origins of Mormonism” (PhD Diss.: University of California, Santa Barbara, 2014). Page 1 for gathering all truth like JS, and 6-16 for a summary of other themes.

[4] Johann Lorentz von Mosheim, Institutes of Ecclesiastical History, trans. Archibald MacLaine (New York, 1821), 1:141, 143. The notion that Jesus’s disciples removed Platonic truth from Christianity probably came from Renaissance Christian Platonist Marsilio Ficino. Hannegraaff, Esotericism and the Academy, 50-51; James Hankins, Plato in the Italian Renaissance (Leiden: Brill, 1990), 1:283-84.

 


Comments

12 responses to “Joseph Smith, Plato, and the Apostasy”

  1. I feel like you’re ignoring the elephant in the room: many Latter-day Saints are convinced Platonic thought corrupted Christianity for completely different reasons than Mosheim. Exhibit A is converting God from a physical being in whose image we were created to an immaterial abstraction, and I’m sure you could expand on that better than I could. Several commenters have raised this objection and I’m sure far more readers are thinking it and thus rejecting the idea that Plato is the real source of truth about God out of hand.

    FWIW, the most detailed description of Greek thought corrupting Christianity I’ve heard came from the clearly atheist chair of the Classics Department at the state university I attended my freshman year (I transferred to BYU after my mission) in a lecture giving us background before reading Dante. He also focused on the nature of God, not what you’re describing from Mosheim. (Also, a lot of stuff from Aristotle.) Of course in his view the corruption started with Paul claiming Jesus was divine, so I’m not really holding him up as an authority except to say that we’re not making this up.

  2. In the original Times and Seasons there was an benign article reprinted referencing Plato and other philosophers that generated this response:

    “We do not make the above extract so much for the intrinsic value of the article, as to show the danger of philosophizing upon religion:—
    Paul was well aware of this course when he
    exclaimed, “beware lest any man spoil you
    through philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of men; after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.” The whole doctrine of salvation, as revealed by God at sundry times, has been diametrically opposed to philosophy. The world by wisdom know not God. Before the flood, and after, men, although they had been created upright, sought out many inventions, which, when viewed closely, all go to put God a great way off,—or to make him out a complete—nothing, showing that without the spirit you cannot know the living God.”

    ——————————
    TIMES AND SEASONS.
    CITY OF NAUVOO,
    THURSDAY, SEPT. 15, 1842.

  3. Stephen Fleming

    Right, the idea that Christianity was corrupted by Greek philosophy was extremely popular before JS, during his life, and remains extremely popular. Adolf von Harnock’s “Hellenization of Christianity” thesis that came out around 1900 has been extremely influential.

    The issue of God’s body is a large and tricky topic, and maybe I’ll give it it’s own post. But here’s a few points.

    1) I think it’s problematic to turn the entirety of JS’s restoration to be about God’s body. Mormonism has a whole lot of other distinctive doctrines (many of which line up with Plato).

    2) JS wasn’t that clear on the nature of God’s body until c. 1840. Lots of Mormons claimed God had a spirit body before then (my point, again, is that JS brought back a whole lot of OTHER doctrines in line with Christian Platonism).

    3) The nature of God’s body isn’t that clear in the NT. As you know, plenty of Christians will argue that the NT does not support God having a flesh body.

    4) Jesus made a lot of changes to the OT. Lots of his changes (like the Sermon on the Mount) look similar to the ethics of Greek philosophy. Jesus lived in a thoroughly Hellenized environment. Alexander took over the area in 332 BC. The Hasmoneans revolted in the mid 2nd century BC, but they practiced a very heavy-handed form of Judaism that Jesus seemed to be against. It looks to me like the first Hellenizer of Christianity was Jesus (sorry if that sounds radical. I’ll post more about that. That’s why I think JS was onto something!)

    5) As I note in the video, Dartmouth professor, John Smith, argued that the ancient theology was corrupting BECAUSE of how material the Stoics were: Stoics said that all spirit was matter and that God had a body. As I note in the video, I see John Smith and other hill-country thinkers likely influencing Joseph Sr. early on (I plan on giving a paper on that at Sunstone if they’ll accept it!)

    6) Again, the notion in Smith’s day was that the ancient theology was bigger than Plato. It went back to ancient sages and included other forms of Greek philosophy like Stoicism.

    7) So a few points. Hellenization in Judea started long before Jesus. Those who really wanted to be distinct and practice the law of Moses vigorously like the Hasmoneans, Jesus seemed to condemn their approach. Mormonism has lots of distinctive doctrines in addition to a God with a flesh body. I think it’s problematic to reduce Mormon theology to that one tenet. There’s reason to believe that JS believed that God with a flesh body was a tenet of the ancient theology that he wanted to restore. John Smith said an embodied God WAS a part of the ancient theology.

    Anyway, this is a complicated topic, but I do think there are several points to consider.

  4. Stephen Fleming

    RL, yeah, I don’t think that was Joseph Smith’s opinion. But a common Protestant one. Lots of Mormons held onto such opinions. Lots of such opinions got printed in the T&S.

  5. Those at the Jospeh Smith papers provide this historical introduction: “JS served as editor for the 15 September 1842 issue, the twenty-second issue in the third volume, of the Times and Seasons, a church newspaper published in Nauvoo, Illinois. He was assisted in his editorial responsibilities by Wilford Woodruff and John Taylor. Together, these three men produced the semimonthly newspaper, including composing its editorial material. While the extent to which JS was involved in the creation and publication of this issue is unclear, as the newspaper’s editor he was responsible for its content…The issue’s editorial content, featured here with introductions to each passage of text for which JS was ultimately responsible, included commentary on the Book of Mormon in light of recent archaeological discoveries, reflections on the risks of philosophizing about religious matters, a condemnation of the way government officials condoned the expulsion of church members from Missouri in 1838, and a report of a recent discourse delivered by Sidney Rigdon to church members in Nauvoo. The issue also included editorials encouraging church members living outside the city to send donations to facilitate the construction of the Nauvoo temple, urging traveling elders to arrange for the free delivery of the Times and Seasons and the Wasp through the postal service, and insisting that JS was consistent in condemning vice and promoting virtue.”

  6. Stephen Fleming

    Yes, Joseph Smith was not a micromanager. Not in the T&S.

    Like Givens said, JS’s views were about embracing a fuller truth, not about setting up boundaries.

    These are the quotes from JS that I begin my dissertation with. And I note they align with how Mosheim described Neo and Christian Platonists.

    “Mormonism is truth, the First Fundamental principal of our holy religion is, that we believe that we have a right to embrace all, and every item of truth, without limitation or without being circumscribed or prohibited by the creeds or superstitious notions of men.” Joseph Smith, letter to Isaac Galland, March 22, 1839.

    “Those real sages … who were sick of those arrogant and contentious sects, which required an invariable attachment to their particular systems. And, indeed, nothing could have a more engaging aspect than a set of men, who, abandoning all cavil and all prejudices in favour of any party, professed searching after the truth alone, were ready to adopt, from all the different systems and sects such tenets as they thought agreeable to it.” Johann Lorenz von Mosheim, discussing Alexandrian Platonism in the first centuries C.E. and its influence on Alexandrian Christianity, Ecclesiastical History, 1:138.

    “[If the] Presbyterians [have] any truth, embrace that. Baptist. Methodist &c. get all the good in the world, [and] come out a pure Mormon.” Joseph Smith, sermon, July 23, 1843.

    “These sages were of opinion that true philosophy, the greatest and most salutary gift of God to mortals was scattered in various portions through all the different sects; and it was, consequently, the duty of every wise man, and more especially of every Christian doctor to gather it from the several corners where it lay dispersed.” Mosheim discussing early Alexandrian Christians including Clement of Alexandria, Ecclesiastical History, 1:139.

    “I cannot believe in any of the creeds of the different denominations, because they all have some things in them I cannot subscribe to though all of them have some thruth [sic]. but I want to come up into the presence of God & learn all things but the creeds set up stakes, & say hitherto shalt thou come, & no further.—which I cannot subscribe to.” Joseph Smith, sermon, October 15, 1843.

  7. Stephen Fleming

    So I’d say the statement RL quoted ins’t consistent with JS’s teachings. JS certainly did not micromanage the TS.

  8. Thanks, Stephen. To me it sounds quite plausible. Would Joseph Smith have consciously thought of Plato or Greek philosophy? I have no idea. I suppose he could have even thought of what he was doing as somehow opposed to Greek philosophy, even while accepting ideas from it.

    (And that really was a great conference. The audience was an order of magnitude larger than what I was used to seeing in sessions at academic conferences, and also more engaged and better informed about the topic of any given paper.)

  9. Vic Rattlehead

    Hello again Stephen! I agree that Smith was trying to restore rather than thin down. I am frequently astounded at some of the similarities and truth the early church fathers had, like Gregory of Nyssa, Origen, and Maximus the Confessor.

    A query for you: Do you think that theology mainly went downhill after Augustine?

    Another thing to mention. I know I take a different view on incorporating ideas from platonism/neoplatonism (as well as other influences like mysticism, particularly Eckhart) but I have found incorporating some of these ideas has helped me to be a better LDS. For example, I really struggled for a while with God not being able to create creatio ex nihilo, but after I learned about emanationism I no longer am concerned with it. I also struggled (because I am inherently an idealistic person) with the idea that matter is not bad and mind and matter are the same, but realizing that matter surely must be good, having emanated from a divine source. (The Good). Additionally I am much more accepting of the more monistic view we have on mind and matter. I now also have a source of morality that does not fall into DCT and a way to assert the primacy of Good and Love.

    In short I think I am better off with these new influences.

  10. I imagine the Great and Abominable Church as a counterfeit of the real thing. And as such it’s going to look like the Savior’s church in a lot of ways even though it’s missing some core elements–such as apostolic authority and the true spirit of revelation that flows through that channel. And these particular elements (IMO) were by far the most important “plain and precious” things to be restored through Joseph Smith.

  11. Stephen Fleming

    Jonathan, the video I posted about Mormon ideas among the Smiths’ contacts while in Vermont and New Hampshire, I think could have set the stage for how JS likely approached all this. There was more truth out there than the Protestant churches allowed.

    And it would seem that JS liked a lot of the theology that was designated a part of what was called “the ancient theology”: ideas like preexistence and eternal matter. Again Mosheim presented Ammonius Saccas as claiming that Christians after Jesus had suppressed the ancient theology. Other contemporary authors gave examples of that suppression.

    So I think the bigger point was that there was a larger ancient truth (with lots of Mormon ideas) that JS felt called to restore. I think it’s likely that he believed that such ideas may have originally gone back to biblical patriarchs: Moses, Noah, Adam. There were claims that such figures taught the ancient theology, but either those texts had been lost, or they were higher truths and thus not written down or distributed.

    The claim was that Plato and Greek philosophers were part of that tradition. So getting ideas from them was okay. Those quotes I posted from JS sound to me like he believed he could get the truth from all sources and didn’t have to be limited by Protestant rules.

  12. Stephen Fleming

    Interesting thoughts, Vic. I do think that JS’s sources (like Mosheim and Enfield) presented a loss of Neo and Christian Platonism when Rome turns Christian, especially in the 5th century. Scholars have argued that Mormonism is anti-Augustinian, and I agree.

    I like Plato. I read it through a Mormon lens, and do think that’s given me insights.

    Jack, indeed, that phrase can be interpreted in a lot of different ways. But there is a lot of Christian Platonism in JS’s Nauvoo theology and there were explanations, like Mosheim’s Ammonius, of how that truth might have been lost in Christianity.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.