“I sup[pose] I am not all[ow]d to go into investing[atio]n but what is cont[aine]d in the Bible & I think is so many wise men who wo[ul]d put me to death for treason,” Joseph Smith declared in the King Follett Sermon.[1] Smith then went onto make a claim about the first phrase in Genesis, a claim that Lance Owen noted was in line with the Zohar’s (a Kabbalistic text) reading of Genesis 1:1. Owens also noted that a Nauvoo tutor of JS, Alexander Neibaur, showed knowledge of Kabbalah.[2]

I note in my dissertation, that the reading JS and the Zohar gave of Gen. 1:1 was in line with Plato’s creation story, the Timaeus, as is Abraham chapter 3. Kabbalah was Jewish Neoplatonism.[3] Joseph Smith referenced a lot of Plato and Platonic ideas throughout his theology and likely drew on such ideas in the KFD. (See this video for a BRIEF discussion of Platonic ideas available to the Smiths early on. He asks me some questions at the beginning and I get to the presentation a little before minute 23. So the presentation is shorter than the video).

The point I want to make here, is that in this statement, JS looks like he’s saying that he wanted to discuss a text or texts other than the Bible to make this theological point in the KFD, but that he felt “so many wise men” would strongly object. Exactly who those objecting wise men were he didn’t say, but considering the setting, it would seem had some or perhaps many of his followers in mind.

I’ve long noticed that arguing for Smith being influenced by sources outside the Bible can make Mormons uneasy. My sense is that many find claims of such influence invalidating or calling into question Smith’s claims of revelation: if he could get the idea out of some book, does that mean he didn’t get the idea from God?

Yet, I’ve also noticed that such attitudes seem to exempt the Bible. Smith’s next line in the KFD was, “I shall turn commentator today” as he discusses “In the beginning.” Apparently, JS felt that the only written source that many in his audience would accept for his theological claims was the Bible.

I’ve noticed this tendency in abundant conversations over decades when I tell fellow members about my research or present at MHA: it’s common to get the pushback of Mormons arguing that JS would have gotten idea x from the Bible and not some other source.

No doubt the Bible WAS very important to Smith’s theology (and in early American culture generally) but were some of JS’s ideas novel? Where do his novel ideas come from? Members often point to revelation/God [4] for JS’s unusual ideas, but when I or others find JS’s unusual ideas in other sources, it’s common for apologists to argue for that disputed ideas actually really come out of the Bible.

Which makes me wonder: would pushing that tendency to its logical end mean that JS simply read the Bible and come up with every Mormon idea? If so, wouldn’t THAT call into question JS receiving revelation if every idea was in the Bible?

This reminds me of a conversation I had with Ryan Mullen (who’s commented on a few of these posts) over a decade ago when we were both in student housing at UC Santa Barbara. I brought up some source for some Mormon idea(s), and Ryan pushed back with a biblical claim (can’t remember the exact ideas I’d brought up). I responded, “Why is it okay for Joseph Smith to get ideas from the Bible and not other sources?” (I should have explained my thoughts better than I did). Ryan responded, “because the Bible is a fundamentally different source.” (again, this was a while ago).

And yet, the Book of Mormon (and JS) specifically said the Bible is missing truth (1 Ne 13:24-26) and that there there is divinity in other sources as well. Again, 2 Nephi 29:12: “I shall speak unto all nations and they shall write it.” In the KFD, JS wanted to refer to extra-biblical sources but felt his followers would not allow it. The idea that he then shared was Platonic.

So can we be okay with JS getting ideas from extra-biblical sources? Can Plato and Platonic ideas be among such sources?  (Again see the link above for a brief overview).

[1] Smith, April 6, 1844, Thomas Bullock, 17. josephsmithpapers.org

[2] Lance S. Owens, “Joseph Smith and the Kabbalah: The Occult Connection,” Dialogue 27, no. 3 (1994): 117-94; The Zohar, Pritzker Edition, trans. and comm. by Daniel C. Matt, 6 vols. (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2004) 1:110.

[3] Stephen J. Fleming, “’The Fulenss of the Gospel’: Christian Platonism and the Origins of Mormonism” (PhD Diss. University of California, Santa Barbara, 2014), 413-15, 398-429, 62-64.

[4] I don’t reject God and revelation as influencing Smith, but think that Smith took a “study and faith” approach to learning.