This post did exactly as you said it would for a Christian esotericist like myself: deeply piqued my interest in Mormon thought, I am eager to learn more. As any good and honest Christian esotericist, I am involved in the process of synthesizing opposites like Tombergs Hermit, not to make them forced hybrids, but to find that which strives toward real unity. I never fit in to the the perennialist or Pharisee crowd because I refuse to settle and fall for either trap. A devil to the left and a devil to the right so to speak. As an American (New England to be precise and descendent of Mayflower voyagers) and disenfranchised evangelical, the question of the Mormons seems to be an important part of “making sense” of the great unfolding of universal history and my own part in it. I especially appreciate the absence of abstraction that imo lead to the great mess that is the state of western philosophy/theology. Once again, thank you.
thank you, I am glad :) what you described was exactly where I was when I found this treasure and it helped me so much, in fact, I think I am still finding all the ways in which it helped me, how many avenues it opened for me. very interested to see where this takes you.
I just found this post as well, and found it exceptionally interesting. As a Latter Day Saint, I find your summary of what we believe to be the most accurate of any I have ever read from a non-member. Also, having had a deep and long-lived fascination with Hugh Nibley and his works (I'm looking at a complete collection of his work sitting on my library shelf, which I have devoured) I was very pleasantly surprised at your characterization if him as the 20th Century's greatest intellectual, a sentiment with which I fully agree. He's had a profound affect on my understanding of LDS theology, and therefore on my entire world-view. I'm also an avid fan of Terryl and Fiona Givens' work.
There is a new young scholar who has recently emerged on the scene by the name of Adam Miller. He's written a book called "Original Grace," that has affected my world-view as much as anything Givens has written, and I'd like to recommend it to you as a fascinating re-examination of the Protestant view on Original Sin through the lens of Joseph Smith's Restoration theology: https://www.amazon.com/Original-Grace-Adam-S-Miller/dp/1639930248 . The book's value far exceeds its price, in my view. See what you think.
thank you Bruce. you are not the first to tell me this, and it is always very good to hear.
I will check Miller's book, thank you for the recommendation.
lastly, if you're interested in another non-LDS take on LDS theology I highly recommend Bruce Charlton's blog which I mentioned at the end of the article. he was really the one who introduced it to me.
Yes, I've been reading Charlton's terrific blog ever since you mentioned it. It is fun seeing his perspectives mature over time. His insights are fascinating, as are yours!
Regarding Miller's book, I love how he uses a Restoration perspective to reexamine suffering in the world, as well as divine Grace, Justice, and Judgement. Incredible insights! I've shared his book with all of my friends and family. Only a few really get it.
A quick word about the Pearl of Great Price, especially the Book of Moses: as you've noticed, it really is a special gem. I've spend a lifetime studying this book, and uncover new insights each time I open it. I highly recommend continuous review, and especially Chapter 6. I read your beautiful allegory of Edom and Ava, so I imagine that you've discovered some of the deep meaning in that book. Please trust me: it keeps getting deeper and deeper.
I read this whole thing again today, and I find that the ideas are growing on me and becoming more clear over time. Definitely feeling this:
"So it’s not that I came to agree with the Mormons; it’s more that I already agreed with them but I didn’t know. I suspect many a Christian esoterist would find the same thing, and be as surprised as I was."
I think that I'll pick up *Wrestling the Angel*. Great job here, making the case.
Some good news, by the way: Angelico Press said yes to publishing a manuscript of mine. Interestingly enough, the epigraph I chose for it a long while ago is by the songwriter Brandon Flowers—who is a Mormon.
It's called *Ghostian Manifesto: An Esoteric Christian Venture*, and I just e-mailed you the PDF. In particular, I'd say check out pp. 23-26 for an uncanny resonance with how God is a Man in the sky.
"One could of course blame the Mormons themselves for the insufficiency and failure of their missionary efforts, and there may indeed be some of that."
I got off my mission October 2022. Let me tell you, there is PLENTY of that.
I enjoyed your post. Lifelong LDS and have followed Bruce Charlton. It's interesting to see with this fresh outside perspective who we are, and why everybody instinctively knows our beliefs are so different.
Thank you for this article, it has definitely inspired some interest to learn more about Mormonism. The only thing I can remember right now (apart from what's in your article) is that human individuals will eventually grow into planetary spirits, and that certainly accords with Christian esotericism! Although I'm not sure if that's actually to be found in the Mormon scriptures.
"But perhaps more importantly for Christian esoterists, we also notice less familiar ideas. For one, the repudiation of Original Sin;"
I'm not sure I would characterize it as a 'repudiation' of Original Sin, but more that Christian esoteric science deepens the doctrine so that it is reconciled with the guilt of personal karma. I can recognize that my Fall into objective consciousness took place within my astral body before I had incarnated a thinking ego, and therefore independently of my choice, but nevertheless, once such an ego was incarnated, I continued (and still continue) to attach my longing to fragmented sensory desires when I know that longing can be repurposed heavenward.
"Now there is nothing that has not its opposite pole. Just as there can be no North Pole without a South Pole, so there can be no phenomenon such as this sin of the astral body without its opposite pole. Without being able to speak in the ordinary sense of moral wrong on our part, it is our destiny as men to be permeated by Luciferic forces. In a certain respect we can do nothing about it, indeed we must rather be thankful that it happened so. We were obliged, then, to incur a burden for which we cannot in the full sense be held responsible.
In human evolution there is something that is related to this as the North Pole is related to the South Pole. This sin which, in its consequences, is inherited, which represents sin in man of which he is not guilty in the real sense, must be counterbalanced by the possibility of re-ascent, also without merit of his own. Just as without guilt of his own, man was obliged to fall, so he must be able to re-ascend without merit of his own—that is to say, without full merit of his own...
An inflowing power repairs the astral body to the same extent to which it has deteriorated. That is the Atonement, that is what in the true sense is called ‘Grace’. Grace is the concept that is complementary to that of Original Sin. So the Christ Impulse has made it possible for man to become one with Christ, to say with St. Paul: ‘Not I, but Christ in me’, thus giving expression to everything that is designated by the concept of Grace."
thank you for your comment and for the recommendation. i'm yet to delve into Steiner proper, i only know of his doctrines second hand, but i will put this one on the list. i'm always glad to inspire people to explore mormon theology.
I realized years ago that If we are made in the image of God, that means God is much more human than we are. Also in the first decades of Mormonism singing and speaking in tongues was frequent among Mormons.
The same thing happened to the Quakers. George Fox their main leader had a full blown miracle healing ministry and other New Testament Spirit gifts were common among them. Fox’s own words -
“as I had forsaken the priests, so I left the separate preachers also, and those esteemed the most experienced people; for I saw there was none among them all that could speak to my condition. And when all my hopes in them and in all men were gone, so that I had nothing outwardly to help me, nor could tell what to do, then, oh, then, I heard a voice which said, "There is one, even Christ Jesus, that can speak to thy condition"; and when I heard it my heart did leap for joy. Then the Lord let me see why there was none upon the earth that could speak to my condition, namely, that I might give Him all the glory; for all are concluded under sin, and shut up in unbelief as I had been, that Jesus Christ might have the pre-eminence who enlightens, and gives grace, and faith, and power. Thus when God doth work, who shall let (i. e. prevent) it? And this I knew experimentally.”
And from Wikipedia
George Fox performed hundreds of healings throughout his preaching ministry, the records of which were collected in a notable but now lost book titled Book of Miracles. This book was listed in the catalogue of George Fox's work maintained by the Library of the Society of Friends at Friends House, London. In 1932, Henry Cadbury found a reference to Book of Miracles in the catalogue, which included the beginning and ending of each account of a miraculous cure. The book was then reconstructed based on this resource and journal accounts. According to Rufus M. Jones, the Book of Miracles "makes it possible for us to follow George Fox as he went about his seventeenth-century world, not only preaching his fresh messages of life and power, but as a remarkable healer of disease with the undoubted reputation of miracle-worker." The Book of Miracles was deliberately suppressed in favour of printing Fox's Journal and other writings.
interesting. thank you. I don't know much about the quakers, but had the general sense that they used to be radical and now are just another run of the mill liberal church.
It was one of Bruce Charlton's recent posts (4/18/24) that brought me to your excellent site. Although I have been reading Charlton for several years, my introduction to Mormonism came via Harold Bloom's "The American Religion," following a brief foray into ancient Gnosticism. I have thoroughly enjoyed your outstanding post and recommendations. As an aspiring Christian, I am deeply intrigued by your characterization of the Holy Spirit as "an embodied and loving immortal Goddess." Coincidentally, in (nondual) Kashmiri Shaivism, Awareness itself is the blessed Goddess, the Supreme Power who vibrates as the various infinite worlds, the personficiation of the power of fully expanded consciousness. (The Recognition Sutras). There are innumerable affinites and similarities between Mormon theology and Plato, Stoicism and Neoplatonism, as well as Eastern philosophy, for which reason, the Mormon Church strikes me as the most "universal" and 'rational' of Christian churches.
thank you for your comment Reinhardt. I am intrigued by much of what you say, starting with the phrase, which I have never read or head before 'aspiring Christian'. I am curious to know what you mean by it.
as for the characterization of the Holy Spirit as an 'embodied and loving immortal goddess' - did I really write such a thing? Because that is not what I believe at all. My understanding of the Holy Spirit is that, in general, it is Jesus' spirit - and as a category it is every spirit that becomes holy.
I do believe in embodied and immortal goddesses, foremost of which the Virgin Mary (aka Mother Earth) and Mary Magdalene (Sophia) - along with all the other names they have been given elsewhere.
I am also unsure about 'awareness itself' and 'supreme power who vibrate' and 'expanded consciousness'. I highly dislike that kind of new age (and generally Hindu/Buddhist) talk that to me means pretty much nothing (and don't they end in nothing anyway? it seems to be the goal). I believe in beings, and personality. those fields and forces I do not care about.
which leads me to the last part: I don't see many, or any really, affinities between Mormon theology and neoplatonism or eastern philosophy (well, maybe with Plato, Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu, but not platonism or taoism - which I believe to be as far from them in teaching as christianity is far from Jesus). So quite the opposite in fact. And that's what I like about it. So also curious to know wat similarities you see and that I do not.
To answer your question, I consider myself to be 'aspiring' because I view being a Christian as a process of growing into (my own) divine nature. It seems to me, the Mormon belief in a pre-earthly existence and view of mortal life as a preparation or laboratory of experience followed by an afterlife is similar to Plato's myth of Er. But the essential affinity with Plato, to my mind, is the emphasis on the "care of soul," where the soul is "eternal" and is described as bearing the strongest resemblance to God (Alcibiades I). That is to say, God and the soul share the same properties or share in the same image, although what that is/feels like, is not articulated in Western philosophy, as far as I know.
The Mormon afterlife strikes me as a bodily, interpersonal and social existence, and I thought the Mormon figure of God resembled the Stoic concept of god, but only to the extent that both appear to be physical or "material," and both are akin to the Platonic demiurge who organizes the universe, but did not create it. Albeit, the Stoics viewed god as the universe, synonymous with nature itself, quite unlike the personal, relatable God of Mormonism.
The Mormon idea of different strata of afterlife and implied levels of participation in the Divine is what suggested to me the affinity to the neoplatonic emanation of the One and the Kashmiri Saiva "descent of Grace," a hierarchy of being/consciousness, of which embodied, mind-conditioned existence forms the lowest level.
But I suppose such similarities are overshadowed by the differences you point out. Whereas much Indian philosophy/religion tends toward abstract schemas, on the one hand, hence the new age cant, and direct-knowledge (contemplation) on the other hand, Western religion, much as extroverted Western philosophy, is focused on personalities and paradigmatic narratives. Under the assumption that human beings are the same everywhere, I have been trying to find correspondences between Eastern and Western systems of thought, as in a Rosetta Stone of religious intuitions. In this respect, the closest analogy for Holy Spirit in Eastern religion would be the energy or Light of Awareness which in Kashmiri Saivism is personified as a Goddess and consort of God. I misread your reference to the Mother as refering to the holy spirit, which obviously, was not your intent. Thank you for your edifying response.
Wm Jas Tyconoviech referred me back to this post which i first read some time ago and had liked. This read through, I was struck by how Jesus praying to the Father proved things about them, and that the same thing happens in the Book of Mormon, but in the Book of Mormon he clearly had been glorified, whereas in the Bible he is last seen ascending to the Father to be glorified (apart from visions). Glorification did not change this.
This made me look into the book of mormon, but after reading it i am certain that a lot of things said of mormons is slanderous, but at the same time that the religion is a big lie. It may also perhaps, but that might just be my bias from such slanderous input, be that mormonism has signs of hidden moral (a outer and inner layer of the religion, with hidden morals in the holy text for the initiated elite).
That said, the theology, especially in the modified version of genesis, is very weak, and misses alot of the points made by the real Torah (Adam makes the first offering to God? The holy spirit speaks (...) and tells Nephi to kill someone? give me a break). This means the religion does not even have theoretical value.
As for the falsity of the book of mormon, a curious eye need only look at this formulation in Nephi 3, 3:2 ;
"2 Lachoneus, most noble and chief governor of the land, behold, I write this epistle unto you, and do give unto you exceedingly great praise because of your firmness, and also the firmness of your people, in maintaining that which ye suppose to be your right and liberty; yea, ye do stand well, as if ye were supported by the hand of a god, in the defence of your liberty, and your property, and your country, or that which ye do call so."
This way of speaking is very american, and drips of american revolution buzzwords post 1776, which never would have been used by culturally isolated jews thousands of years ago. Liberty and rights? Property? Most nations outside of Europe didn´t have a concept or word for what "rights" were until post 1800. Property was also a dubious concept for the native americans.
I am not sure what the official position is, but as far as I'm concerned it is only natural for a document that came to light and was translated by and through the eyes of a certain century to contain forms of language that reflect it. this is unavoidable. we may not be familiar with the linguistic context of the King James Bible, but for sure the translation reflects the period. I am also not shy in saying that in any transmission of knowledge between humans, there is corruption and sometimes outright forgery and addition. I take great value from the Book of Mormon, but I would never claim it to be perfect, or the word of God as he spoke it, because that really does not exist, except for the people who heard God speak. and they can only use the words they have to tell us about it.
That is a fair point. I do not exclude the possibility that the book is spiritually inspired, or even prophetic, so i can somewhat agree with your point of view. My going theory right now is that Joseph Smith must have fabricated the plates, since by testimony of the otherwise adversarial David Whitmer they did exist.
personally I find there is too much truth in the book, and too much flair and genius in the man, for it to be a fake and him a faker. but everyone needs different things.
The people on Earth believe that higher beings are communicating with them, but you eventually find out that those beings are actually humans from the future who have accessed the fifth dimension. So it made me think a lot of the notion that the gods had once been human in our world.
Of course, there's the same secular-materialist distortion we find everywhere else in our culture; but still, I found that resonance uncanny, and I wasn't expecting it.
I see. I guess the difference with the Mormon view (besides the secularism ofc) is that they would say that you could be human in other worlds. but yes, I see the connection.
In the film, the humans of the future are in another galaxy, not another cosmos altogether—which I guess goes along with the whole materialist distortion. Just as I strongly suspect that what people today think of as UFOs are what we used to recognize as the powers of the air.
This is very intriguing. Until quite recently, I had the typical reaction of repugnance to Mormonism (vaguely associated with polygamy and aliens and Mitt Romney); but I eventually had to realize that 1) I knew almost nothing about it and 2) given my interest in ongoing revelation and the age of the Holy Ghost, it was odd of me to not even hear it out. I'm not sure why that specific conditioning takes a deeper hold than most others.
About the Fall: I do like the notion of the felix culpa. From even a more orthodox standpoint, Eve and Adam would have had only untested freedom that was bound for transgression through naivety or simple curiosity, whereas when we take back Paradise, we will presumably be tempered and immune to sin. So, it looks like this adventure yields a dramatic positive gain, which also implies that the Fall that set it all off couldn't be an altogether negative event.
A point I'm not sure about, though, is whether that gain is strictly for the Creation or whether the gain is also in God Himself. The two views seem to be: 1) God is complete in Himself, and all of Creation is a surplus generated out of His kenosis and love; and 2) God is incomplete in Himself, and He needs the Creation to come to fruition in order for Him to achieve His own fullness. I think I favor the first view, mainly because it suggests that the essence of the Creation is overflow rather than lack. But that also definitely shouldn't be taken to mean that the Creation is somehow arbitrary or superfluous, or that it was possible for God to not create.
thank you for your comment. I used to have the same typical reaction.
regarding the 'completeness' versus 'incompleteness', I think this is the wrong way of looking at it. I always start with the Scriptures, and from them it is clear that God is not the 'absolute monad' who lacks nothing. Freedom and Purpose, in Creation and in dealings with it, seem to be at the center. But these imply not the absolute monad who has nothing to gain, but rather what we would describe as human. But we would not call ourselves 'incomplete' just because we Love, and Create. We would call ourselves lovers and creators. Beings with purpose and freedom. And that is how I look at it. I also take issue with the idea of 'overflow' because this is an automatic process. It is something I don't see as worthy of God. God is the furthest away from a Machine that one can get. I can only worship and pray to a God who is purposeful and loving, not one who has no choice but to create. Because if there is no choice, no freedom in God, then we as free agents are superior to Him (or rather, in this conception, it).
Sure—my idea wasn't to imply a mechanical process. More like how a poet has "no choice" but to create, in the sense that he is driven to fulfill his nature, which is his freedom and perfection. Like William Blake: "The cistern contains; the fountain overflows."
Loved this article. I'm LDS. Studying esotericism is new for me, but I've contemplated all of these topics for years, and I agree with pretty much everything you've said here. I often wish that the mainstream body of the church was not so reticent to speak directly about the similarities between what they believe and other mystical/esoteric practices. I've used the term mystic for a long long time and just started identifying more with the esoteric label. I think LDS folks would do well to worry less about what other Christians think of them, and start seeing more of the similarities between our church and other less conventional spiritual practices.
I made a documentary which is on my substack. It's kind of a beast. It's a 6 hour documentary about the culture of the state of Utah.. or specifically Utah Mormons. Maybe you'd find it interesting. No need to watch it all at once. It's a little overwhelming, I admit. https://codecxs.substack.com/p/glorious-things-are-sung-of-zion
This post did exactly as you said it would for a Christian esotericist like myself: deeply piqued my interest in Mormon thought, I am eager to learn more. As any good and honest Christian esotericist, I am involved in the process of synthesizing opposites like Tombergs Hermit, not to make them forced hybrids, but to find that which strives toward real unity. I never fit in to the the perennialist or Pharisee crowd because I refuse to settle and fall for either trap. A devil to the left and a devil to the right so to speak. As an American (New England to be precise and descendent of Mayflower voyagers) and disenfranchised evangelical, the question of the Mormons seems to be an important part of “making sense” of the great unfolding of universal history and my own part in it. I especially appreciate the absence of abstraction that imo lead to the great mess that is the state of western philosophy/theology. Once again, thank you.
thank you, I am glad :) what you described was exactly where I was when I found this treasure and it helped me so much, in fact, I think I am still finding all the ways in which it helped me, how many avenues it opened for me. very interested to see where this takes you.
I just found this post as well, and found it exceptionally interesting. As a Latter Day Saint, I find your summary of what we believe to be the most accurate of any I have ever read from a non-member. Also, having had a deep and long-lived fascination with Hugh Nibley and his works (I'm looking at a complete collection of his work sitting on my library shelf, which I have devoured) I was very pleasantly surprised at your characterization if him as the 20th Century's greatest intellectual, a sentiment with which I fully agree. He's had a profound affect on my understanding of LDS theology, and therefore on my entire world-view. I'm also an avid fan of Terryl and Fiona Givens' work.
There is a new young scholar who has recently emerged on the scene by the name of Adam Miller. He's written a book called "Original Grace," that has affected my world-view as much as anything Givens has written, and I'd like to recommend it to you as a fascinating re-examination of the Protestant view on Original Sin through the lens of Joseph Smith's Restoration theology: https://www.amazon.com/Original-Grace-Adam-S-Miller/dp/1639930248 . The book's value far exceeds its price, in my view. See what you think.
thank you Bruce. you are not the first to tell me this, and it is always very good to hear.
I will check Miller's book, thank you for the recommendation.
lastly, if you're interested in another non-LDS take on LDS theology I highly recommend Bruce Charlton's blog which I mentioned at the end of the article. he was really the one who introduced it to me.
Thank you again.
Yes, I've been reading Charlton's terrific blog ever since you mentioned it. It is fun seeing his perspectives mature over time. His insights are fascinating, as are yours!
Regarding Miller's book, I love how he uses a Restoration perspective to reexamine suffering in the world, as well as divine Grace, Justice, and Judgement. Incredible insights! I've shared his book with all of my friends and family. Only a few really get it.
A quick word about the Pearl of Great Price, especially the Book of Moses: as you've noticed, it really is a special gem. I've spend a lifetime studying this book, and uncover new insights each time I open it. I highly recommend continuous review, and especially Chapter 6. I read your beautiful allegory of Edom and Ava, so I imagine that you've discovered some of the deep meaning in that book. Please trust me: it keeps getting deeper and deeper.
Best wishes to you in your search for truth!
thank you. and I agree, the Pearl is really a pearl, and the name should be changed to priceless :)
I read this whole thing again today, and I find that the ideas are growing on me and becoming more clear over time. Definitely feeling this:
"So it’s not that I came to agree with the Mormons; it’s more that I already agreed with them but I didn’t know. I suspect many a Christian esoterist would find the same thing, and be as surprised as I was."
I think that I'll pick up *Wrestling the Angel*. Great job here, making the case.
Some good news, by the way: Angelico Press said yes to publishing a manuscript of mine. Interestingly enough, the epigraph I chose for it a long while ago is by the songwriter Brandon Flowers—who is a Mormon.
Thank you Sethu, I'm glad it is proving good food for thought.
and congratulations on the upcoming book. what is it about?
It's called *Ghostian Manifesto: An Esoteric Christian Venture*, and I just e-mailed you the PDF. In particular, I'd say check out pp. 23-26 for an uncanny resonance with how God is a Man in the sky.
thank you. I'll have a look.
"One could of course blame the Mormons themselves for the insufficiency and failure of their missionary efforts, and there may indeed be some of that."
I got off my mission October 2022. Let me tell you, there is PLENTY of that.
I believe you.
I enjoyed your post. Lifelong LDS and have followed Bruce Charlton. It's interesting to see with this fresh outside perspective who we are, and why everybody instinctively knows our beliefs are so different.
Thank you J. it's been an interesting journey for me.
Thank you for this article, it has definitely inspired some interest to learn more about Mormonism. The only thing I can remember right now (apart from what's in your article) is that human individuals will eventually grow into planetary spirits, and that certainly accords with Christian esotericism! Although I'm not sure if that's actually to be found in the Mormon scriptures.
"But perhaps more importantly for Christian esoterists, we also notice less familiar ideas. For one, the repudiation of Original Sin;"
I'm not sure I would characterize it as a 'repudiation' of Original Sin, but more that Christian esoteric science deepens the doctrine so that it is reconciled with the guilt of personal karma. I can recognize that my Fall into objective consciousness took place within my astral body before I had incarnated a thinking ego, and therefore independently of my choice, but nevertheless, once such an ego was incarnated, I continued (and still continue) to attach my longing to fragmented sensory desires when I know that longing can be repurposed heavenward.
Steiner has a great lecture on this - https://rsarchive.org/Lectures/GA127/English/Singles/19110503p01.html
"Now there is nothing that has not its opposite pole. Just as there can be no North Pole without a South Pole, so there can be no phenomenon such as this sin of the astral body without its opposite pole. Without being able to speak in the ordinary sense of moral wrong on our part, it is our destiny as men to be permeated by Luciferic forces. In a certain respect we can do nothing about it, indeed we must rather be thankful that it happened so. We were obliged, then, to incur a burden for which we cannot in the full sense be held responsible.
In human evolution there is something that is related to this as the North Pole is related to the South Pole. This sin which, in its consequences, is inherited, which represents sin in man of which he is not guilty in the real sense, must be counterbalanced by the possibility of re-ascent, also without merit of his own. Just as without guilt of his own, man was obliged to fall, so he must be able to re-ascend without merit of his own—that is to say, without full merit of his own...
An inflowing power repairs the astral body to the same extent to which it has deteriorated. That is the Atonement, that is what in the true sense is called ‘Grace’. Grace is the concept that is complementary to that of Original Sin. So the Christ Impulse has made it possible for man to become one with Christ, to say with St. Paul: ‘Not I, but Christ in me’, thus giving expression to everything that is designated by the concept of Grace."
thank you for your comment and for the recommendation. i'm yet to delve into Steiner proper, i only know of his doctrines second hand, but i will put this one on the list. i'm always glad to inspire people to explore mormon theology.
I realized years ago that If we are made in the image of God, that means God is much more human than we are. Also in the first decades of Mormonism singing and speaking in tongues was frequent among Mormons.
" If we are made in the image of God, that means God is much more human than we are" - I believe that.
and yes, it is sad how a movement so radical as early Mormonism became so tame with time.
The same thing happened to the Quakers. George Fox their main leader had a full blown miracle healing ministry and other New Testament Spirit gifts were common among them. Fox’s own words -
“as I had forsaken the priests, so I left the separate preachers also, and those esteemed the most experienced people; for I saw there was none among them all that could speak to my condition. And when all my hopes in them and in all men were gone, so that I had nothing outwardly to help me, nor could tell what to do, then, oh, then, I heard a voice which said, "There is one, even Christ Jesus, that can speak to thy condition"; and when I heard it my heart did leap for joy. Then the Lord let me see why there was none upon the earth that could speak to my condition, namely, that I might give Him all the glory; for all are concluded under sin, and shut up in unbelief as I had been, that Jesus Christ might have the pre-eminence who enlightens, and gives grace, and faith, and power. Thus when God doth work, who shall let (i. e. prevent) it? And this I knew experimentally.”
And from Wikipedia
George Fox performed hundreds of healings throughout his preaching ministry, the records of which were collected in a notable but now lost book titled Book of Miracles. This book was listed in the catalogue of George Fox's work maintained by the Library of the Society of Friends at Friends House, London. In 1932, Henry Cadbury found a reference to Book of Miracles in the catalogue, which included the beginning and ending of each account of a miraculous cure. The book was then reconstructed based on this resource and journal accounts. According to Rufus M. Jones, the Book of Miracles "makes it possible for us to follow George Fox as he went about his seventeenth-century world, not only preaching his fresh messages of life and power, but as a remarkable healer of disease with the undoubted reputation of miracle-worker." The Book of Miracles was deliberately suppressed in favour of printing Fox's Journal and other writings.
And I also say “a pox upon Neoplatonism!”
interesting. thank you. I don't know much about the quakers, but had the general sense that they used to be radical and now are just another run of the mill liberal church.
It was one of Bruce Charlton's recent posts (4/18/24) that brought me to your excellent site. Although I have been reading Charlton for several years, my introduction to Mormonism came via Harold Bloom's "The American Religion," following a brief foray into ancient Gnosticism. I have thoroughly enjoyed your outstanding post and recommendations. As an aspiring Christian, I am deeply intrigued by your characterization of the Holy Spirit as "an embodied and loving immortal Goddess." Coincidentally, in (nondual) Kashmiri Shaivism, Awareness itself is the blessed Goddess, the Supreme Power who vibrates as the various infinite worlds, the personficiation of the power of fully expanded consciousness. (The Recognition Sutras). There are innumerable affinites and similarities between Mormon theology and Plato, Stoicism and Neoplatonism, as well as Eastern philosophy, for which reason, the Mormon Church strikes me as the most "universal" and 'rational' of Christian churches.
thank you for your comment Reinhardt. I am intrigued by much of what you say, starting with the phrase, which I have never read or head before 'aspiring Christian'. I am curious to know what you mean by it.
as for the characterization of the Holy Spirit as an 'embodied and loving immortal goddess' - did I really write such a thing? Because that is not what I believe at all. My understanding of the Holy Spirit is that, in general, it is Jesus' spirit - and as a category it is every spirit that becomes holy.
I do believe in embodied and immortal goddesses, foremost of which the Virgin Mary (aka Mother Earth) and Mary Magdalene (Sophia) - along with all the other names they have been given elsewhere.
I am also unsure about 'awareness itself' and 'supreme power who vibrate' and 'expanded consciousness'. I highly dislike that kind of new age (and generally Hindu/Buddhist) talk that to me means pretty much nothing (and don't they end in nothing anyway? it seems to be the goal). I believe in beings, and personality. those fields and forces I do not care about.
which leads me to the last part: I don't see many, or any really, affinities between Mormon theology and neoplatonism or eastern philosophy (well, maybe with Plato, Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu, but not platonism or taoism - which I believe to be as far from them in teaching as christianity is far from Jesus). So quite the opposite in fact. And that's what I like about it. So also curious to know wat similarities you see and that I do not.
To answer your question, I consider myself to be 'aspiring' because I view being a Christian as a process of growing into (my own) divine nature. It seems to me, the Mormon belief in a pre-earthly existence and view of mortal life as a preparation or laboratory of experience followed by an afterlife is similar to Plato's myth of Er. But the essential affinity with Plato, to my mind, is the emphasis on the "care of soul," where the soul is "eternal" and is described as bearing the strongest resemblance to God (Alcibiades I). That is to say, God and the soul share the same properties or share in the same image, although what that is/feels like, is not articulated in Western philosophy, as far as I know.
The Mormon afterlife strikes me as a bodily, interpersonal and social existence, and I thought the Mormon figure of God resembled the Stoic concept of god, but only to the extent that both appear to be physical or "material," and both are akin to the Platonic demiurge who organizes the universe, but did not create it. Albeit, the Stoics viewed god as the universe, synonymous with nature itself, quite unlike the personal, relatable God of Mormonism.
The Mormon idea of different strata of afterlife and implied levels of participation in the Divine is what suggested to me the affinity to the neoplatonic emanation of the One and the Kashmiri Saiva "descent of Grace," a hierarchy of being/consciousness, of which embodied, mind-conditioned existence forms the lowest level.
But I suppose such similarities are overshadowed by the differences you point out. Whereas much Indian philosophy/religion tends toward abstract schemas, on the one hand, hence the new age cant, and direct-knowledge (contemplation) on the other hand, Western religion, much as extroverted Western philosophy, is focused on personalities and paradigmatic narratives. Under the assumption that human beings are the same everywhere, I have been trying to find correspondences between Eastern and Western systems of thought, as in a Rosetta Stone of religious intuitions. In this respect, the closest analogy for Holy Spirit in Eastern religion would be the energy or Light of Awareness which in Kashmiri Saivism is personified as a Goddess and consort of God. I misread your reference to the Mother as refering to the holy spirit, which obviously, was not your intent. Thank you for your edifying response.
thank you for the clarifications.
Wm Jas Tyconoviech referred me back to this post which i first read some time ago and had liked. This read through, I was struck by how Jesus praying to the Father proved things about them, and that the same thing happens in the Book of Mormon, but in the Book of Mormon he clearly had been glorified, whereas in the Bible he is last seen ascending to the Father to be glorified (apart from visions). Glorification did not change this.
very good point. thank you J.
This made me look into the book of mormon, but after reading it i am certain that a lot of things said of mormons is slanderous, but at the same time that the religion is a big lie. It may also perhaps, but that might just be my bias from such slanderous input, be that mormonism has signs of hidden moral (a outer and inner layer of the religion, with hidden morals in the holy text for the initiated elite).
That said, the theology, especially in the modified version of genesis, is very weak, and misses alot of the points made by the real Torah (Adam makes the first offering to God? The holy spirit speaks (...) and tells Nephi to kill someone? give me a break). This means the religion does not even have theoretical value.
As for the falsity of the book of mormon, a curious eye need only look at this formulation in Nephi 3, 3:2 ;
"2 Lachoneus, most noble and chief governor of the land, behold, I write this epistle unto you, and do give unto you exceedingly great praise because of your firmness, and also the firmness of your people, in maintaining that which ye suppose to be your right and liberty; yea, ye do stand well, as if ye were supported by the hand of a god, in the defence of your liberty, and your property, and your country, or that which ye do call so."
This way of speaking is very american, and drips of american revolution buzzwords post 1776, which never would have been used by culturally isolated jews thousands of years ago. Liberty and rights? Property? Most nations outside of Europe didn´t have a concept or word for what "rights" were until post 1800. Property was also a dubious concept for the native americans.
I am not sure what the official position is, but as far as I'm concerned it is only natural for a document that came to light and was translated by and through the eyes of a certain century to contain forms of language that reflect it. this is unavoidable. we may not be familiar with the linguistic context of the King James Bible, but for sure the translation reflects the period. I am also not shy in saying that in any transmission of knowledge between humans, there is corruption and sometimes outright forgery and addition. I take great value from the Book of Mormon, but I would never claim it to be perfect, or the word of God as he spoke it, because that really does not exist, except for the people who heard God speak. and they can only use the words they have to tell us about it.
That is a fair point. I do not exclude the possibility that the book is spiritually inspired, or even prophetic, so i can somewhat agree with your point of view. My going theory right now is that Joseph Smith must have fabricated the plates, since by testimony of the otherwise adversarial David Whitmer they did exist.
personally I find there is too much truth in the book, and too much flair and genius in the man, for it to be a fake and him a faker. but everyone needs different things.
Very insightful and well said. Thank you.
thank you Mike.
Have you ever seen the film *Interstellar*? I just did last night, and if you have, you'll probably know why I ask.
never watched (and my wife says it's boring so I probably won't). can you elaborate?
Well, this may be a spoiler, but . . .
The people on Earth believe that higher beings are communicating with them, but you eventually find out that those beings are actually humans from the future who have accessed the fifth dimension. So it made me think a lot of the notion that the gods had once been human in our world.
Of course, there's the same secular-materialist distortion we find everywhere else in our culture; but still, I found that resonance uncanny, and I wasn't expecting it.
I see. I guess the difference with the Mormon view (besides the secularism ofc) is that they would say that you could be human in other worlds. but yes, I see the connection.
In the film, the humans of the future are in another galaxy, not another cosmos altogether—which I guess goes along with the whole materialist distortion. Just as I strongly suspect that what people today think of as UFOs are what we used to recognize as the powers of the air.
This is very intriguing. Until quite recently, I had the typical reaction of repugnance to Mormonism (vaguely associated with polygamy and aliens and Mitt Romney); but I eventually had to realize that 1) I knew almost nothing about it and 2) given my interest in ongoing revelation and the age of the Holy Ghost, it was odd of me to not even hear it out. I'm not sure why that specific conditioning takes a deeper hold than most others.
About the Fall: I do like the notion of the felix culpa. From even a more orthodox standpoint, Eve and Adam would have had only untested freedom that was bound for transgression through naivety or simple curiosity, whereas when we take back Paradise, we will presumably be tempered and immune to sin. So, it looks like this adventure yields a dramatic positive gain, which also implies that the Fall that set it all off couldn't be an altogether negative event.
A point I'm not sure about, though, is whether that gain is strictly for the Creation or whether the gain is also in God Himself. The two views seem to be: 1) God is complete in Himself, and all of Creation is a surplus generated out of His kenosis and love; and 2) God is incomplete in Himself, and He needs the Creation to come to fruition in order for Him to achieve His own fullness. I think I favor the first view, mainly because it suggests that the essence of the Creation is overflow rather than lack. But that also definitely shouldn't be taken to mean that the Creation is somehow arbitrary or superfluous, or that it was possible for God to not create.
thank you for your comment. I used to have the same typical reaction.
regarding the 'completeness' versus 'incompleteness', I think this is the wrong way of looking at it. I always start with the Scriptures, and from them it is clear that God is not the 'absolute monad' who lacks nothing. Freedom and Purpose, in Creation and in dealings with it, seem to be at the center. But these imply not the absolute monad who has nothing to gain, but rather what we would describe as human. But we would not call ourselves 'incomplete' just because we Love, and Create. We would call ourselves lovers and creators. Beings with purpose and freedom. And that is how I look at it. I also take issue with the idea of 'overflow' because this is an automatic process. It is something I don't see as worthy of God. God is the furthest away from a Machine that one can get. I can only worship and pray to a God who is purposeful and loving, not one who has no choice but to create. Because if there is no choice, no freedom in God, then we as free agents are superior to Him (or rather, in this conception, it).
Sure—my idea wasn't to imply a mechanical process. More like how a poet has "no choice" but to create, in the sense that he is driven to fulfill his nature, which is his freedom and perfection. Like William Blake: "The cistern contains; the fountain overflows."
Loved this article. I'm LDS. Studying esotericism is new for me, but I've contemplated all of these topics for years, and I agree with pretty much everything you've said here. I often wish that the mainstream body of the church was not so reticent to speak directly about the similarities between what they believe and other mystical/esoteric practices. I've used the term mystic for a long long time and just started identifying more with the esoteric label. I think LDS folks would do well to worry less about what other Christians think of them, and start seeing more of the similarities between our church and other less conventional spiritual practices.
I made a documentary which is on my substack. It's kind of a beast. It's a 6 hour documentary about the culture of the state of Utah.. or specifically Utah Mormons. Maybe you'd find it interesting. No need to watch it all at once. It's a little overwhelming, I admit. https://codecxs.substack.com/p/glorious-things-are-sung-of-zion
thank you. I will check out the documentary when I have the time.
Interesting piece. I think you’d be interested in my piece at https://mormonsmysticsandmuons.substack.com/p/mormonism-psychedelics-quantum-physics and my podcast Mormons, Mystics, and Muons. If you take a read, I’d love to hear what you think.
thank you. will check both out.
this is very helpful; thank you!
thank you Max.