No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Evolution of Mormon Doctrine
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2009
Extract
The intricacies of Mormon polytheism are a perpetual surprise to the student of American thought. But a second surprise awaits the historian who attempts to trace the roots of this American polytheism. It is that Mormon doctrine moved not from ordinary Trinitarian thought but from an original position in which extreme monistic tendencies were dominant. There are three stages in this transition: an original monism, a reversal to tritheism, and the expansion of this into polytheism.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © American Society of Church History 1940
References
1 Cf. Part I of my Revelation in Mormonism (Chicago, 1932)Google Scholar. Chapter II is particularly pertinent.
2 Mosiah, 15:2–3.Google Scholar
3 Ether, 3:14.Google Scholar
4 Ainslie, Peter, The Message of the Disciples for the Union of the Church (3rd ed., New York, 1913), 110 f.Google Scholar
5 Doctrine and Covenants (Utah ed.), 93:4. 05 6, 1833.Google Scholar
6 Cf. 2 Nephi, 31:21Google Scholar and 3 Nephi, 11:27.Google Scholar
7 Zion's Advocate, IX, 144.Google Scholar
8 The Holy Scriptures Translated ana Corrected ?by the Spirit of Revelation, (Independence, Mo., 1027). The verse here appears as Luke, 10:23.Google Scholar
9 Zion's Advocate, IX, 144.Google Scholar
10 Zion's Advocate, X, 125 ff.Google Scholar
11 Ether, 3:8Google Scholar. On Campbell, cf. Revelation in Mormonism, 103.Google Scholar
12 Infant Baptism (Kansas City, Kansas), 6Google Scholar. This pamphlet was published by the Strangite faction.
13 From unpublished MS, Snyder, J. J., Important TeachingsGoogle Scholar, Chapter VIII. Cf. also Revelation in Mormonism, 220.Google Scholar
14 Parry, E. F., Joseph Smith's Teachings (Salt Lake City, Utah, 1912), 57 f.Google Scholar
15 Snyder, , Important Teachings, Chapter VIII.Google Scholar
16 Roberts, C. H., Mormon Doctrine of Deity; The Roberts-Van Der Donckt Discussion (Salt Lake City, Utah, 1.903), 29.Google Scholar
17 This is related to a Persian myth which has demons thus allying themselves with women before the coming of Zoroaster, and in Enoch the idea from Gen. 6:1–2Google Scholar is dramatized in an intricate angelology. See R. H. Charles' comment on Enoch, 6:2Google Scholar in Apocrypha ana Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, II, 191.Google Scholar
18 Moses, 8:13Google Scholar (in Pearl of Great Price, Salt Lake City, Utah, 1928.)Google Scholar
19 Doctrine and Covenants 76:58Google Scholar. This is based on Jesus' Rabbinic statement in John, 10:34Google Scholar where Jesus denies the charge of blasphemy. The irony of His answer is brought out by Plummer's comment in The Cambridge Bible: In your law (Ps. 82:6) “men on whom God's word has conferred a fragment of delegated authority may be called ‘gods’ (Elohim) without scruple; He, Whom the Father Himself sanctified and sent, may not be called Son of God without blasphemy!” There is certainly no hint of polytheism in this; nevertheless as the International Critical Commentary suggests: “The doctrine of the Incarnation has its roots, not in bare Deism, but in that view of God which regards Him as entering into human life and consecrating human activities to His own purposes.” (Comment on John, 10:34).Google Scholar
20 Letter addressed to the author, dated March 28, 1930.
21 Revelation in Mormonism, 105Google Scholar, for their inconsistent attitude toward the polytheistic Book of Abraham.
22 Parry, , Smith's teachings, 58–9.Google Scholar
23 Ibid., 55 f.
24 Widtsoe, J. A., Rational Theology (Salt Lake City, Utah, 1926), 64–65.Google Scholar
25 Consider this prayer: “Jesus, Mary and Joseph, I give you my heart, and my soul! Jesus, Mary and Joseph, assist me in my last agony! Jesus, Mary and Joseph, may I breathe forth my soul in peace with you.” Cf. Klotsche, E. H., Christian Symbolics (Burlington, Iowa, 1929), 74.Google Scholar
26 Statement of Joseph Smith. Cf. Roberts, , Mormon Doctrine, 10.Google Scholar
27 The only extended treatment of the doctrine as it was employed in the various factions apears in my Revelation in Mormonism, and unfortunately this is presented historically rather than systematically.
28 Doctrine and Covenants 131:7–8Google Scholar. At another time he said spirit is “more pure elastic and refined matter than the body.” Parry, , op. cit., p. 164Google Scholar. Unofficial revelation states that God's body is not of “flesh” as we know it, but of “power and glory” and is transparent and perfect in appearance. Saints' Herald, 11 6, 1912Google Scholar (reprinted in Knisley, A., Revelations in Our Times (Independence, Mo., 1913), 49.Google Scholar
29 Widtsoe, , Rational Theology, 29.Google Scholar
30 Snyder, , Important Teachings, Chapter XI.Google Scholar
31 Widtsoe, , Rational Theology, 19.Google Scholar
32 Doctrine ana Covenants, 130:19.Google Scholar
33 Cf. Riley, I. W., The Founder of Mormonism (New York, 1902), 407 ff.Google Scholar
34 Widtsoe, , Rational Theology, 26.Google Scholar
35 Cf. Söderblom, N., The Nature of Revelation (New York, 1933), 20.Google Scholar
36 For sources regarding doctrinal development, where not cited, consult my Revelation in Mormonism.