Names and Reincarnation in Early Mormonism

[Ramus_Stein]

Since my first attempt to post on this new board went pretty well, I will take a chance and post something else. I have a far out idea that Joseph Smith used lots of different names for the same person, and that he may have taught a kind of reincarnation as early as 1830. In the example I talk about in the blog post that I am linking here, Moroni is the angel Gabriel. And the angel Gabriel is Noah, Elias, and John the Baptist too. When Doctrine & Covenants 27:7 says that Elias (Gabriel) visited Zacharias and told him he would have a son who would be "filled with the spirit of Elias," he was not speaking figuratively. He was telling Zacharias that his future son would be Elias in the mortal flesh. This would also mean that the various figures who visited Joseph Smith under the names Gabriel, Moroni, Elias, and John the Baptist, were really all one figure in Joseph Smith's eyes. So we don't need to imagine that Joseph thought that he was being visited by a literal cast of characters. Instead, he was being visited by Gabriel multiple times.

See what you think. I know it sounds pretty crazy. I can hardly believe I am typing this stuff. But I am relying on the words of Joseph Smith himself and also what I think are my solid interpretations of those words.

https://steinramus.wixsite.com/restorat ... -in-a-name

[Kishkumen]

Since my first attempt to post on this new board went pretty well, I will take a chance and post something else. I have a far out idea that Joseph Smith used lots of different names for the same person, and that he may have taught a kind of reincarnation as early as 1830. In the example I talk about in the blog post that I am linking here, Moroni is the angel Gabriel. And the angel Gabriel is Noah, Elias, and John the Baptist too. When Doctrine & Covenants 27:7 says that Elias (Gabriel) visited Zacharias and told him he would have a son who would be "filled with the spirit of Elias," he was not speaking figuratively. He was telling Zacharias that his future son would be Elias in the mortal flesh. This would also mean that the various figures who visited Joseph Smith under the names Gabriel, Moroni, Elias, and John the Baptist, were really all one figure in Joseph Smith's eyes. So we don't need to imagine that Joseph thought that he was being visited by a literal cast of characters. Instead, he was being visited by Gabriel multiple times.

See what you think. I know it sounds pretty crazy. I can hardly believe I am typing this stuff. But I am relying on the words of Joseph Smith himself and also what I think are my solid interpretations of those words.

https://steinramus.wixsite.com/restorat ... -in-a-name

This is fascinating, Ramus! Wow! If you had told me out of the blue that Joseph Smith believed in reincarnation in 1830, I would have called you a kook. This looks like pretty strong evidence that he may have believed in exactly that. I don't understand how one could make sense out of Gabriel being Noah and John the Baptist unless this were the case. This reminds me of the transmigration of souls among the Pythagoreans, minus the animals, although, if we bring our friend Martin Harris into the picture, then Jesus can take the form of a deer. LOL.

In any case, the incarnations of Gabriel would go something like this:

Gabriel---->Noah---->Elias---->John the Baptist---->Moroni---->Gabriel?

If Gabriel is his angelic form, then he may be Gabriel between any of those other mortal incarnations.

[Shulem]

Nope, sorry, but Joseph Smith taught no such thing but actually despised the doctrine of reincarnation or multiple appearances from spirit to body.

Transmigration a Doctrine of the Devil

I told Joshua I did not understand his remarks on the resurrection, and wished him to explain. He replied that he did not feel impressed by the Spirit to unfold it further at present, but perhaps he might at some future time.

I then withdrew to transact some business with a gentleman who had called to see me, when Joshua informed my scribe that he was born in Cambridge, Washington County, New York. He says that all the railroads, canals, and other improvements are projected by the spirits of the resurrection. The silence spoken of by John the Revelator, which is to be in heaven for the space of half an hour, is between 1830 and 1851, during which time the judgments of God will be poured out,11 after that time there will be peace.

Suspicions were entertained that the said Joshua was the noted Matthias of New York, spoken so much of in the public prints, on account of the trials he endured in that place, before a court of justice, for murder, man-slaughter, contempt of court, whipping his daughter, etc.; for the last two crimes he was imprisoned and came out about four months since. After some equivocating, he confessed that he really was Matthias.

After supper I proposed that he should deliver a lecture to us. He did so, sitting in his chair.

He commenced by saying, God said, let there by light, and there was light, which he dwelt upon throughout his discourse. He made some very excellent remarks, but his mind was evidently filled with darkness.

I resumed conversation with Matthias, and desired him to enlighten my mind more on his views respecting the resurrection.

He said that he possessed the spirit of his fathers, that he was a literal descendant of Matthias, the Apostle, who was chosen in the place of Judas that fell; that his spirit was resurrected in him; and that this was the way or scheme of eternal life—this transmigration of soul or spirit from father to son.

I told him that his doctrine was of the devil, that he was in reality in possession of a wicked and depraved spirit, although he professed to be the Spirit of truth itself; and he said also that he possessed the soul of Christ.

He tarried until Wednesday, 11th, when, after breakfast, I told him, that my God told me, that his god was the devil, and I could not keep him any longer, and he must depart. And so I, for once, cast out the devil10 in bodily shape, and I believe a murderer.

[Kishkumen]

That’s good evidence on the other side of the question to be sure, Shulem, but I am not certain it falls decisively against the issue. For one thing, Matthias calls this resurrection, whereas Smith’s concept of resurrection was obviously different. Once one is resurrected, that being the permanent reunion of a spirit with perfected, inmortal physical body, then there is no further separation. So, yes, Matthias’ understanding of resurrection would have been wrong to Smith. One gets the sense, though, that there is much more to this story. The strong subtext here is that Matthias was just a creepy, criminal character. A fine difference in doctrine presented Smith an opportunity to rid himself of Matthias on a pretext.

[Shulem]

That’s good evidence on the other side of the question to be sure, Shulem, but I am not certain it falls decisively against the issue.

Well then, I think we can rely on Smith's theological teachings of the resurrection as told by Alma (chapter 40) in the Book of Mormon when addressing the space between the time of death and the time of resurrection. Alma makes it clear that the spirits of all men, whether they be good or evil, are taken home to that God who gave them life and they await the resurrection in a place where they are assigned to wait for the final call -- the day of resurrection. Chapter 40 is very explicit about Smith's ideas of resurrection regarding the condition of man between the state of death and resurrection.

Also, Smith must have been familiar with the famous saying of Hebrews 9:27 "And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment" and he fully endorsed it.

[Kishkumen]

Well then, I think we can rely on Smith's theological teachings of the resurrection as told by Alma (chapter 40) in the Book of Mormon when addressing the space between the time of death and the time of resurrection. Alma makes it clear that the spirits of all men, whether they be good or evil, are taken home to that God who gave them life and they await the resurrection in a place where they are assigned to wait for the final call -- the day of resurrection. Chapter 40 is very explicit about Smith's ideas of resurrection regarding the condition of man between the state of death and resurrection.

Also, Smith must have been familiar with the famous saying of Hebrews 9:27 "And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment" and he fully endorsed it.

I wasn’t arguing against resurrection. What I am seeing in Ramus’ piece is the possibility of something else. Yes, every man will resurrect once, but resurrection to an immortal body is not the same as rebirth into a mortal one.

Moreover, those who have achieved exaltation are not bound by the limitations of mortal people. They can choose to lay down their lives and take them up again. In that case, Hebrews 9:27 is not a problem at all.

If Michael was actually a god in Smith’s theology, then he may have chosen to become Adam because he could. Perhaps the same is the case with Gabriel and Noah. Gabriel, being exalted, could lay down his life and take it up again as much as was needed.

Remember, Gabriel, like Michael, probably started out as Gabriel before he was Noah and became Gabriel again after he was Noah.

[Shulem]

I see how all that is feasible and worthy of contemplation albeit those things never crossed my mind while studying Smith's teachings and peeling through his writings. From what I gathered about Smith's visitations or angelic persons visiting earth is that they were the originals from the times they lived in mortality.

Who can really say?

Personally, myself, I do believe in reincarnation on a quantum level wherein everything possible and every conceivable thing is experienced in a finite realm -- within either space-time or time-space.

[Moksha]

Where did Brigham Young get his multiple mortal probations idea from?

[Kishkumen]

I see how all that is feasible and worthy of contemplation albeit those things never crossed my mind while studying Smith's teachings and peeling through his writings. From what I gathered about Smith's visitations or angelic persons visiting earth is that they were the originals from the times they lived in mortality.

Who can really say?

Personally, myself, I do believe in reincarnation on a quantum level wherein everything possible and every conceivable thing is experienced in a finite realm -- within either space-time or time-space.

Yes, those things never crossed my mind either, Shulem. And I think you are right to challenge the idea. I really don't know whether Ramus is right. He could be absolutely wrong. There are really historical problems to untangle in my response to you. The big problem from my historian's perspective is the date: 1830. Joseph Smith believed these advanced Nauvoo-like doctrines that early? If so, why muck about with all the other stuff for so long and leave those doctrines unexplicated until a decade later? That's a problem. Ramus needs to address those problems and many others. All I can say at this point is that he has an intriguing idea that requires much more work in order to meet the minimum standard of historical plausibility.

[Kishkumen]

Where did Brigham Young get his multiple mortal probations idea from?

Good question, moksha. Multiple mortal probations becomes a pretty persistent idea in underground esoteric Mormon doctrine up to the present in the Prepper Movement. I know I will be looking into all of this thanks to Ramus' intriguing thoughts.