Since then I've done more research on the topic and I've found that actually far from being the first to make the comparison between Joseph Smith's writing style and Thomas Taylor's the comparisons and the relationship with Neoplatonism has been made for a very long time and by a number of authors. I intend to make a post detailing that history at another time. In the process of doing this research I've found a document that bears an incredible resemblance to a number of Joseph Smith's theological innovations that run through the Book of Mormon, the Book of Moses, the Doctrine and Covenants (particularly the Lectures on Faith), the Book of Abraham, the Nauvoo Temple Endowment and culminating in Joseph Smith's King Follett Discourse and Sermon in the Grove where he explicitly admits and argues for his form polytheism.
The pamphlet that was published anonymously in 1790 under two two titles, "A New System of Religion" and "The Spirit of All Religions". It has been attributed to both Thomas Taylor and to John Pinkerton, both of whom are fascinating characters in their own right and who have been linked to as possible sources for Joseph Smith's writings previously. As I said I'm going to make another post about Thomas Taylor at a later date.
Some of the ideas in this pamphlet that are extremely similar to Joseph Smith's, while this isn't a conclusive list it's a good starting point.
1. The idea of everything having its opposite eternally. "Nor can the human, or perhaps any, mind form a conception of an object, without a tacit comparison between it and its opposite . What idea of light, without darkness? of truth, without falsehood? of good, if there were no evil? It may be said, that to deny existence to any object, is at same time to deny existence to its opposite: for without its contrariety nothing is known to exist."
2. If "you take away any of the attributes of the Deity, you destroy his existence" or in other words if God doesn't have these attributes he ceases to be God.
3. The idea of that "man is but the shadow of nothing" that the earth is not the centre of the universe but that there are an "infinite number of worlds", "whose real use is only known to the Creator".
4. "The Deity is but a Superior man, in the dark conception of fanaticism; or men are inferior deities."
5. The idea of God giving a portion of his power to others, particularly to other "gods".
"But by the Gods are here meant spirits of vast and superior power; capable of creating worlds, and of annihilating them, as a man builds a house, and throws it down.
6. That there are various degrees of advancement between man and God and that this can be inferred from the various degrees of beings "That such high beings are, is inferable from the chain of existence, observable in the material world."
7.That such gods will always be inferior to God in an "infinite degree" "Nor can any idea be more honourable to the Deity, than to suppose that the spirits of his own immediate creation are of amazing power, and perfection, and yet inferior to him in an infinite degree."
8. The idea that these other gods nearest to God could be "creating inferior spirits", "minister to a progress" and "even this world, and man but the work of one of his remote ministers!"
"grant that the Creator only immediately formed the Gods, the spirits next to himself in power and dignity, and imparted to them a supreme portion of his own creative power, why might not they either act upon matter themselves; or by creating inferior spirits, but still of vast power, minister to a progress, that led down by degrees to the creation of matter? What a vast idea must it give us of the great First Cause to suppose even this world, and man, but the work of one of his remote ministers!"
9. "Each God presides over a world of his own creation, and has ministering spirits, to manage different departments"
10. "There may be degrees of matter so fine as to escape out organs. The air almost escapes them."
At this point I haven't found anything proving conclusively that Joseph Smith or any of his contemporaries owned this document but it shows at the very least that a lot of the ideas that Joseph Smith was proposing were not as unique as many people studying Mormonism may now believe. I'm looking into what evidence there is of the pamphlet being available in 19th Century America.
I'm providing the text in full below because a transcription of it isn't available online and I feel it will be conducive to the discussion, I've tried to keep the spelling and grammar identical to the original which can be found here. There may be some mistakes I was in a bit of a rush to type this up and even though it's relatively short for a book it's still a few thousand words.
A new system of religion
Chapter I The Deity
Man, when will thy pride cease to be in exact proportion to thy ignorance? When will the heavenly light of science teach thee humility, and thyself?
Consider, ye of the human race the various systems of religion, which have been recommended to your reverence by the tradition of your fathers. Does not one, and the same, radical error pervade them? Have not their founders taught us pride, instead of humility? Yes, ye awful fathers of our worship! Ye forgot that man is but a particle of littleness and that the Deity is infinite greatness. Ye forgot what different degrees of magnitude there are, between a grain of sand and sun: what infinite scales of being, between the Fountain of existence and man!
Hence blasphemous fanaticism has established an approximation, a familiarity, between little man and the Creator of Gods. All the cares of the Deity, all passions which human folly has imputed to him who is tranquillity, are concentrated in the affairs of a worm. There are no dignified beings, but the Deity and mankind; and angels, who are the servants of man. Oh, horrible pride! The Deity is but a Superior man, in the dark conception of fanaticism; or men are inferior deities.
Abandon this impious familiarity, abandon it forever, and cover thy head with dust, thou son of the meanest existence! Know that, as the particles of snow beneath the northern pole, as the sand in the burning desarts of Zaara, so numerous are the scales of spiritual existence, between the Deity and man: and the lowest race of these beings knows that man is but the shadow of nothing.
Sages have conceived that, as there are venomous, and apparently useless, reptiles in the lower scale of existence, so there may, in the infinite number of worlds, be some noxious and useless; and whose real use is only known to the Creator. As a toad, or a viper upon earth, such may this globe be in the number of worlds. Her inhabitants may have been created, and the lunar orb appointed to maintain their native frenzy, as examples of folly to superior beings, that they may, by comparison know the value of wisdom, and be happy.
The intentions of the Creator we cannot know: but the pride of man we know, and the cause of that pride. Before telescope laid open the wonders of the sky, it was thought that the stars were ornaments to our dome, and sparks to illumine our darkness. But by what mental telescope shall we discover the superior scales of spiritual existence; and learn humility, by comparing ourselves with the inhabitants of eternal day? We are proud, because superior to beasts, whom we see, and know: and might be humble, could we see, and know, even the lowest link of an infinite chain of superior being.
The Atheist, and the Deist, and the worshipper of received faiths, are alike misled by pride. The Atheist erects himself into the intellectual arbiter of the universe; and thinks there is no knowledge, but what resides in his own bosom.
How canst thou prove the existence of a Deity, when thou canst not prove thy own? Art thou not as fanatic, absolutely to deny, as others, absolutely to believe? Do not thy senses, and thy reason, perpetually deceive thee? How then canst thou know that there is no God? True it is that the credulity of the nations is vast, and the arts of priests various: but obeserve well the fabric of this world, and the various scale of being which our organs admit us to perceive, and confess the probability of a Deity; nay, of many superior beings, of such power as to be gods to mankind, though as men to the Fountain of Life. Is thy mind so narrow, as to think that human conceptions imprison the universe? Is man the only rational being because the only one with whom we are acquainted? If thou believest that there is no God, thou art thyself credulous; and if thou wishest to persuade others, thou art but a fanatic of a new faith. Atheist, doubt thy faith: doubt, but do not tremble. Let not the pride of man persuade thee, that thy opinions can excite any passion, but pity, in the minds of superior beings. Could a man create a fly, and put it into his garden, would he not smile to find, that the fly denied the existence of his creator? Would he be angry? No. He would say the eyes of a fly are but small, and how can he see a large object?
And thou, Deist, why has thy pride made thee so familiar with Deity? Thou believest in the existence of man, and in the existence of one God; but formest no conception of the infinite distance between God and man; nor allowest that there must be infinite orders of rational being, between the meanest and the highest. The meanest of these orders must be as gods to thee; and yet thou laughest at the Polytheist.
But the greatest pride belongs to the recieved faiths, which bring down the Deity to human littleness, and level him in our dust. Systems of blasphemy, when will ye cease to disgrace human reason! Thou, fanatic, art humble. Know that thy humility is the extremity of pride. The purple tyrant is a stranger to the pride that swells thy heart. Thou art humble with man, but the bosom friend of thy God, who hears all thy petitions; and has appointed and selected thee from the mass of mankind, to be his familiar companion in this life, and in eternity. Thou art humble!
To human pride are all religions indebted for their progress; and a more powerful and universal principle could not be employed. Hold out the idea of a select, and chosen, society, entitled to the benefits unknown to the rest of mankind, and you will be greedily heard. And what is this life to eternity? Let us, say they, be bruised, and humbled in this life; while even here we are supported with the proud idea, that we are superior to the rest of mankind, and the chosen friends of God; and that we shall enjoy eternal glory, and happiness, while our enemies, nay all mankind, not of our society, shall have eternal torture. How deeply are pride and malice rooted in our hearts! This is what mortals call humility!
Of the Deity man can form no idea: and perhaps even the first spiritual scale cannot have the smallest comprehension of his attributes, or mode of existence. Has a worm any conception of the human mind? When we say that the Deity is self-existent, infinite, eternal, what ideas can we form of those qualities? None. Let us adore him in silence: but never imagine that our adoration can honour the Fountain of Being. Such adoration is blasphemy. Our adoration only marks us as rational creatures; and excites grateful and benevolent ideas in the mind.
Chapter II Matter and Creation
All things in existence, and all modes of existence, have their opposites. Nor can the human, or perhaps any, mind form a conception of an object, without a tacit comparison between it and its opposite. What idea of light, without darkness? of truth, without falsehood? of good, if there were no evil? It may be said, that to deny existence to any object, is at same time to deny existence to its opposite: for without its contrariety nothing is known to exist.
Hence to deny the eternity of matter, is to deny the eternity of the Deity. He is the supreme opposite of matter, of chaos. As the purest of spirits he must have had his opposite, in the grossest of matter, from all eternity.
Had not matter been coeternal with the Deity, he must have filled all space with infinite purity; and it was impossible that any corruptible matter could be produced, in the universe completely filled with divine radiance.
If we deny a coexistent subject, we must allow that the Deity is the absolute creator of evil, which seems absurd; whereas if we grant the eternity of matter, the origin of evil is accounted for, without any derogation to the Creator. For even omnipotence cannot work impossibilities: and it is as impossible to impart spiritual perfection to matter, as it is to make darkness and light the same.
No ancient system of religion, or philosophy, has ever supposed that the Deity absolutely created matter; caused matter to exist while nothing before existed except himself. Even in the book of Genesis, the word translated created, implies merely fashioned or made as the most skilful Hebraists agree. The Bramins, the Persians, the Phoenicians, the Egyptians, the Greek philosophers, all allowed a chaos, a mass of inert matter, coexistent with the Deity.
Atheists assert of course the eternity of matter; and their antagonists assume the opposite proposition. But the eternity of matter is indeed the strongest argument for the existence of a Deity, from that aphorism that no object exists without its opposite. This seems a law of necessity, of fate, as an ancient Greek would express it, that even omnipotence could not alter nor controul.
But how the purest of spirits, the Deity, could act upon gross and inert matter, it is impossible to conceive. Light, which is almost a spiritual substance, acts in a kind of creative capacity upon gross matter; but that a pure spirit could have no contact, nor influence whatever, upon matter, is a grand argument of modern atheism.
The views of atheism, are however, as confined, as those of fanaticism. We must believe that there are at least as many degrees, and sorts, of spirit, as of matter. The creation of spirits by the Deity, is inconceivable by us; and perhaps even by the purest spirits themselves. But grant that the Creator only immediately formed the Gods, the spirits next to himself in power and dignity, and imparted to them a supreme portion of his own creative power, why might not they either act upon matter themselves; or by creating inferior spirits, but still of vast power, minister to a progress, that led down by degrees to the creation of matter? What a vast idea must it give us of the great First Cause to suppose even this world, and man, but the work of one of his remote ministers! But can we have too vast ideas of the Deity? Yes, says human pride, we may!
Chapter III The Gods
The polytheism of all ancient nations was founded upon mistaken principles. Their gods were the offspring of human pride, and often but deified men; ever similar in passions, and vices, to mankind their creators, not their creation. The vastness of the universe was unknown even to the ancient philosophers. The earth was esteemed the essence of creation, man in the next degree to the gods. All religions have stood upon human pride.
The polytheism here to be established, is on the contrary founded upon the vastness of the universe, the insignificance of this earth, and of man. Even inferior spirits must be as gods to man, in power, in knowledge, in every attribute.
But by the Gods are here meant spirits of vast and superior power; capable of creating worlds, and of annihilating them, as a man builds a house, and throws it down.
That such high beings are, is inferable from the chain of existence, observable in the material world. Nor can any idea be more honourable to the Deity, than to suppose that the spirits of his own immediate creation are of amazing power, and perfection, and yet inferior to him in an infinite degree. Now, if we allow the existence of a Deity, the most magnificient ideas concerning him must infallibly be the most true.
It is probable that each God presides over a world of his own creation, and has ministering spirits, to manage different departments. Some ancients believed that each nation had it's guardian divinity; nor can he who believes a first cause of order, think that even human affairs, little as they are, can be entirely left to human management.
If even monarchs be approached with awe, and a fort of adoration, there can surely be no offence in the worship of the Gods, our creators and protectors. Humility, and propriety concur to dictate that our adoration of them cannot be offensive to the Deity, whom we most highly honour in honouring his immediate ministers.
Nor let the trite argument against polytheism be here applied, namely that there cannot be but one being omnipotent, and omnipresent. This is true of the Deity, the great first cause. But man is little; and many are the beings who are gods to him. Nor can the power, or wil of these beings clash. They are created pure intelligences, for good, and not for evil; and feel immediately the constant presence of the omnipotent, and omnipresent, Deity.
Chapter IV The Genii
The spiritual orders of being are unknown to us; and of consequence we have no distinct terms, even for the grand divisions of these orders. A thousand names could not express even these grand divisions of spirits, distinct in power, and in qualities.
The highest order is that of the Gods. The lowest is that of the Genii, or daemons.
Ancient philosophers, who asserted that every human being has his guardian Genius, might with less absurdity have asserted that every ape has his guardian man. Philosophy is often but the quintessence of human pride.
The Gods cannot be evil, because supreme intelligence, and supreme goodness, are the same; and wickedness and folly are sisters. But of the daemons, whose mind exceeds that of man by only one degree, it is not improbable that some may be bad. Their forms may even partake of matter, and yet be what men may call spiritual. There may be degrees of matter so fine as to escape out organs. The air almost escapes them.
The offices, and enjoyments, of these spirits, we are strangers to; but it is highly probable that they often intermix in human affairs, and produce those singular events, which are by some imputed to fortune, and by others to a special providence.
Chapter V Origin of Evil
If, say the Atheists, you take away any of the attributes of the Deity, you destroy his existence, for a Deity without benevolence, or without power, is no Deity. Granted. But evil must have got into the the universe, either with the permission of the Deity, in which case he is not all-good, or in other words, you destroy his existence: or else against his permission, in which case he is not omnipotent, and you also destroy his existence: this dilemma seems the chief basis of atheism.
But the origin of evil may be accounted for in two ways; neither of which derogates from the belief of a Deity.
The eternity of matter the Atheists will grant: and, without this being allowed it seems impossible to account for the origin of evil.
Though the Deity have infinite benevolence, and infinite power to exert that benevolence, yet he cannot operate absolute impossibilities. He cannot make a body be in one place, and in another, at the same instant; nor can he render opposite objects identically the same. He cannot make light darkness, nor truth falsehood. Neither can he make matter perfect, and free from evil; which is in it's essence imperfect, and full of evil.
In another point of view, if pride would permit us to suppose it possible that this our world, and man are but the works of inferior agents of the Deity, whose infinite purity could not act upon matter, the origin of evil may be partly owing to these agents being neither all-good nor all-powerful. And yet no imputation rests upon the Deity, any more than when we allow that the Deity made man, and yet see how imperfect the works of man are. That the Deity can act upon matter may be an impossibility; but it is a certain impossibility that be can impart infinite benevolence, or infinite power, to any other being.
The eastern dogma of an evil deity, coeternal with the good, is inadmissable. An evil deity is a contradiction in terms. Evil seems a mere defect, or absence of good; as darkness is the absence of light. Now a defect can never be an active principle. Moral evil is the fruit of imperfect understanding; but infinite intelligence is essential to the idea of a deity.
Nor can a spirit of any superior order ever mistake evil for it's good or in other words, be evil. The purity of it's essence must act, as a quick instinct, against evil; and the vastness of it's intelligence must guard even against it's distant approach. It is denied that evil at all exists, except in matter and material beings.
Even in human society good must exceed evil, else that society could not exist. In all countries, and ages, a bad man is an exception to society, and not a rule. An action must have great goodness to excite praise; and small wickedness will incur dispraise. When a man does well, he is not praised, because he barely does what is expected; but if ill, he is blamed. The natural state of man must be good: but man in a state of perfection is a contradiction in terms, irreconcileable even by human pride.
Chapter VI Man
Why am I here? Says the Atheist. Thou art here, as part of a large plan, which thou canst never conceive, nor perhaps minds of a thousand times thy powers. Man forms the medium between material and spiritual existence. His component parts are perhaps the most dissonant; and his character of course the most eccentric of all beings.
Some fix upon one predominant character for mankind; others upon others. Some will have all men influenced only by self-interest; others by vanity. But every one needs but consult his own breast, to find that he is influenced by a variety of motives.
All mankind have indeed a leading character, namely incongruity.
The greatest minds often act, and speak, meanly; the wisest, foolishly.
Nay the most opposite qualities are often found in the same man; the greatest folly in some respects joined with the greatest wisdom in others: and the like.
Man is in some matters a spirit, in others a beast. If any rational being have occasion for the utmost humility, it is man: and yet he is certainly of all rational beings the most proud. The reason is, that he is of all these beings the most ignorant.
Chapter VII His Duties
The great duty of man is to be useful, and beneficial to others. A noxious plant produces poison; a beneficial one fruits. Such is man.
The duty which we owe to the Gods is a remote and feeble, incentive to conduct. Our more immediate motive is the good opinion of others; and a regard to the order of society.
Human nature has been represented as in a state of utmost depravity; but it's depravity has never been such, and never will be such, that good actions will pass for bad, and bad for good. Virtue lives.
Our regard for the opinion of others therefore does honour to human nature, and to it's Creator.
But independently of the opinion of others, a man ought to do what, from the nature and essence of morality, he knows to be just and right.
Man has certainly a moral instinct, which gives him satisfaction, when he does what is right; and checks him when he acts amiss. This moral instinct is what is commonly called conscience.
Moral instinct is as necessary to human existence, as natural instinct is to that of beasts.
This moral instinct is an actual emanation of the Deity, enlightening all rational minds; as the emanation of solar light illumines natural objects. The clouds of vice may obstruct, but cannot extinguish, it.
Even brutal instinct is an emanation of the Deity; but as the recipient of light is, such is the colour and nature of that light. A vegetable only grows by the solar heat: an insect grows, and moves. The intellectual light of the Deity is alike varied, in various recipients.
Perhaps the most approximate motive to human action is, the ease and delight we feel in doing good, and our pain in doing evil.
Chapter VIII His Happiness
Pleasure cannot be happiness, because constant pleasure ceases to be such.
Pleasures demand intervals; and the highest of them are momentary. Happiness must be constant; must exist in the intervals of pleasure.
Mere ease, or indolence, is not happiness, any more than sleep is happiness.
Happiness consists in the active pursuit of some great object; and in the intervals of pleasure and of ease.
The improvement of the mind is the most important of human pursuits; the gradual acquisition of virtue and of knowledge, leads to the greatest happiness.
If the moral instinct be much clouded, the love of virtue and useful knowledge obliterated, the man may have many pleasures, but never can have happiness.
If human existence terminate not with this life, it is of the last importance to preserve the moral instinct clear; for in proportion to the clearness of that instinct, must our future happiness be.
That vice and misery are the same, is not a metaphor, but a simple truth. Every act of vice soils the mental mirror of happiness.
Chapter IX A Future Life
Man has no authentic title to a future life. Think not, vain mortals, that if ye died as the beasts, the justice of the Deity could be arraigned. Impious thought!
Let the good be often miserable, and the bad often happy in this life, what is it to the justice of the Deity? Can he work impossibilities, or overcome the imperfection of matter?
Man is so important in his own eyes! But if he does right, what merit has he to entitle him to eternal happiness?
Our horror at annihilation, and our strong hopes of immortality, have been adduced as arguments for our immortality. Wise arguments! Are our fears, and wishes, rules for our Creator?
Could apes flatter themselves that they should at death become men, would we regard their vain imaginations, as rules of nature?
If the soul be immortal, it is the effect of the goodness of the Creator, and not of his justice.
It is impossible to prove the immortality of the soul; and impossible to prove its mortality. But probability is in favour of the first position. For man is the being who connects the material and spiritual chain. As such he must have something spiritual in him; and what is spiritual cannot die.
The happiness, or misery of a future life must consist in the state of the mind. Vice must minister its own torments; virtue its own happiness.
This first post is just setting the stage for later posts where I'll make a more in depth analysis of the writings that this text most influenced and where the ideas from this pamphlet appear most prominently in Joseph Smith's writings.