The Book of Abraham and Thomas Dick's Philosophy of a Future State

Book of Abraham > Book of Abraham Plagiarism Accusations > The Book of Abraham and Thomas Dick's Philosophy of a Future State

The Book of Abraham and Thomas Dick's Philosophy of a Future State

Summary: Thomas Dick was a minister, writer, astronomer, and philosopher born in Scotland. Dick published books in the early 1800s where he tried to make the claims of science and Christianity compatible. Critics believe that Joseph Smith took from Thomas Dick's book called "Philosophy of a Future State" to get ideas that appear in the Book of Abraham.

Fig. 1 Scottish-born minister Thomas Dick.

Fawn Brodie, a critic of Joseph Smith, seems to be the first person to make this claim.

We know that two of Dick's books were available in the library in Manchester, New York near Joseph Smith's childhood home. One of these books was Philosophy of a Future State.[1] However, none of the Smith family were actually members of the library and were unlikely to have had access to its resources.[2]

Joseph Smith began translating the Book of Abraham in the second half of the year 1835. We know that Oliver Cowdery published an excerpt from Dick’s book in the Church's newspaper, Latter Day Saints’ Messenger and Advocate, in December 1836.[3] Therefore, it is possible that Joseph had access to the book in the 1835 when he was translating the Book of Abraham.

We also know that Joseph Smith had Dick's book in 1844 since he donated his copy to the Nauvoo Library and Literary Institute.[4]

Based upon this evidence, Brodie not only assumes that the Prophet must have read the book, but that he incorporated Dick’s ideas into the Book of Abraham.

This article will compare Thomas Dick's Philosophy of a Future State with the Book of Abraham. We'll look at what's similar and what's different about the concepts they teach as well as what they say about the life of the prophet Abraham. Dick's book came out in 1827, which was before 1830. Since Dick's book also talks about Moses, we'll also compare what Dick said about the life of Moses with what's in the Book of Moses.

Philosophy of a Future State and the Book of Abraham on the prophet Abrham

First, it's important to know that Dick's book doesn't talk about the life of Abraham in the same way the Book of Abraham does.

Here's what Dick's book mentions about Abraham:

  • It mentions "The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob"[5]
  • It mentions that Abraham was alive as a spirit when Moses saw the burning bush[6]
  • It mentions that Abraham died and was "gathered to his people"[7]
  • It mentions that Abraham was buried at Machpelah[8]
  • It says that people can sit with "Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven"[9]
  • It says that Abraham expected a future city built by God. Dick says Abraham didn't get this city on Earth, so he must have been thinking about heaven.[10]

None of this is similar to what the Book of Abraham says about Abraham's life.

The Theology of Joseph Smith and Philosophy of a Future State

Many of the ideas that Thomas Dick wrote about were common Christian beliefs at the time. This means Joseph Smith could have heard these ideas from many places, not just from Dick's book.

More importantly, Joseph Smith disagreed with or rejected many of the ideas that Dick wrote about. This makes it unlikely that Joseph had "recently read" Dick's work or that it made a "lasting impression" on him, as Brodie suggested.

Dr. Edward Jones wrote a detailed paper called "The Theology of Thomas Dick and its Possible Relationship to that of Joseph Smith." His research shows even more differences between what these two men believed.[11]

Concept Thomas Dick Joseph Smith
Comparing the Theologies of Philosophy of a Future State and Joseph Smith
Creation None but that Eternal Mind which counts the number of the stars, which called them from nothing into existence, and arranged them in the respective stations...[12] Now, I ask all who hear me, why the learned men who are preaching salvation, say that God created the heavens and the earth out of nothing? The reason is, that they are unlearned in the things of God...[13]
Intelligences The Creator stands in no need of innumerable assemblages of worlds and of inferior ranks of intelligences, in order to secure or to augment his felicity. Innumerable ages before the universe was created, he existed alone, independent of every other being, and infinitely happy in the contemplation of his own eternal excellencies.[14] One critic has claimed that Dick's use of the word "intelligences" to refer to spirits is a significant parallel to the Book of Abraham since, he claims, it substantiates the theory that Joseph "consulted contemporary literature then writing the book [sic] of Abraham, for the Bible does not use 'intelligence' in this particular context."[15] This is severely complicated by the fact that "intelligence" was commonly used to refer to "a spiritual being" in Joseph Smith's day.[16] Also complicated by the fact that Dick would have believed that the spirit was immaterial rather than material as taught by Joseph Smith.[17] Finally, the Book of Abraham uses the words "intelligence," "spirit," and "soul" interchangeably. For example, one reads in Abraham 3:22-23:
22 Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones;
23 And God saw these souls that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born.[18]
Nature of God a spiritual uncompounded substance, having no visible form.[19] "The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as man’s." (Doctrine and Covenants 130:22).
Ability to comprehend God But the eternity, the omnipresence, and the omniscience of the Deity, are equally mysterious; for they are equally incomprehensible, and must for ever remain incomprehensible to all limited intelligences.[20] It is the first principle of the Gospel to know for a certainty the Character of God, and to know that we may converse with him as one man converses with another, and that he was once a man like us; yea, that God himself, the Father of us all, dwelt on an earth.[21]
Nature of Matter What successive creations have taken place since the first material world was launched into existence by the Omnipotent Creator? What new worlds and beings are still emerging into existence from the voids of space?[22] 33 For man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy;[23]
Metaphysics Dick believed that "mind and matter" were the two basic principles of the universe.[24] "There is no such thing as immaterial matter. All spirit is matter, but it is more fine or pure, and can only be discerned by purer eyes" (Doctrine and Covenants 131:7).
The Throne of God Edward T. Jones, in a comprehensive review of Dick's and Joseph's theology, wrote:

What of the references to the "Throne of God?" The solution to this seems to be found in statements referring to Him who "sits on the throne of the universe," or "upon the throne of universal nature." These statements seem only to imply that the universe is God's throne. This position is further defensible from several other statements Dick makes in an introduction he wrote in 1845. He referred to "the majesty of Him who sits on the throne of the universe." He later refers to "him who 'sitteth on the circle of the heavens.'" There cannot be a geographic center of the universe, for that would require boundaries to be placed on the infinite, a concept which, as previously indicated, was rejected by Dick. There cannot be a "spiritual" center at which place God resides—he does not possess a body either physical or spiritual; he is omnipresent, existing everywhere. He is a Spirit which fills every bit of the universe, as has been determined earlier. Thus, Dick would appear to be speaking metaphorically when he refers to a center of the universe or to a Throne of God.

[. . .]

Though she does not state it explicitly, Mrs. Brodie infers that the concept of Kolob being near the throne of God (as taught in the Book of Abraham) came from Thomas Dick. Having referred to this relationship between Kolob and the Throne of God in the body of the text, she then states in a footnote: Compare the Book of Abraham with Dicks "The Philosophy of a Future State." As has already been observed, the concepts of God held by those two theologians are quite in contrast to each other. For Joseph Smith, God was "an exalted man, and sits enthroned in yonder heavens." For Thomas Dick, God was an uncompounded spiritual substance who "sits upon the throne of universal nature." Dick indeed does in one place state that there may be a grand center about which the planetary systems revolve. But God Himself fills the immensity of space, and cannot therefore be located in any single spot; certainly not upon a throne in the sense the Prophet uses the term (and if the definitions agree, similarities are impossible. The terms may be the same, but if they stand for different things, there can be no equating of one to the other). For the latter the throne of God was a glorified or celestialized earth, upon which God, an "exalted man," dwelt. For Dick the throne constituted no planetary body, though there may be a geographical location at which spot Jesus and the holy angels reside, God Himself is every where, yet nowhere. God, as a physical, tangible being, does not exist. As a spiritual Essence, pervading the universe He does exist. Hence, to say that the planets revolve around the throne of God is meaningless, unless it is understood that God "sits upon the throne of universal nature." In this sense God takes on a character not unlike Joseph Smith's concept of the Light of Christ (with distinctions, of course,) It would appear that on this point Mrs. Brodie is again mistaken. It is true that Joseph's thinking may have been aided by some of the concepts he may have read in Dick's writings. But it appears to be a small probability that he was influenced by what Dick taught. If the Prophet "had recently been reading" Dick's works it would appear that he rejected most of that which Dick believed most strongly, while retaining that which Dick seemed to reject. There are several references in the Old Testament to the throne of God. These are referred to, and quoted by Dick, Joseph Smith could likewise have gained knowledge from the Old Testament, not to mention the Book of Mormon. Again, the possibility for influence is present, though small.[25]

Philosophy of a Future State and the Book of Moses on the Prophet Moses

Just like with Abraham, Thomas Dick's book doesn't talk about the life of the prophet Moses in the same way the Book of Moses does.

Here's what Dick's book mentions about Moses:

  • Moses believed in life after death and the future world[26]
  • Moses died and was "gathered to his people"[27]
  • "Holy intelligences" (angels or spirits) sing praises to God using the song of Moses[28]
  • Moses might have been a messenger to John about the "New Jerusalem" mentioned in the book of Revelation[29]
  • Moses and others could have possibly created "something approaching to a paradise on earth"[30]

None of these mentions are like what's in the Book of Moses.

Notes
  1. ↑ Robert Paul, "Joseph Smith and the Manchester (New York) Library," BYU Studies 22, no. 3 (1982): 333–356.
  2. ↑ John L. Brooke, The Refiner's Fire: The Making of Mormon Cosmology, 1644-1844 (Cambridge University Press, 1994), 207.
  3. ↑ Oliver Cowdery (editor), "ON THE ABSURDITY OF SUPPOSING THAT THE THINKING PRINCIPLE IN MAN WILL EVER BE ANNIHILATED," (December 1836) Latter Day Saints' Messenger and Advocate 3:423-425. (An extract from "Thomas Dick's Philosophy of a Future State.") It should be noted that the November 1836 date given for this article given by Brodie in No Man Knows My History on page 171 is incorrect.
  4. ↑ Kenneth W. Godfrey, "A Note on the Nauvoo Library and Literary Institute," BYU Studies 14, no. 3 (1974): 388.
  5. ↑ Thomas Dick, Philosophy of a Future State (William Collins, 1830), 121.
  6. ↑ Dick, Philosophy, 121.
  7. ↑ Dick, Philosophy, 121.
  8. ↑ Dick, Philosophy, 121.
  9. ↑ Dick, Philosophy, 123.
  10. ↑ Dick, Philosophy, 119.
  11. ↑ Edward T. Jones, "The Theology of Thomas Dick and its Possible Relationship to that of Joseph Smith," BYU Master's Thesis, 1969, 94–96.
  12. ↑ Dick, Philosophy, 192.
  13. ↑ Joseph Fielding Smith, Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1977), 350.
  14. ↑ Dick, Philosophy, 52.
  15. ↑ Michael W. Goe, Mormonism Without Theism: The Non-Theistic Origins of Mormon Theology and Mythology (N.P.: Self-Published, 2017), Kindle Loc 4216.
  16. ↑ “Intelligence,” Webster’s Dictionary 1828, accessed November 15, 2025, https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/intelligence.
  17. ↑ Doctrine and Covenants 131:7.
  18. ↑ Abraham 3:22–23.
  19. ↑ Dick, Philosophy, 188.
  20. ↑ Dick, Philosophy, 83.
  21. ↑ Smith, Teachings, 345.
  22. ↑ Dick, Philosophy, 214
  23. ↑ Doctrine and Covenants 93:33. An interesting aspect of this reference is that the revelation cited dates back to 1833 — nearly three years before he began any academic study of the Hebrew language. Thus, Joseph Smith didn't get his rejection of creatio ex nihilo from study of the Hebrew Bible.
  24. ↑ Jones, "Possible Relationship," 27.
  25. ↑ Jones, "Possible Relationship," 85–87.
  26. ↑ Dick, Philosophy, 119.
  27. ↑ Dick, Philosophy, 121.
  28. ↑ Dick, Philosophy, 125.
  29. ↑ Dick, Philosophy, 276.
  30. ↑ Dick, Philosophy, 279.
Retrieved from "https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/index.php?title=The_Book_of_Abraham_and_Thomas_Dick%27s_Philosophy_of_a_Future_State&oldid=264755"