Mormonism and the Doctrine of Pre-Existence Examined

Yet, when one looks at the doctrine and philosophy behind Pre-existence of Man's soul, one finds that this is based upon Plato's (327 - 347 BCE) assertions of the Origin and nature of Man's Soul. Furthermore, Origen taught that man's soul pre-existed, basing his assumption on Plato's philosophy.

Like Pythagoras, Plato admits the pre-existence of the nous,or divine soul of humanity, which chooses the existence for which it must incarnate. It survives the death of the body, and if it has not attained sufficient perfection to merit endless bliss, it must be subjected to new tests by reincarnating in order to attain further progress and perfection. In many other respects, particularly his emphasis on mathematics, Plato can be viewed as teaching in the Pythagorean tradition. { The Roots of Consciousness - Ancient Greece}

Origen's teaching on the Pre-existent soul departs the Platonic philosophy of man's pre-existent soul in this manner:

The earliest surviving Christian writings on the preexistence were from the Platonist Origen, who derived the doctrine from the writings of Plato. Origen believed that the soul was assigned a body as a penalty for its sin of looking downward toward the corrupt earth. The doctrine also derives in part from a repudiation of Greek thought by Tertullian, who argued that for each immaterial soul, a material body was created for it. {Wikipedia.org - Pre-existence}

But this was not the only resource into the idea of man's pre-existent soul. St. Augustine entreated the notion, and there had developed four hypothesis concerning the pre-existent doctrine:

In De Libero Arbitrio III.20 & 21 (circa 395 C.E.), when Augustine first attends to the question of the soul's origin in a manner that focuses upon particular possibilities, he does so as part of an anti-Manichean theodicy intended to show that it is the human soul rather than God that is responsible for the presence of moral evil in the world. Thus, as he later points out in Letter 143 (circa 412 C.E.), he is not concerned to adjudicate between these competing hypotheses, but merely to show that each is consistent with a non-Manichean, Neoplatonizing account of moral evil. Nonetheless, the four hypotheses he does advance are important evidence about how he understands the conceptual landscape [O'Daly 1987, pp. 15-20; Mendelson 1998, pp. 30-44], and the anti-Manichean polemic notwithstanding, it is instructive that he makes no attempt to choose between or even to offer a tentative ranking of them. { Saint Augustine - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy; Mendelson, Michael, "Saint Augustine", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2000 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.)}

To further articulate the nature of Saint Augustine and his understanding of the Pre-Existent of Man's soul, Mendelson continues:

Interestingly enough, two of the four hypotheses require the soul's existence prior to embodiment. On the first, the soul is sent by God to administer the body (henceforth the "sent" hypothesis); on the second, the soul comes to inhabit the body by its own choice (henceforth the "voluntarist" hypothesis). In later presentations of these hypotheses (though not in De Libero Arbitrio III), Augustine treats the voluntarist hypothesis as involving both a sin on the soul's part and a cyclical process whereby the soul is subject to multiple incarnations [Letter 166.27]. The other two hypotheses, the "traducianist" and the "creationist," do not involve pre-existence, but there is nonetheless a significant contrast between them. On the traducianist account, all souls are propagated from Adam's soul in a manner analogous to that of the body, thus linking each soul to all previous ones by a kind of genealogical chain. On the creationist hypothesis, however, God creates a new soul for each body, thus creating a kind of vertical link between God and each individual soul. { Ibid.}

And to which concept and logical possibility did Saint Augustine give himself over concerning one of these four hypotheses that were prevalent in his time:

These hypotheses do not exhaust the logical possibilities, but they were the main contenders in Augustine's time. There remains controversy over the extent to which Augustine himself was inclined towards either of the hypotheses that required pre-existence [O'Connell 1968, O'Daly 1987, pp. 15-20; O'Donnell 1992 II.34-5], but there are passages in the Confessions [see Confessions I.6-8] and elsewhere [e.g. De Genesi Contra Manicheos 2.8 (circa 388-9 C.E.) and De Genesi ad Literam Imperfectus Liber 1.3 (circa 393 C.E.)] that have led some to regard it as a possibility he takes very seriously indeed, perhaps even preferring it, at least until the early part of the fifth century [O'Connell 1968; Teske 1991]. Moreover, given the Neoplatonic architectonic of the Confessions, this would not be all that surprising, for the notion that the preexistent soul falls into the body is a conspicuous feature of Plotinus' thought as well as of Neoplatonism in general [e.g. Plotnius, Enneads IV.8; Origen, On First Principles 1.4.4]. In this regard, it is also not surprising that Augustine should have come to identify the hypothesis of the soul's voluntary descent into the body as involving both sin and cyclicism. Not only are these features reminiscent of what he eventually came to learn of Origen's view, but given the Neoplatonic framework underlying his conception of the soul's origin, it is difficult to construe the soul's choice of embodiment in positive terms. {Ibid.}

Where the Mormon teaching departs on the philosophy of Man's Pre-existent soul is that they believe Man is spiritually Begotten, Christ being the Eldest of the Spiritually Begotten Children of God. That man was provided a choice in the Heavenly Council to accept the Plan of Salvation of Christ, or of our other Brother Lucifer:

And I, the Lord God, spake unto Moses, saying: That Satan, whom thou hast commanded in the name of mine Only Begotten, is the same which was from the beginning, and he came before me, saying - Behold, here am I, send me, I will be thy son, and I will redeem all mankind, that one soul shall not be lost, and surely I will do it: wherefore give me thine honor. But, behold, my Beloved Son, which was my Beloved and Chosen from the beginning, said unto me - Father, thy will be done, and the glory be thine forever. Wherefore, because that Satan rebelled against me, and sought to destroy the agency of man, which I the Lord God, had given him, and also, that I should give unto him mine own power; by the power of mine Only Begotten, I caused that he should be cast down; and he became Satan, yea, even the devil, the father of all lies, to deceive and to blind men, and to lead them captive at his will, even as many as would not hearken unto my voice. (Moses 4:1-4).

Thus, the Mormon assertion that the doctrine of Pre-existence was originally taught and believed in First Century Christianity is erroneous. The philosophy that was taught by Phylogaeus (500-580 BCE) and Plato (427-347 BCE) was based upon Greek Mysticism and Philosophy that was adopted By Origen, and understood by Saint Augustine.

And, even the Greek philosophy behind the doctrine of Pre-Existence is contrary to the Mormon Assertion of the idea of Man's Pre-Existent soul and his origin.

I was always curious regarding the references to Origen and the idea of Man's Pre-existence.

From what I have spent some time studying, the philosophy behind man's pre-existent soul has it's own various spectrum of thinking. Plato asserts that the origin of man's soul pre-existed, but that it also reincarnates itself in a progression until man's soul matures in each life. What man's soul doesn't learn in one life, it learns in another.

Phylogaeus seems to have taught that only the elite of men are capable of "ascension" to the divine.

Origen seemed to have taught that Pre-Existent Man looked upon the corrupt nature of the world, and because of the Antemortal Man (or the Spirit of Mankind) their punishment was mortal embodiment due to their sin against God.

Augustine studied four proponents to the origin of man's soul, two adhering to the philosophy of man's pre-existent, and two that do not.

And yet, Mormon Apologist state that all this was actually understood in the First Century Christian Church?

If Plato's teaching progressed, along with Phylogeanism, then it could have been understood by the first century Christian Gnostic's and other such mysticism cults of the First Century. There could have been some indoctrination of such philosophy in the Early Christian Church, but no substantial evidence standing on actual scripture from the Apostolic fathers.

And, even in light of the understanding of the Greek Philosophy behind Man's Pre-Existence, Mormon teachings is a far departure in its assertions that we were spiritual offspring's of God because even the greek philosophy of man's pre-existence makes no assertion.

From what I am finding out about this idea is that it was not influence by Judaic Mysticism but from a very ancient cult of Orpheus.

The whole premise of Man's Soul and the origin of Man's Soul is under the concept of the idea of Transmigration of the soul.

Namely, according to what I have read and understood so far, Orpheus Mysticism believed that the soul of Man is eternal and that the flesh is actually an imprisonment of the soul. The soul, once the flesh dies, ascends into the heavenly realm and receives its particular judgment and either: 1) Is commissioned back into a tabernacle of flesh as a reincarnate being; or, 2) The soul chooses its next incarnation and therefore cycles through various life's.

In order for the Soul of man to return back to the divine nature of God and/or Gods, it stands in need of redemption. Thus, when it receives redemption, it grows in knowledge and by its obedience the soul then progresses from one incarnation to another as it learns from its previous life until it is able to stand as a perfected entity before God and/or Gods and receives its exalted state with the divine.

Therefore, this sounds like Mormon's concept of the Plan of salvation without the transmigration of the soul and the various levels of incarnation:

Well, here is what I found on wikipedia.org:

We do not know exactly how the doctrine of metempsychosis arose in Greece; most scholars do not believe it was borrowed from Egypt or that it somehow was transmitted from ancient Hindu thinkers of India. It is easiest to assume that earlier ideas which had never been extinguished were utilized for religious and philosophic purposes. The Orphic religion, which held it, first appeared in Thrace upon the semi-barbarous north-eastern frontier. Orpheus, its legendary founder, is said to have taught that soul and body are united by a compact unequally binding on either; the soul is divine, immortal and aspires to freedom, while the body holds it in fetters as a prisoner. Death dissolves this compact, but only to re-imprison the liberated soul after a short time: for the wheel of birth revolves inexorably. Thus the soul continues its journey, alternating between a separate unrestrained existence and fresh reincarnation, round the wide circle of necessity, as the companion of many bodies of men and animals." To these unfortunate prisoners Orpheus proclaims the message of liberation, that they stand in need of the grace of redeeming gods and of Dionysus in particular, and calls them to turn to God by ascetic piety of life and self-purification: the purer their lives the higher will be their next reincarnation, until the soul has completed the spiral ascent of destiny to live for ever as God from whom it comes. Such was the teaching of Orphism which appeared in Greece about the 6th century BC, organized itself into private and public mysteries at Eleusis and elsewhere, and produced a copious literature.

The earliest Greek thinker with whom metempsychosis is connected is Pherecydes; but Pythagoras, who is said to have been his pupil, is its first famous philosophic exponent. Pythagoras probably neither invented the doctrine nor imported it from Egypt, but made his reputation by bringing Orphic doctrine from North-Eastern Hellas to Magna Graecia and by instituting societies for its diffusion.

The real weight and importance of metempsychosis in Western tradition is due to its adoption by Plato. Had he not embodied it in some of his greatest works it would be merely a matter of curious investigation for the Western anthropologist and student of folk-lore. In the eschatological myth which closes the Republic he tells the story how Er, the son of Armenius, miraculously returned to life on the twelfth day after death and recounted the secrets of the other world. After death, he said, he went with others to the place of Judgment and saw the souls returning from heaven and from purgatory, and proceeded with them to a place where they chose new lives, human and animal. He saw the soul of Orpheus changing into a swan, Thamyras becoming a nightingale, musical birds choosing to be men, the soul of Atalanta choosing the honours of an athlete. Men were seen passing into animals and wild and tame animals changing into each other. After their choice the souls drank of Lethe and then shot away like stars to their birth. There are myths and theories to the same effect in other dialogues, the Phaedrus, Meno, Phaedo, Timaeus and Laws. In Plato's view the number of souls was fixed; birth therefore is never the creation of a soul, but only a transmigration from one body to another. Plato's acceptance of the doctrine is characteristic of his sympathy with popular beliefs and desire to incorporate them in a purified form into his system. Aristotle, a far less emotional and sympathetic mind, has a doctrine of immortality totally inconsistent with it.

In later Greek literature the doctrine appears from time to time; it is mentioned in a fragment of Menander (the Inspired Woman) and satirized by Lucian (Gallus 18 seq.). In Roman literature it is found as early as Ennius, who in his Calabrian home must have been familiar with the Greek teachings which had descended to his times from the cities of Magna Graecia. In a lost passage of his Annals, a Roman history in verse, Ennius told how he had seen Homer in a dream, who had assured him that the same soul which had animated both the poets had once belonged to a peacock. Persius in one of his satires (vi. 9) laughs at Ennius for this: it is referred to also by Lucretius (i. 124) and by Horace (Epist. II. i. 52). Virgil works the idea into his account of, the Underworld in the sixth book of the Aeneid (vv. 724 sqq.). It persists in antiquity down to the latest classic thinkers, Plotinus and the other Neoplatonists.

My only question is how did Joseph Smith ever come into such philosophy and understanding of something that was of Antiquity?