Talk:Heaven and Hell (Swedenborg book)

Influence on Joseph Smith

I found the reference to this book's influence on Joseph Smith to be strange, out of place, and oddly incomplete. I didn't know whether to erase it, or balance it. The concept of 3 heavens is not all that uncommon, Indian mystics call the Christian heaven, hell, and world of spirits the Aastral world. The heavenly realm is divided into three regions. Was Swedenborg influenced by Indian mystics? That is a strange kind of conclusion to draw do to an "apparent similarity" of thought. Furthermore, Swedenborg and Joseph Smith both had access to I Cor 15:40-42.

So, upon looking into this more, it is likely that Joseph Smith knew a well read New Church member or members who were very familiar with the Swedenborg's writings (there were converts to Swedenborg's religion in the U.S.). It is not likely that Joseph Smith read Heaven and Hell himself. They are complicated and hard to understand even for modern educated people. Joseph Smith's mother states that by the age of eighteen, Joseph hadn't read the Bible all the way through and was less inclined to reading than any other of the Smith children. (Lucy Mack Smith, History of Joseph Smith, pg 82) Sure, Swedenborg's writings existed in the U.S. when Joseph was alive and Joseph probably heard of him, but the book itself was not as accessible to Joseph as some may think.

A Swodenborgian convert, Edward Hunter, later converted to the LDS Church in 1839 after protecting the Mormon elders when they came through the area preaching. Joseph stayed with Edward for three days and discussed a number of topics, among them the teachings of Emanuel Swedenborg. From these conversations Joseph likely learned all he needed to know about Swedenborg from Mr. Hunter, which led to Joseph Smith's only recorded quote about him, "Emanuel Swedenborg had a view of the world to come, but for daily food he perished." Hunter took this to mean that Swedenborg's teachings were unreliable and without credibility (Hunter, William E., Edward Hunter, Faithful Steward, 1970, pg 51.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smpf38 (talk • contribs) 06:22, 9 March 2009

The biggest issue with that section is that right now it reads as Mormon apologetics followed by a refutation thereof. It's not balanced, it's just one of the worst sections I've seen on Wikipedia to date. Also, the idea that 'Indian Mystics' is a meaningful term is outright Hilarious - identify Which group of natives you're talking about and then you could potentially have a point, otherwise that's like saying "Somewhere on a continent that once had up to 100,000,000 people, there might have been a group that believes in an afterlife similar to what Mormons do. Maybe. But I can't prove it." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.71.109.184 (talk) 13:08, 29 February 2016 (UTC)