Joseph Smith, The Cambridge Years

Anti-Mormons, liberal Mormons, and secular historians have posited many different models and sources to explain the Restoration.  Magic, esotericism, Freemasonry, American interpretations of the origins of Indians, nineteenth century biblical studies, American political theory, and revivalist or primitivist Protestantism, opposition to Enlightenment philosophy etc. have all been proposed as models.  Each of these proposed models or theories have received detailed response and criticism by LDS scholars.

But whatever the relative explanatory merits of these individual theories, one important fact must be remembered.  These theories are not complementary; they are contradictory.  Each of these models posits a wide array of alleged sources that Joseph had to have read, or minimally been influenced by for a given theory to be true.  No one in the nineteenth century could possibly have had access to or have read all the texts that different interpreters claim he must have read for their case to be made.  If Joseph spent his time reading biblical studies or Protestant theology or Enlightenment philosophy, he could not have had the time or resources to become deeply informed in Freemasonry or Magic.

If Joseph had spent his entire life studying in Cambridge University, he still could not have read all the material his critics claim he must have read.  All of these theories cannot be simultaneously true.  It therefore is not enough to merely show the sources on magic that Joseph Smith might have had access to.  It is equally necessary to demonstrate that the other theories that attempt to explain Joseph Smith are inferior to a proposed theory.

And remember: Joseph Smith didn’t have access to Google–like his critics do!