View of the Hebrews theory of Book of Mormon authorship

Contents
Articles about the Book of Mormon
Authorship
Translation process
Gold plates
Witnesses
The Bible and the Book of Mormon
Language and the Book of Mormon
Geography
DNA
Anachronisms
Doctrine and teachings
Lamanites
Other


View of the Hebrews theory of Book of Mormon authorship


Question: Could Joseph Smith have used Ethan Smith's View of the Hebrews as a guideline for creating the Book of Mormon?

Book of Mormon Central, KnoWhy #502: Is the Book of Mormon Like Any Other Nineteenth Century Book? (Video)

Criticisms related to View of the Hebrews and the Book of Mormon

  • It is claimed that a 19th century work by Ethan Smith, View of the Hebrews, provided source material for Joseph Smith's construction of the Book of Mormon.
  • Some also postulate a link between Ethan Smith and Oliver Cowdery, since both men lived in Poultney, Vermont while Smith served as the pastor of the church that Oliver Cowdery's family attended at the time that View of the Hebrews was being written.

Many of the criticisms proposed are based upon B. H. Roberts' list of parallels, which only had validity if one applied a hemispheric geography model to the Book of Mormon

The View of the Hebrews theory is yet another attempt to fit a secular origin to the Book of Mormon. Many of the criticisms proposed are based upon B. H. Roberts' list of parallels, which only had validity if one applied a hemispheric geography model to the Book of Mormon. There are a significant number of differences between the two books, which are easily discovered upon reading Ethan Smith's work. Many points that Ethan Smith thought were important are not mentioned at all in the Book of Mormon, and many of the "parallels" are no longer valid based upon current scholarship.[1]

Advocates of the Ethan Smith theory must also explain why Joseph, the ostensible forger, had the chutzpah to point out the source of his forgery. They must also explain why, if Joseph found this evidence so compelling, he did not exploit it for use in the Book of Mormon text itself, since the Book of Mormon contains no reference to the many "unparallels" that Ethan assured his readers virtually guaranteed a Hebrew connection to the Amerindians.


Question: Was the View of the Hebrews theory of Book of Mormon origin advanced during the lifetime of Joseph Smith?

The theory the Joseph Smith plagiarized View of the Hebrews was never advanced during Joseph Smith's lifetime

The theory the Joseph Smith plagiarized View of the Hebrews was never advanced during his lifetime. The prevailing theory of the day was the Spalding Theory, which quickly lost credibility upon the discovery of an actual Spalding manuscript in 1884 which bore no resemblance to the Book of Mormon. There are no records which indicate that Joseph Smith came into contact with the View of the Hebrews during the period of time that he was translating the Book of Mormon. The View of the Hebrews theory was in fact first proposed by I. Woodbridge Riley in 1902, 58 years after the death of the prophet.[2]

Joseph Smith quoted View of the Hebrews as supporting the Book of Mormon

There was, however, a reference to View of the Hebrews within Joseph Smith's lifetime, but it came from the prophet himself. In an article published in the Times and Seasons on June 1, 1842, Joseph quoted View of the Hebrews in support of the Book of Mormon:

If such may have been the fact, that a part of the Ten Tribes came over to America, in the way we have supposed, leaving the cold regions of Assareth behind them in quest of a milder climate, it would be natural to look for tokens of the presence of Jews of some sort, along countries adjacent to the Atlantic. In order to this, we shall here make an extract from an able work: written exclusively on the subject of the Ten Tribes having come from Asia by the way of Bherings Strait, by the Rev. Ethan Smith, Pultney, Vt., who relates as follows: "Joseph Merrick, Esq., a highly respectable character in the church at Pittsfield, gave the following account: That in 1815, he was leveling some ground under and near an old wood shed, standing on a place of his, situated on (Indian Hill)... [Joseph then discusses the supposed phylacteries found among Amerindians, citing View of the Hebrews p. 220, 223.][3]

It strains credulity to claim that Joseph drew attention to the work from which he derived most of his ideas. Why would he call attention to the source of his forgery?


Question: What did B.H. Roberts say about View of the Hebrews and the Book of Mormon?

B.H. Roberts was playing "devil's advocate" when he examined View of the Hebrews, and showing what a critic might do

Main article:B.H. Roberts and Studies of the Book of Mormon

The View of the Hebrews theory was examined in detail by B. H. Roberts in 1921 and 1922. Roberts took the position of examining the Book of Mormon from a critical perspective in order to alert the General Authorities to possible future avenues of attack by critics. The resulting manuscripts were titled Book of Mormon Difficulties and A Parallel. Roberts, who believed in a hemispheric geography for the Book of Mormon, highlighted a number of parallels between View of the Hebrews and The Book of Mormon. Roberts stated,

[C]ould the people of Mulek and of Lehi...part of the time numbering and occupying the land at least from Yucatan to Cumorah...live and move and have their being in the land of America and not come in contact with other races and tribes of men, if such existed in the New World within Book of Mormon times? To make this seem possible the area occupied by the Nephites and Lamanites would have to be extremely limited, much more limited, I fear, than the Book of Mormon would admit our assuming.[4]

Roberts concluded that, if one assumed that Joseph Smith wrote the Book of Mormon himself, that View of the Hebrews could have provided him with a foundation for creating the book. In fact, many of the issues highlighted by Roberts vanish when a limited geography theory is considered. The acceptance of the View of the Hebrews theory is therefore contingent upon the acceptance of a hemispheric geography model for the Book of Mormon. In order to promote View of the Hebrews as a source, critics necessarily reject any limited geography theory proposal for the Book of Mormon.

Roberts rejected the idea that the Book of Mormon was not divine

In 1985, Roberts' manuscripts were published under the title Studies of the Book of Mormon. This book is used by critics to support their claim that B. H. Roberts lost his testimony after performing the study. Roberts, however, clearly continued to publicly support the Book of Mormon until his death, and reaffirmed his testimony both publicly and in print.


Question: What are the similarities and differences between View of the Hebrews and the Book of Mormon?

Examples of parallels and differences

Some parallels do exist between the two books. For example, View of the Hebrews postulates the existence of a civilized and a barbarous nation who were constantly at war with one another, with the civilized society eventually being destroyed by their uncivilized brethren. This has obvious similarities to the story of the Nephites and the Lamanites in the Book of Mormon.

"Parallels" that actually aren't parallels

Many of the "parallels" that are discussed are not actually parallels at all once they are fully examined:

Both speak of... View of the Hebrews Book of Mormon
...the destruction of Jerusalem... ...by the Romans in A.D. 70. ...by the Babylonians in 586 B.C.
...Israelites coming to the American continent... ...via dry land across the Bering Strait. ...via the ocean on board a ship.
...colonists spread out to fill the entire land... ...from the North to the South. ...from the South to the North.
...a great lawgiver (whom some assume to be associated with the legend of Quetzalcoatl)... ...who is identified as Moses. ...who is identified as Jesus Christ.
...an ancient book that was preserved for a long time and then buried... ...because they had lost the knowledge of reading it and it would be of no further use to them. [5] ...in order to preserve the writings of prophets for future generations.
...a buried book taken from the earth... ...in the form of four, dark yellow, folded leaves of old parchment.[6] ...in the form of a set of gold metal plates.
...the Egyptian language, since ...an Egyptian influence is present in hieroglyphic paintings made by native Americans.[7] ...a reformed Egyptian was used to record a sacred history.

Parallels that are everywhere

Some "parallels" between the Book of Mormon and View of the Hebrews are actually parallels with the Bible as well:

The Book of Mormon View of the Hebrews The King James Bible
The Book of Mormon tells the story of inspired seers and prophets. View of the Hebrews talks of Indian traditions that state that their fathers were able to foretell the future and control nature. The Bible tells the story of inspired seers and prophets.
The Book of Mormon was translated by means of the Nephite interpreters, which consisted of two stones fastened to a breastplate, and later by means of a seer stone, both of which were later referred to by the name "Urim and Thummim" three years after the translation was completed. View of the Hebrews describes a breastplate with two white buttons fastened to it as resembling the Urim and Thummim. The Bible describes the Urim and Thummim as being fastened to a breastplate (Exodus 28:30).

This highlights the fact that general parallels are likely to be found between works that treat the same types of subjects, such as ancient history. In what ancient conflict did one side not see themselves as representing light and civilization against the dark barbarism of their enemies?

"Unparallels"

Critics generally ignore the presence of many "unparallels"—these are elements of Ethan Smith's book which would have provided a rich source of material for Joseph to use in order to persuade his contemporaries that the Book of Mormon was an ancient history of the American Indians, and that they were descended from Israel. Yet, the Book of Mormon consistently ignores such supposed "bulls-eyes," which is good news for proponents of the Book of Mormon's authenticity, since virtually all of Ethan's "evidences" have been judged to be false or misleading.

The lack of such "unparallels" is bad news, however, for anyone wanting to claim that Joseph got his inspiration or information from Ethan Smith.

Main article: "Unparallels": superficially-appealing evidence from View of the Hebrews that the Book of Mormon ignores

Scripture use in View of the Hebrews and the Book of Mormon

If the View of the Hebrews served as the basis for the Book of Mormon, one would think that the Bible scriptures used by Ethan Smith would be mined by Joseph Smith for the Book of Mormon. Yet, this is not the case.

Main articles: Analysis of Isaiah scriptures used in Book of Mormon and View of the Hebrews and Analysis of non-Isaiah scriptures used in Book of Mormon and View of the Hebrews

Why was this only discovered later?

No contemporary critic of Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon pointed out the supposedly "obvious" connection to the View of the Hebrews and the Book of Mormon. It is only with the failure of the Spaulding theory that critics began seeking a new naturalistic explanation for Joseph's production of a 500+ book of scripture. As Stephen Ricks notes:

Beyond these "unparallels," there is a further question that must be answered by proponents of the View of the Hebrews hypothesis: why do none of the early critics of the Book of Mormon mention Ethan Smith in their attacks on it? If the parallels are so evident, why weren't they noticed by individuals who were not only acquainted with Ethan Smith's book, but were also existentially interested in its claims? Why wasn't it prominently mentioned as a source for the Book of Mormon until the beginning of the twentieth century, when the book itself had only an antiquarian interest and its contents were no longer so widely a part of popular discussion? My suspicion is that what appear today to be "distinctives" of View of the Hebrews, eschatological and otherwise, seemed less so in the early part of the nineteenth century, when these ideas flowed freely in published and unpublished forums.[8]


Question: Has the book View of the Hebrews been readily available?

Because availability was limited, BYU's Religious Studies Center re-published the 1825 edition of View of the Hebrews in 1996

The View of the Hebrews theory became more popular as the availability of the book itself diminished. The best evidence that argues against View of the Hebrews as the primary source for the Book of Mormon is a reading of the text itself, yet the ability to access that text had become more difficult over the years. In order to provide the interested reader with the ability to decide for themselves, BYU's Religious Studies Center re-published the 1825 edition of View of the Hebrews in 1996.[9] It is also available at wikisource.


Question: Is there a link between Ethan Smith, author of View of the Hebrews, and Oliver Cowdery?

Both Ethan Smith and Oliver Cowdery lived in Poultney, Vermont while Smith served as the pastor of the church that Oliver Cowdery's family attended

Critics postulate a link between Ethan Smith and Oliver Cowdery, since both men lived in Poultney, Vermont while Smith served as the pastor of the church that Oliver Cowdery's family attended at the time that View of the Hebrews was being written. Beyond speculation based upon this circumstantial evidence, there is no indication of a connection between View of the Hebrews, Oliver Cowdery, and the Book of Mormon.

This article from BYU Studies shows that the type of connection that critics align with Oliver and Ethan almost certainly did not exist.

Testimony from Lorenzo Saunders

At least one critic has attempted to place Oliver Cowdery on the Joseph Smith farm beginning in 1826 based on the testimony of one Lorenzo Saunders to strengthen the supposed connection between Ethan Smith, Oliver Cowdery, and the origins of the Book of Mormon.[10] Dan Vogel writes:

On 19 Janaury 1885, Thomas Gregg of Hamilton, Hancock County, Illinois, wrote to Lorenzo Saunders living near Reading, Michigan, requesting information about Mormon origins. Gregg's letter, as reproduced by Charles A. Shook reads as follows:

Charles A. Shook wrote an expose of Mormonism in 1914 called The True Origin Of The Book of Mormon. He quoted this letter from Lorenzo (brother-in-law to Sally and Willard Chase —the same Chases who had trouble with Joseph) as a means of placing Oliver close to Joseph Smith in years before the publication of the Book of Mormon. However, as Vogel himself writes as commentary in a footnote to this letter:

4. Saunders' claim that Cowdery first came to Palmyra and Manchester in the summer of 1826 is not corroborated in any other source. However, it is known that Cowdery's brother Lyman was in the area as early as 1825 and possibly taught school in Manchester prior to Oliver's arrival for the 1828-1829 winter term. This is another example of Saunders' tendency to remember things in conformity with the demands of his interviewers, which should be considered when assessing his statements regarding Rigdon's appearances in the Palmyra/Manchester area (see note 10 below).[11]

Thus we have:

  1. A late source as the letter comes a little more than 5 decades after Saunders was supposed to have seen Saunders on the farm.
  2. A biased source as Thomas Gregg was an avid Spaulding theorist and Saunders was certainly no friend to Joseph.
  3. A more than plausible alternative for this supposed presence of Oliver on the Smith farm in 1826 which Saunders can easily misremember or remember in conformity with the demands of the situation which, as Vogel notes, is something he was wont to do.

This source is nearly worthless in establishing anything of value in the historical record. Any claims of the evidence being "inconclusive" for Oliver's presence on the Smith farm or meeting Joseph before 1829 based upon this source are of the the same value.


"Unparallels" between the Book of Mormon and A View of the Hebrews

Summary: Those who propose a connection between the Book of Mormon and A View of the Hebrews generally ignore the presence of many "unparallels"—these are elements of Ethan Smith's book which would have provided a rich source of material for Joseph to use in order to persuade his contemporaries that the Book of Mormon was an ancient history of the American Indians, and that they were descended from Israel. Yet, the Book of Mormon consistently ignores such supposed "bulls-eyes," which is good news for proponents of the Book of Mormon's authenticity, since virtually all of Ethan's "evidences" have been judged to be false or misleading.

Analysis of scripture use in the Book of Mormon and A View of the Hebrews

Source(s) of the criticism
Critical sources
  • Richard Abanes, Becoming Gods: A Closer Look at 21st-Century Mormonism (Harvest House Publishers: 2005). 60-61, 360n59-63. ( Index of claims ) (Sources: Tanner, Persuitte)
  • Richard Abanes, One Nation Under Gods: A History of the Mormon Church (New York: Four Walls Eight Windows, 2003), 69 ( Index of claims ) (Sources: Persuitte)
  • John Ankerberg and John Weldon, Everything You Ever Wanted to Know about Mormonism (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1992), 279–80, 301–2
  • Peter Bartley, Mormonism: The Prophet, the Book, and the Cult (Dublin: Veritas, 1989), 28–29.
  • Fawn M. Brodie, No Man Knows My History: The Life of Joseph Smith (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1945), 46–47. ( Index of claims )
  • Maurice C. Burrell, Wide of the Truth: A Critical Assessment of the History, Doctrines and Practices of the Mormon Religion (London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1972).
  • Marvin W. Cowan, Mormon Claims Answered, (Salt Lake City: Utah Lighthouse Ministry, 1997 [original self-published, 1975]), ???.
  • Charles A. Crane & Steven A. Crane, Ashamed of Joseph : Mormon Foundations Crumble (Joplin, Mo. : College Press Pub. Co., 1993), 123–5
  • Ed Decker and Dave Hunt, The God Makers (Eugene, OR: Harvest House, 1984),. (Detailed review)
  • John Dehlin, "Why People Leave the LDS Church," (2008).
  • Ronald Enroth, A Guide to Cults and New Religions (Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity , 1983).
  • Gordon H. Fraser, Is Mormonism Christian? (Chicago: Moody Press, 1957).
  • Ralph L. Foster, The Book of Mormon on Trial (Salt Lake City: n.p., 1963).
  • G. T. Harrison, Mormons Are Peculiar People (New York: Vantage, 1954).
  • Mervin B. Hogan, " "A Parallel': A Matter of Chance vs. Coincidence," Rocky Mountain Mason (January 1956): 17–31.
  • Harold H. Hougey, "A Parallel"?The Basis of the Book of Mormon (Concord, CA: Pacific, 1963).
  • Robert N. Hullinger, "The Lost Tribes of Israel and the Book of Mormon," Lutheran Quarterly 22:3 (August 1970): 319–29.
  • Larry Jonas, Mormon Claims Examined (Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker, 1961).
  • Wesley M. Jones, A Critical Study of Book of Mormon Sources (Detroit: Harlo Press, 1964).
  • Thomas O'Dea, The Mormons (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957).
  • Brigham D. Madsen, ed., B. H. Roberts: Studies of the Book of Mormon (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1985), ???.
  • Richard N. and Joan K. Ostling, Mormon America: The Power and the Promise, (New York:HarperCollins Publishers, 2000), 29. ( Index of claims )
  • Grant H. Palmer, An Insider's View of Mormon Origins (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2002) 58–64. ( Index of claims )
  • David Persuitte, Joseph Smith and the Origins of The Book of Mormon (2nd edition), (McFarland & Company, October 2000), ( Index of claims )
  • John A. Price, "The Book of Mormon vs. Anthropological Prehistory," The Indian Historian 7:3 (Summer 1974): 35–40.
  • Leslie Rumble, "The Book of Mormon," The Homiletic and Pastoral Review 60:4 (January 1960): 338–45.
  • James M. Sire, Scripture Twisting: 20 Ways the Cults Misread the Bible (Downers Grove: Intervarsity, 1980).
  • George D. Smith, "Defending the Keystone: Book of Mormon Difficulties," Sunstone 6 no. (Issue #3) (May–June 1981), 45–50. off-site
  • George D. Smith, "'Is There Any Way to Escape These Difficulties?' The Book of Mormon Studies of B. H. Roberts," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 17 no. 2 (Summer 1984), 94–111.
  • George D. Smith, "Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon," Free Inquiry 4:1 (Winter 1983): 21–31.
  • Simon Southerton, Losing a Lost Tribe: Native Americans, DNA, and the Mormon Church (Salt Lake City, UT: Signature Books, 2004) 153. ( Index of claims )
  • Jerald and Sandra Tanner, Mormonism—Shadow or Reality?, 5th edition, (Salt Lake City: Utah Lighthouse Ministry, 1987).
  • Jerald and Sandra Tanner, The Changing World of Mormonism (Moody Press, 1979), 126–8.( Index of claims )
  • Dan Vogel, Indian Origins and the Book of Mormon: Religious Solutions from Columbus to Joseph Smith (Salt Lake City, Utah: Signature Book, 1986), 48–49, 68 (the argument is suggested more than stated outright.
  • I. Wiley Woodbridge, The Founder of Mormonism (New York, 1902), 124–126.

Notes

  1. ↑ John W. Welch, "View of the Hebrews: 'An Unparallel'," in Reexploring the Book of Mormon, edited by John W. Welch (Provo, Utah: FARMS, 1992), 83–87.
  2. ↑ I. Woodbridge Riley, The Founder of Mormonism (New York, 1902), 124–126.
  3. ↑ Joseph Smith, Jr., "From Priest's American Antiquities," (1 June 1842) Times and Seasons 3:813-815.
  4. ↑ Brigham H. Roberts, Studies of the Book of Mormon, ed. Brigham D. Madsen (Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 1985).
  5. ↑ View of the Hebrews: 1825 2nd Edition Complete Text by Ethan Smith, edited by Charles D. Tate Jr., (Provo: BYU Religious Studies Center, 1996), 223. ISBN 1570082472. off-site wikisource
  6. ↑ Ethan Smith, 220.
  7. ↑ Ethan Smith, 184-185.
  8. ↑ Stephen D. Ricks, "Review of The Use of the Old Testament in the Book of Mormon by Wesley P. Walters," FARMS Review of Books 4/1 (1992): 235–250. off-site
  9. ↑ Andrew H. Hedges, "Review of: View of the Hebrews," FARMS Review of Books 9/1 (1997): 63–68. off-site
  10. ↑ Jeremy Runnells, "Debunking FairMormon" under Witnesses. Last updated 4 June 2014
  11. ↑ Dan Vogel, ed., Early Mormon Documents 5 vols. (Salt Lake City, UT: Signature Books, 1996-2003) 3:176-7
Retrieved from "https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/index.php?title=View_of_the_Hebrews_theory_of_Book_of_Mormon_authorship&oldid=247641"