Array

Book of Mormon/Authorship theories: Difference between revisions

No edit summary
m (Bot: Automated text replacement (-\|H1 +|H))
Line 3: Line 3:
{{H1
{{H1
|L=Book of Mormon/Authorship theories
|L=Book of Mormon/Authorship theories
|H1=Secular authorship theories for the Book of Mormon
|H=Secular authorship theories for the Book of Mormon
|S=
|S=
|L1=An overview of secular authorship theories for the Book of Mormon
|L1=An overview of secular authorship theories for the Book of Mormon

Revision as of 20:02, 26 June 2017


Secular authorship theories for the Book of Mormon


Jump to Subtopic:


An overview of secular authorship theories for the Book of Mormon


Jump to Subtopic:


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

The Spaulding Theory of Book of Mormon Authorship

Summary: Since the Book of Mormon was first published, many have been unwilling to accept Joseph Smith's account of how it was produced. It's easy to dismiss Joseph's story of angels, gold plates, and a miraculous interpretation process; it's much harder to come up with an alternative explanation that accounts for the complexity and consistency of the Book of Mormon, as well as the historical details of its production.

Many critics, unwilling to credit the uneducated, backwater farm boy Joseph Smith as the Book of Mormon's author, have looked to possible sources from which he could have plagiarized. One of the earliest theories was that Joseph plagiarized the unpublished manuscript of a novel written by the Reverend Solomon Spalding (1761–1816).

Spalding was a lapsed Calvinist clergyman and author of an epic tale of the ancient Native American "Mound Builders." The theory postulates that Spalding wrote his manuscript in biblical phraseology and read it to many of his friends. He subsequently took the manuscript to Pittsburgh, where it fell into the hands of a Mr. Patterson, in whose office Sidney Rigdon worked, and that through Sidney Rigdon it came into the possession of Joseph Smith and was made the basis of the Book of Mormon.

Neither the manuscript nor historical evidence supports the Spaulding Theory, and the vast majority of critics have completely abandoned it today as a plausible explanation for the Book of Mormon's origins.

One of the earliest theories of Book of Mormon authorship was that Joseph plagiarized the unpublished manuscript of a novel written by the Reverend Solomon Spalding (or Spaulding)

The earliest uses of the Spaulding theory were from the editor of The Wayne Sentinel in 1833 and by Eber D. Howe in his book Mormonism Unvailed [sic]. The vast majority of critics from the early 1830s to the early 1900s argued for this theory of Book of Mormon origins. This changed dramatically with the rediscovery of the actual Spaulding manuscript in 1885. Since the early 1900s, the most common explanation has been that Joseph plagiarized from Ethan Smith's View of the Hebrews. Today there are few, if any, who adopt the Spaulding theory beyond a couple of writers.[1] Spaulding theorists hold that the production of the Book of Mormon was a conspiracy involving Sidney Rigdon, Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery and others. It is claimed by these theorists that Joseph Smith either plagiarized or relied upon a manuscript by Solomon Spaulding to write the Book of Mormon. These individuals search for links between Spalding and Rigdon in order to make the theory more plausible. Joseph Smith is assumed to have been Rigdon's pawn.

Initial critics of the Book of Mormon tended to take one of two stances—either:

  1. The Book of Mormon was a clumsy, obvious forgery upon which no intelligent person would waste time; and/or
  2. Joseph Smith was the Book of Mormon's obvious author.

Ironically, with the appearance of the Spalding theory, critics quickly began to claim that Joseph Smith could not have written the Book of Mormon, and attributed the Book of Mormon's writing to Spalding and (usually) Sidney Rigdon.

It is interesting to note the after-the-fact admission from critics that prior to the Spalding theory, the Book of Mormon was difficult to account for. Unfortunately for the modern critic, the collapse of the Spalding theory means that they are likewise ill-placed to attribute the Book of Mormon's text to Joseph Smith.

There are three major problems with this theory

  1. The historical record indicates that Sidney Rigdon first learned of the Book of Mormon from Parley P. Pratt and his missionary companions in November 1830, and that Rigdon did not meet Joseph Smith until December of that same year. All of this was long after the Book of Mormon was translated and published. Critics can only marshal circumstantial evidence of a conspiracy in which Rigdon met Joseph much earlier, then later pretended to be converted to Mormonism.
  2. The purported Spalding manuscript was not brought forward for analysis because no one knew where it was, or if it even existed. In 1884 an authentic Solomon Spalding manuscript titled "Manuscript Story—Conneaut Creek" was recovered by Lewis L. Rice in Honolulu, Hawaii and taken to the Oberlin College Library in Ohio. The unfinished story bore hardly any resemblance to the Book of Mormon.[2]:10 The text was published by the RLDS Church in 1885 under the title "Manuscript Found." The LDS Church also published the text. (See "Further Reading," link, for links to online texts).
  3. Claims that Spalding wrote a second manuscript are easily discredited by the fact that the published Spalding manuscript clearly shows that it was not finished, even after Spalding moved away from many of the people who claimed to have heard him read from the later story.[3]

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

The theory requires a second manuscript that doesn't exist, with invented contents, and the invention of a means of getting the alleged manuscript to Joseph Smith via Sidney Rigdon

Modern supporters of the Spalding authorship theory simply ignore the inconvenient fact that the extant Spalding manuscript recovered in the late 19th century bears no resemblance to the Book of Mormon, that it was an unfinished draft, and that no postulated second manuscript has been discovered.

They also ignore the complete lack of any persuasive evidence for contact between Sidney Rigdon and Joseph Smith prior to the Book of Mormon's publication.

Until the purported second manuscript appears, all these critics have is a nonexistent document which they can claim says anything they want. This is doubtlessly the attraction of the "theory" and shows the lengths to which critics will go to disprove the Book of Mormon.

It is interesting to consider that the best explanation such critics can propose requires that they invent a document, then invent its contents, and then invent a means of getting the document to Joseph via Rigdon.

An alleged missing, second Spalding manuscript

The existing Spalding manuscript is obviously unrelated to the Book of Mormon. It is therefore postulated by some that there must exist a second manuscript, despite the fact that the existing manuscript was never completed.

The discovery and publishing of the manuscript put to rest the Spaulding theory for several decades. But in the early 20th century the theory surfaced again, only this time its advocates claimed there was a second Spaulding manuscript that was the real source for the Book of Mormon. However, supporters of the revised Spaulding theory have not produced this second purported manuscript. They do, however, rely upon early works such as a 1908 book written by William Heth Whitsitt called Sidney Rigdon, The Real Founder of Mormonism. The entire book is based upon Whitsitt's initial assumption that Rigdon and Spalding wrote the Book of Mormon. Whitsitt then proceeds to fit the known facts to match that assumption. One of the most amusing parts of the book is the attempt to explain the experience of the Three Witnesses. In Whitsitt's book, Sidney plays the Angel Moroni and the Spalding manuscript itself (the second, undiscovered one) actually plays the part of the gold plates! According to Whitsitt:

It is suspected that Mr. Rigdon was somewhere present in the undergrowth of the forest where the little company were assembled, and being in plain hearing of their devotions he could easily step forward at a signal from Joseph, and exhibit several of the most faded leaves of the manuscript, which from having been kept a series of years since the death of Spaulding would assume the yellow appearance that is well known in such circumstances. At a distance from the station which they occupied the writing on these yellow sheets of paper would also appear to their excited imagination in the light of engravings; Sidney was likewise very well equal to the task of uttering the assurances which Smith affirms the angel was kind enough to supply concerning the genuineness of the "plates" and the correctness of the translation.

See: Solomon Spaulding, Manuscript Found: The Complete Original "Spaulding Manuscript", edited by Kent P. Jackson, (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1996). off-site

Many critics of the Book of Mormon reject the Spalding theory as unworkable

  • Davis H. Bays, The Doctrines and Dogmas of Mormonism Examined and Refuted, (St. Louis: Christian Publishing, 1897), 22, 25
[This theory is] "erroneous, and it will lead to almost certain defeat.... The facts are all opposed to this view, and the defenders of the Mormon dogma have the facts well in hand.... The Spaulding story is a failure. Do not attempt to rely upon it — it will let you down."
  • Fawn Brodie, No Man Knows My History (New York, A. A. Knopf, 1945), 453
"The tenuous chain of evidence accumulated to support the Spaulding-Rigdon theory breaks altogether when it tries to prove that Rigdon met Joseph Smith before 1830."
  • Jerald and Sandra Tanner, Did Spaulding Write the Book of Mormon? (Salt Lake City: Utah Lighthouse Ministry, 1977).

One might ask why if Mormonism's most prominent critics find the Spalding theory unworkable, then what motivates those who tenuously hold to this theory and continue to pursue it? Those that continue to promote this theory have not effectively dealt with the major objections highlighted by other anti-Mormon critics. [4]

Edward E. Plowman, Christianity Today: "Mormon archivists have assembled a large amount of evidence—some of it impressive—to rebut the Spalding theory"

Edward E. Plowman:

...Mormon archivists have assembled a large amount of evidence—some of it impressive—to rebut the Spalding theory. They scored a coup of sorts when they discovered that a manuscript page from another Mormon book, Doctrine and Covenants, is apparently in the same handwriting as that of the Unidentified Scribe in the Book of Mormon manuscript. It is dated June, 1831—fifteen years after Spalding's death.... The average layman can readily note the striking dissimilarities between Spalding's specimens and the others....[5]

Gospel Topics: "Similarities between his manuscript and the Book of Mormon are general and superficial"

Gospel Topics on LDS.org:

Spaulding was born in 1761. He studied at Dartmouth College in New Hampshire and was ordained a minister. Later, he left the ministry and lived in New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania until his death in 1816. In his later years, he wrote a novel, which he never published. Spaulding's manuscript is considerably shorter than the Book of Mormon.

Similarities between his manuscript and the Book of Mormon are general and superficial. Spaulding's fiction is about a group of Romans blown off course on a journey to Britain who arrive instead in America. One of the Romans narrates the adventures of the group and the history and culture of the people they find in America. A major portion of the manuscript describes two nations near the Ohio River. After a long era of peace between the two nations, a prince of one nation elopes with a princess of the other nation. Because of political intrigue, the elopement results in a great war between the two nations and the loss of much life but the ultimate vindication of the prince and his princess.[6]

Sidney Rigdon: "in all of my intimacy with Joseph Smith he never told me but one story"

Sidney Rigdon to his son John, just prior to Sidney's death, asserted that the Book of Mormon was true:

My father, after I had finished saying what I have repeated above, looked at me a moment, raised his hand above his head and slowly said, with tears glistening in his eyes: "My son, I can swear before high heaven that what I have told you about the origin of [the Book of Mormon] is true. Your mother and sister, Mrs. Athalia Robinson, were present when that book was handed to me in Mentor, Ohio, and all I ever knew about the origin of [the Book of Mormon] was what Parley P. Pratt, Oliver Cowdery, Joseph Smith and the witnesses who claimed they saw the plates have told me, and in all of my intimacy with Joseph Smith he never told me but one story. [7]

Solomon's Spaulding's doctor likely did not state that Spaulding talked to him about the Nephites in his manuscript

This claim comes from an affidavit allegedly inscribed in the flyleaf of a copy of the Book of Mormon:

This work, I am convinced by facts related to me by my deceased patient, Solomon Spaulding, has been made from writings of Spaulding, probably by Sidney Rigdon, who was suspicioned by Spaulding with purloining his manuscript from the publishing-house to which he had taken it; and I am prepared to testify that Spaulding told me that his work was entitled, "The Manuscript Found in the Wilds of Mormon; or Unearthed Records of the Nephites." From his description of its contents, I fully believe that this Book of Mormon is mainly and wickedly copied from it. CEPHAS DODD.[8]

It is considered a forgery (even by most Spalding theorists), and was given to C.E. Shook by R.B. Neal.

Shook published it in a book at the beginning of the 20th century. The original (if it ever existed) doesn't exist anymore.

On the other hand, there is an authentic letter from Dodd in which he says he knows almost nothing about Spalding's writings. As one Spaulding theorist wrote:

Rev. Snowden reciting the "further testimony that Solomon Spaulding had written a manuscript entitled 'The Manuscript Found in the Wilds of Mormon, or Unearthed Records of the Nephites,'" is problematic. This assertion was originally published in 1914 by Charles A. Shook[9]—who, in turn, evidently received the unsubstantiated claim from Rev. R. B. Neal. The original source—a purported Cephas Dodd statement of June 5, 1831—has been documented as a forgery, and there is no reliable evidence for Solomon Spalding ever having made use of this strange title.[10]

Eber D. Howe: "I could better believe that Spaulding wrote it than that Joe Smith saw an angel"

Eber D. Howe, publisher of the "Spalding theory" of Book of Mormon authorship in Mormonism Unvailed, during an interview in 1884.:

Because I could better believe that Spaulding wrote it than that Joe Smith saw an angel.[11]

We can admire his frankness, if not the solution he came to.

William Smith (1884): "It was not written from the Spaulding Romance. That story is false"

William dismissed the Spalding theory as absurd:

Where is the Spaulding Story? I am a little too old a man to be telling stories. There is no money in telling this story. I expect to stand before angels and archangels and be judged for how I have told it. When Joseph received the plates he a[l]so received the Urim and Thummim, which he would place in a hat to exclude all light, and with the plates by his side he translated the characters, which were cut into the plates with some sharp instrument, into English. And thus, letter by letter, word by word, sentence by sentence, the whole book was translated. It was not written from the Spaulding Romance. That story is false. Some say this romance was stolen by Sidney Rigdon while at Pittsburgh. This is false. Sidney Rigdon knew nothing about it. He never saw or heard tell of the Book of Mormon until it was presented to him by P. P. Pratt and others. He was never at my father's house to see my brother until after the book was published. If he had wanted to see Joseph at that time and remained very long, he would have had to be in the field rolling logs or carrying brush. [12]

Roper: "Subsequent variants of this hypothesis have been published from time to time"

Matthew Roper:

In 1834, relying on testimony gathered by one Doctor Philastus Hurlbut (a former Mormon who had been excommunicated from the church for immoral behavior), E. D. Howe suggested that the Book of Mormon was based on an unpublished novel called "Manuscript Found," written by a former minister named Solomon Spalding. In statements collected by Hurlbut, eight former neighbors of Spalding said they remembered elements of his story that resembled the historical portions of the Book of Mormon. Some said they recalled names shared by Spalding's earlier tale and the Book of Mormon. Others claimed that the historical narrative of both stories was the same with the exception of the religious material in the Book of Mormon. Howe suggested that, by some means, Sidney Rigdon, a former Campbellite preacher in Ohio and Pennsylvania who had joined the church in November 1830, had obtained a copy of "Manuscript Found" years before and had used it as the basis for the Book of Mormon, to which he also added religious material. Rigdon, Howe argued, must have conspired with Joseph Smith to pass the Book of Mormon off as a divinely revealed book of ancient American scripture as part of a moneymaking scheme. Subsequent variants of this hypothesis have been published from time to time.[13]

Joseph Smith did not know Sidney Rigdon prior to 1830

John Stafford was the eldest son of William Stafford, one of those who provided the Hurlbut affidavits. He was later asked about the Rigdon connection:

Q — If young Joseph — Smith , Jr. — was as illiterate as you say, Doctor, how do you account for the Book of Mormon?
A — "Well, I can't; except that Sidney Rigdon was connected with them."
Q — Was Rigdon ever around there before the Book of Mormon was published?
A — "No; not as we could ever find out. Sidney Rigdon was never there, that Hurlbut, or Howe, or Tucker could find out."
Q — Well; you have been looking out for the facts a long time, have you not, Doctor?
A — "Yes; I have been thinking and hearing about it for the last fifty years, and lived right among all their old neighbors there more of the time."
Q — And no one has ever been able to trace the acquaintance of Rigdon and Smith, until after the Book of Mormon was published, and Rigdon proselyted by Parley P. — Pratt, in Ohio?
A — "Not that I know of.""
— John Stafford, cited in William H. Kelly, "The Hill Cumorah, and the Book of Mormon," Saints' Herald 28 (1 June 1881): 167.[14]

The theory that Sidney Rigdon was the author of the Book of Mormon was only advanced when it became apparent that Joseph Smith was incapable of having written it

Initial reaction to the Book of Mormon attributed the authorship to Joseph Smith himself, and reviewers were quick to criticize the book's problems of style, and simply declared it an obvious, amateurish forgery.

It seems to have soon become clear, however, that Joseph truly was incapable of writing such a book. As a result, Sidney Rigdon, an experienced minister, was soon blamed for the book, with Joseph as a willing fellow-con:

[1 September 1831] ...the money diggers of Ontario county, by the suggestions of the Ex-Preacher from Ohio [i.e., Rigdon], thought of turning their digging concern into a religious plot, and thereby have a better chance of working upon the credulity and ignorance of their associates and the neighborhood. Money and a good living might be got in this way....

There is no doubt but the ex-parson from Ohio is the author of the book which was recently printed and published in Palmyra, and passes for the new Bible. It is full of strange narratives—in the style of the scriptures, and bearing on its face the marks of some ingenuity, and familiar acquaintance with the Bible. It is probable that Joe Smith is well acquainted with the trick, but Harris the farmer and the recent coverts, are true believers....

They were called translations, but in fact and in truth they are believed to be the work of the Ex-Preacher from Ohio, who stood in the back ground and put forward Joe to father the new bible and the new faith.[15]

But as we have seen, the Spalding theory (with or without Rigdon) fails. Few critics now resort to it.

Source(s) of the criticism
Critical sources
  • “Mormon Religion—Clerical Ambition—Western New York—The Mormonites Gone to Ohio,” Morning Courier and New-York Enquirer (New York City, New York) 7, no. 1331 (1 September 1831). off-site

Early reactions to the Book of Mormon

Summary: The Book of Mormon was met by a storm of criticism from early critics. This page archives examples of these early responses.

The Hurlbut Spalding affidavits

Summary: Joseph's neighbors claimed that Joseph had copied the Spalding manuscript

Vernal Holley map—Book of Mormon place names from North America?

Summary: Common place names in the region around New York used as Book of Mormon names?
Source(s) of the criticism
Critical sources
Sources which accept the Spalding manuscript theory:
  • A Little Talk, Between John Robinson and his Master about Mormonism, Shewing its Origin, Absurdity, and Impiety (Bedford: W. White, 1840), 1–8. off-site
  • “The Mormons,” Alton Telegraph (Alton, Illinois) 4, no. 22 (25 May 1839). off-site
  • “More About the Mormon Bible,” Alton Telegraph (Alton, Illinois) 4, no. 23 (1 June 1839). off-site
  • “Origin of Mormonism,” Atkinson’s Evening Post, and Philadelphia Saturday News (Philadelphia) 18 (25 May 1839). off-site
  • “The Book of Mormon and the Mormonites,” Athenaeum, Museum of Foreign Literature, Science and Art 42 (July 1841): 370–74. off-site
  • “The Mormons,” Auburn Journal and Advertiser (22 December 1841). off-site
  • “Mormon Trial,” Chardon Spectator and Geauga Gazette (12 April 1834). off-site
  • [Letter on Mormonism, 29 July 1841,] Christian Advocate and Journal (New York) 15, no. 52 (11 August 1841). off-site
  • [Letter on Mormonism, 26 July 1841,] Christian Advocate and Journal (New York) 15, no. 52 (11 August 1841). off-site
  • “The Mormon Bible,” Christian Register and Boston Observer (Boston, Massachusetts) 18, no. 970 (4 May 1839). off-site
  • C, “For the Register and Observer,” Christian Register and Boston Observer (Boston) 18, no. 971 (11 May 1839). off-site
  • “Mormonism (from the Scotsman),” The Christian Reformer; or, Unitarian Magazine and Review 8 (June 1841): 386. off-site
  • “The Mormon Book,” Michigan Sentinel (3 May 1834). off-site
  • MormonThink.com website (as of 22 April 2012). Page: http://mormonthink.com/witnessesweb.htm
  • “Mormonism,” New York Weekly Messenger and Young Men’s Advocate (29 April 1835). Reprinted from The Pioneer (Rock Springs, Illinois), March 1835. off-site
  • “History of Mormanism,” The Ohio Repository (Canton, Ohio) (1 September 1836). Reprinted from New York Commercial Advertiser, circa August 1836. off-site
    Does not attribute some work to Rigdon, who is said to be a convert only after the book's publication.
  • “To the Public,” Painesville Telegraph (Painesville, Ohio) (31 January 1834). off-site
  • “Mormonism—Its History,” Philadelphia Mirror (22 August 1836). off-site
  • “Origin of the Mormon Bible,” Trumpet and Universalist Magazine (Boston) (3 September 1836). off-site
  • “The Mormon Bible,” Trumpet and Universalist Magazine (Boston) 11, no. 48 (18 May 1839), n.p.. off-site
  • “The Mormon Mystery Developed,” Wayne Sentinel (Palmyra, New York) (20 December 1833). off-site [the earliest mention of this concept which FAIR has identified]
  • Origen Bachelor, Mormonism Exposed Internally and Externally (New York: Privately Published, 1838), 1. off-site
  • B. D., “Mormonism,” Peoria Register and North-Western Gazetteer (Peoria, Illinois) 3, no. 13 (29 June 1839). off-site
  • Alexander Badlam, “A Cunning Device Detected,” Quincy Whig (Quincy, Illinois) 2, no. 29 (16 November 1839). off-site
  • A[lexander] Campbell, “Mormonism Unveiled,” Millennial Harbinger (Bethany, Virginia) 6, no. 1 (January 1835): 44-45. off-site
    Campbell here abandons his earlier certainty that Joseph Smith alone was responsible for the Book of Mormon.
  • Alexander Campbell, “The Mormon Bible,” Millennial Harbinger 3, no. 6 (June 1839): 267–68. off-site
  • A.C.[Alexander Campbell], “Mistakes Touching the Book of Mormon,” Millennial Harbinger 1, no. 1 (January 1844): 37-38. off-site
  • Henry Caswall, The Prophet of the Nineteenth Century, or, the Rise, Progress, and Present State of the Mormons, or Latter-Day Saints : To Which Is Appended an Analysis of the Book of Mormon (London: Printed for J. G. F. & J. Rivington, 1843), 12–25. off-site
  • Rev. John A. Clark, Gleanings by the Way, (Philadelphia: W.J. and J.K. Simon; New York: Robert Carter, 1842), 246–254 off-site.
  • John A. Clark, “Gleanings by the Way. No. VII,” Episcopal Recorder (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) 18, no. 25 (12 September 1840), ?. off-site }
  • John A. Clark, “Gleanings by the Way No. X,” Episcopal Recorder (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) (10 October 1840): 114-115. off-site
  • Clericus, “Mormonism,” Christian Register (Boston) 15, no. 52 (24 December 1836): 1. Reprinted from Hampshire Gazette, circa December 1836. (Cites Mormonism Unvailed). off-site
  • Craig Criddle, "Sidney Rigdon:Creating the Book of Mormon," e-paper, sidneyrigdon.com (originally published 8 October 2005; revised 15 Mar 2009), multiple.
  • “Mormonism,” Daily Morning Post (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) no. 64 (23 November 1842). off-site
  • D. Griffiths, Jun., Two Years’ Residence in the New Settlements of Ohio, North America: With Directions to Emigrants (London: Westley and Davis, 1835), 134–140. off-site
  • Father Brian Harrison, "The Wacky World of Joseph Smith: And the un-Christianity of Mormon Theology," Part 2 of 2 from a pamphlet published by the Australian Catholic Truth Society (no date given) http://archive.catholic.com/thisrock/2003/0305fea4.asp
  • Eber D. Howe, Mormonism Unvailed (Painesville, OH, 1834), 277–. (Affidavits examined) off-site.
  • James H. Hunt, Mormonism: Embracing the Origin, Rise and Progress of the Sect (St. Louis: Ustick and Davies, 1844), 34-35,83. off-site
  • J.A.H., “Origin of Mormonism,” Wayne County Whig (Lyons) 3, no. 51 (14 September 1842). off-site
  • Daniel P. Kidder, Mormonism and the Mormons (New York:Lane and Sandford, 1842), 35-49. off-site Full title
  • E. G. Lee, The Mormons, or Knavery Exposed (Frankford, Philadelphia: Webber & Fenimore, 1841), 2-3. off-site Full title
  • William Alexander Linn, The Story of the Mormons (New York: Macmillan, 1902), ??.
  • Richard Livesey, An Exposure of Mormonism, being a statement of facts relating to the self-styled “Latter day Saints,” and the Origin of the Book of Mormon (Preston: J. Livesey, 1838), 4–5. off-site
  • James M’Chesney, An Antidote To Mormonism, revised by G. J. Bennet (New York, NY: Burnett & Pollard, 1838), 18, 49. off-site Full title
  • W. J. Morrish, The Latter-day Saints and the Book of Mormon. A Few Words of Warning from a Minister to his Flock (Ledbury: J. Gibbs, 1840), 1-4.
  • George Peck, “Mormonism and the Mormons,” Methodist Quarterly Review (January 1843): 111–27. off-site
  • Philanthropist of Chester County, Mormonism Unmasked, Showed to be an Impious Imposture, and Mr. Bennett’s Reply Answered and Refuted (Philadelphia: T. K. & P. G. Collins, 1840), 7. off-site Response
  • Stenhouse, "Tell It All", 267.
  • John Storrs, “Mormonism,” Boston Recorder (Boston, Massachusetts) 24 (19 April 1839). off-site
  • La Roy Sunderland, “Mormonism,” Zion’s Watchman (New York) 3, no. 9 (3 March 1838): 34, citing Howe. off-site
  • Pomeroy Tucker, Origin, Rise, and Progress: of Mormonism.... (New York: D. Appleton, 1867), 111–128.
  • Amos H. Wickersham, An Examination of the Principles of Mormonism, as Developed in the Recent Discussion Between the Author and Elders Wharton & Appleby, With a Brief Statement of Facts in Regard to Said Discussion (Wilmington, DE: Allderidge, Jeandell, & Miles, 1843), 1-21. off-site Reply
  • Wilhelm Wyl, Mormon Portraits Volume First: Joseph Smith the Prophet, His Family and Friends (Salt Lake City: Tribune Printing and Publishing Co., 1886), 20, 118, 122–124, 238–243.

Claimed the existence of a second Spalding manuscript when the first theory failed:

  • George B. Arbaugh, Revelation in Mormonism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1932), ?.
  • Howard A. Davis, Wayne L. Cowdrey, and Walter Martin, Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon? (Santa Ana, Ca.: Vision House Publishers, 1977), 1–. Analysis
  • Wayne L. Cowdrey, Howard A. Davis, and Arthur Vanick, Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon? The Spalding Enigma. (St. Louis: Concordia, 2005), 1–. Analysis
  • Walter Martin, The Kingdom of the Cults (Revised) (Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1997), 213, n15-16. ( Index of claims )
  • William S. West, A Few Interesting Facts, Respecting the Rise Progress and Pretensions of the Mormons (1837), 15-16. off-site
  • S. Williams, Mormonism Exposed (1838), 1-2. off-site (citing Mormonism Unvailed)
Past responses
  • Anon., "Caswall’s Prophet of the Nineteenth Century," Millennial Star 3 no. 12 (April 1843), 196. off-site
  • George J. Adams, A Few Plain Facts (C. B. Merry, 1841), ii–16. Full title
  • W.I. Appleby, Mormonism Consistent! Truth Vindicated, and Falsehood Exposed and Refuted: Being A Reply to A. H. Wickersham (Porter & Nafe, 1843), 1–24.
  • John Hardy, Hypocrisy Exposed (Boston: Albert Morgan, 1842), 3-12 off-site Full title
  • John E. Page, “Mormonism Defended,” Morning Chronicle (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) (2 July 1842). off-site
  • John E. Page, “Mormonism, alias Truth,” Morning Chronicle (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) (8 July 1842). off-site
  • [Parley P. Pratt,] “Joe Smith and the Devil: A Dialogue,” The New York Herald (New York) 10, no. 236 (25 August 1844). off-site
  • Parley P. Pratt, "The Mormonites. To the Editor of the New Era [Reprinted from New Era (New York) (27 November 1839)," Times and Seasons 1 no. 3 (January 1840), 45-46. off-site GospeLink off-site
  • Parley P. Pratt, A Reply to...“Complete Failure,”...and...“Mormonism Exposed,” (Manchester: W. R. Thomas, 1840), 1-9. off-site Full title
  • Parley P. Pratt, "Reply to the Athenæum: Being An Exposition of the Ignorance and Folly of men Who Oppose the Truth," Millennial Star 2 no. 1 (May 1841), 1-5. off-site
  • John Taylor, Calumny Refuted and the Truth Defended (Liverpool: J. Tompkins, 1840), 1–12. Full title
  • E. Snow and Benjamin Winchester, "An Address to the Citizens of Salem (Mass.) And Vicinity," Times and Seasons 2 no. 24 (1 October 1841), 574-76. off-site GospeLink off-site
  • B[enjamin] Winchester, The Origin of the Spaulding Story, Concerning the Manuscript Found (Philadelphia: Brown, Bicking & Guilpert, 1840), 1-16, 20-21 off-site

Notes (click to expand)
Back to Top
  1. ↑ For a helpful longitudinal history of naturalistic theories for Book of Mormon origins, see Brian C. Hales, "Naturalistic Explanations of the Origin of the Book of Mormon: A Longitudinal Study," BYU Studies 58:3 (2019).
  2. ↑ Matthew Roper, "The Mythical "Manuscript Found" (Review of: Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon? The Spalding Enigma)," FARMS Review 17/2 (2005): 7–140. off-site,
  3. ↑ The Spalding Theory Debunked off-site
  4. ↑ Matthew Roper, "The Mythical "Manuscript Found" (Review of: Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon? The Spalding Enigma)," FARMS Review 17/2 (2005): 7–140. off-site, p. 21, note 62.
  5. ↑ Edward E. Plowman, Christianity Today (21 October 1977): 38-39).
  6. ↑ "Spaulding Manuscript," Gospel Topics on LDS.org.
  7. ↑ Rex C. Reeve, Jr. "What is 'Manuscript Found'?" in Manuscript Found: The Complete Original "Spaulding" Manuscript, edited by Kent B. Jackson, Vol. 11 in the Specialized Monographs Series (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1996), footnote 47.
  8. ↑ Cited in Appendix 5, "The Cephas Dodd Hoax and Other Fabrications," in Wayne L. Cowdrey, Howard A. Davis, and Arthur Vanick, Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon? The Spalding Enigma. (St. Louis: Concordia, 2005), 402. Analysis
  9. ↑ Charles A. Shook, The True Origin of Mormon Polygamy (Cincinnati: The Standard Publishing Company, 1910). It was also cited by Dr. W. L. Dodd, Early History of Amity, Pa. 1770-1870 (Private publication, 1940).
  10. ↑ Dale Broadhurst, "Wayne Cowdrey, et al. Who Really Wrote The Book of Mormon? The Spalding Enigma," Note 2, accessed 2 May 2015. http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/PA/penn1900.htm
  11. ↑ Interview with E.D. Howe, in E.L. Kelley, Public Discussion of the Issues between the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and the Church of Christ (Disciples), Held in Kirtland, Ohio, Beginning February 12, and Closing March 8, 1884, between E. L. Kelley, of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and Clark Braden, of the Church of Christ (St. Louis: Christian Publishing and Smart, 1884), 83.
  12. ↑ Dan Vogel (editor), Early Mormon Documents (Salt Lake City, Signature Books, 1996–2003), 5 vols, 1:505-506.
  13. ↑ Matthew Roper, "The Mythical "Manuscript Found" (Review of: Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon? The Spalding Enigma)," FARMS Review 17/2 (2005): 7–140. off-site
  14. ↑ Dan Vogel (editor), Early Mormon Documents (Salt Lake City, Signature Books, 1996–2003), 5 vols, 2:123–124.)
  15. ↑ “Mormon Religion—Clerical Ambition—Western New York—The Mormonites Gone to Ohio,” Morning Courier and New-York Enquirer (New York City, New York) 7, no. 1331 (1 September 1831). off-site



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 and the Book of Mormon

Summary: One of the longest-running naturalistic theories of Book of Mormon authorship proposes that Joseph Smith drew heavily from the 1823 book View of the Hebrews, written by Ethan Smith. The theory gained prominence because both books discuss Israelites in the Americas and contain certain broad thematic similarities. However, the evidence for direct borrowing is weak, and the differences between the two books outweigh the similarities.

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.

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?

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.

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]

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.

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.

What "non-parallels" are apparent in a comparison of View of the Hebrews and the Book of Mormon?

There are many elements of Ethan Smith's book which would have provided a rich source of material for Joseph Smith, but he didn't use them

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 parallels is bad news, however, for anyone wanting to claim that Joseph got his inspiration or information from Ethan Smith. Some examples follow:

Hebrew Evidence View of the Hebrews claim (not present in Book of Mormon)

No revelation?
  • "We are to expect no new revelation from heaven. And the days of miracles are thought to be past" (127).
  • View of the Hebrews denies new revelation or miracles. The Book of Mormon was emphatically a new revelation, and it insists that miracles continue today (Mormon 9꞉7-20).

Ark of the covenant
  • "The Indians have had their imitation of the ark of the covenant in ancient Israel" (68).
  • "we have an account that the Shawano Indians in an excursion captured the Indian warrior called Old Scranny, of the Muskhoge tribe, and condemned him to a fiery torture. He told them the occasion of his falling into their hands was, he had forfeited the protection of the Divine Power by some impurity or other, when carrying the holy ark of war against his devoted enemy" (121).
  • The Book of Mormon never mentions the ark of the covenant, or anything like it. (The only reference to "ark" is to Noah's ark—Ether 6꞉7.)

Circumcision
  • "The American Indians have practised circumcision" (69).
  • The pre-Christian Book of Mormon peoples never mention circumcision, much less emphasize it as a vital rite (Moroni 8꞉8 notes its passing).
  • Why did not Joseph emphasize this supposed parallel with the Amerindians?

Fire god conflated with Israel's god
  • ""The Indians have had much of an apprehension that their one Great Spirit had a great affinity to fire. And the Peruvians, it seems, went so far as to embody him in the sun. Here seems a shred of mixture of the Persian idolatry, with the theocracy of Israel. As the more ancient Israelites caught a degree of the idolatrous distemper of Egypt, as appears in their golden calf; so the ten tribes, the time they resided in Media, and before they set off for America, may have blended some idea of fire with their one God" (72).
  • The Book of Mormon never mentions fire or sun worship, despite it being a known part of pre-Columbian religion.

Indians used Hebrew terms
  • "In their sacred dances, these authors assure us the Indians sing "Halleluyah Yohewah;"—praise to Jah Jehovah. When they return victorious from their wars, they sing, Yo-he-wah; having been by tradition taught to ascribe the praise to God.
"The same authors assure us, the Indians make great use of initials of the mysterious name of God, like the tetragrammaton of the ancient Hebrews; or the four radical letters which form the name of Jehovah; as the Indians pronounce thus, Y-O-He-wah. That like the ancient Hebrews, they are cautious of mentioning these together, or at once. They sing and repeat the syllables of this name in their sacred dances thus; Yo-yo, or ho-ho-he-he-wah-wah. Mr. Adair upon the same, says; "After this they begin again; Hal-hal-le-le-lu-lu-yahyah. And frequently the whole train strike up, hallelu-halleluhalleluyah- halleluyah." They frequently sing the name of Shilu (Shilo, Christ) with the syllables of the name of God added; thus, "Shilu-yo-Shilu-yo-Shilu-he-Shilu-he-Shilu-wah-Shilu-wah." Thus adding to the name of Shilu, the name of Jehovah by its sacred syllables. Things like these have been found among Indians of different regions of America" (72).
"He says the general name of all their priestly [113] order is Ishtoallo. And the name of the high priest's waiter is Sagan. Mr. Faber (remarking upon this) thinks the former word is a corruption of Ish-da-eloah, a man of God; see original of 2 Kings, iv. 21,22, 25, 27, 40, and other places. And of the latter word he says, "Sagan is the very name by which the Hebrews called the deputy of the high priest, who supplied his office, and who performed the functions of it in the absence of the high priest. See Calmet's Dict, vox Sagan.'"
"Here then is evidence to our purpose, that those Indians should call their order of priests, and the high priest's waiter, by those ancient Hebrew names of a man of God, and a deputy of the high priest. How could these events have occurred, had not those natives been Hebrew, and brought down these names by Hebrew tradition?" (112–113)
  • The Book of Mormon never mentions the use of such terms as "Shilo[h]" or "Hallelujah." It gives no names of priests or priestly orders.
  • The name "Jehovah" is only used in the last verse of the Book of Mormon, and in a citation from Isaiah.

Language affinities
  • Ethan Smith claimed that a number of Indian words were evidence that their language was connected with Hebrew. The Book of Mormon relies on nothing like this.
  • Click here (bottom) and here (top) to see the language lists.

Tribal totems
  • VoH claims that the Amerindian tribes use animal emblems which recall Jacob's blessing to his twelve sons:
The Indians being in tribes, with their heads and names of tribes, affords further light upon this subject. The Hebrews not only had their tribes, and heads of tribes, as have the Indians; but they had their animal emblems of their tribes. Dan's emblem was a serpent; Issachar's an ass; Benjamin's a wolf; and Judah's a lion. And this trait of character is not wanting among the natives of this land. They have their wolf tribe; their tiger tribe; panther tribe; buffalo tribe; bear tribe; deer tribe; raccoon tribe; eagle tribe; and many others. What other nation on earth bears any resemblance to this? Here, no doubt, is Hebrew tradition.
Various of the emblems given in Jacob's last blessing, have been strikingly fulfilled in the American Indians. "Dan shall be a serpent by the way, an adder in the path, that biteth the horse heels, so that the rider shall fall backwards. Benjamin shall ravin as a wolf; in the morning he shall devour the prey; and at night he shall divide the spoil" [Gen 49:17, 27]. Had the prophetic eye rested on the American aborigines, it seems as though no picture could have been more accurate" (81, italics removed).
  • The Book of Mormon makes no mention of Jacob's prophecy, such tribal characteristics, or totem or tribal signs of this type. Yet another dramatic evidence, well-known to Americans on the frontier, was ignored.

Cities of refuge
  • "Their having an imitation of the ancient city of refuge, evinces the truth of our subject" (81).
  • No cities of refuge are described in the Book of Mormon, nor does Nephite law mention the right of refuge.

Passover
  • "The Hebrews were commanded to eat their passover with bitter herbs; Exod. xii. 8. The Indians have a notable custom of purifying themselves with bitter herbs and roots. Describing one of their feasts, the writer says, "At the end of the notable dance, the old beloved women return home to hasten the feast. In the mean time every one at the temple drinks plentifully of the Cussena, and other bitter liquids, to cleanse their sinful bodies, as they suppose" (88).
  • The Book of Mormon never uses the term "Passover," or describes the passover meal.

High Priest and garments
  • "The Indian high priest makes his yearly atonement for sin. He appears at their temple, (such as it is) arrayed in his white deer skin garments, seeming to answer to the ancient ephod" (89).
  • "Here, as in Mr. Adair's account, is their high priest's robe and breast plate. On ordinary occasions, they retire secretly (Mr. H. adds) to their sacred places, and invoke the assistance of the Great Spirit, and make the most solemn vows to him, which they never fail to perform, should events correspond to their prayers. But at times more momentous, such as the declaration of war, conclusion of peace, or the prevalence of epidemics, &c. they impose on themselves long fastings, and severe penance, take narcotics and nauseating drugs" (125).
  • The Book of Mormon says nothing of Nephite priesthood's dress, and does not discuss the day of atonement rituals. Any Nephite teaching is focused on Christ as redeemer (e.g., Mosiah 2-5), not the use of a mortal high priest as intermediary.
  • The term "ephod" is never mentioned in the Book of Mormon, and there is no mention of narcotics or nauseating drugs.

Indian Ritual = Hebrew
  • "Mr. Adair describes the Indian feasts, and speaks of them as bearing a very near resemblance of the stated feasts in ancient Israel. He gives accounts that when the Indians are about to engage in war, they have their preparatory sacrifices, purifications, and fastings. He speaks of their daily sacrifice, their ablutions, marriages, divorces, burials, mournings for the dead, separations of women, and punishment of various crimes, as being in his opinion manifestly of Hebrew origin" (90).
  • The Book of Mormon never mentions feasts, preparations for war, ritual purification, washings, marriage forms, divorce forms, or separation of women.

War preparations
  • "The purifications, fasting, abstinences, and prayers, to prepare for war, appear to be Hebrew. Adair says; "Before the Indians go to war, they have many preparatory ceremonies of purification and fasting, like what is recorded of the Israelites. When the leader begins to beat up for volunteers, he goes three times round his dark winter house, contrary to the course of the sun, sounding the war-whoop, [90] singing the war song, and beating a drum.* He addresses the crowd, who come about him, and after much ceremony, he proceeds to whoop again for the warriors to come and join him, and sanctify themselves for success against the common enemy, according to their ancient religious law. A number soon join him in his winter house, where they live separate from all others, and purify themselves for the space of three days and three nights, exclusive of the first broken day. On each day they observe a strict fast till sunset, watching the young men very narrowly (who have not been initiated in war titles) lest unusual hunger should tempt them to violate it, to the supposed danger of all their lives in the war, by destroying the power of their purifying, beloved physic, which they drink plentifully during that time. They are such strict observers of their law of purification, and think it so essential in obtaining health and success in war, as not to allow the best beloved trader that ever lived among them, knowingly, to enter the beloved ground appropriated to the duty of being sanctified for war, much less to associate with the camp in the woods, at such a time, though he is united with them in the same war design. They oblige him to walk and encamp separately by himself, as an impure, dangerous animal, till the leader hath purified him, according to the usual time and method, with the consecrated things of the ark" (90).
  • This vivid material would have resonated deeply with nineteenth century Americans, who were either fascinated or fearful of warlike Amerindians. Yet, no such dramatic or picturesque material graces the Book of Mormon accounts of war—its descriptions are pedestrian, describing only the making of weapons, or the preparations of supplies. The Book of Mormon view of warfare is pragmatic, not romantic or exotic.

Burial rites
  • "The Indians, when one dies, wash and anoint the body. The Hebrews did the same" (92).
  • Burial rites are rarely described in the Book of Mormon (see Alma 19꞉43, Alma 20꞉1-5). Generally all we are told is that the dead were buried (Alma 3꞉1, Alma 30꞉1-2, Alma 53꞉1-3) or (on rare occasions) cast into a river because of the number of the dead (Alma 44꞉21-22).
  • No discussion of washing or anointing the body of the dead appears.

Widowhood laws
  • "A widow among them is bound by a strict Indian custom, to mourn the death of her husband for three years or more, unless the brother of her deceased husband wishes to take her. In that case, she is released from this law, as soon as it is known that the brother makes love to her. She may then throw off her [93] mourning habits, and dress and paint like others. Certainly this appears to have originated in that Mosaic law" (92–93).
  • No laws or regulations are discussed in the matter of widows. The one widow discussed deviates from the pattern which Ethan Smith assures us is a clear sign of Hebrew behavior (Alma 47꞉32-35)—another lost opportunity for Joseph's forgery!

Medicine bag
  • "This tribe of Chippeways, (Mr. Herman informs,) call their sacred sack, their "medicine bag." The contents appear to be essentially the same, and for the same end, with the contents of the sacred ark in other tribes" (105).
  • No medicine bag or parallel to the ark of the covenant is discussed in the Book of Mormon.

Kosher
  • "Eagles of every kind they esteem unclean food; likewise ravens, crows, bats, buzzards, swallows, and every species of owl." This he considers as precisely Hebrew; as also their purifications of their priests; and purification for having touched a dead body, or any other unclean thing" (114).
  • The Book of Mormon never mentions kosher laws, or describes the animals to be avoided.

Architecture
  • Extensive descriptions of pyramids are given as impressive evidence (136, 154–156).
  • Geometry in architecture is stressed: "They have left us perfect specimens of circles, squares, octagons, and parallel lines, on a grand and noble scale" (144, see also 147).
  • The Book of Mormon ignores geometry, and does not indulge in descriptions of buildings intended to impress or awe the audience.

Phylacteries
  • Wherever they went then, they would have these phylacteries with them. If they brought them to this country, they would keep them with diligence. They would most naturally become some of the most precious contents in their holy ark, as their nation formerly kept the holy law in the ark. Here such a phylactery would be safe through ever so many centuries. This is so far from being improbable, that it is almost a moral certainty" (italics in original) (172).
  • Once again, Joseph Smith ignores a supposed "home run" bit of evidence—there are no phylacteries in the Book of Mormon.

Quetzalcoatl
  • View of the Hebrews associates Quetzalcoatl with Moses and discusses this figure at length (156–160).
  • The Book of Mormon makes no mention of Quetzalcoatl, even though later Latter-day Saints would find the legends compelling descriptions of Christ. Once again, however, Joseph Smith ignores the rich vein of material that Ethan Smith provided.

</onlyinclude>

How does the use of scripture compare between the Book of Mormon and View of the Hebrews?

KJV scripture VoH Page BoM Use? Comments and/or text (as it appears in View of the Hebrews)

Isaiah 6:11
  • 43
  • Until the cities be wasted without inhabitant; and the houses without man; and the land be utterly desolate; and the Lord have removed man far away, and there be a great forsaking in the midst of the land.

Isaiah 11:1
  • 56
  • ...the stem from the root of Jesse is promised....

Isaiah 11:11
  • 56–57
  • And it shall come to pass in that day that the Lord shall set his hand again, the second time, to gather the remnant of his people, who shall be left, from Assyria and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Humah, and from the isles of the sea. And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah, from the four corners of the earth.

Isaiah 11:15
  • 57
  • ...seven streams...

Isaiah 14:1
  • 62–63
  • For the Lord will have mercy on Jacob, and will yet choose Israel, and set them on their own land. And the strangers shall be joined with them, and they shall cleave to the house of Jacob.

Isaiah 49:18-23
  • 63
  • VoH only mentions the verses; it does not cite the text. Book of Mormon reproduces the entire chapter of Isaiah 49.

Isaiah 49:18-22
  • 70–72
  • removing to and fro; left alone; Who hath brought up these? Behold, I was left alone; these, where had [have – BoM] they been?

Isaiah 11:12
  • 70
  • ...assemble the outcasts of Israel; and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.

Isaiah 11:12
  • 242
  • ...where God sets his hand a second time to gather his Hebrew family from all nations and regions beyond sea; doubtless from America, as well as other nations; and it is promised, "He shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth."

Isaiah 11:13
  • 72
  • The envy also of Ephraim [also, and the adversaries of Judah shall be cut off – BoM] shall depart; Ephraim shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim.

Isaiah 49:21
  • 73
  • ...these, where had [have-BoM] they been?

Isaiah 3:18-21
  • 110
  • The bravery of their tinkling ornaments about their feet; their cauls, and round tires like the moon; their chains, bracelets, mufflers, bonnets, ornaments of the legs; head bands, tablets, ear rings, rings, and nose-jewels; the mantles, the wimples; and the crisping pins.

Isaiah 3:24-25
  • 111
  • They are represented by the prophet as sitting on the ground; having their secret parts discovered; having given to them instead of a sweet smell, a stench; instead of a girdle, a rent; instead of well set hair, baldness; instead of a stomacher, a girding of sackcloth; and burning, instead of beauty.

Isaiah 9:6
  • 163
  • Their infant to be born, was "the mighty God, the everlasting Father"

Isaiah 11:
  • 179–180
  • Ephraim and Judah are both restored, the one from his "dispersed." the other from his "outcast" state; and their mutual envies are forever healed. And the places from which they are recovered are noted; among which are "the isles of the sea;" or lands away over the sea, and "the four corners of the earth."

Isaiah 5:26
  • 181-182
  • ...in both of which passages [see below for other], the hiss was to call distant heathen....

Isaiah 7:18
  • 181-182
  • ...in both of which passages [see above for other], the hiss was to call distant heathen

Isaiah 5:13
  • 182–183
  • Therefore my people are gone into captivity, because they have no knowledge.

Isaiah 7:8
  • 183
  • ...within threescore and five years shall Ephraim be broken that it be not a people.

Isaiah 10:20-22
  • 199–200
  • And it shall come to pass in that day that the remnant of Israel, and such as are escaped of the house of Jacob, shall no more again stay upon him that smote them; but shall stay upon the Lord, the Holy One of Israel, in truth. The remnant shall return, even the remnant of Jacob, unto the Mighty God. For though the people of Israel be as the sand of the sea; yet a remnant of them shall return.

Isaiah 49:1,11-13
  • 202–203
  • Listen, O isles, unto me; (or ye lands away over the sea) hearken ye people from afar. I will make all my mountains a way; and my highways shall be exalted. Behold, these shall come from far; and lo, these from the north, and from the west; and these from the land of Sinim.--Sing, O heavens; and be joyful, O earth; and break forth into singing, O mountains; for the Lord hath comforted his people, and will have mercy upon his afflicted.

Isaiah 51:11
  • 202–203
  • And the redeemed of the Lord shall return and come to Zion with songs and everlasting joy upon their heads; they shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away"


Isaiah 11:12
  • 214–215
  • And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.

Isaiah 11:13
  • 214
  • It is predicted, in Isai. xi. 13, as one peculiarity of these two branches of Israel, after their final restoration, that they shall envy each other no more.

Analysis

The Book of Mormon and View of the Hebrews have only 30 verses from Isaiah in common, some of which are in Isaiah 11, which entire chapter Ethan Smith references but does not quote. Only ten chapters of Isaiah are mentioned by both works.


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. 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 Tanner and Sandra Tanner, Mormonism—Shadow or Reality?, 5th ed. (Utah Lighthouse Ministry, 1987).
  • Jerald Tanner 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 (click to expand)
Back to Top
  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


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

Creative Fiction Theories of Book of Mormon Authorship

Summary: Several modern naturalistic theories attempt to explain the Book of Mormon without accepting Joseph Smith's claim of divine revelation. There are three major proposals: automatic writing, epileptic experiences, and William Davis's theory that Joseph composed the Book of Mormon using an oral preaching technique known as "laying down heads." Each theory faces substantial difficulties and fails to adequately explain the historical evidence surrounding the Book of Mormon's production.

Could Joseph Smith have written the Book of Mormon through a process known as "automatic writing?"

Without a logical explanation of its source, some critics have turned to supernatural explanations that do not involve the divine as Joseph testified

At least one critic of the Book of Mormon attempts to explain the complexity of the book by suggesting that Joseph Smith wrote it using a process called "automatic writing" or "spirit writing."[1] The critic, Scott C. Dunn, gives us the following definition of automatic writing:

“The ability to dictate or write material in a relatively rapid, seemingly effortless and fluent manner. Moreover, the practitioner of automatic writing does not consciously compose the material. Indeed, except for sometimes knowing a word or two moments in advance of writing or speaking, the individual is typically unaware of what the content of the writing will be.”

Dunn gives multiple examples of documented automatic writing experiences and correlates them with various facts surrounding the origins of the Book of Mormon. Some people write with just a pencil while others use objects such as stones or crystals to receive the text that is to be written. This information could lead one to draw the conclusion that the Book of Mormon’s origins are something other than divine.

Much research has been done to complicate Dunn's thesis. Papers can be found in the citation found to the right of this sentence.[2] Rather than reproduce these scholars' points, we invite readers to review this scholarship for themselves and come to their own conclusions.

Critics have come up empty handed after many attempts to refute the divinity of the Book of Mormon. The historical documentation and modern-day evaluations disprove the possibility that Joseph Smith wrote the book himself. Mr. Dunn explains this in his own paper: “Virtually all available historical evidence militates against the possibility of calculated fraud.” Without a logical explanation of its source, some critics have turned to supernatural explanations that do not involve the divine as Joseph testified. As people have tried to attribute the writing/translation of the Book of Mormon to something other than divine the accusations have been proven incorrect. This has lead to an increase in the complexity of the claims. Similarly, more complex research has been conducted to thwart the negative claims. Such can be found, for instance, in recent scholarship conducted on automatic writing that complicate this thesis. The only claims left are those of supernatural origin, either the book is of God or the devil.

If one believes that Joseph Smith produced the Book of Mormon by way of divinely inspired automatic writing, Dunn gives us the following explanation:

“It may be, for example, that automatic writing is God's true means of giving revelations and translations (in the case of Joseph Smith) which has been counterfeited by Satan (in the cases of Jane Roberts, Pearl Curran, and others).”

One may ask why these other cases exist. In general, there are many examples of the adversary mimicking the ways of the Lord to deceive mankind. He knew that the Book of Mormon would be a great work in the hands of the Lord to bring about the salvation of many souls and to be the foundation for His restored church. It is not hard to believe that Satan would try to create similar stories to that of Joseph’s in an effort to discredit the work of the Lord.

Two Reasons Why the 'Automatic Writing' Explanation is Not More Widely Adopted

The two biggest reasons that automatic writing is not more popular as an explanation for the Book of Mormon are these:

  1. Hypnosis does not transform a person into someone with greater creativity, memory, or cognitive function. In fact, it can do the opposite. Psychologist John F. Kihlstrom wrote, “Hypnosis appears to be incapable of enhancing memory [but] hypnotic procedures can impair memory.” John A. Bargh and Ezequiel Morsella of Yale said, “Although concept activation and primitive associative learning could occur unconsciously, anything complex requiring flexible responding, integration of stimuli, or higher mental processes could not.”
  2. As Brian Hales has said, "explaining an alleged supernatural activity with another alleged supernatural activity does not result in a naturalistic explanation. And we see critics will sometimes refer to The Sorry Tale and Pearl Curran and say, see, I’ve explained how Joseph did it. Well, not really. What they need is a naturalistic explanation for one of the processes and then maybe they could apply it to both."[3]

You can get a full transcript including slides from Brian Hales' presentation on this subject here or watch the video of that presentation below.

Load video
YouTube

Robert A. Rees, "The Book of Mormon and Automatic Writing"

Robert A. Rees,  Journal of Book of Mormon Studies, (2006)

Having exhausted the more bizarre and byzantine explanations of the coming forth of the Book of Mormon (written by Joseph Smith, plagiarized from Solomon Spaulding or Ethan Smith, written by Oliver Cowdery or Sidney Rigdon, dictated under the spell of epileptic seizures, etc.), some naturalist critics have postulated what appears to be a more rational explanation—it was the product of "automatic writing." That is, by some mysterious process, "psychic forces," "angelic voices," "discarnate personalities," "goddesses of wisdom," or other sources dictate a rapid and voluminous flow of words that somehow turns out to be coherent, inspiring, and often amazing in its brilliance and inclusion of esoteric facts, some of which may be beyond the author's knowledge. In this paper, I examine the proposition that the Book of Mormon can be explained as a product of automatic writing.

Click here to view the complete article

Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship, "Playing to an Audience: A Review of Revelatory Events"

Kevin Christensen,  Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship, (February 2, 2018)

The advent of the computer and the internet allows Joseph Smith as the “author” of the Book of Mormon to be compared to other authors and their books in ways essentially impossible even a couple of decades ago. Six criteria can demonstrate the presence of similarity or distinctiveness among writers and their literary creations: author education and experience, the book’s size and complexity, and the composition process and timeline. By comparing these characteristics, this essay investigates potentially unique characteristics of Joseph Smith and the creation of the Book of Mormon.

Click here to view the complete article

See also: Brian C. Hales, "Automatic Writing and the Book of Mormon: An Update" Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought Vol 52, No. 2 (Summer 2019)

Question: Could Joseph Smith have written the Book of Mormon under the influence of an "epileptic fit?"

The Book of Mormon was not started and completed in a single sitting

Some critics of the Book of Mormon have claimed that Joseph Smith wrote the book while under the influence of an "epileptic fit," thus perpetuating a fraud without knowing it. However, such a story is baseless and incongruent with any document of his life.

The Book of Mormon was not started and completed in a single sitting. Rather, the book was translated in many small segments over an extended period of time. These segments were started at will and with various people as the prophet's scribes. Not one of these scribes ever noted any seizure symptoms during any part of the translation process. There are no accounts by anybody concerning symptoms of epilepsy during the prophet's life.

To think that Joseph had multiple seizures, only when translating, at will for the various starting points of each new section, without any of the multiple scribes noticing or at any non-translating time in his life is preposterous. Even the author himself admits on page 437 of his own book that there is no direct evidence of epilepsy from the prophet's life.

</onlyinclude>

Source(s) of the criticism
Critical sources
  • I. Wiley Woodbridge, The Founder of Mormonism (New York, 1902).

Question: Did Joseph Smith produce the Book of Mormon by using the Methodist preaching device known as “laying down heads”?

Introduction to Criticism

Author William L. Davis (PhD. UCLA, Theater and Performance Studies) in his book Visions in a Seer Stone (2020) alleges that Joseph Smith may have been able to produce the text of the Book of Mormon by using, among other similar methods, a Methodist homiletic composition technique known as “laying down heads.”

The process involves coming up with a basic list of points (perhaps on a paper or in his/her memory) that a person would like to address within a given sermon. Then, throughout the course of his/her sermon, the preacher extemporaneously connects those heads into the most coherent and powerful homily possible.

Davis alleges that Joseph Smith came up with such "heads" prior to the dictation of the Book of Mormon and then, at the time of alleged creation of the book during translation, interlaced them with his own extemporaneous creation of text that we today have as the Book of Mormon. As he writes in the introduction:

The focus of this study is the oral performance techniques that Smith used to dictate the Book of Mormon, with specific attention to the methods of preaching in Smith’s contemporary sermon culture. Thus, the central issues revolve around the methods of oral composition, rather than narrative content. As such, this study will only address matters of content—the stories, the messages, and the theology of the Book of Mormon—when they illuminate techniques of oral production. Abundant evidence throughout the work indicates that Smith made use of several techniques that facilitated the process of oral composition, including such methods as the semi-extemporaneous amplification of skeletal narrative outlines, the use of formulaic language in biblical and pseudobiblical registers, rhetorical devices common in oral traditions, and various forms of repetition (e.g., recycled narrative patterns), among other traditional compositional strategies. Viewing the Book of Mormon within the context of nineteenth-century oratorical training and techniques therefore offers a performance-based approach to understanding the text.


In the early nineteenth century children and young adults encountered many of these techniques, either by conscious study or direct exposure, through a variety of social venues: domestic worship and daily family Bible reading, domestic education, Sunday schools, church attendance, revivals, introductory composition lessons in common schools, and a variety of voluntary societies for self-improvement, such as juvenile literary and debate societies. Such skills were further reinforced within a culture that relied heavily on various forms of oral performance in social interactions, including household fireside storytelling practices, public orations at civic events, classroom recitation exercises, school exhibitions, exhortations and sermons in churches, and camp meeting revivals. Within this kaleidoscope of oral performances, Smith’s exposure to the sermon cultures within his contemporary evangelical churches offers particularly important and relevant insights. Smith actively participated as a lay exhorter among the Methodists near his home in the Palmyra/Manchester region of Western New York, and he frequently attended the church services and revival meetings of several denominations in his surrounding area, including Baptists, Methodists, and Presbyterians. For young adults like Smith, who aspired to exhort and preach, exposure to the informal training among such evangelical groups involved the instruction in and regular practice of a robust set of oral performance techniques that figured prominently in the ambitious development of semi-extemporaneous oratorical skills.

A comprehensive study addressing all of these areas of influence lies well beyond the scope of a single monograph. Many of the oral techniques mentioned, for example, were integral components of introductory writing instruction in common schools, with lessons involving the composition of “themes,” various imitation exercises, and a variety of short and expanded essays. As such, a thorough discussion on the topic of oral performance in early nineteenth-century education would, by itself, require a separate study. Even so, I have addressed some of these issues in greater detail in two preliminary works: “Performing Revelation: Joseph Smith and the Creation of the Book of Mormon” (2016), and “Reassessing Joseph Smith Jr.’s Formal Education” (2016). This present study contains material drawn from these two sources, which I have often silently revised and included in this work. Nevertheless, because Smith’s own sermonizing and compositional styles follow common practices found among contemporary evangelical preachers, this study will focus on the relationship between Smith’s works and contemporary sermon culture as the central topic of exploration.

Davis is very sympathetic to Latter-day Saints and welcomes ways in which the faithful might make sense of the data that he provides in his book. As he writes in the preface:

Regardless of what one believes about the origin of the work, the Book of Mormon contains an enormous amount of nineteenth-century material that permeates both the content and structure of the work. These contemporary influences, however, do not (or should not) pose a problem for believers. Within the community of faith, several theories regarding Smith’s translation process help to explain the presence of such modern elements. Some Mormon scholars, for example, propose that Smith did not actually translate the Book of Mormon but rather transcribed the text by peering into a “seer stone”—a stone used in crystal-gazing and folk magic—which provided a ready-made, preexisting English translation, either by projecting glowing letters on the surface of the stone or else catalyzing a vision of a written text (a theory referred to as “tight control”). In this view, according to Grant Hardy’s formulation, “Joseph would have been using the seer stone to gain access to a previously existing translation, perhaps one done by God himself or by appointed angels.” For those who believe that the translation appeared on the surface of the seer stone or in a vision of the text, without Smith’s input, the nineteenth-century anachronisms in the Book of Mormon can then be framed as God’s alterations to the ancient record, which He transmitted to Smith via the seer stone or as a seer-stone-inspired vision in order to make the final text more accessible to Smith’s nineteenth-century audience.

Alternatively, some believing scholars argue that Smith did, in fact, actually translate a text. In other words, through some process of visionary imagery, mental impressions, and divine inspiration, Smith produced the Book of Mormon by making use of his own vocabulary, frames of reference, training, and life experiences to articulate the work. Thus, for those who believe that Smith actively participated in a literal translation, the nineteenth-century elements can be understood as Smith’s personal contributions to the translation project (a theory often described as “loose control”). How much or how little Smith contributed to the construction of the Book of Mormon is therefore left to the reader’s personal determinations. Without commenting on the merits or failings of these competing theories, I invite those who believe in the historicity of the text to consider the ways in which their own religious and perceptual frameworks already provide a means to incorporate academic studies such as this one into their faith-based and faith-seeking paradigms.

Moreover, I would also encourage believing scholars and readers to recognize that this study addresses a readership that extends beyond the religious boundaries of the various denominations within the Latter Day Saint movement to include those who do not embrace the Book of Mormon as an inspired or authentic ancient text. This study represents an academic project, governed by evidence-based explorations of the connections between the Book of Mormon and the nineteenth-century environment in which it emerged. As such, I will be speaking about some of those specific nineteenth-century elements in the work as the product of Smith’s compositional skill and creative imagination. Likewise, in order to avoid bogging down the work with constant clarifications of the differences between nineteenth-century textual elements attributable to Smith and elements that believing scholars attribute to ancient Book of Mormon authors, I will often streamline the discussion by referring to the work as the result of Smith’s individual creative efforts.

Three thorough, informed, and charitable responses have appeared in Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship from Latter-day Saint scholars Brant A. Gardner, Brian C. Hales, and Stephen O. Smoot. These will be summarized as this FAIR page is edited later on. For now readers can be informed by and enjoy the reviews themselves from Interpreter.

Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship, "Oral Creation and the Dictation of the Book of Mormon"

Brant A. Gardner,  Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship, (September 4, 2020)

Visions in a Seer Stone: Joseph Smith and the Making of the Book of Mormon introduces a new perspective in the examination of the construction of the Book of Mormon. With an important introduction to the elements of early American extemporaneous speaking, Davis applies some of those concepts to the Book of Mormon and suggests that there are elements of the organizational principles of extemporaneous preaching that can be seen in the Book of Mormon. This, therefore, suggests that the Book of Mormon was the result of extensive background work that was presented to the scribe as an extended oral performance.

Click here to view the complete article

Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship, "Theories and Assumptions: A Review of William L. Davis’s Visions in a Seer Stone"

Brian C. Hales,  Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship, (September 4, 2020)

Within the genre of Book of Mormon studies, William L. Davis’s Visions in a Seer Stone presents readers with an innovative message that reports how Joseph Smith was able to produce the words of the Book of Mormon without supernatural assistance. Using oral performance skills that Smith ostensibly gained prior to 1829, his three-month “prodigious flow of verbal art and narrative creation” (7) became the Book of Mormon. Davis’s theory describes a two-part literary pattern in the Book of Mormon where summary outlines (called “heads) in the text are consistently expanded in subsequent sections of the narrative. Termed “laying down heads,” Davis insists that such literary devices are anachronistic to Book of Mormon era and constitute strong evidence that Joseph Smith contributed heavily, if not solely, to the publication. The primary weaknesses of the theory involve the type and quantity of assumptions routinely accepted throughout the book. The assumptions include beliefs that the historical record does not support or even contradicts (e.g. Smith’s 1829 superior intelligence, advanced composition abilities, and exceptional memorization proficiency) and those that describe Smith using oral performance skills beyond those previously demonstrated as humanly possible (e.g. the ability to dictate thousands of first-draft phrases that are also refined final-draft sentences). Visions in a Seer Stone will be most useful to individuals who, like the author, are willing to accept these assumptions. To more skeptical readers, the theory presented regarding the origin of the Book of Mormon will be classified as incomplete or inadequate.

Click here to view the complete article

Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship, "Notes on Book of Mormon Heads"

Stephen O. Smoot,  Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship, (October 30, 2020)

This paper looks at the two types of heads used in the Book of Mormon. It argues against a recent theory that these heads served as mnemonic cues that enabled Joseph Smith to extemporaneously compose and dictate the text. Instead, it argues that the function and form of heads in the Book of Mormon finds ancient precedent in Egyptian literary culture and scribal practice. A brief addendum on the ancient precedent for the chapter breaks in the original text of the Book of Mormon is also provided.

Click here to view the complete article

Hales, Brian C. "Naturalistic Explanations of the Book of Mormon: A Longitudinal Study." BYU Studies 58, no. 3 (2019):105–48.

Abstract: Joseph Smith and his followers declared the Book of Mormon’s supernatural origin—that it was a divinely inspired translation of an ancient-American record, acquired by Joseph through visions and the help of an angel. This explanation, however, was widely rejected by outsiders from the outset. Within weeks after the Book of Mormon’s first pages came off the press, critics promoted “naturalistic explanations”—so called because they are based on scientific observation or natural phenomena—that rejected the possibility of a divine, supernatural origin of the Book of Mormon. To varying degrees, these naturalistic theories continue to be perpetuated today. This article examines the most popular naturalistic explanations for the Book of Mormon longitudinally, which will enable readers to better understand them and why they have waxed and waned in popularity over time.

Hales, Brian C. "Curiously Unique: Joseph Smith as Author of the Book of Mormon." Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 31 (2019) : 151–90.

Abstract: The advent of the computer and the internet allows Joseph Smith as the “author” of the Book of Mormon to be compared to other authors and their books in ways essentially impossible even a couple of decades ago. Six criteria can demonstrate the presence of similarity or distinctiveness among writers and their literary creations: author education and experience, the book’s size and complexity, and the composition process and timeline. By comparing these characteristics, this essay investigates potentially unique characteristics of Joseph Smith and the creation of the Book of Mormon.


Source(s) of the criticism
Critical sources
  • Scott C. Dunn, “Automaticity and the Dictation of the Book of Mormon,” in Dan Vogel and Brent Lee Metcalfe eds., American Apocrypha (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2002), 33.
  • Scott C. Dunn, "Spirit Writing: Another Look at the Book of Mormon," Sunstone 10 (June 1985): 17-26.


Notes (click to expand)
Back to Top
  1. ↑ Scott C. Dunn, "Automaticity and the Dictation of the Book of Mormon," American Apocrypha: Essays on the Book of Mormon (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 2002), 17-46.
  2. ↑ Kevin Christensen, "Playing to an Audience: A Review of Revelatory Events," Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 28 (2018): 65-114; Brian C. Hales, "Automatic Writing and the Book of Mormon: An Update," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 52/2 (Summer 2019); "Curiously Unique: Joseph Smith as Author of the Book of Mormon," Interpreter: A Journal of Latter-day Saint Faith and Scholarship 31 (2019): 151-190; "Naturalistic Explanations of the Origin of the Book of Mormon: A Longitudinal Study," BYU Studies Quarterly 58/3 (2019); Robert A. Rees, "The Book of Mormon and Automatic Writing," Journal of Book of Mormon Studies 15, no. 1 (2006): 4–17, 68–70.
  3. ↑ Brian C. Hales, "Supernatural or Supernormal: Scrutinizing Secular Sources for the Book of Mormon," (presentation, FAIR Conference, Provo, UT, 2019).


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

The Golden Pot and the Book of Mormon

Summary: Some critics, most notably Grant Palmer, have argued that Joseph Smith's account of Moroni's visits and the discovery of the gold plates was influenced by the German fantasy tale The Golden Pot (Der goldene Topf) by E. T. A. Hoffmann. This theory has gained little acceptance among either believing or non-believing historians and remains one of the more speculative naturalistic explanations for the Book of Mormon's origins.

Palmer suggested that there are similarities between Hoffmann's story and Joseph Smith's narrative. According to the theory, ideas from The Golden Pot somehow reached western New York and helped shape Joseph's account of angelic visitations, hidden records, and supernatural discovery. The alleged parallels are superficial and depend upon a highly speculative chain of assumptions.

Question: Did Joseph Smith develop the story of Moroni's visit based upon information contained in the story The Golden Pot?

This claim has not been found credible by any other historians or authors, including other anti-Mormon writers

Former Church Education System (CES) teacher Grant Palmer argues that Joseph Smith developed his story of visits by Moroni and the translation of a sacred book from The Golden Pot, a book by German author E.T.A. Hoffmann.

To date, Palmer's conclusion has not been found credible by any other historians or authors, including other anti-Mormon writers. His theory is based on a forgery from twenty years before his book's publication, and he remained wedded to his ideas despite this. His inability to jetison his convoluted pet theory once the Salamander forgery became known does not speak highly of his historical skills, or his work's intellectual rigor. Palmer's decision to hide his hostile work until he could retire with a pension paid by the tithing funds of the Church belies his claimed commitment to honesty and 'telling the whole truth.'

Understanding this attack requires that we understand the intellectual history of Palmer's claim. This is not to dismiss Palmer through argumentum ad hominem, but because the context in which ideas are developed can often explain the origin of those ideas.

Therefore, one must realize that Grant Palmer was a teacher in the Church educational system. More than twenty years prior to publication, while still a Church employee, Palmer began work on the manuscript that was later published as "An Insider's View."

Palmer's Golden Pot theory is based on a known forgery

In 1985 a Hofmann forgery known as the Salamander letter became public. Louis Midgley has shown how this letter affected Palmer's faith. When Palmer became aware of the book The Golden Pot, he saw parallels between the Salamander letter and the fictional story. As his personal doubts grew, Palmer saw a connection between these two fictional stories and a secular explanation for the origins of Book of Mormon.

When the true nature of the Salamander letter as a forgery became known, Palmer had already convinced himself that the Book of Mormon was not a work of God. He therefore was unwilling or unable to reconcile his faith. He took his 20 years worth of letters and began writing a book during this time of which an early draft came into Midgley's possession during 1987. Palmer first used the name Paul Pry, Jr., a pseudonym also used by an early anti-Mormon writer active in the 1800s. Midgley indicated that "[b]y hiding behind the name Paul Pry, Palmer signaled his anti-Mormon agenda in the first draft of his book."[1]

After going through a detailed examination of some of the claims of Palmer relating to the similarities between the two, Midgley makes the observation that "Every claim that Palmer makes concerning parallels between Hoffmann's weird tale and the story of the restoration is just as tenuous and problematic—just as forced or contrived—as is his claim that there is translation of an ancient history being described in that tale."[1]:395

James Allen points out that the comparisons between The Golden Pot and Joseph's story are forced, "that is, they are presented in such a way that the context in 'The Golden Pot' is distorted and the comparison with Joseph Smith's story is contrived."[2]

A Tortured Tale

To believe Palmer's version of history one must subscribe to the following scenario (or something very similar) with all its assumptions—

Der golden Topf (The Golden Pot) was first published in Europe in German in 1814 and 1819. It was published in French in 1822.[3]:141 It was not available in English until 1827 in London and Edinburgh,[3]:138 and became available in America that same year. According to Palmer, a man by the name of Luman Walters lived in Paris after the story had been first published and when the story would have been available to him. Palmer suggests, although he offers no real evidence, that Mr. Walters had an unusual interest in the occult and things magical and therefore would surely (despite a lack of evidence) have brought Der golden Topf with him from Europe. Mr. Walters moved to Sodus, New York,[3]:139 about 25 miles from Palmyra, and lived there at least during the period of 1820 to 1823 when he likely knew Joseph Smith.[3]:142 Walters and Joseph Smith were part of a group involved in digging for treasure at Miner's Hill, owned by Abner Cole.

According to Palmer, Luman Walters became acquainted with Joseph Smith during this period, and was thought to be the "most likely conduit"[3]:141 for The Golden Pot to be made available to Joseph Smith. Abner Cole and others claimed that it was during this period the "idea of a 'book' [The Book of Mormon?] was doubtless suggested to the Smiths by one Walters, although they make no direct connection with 'The Golden Pot.'"[3]:142

Even as Palmer points to the relationship between Walters and Joseph Smith as a reason to accept The Golden Pot as the basis for early Mormon history, he fails to mention that Brigham Young noted that Walters "rode over sixty miles three times the same season they [the gold plates] were obtained by Joseph" in an effort to obtain the plates for himself.[4] This hardly sounds like a man who had convinced Joseph to concoct the story of the plates based on some fictional story.

Either Walters believed the plates were real or knew they were not because of his part in formulating the plan of deception. His desire to obtain them certainly suggests the former and argues against the latter. Even this does not establish that Joseph and Walters were acquainted; only that Walters knew about Joseph Smith, had heard about the plates, and presumed they were genuine. This, of course, is fatal to Palmer's theory, but he does not account for it.

Joseph Smith reported his First Vision from God the Father and Jesus Christ as happening in 1820. Yet Palmer claims that Joseph received the idea of this divine visit from conversations with Luman Walters sometime during the period 1820-1823. This means that Joseph Smith was chosen by Mr. Walters from a town 25 miles from his own (a significant distance in the 1820s), and was convinced, apparently rather quickly, by virtue of a story Walters related (from the German or the French version as the English version was not available until 1827) to formulate a lifelong plan of deception. Palmer never claims that Joseph ever read The Golden Pot, only that Walters shared the story with him.

Joseph was 15–18 years old during these years, and yet the reader is to believe that Walters convinced him to adapt and concoct a story that would follow in some crude manner the outline of this fictional book. Somehow, Palmer insists, Walters convinced this young man, whom he had known for a relatively short time, to commit to living a lie for the rest of his life. Furthermore, Walters had Joseph backdate his First Vision to an earlier year and then immediately begin the deception that would become the central focus of his entire life. This plan would be followed in spite of the persecution that immediately came into the Prophet's life because of the very nature of the story.

It is not clear what Walters would have gained from encouraging Joseph in such a course, and there is no evidence that Walters turned up later to try to profit from Joseph's position of prominence in Kirtland or Nauvoo.

Not only did the young Joseph need to commit to this path, it also had to be enthusiastically accepted and followed by his trusting family. According to Palmer's strained scenario, Joseph's family must have seen some virtue in doing so, although no evidence is given as to what they hoped to gain. During this period the Smiths were under extreme financial hardship, and they would scarcely had seen any economic advantage to the tale. (Any delusions which the Smiths might have entertained about Joseph's story making them rich and popular would have been quickly dispelled by events.

Walters would have had to persuade Joseph, or the future prophet was able to immediately take the story verbally related to him (as he was unable to read it in German or French), make the personal commitment needed, and then quickly convince his family that it was true and that God had, indeed, visited him a few years ago and that he had just forgot to mention it.

It is no wonder that Palmer's theory has not been embraced by others who share his disbelief in the Restoration, since this reconstruction is at least as incredible as talk of angels and gold plates.

Question: What influences led to the development of Grant Palmer's "Golden Pot" theory of Book of Mormon origin?

The evidence indicates that Palmer turned from his faith based on a Mark Hofmann forgery and E.T.A. Hoffman's fairy tale, and then wrote this book to justify his new found disbelief

Despite his lack of faith in the Church's foundational events, Palmer continued to portray himself as a believer, in order to maintain his employment with the Church. However, Palmer did wish to publish his book; he simply waited until he retired with Church pension intact.

Palmer's supporters have argued that there is nothing wrong with Palmer deceiving Church leaders and members about his convictions and beliefs, while being paid with Church funds to teach Church doctrine to its youth in the CES. Palmer's supporters on this point should consider that non-LDS thinkers clearly understand the ethical and moral problem here, even if Palmer doesn't. As C.S. Lewis observed:

It [the clergy's] duty to to fix the lines (of doctrine) clearly in your minds: and if you wish to go beyond them you must change your profession. This is your duty not specially as Christians or as priests but as honest men. There is a danger here of the clergy developing a special professional conscience which obscures the very plain moral issue. Men who have passed beyond these boundary lines in either direction are apt to protest that they have come by their unorthodox opinions honestly. In defense of those opinions they are prepared to suffer obloquy and to forfeit professional advancement. They thus come to feel like martyrs. But this simply misses the point which so gravely scandalizes the layman. We never doubted that the unorthodox opinions were honestly held: what we complain of is your continuing in your ministry after you have come to hold them. We always knew that a man who makes his living as a paid agent of the Conservative Party may honestly change his views and honestly become a Communist. What we deny is that he can honestly continue to be a Conservative agent and to receive money from one party while he supports the policy of the other.[5]


Source(s) of the criticism
Critical sources


Notes (click to expand)
Back to Top
  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 Louis Midgley, "Prying into Palmer (Review of: An Insider's View of Mormon Origins)," FARMS Review 15/2 (2003): 365–410. off-site
  2. ↑ James B. Allen, "Asked and Answered: A Response to Grant Palmer (Review of: An Insider's View of Mormon Origins)," FARMS Review 16/1 (2004): 235–286. off-site
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 Palmer, An Insider's View
  4. ↑ Allen, "Asked and Answered," 261; and Brigham Young, "The Priesthood and Satan, Etc.," (18 February 1855) Journal of Discourses 2:180.
  5. ↑ C.S. Lewis, "Christian Apologetics," Easter 1945; reprinted in God in the Dock, edited by Walter Hooper, (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1970 [1945]), 89–90.


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

The Spaulding Theory of Book of Mormon Authorship

Summary: Since the Book of Mormon was first published, many have been unwilling to accept Joseph Smith's account of how it was produced. It's easy to dismiss Joseph's story of angels, gold plates, and a miraculous interpretation process; it's much harder to come up with an alternative explanation that accounts for the complexity and consistency of the Book of Mormon, as well as the historical details of its production.

Many critics, unwilling to credit the uneducated, backwater farm boy Joseph Smith as the Book of Mormon's author, have looked to possible sources from which he could have plagiarized. One of the earliest theories was that Joseph plagiarized the unpublished manuscript of a novel written by the Reverend Solomon Spalding (1761–1816).

Spalding was a lapsed Calvinist clergyman and author of an epic tale of the ancient Native American "Mound Builders." The theory postulates that Spalding wrote his manuscript in biblical phraseology and read it to many of his friends. He subsequently took the manuscript to Pittsburgh, where it fell into the hands of a Mr. Patterson, in whose office Sidney Rigdon worked, and that through Sidney Rigdon it came into the possession of Joseph Smith and was made the basis of the Book of Mormon.

Neither the manuscript nor historical evidence supports the Spaulding Theory, and the vast majority of critics have completely abandoned it today as a plausible explanation for the Book of Mormon's origins.

One of the earliest theories of Book of Mormon authorship was that Joseph plagiarized the unpublished manuscript of a novel written by the Reverend Solomon Spalding (or Spaulding)

The earliest uses of the Spaulding theory were from the editor of The Wayne Sentinel in 1833 and by Eber D. Howe in his book Mormonism Unvailed [sic]. The vast majority of critics from the early 1830s to the early 1900s argued for this theory of Book of Mormon origins. This changed dramatically with the rediscovery of the actual Spaulding manuscript in 1885. Since the early 1900s, the most common explanation has been that Joseph plagiarized from Ethan Smith's View of the Hebrews. Today there are few, if any, who adopt the Spaulding theory beyond a couple of writers.[1] Spaulding theorists hold that the production of the Book of Mormon was a conspiracy involving Sidney Rigdon, Joseph Smith, Oliver Cowdery and others. It is claimed by these theorists that Joseph Smith either plagiarized or relied upon a manuscript by Solomon Spaulding to write the Book of Mormon. These individuals search for links between Spalding and Rigdon in order to make the theory more plausible. Joseph Smith is assumed to have been Rigdon's pawn.

Initial critics of the Book of Mormon tended to take one of two stances—either:

  1. The Book of Mormon was a clumsy, obvious forgery upon which no intelligent person would waste time; and/or
  2. Joseph Smith was the Book of Mormon's obvious author.

Ironically, with the appearance of the Spalding theory, critics quickly began to claim that Joseph Smith could not have written the Book of Mormon, and attributed the Book of Mormon's writing to Spalding and (usually) Sidney Rigdon.

It is interesting to note the after-the-fact admission from critics that prior to the Spalding theory, the Book of Mormon was difficult to account for. Unfortunately for the modern critic, the collapse of the Spalding theory means that they are likewise ill-placed to attribute the Book of Mormon's text to Joseph Smith.

There are three major problems with this theory

  1. The historical record indicates that Sidney Rigdon first learned of the Book of Mormon from Parley P. Pratt and his missionary companions in November 1830, and that Rigdon did not meet Joseph Smith until December of that same year. All of this was long after the Book of Mormon was translated and published. Critics can only marshal circumstantial evidence of a conspiracy in which Rigdon met Joseph much earlier, then later pretended to be converted to Mormonism.
  2. The purported Spalding manuscript was not brought forward for analysis because no one knew where it was, or if it even existed. In 1884 an authentic Solomon Spalding manuscript titled "Manuscript Story—Conneaut Creek" was recovered by Lewis L. Rice in Honolulu, Hawaii and taken to the Oberlin College Library in Ohio. The unfinished story bore hardly any resemblance to the Book of Mormon.[2]:10 The text was published by the RLDS Church in 1885 under the title "Manuscript Found." The LDS Church also published the text. (See "Further Reading," link, for links to online texts).
  3. Claims that Spalding wrote a second manuscript are easily discredited by the fact that the published Spalding manuscript clearly shows that it was not finished, even after Spalding moved away from many of the people who claimed to have heard him read from the later story.[3]

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

The theory requires a second manuscript that doesn't exist, with invented contents, and the invention of a means of getting the alleged manuscript to Joseph Smith via Sidney Rigdon

Modern supporters of the Spalding authorship theory simply ignore the inconvenient fact that the extant Spalding manuscript recovered in the late 19th century bears no resemblance to the Book of Mormon, that it was an unfinished draft, and that no postulated second manuscript has been discovered.

They also ignore the complete lack of any persuasive evidence for contact between Sidney Rigdon and Joseph Smith prior to the Book of Mormon's publication.

Until the purported second manuscript appears, all these critics have is a nonexistent document which they can claim says anything they want. This is doubtlessly the attraction of the "theory" and shows the lengths to which critics will go to disprove the Book of Mormon.

It is interesting to consider that the best explanation such critics can propose requires that they invent a document, then invent its contents, and then invent a means of getting the document to Joseph via Rigdon.

An alleged missing, second Spalding manuscript

The existing Spalding manuscript is obviously unrelated to the Book of Mormon. It is therefore postulated by some that there must exist a second manuscript, despite the fact that the existing manuscript was never completed.

The discovery and publishing of the manuscript put to rest the Spaulding theory for several decades. But in the early 20th century the theory surfaced again, only this time its advocates claimed there was a second Spaulding manuscript that was the real source for the Book of Mormon. However, supporters of the revised Spaulding theory have not produced this second purported manuscript. They do, however, rely upon early works such as a 1908 book written by William Heth Whitsitt called Sidney Rigdon, The Real Founder of Mormonism. The entire book is based upon Whitsitt's initial assumption that Rigdon and Spalding wrote the Book of Mormon. Whitsitt then proceeds to fit the known facts to match that assumption. One of the most amusing parts of the book is the attempt to explain the experience of the Three Witnesses. In Whitsitt's book, Sidney plays the Angel Moroni and the Spalding manuscript itself (the second, undiscovered one) actually plays the part of the gold plates! According to Whitsitt:

It is suspected that Mr. Rigdon was somewhere present in the undergrowth of the forest where the little company were assembled, and being in plain hearing of their devotions he could easily step forward at a signal from Joseph, and exhibit several of the most faded leaves of the manuscript, which from having been kept a series of years since the death of Spaulding would assume the yellow appearance that is well known in such circumstances. At a distance from the station which they occupied the writing on these yellow sheets of paper would also appear to their excited imagination in the light of engravings; Sidney was likewise very well equal to the task of uttering the assurances which Smith affirms the angel was kind enough to supply concerning the genuineness of the "plates" and the correctness of the translation.

See: Solomon Spaulding, Manuscript Found: The Complete Original "Spaulding Manuscript", edited by Kent P. Jackson, (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1996). off-site

Many critics of the Book of Mormon reject the Spalding theory as unworkable

  • Davis H. Bays, The Doctrines and Dogmas of Mormonism Examined and Refuted, (St. Louis: Christian Publishing, 1897), 22, 25
[This theory is] "erroneous, and it will lead to almost certain defeat.... The facts are all opposed to this view, and the defenders of the Mormon dogma have the facts well in hand.... The Spaulding story is a failure. Do not attempt to rely upon it — it will let you down."
  • Fawn Brodie, No Man Knows My History (New York, A. A. Knopf, 1945), 453
"The tenuous chain of evidence accumulated to support the Spaulding-Rigdon theory breaks altogether when it tries to prove that Rigdon met Joseph Smith before 1830."
  • Jerald and Sandra Tanner, Did Spaulding Write the Book of Mormon? (Salt Lake City: Utah Lighthouse Ministry, 1977).

One might ask why if Mormonism's most prominent critics find the Spalding theory unworkable, then what motivates those who tenuously hold to this theory and continue to pursue it? Those that continue to promote this theory have not effectively dealt with the major objections highlighted by other anti-Mormon critics. [4]

Edward E. Plowman, Christianity Today: "Mormon archivists have assembled a large amount of evidence—some of it impressive—to rebut the Spalding theory"

Edward E. Plowman:

...Mormon archivists have assembled a large amount of evidence—some of it impressive—to rebut the Spalding theory. They scored a coup of sorts when they discovered that a manuscript page from another Mormon book, Doctrine and Covenants, is apparently in the same handwriting as that of the Unidentified Scribe in the Book of Mormon manuscript. It is dated June, 1831—fifteen years after Spalding's death.... The average layman can readily note the striking dissimilarities between Spalding's specimens and the others....[5]

Gospel Topics: "Similarities between his manuscript and the Book of Mormon are general and superficial"

Gospel Topics on LDS.org:

Spaulding was born in 1761. He studied at Dartmouth College in New Hampshire and was ordained a minister. Later, he left the ministry and lived in New York, Ohio, and Pennsylvania until his death in 1816. In his later years, he wrote a novel, which he never published. Spaulding's manuscript is considerably shorter than the Book of Mormon.

Similarities between his manuscript and the Book of Mormon are general and superficial. Spaulding's fiction is about a group of Romans blown off course on a journey to Britain who arrive instead in America. One of the Romans narrates the adventures of the group and the history and culture of the people they find in America. A major portion of the manuscript describes two nations near the Ohio River. After a long era of peace between the two nations, a prince of one nation elopes with a princess of the other nation. Because of political intrigue, the elopement results in a great war between the two nations and the loss of much life but the ultimate vindication of the prince and his princess.[6]

Sidney Rigdon: "in all of my intimacy with Joseph Smith he never told me but one story"

Sidney Rigdon to his son John, just prior to Sidney's death, asserted that the Book of Mormon was true:

My father, after I had finished saying what I have repeated above, looked at me a moment, raised his hand above his head and slowly said, with tears glistening in his eyes: "My son, I can swear before high heaven that what I have told you about the origin of [the Book of Mormon] is true. Your mother and sister, Mrs. Athalia Robinson, were present when that book was handed to me in Mentor, Ohio, and all I ever knew about the origin of [the Book of Mormon] was what Parley P. Pratt, Oliver Cowdery, Joseph Smith and the witnesses who claimed they saw the plates have told me, and in all of my intimacy with Joseph Smith he never told me but one story. [7]

Solomon's Spaulding's doctor likely did not state that Spaulding talked to him about the Nephites in his manuscript

This claim comes from an affidavit allegedly inscribed in the flyleaf of a copy of the Book of Mormon:

This work, I am convinced by facts related to me by my deceased patient, Solomon Spaulding, has been made from writings of Spaulding, probably by Sidney Rigdon, who was suspicioned by Spaulding with purloining his manuscript from the publishing-house to which he had taken it; and I am prepared to testify that Spaulding told me that his work was entitled, "The Manuscript Found in the Wilds of Mormon; or Unearthed Records of the Nephites." From his description of its contents, I fully believe that this Book of Mormon is mainly and wickedly copied from it. CEPHAS DODD.[8]

It is considered a forgery (even by most Spalding theorists), and was given to C.E. Shook by R.B. Neal.

Shook published it in a book at the beginning of the 20th century. The original (if it ever existed) doesn't exist anymore.

On the other hand, there is an authentic letter from Dodd in which he says he knows almost nothing about Spalding's writings. As one Spaulding theorist wrote:

Rev. Snowden reciting the "further testimony that Solomon Spaulding had written a manuscript entitled 'The Manuscript Found in the Wilds of Mormon, or Unearthed Records of the Nephites,'" is problematic. This assertion was originally published in 1914 by Charles A. Shook[9]—who, in turn, evidently received the unsubstantiated claim from Rev. R. B. Neal. The original source—a purported Cephas Dodd statement of June 5, 1831—has been documented as a forgery, and there is no reliable evidence for Solomon Spalding ever having made use of this strange title.[10]

Eber D. Howe: "I could better believe that Spaulding wrote it than that Joe Smith saw an angel"

Eber D. Howe, publisher of the "Spalding theory" of Book of Mormon authorship in Mormonism Unvailed, during an interview in 1884.:

Because I could better believe that Spaulding wrote it than that Joe Smith saw an angel.[11]

We can admire his frankness, if not the solution he came to.

William Smith (1884): "It was not written from the Spaulding Romance. That story is false"

William dismissed the Spalding theory as absurd:

Where is the Spaulding Story? I am a little too old a man to be telling stories. There is no money in telling this story. I expect to stand before angels and archangels and be judged for how I have told it. When Joseph received the plates he a[l]so received the Urim and Thummim, which he would place in a hat to exclude all light, and with the plates by his side he translated the characters, which were cut into the plates with some sharp instrument, into English. And thus, letter by letter, word by word, sentence by sentence, the whole book was translated. It was not written from the Spaulding Romance. That story is false. Some say this romance was stolen by Sidney Rigdon while at Pittsburgh. This is false. Sidney Rigdon knew nothing about it. He never saw or heard tell of the Book of Mormon until it was presented to him by P. P. Pratt and others. He was never at my father's house to see my brother until after the book was published. If he had wanted to see Joseph at that time and remained very long, he would have had to be in the field rolling logs or carrying brush. [12]

Roper: "Subsequent variants of this hypothesis have been published from time to time"

Matthew Roper:

In 1834, relying on testimony gathered by one Doctor Philastus Hurlbut (a former Mormon who had been excommunicated from the church for immoral behavior), E. D. Howe suggested that the Book of Mormon was based on an unpublished novel called "Manuscript Found," written by a former minister named Solomon Spalding. In statements collected by Hurlbut, eight former neighbors of Spalding said they remembered elements of his story that resembled the historical portions of the Book of Mormon. Some said they recalled names shared by Spalding's earlier tale and the Book of Mormon. Others claimed that the historical narrative of both stories was the same with the exception of the religious material in the Book of Mormon. Howe suggested that, by some means, Sidney Rigdon, a former Campbellite preacher in Ohio and Pennsylvania who had joined the church in November 1830, had obtained a copy of "Manuscript Found" years before and had used it as the basis for the Book of Mormon, to which he also added religious material. Rigdon, Howe argued, must have conspired with Joseph Smith to pass the Book of Mormon off as a divinely revealed book of ancient American scripture as part of a moneymaking scheme. Subsequent variants of this hypothesis have been published from time to time.[13]

Joseph Smith did not know Sidney Rigdon prior to 1830

John Stafford was the eldest son of William Stafford, one of those who provided the Hurlbut affidavits. He was later asked about the Rigdon connection:

Q — If young Joseph — Smith , Jr. — was as illiterate as you say, Doctor, how do you account for the Book of Mormon?
A — "Well, I can't; except that Sidney Rigdon was connected with them."
Q — Was Rigdon ever around there before the Book of Mormon was published?
A — "No; not as we could ever find out. Sidney Rigdon was never there, that Hurlbut, or Howe, or Tucker could find out."
Q — Well; you have been looking out for the facts a long time, have you not, Doctor?
A — "Yes; I have been thinking and hearing about it for the last fifty years, and lived right among all their old neighbors there more of the time."
Q — And no one has ever been able to trace the acquaintance of Rigdon and Smith, until after the Book of Mormon was published, and Rigdon proselyted by Parley P. — Pratt, in Ohio?
A — "Not that I know of.""
— John Stafford, cited in William H. Kelly, "The Hill Cumorah, and the Book of Mormon," Saints' Herald 28 (1 June 1881): 167.[14]

The theory that Sidney Rigdon was the author of the Book of Mormon was only advanced when it became apparent that Joseph Smith was incapable of having written it

Initial reaction to the Book of Mormon attributed the authorship to Joseph Smith himself, and reviewers were quick to criticize the book's problems of style, and simply declared it an obvious, amateurish forgery.

It seems to have soon become clear, however, that Joseph truly was incapable of writing such a book. As a result, Sidney Rigdon, an experienced minister, was soon blamed for the book, with Joseph as a willing fellow-con:

[1 September 1831] ...the money diggers of Ontario county, by the suggestions of the Ex-Preacher from Ohio [i.e., Rigdon], thought of turning their digging concern into a religious plot, and thereby have a better chance of working upon the credulity and ignorance of their associates and the neighborhood. Money and a good living might be got in this way....

There is no doubt but the ex-parson from Ohio is the author of the book which was recently printed and published in Palmyra, and passes for the new Bible. It is full of strange narratives—in the style of the scriptures, and bearing on its face the marks of some ingenuity, and familiar acquaintance with the Bible. It is probable that Joe Smith is well acquainted with the trick, but Harris the farmer and the recent coverts, are true believers....

They were called translations, but in fact and in truth they are believed to be the work of the Ex-Preacher from Ohio, who stood in the back ground and put forward Joe to father the new bible and the new faith.[15]

But as we have seen, the Spalding theory (with or without Rigdon) fails. Few critics now resort to it.

Source(s) of the criticism
Critical sources
  • “Mormon Religion—Clerical Ambition—Western New York—The Mormonites Gone to Ohio,” Morning Courier and New-York Enquirer (New York City, New York) 7, no. 1331 (1 September 1831). off-site

Early reactions to the Book of Mormon

Summary: The Book of Mormon was met by a storm of criticism from early critics. This page archives examples of these early responses.

The Hurlbut Spalding affidavits

Summary: Joseph's neighbors claimed that Joseph had copied the Spalding manuscript

Vernal Holley map—Book of Mormon place names from North America?

Summary: Common place names in the region around New York used as Book of Mormon names?
Source(s) of the criticism
Critical sources
Sources which accept the Spalding manuscript theory:
  • A Little Talk, Between John Robinson and his Master about Mormonism, Shewing its Origin, Absurdity, and Impiety (Bedford: W. White, 1840), 1–8. off-site
  • “The Mormons,” Alton Telegraph (Alton, Illinois) 4, no. 22 (25 May 1839). off-site
  • “More About the Mormon Bible,” Alton Telegraph (Alton, Illinois) 4, no. 23 (1 June 1839). off-site
  • “Origin of Mormonism,” Atkinson’s Evening Post, and Philadelphia Saturday News (Philadelphia) 18 (25 May 1839). off-site
  • “The Book of Mormon and the Mormonites,” Athenaeum, Museum of Foreign Literature, Science and Art 42 (July 1841): 370–74. off-site
  • “The Mormons,” Auburn Journal and Advertiser (22 December 1841). off-site
  • “Mormon Trial,” Chardon Spectator and Geauga Gazette (12 April 1834). off-site
  • [Letter on Mormonism, 29 July 1841,] Christian Advocate and Journal (New York) 15, no. 52 (11 August 1841). off-site
  • [Letter on Mormonism, 26 July 1841,] Christian Advocate and Journal (New York) 15, no. 52 (11 August 1841). off-site
  • “The Mormon Bible,” Christian Register and Boston Observer (Boston, Massachusetts) 18, no. 970 (4 May 1839). off-site
  • C, “For the Register and Observer,” Christian Register and Boston Observer (Boston) 18, no. 971 (11 May 1839). off-site
  • “Mormonism (from the Scotsman),” The Christian Reformer; or, Unitarian Magazine and Review 8 (June 1841): 386. off-site
  • “The Mormon Book,” Michigan Sentinel (3 May 1834). off-site
  • MormonThink.com website (as of 22 April 2012). Page: http://mormonthink.com/witnessesweb.htm
  • “Mormonism,” New York Weekly Messenger and Young Men’s Advocate (29 April 1835). Reprinted from The Pioneer (Rock Springs, Illinois), March 1835. off-site
  • “History of Mormanism,” The Ohio Repository (Canton, Ohio) (1 September 1836). Reprinted from New York Commercial Advertiser, circa August 1836. off-site
    Does not attribute some work to Rigdon, who is said to be a convert only after the book's publication.
  • “To the Public,” Painesville Telegraph (Painesville, Ohio) (31 January 1834). off-site
  • “Mormonism—Its History,” Philadelphia Mirror (22 August 1836). off-site
  • “Origin of the Mormon Bible,” Trumpet and Universalist Magazine (Boston) (3 September 1836). off-site
  • “The Mormon Bible,” Trumpet and Universalist Magazine (Boston) 11, no. 48 (18 May 1839), n.p.. off-site
  • “The Mormon Mystery Developed,” Wayne Sentinel (Palmyra, New York) (20 December 1833). off-site [the earliest mention of this concept which FAIR has identified]
  • Origen Bachelor, Mormonism Exposed Internally and Externally (New York: Privately Published, 1838), 1. off-site
  • B. D., “Mormonism,” Peoria Register and North-Western Gazetteer (Peoria, Illinois) 3, no. 13 (29 June 1839). off-site
  • Alexander Badlam, “A Cunning Device Detected,” Quincy Whig (Quincy, Illinois) 2, no. 29 (16 November 1839). off-site
  • A[lexander] Campbell, “Mormonism Unveiled,” Millennial Harbinger (Bethany, Virginia) 6, no. 1 (January 1835): 44-45. off-site
    Campbell here abandons his earlier certainty that Joseph Smith alone was responsible for the Book of Mormon.
  • Alexander Campbell, “The Mormon Bible,” Millennial Harbinger 3, no. 6 (June 1839): 267–68. off-site
  • A.C.[Alexander Campbell], “Mistakes Touching the Book of Mormon,” Millennial Harbinger 1, no. 1 (January 1844): 37-38. off-site
  • Henry Caswall, The Prophet of the Nineteenth Century, or, the Rise, Progress, and Present State of the Mormons, or Latter-Day Saints : To Which Is Appended an Analysis of the Book of Mormon (London: Printed for J. G. F. & J. Rivington, 1843), 12–25. off-site
  • Rev. John A. Clark, Gleanings by the Way, (Philadelphia: W.J. and J.K. Simon; New York: Robert Carter, 1842), 246–254 off-site.
  • John A. Clark, “Gleanings by the Way. No. VII,” Episcopal Recorder (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) 18, no. 25 (12 September 1840), ?. off-site }
  • John A. Clark, “Gleanings by the Way No. X,” Episcopal Recorder (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania) (10 October 1840): 114-115. off-site
  • Clericus, “Mormonism,” Christian Register (Boston) 15, no. 52 (24 December 1836): 1. Reprinted from Hampshire Gazette, circa December 1836. (Cites Mormonism Unvailed). off-site
  • Craig Criddle, "Sidney Rigdon:Creating the Book of Mormon," e-paper, sidneyrigdon.com (originally published 8 October 2005; revised 15 Mar 2009), multiple.
  • “Mormonism,” Daily Morning Post (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) no. 64 (23 November 1842). off-site
  • D. Griffiths, Jun., Two Years’ Residence in the New Settlements of Ohio, North America: With Directions to Emigrants (London: Westley and Davis, 1835), 134–140. off-site
  • Father Brian Harrison, "The Wacky World of Joseph Smith: And the un-Christianity of Mormon Theology," Part 2 of 2 from a pamphlet published by the Australian Catholic Truth Society (no date given) http://archive.catholic.com/thisrock/2003/0305fea4.asp
  • Eber D. Howe, Mormonism Unvailed (Painesville, OH, 1834), 277–. (Affidavits examined) off-site.
  • James H. Hunt, Mormonism: Embracing the Origin, Rise and Progress of the Sect (St. Louis: Ustick and Davies, 1844), 34-35,83. off-site
  • J.A.H., “Origin of Mormonism,” Wayne County Whig (Lyons) 3, no. 51 (14 September 1842). off-site
  • Daniel P. Kidder, Mormonism and the Mormons (New York:Lane and Sandford, 1842), 35-49. off-site Full title
  • E. G. Lee, The Mormons, or Knavery Exposed (Frankford, Philadelphia: Webber & Fenimore, 1841), 2-3. off-site Full title
  • William Alexander Linn, The Story of the Mormons (New York: Macmillan, 1902), ??.
  • Richard Livesey, An Exposure of Mormonism, being a statement of facts relating to the self-styled “Latter day Saints,” and the Origin of the Book of Mormon (Preston: J. Livesey, 1838), 4–5. off-site
  • James M’Chesney, An Antidote To Mormonism, revised by G. J. Bennet (New York, NY: Burnett & Pollard, 1838), 18, 49. off-site Full title
  • W. J. Morrish, The Latter-day Saints and the Book of Mormon. A Few Words of Warning from a Minister to his Flock (Ledbury: J. Gibbs, 1840), 1-4.
  • George Peck, “Mormonism and the Mormons,” Methodist Quarterly Review (January 1843): 111–27. off-site
  • Philanthropist of Chester County, Mormonism Unmasked, Showed to be an Impious Imposture, and Mr. Bennett’s Reply Answered and Refuted (Philadelphia: T. K. & P. G. Collins, 1840), 7. off-site Response
  • Stenhouse, "Tell It All", 267.
  • John Storrs, “Mormonism,” Boston Recorder (Boston, Massachusetts) 24 (19 April 1839). off-site
  • La Roy Sunderland, “Mormonism,” Zion’s Watchman (New York) 3, no. 9 (3 March 1838): 34, citing Howe. off-site
  • Pomeroy Tucker, Origin, Rise, and Progress: of Mormonism.... (New York: D. Appleton, 1867), 111–128.
  • Amos H. Wickersham, An Examination of the Principles of Mormonism, as Developed in the Recent Discussion Between the Author and Elders Wharton & Appleby, With a Brief Statement of Facts in Regard to Said Discussion (Wilmington, DE: Allderidge, Jeandell, & Miles, 1843), 1-21. off-site Reply
  • Wilhelm Wyl, Mormon Portraits Volume First: Joseph Smith the Prophet, His Family and Friends (Salt Lake City: Tribune Printing and Publishing Co., 1886), 20, 118, 122–124, 238–243.

Claimed the existence of a second Spalding manuscript when the first theory failed:

  • George B. Arbaugh, Revelation in Mormonism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1932), ?.
  • Howard A. Davis, Wayne L. Cowdrey, and Walter Martin, Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon? (Santa Ana, Ca.: Vision House Publishers, 1977), 1–. Analysis
  • Wayne L. Cowdrey, Howard A. Davis, and Arthur Vanick, Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon? The Spalding Enigma. (St. Louis: Concordia, 2005), 1–. Analysis
  • Walter Martin, The Kingdom of the Cults (Revised) (Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 1997), 213, n15-16. ( Index of claims )
  • William S. West, A Few Interesting Facts, Respecting the Rise Progress and Pretensions of the Mormons (1837), 15-16. off-site
  • S. Williams, Mormonism Exposed (1838), 1-2. off-site (citing Mormonism Unvailed)
Past responses
  • Anon., "Caswall’s Prophet of the Nineteenth Century," Millennial Star 3 no. 12 (April 1843), 196. off-site
  • George J. Adams, A Few Plain Facts (C. B. Merry, 1841), ii–16. Full title
  • W.I. Appleby, Mormonism Consistent! Truth Vindicated, and Falsehood Exposed and Refuted: Being A Reply to A. H. Wickersham (Porter & Nafe, 1843), 1–24.
  • John Hardy, Hypocrisy Exposed (Boston: Albert Morgan, 1842), 3-12 off-site Full title
  • John E. Page, “Mormonism Defended,” Morning Chronicle (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) (2 July 1842). off-site
  • John E. Page, “Mormonism, alias Truth,” Morning Chronicle (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) (8 July 1842). off-site
  • [Parley P. Pratt,] “Joe Smith and the Devil: A Dialogue,” The New York Herald (New York) 10, no. 236 (25 August 1844). off-site
  • Parley P. Pratt, "The Mormonites. To the Editor of the New Era [Reprinted from New Era (New York) (27 November 1839)," Times and Seasons 1 no. 3 (January 1840), 45-46. off-site GospeLink off-site
  • Parley P. Pratt, A Reply to...“Complete Failure,”...and...“Mormonism Exposed,” (Manchester: W. R. Thomas, 1840), 1-9. off-site Full title
  • Parley P. Pratt, "Reply to the Athenæum: Being An Exposition of the Ignorance and Folly of men Who Oppose the Truth," Millennial Star 2 no. 1 (May 1841), 1-5. off-site
  • John Taylor, Calumny Refuted and the Truth Defended (Liverpool: J. Tompkins, 1840), 1–12. Full title
  • E. Snow and Benjamin Winchester, "An Address to the Citizens of Salem (Mass.) And Vicinity," Times and Seasons 2 no. 24 (1 October 1841), 574-76. off-site GospeLink off-site
  • B[enjamin] Winchester, The Origin of the Spaulding Story, Concerning the Manuscript Found (Philadelphia: Brown, Bicking & Guilpert, 1840), 1-16, 20-21 off-site

Notes (click to expand)
Back to Top
  1. ↑ For a helpful longitudinal history of naturalistic theories for Book of Mormon origins, see Brian C. Hales, "Naturalistic Explanations of the Origin of the Book of Mormon: A Longitudinal Study," BYU Studies 58:3 (2019).
  2. ↑ Matthew Roper, "The Mythical "Manuscript Found" (Review of: Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon? The Spalding Enigma)," FARMS Review 17/2 (2005): 7–140. off-site,
  3. ↑ The Spalding Theory Debunked off-site
  4. ↑ Matthew Roper, "The Mythical "Manuscript Found" (Review of: Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon? The Spalding Enigma)," FARMS Review 17/2 (2005): 7–140. off-site, p. 21, note 62.
  5. ↑ Edward E. Plowman, Christianity Today (21 October 1977): 38-39).
  6. ↑ "Spaulding Manuscript," Gospel Topics on LDS.org.
  7. ↑ Rex C. Reeve, Jr. "What is 'Manuscript Found'?" in Manuscript Found: The Complete Original "Spaulding" Manuscript, edited by Kent B. Jackson, Vol. 11 in the Specialized Monographs Series (Religious Studies Center, Brigham Young University, 1996), footnote 47.
  8. ↑ Cited in Appendix 5, "The Cephas Dodd Hoax and Other Fabrications," in Wayne L. Cowdrey, Howard A. Davis, and Arthur Vanick, Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon? The Spalding Enigma. (St. Louis: Concordia, 2005), 402. Analysis
  9. ↑ Charles A. Shook, The True Origin of Mormon Polygamy (Cincinnati: The Standard Publishing Company, 1910). It was also cited by Dr. W. L. Dodd, Early History of Amity, Pa. 1770-1870 (Private publication, 1940).
  10. ↑ Dale Broadhurst, "Wayne Cowdrey, et al. Who Really Wrote The Book of Mormon? The Spalding Enigma," Note 2, accessed 2 May 2015. http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/PA/penn1900.htm
  11. ↑ Interview with E.D. Howe, in E.L. Kelley, Public Discussion of the Issues between the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and the Church of Christ (Disciples), Held in Kirtland, Ohio, Beginning February 12, and Closing March 8, 1884, between E. L. Kelley, of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, and Clark Braden, of the Church of Christ (St. Louis: Christian Publishing and Smart, 1884), 83.
  12. ↑ Dan Vogel (editor), Early Mormon Documents (Salt Lake City, Signature Books, 1996–2003), 5 vols, 1:505-506.
  13. ↑ Matthew Roper, "The Mythical "Manuscript Found" (Review of: Who Really Wrote the Book of Mormon? The Spalding Enigma)," FARMS Review 17/2 (2005): 7–140. off-site
  14. ↑ Dan Vogel (editor), Early Mormon Documents (Salt Lake City, Signature Books, 1996–2003), 5 vols, 2:123–124.)
  15. ↑ “Mormon Religion—Clerical Ambition—Western New York—The Mormonites Gone to Ohio,” Morning Courier and New-York Enquirer (New York City, New York) 7, no. 1331 (1 September 1831). off-site


< Back to FAIR Answers Index

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

Joseph Smith as the "Author and Proprietor" of the Book of Mormon

Summary: Joseph Smith is listed as the "author and proprietor" in the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon. Critics of the Church consider this evidence that Joseph wrote the book himself.

However, it is well documented that Joseph Smith complied with federal copyright law and did not admit to fabricating the Book of Mormon.

Book of Mormon Central, KnoWhy #507: Was Joseph Smith the “Author” of the Book of Mormon? (Video)

Copyright law in 1830 in New York, where the Book of Mormon was first published, provided for the granting of copyrights to "authors and proprietors" but did not offer the same to translators

As one historian noted:

The fact is, Joseph Smith was complying with federal law (see I Statutes 124, 1790, as amended by 2 Stat. 171, 1802), which dictated the words the district clerk had to write when a person was taking out a copyright on a book. It can be demonstrated historically that many translators, including those who produced the 1824 edition of the King James Version of the Bible, were listed as "Author" to conform to this law.[1]

The first edition of the Book of Mormon contained a transcript of the secured copyright making this clear:

Northern District of New York, to wit:

BE IT REMEMBERED, That on the eleventh day of June, in the fifty-third year of the Independence of the United States of America, A. D. 1829, JOSEPH SMITH, JUN., of the said District, hath deposited in this office the title of a Book, the right whereof he claims as author, in the words following, to wit: "The Book of Mormon: an account written by the hand of Mormon, upon plates taken from the Plates of Nephi. Wherefore it is an abridgment of the Record of the People of Nephi; and also of the Lamanites; written to the Lamanites, who are a remnant of the House of Israel; and also to Jew and Gentile; written by way of commandment, and also by the spirit of Prophesy and of Revelation. Written, and sealed up, and hid up unto the Lord, that they might not be destroyed; to come forth by the gift and power of God, unto the interpretation thereof; sealed by the hand of Moroni, and hid up unto the Lord, to come forth in due time by the way of Gentile; the interpretation thereof by the gift of God; an abridgment taken from the Book of Ether. Also, which is a Record of the People of Jared, which were scattered at the time the Lord confounded the language of the people when they were building a tower to get to Heaven: which is to shew unto the remnant of the House of Israel, how great things the Lord hath done for their fathers; and that they may know the covenants of the Lord, that they are not cast off forever: and also to the convincing of the Jew and Gentile, that Jesus is the Christ, the Eternal God, manifesting Himself unto all nations. And now if there be fault, it be the mistake of men; wherefore condemn not the things of God, that ye may be found spotless at the judgment seat of Christ.—By Joseph Smith. Jun. Author and Proprietor."

In conformity to the act of the Congress of the United States, entitled, "An act for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of Maps, Charts, and Books, to the authors and proprietors of such copies, during the times therein mentioned;" and also the act, entitled, "An act supplementary to an act, entitled, "An act for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of Maps, Charts, and Books, to the authors and proprietors of such copies, during the times therein mentioned, and extending the benefits thereof to the arts of designing, engraving, and etching historical and other prints."

R. R. LANSING

Clerk of the Northern District of New York

The title page of the 1830 Book of Mormon

The State of New York would have rejected the copyright if it had been assigned to "God" or "the angel Moroni" as the "author and proprietor"

It would be unreasonable if Joseph Smith were to apply for the copyright and assign "God" or "the angel Moroni" as the "author and proprietor". This complaint is not a serious issue, but merely an effort to find fault. Besides, the 1830 edition also states that the book was a translation of ancient records.

The 1830 Book of Mormon clearly identifies Joseph Smith as the translator of the work

Notice in the first paragraph of the copyright form above that even though Joseph Smith legally claimed his right as "author" he still inserted information making it clear that the text originated from an ancient, pre-written "abridgment" that came forth to the modern world "by the gift and power of God" and through an act of "interpretation" or translation.

It should also be pointed out that in the Preface of the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon the Prophet Joseph Smith designated himself as the "Author" but also indicated no less than six times that he was the translator of the text. Likewise, it can be seen in the 1830 testimony of the Eight Witnesses that Joseph Smith is called the "Author and Proprietor of this work" but it is also said that he "translated" the golden plates in order to obtain the text of the Book of Mormon.

Page 1 from the 1830 edition of the Book of Mormon: "I would inform you that I translated, by the gift and power of God...."
Notes (click to expand)
Back to Top
  1. ↑ Kenneth H. Godfrey, "Not Enough Trouble," Dialogue: A Journal of Mormon Thought 19, no. 3 (Fall 1986): 143.
Retrieved from "https://www.fairlatterdaysaints.org/answers/index.php?title=Book_of_Mormon/Authorship_theories&oldid=182627"