Did Joseph Smith Obtain His ldeas for the Book of Mormon from Contemporary Books?

Some critics of the Nephite record have suggested that Joseph Smith got his ideas for writing the Book of Mormon from contemporary books which mention the ancient Israelites and try to connect them with the American Indians. It was not uncommon in Joseph Smith's day, and even before, for pious and sincere men to speculate upon the origin of the American Indians and attempt, one way or another, to show that they were of Israelite lineage; indeed, some writers evensuppose they were descendants of the "Lost Ten Tribes." Thus, James Adair in his History of the American Indians (London, 1775) attempts in some detail to demonstrate that the American Indians are of Jewish descent. He even says that "the Indian lnguage, and dialects, appear to have the very idiom and genius of the Hebrew." But Ethan Smith's View of the Hebrews; or the Tribes of Israel in America, published and printed by Smith and Shute in Poultney, Vermont, in 1823 (second edition, 1825), is the book most used by critics in their attempts to show close parallels between the ideas of the Book of Mormon and current views in Joseph Smith's day. The critics have to show, one way or another, that the ideas in the Book of Mormon come from books already known to the prophet and not from a divine source. We think that Dr. Ariel L. Crowley, in his brochure About the Book of Mormon (1961) pp., 111-133, has already deflated the critics in admirable fashion in his chapter giving an analysis of Ethan Smith's book and a comparison with the Book of Mormon. It will not be necessary, therefore, for us to go over the entire ground again. We are quite familiar with Ethan Smith's book, and the second edition, improved and enlarged, is before us as we write. On the title page of the book, Smith exhibits its general content under four chapters:

Chap. I. The Destruction of Jerusalem.

Chap. II. The Certain Restoration of Judah and Israel.

Chap. III. The Present State of Judah and Israel.

Chap. IV. An Address of the Prophet Isaiah to the United States Relative to their Restoration.

Now it is true that the first part of the Book of Mormon speaks of the coming destruction of Jerusalem (see 1 Nephi 1:13), but that destruction has reference mainly to the one by the Babylonians, not to the later Roman destruction of which Ethan Smith speaks. It is true that the Book of Mormon deals at times with the restoration of Israel and Judah, but there is nothing on that subject that Joseph Smith couldn't have gotten from the Bible. He didn't have to get his ideas on the subject from Ethan Smith. In his third chapter Smith argues that the "Lost Ten Tribes" are to be identified with the American Indians and cites the views of many others to the same effect. "They are the aborigines of our own continent," says he. (p. 79) The Book of Mormon, on the other hand, would identify our American Indians as descendants of the Nephites and Mulekites who left Jerusalem about 600 B.C., not as descendants of the "Lost Ten Tribes" whose ancestors were taken captive by the Assyrians after the fall of Samaria in 722 B.C. Ethan Smith makes much of Isaiah 18 as an address "apprehended to be of deep interest to America" (p. 228), but the Book of Mormon does not quote that chapter, though it does quote extensively from the prophet.

It is true that there are some obvious parallels between Ethan Smith's book and the Book of Mormon, but parallels can be drawn between the Nephite record and many other early American books. These parallels prove nothing concerning the origin of the Book of Mormon. Attention should be called to the numerous differences between ideas found in the Book of Mormon and those found in Ethan Smith's book and other books similar in purpose to his. Where in Smith's book can be found a discussion of the atonement as distinctive as found in 2 Nephi 9:6-9? Where in Smith's book can be found a treatment of the doctrine of an opposition in all things and the meaning of the fall such as in 2 Nephi 2:11-25? How could Joseph Smith possibly extract the ideas pertaining to Lehi's dream of the tree, the river, and the rod of iron (1 Nephi 8) from View of the Hebrews? Or where in this book could he possibly get the ideas found in Alma 32 pertaining to faith? Certainly Joseph Smith could not have found ideas in View of the Hebrews to compose what is said about the state of the soul between death and the resurrection in Alma 40: 11-14. And is there anything comparable in Ethan Smith's book to the dramatic three-day ministry of Jesus in 3 Nephi 11-26? Such examples may be multiplied. We submit that the style and purpose of View of the Hebrews is so different from that of the Book of Mormon that any fair-minded person who examines the two must have grave doubts that Joseph Smith was any more dependent upon Ethan Smith's book than upon a dozen other early American publications dealing with the American Indians. Besides, there is no documented evidence that Joseph Smith had ever read View of the Hebrews before translating the Book of Mormon. Supposition and some parallels from View of the Hebrews don't prove that the critics are correct.