Contact with Ethan Smith’s Book

What makes Ethan Smith’s book of special interest with regard to the production of the Book of Mormon is the fact that Oliver Cowdery, Smith’s closest associate in producing the Book of Mormon, was living in the small town of Poultney, Vermont, where Rev. Mr. Smith had his pastorate and where he published both editions of his book. In fact, Oliver’s step-mother was a member of Ethan Smith’s congregation.

Oliver Cowdery left Poultney some time after the second edition of Ethan’s book appeared in 1825. Three or four years later we find Oliver working with his cousin, Joseph, and serving as his scribe in writing the Book of Mormon. Oliver’s family association with Rev. Ethan Smith, the pastor’s continuous mention of his views in the local Poultney paper, and the likelihood that the family purchased a copy of their pastor’s book make it most probable that Ethan Smith’s ideas easily became known to Joseph Smith through Oliver Cowdery. In addition, Ethan Smith, who resigned his church in Poultney in mid-December, 1826, apparently visited Palmyra himself early in 1827 and may have spoken publicly about his Indian-Israelite ideas.

Furthermore, a lengthy selection from Ethan’s book, setting forth his evidence for believing the Indians were really Israelites, was reprinted in Josiah Priest’s The Wonders of Nature and Providence Displayed. The book was in the local Manchester Rental Library, not more than 5 miles from Smith’s home, and the extant records show that it was checked out continuously by residents of Manchester throughout 1826, 1827 and 1828. The Mormon historian B. H. Roberts has found the parallels in thought between the books of the two Smiths so striking that Ethan’s could be said to have provided “the ground-plan” for Joseph’s.

. . .

What is more, some of the same scriptures upon which Ethan Smith built his case are also employed in much the same manner by Joseph Smith. It is in connection with the establishing of the Book of Mormon’s prophetic system that nearly all of the Old Testament passages are quoted. If one is more fully to understand why and how Joseph Smith employed the Old Testament passages he quoted, attention must be turned to a consideration of the eschatological system set forth in the Book of Mormon.

. . .

Remarkable Parallels with Ethan Smith

Here in this first extended presentation of Joseph Smith’s eschatological views regarding Israel we see a remarkable parallel with those views already set forth by the New England clergyman, Ethan Smith. Six of Ethan’s seven major points are touched upon. God is presented as having a plan to regather all Israel. The location of these scattered Israelites was unknown to the Jews themselves. The Gentiles have been divinely appointed to aid in regathering these outcast sons of Abraham and they are to do this by both bringing them a knowledge of their Hebrew origin and of Jesus their Redeemer. If the Gentiles turn from the Lord and the fulfillment of that task, God will tread them down under the feet of the house of Israel who will at that time be recognized to be the American Indians. America is to figure prominently in the restoration of these lost children of Israel by becoming the land of their inheritance. All these thoughts about the future of the ancient Israelites were set forth plainly in print by Ethan Smith at least three years before Joseph Smith began the writing of his book. Only slight variations are needed in Ethan’s views to adapt them to the plot-line of the Book of Mormon. As Joseph progressed with his work, still more of Ethan Smith’s views show up in Joseph’s eschatological statements concerning the future of Israel.

. . .

Summary of the Earliest Segment

In summary, then, we have seen Joseph Smith at this stage of his writing begin to work into the plot-line of the Book of Mormon a future gathering of the rest of Israel to Jerusalem. The points set forth in Ethan Smith’s book begin to be distributed, some to apply to the American Israelites, and some to Israel-at-large, and some to both groups. There will be a restoration of both groups. Those who have become the American Indians will flourish in this land, which shall become a New Jerusalem. In fact, a city by that name shall be built and the Gentiles will both help in the building and will assist in gathering the red-skinned Israelites to that city, as well as gathering any other Jewish people who may desire to share in that enterprise. However, at the same time the rest of Israel will be gathering to their homeland in Palestine. According to the Book of Mormon, Isaiah 52 and 54 primarily relate to events connected with that return. The publication of the Book of Mormon will mark the commencement of this final restoration.

The Gentiles, who have been divinely called to the role of restorer, will use that book to convert the Indians to the Redeemer and make them conscious of their ancient origins. Like Ethan Smith, the Savior in the Book of Mormon exhorts these American Gentiles to undertake this divine program or face the judgment of God upon themselves. This judgment, the Book of Mormon asserts, will consist of a conquest of America by the native Indians. Three immortal Nephites will work effectively among Israel-at-large. Thus when the Book of Mormon goes forth, the end is in sight; judgment is near; and the Lord no longer delays his coming. When the new heaven and new earth do come, the distinction between the two Zions will persist into eternity.

Six out of the seven major points of Ethan Smith’s system again find expression here. Only the variations necessitated by having two different centers of restoration mark a difference between the Book of Mormon and the prior work of the New England author. The duplication that results from the Book of Mormon’s bifurcation of gathering places leads to both confusion and attempted harmonization. Joseph works out the problem arising from having a duplicate dozen disciples. However, he leaves confused and ambivalent the matter of which of the two Israels Isaiah’s words relate to, applying the same passages first to the New World and them to the Old.

. . .

Conclusions Concerning the Eschatological Use of the Old Testament

In summary, the survey of the eschatological use of the Old Testament has clearly shown that Joseph Smith’s system was both derived and, at the same time, imaginatively original. The Book of Mormon was produced in a period when Bible expositors were moving from a “spiritualized” understanding of the regathering of Israel to a more literal interpretation. Influencing the move in that direction was the idea that the Indians constituted the “lost tribes” of Israel. One of the most persuasive presentations of that position was set forth in Rev. Ethan Smith’s View of the Hebrews. Joseph Smith, Jr. could have had contact with that work (1) through his cousin Oliver Cowdery who was living at Poultney, Vermont when the book was published, and whose step-mother was a member of Rev. Mr. Smith’s church; (2) through extracts of the book circulating in Joseph’s home-town of Manchester; or (3) through the personal visit which Ethan Smith made to the Palmyra area early in 1827.

Material Derived From Ethan Smith

The major tenets of Ethan Smith’s eschatological system, including some refinements peculiar to the Poultney clergyman’s work, are clearly reflected in the Book of Mormon’s eschatological position. (1) Both works regarded the Indians as being Israelites whose existence had become completely unknown to the rest of the Jewish people, and both attributed the degraded condition in which they were found to God’s judgment upon them for their unbelief and disobedience.

(2) Both expected a literal regathering of Israel from “the four corners of the earth” (Is. 11:12), with both following the KJV’s “corners” in quoting the verse, but both, changing to “four quarters” in discussing it. Based on an identical interpretation of Isaiah 11:11 (“The Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people”) both argued that this regathering would occur at a period considerably after Christ’s crucifixion and the subsequent second destruction of Jerusalem (2 Ne. 10:5-7; 25:13-17). In reaching this conclusion both works discussed the question of whether prophecy was to be regarded as literal or spiritual, and concluded that both view-points were legitimate, but that the words of Isaiah were especially to be understood literally.

(3) Both held that it was essential to convert the Indians before the way could be opened for the final regathering to begin.

(4) Both taught that America would play a major role in the future restoration of Israel and that these Gentiles would help to transport the Israelites to the land of their inheritance.

(5) Both maintained that America had been prophetically designated and divinely called to reach the red sons of Israel and that a refusal to fulfill this mission would only lead to judgment coming upon the American Gentiles. In particular, both taught that the Pilgrim fathers had been led to this continent for this very end. Both held that in passages like Isaiah 11:11 and 49:1 the expression “isles of the sea” included the American continent. Both repeatedly appealed to verses from Isaiah forty-nine to establish the role that the American nation would play in the future restoration of the Indian-Israelites. Both accordingly held that America was under special divine protection and preserved as a “land of liberty” to enable her to fulfill her heaven-assigned role.

(7) Finally, both regarded the recovery of Israel as an added witness that God was faithful to his promises and that this regathering of Israel would be convincing evidence that the Bible was true.