|
“…did Ethan
Smith's View of the Hebrews furnish structural material for Joseph
Smith's Book of Mormon? It has
been pointed out in these pages that there are many
things in the former book that might well have suggested many major things
in the other. Not a few things merely, one or two, or a half dozen, but
many; and it is this
fact of many things of similarity and the cumulative force of them
that makes them so serious a menace to Joseph Smith's story of the Book of
Mormon origin… The
material in Ethan Smith's book is of a character and quantity
to make a ground plan for the Book of Mormon...” (p. 240)
“…the
prevailing ideas respecting the American Indians throughout the regions named
were favorable to the notion that they were of Hebrew origin... And with the
existence of such a body of knowledge, or that which was accepted as ‘knowledge,’
and a person of vivid and constructive imaginative power in contact with
it, there is little room for doubt that it might be possible for Joseph Smith to
construct a theory of origin for
his Book of Mormon in harmony with these prevailing
notions; and more especially since this ‘common knowledge’ is set forth
in almost handbook form in the little work of Ethan Smith... that one book,
at least, with which he was most
likely acquainted, could well have furnished structural
outlines for the Book of Mormon; and that Joseph Smith was possessed of
such creative imaginative powers as would make it quite within the lines of
possibility that the Book of
Mormon could have been produced in that way.” (pp.152-54)
“Could an
investigator of the Book of Mormon be much blamed if he were to decide
that Ethan Smith’s book with its suggestion as to the division of his Israelites
into two peoples; with its suggestion of ‘tremendous wars between them’;
and of the savages overcoming the civilized division led to the fashioning
of chiefly these same things in
the Book of Mormon?” (p. 192)
|